02Apr18i Burning a book
Remarkably: Quote: "(Much
of Rind and Bauserman's work is documented here.)"
As you see, the link refers to the Dutch Tegenwicht web site!
Also the Star
Tribune article is quoted.
Frans, webmaster@tegenwicht.org
Burning
a Book Before It's Printed (Op-Ed)
By Eloquence
Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 07:07:00 PM EST
< http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/4/7/175457/5447
>
(with long thread of reactions)
It is easy and comfortable to believe that we live in enlightened times, that scientific and rational thought have illuminated all parts of our culture. But every now and then we are reminded that there are subjects that we are not supposed to talk about, even think about. One of these subjects is child sexuality, as is demonstrated by the reaction to the book Harmful to Minors by Judith Levine. Even one month before its publication, it has been widely denounced as "evil" by people who have never read the book -- because it argues that children and juveniles should be allowed to have satisfying sex lives. A stunning tale of shutting up those who dare to ask the wrong questions.
"In America today, it is nearly impossible to publish a book that says children and teen-agers can have sexual pleasure and be safe too," writes Judith Levine in the introduction to Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children From Sex (Amazon.com). The book, on which she has been working since the mid-1990s, was rejected by one publisher after the next, its content called "radioactive" by one of them. The University of Minnesota Press accepted the manuscript a year ago -- a decision it now almost certainly regrets. The UMNP description of the book reads as follows:
The book has been endorsed by Dr. Jocelyn Elders, who wrote the foreword, and by authors Robie Harris, James Kincaid, and Debbie Nathan. But a misleading interview with the author in late March quickly triggered a national wave of protests against the book, mostly coming from religious fundamentalists. The article by Mark O'Keefe (Newhouse News Service, published in the Star Tribune) titled "Some in mainstream contend certain cases of adult-minor sex should be acceptable" discusses recent scientific studies of adult-child sexual interaction. One of these studies is the controversial meta-analysis by psychologists Bruce Rind and Michael Bauserman that found that negative effects of adult-child sexual contact "were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women." (Much of Rind and Bauserman's work is documented here.) Their study has been subject of loud scientific and political controversy (so much that the US House of Representatives eventually unanimously passed a resolution condemning the study). The study is cited by Judith Levine in her book, which is described in the article as follows:
Even with the little information provided here, it is already obvious that this is a gross mischaracterization. From the UMN press release, it is clear that Levine's book discusses much more than just pedophilia. Her statement about a relationship between a boy and a priest is abridged, and it is unclear to which question she responded. Levine's last statement could come out of a completely different context, e.g. statutory rape laws (how old was she when she had sex with an adult?). Based on this almost propagandistic mischaracterization, a media campaign against the book quickly followed. One of its main spokespersons is Robert Knight of the religious fundamentalist propaganda organization "Concerned Women for America", which is also anti-homosexual, anti-evolution and anti-abortion. Two days after the Star Tribune story, CFI released the following statement:
One should also note the small notice at the bottom of the press release:
The Children of Table 34 is a professional, expensively produced "documentary" that has been used to discredit Alfred Kinsey's groundbreaking and unique work on human sexuality -- because some of his data on child sexuality came from a pedophile's personal records. As a propaganda expert, Knight was the right man for the job of destroying another book that advocated a positive attitude towards children's sexuality. He managed to get his message, which was based on a misrepresentation in another article, into the international Associated Press wire news service, from where it was then broadcasted to millions of homes, over websites like MSNBC, ABCNews, CNN and others. The AP story quotes Knight as saying that "the action is so grievous and so irresponsible that I felt they relinquished their right to academic freedom." He calls the book "very evil", although he admits he hasn't read it. He also claims that "this book will aid and abet child molesters because it gives a pseudo-scientific rationale that can be used by a defense attorney." ABCNews, in their expanded version of the AP story, at least allows Levine to make her case:
Elsewhere, Levine also clearly states that she doesn't think children below the age of 12 can have positive sexual experiences with adults. "I deplore rape, sexual abuse of children and any way that a person is forced to have sex against their will," Levine says. "I am a feminist, and I am glad that our legal system has laws against rape. For anybody to say I promote child abuse is absurd." Of course, given the emotions already invoked by calling Levine a pedophile-defender, her rebuttal was not enough. State Rep. Tim Pawlenty, majority leader of the Minnesota House and Republican candidate for governor, called for the stop of the book's release, according to the Star Tribune:
While the UMN has so far mostly defended its release of the book, it had reportedly received more than 200 mostly negative responses by early April, and has now announced to review its publishing guidelines. While the press release still defends the book, it sends a chilling message to all those wishing to inititiate rational discourse of children's sexuality. What we have here is a classical case of an attempt to kill a book before it is even released. Apparently the rationale of current statutory rape laws, which has put many juveniles in prison for consensual sex, as well as for sexual abstinency education, a major cause of teen pregnancies, is so weak that anyone arguing against it must be singled out and completely discredited in a well-funded ad hominem campaign. Some of Levine's previous writings are interesting to gauge where the author is standing. For example, in Shooting the Messenger: Why Censorship Won't Stop Violence, she argues against using the media as a scapegoat for school violence as was done in the aftermath of the Columbine shootings. In A Question of Abuse (Mother Jones 1996) she tells the tale of a young boy who was treated -- and psychologically destroyed -- for being a "sex offender" at the age of 9. She describes the "children who molest" scare, which I have already discussed in my Right to Pleasure article. To understand the child sexual abuse scare, the book Making Monsters: False Memory, Psychotherapy, and Sexual Hysteria (Amazon.com) is an absolute must. If you want to protest the smear campaign against Levine's book, you can contact the University of Minnesota Press to show your support:
You can also contact the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
Of course, pre-ordering the book will probably send the strongest message. The attempted suppression of Levine's book raises another question: How many books about controversial subjects never find a publisher? What is the value of free speech if nobody is willing to make your speech heard? Hopefully, the Internet and books published through print-on-demand will eventually make it possible for non-technical authors to reach large audiences effectively.
Further sources: Book
on children and sex finds harsh critics (Star
Tribune) Erik Möller 2002, public domain content. If you enjoyed this article, buy me a text-ad on Kuro5hin (email me for details). |