Nila Kartika Wati
The recent unsealing of documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case has once again thrust the harrowing realities of high-level sexual exploitation into the global spotlight, yet the subsequent public reaction highlights a recurring and problematic social cycle: a brief period of intense collective outrage followed by a steady descent back into silence and institutional forgetting. This pattern suggests that while the public is capable of witnessing the symptoms of gender-based violence, there remains a fundamental failure to comprehend the systemic frameworks that allow such violence to persist. When media narratives and public discourse focus exclusively on the "scandal" or the individual depravity of high-profile "monsters," they inadvertently obscure the root causes and the institutional structures that facilitate, protect, and reproduce harm on a mass scale.
The reliance on a narrative of individual pathology—framing violence as the work of a few deviant actors—permits the broader systems of power to evade critical scrutiny. This myopic view ensures that while individual perpetrators may occasionally face consequences, the conditions that enable child sexual exploitation and gender-based violence (GBV) remain largely intact. To break this cycle, experts argue that society must shift its focus toward "narrative power," which dictates how social issues are identified, who is held accountable, and which solutions are deemed viable. Without a sustained investment in the narrative and physical infrastructure required to challenge these systems, survivors remain marginalized, and the elite networks that perpetuate harm continue to operate with relative impunity.
A Chronology of Scandal and the Persistence of Systemic Harm
The history of modern gender-based violence reporting is marked by explosive revelations that promise systemic change but often result in limited institutional reform. The 2017 resurgence of the #MeToo movement, sparked by investigations into Harvey Weinstein, initially appeared to signal a permanent shift in power dynamics. This was followed in 2019 by the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein and the subsequent exposure of a vast, international network of exploitation involving some of the world’s most powerful figures. In each instance, the initial shockwave led to a flurry of headlines and public demands for justice.
However, a look at the timeline of these events reveals a sobering trend. Following the 2019 Epstein arrest and his subsequent death, public interest waned until the 2024 release of court documents reignited the conversation. This "scandal-response" model is reactive rather than preventative. While legal proceedings against individuals like Ghislaine Maxwell provided a semblance of accountability, the underlying vulnerabilities that the Epstein network exploited—such as the child welfare system and the economic precarity of young girls—have seen little to no structural intervention.
The machinery used to protect perpetrators is often as sophisticated as the exploitation itself. Historical evidence shows that powerful individuals routinely employ crisis PR firms, private intelligence agencies, and aggressive litigation strategies to discredit survivors and suppress testimony. For example, during the height of the allegations against him, Weinstein utilized private contractors to surveil and intimidate accusers. These tactics create a narrative asymmetry where those with immense financial resources can shape public perception, while survivors—particularly those from marginalized backgrounds—must struggle simply to be believed.
Statistical Disparities and the Crisis of Underfunding
The scale of gender-based violence remains one of the most significant human rights challenges of the 21st century. According to data from the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly one in three women worldwide has experienced physical or sexual violence. In the United States, that figure is even more staggering, with more than 50 percent of women reporting such experiences in their lifetime.
The impact is not distributed equally across all demographics. Data from the National Institute of Justice indicates that Indigenous and Alaska Native women experience sexual violence at rates significantly higher than the national average, with over 56 percent reporting such trauma. Similarly, Black women and girls face disproportionate levels of violence and are often subjected to "adultification bias." Research from the Georgetown Law Center on Poverty and Inequality shows that Black girls are frequently perceived as older, less innocent, and more "adult" than their White peers. This bias results in Black girls being less likely to receive protection and more likely to be blamed or criminalized when they disclose abuse.
Despite the prevalence of these issues, the philanthropic response has been historically inadequate. In 2023, organizations dedicated to women and girls received only 2.04 percent of total charitable giving in the United States. The funding gap is even more pronounced for trans-led organizations. A global survey of 449 trans organizations found that more than half operated on annual budgets of less than $20,000, despite 90 percent of these groups reporting high levels of violence and harassment within their communities. When funding is further disaggregated by race and geography, the resources reaching grassroots, feminist-led organizations—those most proximate to the harm—become almost negligible.
The Role of Technology in Amplifying Gender-Based Violence
The challenge of addressing gender-based violence is being further complicated by the rapid advancement of digital technology and artificial intelligence. The rise of AI-generated "deepfake" pornography is a prominent example of technology-facilitated violence, with the vast majority of such content targeting non-consenting women and girls. This form of digital abuse serves to humiliate and silence victims, often with little to no legal recourse available to the targets.
Furthermore, digital grooming and "sextortion" targeting minors have seen a sharp increase as perpetrators exploit the anonymity and reach of the internet. Algorithmic systems on social media platforms have also been criticized for amplifying content that normalizes sexual violence or promotes misogynistic ideologies. Philanthropic and policy responses have been slow to adapt to these shifts, often treating digital violence as a secondary concern rather than a structural evolution of traditional gender-based harm.
Investing in Narrative Infrastructure as a Public Good
To move beyond the limitations of "scandal-driven" advocacy, there is a growing call for philanthropy to treat "narrative infrastructure" as an essential public good. Narrative infrastructure refers to the network of storytellers, researchers, cultural workers, and community leaders who work to shift the underlying stories a society tells about itself. In the context of gender-based violence, this means moving away from the "monster" narrative and toward a comprehensive understanding of how power, race, and economics intersect to facilitate exploitation.
When dominant narratives prioritize the reputations of perpetrators or cast doubt on the credibility of survivors, the health consequences are severe. Stigma and trauma are compounded, leading to delays in medical treatment and mental health support. Conversely, a robust narrative infrastructure can foster an environment where survivors expect to be believed and supported. Currently, more than two-thirds of sexual assaults in the United States go unreported, a statistic that reflects a deep-seated lack of trust in institutional systems.
Philanthropic organizations have a unique opportunity to address this by providing multi-year, flexible funding to grassroots movements. This approach allows organizations to move beyond crisis management and toward long-term cultural strategy. It involves supporting research that challenges traditional assumptions, investing in survivor-led storytelling, and recognizing that movements are not just service providers but are essential actors in reshaping the public imagination.
Broader Impact and the Future of Gender Justice
The fight against gender-based violence is inextricably linked to the health of democratic institutions. In many parts of the world, rising authoritarianism is accompanied by intensified attacks on gender equity and the roll-back of protections for women and gender-expansive individuals. Gender-based violence is frequently used as a tool of social and political control, aimed at maintaining traditional hierarchies and silencing dissent.
Therefore, the investment in ending GBV is also an investment in democratic resilience. By centering the experiences of those most affected—particularly Black, Indigenous, and trans youth—society can begin to build systems where safety and dignity are the norm rather than the exception. The goal is to transform the conditions that make violence seem inevitable into a framework where accountability is sustained and prevention is prioritized.
In conclusion, the reliance on public scandal to drive social change is a failing strategy. While revelations like the Epstein files may provide a momentary spark of awareness, they do not constitute a plan for systemic transformation. Philanthropy and the public at large must recognize that the silence following a scandal is not a sign that the problem has been solved, but rather an indication that the systems of power have successfully weathered another storm. Only through deep, sustained investment in narrative power and the leadership of those most proximate to the harm can we hope to dismantle the structures of violence and build a future defined by genuine safety and freedom.
