Reconceptualising the Measurement of Rape in Jamaica: Expanding Legal and Empirical Definitions to Include Male Victimisation

Abstract

Rape in Jamaica has historically been defined, measured, and interpreted through a narrow legal and socio-cultural lens that privileges female victimisation while marginalising male experiences. This study critically examines the conceptual and methodological limitations embedded in traditional definitions of rape, particularly within Jamaican legal frameworks and statistical systems. Using a dissertation-style analytical approach, the research interrogates how underreporting, gender norms, and institutional biases contribute to the systematic exclusion of male victims from official crime statistics and scholarly discourse. The study advances a redefined conceptualisation of rape as any act of sexual intercourse that occurs against a person’s will, irrespective of gender, marital status, age, or physical or mental capacity to consent. By synthesising legal analysis, criminological theory, and empirical evidence, the paper demonstrates that the current measurement of rape in Jamaica is both incomplete and structurally biased. Comparative insights from international jurisdictions further reveal the feasibility and necessity of gender-neutral legal definitions and inclusive measurement frameworks. The study also explores the implications of redefining rape for public health policy, criminal justice reform, and social attitudes toward masculinity and victimhood. Ultimately, the research argues that expanding the definition of rape to include males is not merely a semantic adjustment but a fundamental requirement for achieving equity, accuracy, and justice in both legal and statistical systems. This reconceptualisation provides a foundation for more comprehensive victim support services and evidence-based policymaking in Jamaica.