Women’s aggressive acts are in some circumstances perceived as more intentional but at the same time more acceptable than male aggression. Women typically display less direct, especially physical, aggression, and there are fewer instances of female harm-doers, which may draw more visual attention. That is why the main aim of the current project was to investigate gender differences in ascriptions of intentionality and blame to both male and female harm-doers, as well as attention to their faces using eye-tracking methodology. The authors conducted three studies as follows: Study 1 was done among adults (N = 122, M = 23.94; SD = 5.33, range from 18 to 49) from the general community and focused on ambiguous aggressive encounters. The second study not only aimed to replicate Study 1 (N = 120, M = 28.88; SD = 10.42, range from 17 to 80) but also tested the hypotheses in clearly hostile scenes, where someone was undeniably harmed. In a third study (N = 60, M = 38.55; SD = 9.45, range 22 to 60), the authors aimed to replicate the findings of the first studies in aggressive-prone participants: imprisoned violent offender men and women. The eye-tracking data in all three studies indicated that female harm-doers compared with male harm-doers captured more attention. In addition, there were no clear gender differences in attribution of intentionality and blame ascription to both male and female harm-doers.