Most sexual harm is committed by someone the victim knows, which means continued contact after the incident is common. It’s easy to assume that a “real victim” would never see the person who harmed her again, but that expectation does not reflect how these situations often unfold. Meeting him again, whether for work, social reasons, logistics, pressure, or confusion, is not evidence that it was consensual or that it did not constitute assault or rape. It’s more common than people assume.

So how do we make sense of this?

Trauma Responses Are Often Not “Logical” 

After assault, the brain does not behave the way people expect. Trauma responses are shaped by psychological, social, and situational pressures that can create confusion, limit agency, and make it difficult to recognize or respond to coercion in the moment.

Common responses include:

• freeze or appease reactions, not just fight or flee
• confusion about what happened
• delayed recognition that it was assault
• minimizing or reinterpreting the event

Survivors often question themselves, wonder if they “gave the wrong impression,” or try to restore a sense of normalcy. Research shows trauma can produce PTSD symptoms, dissociation, and difficulty accurately interpreting threat and safety.

Returning or maintaining contact is often misread as consent, when it is more accurately understood as an attempt to regain control, make sense of the experience, or reduce danger.

“Trauma Bonding” and Coercive Dynamics

In some cases, survivors experience what is known as a trauma bond. Abusive dynamics often follow a cycle of harm followed by apology or affection, then harm again. Over time, this can create a powerful attachment that feels like dependence or loyalty.

While most commonly studied in domestic violence, similar dynamics can appear in situations of sexual coercion, particularly when the perpetrator is known, there is an emotional or social connection, or a power imbalance exists, such as with a boss, coworker, or partner.

Structural and Social Pressures Matter

Survivors may maintain contact for a range of reasons, including workplace constraints, fear of escalation, economic dependence, social pressure to be “nice” or avoid conflict, concern about not being believed, and, at times, even a reluctance to embarrass or upset the person who harmed them. What may seem counterintuitive from the outside does not change the reality that their boundaries were crossed. And importantly, survivors who don’t disclose or who blame themselves are more likely to continue contact.

Just-World Fallacy

Victim blaming is often driven by the just-world fallacy. People want to believe that bad things only happen for a reason, because that belief offers a sense of safety. If she did something wrong, then we can avoid doing that thing. If there is a clear cause, then there is a clear way to stay safe. That logic replaces the discomfort of uncertainty with the illusion of control. The harder truth is that the world is often unpredictable, and harm does not always follow rules we can neatly manage. It is easier to question her choices than to confront that reality. So instead of asking what pressures or trauma responses were operating? People default to predictable lines of doubt: She’s just having regrets. Why did she go back? Why didn’t she say anything sooner? Each question reframes the situation around her behavior rather than his.

Socialization

Women and girls are often socialized to doubt themselves and prioritize others, a pattern well documented in sexual violence research. Survivors frequently interpret ambiguous situations in ways that preserve social harmony, giving the benefit of the doubt and at times reinterpreting coercion as miscommunication. This dynamic can produce real uncertainty and confusion.

In summary, continued contact with a perpetrator is not evidence of consent; it is a well-documented feature of sexual violence. Most assaults occur within existing relationships, and many survivors maintain contact due to trauma responses, social pressures, and structural constraints. It is understandable to assume that a “real victim” would immediately sever all ties or report right away. In reality, sexual violence often unfolds in ways that are far more complex.