“Why Are We Still Asking Her Why?”

Aastha Kunj, Victim-Blaming and the Psychology of Sexual Violence

By Rituraj Dubey
Editor, The Fourth Dimension

Crimes against women have remained a subject of social and political debate for centuries. From the persecution of women as witches in medieval Europe to slavery and sexual exploitation in different historical societies, and to practices such as sati in parts of pre-modern India, women's bodies have repeatedly been subjected to control, violence and institutionalised discrimination.

Modern societies have formally moved away from many of these practices. Yet violence against women has not disappeared. It has changed its forms.

Women continue to face physical, psychological and sexual harassment in homes, workplaces, educational institutions, public transport, streets and increasingly, digital spaces.

According to the National Crime Records Bureau's Crime in India 2024 data, 4,41,534 cases of crimes against women were registered across India in 2024. That translates to approximately 1,210 registered cases every day, or one registered crime against a woman approximately every 71 seconds. Rape accounted for 29,536 registered cases, while offences under the POCSO Act involving girl children accounted for 67,809 cases.

These numbers are not merely statistics. Behind every FIR is a person, a family and often a life permanently altered by violence.

And yet, even as the debate over women's safety continues, another case brings the question back into public consciousness.

The alleged gang rape of a 17-year-old girl at Aastha Kunj Park in Delhi on September 21, 2026, has once again triggered questions about women's safety in public spaces, policing, victim-blaming and the deeper social and psychological roots of sexual violence.

According to the FIR and police accounts reported by the media, three men allegedly approached the teenager and her male friend inside the park, claimed to be policemen, threatened them and allegedly sexually assaulted the girl after taking her to a secluded area. All three accused have been arrested, and the investigation and judicial proceedings are continuing.

The case has also raised questions about the physical safety of large public parks, including lighting, surveillance, patrolling and access control. Delhi authorities have subsequently ordered safety audits and reviews of public spaces.

But there is a larger question that remains.

What makes a person capable of committing sexual violence in the first place?

If we discuss only where the crime happened, we understand the location.

If we discuss only how the police responded, we understand the investigation.

But if we want to prevent sexual violence, we have to ask a much more uncomfortable question:

What happens inside the mind of a person who decides that another human being's autonomy can be violated?

The Numbers Tell Us Something — But Not Everything

The NCRB's 2024 figures show the scale of registered crimes against women in India. But official crime statistics have an important limitation: they represent crimes that are reported and registered within the criminal justice system, not every incident that actually occurs.

Sexual violence is particularly vulnerable to under-reporting because survivors may face stigma, threats, family pressure, fear of retaliation, economic dependence and distrust of institutions.

The World Health Organization has similarly noted that violence against women is significantly under-reported because of stigma, fear and barriers to accessing services and justice.

There is another statistic that should fundamentally change how we imagine rape.

According to analysis of NCRB's 2024 data, 96.8 per cent of registered rape cases involved an accused who was known to the survivor.

The popular imagination often associates rape with an unknown stranger lurking in a dark alley.

The data tell a more complicated story.

The perpetrator can be someone known to the survivor — a relative, partner, acquaintance, neighbour, colleague or another person within the survivor's social environment.

This means that women's safety cannot simply be reduced to avoiding deserted places.

The problem is much deeper.

So, What Creates a Sexual Offender?

There is no single psychological profile of a person who commits sexual violence.

This distinction is important.

It is tempting to search for one convenient explanation — pornography, alcohol, mental illness, childhood trauma, sexual frustration, patriarchy or a "bad upbringing" — and declare that we have found the cause.

Research does not support such a simple explanation.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identifies multiple factors associated with sexual-violence perpetration, including hostility towards women, hypermasculinity, traditional gender norms, acceptance of violence, exposure to sexually explicit media, coercive sexual fantasies, alcohol and drug use, early sexual experiences and previous experiences of victimisation or perpetration.

The WHO similarly identifies gender inequality, harmful gender norms, attitudes that justify violence, a sense of entitlement, controlling behaviour, childhood exposure to violence, harmful alcohol use and weak institutional responses among factors associated with violence against women.

These factors do not operate independently in every case.

Rather, sexual violence can emerge from a combination of individual attitudes, social conditioning, relationships, opportunity, power and institutional environments.

The Direct Drivers

Entitlement: "I Deserve Access"

At the heart of many forms of sexual violence lies something more fundamental than sexual desire: entitlement.

The belief can take different forms:

She owes me.

She cannot say no.

I am entitled to her attention.

She encouraged me, so she cannot withdraw.

If she rejects me, she deserves to be punished.

The WHO identifies attitudes that justify violence and a sense of entitlement among factors associated with violence against women.

This is where rape becomes fundamentally different from consensual sexual behaviour.

The problem is not desire.

The problem is the decision to override another person's autonomy.

Sexual violence begins where consent ends and entitlement takes over.

Hypermasculinity and the Performance of Dominance

Masculinity itself is not a cause of rape.

But a model of masculinity that equates manhood with dominance, aggression, sexual conquest and control can become dangerous when combined with other risk factors.

The CDC lists hypermasculinity, hostility towards women and adherence to traditional gender norms among factors associated with sexual-violence perpetration.

UN Women has also highlighted the role of gender norms that associate masculinity with dominance and violence and devalue women.

The problem, therefore, is not teaching boys to be confident, strong or assertive.

The problem begins when strength is defined as the ability to dominate someone weaker.

A boy repeatedly told that a "real man" must always control the situation may eventually learn a dangerous lesson:

that another person's boundary is an obstacle to overcome rather than a boundary to respect.

Gendered Socialisation

There is an uncomfortable difference in the way boys and girls are often raised.

A girl is told:

Don't go out alone.

Don't come home late.

Don't talk to strangers.

Don't trust men.

Don't wear that.

Don't drink.

Don't sit there.

Don't travel alone.

But how often is a boy systematically taught:

Don't intimidate girls.

Don't touch someone without consent.

"No" means no.

Silence is not consent.

A relationship does not give you ownership.

Rejection does not justify humiliation.

A woman's clothing has nothing to do with your right to control her body.

This difference matters.

The UNFPA's review of gender norms in India has highlighted the relationship between restrictive gender norms, women's wellbeing and the need for interventions that address gender, power and sexuality.

The question, therefore, cannot simply be:

How do we protect girls?

It must also be:

What are we teaching boys about girls?

The Indirect and Contributing Factors

Some factors frequently associated with sexual violence do not independently "cause rape".

That distinction is essential.

They may increase risk when combined with other factors such as entitlement, hostility towards women, poor impulse control, violence-supportive attitudes or social acceptance of coercion.

Understanding that difference prevents us from replacing one oversimplification with another.

Alcohol and Drugs

Alcohol is frequently mentioned whenever sexual violence occurs.

But alcohol does not manufacture a rapist.

Research identifies harmful alcohol use as a risk factor associated with sexual violence because intoxication can impair judgement, reduce inhibition and increase impulsive or aggressive behaviour.

But there is an important line that must never be blurred:

Alcohol may be a contributing factor. It is never an excuse.

A person being intoxicated does not give them the right to violate another person's body.

Responsibility for sexual violence remains with the perpetrator.

Pornography: Influence, Not a Simple Explanation

This is perhaps one of the most difficult areas to discuss responsibly.

Pornography cannot simply be declared the cause of rape.

The evidence is considerably more complicated.

The CDC includes exposure to sexually explicit media among factors associated with sexual violence, but that does not mean that consuming pornography automatically causes someone to become a sexual offender.

The concern becomes more significant when explicit material is consumed alongside misogyny, coercive sexual scripts, objectification and the belief that sexual access is an entitlement.

Therefore, perhaps the more meaningful question is not:

Does pornography create rapists?

It is:

What happens when sexual imagery is consumed without any education about consent, mutuality, dignity and boundaries?

Childhood Abuse and Exposure to Violence

Research has identified childhood exposure to abuse and violence as factors associated with later perpetration of violence.

But this relationship must be understood carefully.

A person who was abused as a child does not automatically become an abuser.

The overwhelming majority of people who experience childhood trauma do not grow up to commit sexual violence.

Trauma may be a risk factor.

It is never a justification.

This distinction is important because otherwise the discussion risks becoming another form of reductionism: explaining a perpetrator entirely through his childhood while ignoring the choices and responsibility involved in an adult crime.

Narcissistic Entitlement and Distorted Thinking

The Aastha Kunj case has also brought renewed attention to psychological explanations of sexual offending.

Psychiatrist Dr Rajiv Mehta of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, speaking to The Times of India in the context of the case, discussed factors such as impulsivity, low frustration tolerance, anger, a belief that one can escape the law and, in some cases, substance use.

Clinical psychologist and psychoanalytic therapist Pulkit Sharma highlighted narcissistic entitlement and patriarchal beliefs of superiority as possible contributors in some cases, while also pointing towards the influence of popular culture and social-media narratives around dominance and masculinity.

Forensic psychologist Dr Rajat Mitra, who has worked with survivors of sexual assault, made another important distinction: sexual offenders do not necessarily suffer from mental illness. He pointed instead towards deviant thinking, distorted ideas about relationships and the perception of force as acceptable in some offenders.

This distinction deserves emphasis.

Rape is not a mental illness.

Nor does mental illness explain sexual violence as a category.

Mental-health conditions and criminal behaviour should not be casually equated. To do so not only misunderstands psychiatry but also contributes to stigma against people living with mental-health conditions.

Then Comes the Question We Avoid: Victim-Blaming

Perhaps the most disturbing part of sexual violence is what happens after the violence.

The survivor becomes the subject of an investigation conducted by society.

Where was she?

Why was she there?

Why was she with a boy?

What was she wearing?

Why did she trust him?

Why did she not fight?

Why did she not scream?

Why did she go to the park?

But none of these questions answer the central question:

Why did the perpetrator assault her?

A woman entering a public park does not constitute consent.

A friendship does not constitute consent.

A relationship does not constitute consent.

Clothing does not constitute consent.

Alcohol does not constitute consent.

Being alone does not constitute consent.

And silence does not constitute consent.

Nothing transfers ownership of another human being's body.

Aastha Kunj Is Bigger Than Aastha Kunj

The park itself matters.

Lighting matters.

CCTV matters.

Police patrolling matters.

Security personnel matter.

Public transport matters.

Emergency response matters.

Fast investigation matters.

Accountability matters.

After the Aastha Kunj incident, concerns were raised about lighting, surveillance and security arrangements in the large DDA-managed park, while authorities initiated safety audits and reviews of public spaces.

These interventions are necessary.

But they are not the entire answer.

Imagine a perfectly illuminated city populated by people who still believe women owe men obedience.

It would still not be safe.

And imagine a society with progressive attitudes but abandoned parks, inadequate policing and weak institutional accountability.

That would not be enough either.

Women's safety requires both safer environments and safer social attitudes.

The Myth of "Stranger Danger"

There is another misconception that needs to be confronted.

Women are frequently advised to fear the unknown man.

But NCRB data show that in 96.8 per cent of registered rape cases in 2024, the accused was known to the survivor.

UNICEF has similarly noted, in its discussion of sexual violence against children, that perpetrators are frequently people known to and trusted by the child.

This changes the prevention conversation.

Safety education cannot simply be:

"Don't talk to strangers."

It has to include:

Know what consent means.

Know that an adult cannot demand sexual secrecy from a child.

Know that authority does not equal consent.

Know that coercion is not consent.

Know that you can say no even to someone you know.

And equally importantly:

Teach boys what those boundaries mean.

Sex Education Is Not About Teaching Children to Have Sex

This is another conversation Indian society often approaches with unnecessary discomfort.

Comprehensive sexuality education is not simply a lesson about sexual activity.

It includes knowledge about bodies, relationships, consent, communication, rights, boundaries, gender equality and personal safety.

UNFPA describes comprehensive sexuality education as an age-appropriate process that addresses the physical, emotional and social dimensions of sexuality and relationships.

The UNFPA India review on gender norms has also highlighted interventions that address gender and power and reported improvements in gender-equitable attitudes and knowledge among young people in certain Indian programmes.

If families and schools refuse to discuss these issues, young people will still learn about sexuality.

They will simply learn from somewhere else.

Friends.

Social media.

Algorithms.

Pornography.

Popular culture.

And sometimes from people who themselves have deeply distorted ideas about intimacy.

Silence is not protection.

A Crime Cannot Be Prevented by Asking Its Potential Victim to Become Smaller

Perhaps this is the most important question in the entire debate.

Why does the burden of prevention so often fall upon women?

Don't go there.

Don't wear this.

Don't travel alone.

Don't trust him.

Don't stay out late.

Don't use that route.

Don't sit in that park.

Don't drink.

Don't date.

Don't post.

Don't attract attention.

At some point, safety advice becomes something else.

It becomes a restriction on freedom.

A society cannot call itself safe merely because women have learned how to make themselves smaller.

The objective of public safety should be to expand women's freedom—not shrink it.

A woman should be able to study late, work late, travel alone, meet a friend, sit in a park, take public transport and return home without having to calculate the possibility of becoming a victim.

That is not privilege.

That is citizenship.

The Question Society Must Answer

The Aastha Kunj case has generated anger.

That anger is understandable.

But anger alone does not prevent the next crime.

Nor does another hashtag.

Nor does another promise.

Nor does another debate about women's clothing.

Nor does telling women to carry pepper spray.

Self-defence can be useful. Better lighting can save lives. CCTV can assist investigations. Police patrols can deter offenders. Fast trials can strengthen institutional credibility.

But prevention has to begin much earlier.

Inside families.

Inside schools.

Inside peer groups.

Inside popular culture.

Inside our understanding of masculinity.

Inside our understanding of consent.

And, ultimately, inside the way we teach boys what it means to be a man.

The question should not merely be:

"How can women protect themselves from men?"

That question places the entire burden on women.

The harder and more necessary question is:

"How do we raise men who understand that a woman's autonomy is not negotiable?"

That requires parents who discuss respect rather than only reputation.

Teachers who discuss consent rather than only biology.

Institutions that respond rather than merely react.

Police forces that investigate rather than intimidate.

Courts that deliver timely justice.

Media that report without turning survivors into spectacles.

And a society that stops asking the survivor what she did to invite the crime.

The Genesis

Because the genesis of rape is not found in a woman's clothes, a park, a late-night outing or a friendship with a man.

It lies in the moment when another human being's autonomy is devalued—when entitlement replaces consent, domination replaces respect, and the perpetrator decides that his desire, anger, power or gratification matters more than another person's dignity.

And perhaps that is where the conversation after Aastha Kunj must begin.

Not with:

"Why was she there?"

But with:

"Why did he believe he could do this?"

And beyond that:

"What did the family, school, peer group, culture, institutions and society around him teach—or fail to teach—about the meaning of another person's 'no'?"

Until we are willing to confront those questions, every new case risks producing the same cycle:

Crime. Outrage. Debate. Silence. And then, another crime.

The real measure of women's safety will not be how loudly society reacts after a woman is harmed.

It will be whether society can create a world in which she does not have to live in fear of being harmed in the first place.

— Rituraj Dubey
Editor, The Fourth Dimension

Further Reading

1. National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) — Crime in India 2024
   Official national crime statistics, including crimes against women, rape and offences under the POCSO Act.
2. World Health Organization (WHO) — Violence Against Women
   Global evidence on the prevalence, risk factors and consequences of violence against women.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — Sexual Violence: Risk and Protective Factors
   Evidence-based framework examining individual, relationship, community and societal factors associated with sexual violence.
4. UNFPA India — Gender Norms and the Wellbeing of Women and Girls in India: A Review
   Research on gender norms, women's wellbeing, gender equality and interventions addressing gender and power relations in India.
5. UN Women — Rape Culture and Sexual Violence
   Resources examining victim-blaming, gender norms, sexual violence and social attitudes.
6. UNICEF India — Sexual Violence Against Children
   Resources and evidence concerning sexual violence against children, prevention and child protection.
7. The Indian Express — Reporting on the Aastha Kunj Park case, September 2026.
8. The Times of India — Why some men commit sexual crimes? No easy answers to this, September 27, 2026 — expert perspectives from psychiatrist Dr Rajiv Mehta, forensic psychologist Dr Rajat Mitra and clinical psychologist Pulkit Sharma.
9. Hindustan Times / The New Indian Express / Deccan Chronicle — Reporting on Delhi's public-space safety audits, infrastructure gaps and the wider response following the Aastha Kunj incident.