-
There
is a real and growing movement to legitimize and also legalize sexual
relations between boys aged 10 to 16 and adult males;
-
Robert Bauserman, one of the
authors of the article, has associated himself with the pedophilia movement
through a previous article;
-
The movement's strategy is to
promote the "objective" study of child/adult sex, free of moral
considerations;
-
The APA should have known this
before they published the article.
Those who are interested in legalizing
sexual relations between adults and children want to change the parameters of
the discussion from the "absolutist" moral position, to the "relative" position
that it can sometimes be beneficial. The A.P.A. article furthered exactly this
position.
Deconstructionists have argued--with
some success--that distinctions between the genders are arbitrary and
politically motivated. Now, the same argument is being advanced about the
distinction between the generations.
In a recent lead article of the
Journal of Homosexuality (1), for example, Harris Mirkin says the "sexually
privileged" have disadvantaged the pedophile through sheer political force in
the same way that blacks were disadvantaged by whites before the civil-rights
movement.
The
Movement to Legitimize Pedophilia
In 1981, Dr. Theo Sandfort, co-director
of the research program of the Department of Gay and Lesbian Studies at the
University of Utrecht, Netherlands, interviewed 25 boys aged 10 to 16 who were
currently involved in sexual relationships with adult men. The interviews took
place in the homes of the men.
According to Sandfort, "For virtually
all the boys ... the sexual contact itself was experienced positively..." Could
an adult-child sexual contact, then, truly be called positive for the child?
Based on the research presented, Sandfort answered that question in the
affirmative.
The study was severely criticized by
experts in the field of child sexual abuse. Dr. David Mrazek, co-editor of
Sexually Abused Children and Their Families, attacked the Sandfort research
as unethical, saying:
"In
this study, the researchers joined with members of the National Pedophile
Workshop to 'study' the boys who were the sexual 'partners' of its members
... there is no evidence that human subject safeguards were a paramount
concern. However, there is ample evidence that the study was politically
motivated to 'reform' legislation.
"These researchers knowingly
colluded with the perpetuation of secret illegal activity ... In the
majority of cases, these boys' parents were unaware of these sexual
activities with adult men, and the researchers contributed to this deception
by their action."
Child sexual-abuse expert Dr. David
Finkelhor also criticized the Sandfort research, pointing to the numerous
studies which show adult-child sexual contact as a predictor of later
depression, suicidal behavior, dissociative disorders, alcohol and drug abuse,
and sexual problems.
Dr. Finkelhor strongly defended laws
against child/adult sex, saying that many of those now-grown children are very
active in lobbying for such protection.
In 1990, the campaign to legalize
man-boy sex was furthered by the publication of a two-issue special of the
Journal on Homosexuality, reissued as Male Intergenerational Intimacy:
Historical, Socio-Psychological, and Legal Perspectives.
This volume provided devastating
information on the way psychologically immature pedophile men use vulnerable
boys who are starved for adult nurturance and protection.
In the forward, Gunter Schmidt decries
discrimination against and persecution of pedophiles, and describes
"successful pedophile relationships which help and encourage the child, even
though the child often agrees to sex while really seeking comfort and
affection. These are often emotionally deprived, deeply lonely, socially
isolated children who seek, as it were, a refuge in an adult's love and for
whom, because of their misery, see it as a stroke of luck to have found such
an 'enormously nurturant relationship'."
There is another deeply disturbing
article in the volume, revealingly titled, "The Main Thing is Being Wanted: Some
Case Studies on Adult Sexual Experiences with Children." In it, pedophiles
reveal their need to find a child who will satisfy their desire for uncritical
affirmation and a lost youth. One of the men justifies his activity as a search
for love, and complains that: "Although I've had physical relationships with
probably, I don't know, maybe a hundred or more boys over the years, I can only
point to four or five true relationships over that time."
The volume also contains an
introductory article which decries society's anti-pedophile sentiment. The
authors complain about the difficulty studying man-boy relationships in "an
objective way," and they hope the social sciences will adopt a broader approach
which could lead to understanding of the "diversity and possible benefits of
intergenerational intimacy."
Bauserman Defends Sandfort's Research
The same volume contains an article by
Robert Bauserman-co-author of the A.P.A. study--which complains that objective
research is impossible in a social climate that condemns man-boy sexual
relationships. Bauserman decries the prevailing ideology that labels all boys as
"victims" and all adult pedophiles as "perpetrators." He attacks researchers
Mzarek and Finkelhor as being driven by a "particular set of beliefs about
adult-juvenile sex." Bauserman looks for a new "scientific objectivity," with
the explicit call for research that will challenge the social-moral taboo
against adult/child sex. The meta-analysis which he co-authored, and which the
American Psychological Association published, can be seen as Bauserman's
follow-up to his Journal of Homosexuality article.
More
Recent Defenses of Pedophilia
Harris Mirkin recently wrote a lead
article in the Journal of Homosexuality entitled "The Pattern of Sexual
Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia." Using social-constructionist
theory, he argues that the concept of child molestation is a "culture- and
class-specific creation" which can and should be changed.
He likens the battle for the
legalization of pedophilia to the battles for women's rights, homosexual rights,
and even the civil rights of blacks.
He sees the hoped-for shift as taking
place in two stages. During the first stage, the opponents of pedophilia control
the debate by insisting that the issue is non-negotiable--while using
psychological and moral categories to silence all discussion.
But in the second stage, Mirkin says,
the discussion must move on to such issues as the "right" of children to have
and enjoy sex.
If this paradigm shift could be
accomplished, the issue would move from the moral to the political
arena, and therefore become open to negotiation. For example, rather than
decrying sexual abuse, lawmakers would be forced to argue about when and under
what conditions adult/child sex could be accepted. Once the issues becomes
"discussible," it would only be a matter of time before the public would begin
to view pedophilia as another sexual orientation, and not a choice for the
pedophile.
The response to the APA article shows
that for the present, social opposition to pedophilia continues to be strong.
Finkelhor's response to Bauserman, which was included in Male
Intergenerational Intimacy, explains why:
"Some
types of social relationships violate deeply held values and principles in
our culture about equality and self-determination. Sex between adults and
children is one of them. Evidence that certain children have positive
experiences does not challenge these values, which have deep roots in our
worldview."
To pedophile advocates, any discussion
of the benefits of child-adult sex is a victory. The APA should have understood
this, should have known about Bauserman's connections, and should have been well
aware of--and vocally resistent to--the growing movement to legalize pedophilia.
Endnote
Mirkin, Harris, "The Pattern of Sexual
Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia," Journal of Homosexuality
vol. 37(2), 1999, p. 1-24.