In about one-third of sexual assaults, at least one other person is present who could potentially intervene, yet in most instances no one does. Social psychologist Catherine A. Sanderson uses the reported case at Cornell University—where an alleged assault by seven fraternity members was said to have been discussed in a group chat of more than 50 men as it unfolded, with no public report of anyone trying to stop it or call police—to examine why bystanders stay silent.
Sanderson recounts a dorm workshop from her undergraduate years in which a high-profile athlete responded to the definition of rape by saying, “By that definition, everyone I’ve ever had sex with I’ve raped.” Most students laughed. For her, the reaction illustrated how some men wrongly assume their own coercive attitudes are widely shared.
Research suggests that actual perpetrators are a minority: an estimated 6.5% of male college students in the United States and Canada have committed rape. Yet many men who find sexual violence offensive mistakenly believe other men do not. In one study, undergraduates were asked about rape myths and then asked how their close friends and average male students would answer. They rated peers as more supportive of those myths than they themselves were.
Believing that other men accept sexual violence, even when false, makes men less willing to intervene. Fear of being laughed at or ridiculed—and not wanting to appear weak to other men—is the most common reason male college students give for failing to act. Men who commit assault also overestimate support for such behaviour, which leads them to talk about it as normal and reinforces the mistaken impression among others.
The challenge, Sanderson argues, is not to change a social norm but to correct the misperception of what the norm already is. A 90-minute prevention programme for first-year male students that refutes rape myths, stresses consent and corrects beliefs about peers was found to reduce self-reported sexual aggression four months later. Such programmes work by making non-perpetrators less inhibited about speaking out and by showing at-risk men that their peers do not support sexual aggression.
Tight-knit groups can pressure members into loyalty and silence, but the same peer dynamics can be redirected. Sanderson gives the example of a college football player who described interrupting a potential sexual encounter as looking out for a teammate: maybe you don’t get the girl, but you keep your scholarship and still be on the team.
Bystander intervention programmes emphasise stopping bad behaviour before it escalates, teach specific skills and remind people that everyone has a responsibility. Students who complete them report greater confidence and willingness to act. One study found that campuses using these programmes had 11% lower experiences of sexual harassment and stalking, and as much as 17% lower instances of unwanted sexual activity with women too drunk or high to stop them.
The Cornell case may seem like a problem of one college, fraternities or students, but Sanderson says the pattern is broader: most people have seen problematic behaviour and failed to speak up. Understanding the normal psychological factors that distort what we think others feel—and learning intervention skills—can, she says, make a real difference.
Comments