The following is a list of words used to describe a very specific demographic. See if you can guess it:

"She was as much in control of the situation [as the 49-year-old man.]"

"[She was] like the spider."

"She dressed older than her age … She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground."

These quotes seem to be describing quite the voracious temptress – Jessica Rabbit, perhaps? Samantha from Sex and the City? Actually, they all come from judges, lawyers and reporters, used over the past two years to describe girls – children – aged between 11 and 14 who were raped.

Perhaps you are rolling your eyes, just a little. Perhaps you are bored with stories of oafishly out-of-touch judges rousing themselves out of their afternoon stupor to belch out some turgid bit of misogyny – and who could blame you? These incidents seem to happen with such frequency that it's easy to become blase. Yet looked at all together, these cases build up a picture in which, however modern some of us fancy our world to be, misogyny is still dismayingly pervasive in the highest offices.

Last week, Montana judge G Todd Baugh described Cherice Moralez, who was 14 when she was raped by 49-year-old teacher Stacey Rambold, as "older than her chronological age" and said she was "as much in control of the situation" as Rambold. Judge Baugh has since apologised for his words, saying he is "not quite sure what I was attempting to say", but he could look at the sentence he gave Rambold for clarity: a grand total of 30 days – days – in prison. After all, as Judge Baugh stressed in his non-apology, "[the rape] wasn't this forcible beat-up rape".

Cherice Moralez's mother, Auliea Hanlon, has been eloquent in her outrage. Her daughter, however, has not been able to comment, because she killed herself in 2010, when she was 16, in her mother's bed, while the case was pending. Her mother has said that the "hell" her daughter endured after reporting the rape – the bullying from classmates, the ardurous legal process – was unbearable.

If all this sounds familiar, it is. Just last month Judge Nigel Peters in this country reassured 41-year-old Neil Wilson that the 13-year-old he abused was "predatory" and "egging you on". Robert Colover, who was representing the state, added: "There was sexual activity but it was not of Mr Wilson's doing. You might say it was forced upon him, despite his being older and stronger than her." Colover has since been suspended from prosecuting sexual abuse trials and the lord chief justice Lord Judge announced that a specialist team of judges and lawyers with training will be created to deal with complex child abuse cases.

Yet how much training does one need to learn that children are not Lolitas and grown men are not helpless Humbert Humberts, in thrall to juvenile sexuality? Quite a lot, apparently. At around the same time barrister Robert Colover was arguing that a 13-year-old was "predatory" because she had been abused before, in Louisiana, where the age of consent is 17, lawyers argued that a 14-year-old must have consented to sex with Angelo Vickers, an adult juvenile detention guard – the man who was supposed to be keeping her safe – because: "Vickers could not have engaged in sexual relations within the walls of the detention centre with [the victim] without cooperation from her." After all, one official told a journalist: "These girls in the detention centre are not Little Miss Muffin." Indeed, this girl, now 20, had suffered a lifetime of horrific sexual abuse from family members and strangers, and, as with the case of the 13-year-old in Britain, this past abuse and present vulnerability was cited as proof of her culpability.

Some have suggested that a victim's race may also play against them, with tenacious stereotypes about women of colour being prematurely sexualised used by legal teams and the media. Cherice Moralez was Latina and, as Jessica Valenti points out in the Nation, a report from the American Psychological Association shows that: "Teachers sometimes … hold beliefs that girls of colour are 'hypersexual'."

There are many more cases I could mention here, such as the 11-year-old girl in Texas who was gang-raped and then castigated by the New York Times in 2011 for dressing "older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground." (That same girl was later compared by the defence to a "spider". A sexy, grownup, makeup-wearing spider, presumably.)

Women getting the blame for being raped is an old story, one that, incredibly, refuses to die. When this trope is applied to children one sees misogyny in its purest form, with its belief that 11-year-old girls lure helpless men on and deserve what they get. I wrote a few months ago about the Jeremy Forrest case, the teacher who was jailed for five-and-a-half years for child abduction and sexual activity with a child, and said the scary thing was not that he was a monster but how common he could be. But at least as scary is the eagerness of people in authority to absolve rapists, even when the victim later shoots herself in the head in her mother's bed. As Cherice Moralez's mother said in a written statement after the sentencing of her daughter's rapist: "I guess somehow it makes a rape more acceptable if you blame the victim, even if she was only 14."

• This article was amended on 6 December 2013 to remove from the opening paragraph two quotes from the case of Neil Wilson which had been wrongly used in the context of rape. It was further amended on 28 February 2014 to clarify: Neil Wilson was accused of (and pleaded guilty to) sexual activity with a child, not rape.