The Dangerous Normalisation of Sexual Entitlement
By Sally Jackson, FiLiA lead for ending male violence against women and girls
The exposure of widespread drugging and rape within intimate relationships has shattered a comforting myth: that sexual violence is primarily committed by strangers, predators lurking outside the home or a small number of ‘monsters’ unlike the rest of society. Cases such as Gisèle Pelicot forced public attention on to a far more disturbing reality: that ordinary, socially-integrated men can – and do – commit extreme violence against women, often with the support, encouragement or silent complicity of other men.
What porn sites like Motherless (thankfully taken down last weekend, although we know there will be others out there) reveal is not simply individual pathology, but a culture in which women’s humanity is routinely subordinated to male entitlement. The sharing of images, fantasies and accounts of drugging and rape is part of a broader ecosystem of misogyny that eroticises domination, humiliation and the removal of women’s consent. Technology has accelerated this process, allowing men to normalise and validate each other’s behaviour in ways that were once hidden or fragmented.
Feminists have warned for decades that violence against women does not emerge in a vacuum. It is sustained by social attitudes that minimise women’s boundaries, treat male sexual access as expected and frame women’s bodies as available for consumption. The growth of violent pornography, online misogynist communities and ‘joking’ cultures around coercion have all contributed to an environment where abuse can be reframed as fantasy, kink or private behaviour rather than recognised as male violence.
Survivors from the sex industry who have spoken at FiLiA have over the years repeatedly warned about the consequences of normalising the idea that consent can be bought. When sexual access to women’s bodies is treated as a commodity, it further erodes any meaningful understanding of consent as something freely given, mutual and revocable. Their testimonies expose how transactional models of sex can reinforce male entitlement and blur understanding of coercion, compliance and abuse. In that context, the drugging of women is not an inexplicable leap from ‘normal’ behaviour, but part of a continuum in which women’s autonomy is progressively disregarded.
The drugging of partners is also deeply connected to coercive control. It is an expression of total entitlement: the belief that a woman’s consciousness, autonomy and bodily integrity can be removed entirely for male gratification. The fact that many perpetrators are husbands or partners matters profoundly. These are not failures to recognise consent; they are deliberate acts designed to eliminate it.
Our sisters in the Network Against Non State Torture have also recognised that sexual assault of a victim while drugged should be understood not as an isolated incident, but as part of a wider pattern of abusive behaviour and psychological torture. The deliberate administration of substances in order to incapacitate, violate, confuse and silence women creates profound and lasting trauma. Survivors often describe not only the assault itself, but the terror of lost memory, self-doubt, disorientation and the destruction of trust in their own perceptions. These tactics mirror broader patterns seen in coercive and sadistic abuse, where domination is achieved through fear, destabilisation and the erosion of a woman’s sense of reality and selfhood.
We should resist the temptation to treat these crimes as shocking anomalies exposed only through extraordinary cases. Survivors, particularly women in abusive relationships, have spoken for years about being sexually assaulted while asleep, intoxicated, medicated, dissociated or otherwise unable to consent. Too often they were dismissed, disbelieved or encouraged to see these acts as misunderstandings within relationships rather than rape.
Addressing this requires more than criminal justice responses alone, though robust investigation and prosecution are essential. It demands cultural and political change, including:
Naming male violence clearly, without euphemism or attempts to individualise it away from wider patterns.
Challenging the industries and online spaces that profit from the sexualisation of coercion and abuse.
Teaching consent not as a technical checklist, but as rooted in mutuality, respect and recognition of women’s full humanity.
Supporting survivor-led organisations and feminist services that understand the impact of male violence against women.
Taking seriously women’s accounts of abuse within intimate relationships, particularly where coercive control is present.
Holding institutions accountable when they minimise or fail to recognise sexual violence perpetrated by intimate partners.
There is understandable public horror in response to these revelations. But horror alone is not enough. The uncomfortable truth is that these acts grow from attitudes and structures that remain widespread and tolerated. If we want to prevent further harm, we must confront not only the perpetrators themselves, but the culture that has allowed so many men to believe they are entitled to women’s bodies, consciousness and silence.
If you want to add your voice to an important survivor campaign highlighting this issue and developing an international support network, check out #EndEyeCheck