‘Rape myths not behind low conviction rate, says leading family lawyer’ stated a headline from the Guardian newspaper in March 2013. Helen Reece (a lawyer and academic at the London School of Economics) argued that the rate of convictions for rape in England in 2011/12 (at less than seven per cent of prosecutions) should be attributed to the lack of independent witness evidence in such crimes. She acknowledged that certain ‘myths’ do exist in society that persist with ‘victim-blaming’: that is, alleging that the woman was at fault in her behaviour which led to the act of sexual violence. Instead of tying these myths to conviction rates, however, she contends that these myths are merely a convenient way of explaining the low number of guilty verdicts, as she believes that judges, lawyers and juries are in fact capable of distancing their arguments and decisions from such misconceptions. Reece fails to address, however, why these myths persist in society or, indeed, their origins, divorcing the potential for cultural exchange between wider social ideas and the courtroom environment. In discussing conviction rates she also completely ignores the reasons behind the low numbers of sexual crimes that are reported to the police, and even when they are reported, the limited odds that the case will reach a formal prosecution. As this collection shows, we must turn to history to fully investigate the roots of modern perceptions of sexual violence and to understand the significance of continuity and change in these ideas.