University of Huddersfield Repository (University of Huddersfield)
Editorial / institución
University of Huddersfield
Licencia
Licencia no declarada
Citas
8
Resumen ADIPA
Elaborado con IA a partir del resumen de los autores
Capítulo de investigación que examina por qué la sociedad percibe a las mujeres como incapaces de cometer abuso sexual infantil, a pesar de la evidencia de su existencia. Mediante un enfoque de construcción social, el trabajo analiza cómo los estereotipos de género, la percepción de la mujer como cuidadora y la ausencia de una imagen mental del perpetrador femenino obstaculizan el reconocimiento de las agresoras sexuales de niños. El capítulo señala que las víctimas masculinas de abusadoras mujeres enfrentan creencias de falta de validez, diferencias en sentencias judiciales según el sexo del agresor, y un daño compuesto por la negación social, lo que perpetúa la idea de que "mamá no haría eso".
Puntos clave
Los estereotipos de género llevan a percibir a las mujeres como cuidadoras naturales, lo que genera incredulidad ante acusaciones de abuso sexual infantil cometido por mujeres.
Las víctimas masculinas de abusadoras mujeres enfrentan desvalidez social y son frecuentemente percibidas como afortunadas en lugar de dañadas, lo que agrava el traumatismo.
La sentencia judicial tiende a ser más leve para agresoras sexuales mujeres que para hombres, reflejando una percepción social de culpabilidad diferenciada según el género del perpetrador.
La ausencia de una representación mental del delincuente sexual infantil como mujer facilita que los crímenes cometidos por agresoras permanezcan no denunciados y sin reconocimiento público.
Para quién: Estudiantes, docentes e investigadores de psicología, criminología y género interesados en comprender cómo los estereotipos de género obstaculizan el reconocimiento del abuso sexual infantil femenino y sus efectos en víctimas y justicia penal.
Resumen de los autores
Despite their evolving role in society, the perception of women is still subject to stereotyping; the female offender is no exception (Herzog & Oreg, 2008). Female offenders are seen as either victims of crime and oppression themselves, or as evil diversions from “normal” womanly behaviour. This is true of female sex offenders, women accused and convicted of child sex abuse are more likely to be seen as victims of abuse themselves. Women’s perceived natural role is as the caregivers, the nurturers in society, and women who step outside of these persona are viewed with either suspicion, distaste or ignorance (see Yoder, 2003). In addition, a sex offender, particularly an abuser of children, who is also female, is regarded with disbelief, coupled with a range of conflicting assessments of her character and behaviour. A worrying outcome of this perception is that many sex crimes committed by women may remain unreported, due to society’s view of such women and their victims. The image that is brought to mind by the term “sexual predator” is predominantly male. The term “child sex offender” will probably lead to a representation of a perpetrator who is an older stranger, with uncontrollable sexual urges, innately evil, and male, with predominantly female victims (Gavin, 2005). People who abuse children sexually are often familiar to the child, in a position of trust and/or authority, and this is no different for female abusers. However, the victim, once he or she is able to discuss what has happened, will often not be believed, or, for teenage boys, told that they are lucky to be sexually initiated this way. Society, particularly male society, still perceives sex between an underage boy and an older woman as an accomplishment. Shoop (1997) suggests that female sex offenders are more likely to receive suspended sentences, whereas male offenders receive long custodial sentences. He suggests that it is difficult for people to accept that sentences should be the same for both sexes, even though the destructive nature of the behaviour may be the same. This means that there may be differentially imposed sentencing and an implicit distinction between male and female child sex offenders in either the mind of the public or the judiciary. What is clear is that the damage to the victim is the same, and may even be worse in the cases of female offenders/male victims, as the victims are less likely to be believed. Male victims of female abusers suffer twice, once at the hands of the abuser, and once at the hands of those they tell, but who do not believe them (Shoop, 2007). The recognition of female perpetrators of child sex abuse is impeded by the perception of women as incapable of such acts. Why is such perception persistent in the face of information to the contrary? This research uses a social constructivist approach to examining perceptions of female sexual abusers, to try to determine the answer to why we think mummy wouldn’t do that
Gavin, H. (2010).“Mummy wouldn’t do that” The Perception and Construction of the Female Child Sex Abuser. University of Huddersfield. https://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/4503/1/HG_EWF2.doc