The conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell in 2021 marked one of the only moments of criminal accountability to emerge from the sprawling sexual exploitation operation run by Jeffrey Epstein. Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years in federal prison for conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor. While a conviction was long-overdue and Maxwell’s actions deserved prosecution, her status as the sole person convicted in Epstein’s “pyramid scheme of sexual exploitation” raises gender-based questions. Despite the network of abuse reportedly involving numerous powerful men, the only conviction belongs to a woman.
Women who commit crimes are often judged more harshly when their actions violate gender norms. This is the “double deviance” effect: women are punished not only for breaking the law but also for transgressing expectations of femininity. In traditional gender ideology, women are socially positioned as caretakers and nurturers of children. When a woman is the perpetrator of sexual exploitation and abuse, the violation of those expectations contributes to her portrayal as uniquely monstrous. Maxwell’s attorney, Bobbi Sternheim, asserted, “ever since Eve was accused of tempting Adam with the apple, women have been blamed for the bad behavior of men. And women are often villainized and punished more than the men ever are.” While Maxwell is blameworthy for her active participation in the sex trafficking operation, Sternheim’s point brings light to the disparity in accountability seen in this case.
Furthermore, the Maxwell case highlights how gender operates within elite networks of wealth and influence. Epstein’s social circle reportedly included billionaires, politicians, financiers, royalty, and otherprominent public figures. Networks of this kind often function through institutional self-protection and elite interconnection, making it difficult for legal systems to penetrate since it would require governmental agencies to admit to decades of negligence and powerful individuals to turn on each other, endangering themselves in the process. Many of the men named and accused of involvement in Epstein’s sex trafficking operation have agreed to civil settlements without ever facing criminal charges.
Women who operate within male-dominated elite networks have less structural protection than the men at the top of those networks. In cases where “networks are stronger than protection of the weakest, power results in impunity.” Thus, women may participate in wrongdoing while also being more vulnerable to legal accountability than the powerful men around them. If powerful men benefit from institutional protection while a female associate becomes the sole convicted participant, the legal narrative risks reinforcing a system where women are punished not only for their wrongdoing, but for enabling male wrongdoing while male perpetrators escape scrutiny.
Recognizing these gendered dynamics does not diminish Maxwell’s culpability. Survivors testified that she recruited them as teenagers, normalized Epstein’s abuse, and facilitated encounters that caused lasting harm. Assistant U.S. Attorney Lara Pomerantz asserted that Maxwell “preyed on vulnerable young girls, manipulated them, and served them up to be sexually abused.” Holding her accountable was an essential step toward justice. At the same time, when an operation involves multiple actors across decades, the legal system’s ability to produce only one conviction inevitably incites scrutiny.
When the only person held criminally accountable in a case involving powerful men is a woman, it requires an investigation into how gender influences blame and punishment. It is not time to move on from the Epstein files; it is time to hold powerful men accountable for their crimes against humanity.
This piece is part of our first-year law student blog series. Congratulations to author Catherine Diel on being chosen!
All views expressed herein are personal to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law or of Villanova University.