Sosyal Hizmet Bölümü Öğrencilerinin Tecavüz Mitlerini Kabul Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Cinsel saldırı eylemlerini haklılaştıran, teşvik eden ve meşrulaştıran cinsiyetçi değerler, inançlar ve bilgilerden oluşan tecavüz mitlerinin benimsenme düzeyi, cinsel şiddetin normalleşmesine yol açmakta; bu mitlere inanan profesyoneller tarafından sunulan ataerkil kurumsal hizmetler ise kadınların insan haklarının ihlal edilmesine neden olmaktadır. Bu çalışma, kadına yönelik şiddet alanında gelecekte görev alması muhtemel sosyal hizmet öğrencilerinin cinsel şiddetle ilgili yaygın yanlış inanışlara ne ölçüde bağlı olduklarını değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Veriler, sosyo-demografik öğeleri ve cinsel saldırıyla ilgili yanlış inanışların benimsenmesini ölçen Illinois Tecavüz Mitlerini Kabul Ölçeği Kısa Formu (Payne ve diğ., 1999)’nu içeren bir anket aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Nicel araştırma deseniyle yapılandırılan bu kesitsel çalışma, sosyal hizmet lisans programına kayıtlı ve tüm akademik sınıf düzeylerini temsil eden toplam 213 öğrenciyi kapsamaktadır. Katılımcıların tecavüze ilişkin kalıplaşmış düşüncelere düşük düzeyde bağlılık gösterdiği gözlemlenmiştir (M = 1.23). “En uzun yaşanılan yer” değişkeni dışında, öğrenim yılı ve cinsel şiddet deneyimi gibi diğer değişkenler açısından tecavüz miti kabulü bakımından anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır. Katılımcıların tecavüz mitlerine yönelik düşük inanç düzeyi, rıza kültürünün geliştirilmesi açısından umut verici olup, cinsel şiddete maruz kalan bireylerin sosyal hizmet ihtiyaçlarının uygun şekilde karşılanacağına işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca bu bulgu, sosyal hizmet eğitiminin toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği temelli ve eleştirel pedagojik bir yaklaşımla sunulmasının önemine dikkat çekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tecavüz
• tecavüz mitleri
• cinsel şiddet
• sosyal hizmet

An Assessment of Social Work Students’ Acceptance Levels of Rape Myths

Öz

The extent to which rape myths are endorsed —comprising sexist values, cults, and nd forms of misinformation that justify, encourage, and legitimize acts of sexual assault—contributes to normalization of sexual violence. Moreover, when professionals who endorse such myths provide institutional services, this may result in violations of women’s human rights. This study seeks to assess the extent to which social work students — future professionals likekly to work in the field of violence against women—endorse common misconceptions about sexual violence. Data were gathered via a questionnaire that comprising socio-demographic items and the short version of the Illınois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (Payne et al., 1999), which measures endorsement of rape-related misconceptions. Framed within a quantitative research design, this cross-sectional study involved a total of 213 undergraduate social work students, representing all academic levels. It was observed that participants demonstrated a low degree of adherence to stereotypical ideas about rape (M = 1.23). Except for the variable of "the place lived the longest," no significant difference was found in terms of rape myth acceptance across other variables such as year of study and exposure to sexual violence. The low level of participants’ belief in rape myths is a promising finding, indicating that the social service needs of individuals who have experienced sexual violence may be addressed in an appropriate manner. Furthermore, this result underscores the importance of delivering social work education through a gender equality–based and critically oriented pedagogical approach.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Rape
• rape myths
• sexual violence
• social work

Kaynakça

1. Addis, M. E., ve Mahalik, J. R. (2003). Men, masculinity, and the contexts of help seeking. American Psychologist, 58(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.5
2. Baird, S., ve Jenkins, S. R. (2003). Vicarious traumatization, secondary traumatic stress, and burnout in sexual assault and domestic violence agency staff. Violence and victims, 18(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1891/vivi.2003.18.1.71
3. Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior, Child Development, 3(4), 888–907.
4. Birleşmiş Milletler Kadınlara Karşı Ayrımcılığın Önlenmesi Komitesi (CEDAW). (2017). Kadınlara yönelik toplumsal cinsiyete dayalı şiddet hakkında Genel Tavsiye No. 35 (Genel Tavsiye No. 19’un güncellenmesi) (CEDAW/C/GC/35). Birleşmiş Milletler.
5. Bohner, G., Siebler, F., Sturm, S., Effler, D., Litters, M., Reinhard, M.-A., ve Rutz, S. (1998). Rape Myth acceptance and accessibility of the gender category. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 1(1), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430298011006.
6. Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. New York: Simon & Schuster.
7. Bussey, K., ve Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychological Review, 106(4), 676–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.676
8. Cinsel Şiddetle Mücadele Derneği. (2019, Mart 11). Cinsel şiddetle mücadele için kavramlar: Tecavüz kültürü. Kaos GL. https://kaosgl.org/haber/cinsel-siddetle-mucadele-icin-kavramlar-tecavuz-kulturu

9. Connell, R.W. (2005) Masculinities 2nd Edt. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, Vol. 43/6, 1241-1299.
11. Çoklar, I. ve Meşe G. (2015). Illinois Tecavüz Mitlerini Kabul Ölçeği kısa formunu Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması. Psikoloji Çalışmaları Dergisi, 34(2), 53-64.
12. Davies, M., Gilston, J., ve Rogers, P. (2012). Examining the relationship between male rape myth acceptance, female rape myth acceptance, victim blame, homophobia, gender roles, and ambivalent sexism. Journal of interpersonal violence, 27(14), 2807–2823. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260512438281
13. Eastman, B. J., Bunch, S. G., Williams, A. H., ve Carawan, L. W. (2007). Exploring the Perceptions of Domestic Violence Service Providers in Rural Localities. Violence Against Women, 13(7), 700-716. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801207302047 (Original work published 2007)
14. Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS) (2022). Council on Social Work Education (CSWE). https://www.cswe.org/getmedia/94471c42-13b8-493b-9041-b30f48533d64/2022-EPAS.pdf
15. Fagot, B.I., ve Hagan, R. (1991). Observations of parent reactions to sexstereotyped behaviors: Age and sex effects. Child Development, 62, 617- 628.
16. Flood, M. (2010). Men, sex, and homosociality: How bonds between men shape their sexual relations with women. Men and Masculinities, 12(1), 37-53.
17. Gaspar, M.M., (2024). Shaping Gender: The Role of Family in Children’s Identity Construction. (2024). Social Science and Humanities Journal, 8(11), 5913-5922. https://doi.org/10.18535/sshj.v8i11.1482
18. George, S. S., Denne, E., ve Stolzenberg, S. N. (2022). Blaming children: How rape myths manifest in defense attorneys’ questions to children testifying about child sexual abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(17-18), NP16623–NP16646. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211023485
19. Griffin, S. (1979). Rape: The power of consiousness. San Francisco: Harper and Row.
20. Grubb, A., ve Turner, E. (2012). Attribution of blame in rape cases: A review of the impact of rape myth acceptance, gender role conformity and substance use on victim blaming. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(5), 443-452.
21. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü. (2015). Türkiye'de Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddet Araştırması 2014.https://fs.hacettepe.edu.tr/hips/dosyalar/Ara%C5%9Ft%C4%B1rmalar%20-%20raporlar/Aile%20i%C3%A7i%20%C5%9Eiddet%20Ara%C5%9Ft%C4%B1rmalar%C4%B1/2014_AiSA_Anarapor.pdf
22. Herman, J. (2007). Travma ve iyileşme. İstanbul: Literatür Yayınları.
23. Hirtenlehner, H. ve Farrall, S. (2014). Is the ‘shadow of sexual assault’ responsible for women’s higher fear of burglary?, The British Journal of Criminology, 54(6), 1167–1185. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu054
24. Hooks, B. (2014). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
25. Jones, J.S., Alexander, C., Wynn, B.N., Rossman, L. ve Dunnuck, C. (2009). Why women don't report sexual assault to the police: The ınfluence of psychosocial variables and traumatic ınjury. The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 36(4), 417-424.
26. Jirek, S. L. (2015). Soul pain: The hidden toll of working with survivors of physical and sexual violence. SAGE Open, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015597905 (Original work published 2015)
27. Kazmi, S. M. A., Iftikhar, R., ve Fayyaz, M. U. (2023). “It is all her fault”: psychosocial correlates of the negative attitudes towards rape victims among the general population of pakistan. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-022-00320-3
28. Lievore, D. (2003). Non-reporting and hidden recording of sexual assault in Australia. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
29. Littleton, H. (2011). Rape myths and beyond: a commentary on edwards and colleagues. Sex Roles, 65(11-12), 792-797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9982-8
30. Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape Myths: In Review: In Review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(2), 133-164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00448.x
31. Olszewska, K., Piotrowski, P. ve Wojciechowski, B.W. (2023). Attitudes towards rape and their determinants among men, women and non-binary people in Poland. Sexuality & Culture 27, 863–877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-022-10042-2
32. Payne, D. L., Lonsway, K. A., ve Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement. Journal of Research in Personality, 33(1), 27-68.
33. Stewart, S., Willmott, D., Murphy, A., ve Phillips, C. (2023). “I thought I’m better off just trying to put this behind me” – a contemporary approach to understanding why women decide not to report sexual violence. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 35(1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2023.2292103
34. Thelma Riddell, M. F-G. ve Bevery. L. (2009). Strategies used by rural women to stop, avoid, or escape from ıntimate partner violence, Health Care for Women International, 30:1-2, 134-159, DOI: 10.1080/07399330802523774
35. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Adalet Bakanlığı. (2004). 5237 sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu, Madde 102: Cinsel saldırı (Resmî Gazete).
36. Ullman, S. E. (2010). Talking about sexual assault: Society's response to survivors. American Psychological Association.
37. Websdale N. (1995). Rural woman abuse: the voices of Kentucky women. Violence against women, 1(4), 309–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801295001004002
38. Walby, S. (1990). Theorizing patriarchy. Oxford : Basil Blackwell.
39. Wasco, S. M. ve Campbell, R. (2002). Emotional reactions of rape victim advocates: A multiple case study of anger and fear. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(2), 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00050