Mentions of complainant sexual arousal in Canadian criminal sexual assault cases.

This article examines the role and interpretation of complainant sexual arousal in Canadian criminal sexual assault cases, focusing on whether such arousal is discussed, how it is interpreted by legal actors, and its influence on case outcomes. A review of 4,301 legal documents identified 13 cases mentioning signs of complainant arousal—such as moaning, pelvic movements, vaginal lubrication, and penile erection—primarily involving female complainants and male accused. In all cases, defence teams used arousal indicators to support a defence of "honest but mistaken belief in consent," reflecting a rape myth equating arousal with consent; however, judges mostly rejected this argument, emphasizing that physiological arousal does not constitute consent. The findings highlight inconsistencies in judicial responses, the potential for retraumatization of complainants, and recommend legal reforms to restrict the misuse of arousal evidence, alongside standardized sexual education to clarify distinctions between sexual arousal and consent.