While the sexual violence focus in the human rights movement might have been an effective tool to make the gender-specific content of violence visible to key human rights bodies and actors who, until the late 1980s, had failed to pay attention either to women as rights holders or to sexual harm as a type of harm, a “hyper-attention” to sex now risks doing further harm to women by deviating attention from other non-sexual forms of sex-specific harms. Mindful of this risk, this article spells out principles and guidelines which ought to guide reparations for conflict-related victims of SRV, paying particular attention to the risk of further entrenching patriarchy or further harming the victims. Taking into account the specificity of the harm that ensues from SRV, Part I outlines three meta-principles which should inspire SRV reparations initiatives so as to facilitate victims’ access to adequate reparations. Focusing on reparations programs as arguably the most conducive venue to provide redress to victims of SRV in post-conflict settings, Part II then spells out ten specific guidelines indicating how the general principles spelled out under Part I can be best achieved.