Consent Myths and Norm Violation Responses: Reconceptualizing Rape Myth Theory in Sexual Assault Sentencing in China

Criminal sentencing in sexual assault cases exhibits systematic disparities based on victim-offender relationships, yet existing theoretical explanations remain inadequate for understanding the underlying cognitive mechanisms. This study reconceptualizes rape myth theory by distinguishing between two distinct cognitive structures: consent myths that operate through everyday cultural reinforcement, and norm violation responses that activate through moral boundary violations. Analyzing 7701 Chinese rape case judgments (2012-2020), we demonstrate that these mechanisms produce opposing sentencing effects. Consent myths lead to sentencing discounts of 5%-9% for acquaintance and intimate partner cases, while norm violation responses trigger 25% longer sentences for familial cases. This dual-structure framework explains previously puzzling cross-cultural patterns, including why Chinese courts impose harsher punishment on family members than strangers. We identify two critical moderating factors that interact differently with these myth types. Lay assessor participation produces "accidental equity" through generalized punitiveness, compressing relationship-based disparities via universal severity rather than bias correction. Provincial modernization demonstrates contradictory effects: reducing consent myth influence through changing gender norms while simultaneously amplifying norm violation responses through heightened moral sensitivity. Crucially, female educational advancement proves more effective than general economic growth in reducing rape myth influence.