ABSTRACT In post-genocide Cambodia and Rwanda, low-level perpetrators often identify as victims of the genocidal regimes alongside those they tortured and killed. However, state and societal responses to these claims appear to have varied dramatically. In Cambodia, the government and civil society organizations seem to view former Khmer Rouge cadres’ claims to victim status as socially acceptable and politically useful, while in Rwanda, the government and civil society organizations have firmly rejected perpetrators’ efforts to claim space as victims. What accounts for these different societal responses in Cambodia and Rwanda? At present, there is ample literature on how authoritarian government actors in both contexts have shaped their nation’s post-genocide transitional justice responses to prevent future bloodshed, while simultaneously reinforcing their regimes’ sometimes tenuous political legitimacy. However, this article offers complementary insights by exploring two otherwise under-researched factors that we argue further inform these polar-opposite reactions to perpetrators’ claims to victim status: (1). post-genocide governments’ offers of inclusivity in defining who is part of each nation’s ideal post-genocide ingroup; and (2). the social proximity of perpetrators and their victims during and after the genocides. Our focus on inclusivity and social proximity related to the Cambodian and Rwandan genocide advances scholarly understandings of the various factors that shape government and social responses to perpetration in the aftermath of genocide internationally.