In addition to focusing on the intersectionality of race and gender and recognizing the marginalization of women within their own cultures, it is also necessary to establish a uniform standard in admitting cultural evidence. One approach advocates allowing cultural evidence as a challenge to the prosecution's burden of proving mens rea (Maguigan, Cultural Evidence and Male Violence, 1995).

Prosecutors would assume a vital role in exposing stereotypes and other types of incorrect information in the defendant's arguments. Prosecutors would also have the responsibility, when necessary, of providing accurate information about the defendant's culture and about, non-violent choices in the situation. In cases involving violence against women, for example, the prosecution could present rebuttal cultural evidence from a women's advocacy organization in the defendant's community, to dispel stereotypes about gender roles or to discuss the non-violent options the defendant might have had in his community. Another scholar goes further in advocating a formal cultural defense as a partial excuse, such as in provocation or diminished responsibility, to either reduce a charge or a sentence (Renteln, A Justification of the Cultural Defense, 1986).

As discussed in Module IV. Why Victim's Don't Report, Ignorance of the Law, women from cultures where neither marital rape nor domestic violence are crimes may not know that they have legal recourse in the United States. More importantly, in such cultures there is tremendous pressure from family and friends to stay with an abusive partner, which compounds the myriad reasons victims don't report with fear of being disowned by one's own community. Cultural evidence should not be used merely as a defense strategy. See Why Victim's Don't Report, Cultural Considerations. Cultural evidence should also be used to assist jurors and fact finders in understanding the gender-role limitations and oppressive contexts in which victims act.