Epistemic injustices and sexual violence against girls and women
on data and facts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70622/2238-7110.2025.666Keywords:
justice, epistemic injustice, social epistemology, sexual violence, gender and raceAbstract
This article discusses the concept of justice and its counterpoint to injustice, highlighting the historical neglect of science in exploring the latter in depth. Based on the social epistemology proposed by Miranda Fricker, this study analyzes epistemic injustice as a phenomenon that limits access to and validation of individual and collective experiences, especially those of historically marginalized groups. This reflection is grounded in the epistemic practices that, over time, legitimize and reproduce gender, racial, and class inequalities, resulting in epistemicide and social exclusion. In this context, it is evident how sexual violence against women and children, especially Black women, not only violates fundamental rights but also constitutes a serious form of epistemic injustice by
silencing victims and denying credibility to their testimonies. The study thus seeks to articulate theoretical concepts and empirical data, demonstrating the relevance of Fricker's approach to understanding the social dynamics that underpin sexual violence and to indicating ways to address it through cognitive justice. Methodologically, this research is qualitative in nature, theoretical and bibliographical, and based on the analysis of references from philosophy, sociology, anthropology, and social epistemology, particularly Miranda Fricker's work on epistemic injustice. The study begins with a critical review of academic literature and official documents, linking concepts of justice, injustice, and epistemic practices to discussions on sexual violence against women and children, using an exploratory-analytical method.
References
ALVAREZ, Sonia E. Para além da sociedade civil: reflexões sobre o campo feminista. Cadernos Pagu, Campinas, v. 43, 2014.
BRAH, Avtar. Ain’t I a Woman?. Journal of International Women’s Studies, [s.l.], v.5, n. 3, p. 75-86, 2004.
BRASIL. Ministério da Saúde. Viva: instrutivo notificação de violência interpessoal e autoprovocada. Brasília, DF: Ministério da Saúde, 2016.
BROWNMILLER, Susan. In our time: memoir of a revolution. Rio de Janeiro: Delta, 2000.
BYSKOV, Morten Fibieger. What makes epistemic injustice an “Injustice”? Journal of Social Philosophy, [s.l.], v. 52, n. 1, p. 116-133, Spring 2021.
CARASTATHIS, Anna. Intersectionality: origins, contestations, horizons. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 2016.
COLLINS, Patricia Hill; BILGE, Sirma. Intersectionality. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2016.
FACIO, Alda. La responsabilidad estatal frente al derecho humano a la igualdad. México: RC, 2014.
FETT, João Rizzio Vicente. O que é o conhecimento? Uma introdução à epistemologia contemporânea. Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS, 2019.
FRICKER, Miranda. Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
FRICKER, Miranda. Replies to Alcoff, Goldberg, and Hookway on Epistemic Injustice. Episteme, [s.l.], v. 7, n. 2, 2010.
GONZALES, Lélia. Racismo e sexismo na cultura brasileira. Revista Ciências Sociais Hoje, Anpocs, [s.l.], p. 223-244, 1984.
KELLY, Gregory J. Inquiry, activity, and epistemic practices. In: INQUIRY CONFERENCE ON DEVELOPING A CONSENSUS RESEARCH AGENDA, Feb. 2005, New Brunswick, NJ.
MULLER, Felipe de Matos; ETCHEVERRY, Kátia Martins (ed.). Ensaios sobre epistemologia do testemunho. Porto Alegre: Editora Fi, 2017.
ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS NAÇÕES UNIDAS (ONU). Recomendação Geral n. 33 sobre o acesso das mulheres à justiça. Comitê CEDAW, 2015.
ORGANIZAÇÃO DOS ESTADOS AMERICANOS (OEA). Convenção Interamericana para Prevenir, Punir e Erradicar a Violência contra a Mulher. Belém do Pará: OEA, 1994.
PEREIRA, Ana Claudia J. Pensamento social e político do movimento de mulheres negras: o lugar de ialodês, orixás e empregadas domésticas em projetos de justiça social. 2016. 245f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência Política) — Instituto de Estudos Sociais e Políticos, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 2016.
POHLHAUS JR., Gaile. Varieties of Epistemic Injustices. In: KIDD, Ian James; MEDINA, José; JR. POHLHAUS, Gaile. The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice. London: Routledge, 2017.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bruna dos Santos Costa Rodrigues

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Constitutional Research the right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International which allows sharing the work with recognition of the authors and its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this Journal (eg.: publishing in institutional repository or as a book), with a recognition of its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish their work online (eg.: in institutional repositories or on their personal website) at any point before or during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and the citation of the published work (see the Effect of Open Access).












