If you
are referring to the Rind, Tromovich, and Bauserman article which appeared in
Psychological Bulletin, yes, I have.
The
conclusions that the authors draw from the data and the implications that other
sources (MassMedia, it appears in this case, and Dr. Laura and the North
American Man-Boy Love Association in 1999) appear to be vastly different. The
authors conducted a meta-analysis of a number of studies examining the effects
(long-term and short-term) of sexual abuse on psychological functioning. The big
conclusion that they draw is that sexual abuse is not as harmful as we try to
make it out to be. Sexual abuse is postulated as a root cause for a number of
psychological disorders, everything from depression to eating disorders to
schizophrenia to dissociative identity disorder. The data would suggest,
however, that most people recover appropriate psychological functioning,
long-term, following sexual abuse. To me, that bolsters the idea that humans are
resilient and that they can recover from any number of traumas, from
psychological trauma to natural disaster.
They
do, early on, speak to the need for new nomenclature to remove the stigma from
the victim. This, I believe, is a push to stop blaming the victim for the sexual
abuse as we know that it is the adult in the relationship who a) has higher
levels of cognitive functioning (or at least should have higher levels) and b)
initiates the encounters. (I read this as somewhat PC, BTW.)
As far
as NAMBLA's position, I think they took the conclusion of the authors and
distorted it to their position. The conclusion the authors draw is that
sometimes early sexual experiences (here, I read in high school rather than in
college) for boys can be good becasue it can lead to an increase in confidence
and other positive personality characteristics. However, I do not recall the
authors specifying that early sexual relationships between men and boys as
qualifying.
In all
honesty, my reaction after reading the entire article was, "Well, duh! That
makes sense." I was, however, and still am, outraged at people blowing the
findings out of proportion apparently without reading the article itself.
--Rick
Grieve
Rick Grieve, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of
Psychology
Austin Peay State
University
I am here to chew bubblegum and take names.
--------Original Message-----Anyone read this article?
From: Mike Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:46 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Subject: This is scarier than Ted Nugent!
MassNews was one of the first newspapers in the country to report in 1999 that the American Psychological Association had published a study indicating that pedophilia can have a positive influence on a child.
This article was made even more salient after having delivered a lecture today in "abnormal" psychology.
http://www.rense.com/general20/divers.htmMike Lee, MA
P435A Duff Roblin Building
(204) 474-6627 (office)
Dept of Psychology
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, MB Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mdlee, http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mdlee/Teaching.html
Owner: Talk-Psychology Mailing List for Students of Introductory Psychology
"Our situation on this Earth seems strange. Every one of us appears here involuntarily,
and uninvited, for a short stay without knowing why. To me it is enough to wonder at the secrets."
-- Albert Einstein
"Men are probably nearer the central truth in their superstitions than in their science."
--Henry David Thoreau
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
