How the media’s portrayal of abuse survivors distorts justice and fuels stigma.

by Ella O’Neal

If, by the end of this article, you still can’t comprehend how two boys could commit such an act against their own parents, then consider yourself fortunate. Fortunate that you have never experienced a suffering so profound, so unrelenting, that it could drive you to sacrifice your entire life just to escape it.

Menendez Brothers: When Sexual Abuse Survivors Are Portrayed as Monsters

The release of Netflix’s Monsters: The Menendez Brothers has reignited public outrage over how the brothers’ story is being portrayed. Many viewers are disturbed by the show’s implications surrounding Erik and Lyle’s relationship, particularly the suggestion that they were “lovers” or the undue focus on Erik’s sexuality. This sensationalized narrative not only distorts the reality of their traumatic experiences but also perpetuates harmful stereotypes about male survivors of sexual abuse. The show’s eroticized directing choices reduce it to sensational content rather than acknowledging the gravity of their experiences.

Lyle and Erik Menendez were convicted in 1996 for the murders of their parents, José and Kitty Menendez, in what many believed was a cold-blooded act of greed. However, as the brothers testified during their trial, the killings were the culmination of years of horrific abuse at the hands of their father. They described a childhood filled with sexual, physical, and emotional abuse that ultimately drove them to a breaking point.

Too often, it takes extreme cases like the Menendez brothers to even begin a meaningful conversation around sexual abuse—and by then, the damage is already done. Instead of focusing on prevention and support, we end up dissecting the aftermath of unimaginable pain and violence. It’s a tragic cycle: only when victims reach a breaking point do we start paying attention, but by then, it’s often too late to change the trajectory of their lives. This reactive approach fails not just the individuals involved but also the countless others who suffer in silence, feeling that their voices won’t be heard until something drastic happens.

Despite presenting substantial evidence of their father’s abusive behavior, the brothers’ claims were met with skepticism and disbelief. They were painted as manipulative liars seeking to escape responsibility for their actions, a narrative that disregarded the profound psychological impact of long-term abuse. This case, now under the spotlight again with Ryan Murphy’s new Netflix series raises crucial questions about how we view and treat survivors of sexual abuse, particularly male survivors, in the media and legal system.

Controversial Portrayals and Media Impact

The media has a long history of misrepresenting survivors, especially male survivors. When Erik’s sexuality was brought up during the trial, it was often used against him, suggesting that his abuse somehow defined or invalidated his identity. This kind of narrative is deeply problematic, as it reinforces harmful stigmas about masculinity and sexuality. The focus should be on understanding the devastating impact of their abuse, not sensationalizing their personal lives for shock value.

Decades later, little has changed. Even when the case was fresh, shows like Saturday Night Live were mocking the brothers’ testimonies on the stand, turning their harrowing experiences into punchlines. The way Erik and Lyle’s story is being told in Monsters reflects a much larger societal issue: the refusal to acknowledge the complexity of male victimhood and the tendency to sensationalize trauma—framing male survivors as either aggressors, liars, or somehow complicit in their abuse. This harmful portrayal not only retraumatizes survivors but also perpetuates a culture of disbelief and stigma that prevents many from coming forward.

By focusing on sensational aspects of the brothers’ lives, the show misses an opportunity to address the real issue: the cycle of abuse and the severe impact it has on survivors. For many viewers, the depiction of Erik and Lyle’s story is not just inaccurate; it’s a painful reminder of how male survivors are often discredited and misrepresented in the media.The brothers have spoken out against the show, with Erik stating, “It’s painful to see our story sensationalized and twisted. It’s like they’re using our trauma for entertainment.” Lyle echoed this sentiment, saying, “They’ve taken our darkest moments and turned them into a spectacle, completely ignoring the reality of what we endured.” Their frustration highlights the ongoing issue of media exploitation of survivors’ stories.

The Cycle of Abuse and Its Impact

Both Lyle and Erik described their father’s relentless physical and sexual abuse, starting from a young age. Their mother’s neglect and emotional instability added to an environment of fear and manipulation, turning their household into a place where love was distorted into control and violence. This type of upbringing doesn’t just leave physical scars—it completely alters the way survivors perceive themselves and the world around them, often trapping them in a vicious cycle of trauma and destructive behavior.

This cycle is particularly insidious for male survivors. A study from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) found that male victims of childhood sexual abuse are less likely to disclose their experiences due to fear of not being believed, shame, and societal expectations of masculinity. Society often expects men to “get over it” or “toughen up,” dismissing the long-term psychological effects of abuse. This toxic masculinity discourages men from seeking help and leaves them ill-equipped to process their trauma in healthy ways. 

Research shows that individuals who experience abuse in childhood are significantly more likely to encounter further victimization or become perpetrators themselves. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), children who experience abuse or household dysfunction are at a much higher risk for lifelong health and social issues. They are also twice as likely to experience depression, anxiety, and substance abuse, and are three times more likely to engage in violent behavior as adults.

For the Menendez brothers, this traumatic cycle manifested in profoundly damaging ways. At the time of their trial, therapists and experts testified that despite being 21 and 18 years old, Lyle and Erik had the emotional and cognitive maturity levels of children aged 8 to 10. This profound developmental delay was attributed to the relentless abuse and manipulation they endured from their parents, leaving them emotionally stunted and struggling to comprehend or escape their reality. Lyle, in particular, fell victim to perpetuating the cycle of abuse by mirroring the harmful behaviors he experienced. When he was a child, he confusedly directed this learned behavior toward Erik, demonstrating how the cycle of abuse continued within the family. The stigma and silence surrounding their abuse compounded their isolation, ultimately leading to the extreme actions they felt were their only means of survival.

Breaking the cycle of abuse requires more than just acknowledging that it exists; it means creating environments where survivors can heal without fear of judgment or retribution. It means believing them when they speak out and providing the resources they need to recover. In the case of the Menendez brothers, society’s failure to do this had catastrophic consequences—ones that we must strive not to repeat.

Stigmas and Challenges Faced by Male Survivors

Society has long struggled with acknowledging that boys and men can be victims of sexual abuse, often dismissing their experiences or questioning their credibility. This skepticism is compounded by stereotypes about masculinity that discourage men from showing vulnerability or admitting they’ve been harmed.

Prosecutors and media outlets suggested that the brothers fabricated their stories to avoid accountability for their actions, ignoring the overwhelming evidence presented by numerous experts. This kind of narrative is not uncommon; male survivors are often seen through a lens of skepticism, making it difficult for them to be taken seriously and receive the support they need. A prime example is the case of Corey Feldman, a former child actor who has been vocal about the abuse he endured in Hollywood. Despite his willingness to name his abusers and advocate for other survivors, Feldman’s claims have frequently been dismissed or sensationalized by the media, overshadowing the very serious nature of his accusations. This skepticism not only undermines his efforts to expose systemic abuse but also perpetuates a culture where male survivors are discredited and silenced. Just like the Menendez brothers, Feldman’s experience illustrates the societal barriers that male survivors face, particularly when their disclosures challenge powerful narratives or individuals.

Understanding Child Sexual Abuse Through Expert Insight

One of the most challenging aspects of the Menendez brothers’ case—and many like it—is society’s reluctance to fully grasp and acknowledge the complexities of child sexual abuse. According to Deborah Tuerkheimer, a professor at Northwestern University School of Law and an expert on the intersection of criminal law and child sexual abuse, our culture often struggles to comprehend the nuanced dynamics of abuse, particularly when it involves young boys.

Tuerkheimer argues that our societal misconceptions about child sexual abuse are deeply rooted in myths and stereotypes. “There’s a pervasive myth that children, particularly boys, will fabricate or exaggerate claims of abuse,” she explains. This skepticism often extends to the legal system, where the burden of proof for abuse survivors becomes an almost insurmountable barrier. In cases like the Menendez brothers’, where the abuse was disclosed only after they were accused of a violent crime, this skepticism is amplified. Critics often question why the brothers didn’t disclose the abuse sooner, not understanding the immense psychological barriers that prevent many survivors from speaking out.

Research shows that only 38% of child sexual abuse victims ever disclose their abuse, and of those, many delay disclosure until adulthood. Tuerkheimer notes that the fear of not being believed, feelings of shame, and loyalty to the abuser—often a trusted family member—are significant factors that inhibit disclosure. This is particularly true for male survivors, who face additional stigmas around masculinity and vulnerability.

By dismissing the brothers’ abuse as a convenient defense strategy, we perpetuate a culture that doubts and silences survivors, forcing them to navigate their trauma alone. As Tuerkheimer emphasizes, we need to shift the narrative from one of doubt and dismissal to one of empathy and support. Only by doing so can we begin to create a justice system—and a society—that truly supports and believes survivors, no matter the circumstances under which their abuse is revealed.

A Systemic Failure to Believe Survivors

Despite the testimony of experts who confirmed the presence of trauma and psychological damage consistent with long-term abuse, the brothers’ accounts were dismissed by many as fabrications. This response wasn’t unique to their case but indicative of a broader societal issue: the reluctance to acknowledge that boys and men can be victims of sexual abuse.

In fact, the Menendez brothers’ trial revealed more concrete evidence of abuse than many other cases that are widely accepted as legitimate. Multiple mental health professionals testified about the severe trauma Lyle and Erik exhibited, including Dr. William Vicary, who described Erik’s symptoms as consistent with those of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Additionally, numerous family members and friends corroborated the brothers’ claims, recounting troubling behaviors they had witnessed over the years.

Yet, despite this, the narrative that took hold was one of victim-blaming. Just because the brothers finally acted out in a violent way, does that now become a reason to dismiss the abuse they endured? This flawed perspective suggests that once a victim reacts—no matter how extreme or misguided their response—their suffering becomes irrelevant, their trauma minimized, and their abusers somehow absolved. It’s a dangerous mindset that shifts the focus from the roots of their actions—the years of torment and manipulation they endured—to a simplistic, one-dimensional portrayal of them as cold-blooded killers. This kind of thinking not only perpetuates harmful stereotypes about survivors but also undermines the reality that trauma can drive people to desperate measures when they feel there is no escape.

Reforming the System: How We Can Do Better for Survivors

There’s an urgent need for media creators to be more responsible in their portrayals of male survivors. This means consulting with survivors and advocacy organizations, focusing on accuracy and sensitivity, and resisting the urge to sensationalize trauma for the sake of viewership. Accurate representation can foster a more compassionate and supportive environment for all survivors, encouraging them to come forward and seek help.

Flaws in the Justice System

The criminal justice system has historically failed survivors of sexual abuse, and the Menendez brothers’ case is a stark example of these failures. Despite overwhelming evidence of the abuse they endured, the brothers were portrayed as ruthless killers rather than victims of severe, prolonged trauma. This approach not only denied them justice but also highlighted the systemic issues that plague our legal system when it comes to handling cases involving abuse.

One of the biggest flaws in the justice system is its lack of trauma-informed practices. During the Menendez brothers’ trials, the focus was placed almost entirely on the nature of their crime, with little attention given to the abuse they suffered. This is a common issue in many cases involving survivors—where the trauma they endured is sidelined, and they are judged solely on their actions in the aftermath of that trauma.

Trauma-Informed Legal Practices

The justice system must shift towards a trauma-informed approach that recognizes the impact of abuse on behavior and decision-making. This means training law enforcement, attorneys, and judges to understand the complex dynamics of abuse and its long-lasting effects on survivors. It also means ensuring that survivors’ voices are heard and validated throughout the legal process, rather than dismissed or discredited.

Systemic Change is Necessary

To truly support survivors, the justice system needs comprehensive reform. This includes revisiting policies that limit the admissibility of evidence related to abuse, providing better support services for survivors within the legal system, and promoting alternative forms of justice, such as restorative justice, that prioritize healing over punishment. Without these changes, the system will continue to fail survivors, perpetuating the cycle of trauma and silence.

A Call for Action

It’s time for the justice system to catch up with what we know about trauma and its effects on survivors. Organizations like SafeBAE are at the forefront of advocating for these changes by providing education, resources, and support to young people and their communities. SafeBAE’s trauma-informed approach emphasizes believing survivors, understanding the complexities of abuse, and working to create environments where all survivors feel safe and empowered to share their stories.

If you’re moved by the issues raised in this article, consider supporting SafeBAE’s work. By donating, sharing their resources, or booking a speaker, you can help create a more just and compassionate world where survivors are heard, believed, and supported. Together, we can challenge harmful stereotypes and push for the systemic change that is so urgently needed.