Through the use of focus groups and interviews, this research aims to increase understanding of the ways in which the public in Adelaide, South Australia draw on well documented rape myths and the influence of this process on their understandings of consent to sexual intercourse. This research explores how individual attitudes and opinions about rape are shaped through social interaction, including comparing the attitudes of men and women. Equal numbers of men and women were drawn from one geographical location by snowball sampling and vignettes were used to facilitate discussion in focus groups. Findings showed that rape myths remain influential amongst the public and are often used to attribute responsibility to women in acquaintance rape scenarios. However, analysis of the public’s engagement with rape myths revealed a complex process. People did not simply adhere to or challenge rape myths but rather these myths were engaged with in different ways at different times and in different circumstances. Findings also highlighted the complexity of the notion of consent and revealed contradictions in the ways in which consent was understood. Moreover, in many cases despite being willing to label an incident as rape, participants were still reluctant to say that they would find the man guilty of the crime of rape. Overall, this study suggests that the public struggle with issues concerning how rape is defined and that this has widespread implications both for rape victims and for the Australian legal system. Findings also suggest that radical attitude change is required before any real improvement will be seen in rape conviction rates.

The purposes of this study were threefold: 1.) to duplicate previous studies by demonstrating differences in victim blame attribution, minimization of rape, and degree of excusing the perpetrator between homosexual and heterosexual victims; 2.) determine if similar patterns will be shown with male victims as with female victims in the demonstration of rape myths when the victim and perpetrator are acquainted or strangers; and 3.) test the mediation effect of homophobia on perceptions of male rape victims. 119 university students participated. Participants read a scenario in which a homosexual or heterosexual was raped by a male stranger or acquaintance. Participants then answered questions judging the seriousness of the attack and the degree of responsibility held by the victim and perpetrator. Participants also answered questions measuring their homophobic and traditional gender role beliefs. Significant differences were found between the male and female participants in victim blame attribution and rape minimization. Significant differences were also found in the amount of blame attributed to the victim and perceived seriousness of the attack between stranger and acquaintance rape for heterosexual victims, and the degree of rape minimization between heterosexual and homosexual victims of acquaintance rape. Homophobia and gender role traditionality were not found to be mediating variables in predicting victim blame attribution, degree of rape minimization, or degree of excusing the perpetrator. This study expands the current literature by examining the effects of the victim-perpetrator relationship in perceptions of male rape victims, as well as adding to the vast amount of literature suggesting that sexual orientation plays a role in how one views a male rape victim.