"But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of paedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably paedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”."
Dr. Philip Tromovitch’s name pops up in this 1999 New York Times article. He is a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA grad who coauthored a journal article advocating – you guessed it: trivializes the impact of child sexual abuse and condones pedophilia.
Study on Child Sex Abuse Provokes a Political Furor
Few people took notice last July when Psychological Bulletin, an academic psychology journal, carried a lengthy, jargon-heavy report titled ''A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples.''
But nearly a year later, the study, its authors, and the American Psychological Association, which publishes the journal, are at the center of a political storm.
Conservatives like Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the radio talk-show host, and Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the majority whip, have declared that the study, which concludes that the effects of sexual abuse on children are not always severe, trivializes the impact of such abuse and condones pedophilia.
<snipped>
The journal article was written by Dr. Bruce Rind, an adjunct faculty member in the psychology department at Temple University, Dr. Robert Bauserman, an evaluation specialist working on AIDS prevention at the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and Philip Tromovitch, a graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania.The article, a statistical reanalysis of 59 studies of college students who said they were sexually abused in childhood, concluded that the effects of such abuse ''were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women.''
The researchers also questioned the practice, common in many studies, of lumping all types of sexual abuse together. They argued that treating all forms of sexual abuse equally presents problems that, the researchers wrote, ''are perhaps most apparent when contrasting cases such as the repeated rape of a 5-year-old girl by her father and the willing sexual involvement of a mature 15-year-old adolescent boy with an unrelated adult.''
In the first case, serious harm may result, Dr. Rind and his colleagues maintained, but the second case ''may represent only a violation of social norms with no implication for personal harm.'' The authors also suggested that the term ''adult-adolescent sex'' or ''adult-child sex'' be substituted, in some cases, for ''child sexual abuse.''
I just read that paper (available here as PDF: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Bauserman/publication/13613793_A_Meta-Analytic_Examination_of_Assumed_Properties_of_Child_Sexual_Abuse_Using_College_Samples/links/54b031db0cf220c63ccded8f/A-Meta-Analytic-Examination-of-Assumed-Properties-of-Child-Sexual-Abuse-Using-College-Samples.pdf)). As an academic, I'm horrified that this was published in a high-impact peer-reviewed journal like the the Psychological Bulletin. The intro and discussion consistently downplay the seriousness of child abuse and its effects, and let the perpetrators off scot-free. The argument essentially is that if the child is "willing", it shouldn't be called abuse, with no mention of the moral obligations of the other party in all this. They even have the audacity to compare the "moral panic" over child abuse to antiquated beliefs about the dangers of masturbation. Looking at college samples only is obviously going to favour the better adjusted of victims anyway, many will be too fucked up to get there and seeing as most are trapped in child "protection" services from an early stage they're unlikely to be able to afford it. Going to do some digging on the three authors, they all seem to have made a career out of being paedophilia apologists, it disgusts me that people like this can have such successful careers in my profession.
Yes, since the 'women's movement' in the sixties, men have been demonized. Men have been emasculated in our society. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. You see it in religious institutions , schools ( 'Johnny' is too active- he needs meds) , the military , the media.
Men have to take back their masculinity, their strength. This whole transgender movement is an attack on the inherent gifts of both sexes, and what keeps us strong.
Either way, the guy is still a pedo or at the very least a pedo sympathizer. It just proves no matter what kind of school u go to (the best ivy leagues or even no school at all) there are pedophiles.
The researchers.... argued that treating all forms of sexual abuse equally presents problems that, the researchers wrote, ''are perhaps most apparent when contrasting cases such as the repeated rape of a 5-year-old girl by her father and the willing sexual involvement of a mature 15-year-old adolescent boy with an unrelated adult.
This is the furphy pushed by the pedophile enablers. They always justify and rationalise their grooming and rape of children by saying that the child 'enjoys' it and even derives pleasure from the abuse. They won't acknowledge the experts--psychologists, psychiatrists, counsellors--who treat these abused children when they're adults. To say that a 15 year old boy can know what he's getting himself into if he has a 'sexual relationship' with a grown up is rubbish. A 15 year old boy (if he's going to have a consenting sexual relationship) should be having it with another 15 year old girl (or boy). There is no imbalance of power then; it is a relationship of equals. I'm so tired of these same old diatribes and excuses from men who are looking for excuses to groom children so that they can rape them.
view the rest of the comments →
equineluvr ago
"But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of paedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably paedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”."
Dr. Philip Tromovitch’s name pops up in this 1999 New York Times article. He is a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA grad who coauthored a journal article advocating – you guessed it: trivializes the impact of child sexual abuse and condones pedophilia.
Study on Child Sex Abuse Provokes a Political Furor
Few people took notice last July when Psychological Bulletin, an academic psychology journal, carried a lengthy, jargon-heavy report titled ''A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples.''
But nearly a year later, the study, its authors, and the American Psychological Association, which publishes the journal, are at the center of a political storm.
Conservatives like Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the radio talk-show host, and Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the majority whip, have declared that the study, which concludes that the effects of sexual abuse on children are not always severe, trivializes the impact of such abuse and condones pedophilia.
<snipped>
The journal article was written by Dr. Bruce Rind, an adjunct faculty member in the psychology department at Temple University, Dr. Robert Bauserman, an evaluation specialist working on AIDS prevention at the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and Philip Tromovitch, a graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania. The article, a statistical reanalysis of 59 studies of college students who said they were sexually abused in childhood, concluded that the effects of such abuse ''were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women.''
The researchers also questioned the practice, common in many studies, of lumping all types of sexual abuse together. They argued that treating all forms of sexual abuse equally presents problems that, the researchers wrote, ''are perhaps most apparent when contrasting cases such as the repeated rape of a 5-year-old girl by her father and the willing sexual involvement of a mature 15-year-old adolescent boy with an unrelated adult.''
In the first case, serious harm may result, Dr. Rind and his colleagues maintained, but the second case ''may represent only a violation of social norms with no implication for personal harm.'' The authors also suggested that the term ''adult-adolescent sex'' or ''adult-child sex'' be substituted, in some cases, for ''child sexual abuse.''
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/13/us/study-on-child-sex-abuse-provokes-a-political-furor.html
Mad_As_Hell ago
I just read that paper (available here as PDF: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Bauserman/publication/13613793_A_Meta-Analytic_Examination_of_Assumed_Properties_of_Child_Sexual_Abuse_Using_College_Samples/links/54b031db0cf220c63ccded8f/A-Meta-Analytic-Examination-of-Assumed-Properties-of-Child-Sexual-Abuse-Using-College-Samples.pdf)). As an academic, I'm horrified that this was published in a high-impact peer-reviewed journal like the the Psychological Bulletin. The intro and discussion consistently downplay the seriousness of child abuse and its effects, and let the perpetrators off scot-free. The argument essentially is that if the child is "willing", it shouldn't be called abuse, with no mention of the moral obligations of the other party in all this. They even have the audacity to compare the "moral panic" over child abuse to antiquated beliefs about the dangers of masturbation. Looking at college samples only is obviously going to favour the better adjusted of victims anyway, many will be too fucked up to get there and seeing as most are trapped in child "protection" services from an early stage they're unlikely to be able to afford it. Going to do some digging on the three authors, they all seem to have made a career out of being paedophilia apologists, it disgusts me that people like this can have such successful careers in my profession.
micha_ ago
While the pedo epidemic is raping/killing/sacrificing children, men and fathers have been silenced with neo-Marxist propaganda of "TOLERANCE".
4warned ago
Yes, since the 'women's movement' in the sixties, men have been demonized. Men have been emasculated in our society. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. You see it in religious institutions , schools ( 'Johnny' is too active- he needs meds) , the military , the media. Men have to take back their masculinity, their strength. This whole transgender movement is an attack on the inherent gifts of both sexes, and what keeps us strong.
WakeyWake ago
I would like to make a correction to your post.
University of Pennsylvania is not Pennstate.
Pennsylvania State University is PennState
University of Pennsylvania is an Ivy league, private school that Trump attended
Pennsylvania State University is Penn State, the school of pedophiles.
equineluvr ago
Thank you. I stand corrected and have corrected the error in my post.
It was about 2 AM here, and I was dog tired when I posted that. Lesson learned. :)
WakeyWake ago
It was a very honest & very easy mistake to make.
Either way, the guy is still a pedo or at the very least a pedo sympathizer. It just proves no matter what kind of school u go to (the best ivy leagues or even no school at all) there are pedophiles.
Piscina ago
The researchers.... argued that treating all forms of sexual abuse equally presents problems that, the researchers wrote, ''are perhaps most apparent when contrasting cases such as the repeated rape of a 5-year-old girl by her father and the willing sexual involvement of a mature 15-year-old adolescent boy with an unrelated adult.
This is the furphy pushed by the pedophile enablers. They always justify and rationalise their grooming and rape of children by saying that the child 'enjoys' it and even derives pleasure from the abuse. They won't acknowledge the experts--psychologists, psychiatrists, counsellors--who treat these abused children when they're adults. To say that a 15 year old boy can know what he's getting himself into if he has a 'sexual relationship' with a grown up is rubbish. A 15 year old boy (if he's going to have a consenting sexual relationship) should be having it with another 15 year old girl (or boy). There is no imbalance of power then; it is a relationship of equals. I'm so tired of these same old diatribes and excuses from men who are looking for excuses to groom children so that they can rape them.
Mad_As_Hell ago
Exactly. The author's choice of example (15-year-old boy) says a lot about his own preferences I'd imagine. Shudder.
Vindicator ago
Seems that way, doesn't it? And they're undoubtedly not the only one.