Documentation of sex-based violations is likely to be even weaker for women and girls facing intersectional factors, including discrimination based on ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and disability. Another under-recognised form is the forced erasure of women from public life, which is a form of violence. Women’s rights defenders, journalists, and politicians face threats of arrest, execution, and sexual violence, forcing many into hiding or exile. Their displacement disrupts democratic movements and silences women’s voices. The economic impact of sex-based violence is also overlooked. Survivors often lose jobs, homes, and financial independence, making them more vulnerable to further abuse. This economic marginalisation is not just a consequence of violence but a deliberate tactic to disempower women politically and socially. Role of language in addressing sex-based violence The debate between “sex-based violence” (SBV) and “gender-based violence” (GBV) has profound implications in Myanmar, shaped by entrenched patriarchy, the military’s use of sexual violence, and the intersection of political repression with women’s rights. Understanding this distinction is critical for addressing both immediate harm and long-term accountability. The case for “sex-based violence” (SBV) Sex-based violence in Myanmar is deeply rooted in military strategy and structural oppression. The military has long used sexual violence, including rape, forced pregnancy, and sexual slavery, as a weapon of war against women and girls. These violations are committed specifically against women because of their biological sex, making SBV a precise term for such atrocities. Ethnic minority women—particularly Rohingya, Kachin, Karen, and Shan—have been systematically targeted, with rape used as a tool of terror and demographic alteration. The targeting of women’s reproductive capacities highlights the sex-specific nature of these crimes, reinforcing the need for SBV as a framework in legal and advocacy efforts to ensure that crimes specifically inflicted upon women are not diluted in broader gender discussions. The case for “gender-based violence” (GBV) While SBV highlights the biological dimension of violence, GBV offers a broader perspective that includes violence against gender-nonconforming individuals. The military targets not only women but also LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly transgender women, who face sexual violence, torture, and arbitrary detention. Myanmar’s rigid gender roles exacerbate this violence. Patriarchal norms demand that men be dominant and women be submissive. Those who defy these roles—whether women asserting their rights or LGBTQ+ individuals—become targets of State repression and social exclusion. GBV allows for a comprehensive analysis of how enforced gender expectations fuel systemic violence.