{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01649928263988522, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002152080344332855, 'mean_word_length': 5.642857142857143, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Responsibility and Explanations of Rape

This chapter examines the psychological function and consequences of responsibility ascriptions in relation to the crime of rape. Section 1 draws on recent work in the philosophy and science of causal cognition to argue that responsibility ascriptions, like explanations, are tethered to interests and perspectives: descriptive and prescriptive background norms affect not only what counts as a satisfying explanation of why something happened, but who is singled out as the bearer of responsibility for what happened. Section 2 draws on in-depth qualitative interviews with convicted rapists, together with empirical studies of the attitudes and factors that result in ‘victim-blaming’ within the general population, to detail the descriptive and prescriptive norms of rape culture. Section 3 brings these discussions together. Given the pervasive influence of rape culture norms, introducing a woman’s violation of any of them in court can serve to (implicitly or explicitly) focus attention on those violations as causally salient and explanatory of what happened, and hence on her—as opposed to him—as the bearer of responsibility for what happened. The psychological function and consequences of responsibility ascriptions may therefore contribute to the grotesque and persistent failure of the courts to convict and appropriately sentence rapists.