It’s Her Fault

Abstract

The present study examined factors that are associated with an individual’s adherence to rape myths at two colleges located in the same town. Particularly, we examined sex, race, and participants’ drinking behavior in relation to rape myth acceptance. We found that males and heavy drinkers are more likely than females and non/low drinkers to adhere to rape myths. An interaction between males and drinking was also found indicating a moderated effect of gender on rape myth acceptance. In addition, the college with sexual assault programming did not experience a lowered acceptance of rape myths compared with the college with no programming.

Keywords

rape myths college students sexual assault rape culture victim blaming

The exact prevalence of sexual assault is unknown due to various reasons (e.g., underreporting or definitions of sexual assault). However, the National Institute of Justice (1998) estimated that one in six women in the United States has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape. In an earlier study, Russell and Howell (1983) estimated one in four women (approximately 26%) will experience a sexual assault in her lifetime. A recent National Crime Victimization report showed that only 55% of sexual assaults reported in their survey were reported to the police (U.S. Department of Justice, 2010). According to Fisher, Cullen, and Turner (2000), only approximately 5% of rapes are reported to officials. With the age group of 16-24 experiencing the most sexual assault (Smith & Welchans, 2000), alcohol as the number one date rape drug (Scott-Ham & Burton, 2006), and with the high concentration of females, college campuses are fraught with issues of sexual assault. Specifically, sexual assault is a highly prevalent, yet underreported, crime whereby empowering individuals to report a rape has proven to be quite a task with rape myths and false allegations being at the center of the description of this crime (Belknap, 2010).

Rape myths are defined as attitudes and false beliefs held about rape that deny or minimize victim injury and/or blame the victims for their own victimization (Burt, 1980; Hayes-Smith & Levett, 2010). Recent research continues to show evidence of how rape myth acceptance influences a victim’s decision to report a rape (Cohn, Dupuis, & Brown, 2009; Franiuk, Seefelt, Cepress, & Vandello, 2008). Research demonstrates that certain groups are more likely to adhere to rape myths, specifically, males, members of the working class, and non-Whites. However, rape myth acceptance is experienced throughout the United States, which supports the notion of the United States as a rape culture (Brownmiller, 1975; Burt, 1980; Wakelin & Long, 2003).

Rape culture is derived from rhetorical patterns that are entrenched in conscious or unconscious hetero-normative, White male, privileged traditions. The perpetuation of a rape culture on college campuses is related to several social factors. These factors are constructions of gender (Doherty & Anderson, 2004; Klaw et al., 2008), race (Feild, 1978; Giacopassi & Dull, 1986; Jimenez & Abreu, 2003), media (Franiuk et al., 2008), religion (Aosved & Long, 2006), Greek association (Bleecker & Murnen, 2005), and, especially pertinent to a college campus, alcohol consumption (Armstrong, Hamilton, & Sweeney, 2006). The present study examined how gender, race, and participant’s drinking behavior were related to reported acceptance of rape myths on two college campuses in the same small Midwestern town. Only one of these campuses has sexual assault educational programming and resources for survivors. Because this campus appears to have a culture that is more supportive of rape survivors, it is expected that students will be less accepting of rape myths.

Literature Review

U.S. Rape Culture and Male Peer Support

Researchers and scholars alike have called for a major intervention aimed directly at the patriarchal attitudes that can cause rape and other forms of interpersonal violence against women (Schwartz & DeKeseredy, 2008). Patriarchal society encourages male violence against women and, therefore, there is a need to deal with the inherent gendered structure of society instead of individual men (Schwartz & DeKeseredy, 2008). In addition, scholars have argued that the United States is a rape-supportive culture (Briere & Malamuth, 1983; Burt, 1980; Kelner, 2013). Rape culture appears to be at least partially guided by the principles that are observed in the theory of male peer support. Male peer support conceptualized by Schwartz and Nogrady (1996) proposed that men (especially college men) tend to spend time with other men who support their views. That is, there is a direct relationship between peer support and violence against women. They have not been able to ascertain whether the groups form because of the influences that occur on college campuses or simply due to individuals being drawn to others who already hold their viewpoints. These ideas are not very far removed from the social learning theory (Akers, Krohn, Lanza-Kaduce, & Radosevich, 1979) and social bonding theory (Hirschi, 1969) debate of whether it is “birds of a feather flock together” or “when you sleep with the dogs you get fleas” (Akers, 1999). On one hand, fraternities and sports teams knowingly encourage the objectification of women, which is likely not a new lesson for these young men who have been raised on the objectification of women in the media, especially pop culture (Moradi & Huang, 2008). On the other hand, it is the intensity and encouragement of a peer group that may serve to further ingrain and solidify the message that women are commodities to be used and discarded. Add-in alcohol and this message is even further exacerbated where college subculture encourages binge drinking, but has a double standard regarding male and female drinking norms. That is, men are encouraged to binge drink, whereas women are expected to maintain a certain level of control (Ricciardelli, Connor, Williams, & Young, 2001).

These double standards are represented in the rape myths that are still accepted in our rape culture (Boswell & Spade, 1996). An important link to sexual aggression is the peer acceptance of such double standards and subsequent behavior. With alcohol being a common date rape drug, a woman who engaged in binge drinking would be seen as engaging in risky behavior (Ricciardelli et al., 2001). Lee, Pomeroy, Yoo, and Rheinboldt (2005) state that some cultures cause the victims to blame themselves more when rape is considered a personal or female problem rather than a public problem. This could be the case in the college subculture where drinking is encouraged and women are held to a different standard of control than men, further encouraging peer support for males and adding blame to females. It is the socially constructed patriarchal notions of gender that encourage hegemonic male peer support, where rape culture is supported through continued acceptance of rape myths.

Gender and Race/Ethnicity and Acceptance of Rape Myths

In rape myth acceptance, what occurs is a form of institutionalized sexism whereby the blind acceptance of a gendered hierarchy plays out into this attitude of victim blaming. Rape myths, as defined by Lonsway and Fitzgerald (1994), are “attitudes and generally false beliefs about rape that are widely and persistently held, and that serve to deny and justify male sexual aggression against women” (p. 134). Both sexism and rape myths have been theoretically and empirically linked to sexual coercion (Forbes, Adams-Curtis, Pakalka, & White, 2006). Forbes et al. (2006) found that men’s hostility toward women was more closely related to participation in sports and that this was also related to psychological aggression, physical aggression, sexual coercion, sexist attitudes, and adherence to rape myths.

Research continues to highlight that men are significantly more likely than women to accept rape myths (for a recent meta-analysis, see Suarez & Gadalla, 2010). Lee et al. (2005) found that men are more likely than women to hold tolerant attitudes toward rape and attribute blame to the victim. Therefore, the blame indicates that women should be held responsible for the prevention of rape. In one study, 23% of college men surveyed admitted to committing acts that met the legal definition of rape, and most of them did not perceive that anything unusual or aggressive had taken place (Burgess, 2007). Nagel, Matsuo, McIntire, and Morrison (2005) also found sex to be a strong predictor of attitudes for African Americans, regardless of socioeconomic status. Therefore, intersecting with the acceptance of a gendered hierarchy is the racial/ethnic identity of the culture.

Along with gender, Lee et al. (2005) ascertained that rape was accepted by men because in Chinese culture virginity is strongly emphasized, which discourages rape victims from disclosing incidents. Similar to the notion of male peer support, families are also apt to encourage aggression of men and the silencing of women. Research continues to illuminate how race/ethnicity matters regarding an acceptance of rape myth attitudes (Cowan, 2000; Kahlor & Morrison, 2007; Lee et al., 2005; Wyatt, 1992). In particular, other races/ethnicities aside from non-Hispanic Whites appear to have a higher acceptance of rape myths. Research has found that Asian students compared with Caucasian students think that women should be held responsible for the prevention of rape and that this crime is related to sex (Lee et al., 2005). In a similar vein, Kahlor and Morrison (2007) stated that African American and Hispanic college students indicated a higher acceptance of rape myths than European Americans. Hispanics are also more likely to adhere to heteronormativity, blaming rape on male sexuality, and to be more accepting of forcible rape (Cowan, 2000). These studies found disparities in victim blaming attitudes, predominately rape myth acceptance (Frese, Moya, & Megías, 2004), due to the cultural aspects of individuals’ racial group.

Although the underlying cultural complexities are different for each of these race/ethnic groups, the majority of these studies still find a gender component in the acceptance of rape myths. That is, culture matters because it is through culture that gender, a strong predictor of adherence to rape myths, is defined (Aydt & Corsaro, 2003; Lorber, 1994). Even with other socio-demographic controls such as income and education levels, studies continue to show that women are generally less supportive of rape myths than men (Lee et al., 2005; Nagel et al., 2005). The question then becomes what type of culture continues its presence on a college campus that is supportive of the continuing use of rape as a female control mechanism.

College Drinking Culture and Rape Myth Acceptance

The association between the incidence of rape and alcohol is well established in extant literature (Abbey, 2002; Abbey, Ross, McDuffie, & McAuslan, 1996; Abbey, Zawacki, Buck, Clinton, & McAuslan, 2001; Anderson, Spruille, Venable, & Strano, 2005; Benson, Gohm, & Gross, 2007; Koss, Dinero, Seibel, & Cox, 1988; Ullman, Karabatsos, & Koss, 1999). An estimated 50% of college students’ sexual assaults are associated with alcohol use (Abbey, 2002). College women who reported higher levels of alcohol consumption also reported higher incidences of attempted rape and completed rape (Benson et al., 2007). In a study of both sexes, Anderson et al. (2005) found that males, not females, were more likely to report that they would take advantage of someone sexually after heavy episodic drinking. Specifically, men’s alcohol consumption in sexual situations was correlated with the occurrence of an attempted sexual assault (Parkhill & Abbey, 2008). However, this study also identified a relationship between drinking behaviors and beliefs regarding hostile masculinity. Authors suggest that this may again indicate the importance of being a part of a supportive peer group that encourages these behaviors (Parkhill & Abbey, 2008).

One such supportive peer group that encourages drinking, hostile masculinity, and risky sexual behaviors is readily available on most major college campus, specifically fraternities and sororities (Foubert, Garner, & Thaxter, 2006; Schwartz & Nogrady, 1996). Comparatively, fraternity and athletic team members are more likely to commit sexual assault than males in the general student population (Humphrey & Kahn, 2000). Subsequently, there is an abundance of literature researching fraternity drinking (for a review, see Borsari & Carey, 1999). Within fraternity culture, excessive drinking is acceptable and is constructed as a positive and necessary activity (Workman, 2001). Research supports the relationship between Greek associations and heavy drinking while controlling for other demographic predictors. However, social learning variables, such as peer association, have demonstrated an influence on drinking behavior (Durkin, Wolfe, & Clark, 2005).

At least in the Midwest, not many universities have programs to educate students about rape and rape myths in an attempt to prevent rape (Hayes-Smith & Hayes-Smith, 2009). Whereas most of these programs are aimed at women and target-hardening techniques, few are aimed at men and their role in the prevention of rape. Men are also capable of improving their understanding of rape myths. Most studies involving both men and women show a greater improvement on rape myth scales for men than women. This could be due to women’s already lower rate of rape myth acceptance (Lee et al., 2005; Nagel et al., 2005). Smith and Welchans (2000) found an immediate change in attitudes about sexual assault after attending a program on rape myths. Conversely, Foubert and Marriott (1997) found an immediate significant reduction in rape myths with a slight regression back to the mean 3 months after the training. They suggest that updated and continual training may be necessary for prolonged reduction of rape myth acceptance (Foubert et al., 2006). Research also argues that men should be the main focus for rape prevention, reaching the students who may be potential rapists could change their attitudes and stop them from committing the crime (Hayes-Smith & Levett, 2010; Parkhill & Abbey, 2008). Johansson-Love and Geer (2003) state that society needs programs that are successful in producing long-term attitude changes regarding rape myth acceptance. Rape education programs are essential in the battle against rape, and more research is needed to find the most effective course, many of these programs are too little too late.

Method

The data for this study were collected from two Midwest colleges – one a university and one a community college – located in the same town during Spring 2010 and Fall 2010. A non-probability sampling technique was used, whereby surveys were administered to Introduction to Sociology and Introductory English classes at both institutions. A research assistant not affiliated with the instructor entered the room and requested participation. There were no benefits or consequences for participation or non-participation. Participants consented, completed the survey, and were thanked for their participation. The survey took approximately 15 min to complete.

Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1: Males and non-Whites will have a higher acceptance of rape myths than females and Whites.

Hypothesis 2: The college students will have a higher acceptance of rape myths than the university students.

Hypothesis 3: Females who consume more alcohol are more likely to accept rape myths than females who consume less alcohol. Conversely, males who consume more alcohol are more likely to accept rape myths than males who consume less alcohol.

Sample

Participants were 263 undergraduate students from two Midwestern colleges, 84% from the larger university and 16% from the community college. Students were 60.9% female and 39.1% male (% of not reported). Similar to the area, the majority of the sample indicated race as White (83.4%), followed by Black (7.3%) and Other (7%). Participants’ age ranged from 17-51 with an approximate average age of 20. The largest percentage of students were freshmen (56.7%), followed by sophomores (26.8%), juniors (9.2%), and seniors (6.5%). Only 18 (7%) of the participants indicated that they were in a sorority or fraternity; otherwise, this would have been used as a control variable.

Measures

Dependent

Rape Myth Scale

The previously validated Rape Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (Burgess, 2007) was utilized for the present study. The scale includes 50 statements, and participants indicated their agreement with those statements on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). For example, one item reads, “If a woman leads a man on by dressing up, dancing with him close, and kissing him, the man is somewhat justified to have sexual intercourse with her, even if she says she doesn’t want to.” The entire Rape Myth Scale that was used in the survey is available in Table 2. An exploratory factor analysis using equamax rotation was conducted with all 50 items. The amount of variance explained was 22% with a Cronbach’s alpha of .88. A close examination of the items reveal six items with negative eigenvalues and six items with values below the general cutoff of 0.4. Items with small and negative factor loadings were eliminated from the scale and the final scale was reliable (α = .91). However, variance remained low at 26%, with some items still factoring low at .36. It did not assist with variance explained or reliability to delete the low items, so they remained, with the final scale including 39 of the original 50 items.

Rape myth subscales

Due to the low explained variance and lack of unidimensionality of the overall scale, which has been found for other rape myth scales, we decided to create subscales (see Payne, Lonsway, & Fitzgerald, 1999). Burgess (2007) originally proposed five subscales within the larger Rape Myth Scale. Factor analysis confirmed that smaller subscales similar to the scales noted by Burgess were present. The first factor, Justifications (α = .80), was made up of nine items with 42% explained variance. Second, Blame (α = .82) had 11 items and 37% explained variance. The third pairing of items is called Status (α = .79), with 13 items and 35% explained variance. Fourth are the Gender (α = .76) items, with seven items factoring together to explain 41% variance. Finally, the last subscale, called Tactics (α = .79), included eight items with 41% explained variance.

Independent

Sex

Sex was coded as biological sex, with female = 1 and male = 0.

Alcohol consumption

Students responded to two questions about their weekly and daily alcohol consumption. Specifically, they were asked on average how many nights a week they drink, with answers ranging from 0-7, and in an average night when drinking, how many beverages they consume. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC, 2012), four drinks in 2 hr is binge drinking for women and five drinks in 2 hr is considered binge drinking for men. Weekly drinking remained a ratio variable with the exception of those who responded 8 days a week, which were coded as missing. Whereas, binge drinking was coded from the “in an average night” as four or more drinks = 1 and moderate drinking 0-3 = 0.

Race

Race was represented with a binary, dummy coded variable of 1 = White and 0 = non-White.

Controls

Year in school

This variable was coded as 1 = freshman, 2 = sophomore, 3 = junior, 4 = senior.

School

There were two schools represented in this sample: 1 = university and 0 = community college.

Results

Univariate and Bivariate Analysis

A full view of the descriptives is provided in Table 1. Participants’ averaged 2.74 on the Rape Myth Scale with a range of 1.21-5.58 (SD = 0.05, skewness = 0.50, kurtosis = 0.66). The subscales ranged from 1.41-3.44. The Rape Myth Scale, Justification subscale, and Tactics subscale were all skewed (all ps < .05). However, the Blame, Status, and Gender subscales were not skewed and were closer to a normal distribution. We continued with the original scale because logging the variable did not assist with normality and the items as measured are meaningful.

Table 1.

OLS Regression Rape Myth Subscales and Predictor Variables.

Variables	Justification		Blame		Status		Tactics		Gender
Variables	b (SE)	B	b (SE)	B	b (SE)	B	b (SE)	B	b (SE)	B
Intercept	1.69 (.19)**		3.84 (.33)**		3.83 (.18)**		3.15 (.29)**		4.12 (.34)**
Gender	−0.21 (.10)*	−.17	−0.64 (.17)**	.30	−0.31 (.09)*	−.27	−0.83 (.15)**	−.41	−0.85 (.17)**	−.38
Race	0.01 (.13)	.008	0.36 (.23)	.13	0.08 (.13)	.05	−0.07 (.21)	−.03	0.34 (.24)	.11
Binge drinking	0.09 (.10)	.08	−0.33 (.18)	−.15	−0.06 (.10)	−.05	0.00 (.16)	.00	0.01 (.18)	.003
Weekly	0.04 (.05)	−.07	0.02 (.07)	.02	0.01 (.04)	.01	0.09 (.07)	.09	0.12 (.07)	.13
University	−0.25 (.13)	−.15	−0.24 (.23)	−.08	−0.20 (.12)	−.12	−0.31 (.21)	−.11	−0.13 (.24)	−.04
Year in school	0.05 (.05)	.08	0.01 (.09)	.10	−0.07 (.05)	−.13	0.06 (.08)	.06	−0.10 (.09)	−.08

Note. OLS = ordinary least squares.

p < .05. **p < .01.

The majority of participants (58.7%) reported drinking 1-3 days a week, with 34.7% reporting no drinking at all (M = 1.95, SD = 1.15, skewness = 0.88, and kurtosis = 3.48). Of the reported drinkers, 62.3% indicated drinking four or more drinks in one sitting, with 37.7% reporting the suggested one to three drinks.

Before running regression analyses, we ran bivariate statistics of either one-way ANOVAs or correlations, depending on the level of measurement. First, we examined whether gender had a significant relationship with rape myth acceptance and the subscales. A one-way ANOVA revealed that there was a significant gender difference in rape myth acceptance, F(1, 242) = 19.23, p < .01. As predicted, males were more likely to report higher rape myth acceptance (M = 2.97, SD = 0.76) compared with females (M = 2.58, SD = 0.62). All rape myth subscales revealed a significant gender difference in the expected direction with males having a higher acceptance of rape myths than females.

Next, we examined whether the particular college had a significant relationship with rape myth acceptance and found no significant diffeence between the two colleges. An analysis was also conducted to examine race and rape myth acceptance and there was no significant difference between Whites and non-Whites (all ps > .07). A bivariate correlation analysis with weekly drinking and the rape myth acceptance full and subscales demonstrated significant results. Weekly drinking and rape myth acceptance were correlated (r = .15, p < .05). In addition, weekly drinking was also significantly correlated with tactics (r = .26, p < .05) and gender (r = .22, p < .05). One-way ANOVA’s revealed a significant difference between binge drinkers and light/non-drinkers with the overall Rape Myth Acceptance Scale, F(1, 238) = 5.36, p < .05. Participants who were binge drinkers (M = 2.85, SD = 0.76) were more likely than light/non-drinkers (M = 2.64, SD = 0.63) to accept tactics associated with rape.

Multivariate statistics (outliers, heteroskedasticity, multivariate normality, and multicollinearity) were tested for each model. Influence statistics revealed evidence of a few outliers, and further inspection of the data indicates that the cause is unknown. However, it is not due to errors in data entry. We considered truncating the data, but after deleting the items and comparing the regression results, the slope and intercepts were only minimally influenced. Due to the skewness of the data, logging variables was also considered, but ultimately avoided as it would have made the corresponding results less meaningful and also less interpretable. There were no indicators of multicollinearity (all tolerance levels well above the 0.4 threshold) and the scatterplots for homoskedasticity were reasonably distributed. There were a few distributions where the minimum and maximum values were beyond −2 and +2, which may indicate that the residuals are decreasing systematically with the value of the independent values due to negative heteroskedasticity, but it was not extreme enough to not proceed with the analysis.

Regression Analysis

The following ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models include the predictors and controls for participant sex, race, binge drinking, weekly alcohol consumption, year in school, and college. In examining whether males had stronger rape myth acceptance than females, the model revealed an adjusted R² of .08. In this model, males, β = −.34, t(156) = −4.15, p < .01, were significantly more likely than females to accept rape myths controlling for all other factors. All other predictors and controls were not significant. Next, we ran separate regression analyses for each rape myth subscale regressing sex, and all other predictors and controls on each subscale: Justification, blame, status, tactics, and gender revealed some differences among the subscales. Consistent with the full scale, being male was a significant predictor for higher acceptance of the rape myth subscales (blame, status, justification, tactics, and gender) compared with females. Statistics are available in Table 1.

To test for interaction effects, we multiplied the centered weekly drinking variable by gender then regressed this onto the Rape Myth Scale. First, we ran stepwise regression analyses that included weekly drinking and gender and then Step 2 included the interaction (Model 1). Second, because the interaction of female and weekly drinking was significant in Model 1, we ran two separate equations by sex with only weekly drinking in the model. In Model 1, with only weekly alcohol consumption and sex as predictors, the model demonstrated predictive ability with an adjusted R² = .09 for the main effects and adjusted R² = .11 when the interaction effect was entered into the model. Weekly drinking behavior (β= .14, p < .05) and gender (β = −.38, p < .001) had statistically significant impacts on rape myth acceptance. Males were more likely to accept rape myths than women. Because the interaction term for drinking and gender was significant (β = −2.63, p < .001), we ran separate analyses by gender. The all-male model with weekly drinking as a predictor was significant. That is, for males weekly alcohol consumption increased the acceptance of rape myths by (β = .312, p < .001), whereas for females the relationship was not significant. Statistics are available in Table 2.

Table 2.

OLS Regression Rape Myth Models With Interaction Effects.

	Model 1
	b (SE)	B	b (SE)	B
Intercept	2.98 (.07)**		2.97 (.07)**
Weekly drinking		.14	0.25 (.08)**	.35
Gender	−0.39 (.09)**	−.27	−0.38 (.09)**	−.27
Interaction	—		−0.24 (09)**	−.26

p < .05. **p < .01.

Next, we ran stepwise regression analyses with all the predictors (centered weekly, sex, race, binge drinking, college, year in school) entered into Step 1 and the interaction into Step 2 (Model 2). For Model 2, the adjusted R² = .08 indicated the predictiveness of the model actually declined with the inclusion of the other variables. In the first step of the model, the only predictor that was significant was gender (β = −.34, p < .001). That is, again males have a higher rape myth acceptance than females. The interaction was not significant. It could be that the other variables are mediating the relationship.

Discussion

As expected, the main finding was that males accept rape myths at a higher rate than females (see Suarez & Gadella, 2010, for a meta-analysis). In addition, participants’ reported drinking behavior had an influence on reported rape myth acceptance, whereas college did not. As we know that alcohol is the most commonly used date rape drug (Scott-Ham & Burton, 2006), the correlation found between drinking behavior and acceptance of rape myths is quite telling. It appears that alcohol is not merely a tool used for rape but a part of the rape culture. The correlation between heavy drinking and positive acceptance of rape myths indicates that drinking may encourage the rape culture, or that rape culture may encourage drinking. If a causal relationship is eventually established between drinking and rape culture, then programs to address both issues would be more thorough. In addition, the sex differences among drinking and acceptance of rape myths would be easier to untangle. In particular, heavier drinking influenced males’ acceptance of rape myths but not females’ acceptance of rpe myths. This finding could show that although drinking behavior is a predictor of rape myths, sex is a stronger predictor. This could be because the drinking culture only amplifies existing gender attitudes and rape myth acceptance. Females already have a lower acceptance of rape myths leaving the drinking culture less likely to amplify. This would also lend weight to the social bonding argument or “birds of a feather flock together” (Hirschi, 1969).

As discussed above, previous literature consistently finds a strong correlation between race and victim-blaming attitudes. Given the significant relationship between victim-blaming attitudes and adherence to rape myths; that is, that adherence to rape myths is only one component and predictor of victim-blaming attitudes (Frese et al., 2004), we expected to find a correlation between rape myth attitudes and race. We did not find race to be a significant predictor of rape myth acceptance. The small sample of non-White participants, which is decently representative of the area, could explain the lack of correlation between race and rape myth acceptance. Future research should either oversample race to attain enough variability or conduct research in a geographic location that has more diversity. Race/ethnicity influences gendered expectations, which we continue to find is related to rape myths, and this relationship deserves more attention.

Generally, our findings further support the notions of male peer support culture and how in order to subvert this culture we need to breakdown the ideas steeped in the patriarchy (Schwartz & DeKeseredy, 2008). The misogynistic entrenched socializing that surrounds male communities (athletics and fraternities) is further amplified when mixed with binge drinking and its associated double standards (Ricciardelli et al., 2001). Our findings support the notions that there are masculinized subcultures that amplify the male dominanation and “conquerors of females” mentality, as demonstrated by women as the opponents in the sexual arena and victims being blamed for their own “failure.” These women failed to stay sober, as the drinking culture says they should and, as a consequence, they failed to repel the masculine force, as the male community says is their duty. It is these subcultures, not the overarching college setting, which reiterate these mentalities that encourage victim blaming.

Although the study did not specifically examine the effectiveness of sexual assault programming, the lack of difference between the two colleges is problematic. Many of the participants from the larger university were freshmen who had recently gone through a sexual assault advocacy training. This kind of program has been known to positively influence attitudes regarding sexual violence (Hickman, Jaycox, & Aronoff, 2004). The programming at this institution involves both prevention and reaction to sexual violence, but individuals may tune it out due to the fact that they think it does not apply to them. As freshmen, they have not yet encountered many of the date rape scenarios that occur at college parties. However, due to the interaction in the full model not being significant, it is possible that college is mediating the relationship between sexes and drinking’s influence on rape myths. Of course, the different college demographics need to be taken into consideration.

The two campuses examined in this study vary in many ways that could affect the rate of rape myth acceptance. The university is larger, has a more diverse student body, and more social activities with 250+ student organizations, all of which increase the opportunity for socializing and, more important, the number of parties and binge drinking. The strong presence of a party culture at the university could also increase the acceptance of rape myths and culture. Also, the larger presence of fraternities on the university campus might increase the acceptance of rape myths (Bleecker & Murmen, 2005). Our hypothesized difference of a lowered acceptance of rape myths for the university with rape prevention and response training compared with the community college was not supported. This lack of significant difference is likely due to institutional and residential factors that may mediate or moderate the relationship. The community college has the majority of its student body matriculating from within the county, possesses fewer student organizations, and no Greek life; this is likely to decrease campus socializing and, therefore, the “party atmosphere.” That is, the established relationship of drinking and rape myth acceptance may be different for a college where there is less out-of-class student interaction and likely less recreational drinking. Future research should examine the institutional differences between schools and its influence on rape myth acceptance.

Rape myth acceptance assesses individual attitudes, but is part of the societal rape culture. Therefore, another potential issue with sexual assault prevention/response programs that could be researched is the focus on individual attitudes and behaviors versus societal problems. Rape culture is a macro problem and many are studying/addressing it at the individual level. That is, at universities there is an overall institutional climate that downplays the gravity of sexual assault. This is a form of institutional betrayal where the culture discourages reporting and creates an environment that silences the victim (Freyd & Birrell, 2013).

This research is but one study in the field of violence against women, particularly sexual assault on college campuses. The limitation of use of a convenience sample located in one town lends itself to the criticism of lack of generalizability. Future research should attempt to gain a more representative sample not only of the student body, but also of the United States as a whole. In addition, the inclusion of more predictors could further explain the continued prevalence of rape myth acceptance. Recent research found that sex and belief in the world as a just place influence acceptance of rape myths (Hayes, Lorenz & Bell, 2013). However, this study sheds light on the continuing problem of sexual assault on college campuses. Given that the media continues to focus on the celebrated cases of rape and the overall commonness of its occurrence, this work remains important.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Kathy Lorenz, Lativia Smith, Matt Weiland, Erin Thomsen, and Ashley Wiegand for their invaluable assistance in collecting, entering, and cleaning the data.

Authors’ Note

Portions of this research were presented at the 2011 meetings of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences in Toronto, Canada.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Rebecca M. Hayes has researched violence against women, both nationally and internationally, for the last 10 years. Her work has been published in high-quality journals such as Feminist Criminology and Crime & Delinquency. Her expertise extends to the practitioner realm in the form of victim advocacy.

Rebecca L. Abbott completed her undergraduate education at Central Michigan University and is currently in a PhD program at University of Illinois–Chicago.

Savannah Cook completed her undergraduate education at Central Michigan University.

References

Abbey

(2002). Alcohol-related sexual assault: A common problem among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 14, 118-128.

Abbey

Ross

L. T.

McDuffie

McAuslan

(1996). Alcohol and dating risk factors for sexual assault among college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 147-169.

Abbey

Zawacki

Buck

P. O.

Clinton

A. M.

McAuslan

(2001). Alcohol and sexual assault. Alcohol Research & Health, 25, 43-51.

Akers

(1999). Social learning and social structure: Reply to Sampson, Morash, and Krohn. Theoretical Criminology, 3, 477-493.

Akers

Krohn

Lanza-Kaduce

Radosevich

(1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44, 636-655.

Anderson

P. B.

Spruille

Venable

Strano

D. A.

(2005). The relationships between heavy episodic drinking, sexual assaulting and being sexually assaulted for Southern urban university students. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 8. Retrieved from http://www.ejhs.org/volume8/heavy_drinking.htm

Aosved

Long

(2006). Co-occurrence of rape myth acceptance, sexism, racism, homophobia, ageism, classism, and religious intolerance. Sex Roles, 55, 481-492.

Armstrong

Hamilton

Sweeney

(2006). Sexual assault on campus: A multilevel, integrative approach to party rape. Social Problems, 53, 483-499.

Aydt

Corsaro

(2003). Differences in children’s construction of gender across culture: An interpretive approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1306-1325.

10.

Belknap

(2010). Rape: Too hard to report and too easy to discredit victims. Violence Against Women, 16, 1335-1344.

11.

Benson

Gohm

Gross

(2007). College women and sexual assault: The role of sex-related alcohol expectancies. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 341-351.

12.

Bleecker

Murnen

(2005). Fraternity membership, the display of degrading sexual images of women, and rape myth acceptance. Sex Roles, 53, 487-493.

13.

Borsari

B. E.

Carey

K. B.

(1999). Understanding fraternity drinking: Five recurring themes in the literature, 1980-1998. Journal of American College Health, 48, 30-37.

14.

Boswell

Spade

(1996). Fraternities and collegiate rape culture: Why are some fraternities more dangerous places for women? Gender & Society, 10, 133-147.

15.

Briere

Malamuth

(1983). Self-reported likelihood of sexually aggressive behavior: Attitudinal versus sexual explanations. Journal of Research in Personality, 17, 315-323.

16.

Brownmiller

(1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. New York: Simon & Schuster.

17.

Burgess

G. H.

(2007). Assessment of rape supportive attitudes and beliefs in college men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 973-993.

18.

Burt

(1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217-230.

19.

Centers for Disease Control. (2012). Vital signs: Binge drinking prevalence, frequency, and intensity among adults- United States, 2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 61(1), 14-19.

20.

Cohn

E. S.

Dupuis

E. C.

Brown

T. M.

(2009). In the eye of the beholder: Do behavior and character affect victim and perpetrator responsibility for acquaintance rape? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 1513-1535.

21.

Cowan

(2000). Beliefs about the causes of four types of rape. Sex Roles, 42, 807-823.

22.

Doherty

Anderson

(2004). Making sense of male rape: Constructions of gender, sexuality and experience of rape victims. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 14, 85-103.

23.

Durkin

K. F.

Wolfe

T. W.

Clark

G. A.

(2005). College students and binge drinking: An evaluation of social learning theory. Sociological Spectrum, 25, 255-272.

24.

Feild

(1978). Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counselors and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 156-179.

25.

Fisher

Cullen

Turner

(2000). The sexual victimization of college women (NCJ 182369). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.

26.

Forbes

G. B.

Adams-Curtis

L. E.

Pakalka

A. H.

White

K. B.

(2006). Dating aggression, sexual coercion, and aggression supporting attitudes among college men as a function of participation in aggressive high school sports. Violence Against Women, 12, 441-455.

27.

Foubert

J. D.

Garner

Thaxter

P. J.

(2006). An exploration of fraternity culture: Implications for programs to address alcohol-related sexual assault. College Student Journal, 40, 361-373.

28.

Foubert

J. D.

Marriott

(1997). Effects of a sexual assault peer education program on men’s belief in rape myths. Sex Roles, 36, 259-268.

29.

Franiuk

Seefelt

J. L.

Cepress

S. L.

Vandello

J. A.

(2008). Prevalence of rape myths in headlines and their effects on attitudes toward rape. Sex Roles, 58, 790-801. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9372-4

30.

Frese

Moya

Megías

J. L.

(2004). Social perception of rape: How rape myth acceptance modulates the influence of situational factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 143-161.

31.

Freyd

Birrell

(2013). Blind to betrayal: Why we fool ourselves: We aren’t being fooled. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

32.

Giacopassi

D. J.

Dull

T. R.

(1986). Gender and racial differences of rape myths within a college population. Sex Roles, 15, 63-75.

33.

Hayes

R. M.

Lorenz

Bell

(2013). Victim blaming others: Rape myth acceptance and the just world belief. Feminist Criminology, 8, 202-220.

34.

Hayes-Smith

R. M.

Hayes-Smith

J. M.

(2009). A website content analysis of women’s resources and sexual assault literature on college campuses. Critical Criminology, 17, 109-123.

35.

Hayes-Smith

R. M.

Levett

L. M.

(2010). Student perceptions of sexual assault resources and prevalence of rape myth attitudes. Feminist Criminology, 5, 335-354.

36.

Hickman

L. J.

Jaycox

L. H.

Aronoff

(2004). Dating violence among adolescents: Prevalence, gender distribution, and prevention program effectiveness. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5, 123-142.

37.

Hirschi

(1969). Causes of delinquency. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

38.

Humphrey

S. E.

Kahn

A. S.

(2000). Fraternities, athletic teams, and rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 1313-1320.

39.

Jimenez

J. A.

Abreu

J. M.

(2003). Race and sex effects on attitudinal perceptions of acquaintance rape. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 252-256.

40.

Johansson-Love

Geer

J. H.

(2003). Investigation of attitude change in a rape prevention program. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 84-99.

41.

Kahlor

Morrison

(2007). Television viewing and rape myth acceptance among college women. Sex Roles, 56, 729-739. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9232-2

42.

Kelner

(2013). The United States of rape: A theory of rape culture in American public policy (Doctoral dissertation). California State University, Long Beach.

43.

Klaw

Lonsway

Berg

Waldo

Kothari

Mazurek

Hegeman

(2008). Challenging rape culture: Awareness, emotion and action through campus acquaintance rape education. Women & Therapy, 28, 47-63.

44.

Koss

M. P.

Dinero

T. E.

Seibel

C. A.

Cox

S. L.

(1988). Stranger and acquaintance rape: Are there differences in the victim’s experience? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 1-24.

45.

Lee

Pomeroy

E. C.

Yoo

S. K.

Rheinboldt

K. T.

(2005). Attitudes toward rape. Violence Against Women, 11, 177-196.

46.

Lonsway

K. A.

Fitzgerald

L. F.

(1994). Rape myths in review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 133-164.

47.

Lorber

(1994). “Night to his day”: The social construction of gender. Paradoxes of Gender, 1, 1-8.

48.

Moradi

Huang

(2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women: A decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 377-398.

49.

Nagel

Matsuo

McIntire

K. P.

Morrison

(2005). Attitudes toward victims of rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 725-737.

50.

National Institute of Justice. (1998). Prevalence, incidence and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NCJ Publication No. 172837). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

51.

Parkhill

Abbey

(2008). Does alcohol contribute to the confluence model of sexual assault perpetration? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27, 529-554.

52.

Payne

D. L.

Lonsway

K. A.

Fitzgerald

L. F.

(1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the “Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale.” Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 27-68.

53.

Ricciardelli

Connor

Williams

Young

(2001). Gender stereotypes and drinking cognitions as indicators of moderate and high risk drinking among young women and men. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 61, 129-136.

54.

Russell

Howell

(1983). The prevalence of rape in the United States revisited. Signs, 8, 688-695.

55.

Schwartz

M. D.

DeKeseredy

W. S.

(2008). Interpersonal violence against women. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 178-185.

56.

Schwartz

M. D.

Nogrady

C. A.

(1996). Fraternity membership, rape myths, and sexual aggression on a college campus. Violence Against Women, 2, 148-162.

57.

Scott-Ham

Burton

(2006). A study of blood and urine alcohol concentrations in cases of alleged drug-facilitated sexual assault in the United Kingdom over a 3-year period. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 13, 107-111.

58.

Smith

Welchans

(2000). Peer education: Does focusing on male responsibility change sexual assault attitudes? Violence Against Women, 6, 1255-1268.

59.

Suarez

Gadalla

T. M.

(2010). Stop blaming the victim: A meta-analysis on rape myths. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 2010-2035.

60.

Ullman

S. E.

Karabatsos

Koss

M. P.

(1999). Alcohol and sexual assault in a national sample of college women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 603-625.

61.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). Criminal victimization, 2009 (USDJ Publications No. NCJ 231327). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

62.

Wakelin

Long

K. M.

(2003). Effects of victim gender and sexuality on attributions of blame to rape victims. Sex Roles, 49, 477-487.

63.

Workman

T. A.

(2001). Finding the meanings of college drinking: An analysis of fraternity drinking stories. Journal of Health Communication, 13, 427-447.

64.

Wyatt

G. E.

(1992). The sociocultural context of African American and White American women’s rape. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 77-91.