Richard Green - Revision history

Jim Burton at 11:51, 23 March 2026

2026-03-23T11:51:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:51, 23 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Richard Green (sexologist).jpg\|thumb\|Richard Green]]~~__NOTOC__~~		__NOTOC__{{Template:Ac}}[[File:Richard Green (sexologist).jpg\|thumb\|200px\|left\|Richard Green]]
	'''Richard Green''' (6 June 1936 – 6 April 2019) was an American-British sexologist, psychiatrist, lawyer, and author specializing in homosexuality and transsexualism, specifically "gender identity disorder" in children. Green was the founding editor of the [[Archives of Sexual Behavior]] (1971), and served as Editor for 30 years until 2001. He was also the founding president of the ''International Academy of Sex Research'' (1975), which made the ''Archives'' its official publication. The ''Academy'' and the ''Archives'' owe their existence, in part, to Hugh Hefner and the ''Playboy Foundation'', which supported these causes as well as providing financial assistance to facilitate sex research.<ref>Green, R. (2017). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1098-y Hugh Hefner, the International Academy of Sex Research, and Its Founding President.] Arch Sex Behav 46, 2211–2212 (open access)</ref>		'''Richard Green''' (6 June 1936 – 6 April 2019) was an American-British sexologist, psychiatrist, lawyer, and author specializing in homosexuality and transsexualism, specifically "gender identity disorder" in children. Green was the founding editor of the [[Archives of Sexual Behavior]] (1971), and served as Editor for 30 years until 2001. He was also the founding president of the ''International Academy of Sex Research'' (1975), which made the ''Archives'' its official publication. The ''Academy'' and the ''Archives'' owe their existence, in part, to Hugh Hefner and the ''Playboy Foundation'', which supported these causes as well as providing financial assistance to facilitate sex research.<ref>Green, R. (2017). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1098-y Hugh Hefner, the International Academy of Sex Research, and Its Founding President.] Arch Sex Behav 46, 2211–2212 (open access)</ref>

Line 5:		Line 5:

	Dr. Green received numerous awards and honors. From 1982 to 1983, he was Fellow in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford and, in 1992, he was awarded the prestigious Fulbright Scholarship. This allowed him to study medical law and [[Child Sexual Abuse]] in England, culminating in his 1992 book ''Sexual Science and the Law'' (quoted below) which included a chapter on "intergenerational sexuality".<ref>See chapter 8. Green, R. (1992). ''Sexual science and the law''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [https://books.google.ee/books?id=pPkRHairg3UC&printsec=frontcover&hl=et#v=onepage&q&f=false Google books link].</ref> In 2006, he was awarded the Magnus Hirschfeld Medal for Sexual Research.		Dr. Green received numerous awards and honors. From 1982 to 1983, he was Fellow in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford and, in 1992, he was awarded the prestigious Fulbright Scholarship. This allowed him to study medical law and [[Child Sexual Abuse]] in England, culminating in his 1992 book ''Sexual Science and the Law'' (quoted below) which included a chapter on "intergenerational sexuality".<ref>See chapter 8. Green, R. (1992). ''Sexual science and the law''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [https://books.google.ee/books?id=pPkRHairg3UC&printsec=frontcover&hl=et#v=onepage&q&f=false Google books link].</ref> In 2006, he was awarded the Magnus Hirschfeld Medal for Sexual Research.
	~~{{Template:Ac}}~~
	Green took great personal and professional risk in writing on sexual minorities in an either sympathetic/supportive, or non-sensationalist way. He took a supportive stance on homosexuality in published writing with the MAP ally criminologist [[Donald West]] (1997)<ref>West and Green (eds), [https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/b108010 Sociolegal Control of Homosexuality: A Multi-Nation Comparison] (New York : Plenum Press, 1997).</ref>, and appeared on television alongside gay rights activist [[Frank Kameny]]. His professional career focused on studying children's everyday lives, with papers such as "Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys" (1961),<ref>Money, John; Green, Richard (February 1961), "[https://doi.org/10.1542%2Fpeds.27.2.286 Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys]", ''Pediatrics'', 27 (2): 286–291.</ref>, where he studied under and became personal friends with the MAP ally "Dean of American sexology" Dr. [[John Money]].<ref>Green, R. (2006). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9132-5 John Money, Ph.D. (July 8, 1921–July 7, 2006): A Personal Obituary]. Arch Sex Behav 35, 629–632 (open access).</ref> Green wrote on stigmatized topics such as sadomasochism<ref>Green, R. [https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010295302496 (Serious) Sadomasochism: A Protected Right of Privacy?]. Arch Sex Behav 30, 543–550 (2001).</ref>, and criticized the [[Research:_Prevalence_of_Harm_and_Negative_Outcomes\|false notion of inherent harm]] in unlawful age-disparate sexual experience. During the [[Rind_et_al\|Rind et al. controversy]], the Rind team cited Green (1992)<ref>Green, R. (1992). ''Sexual science and the law''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [https://books.google.ee/books?id=pPkRHairg3UC&printsec=frontcover&hl=et#v=onepage&q&f=false Google books link].</ref>, writing:		Green took great personal and professional risk in writing on sexual minorities in an either sympathetic/supportive, or non-sensationalist way. He took a supportive stance on homosexuality in published writing with the MAP ally criminologist [[Donald West]] (1997)<ref>West and Green (eds), [https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/b108010 Sociolegal Control of Homosexuality: A Multi-Nation Comparison] (New York : Plenum Press, 1997).</ref>, and appeared on television alongside gay rights activist [[Frank Kameny]]. His professional career focused on studying children's everyday lives, with papers such as "Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys" (1961),<ref>Money, John; Green, Richard (February 1961), "[https://doi.org/10.1542%2Fpeds.27.2.286 Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys]", ''Pediatrics'', 27 (2): 286–291.</ref>, where he studied under and became personal friends with the MAP ally "Dean of American sexology" Dr. [[John Money]].<ref>Green, R. (2006). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9132-5 John Money, Ph.D. (July 8, 1921–July 7, 2006): A Personal Obituary]. Arch Sex Behav 35, 629–632 (open access).</ref> Green wrote on stigmatized topics such as sadomasochism<ref>Green, R. [https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010295302496 (Serious) Sadomasochism: A Protected Right of Privacy?]. Arch Sex Behav 30, 543–550 (2001).</ref>, and criticized the [[Research:_Prevalence_of_Harm_and_Negative_Outcomes\|false notion of inherent harm]] in unlawful age-disparate sexual experience. During the [[Rind_et_al\|Rind et al. controversy]], the Rind team cited Green (1992)<ref>Green, R. (1992). ''Sexual science and the law''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [https://books.google.ee/books?id=pPkRHairg3UC&printsec=frontcover&hl=et#v=onepage&q&f=false Google books link].</ref>, writing:

Jim Burton: introduce italics

2026-03-20T20:53:03Z

introduce italics

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:53, 20 March 2026
Line 10:		Line 10:
	After qualitatively reviewing the CSA literature, Green (1992) stated the following:		After qualitatively reviewing the CSA literature, Green (1992) stated the following:

	<blockquote>Ultimately, scientists, if no one else, must be objective in their approach to this emotional issue. Judgmental terminology regarding intergenerational sexuality is more dramatic than that in the earlier psychiatric literature on homosexuality. There, patients were labeled perverts and psychopaths. Here, the experience is always abuse, the children are invariably victims, the adults are perpetrators, and those who later report childhood sexual experiences are, without apology to victims of the Nazi Holocaust, survivors. (p. 175).<ref>Bruce Rind et al., ‘The Validity and Appropriateness of Methods, Analyses, and Conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A Rebuttal of Victimological Critique From Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001)’, in Psychological Bulletin, 127:6 (2001), 734-758 <DOI: IO.1O37//0O33-29O9.127.6.734>, p. 751.</ref></blockquote>		<blockquote>''Ultimately, scientists, if no one else, must be objective in their approach to this emotional issue. Judgmental terminology regarding intergenerational sexuality is more dramatic than that in the earlier psychiatric literature on homosexuality. There, patients were labeled perverts and psychopaths. Here, the experience is always abuse, the children are invariably victims, the adults are perpetrators, and those who later report childhood sexual experiences are, without apology to victims of the Nazi Holocaust, survivors.'' (p. 175).<ref>Bruce Rind et al., ‘The Validity and Appropriateness of Methods, Analyses, and Conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A Rebuttal of Victimological Critique From Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001)’, in Psychological Bulletin, 127:6 (2001), 734-758 <DOI: IO.1O37//0O33-29O9.127.6.734>, p. 751.</ref></blockquote>

	Green published a critical commentary on Harvard psychologist Susan Clancy's 2009 book [[The Trauma Myth]], writing:		Green published a critical commentary on Harvard psychologist Susan Clancy's 2009 book [[The Trauma Myth]], writing:

	<blockquote>The headline, press release, book title message trumpeted here is: Most children who experience sexual contact with adults are not traumatized at the time of the experience. [...] [I]t is this aura of evil in the adult world that energizes the social construction of trauma that attaches to experience that was not traumatic. Contact morphs to abuse. This is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) without the T.		<blockquote>''The headline, press release, book title message trumpeted here is: Most children who experience sexual contact with adults are not traumatized at the time of the experience.'' [...] [I]''t is this aura of evil in the adult world that energizes the social construction of trauma that attaches to experience that was not traumatic. Contact morphs to abuse. This is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) without the T.''

	[...]		[...]

	But, is Clancy, when broadcasting the trauma myth while invoking the moral mantra, contributing to the problem or the solution? Might her finding be an argument to dilute societal condemnation so that delayed trauma would be diminished? If non-pedophile adults became less exercised about adult–child sexual contact that was not aggressive/violent, as with adult–adult-sexuality that is not aggressive/violent, could this reduce the nascent trauma?		''But, is Clancy, when broadcasting the trauma myth while invoking the moral mantra, contributing to the problem or the solution? Might her finding be an argument to dilute societal condemnation so that delayed trauma would be diminished? If non-pedophile adults became less exercised about adult–child sexual contact that was not aggressive/violent, as with adult–adult-sexuality that is not aggressive/violent, could this reduce the nascent trauma?''

	Not condemning adult–child sex is not endorsing it. But, it has been around a long time. And, it is not going to go away, no matter what code number is attached in DSM-5 or how long the prison sentences that attach. (2010, p. 1205).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1007/s10508-010-9643-y The Trauma Myth]. Arch Sex Behav 39, 1205–1206.</ref></blockquote>		''Not condemning adult–child sex is not endorsing it. But, it has been around a long time. And, it is not going to go away, no matter what code number is attached in DSM-5 or how long the prison sentences that attach.'' (2010, p. 1205).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1007/s10508-010-9643-y The Trauma Myth]. Arch Sex Behav 39, 1205–1206.</ref></blockquote>

	Green also co-authored an early (1971) paper comparing [[Research:_The_effects_of_pornography\|adolescent exposure to pornography]] among a sample of rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, with a control group, finding that "''Adolescent exposure to erotica was significantly less for all deviant and offender groups compared to the nondeviants. ''[...]'' The nondeviant, non-sex-offender groups sampled had had significantly greater exposure to erotic materials during adolescence than the deviants, convicted sex offenders, or heavy adult users of pornography.''"<ref>Goldstein, M., Kant, H., Judd, L. et al. (1971). [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540933 Experience with pornography: Rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, and controls.] Arch Sex Behav 1, 1–15.</ref> He published widely, and had some association with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation as one of its Advisory Board members.<ref>[https://www.fmsfonline.org/?about=AdvisoryBoardProfiles#richardgreen Green advisory board profile]</ref>		Green also co-authored an early (1971) paper comparing [[Research:_The_effects_of_pornography\|adolescent exposure to pornography]] among a sample of rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, with a control group, finding that "''Adolescent exposure to erotica was significantly less for all deviant and offender groups compared to the nondeviants. ''[...]'' The nondeviant, non-sex-offender groups sampled had had significantly greater exposure to erotic materials during adolescence than the deviants, convicted sex offenders, or heavy adult users of pornography.''"<ref>Goldstein, M., Kant, H., Judd, L. et al. (1971). [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540933 Experience with pornography: Rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, and controls.] Arch Sex Behav 1, 1–15.</ref> He published widely, and had some association with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation as one of its Advisory Board members.<ref>[https://www.fmsfonline.org/?about=AdvisoryBoardProfiles#richardgreen Green advisory board profile]</ref>
Line 43:		Line 43:

	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
	After we met in Paris we continued to see each other whenever I was in London, where he was a professor of psychiatry until his retirement [...] He successfully proposed me for membership of psychologist J. Michael Bailey’s cross-disciplinary Sexnet forum, wrote to the court on my behalf when I was in trouble with the law, and gave a glowing pre-publication endorsement of my book Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons.		''After we met in Paris we continued to see each other whenever I was in London, where he was a professor of psychiatry until his retirement'' [...] ''He successfully proposed me for membership of psychologist J. Michael Bailey’s cross-disciplinary Sexnet forum, wrote to the court on my behalf when I was in trouble with the law, and gave a glowing pre-publication endorsement of my book Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons.''

	[...]		[...]

	All those years ago in Paris, Richard and his wife Melissa Hines, a neuroscientist, put me at ease immediately, joining me on a conference-organised canal-boat excursion, where they introduced me to their ten-year-old son, Adam. More than anything else they could have done, this friendly gesture (fully visible to other conference participants on the trip) convinced me that neither of them shared the popular prejudice that paedophiles must be shunned as pariahs.		''All those years ago in Paris, Richard and his wife Melissa Hines, a neuroscientist, put me at ease immediately, joining me on a conference-organised canal-boat excursion, where they introduced me to their ten-year-old son, Adam. More than anything else they could have done, this friendly gesture (fully visible to other conference participants on the trip) convinced me that neither of them shared the popular prejudice that paedophiles must be shunned as pariahs.''
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

Thorn: /* External links */

2026-03-15T15:46:41Z

External links

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:46, 15 March 2026
Line 51:		Line 51:

	== External links ==		== External links ==
	* Review of the chapter on intergenerational sexuality in ''Sexual Science and the Law'' (by Richard Green) [https://www.nambla.org/greensci.html Expert Testimony — A Researcher Speaks Out], by Peter Reed (1994)		* Review of the chapter on intergenerational sexuality in ''Sexual Science and the Law'' (by Richard Green): [https://www.nambla.org/greensci.html Expert Testimony — A Researcher Speaks Out], by Peter Reed (1994)

	==See also==		==See also==

Thorn: /* See also */

2026-03-15T15:07:30Z

Xtjvimds16dovrfc at 00:12, 31 January 2025

2025-01-31T00:12:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:12, 31 January 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	Green took great personal and professional risk in writing on sexual minorities in an either sympathetic/supportive, or non-sensationalist way. He took a supportive stance on homosexuality in published writing with the MAP ally criminologist [[Donald West]] (1997)<ref>West and Green (eds), [https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/b108010 Sociolegal Control of Homosexuality: A Multi-Nation Comparison] (New York : Plenum Press, 1997).</ref>, and appeared on television alongside gay rights activist [[Frank Kameny]]. His professional career focused on studying children's everyday lives, with papers such as "Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys" (1961),<ref>Money, John; Green, Richard (February 1961), "[https://doi.org/10.1542%2Fpeds.27.2.286 Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys]", ''Pediatrics'', 27 (2): 286–291.</ref>, where he studied under and became personal friends with the MAP ally "Dean of American sexology" Dr. [[John Money]].<ref>Green, R. (2006). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9132-5 John Money, Ph.D. (July 8, 1921–July 7, 2006): A Personal Obituary]. Arch Sex Behav 35, 629–632 (open access).</ref> Green wrote on stigmatized topics such as sadomasochism<ref>Green, R. [https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010295302496 (Serious) Sadomasochism: A Protected Right of Privacy?]. Arch Sex Behav 30, 543–550 (2001).</ref>, and criticized the [[Research:_Prevalence_of_Harm_and_Negative_Outcomes\|false notion of inherent harm]] in unlawful age-disparate sexual experience. During the [[Rind_et_al\|Rind et al. controversy]], the Rind team cited Green (1992)<ref>Green, R. (1992). ''Sexual science and the law''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [https://books.google.ee/books?id=pPkRHairg3UC&printsec=frontcover&hl=et#v=onepage&q&f=false Google books link].</ref>, writing:		Green took great personal and professional risk in writing on sexual minorities in an either sympathetic/supportive, or non-sensationalist way. He took a supportive stance on homosexuality in published writing with the MAP ally criminologist [[Donald West]] (1997)<ref>West and Green (eds), [https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/b108010 Sociolegal Control of Homosexuality: A Multi-Nation Comparison] (New York : Plenum Press, 1997).</ref>, and appeared on television alongside gay rights activist [[Frank Kameny]]. His professional career focused on studying children's everyday lives, with papers such as "Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys" (1961),<ref>Money, John; Green, Richard (February 1961), "[https://doi.org/10.1542%2Fpeds.27.2.286 Effeminacy in Prepubertal Boys]", ''Pediatrics'', 27 (2): 286–291.</ref>, where he studied under and became personal friends with the MAP ally "Dean of American sexology" Dr. [[John Money]].<ref>Green, R. (2006). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9132-5 John Money, Ph.D. (July 8, 1921–July 7, 2006): A Personal Obituary]. Arch Sex Behav 35, 629–632 (open access).</ref> Green wrote on stigmatized topics such as sadomasochism<ref>Green, R. [https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010295302496 (Serious) Sadomasochism: A Protected Right of Privacy?]. Arch Sex Behav 30, 543–550 (2001).</ref>, and criticized the [[Research:_Prevalence_of_Harm_and_Negative_Outcomes\|false notion of inherent harm]] in unlawful age-disparate sexual experience. During the [[Rind_et_al\|Rind et al. controversy]], the Rind team cited Green (1992)<ref>Green, R. (1992). ''Sexual science and the law''. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [https://books.google.ee/books?id=pPkRHairg3UC&printsec=frontcover&hl=et#v=onepage&q&f=false Google books link].</ref>, writing:

	"After qualitatively reviewing the CSA literature, Green (1992) stated the following:		After qualitatively reviewing the CSA literature, Green (1992) stated the following:

	<blockquote>''Ultimately, scientists, if no one else, must be objective in their approach to this emotional issue. Judgmental terminology regarding intergenerational sexuality is more dramatic than that in the earlier psychiatric literature on homosexuality. There, patients were labeled perverts and psychopaths. Here, the experience is always abuse, the children are invariably victims, the adults are perpetrators, and those who later report childhood sexual experiences are, without apology to victims of the Nazi Holocaust, survivors.'' (p. 175).<ref>Bruce Rind et al., ‘The Validity and Appropriateness of Methods, Analyses, and Conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A Rebuttal of Victimological Critique From Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001)’, in Psychological Bulletin, 127:6 (2001), 734-758 <DOI: IO.1O37//0O33-29O9.127.6.734>, p. 751.</ref></blockquote>		<blockquote>Ultimately, scientists, if no one else, must be objective in their approach to this emotional issue. Judgmental terminology regarding intergenerational sexuality is more dramatic than that in the earlier psychiatric literature on homosexuality. There, patients were labeled perverts and psychopaths. Here, the experience is always abuse, the children are invariably victims, the adults are perpetrators, and those who later report childhood sexual experiences are, without apology to victims of the Nazi Holocaust, survivors. (p. 175).<ref>Bruce Rind et al., ‘The Validity and Appropriateness of Methods, Analyses, and Conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A Rebuttal of Victimological Critique From Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001)’, in Psychological Bulletin, 127:6 (2001), 734-758 <DOI: IO.1O37//0O33-29O9.127.6.734>, p. 751.</ref></blockquote>

	Green published a critical commentary on Harvard psychologist Susan Clancy's 2009 book [[The Trauma Myth]], writing:		Green published a critical commentary on Harvard psychologist Susan Clancy's 2009 book [[The Trauma Myth]], writing:

	<blockquote>''The headline, press release, book title message trumpeted here is: Most children who experience sexual contact with adults are not traumatized at the time of the experience. ''[...] [I]''t is this aura of evil in the adult world that energizes the social construction of trauma that attaches to experience that was not traumatic. Contact morphs to abuse. This is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) without the T.''		<blockquote>The headline, press release, book title message trumpeted here is: Most children who experience sexual contact with adults are not traumatized at the time of the experience. [...] [I]t is this aura of evil in the adult world that energizes the social construction of trauma that attaches to experience that was not traumatic. Contact morphs to abuse. This is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) without the T.

	[...]		[...]

	''But, is Clancy, when broadcasting the trauma myth while invoking the moral mantra, contributing to the problem or the solution? Might her finding be an argument to dilute societal condemnation so that delayed trauma would be diminished? If non-pedophile adults became less exercised about adult–child sexual contact that was not aggressive/violent, as with adult–adult-sexuality that is not aggressive/violent, could this reduce the nascent trauma?''		But, is Clancy, when broadcasting the trauma myth while invoking the moral mantra, contributing to the problem or the solution? Might her finding be an argument to dilute societal condemnation so that delayed trauma would be diminished? If non-pedophile adults became less exercised about adult–child sexual contact that was not aggressive/violent, as with adult–adult-sexuality that is not aggressive/violent, could this reduce the nascent trauma?

	''Not condemning adult–child sex is not endorsing it. But, it has been around a long time. And, it is not going to go away, no matter what code number is attached in DSM-5 or how long the prison sentences that attach.'' (2010, p. 1205).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1007/s10508-010-9643-y The Trauma Myth]. Arch Sex Behav 39, 1205–1206.</ref></blockquote>		Not condemning adult–child sex is not endorsing it. But, it has been around a long time. And, it is not going to go away, no matter what code number is attached in DSM-5 or how long the prison sentences that attach. (2010, p. 1205).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1007/s10508-010-9643-y The Trauma Myth]. Arch Sex Behav 39, 1205–1206.</ref></blockquote>

	Green also co-authored an early (1971) paper comparing [[Research:_The_effects_of_pornography\|adolescent exposure to pornography]] among a sample of rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, with a control group, finding that "''Adolescent exposure to erotica was significantly less for all deviant and offender groups compared to the nondeviants. ''[...]'' The nondeviant, non-sex-offender groups sampled had had significantly greater exposure to erotic materials during adolescence than the deviants, convicted sex offenders, or heavy adult users of pornography.''"<ref>Goldstein, M., Kant, H., Judd, L. et al. (1971). [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540933 Experience with pornography: Rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, and controls.] Arch Sex Behav 1, 1–15.</ref> He published widely, and had some association with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation as one of its Advisory Board members.<ref>[https://www.fmsfonline.org/?about=AdvisoryBoardProfiles#richardgreen Green advisory board profile]</ref>		Green also co-authored an early (1971) paper comparing [[Research:_The_effects_of_pornography\|adolescent exposure to pornography]] among a sample of rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, with a control group, finding that "''Adolescent exposure to erotica was significantly less for all deviant and offender groups compared to the nondeviants. ''[...]'' The nondeviant, non-sex-offender groups sampled had had significantly greater exposure to erotic materials during adolescence than the deviants, convicted sex offenders, or heavy adult users of pornography.''"<ref>Goldstein, M., Kant, H., Judd, L. et al. (1971). [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540933 Experience with pornography: Rapists, pedophiles, homosexuals, transsexuals, and controls.] Arch Sex Behav 1, 1–15.</ref> He published widely, and had some association with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation as one of its Advisory Board members.<ref>[https://www.fmsfonline.org/?about=AdvisoryBoardProfiles#richardgreen Green advisory board profile]</ref>
Line 43:		Line 43:

	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
	''After we met in Paris we continued to see each other whenever I was in London, where he was a professor of psychiatry until his retirement ''[...]'' He successfully proposed me for membership of psychologist J. Michael Bailey’s cross-disciplinary Sexnet forum, wrote to the court on my behalf when I was in trouble with the law, and gave a glowing pre-publication endorsement of my book Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons.''		After we met in Paris we continued to see each other whenever I was in London, where he was a professor of psychiatry until his retirement [...] He successfully proposed me for membership of psychologist J. Michael Bailey’s cross-disciplinary Sexnet forum, wrote to the court on my behalf when I was in trouble with the law, and gave a glowing pre-publication endorsement of my book Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons.

	[...]		[...]

	''All those years ago in Paris, Richard and his wife Melissa Hines, a neuroscientist, put me at ease immediately, joining me on a conference-organised canal-boat excursion, where they introduced me to their ten-year-old son, Adam. More than anything else they could have done, this friendly gesture (fully visible to other conference participants on the trip) convinced me that neither of them shared the popular prejudice that paedophiles must be shunned as pariahs.''		All those years ago in Paris, Richard and his wife Melissa Hines, a neuroscientist, put me at ease immediately, joining me on a conference-organised canal-boat excursion, where they introduced me to their ten-year-old son, Adam. More than anything else they could have done, this friendly gesture (fully visible to other conference participants on the trip) convinced me that neither of them shared the popular prejudice that paedophiles must be shunned as pariahs.
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

Thorn: /* Is pedophilia a mental illness? */

2025-01-28T08:07:04Z

Is pedophilia a mental illness?

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:07, 28 January 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:
	==Is pedophilia a mental illness?==		==Is pedophilia a mental illness?==

	Using the same criteria he had earlier used to successfully argue for the depathologization of homosexuality, in 2002 Green initiated a debate in a special issue of the [[Archives of Sexual Behavior]] regarding the extent to which preferential attraction to people before puberty (i.e. [[pedophilia]]) should be classified as a mental disorder / mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association. Without impinging on the legal status of pedophilic age-disparate sexual contact, he argued that sexual arousal to pre-pubescent individuals is subjectively reported "in a substantial minority of "normal" people", that pedophilic sexual contact is normative in the animal kingdom via non-human primates, and reviewed sources indicating a much higher level of social acceptance of pedophilic attraction in the past.<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://www.ipce.info/library_2/files/green_asb_2002.html Is pedophilia a mental disorder?]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 2002.</ref> He stated that such observations do not entail cultural or legal acceptance today, and his article inspired a large number of replies from many of the most famous figures in sexual science: [[Robert Spitzer]] (the father of the modern DSM), [[Fred Berlin]], [[Michael Seto]], [[Bruce Rind]], [[Paul Okami]], and [[Vern Bullough]]. Their responses were collected and published in a single article entitled ''Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and [[Gunter_Schmidt\|Schmidt]] (2002)'', and we at Newgon strongly recommend Okami and Rind's contributions.<ref>[https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020603214218 Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 6, December 2002, pp. 479–503.</ref> Green published a short reply to these commentaries in a "Rejoinder" article (2002).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020655231056 Rejoinder]. Arch Sex Behav 31, 505–507.</ref>		Using the same criteria he had earlier used to successfully argue for the depathologization of homosexuality, in 2002 Green initiated a debate in a special issue of the [[Archives of Sexual Behavior]] regarding the extent to which preferential attraction to people before puberty (i.e. [[pedophilia]]) should be classified as a mental disorder / mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association. Without impinging on the legal status of pedophilic age-disparate sexual contact, he argued that sexual arousal to pre-pubescent individuals is subjectively reported "in a substantial minority of "normal" people", that pedophilic sexual contact is normative in the animal kingdom via non-human primates, and reviewed sources indicating a much higher level of social acceptance of pedophilic attraction in the past.<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://www.ipce.info/library_2/files/green_asb_2002.html Is pedophilia a mental disorder?]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 2002. ([https://web.archive.org/web/20250128080531/http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/pedophilia.htm web.archive])</ref> He stated that such observations do not entail cultural or legal acceptance today, and his article inspired a large number of replies from many of the most famous figures in sexual science: [[Robert Spitzer]] (the father of the modern DSM), [[Fred Berlin]], [[Michael Seto]], [[Bruce Rind]], [[Paul Okami]], and [[Vern Bullough]]. Their responses were collected and published in a single article entitled ''Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and [[Gunter_Schmidt\|Schmidt]] (2002)'', and we at Newgon strongly recommend Okami and Rind's contributions.<ref>[https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020603214218 Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 6, December 2002, pp. 479–503.</ref> Green published a short reply to these commentaries in a "Rejoinder" article (2002).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020655231056 Rejoinder]. Arch Sex Behav 31, 505–507.</ref>

	The paper also raised specific concerns about the DSM-IV definition, some of which were later acknowledged by Ray Blanchard in his literature review for the DSM-5 workgroup, which proposed a more general distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. This has since been accepted in the case of pedophilia, where pedophilia (the attraction) is distinguished from pedophilic disorder ("acting on" sexual attraction). With revisions to the DSM-5-TR, the "acting on" criteria for pedophilic disorder now specifically refers to interpersonal, physical sexual contact, not individual activities such as viewing pornography intended to (or actually depicting) minors.<ref>Seto, M.C. (2022). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02336-1 Clinical and Conceptual Problems With Pedophilic Disorder in the DSM-5-TR.] Arch Sex Behav 51, 1833–1837.</ref> Pedophilia is therefore no longer a mental illness according to the DSM.		The paper also raised specific concerns about the DSM-IV definition, some of which were later acknowledged by Ray Blanchard in his literature review for the DSM-5 workgroup, which proposed a more general distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. This has since been accepted in the case of pedophilia, where pedophilia (the attraction) is distinguished from pedophilic disorder ("acting on" sexual attraction). With revisions to the DSM-5-TR, the "acting on" criteria for pedophilic disorder now specifically refers to interpersonal, physical sexual contact, not individual activities such as viewing pornography intended to (or actually depicting) minors.<ref>Seto, M.C. (2022). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02336-1 Clinical and Conceptual Problems With Pedophilic Disorder in the DSM-5-TR.] Arch Sex Behav 51, 1833–1837.</ref> Pedophilia is therefore no longer a mental illness according to the DSM.

Thorn: /* Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! */

2025-01-28T08:05:08Z

Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:05, 28 January 2025
Line 36:		Line 36:
	==Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!==		==Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!==

	In 2010, Green criticized Ray Blanchard's proposal to introduce [[hebephilia]] as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 (as a subtype the proposed pedohebophilic disorder).<ref>Richard Green (2010). [http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/green42011.htm Hebephilia is a Mental Disorder?] First published in ''Sexual Offender Treatment'', Volume 5 </ref> The proposal led to widespread criticism and was not accepted.<ref>These letters and articles are summarized in Bruce Rind and Richard Yuill, 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review', in Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 42 (2012), 797-829 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9982-y></ref> In his criticism, Green pointed to the legal age of sexual consent in several countries of Europe, arguing that this proposal would declare 19-year-olds engaged sexually with 14-year-olds as having a mental disorder. His piece was titled "''Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!''".<ref>Green, R. (2010). [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.470.143 "Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! (letter to the editor)"]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 39 (3): 585–586. Full letter on [https://www.ipce.info/library/journal-article/sexual-preference-14-year-olds Ipce].</ref>		In 2010, Green criticized Ray Blanchard's proposal to introduce [[hebephilia]] as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 (as a subtype the proposed pedohebophilic disorder).<ref>Richard Green (2010). [http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/green42011.htm Hebephilia is a Mental Disorder?] First published in ''Sexual Offender Treatment'', Volume 5 ([https://web.archive.org/web/20250128080341/http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/green42011.htm web.archive.])</ref> The proposal led to widespread criticism and was not accepted.<ref>These letters and articles are summarized in Bruce Rind and Richard Yuill, 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review', in Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 42 (2012), 797-829 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9982-y></ref> In his criticism, Green pointed to the legal age of sexual consent in several countries of Europe, arguing that this proposal would declare 19-year-olds engaged sexually with 14-year-olds as having a mental disorder. His piece was titled "''Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!''".<ref>Green, R. (2010). [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.470.143 "Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! (letter to the editor)"]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 39 (3): 585–586. Full letter on [https://www.ipce.info/library/journal-article/sexual-preference-14-year-olds Ipce].</ref>

	==A friend to MAPs?==		==A friend to MAPs?==

Thorn: /* Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! */

2025-01-22T12:46:46Z

Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:46, 22 January 2025
Line 36:		Line 36:
	==Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!==		==Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!==

	In 2010, Green criticized Ray Blanchard's proposal to introduce [[hebephilia]] as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 (as a subtype the proposed pedohebophilic disorder).<ref>Richard Green (2010)[http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/green42011.htm Hebephilia is a Mental Disorder?] First published in ''Sexual Offender Treatment'', Volume 5 </ref> The proposal led to widespread criticism and was not accepted.<ref>These letters and articles are summarized in Bruce Rind and Richard Yuill, 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review', in Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 42 (2012), 797-829 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9982-y></ref> In his criticism, Green pointed to the legal age of sexual consent in several countries of Europe, arguing that this proposal would declare 19-year-olds engaged sexually with 14-year-olds as having a mental disorder. His piece was titled "''Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!''".<ref>Green, R. (2010). [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.470.143 "Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! (letter to the editor)"]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 39 (3): 585–586. Full letter on [https://www.ipce.info/library/journal-article/sexual-preference-14-year-olds Ipce].</ref>		In 2010, Green criticized Ray Blanchard's proposal to introduce [[hebephilia]] as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 (as a subtype the proposed pedohebophilic disorder).<ref>Richard Green (2010). [http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/green42011.htm Hebephilia is a Mental Disorder?] First published in ''Sexual Offender Treatment'', Volume 5 </ref> The proposal led to widespread criticism and was not accepted.<ref>These letters and articles are summarized in Bruce Rind and Richard Yuill, 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review', in Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 42 (2012), 797-829 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9982-y></ref> In his criticism, Green pointed to the legal age of sexual consent in several countries of Europe, arguing that this proposal would declare 19-year-olds engaged sexually with 14-year-olds as having a mental disorder. His piece was titled "''Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!''".<ref>Green, R. (2010). [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.470.143 "Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! (letter to the editor)"]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 39 (3): 585–586. Full letter on [https://www.ipce.info/library/journal-article/sexual-preference-14-year-olds Ipce].</ref>

	==A friend to MAPs?==		==A friend to MAPs?==

Thorn: /* Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! */

2025-01-22T12:46:09Z

Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:46, 22 January 2025
Line 36:		Line 36:
	==Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!==		==Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!==

	In 2010, Green criticized Ray Blanchard's proposal to introduce [[hebephilia]] as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 (as a subtype the proposed pedohebophilic disorder). The proposal led to widespread criticism and was not accepted.<ref>These letters and articles are summarized in Bruce Rind and Richard Yuill, 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review', in Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 42 (2012), 797-829 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9982-y></ref> In his criticism, Green pointed to the legal age of sexual consent in several countries of Europe, arguing that this proposal would declare 19-year-olds engaged sexually with 14-year-olds as having a mental disorder. His piece was titled "''Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!''".<ref>Green, R. (2010). [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.470.143 "Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! (letter to the editor)"]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 39 (3): 585–586. Full letter on [https://www.ipce.info/library/journal-article/sexual-preference-14-year-olds Ipce].</ref>		In 2010, Green criticized Ray Blanchard's proposal to introduce [[hebephilia]] as a mental disorder in the DSM-5 (as a subtype the proposed pedohebophilic disorder).<ref>Richard Green (2010)[http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/green42011.htm Hebephilia is a Mental Disorder?] First published in ''Sexual Offender Treatment'', Volume 5 </ref> The proposal led to widespread criticism and was not accepted.<ref>These letters and articles are summarized in Bruce Rind and Richard Yuill, 'Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural, Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary Review', in Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 42 (2012), 797-829 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9982-y></ref> In his criticism, Green pointed to the legal age of sexual consent in several countries of Europe, arguing that this proposal would declare 19-year-olds engaged sexually with 14-year-olds as having a mental disorder. His piece was titled "''Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!!''".<ref>Green, R. (2010). [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.470.143 "Sexual preference for 14-year-olds as a mental disorder: you can't be serious!! (letter to the editor)"]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 39 (3): 585–586. Full letter on [https://www.ipce.info/library/journal-article/sexual-preference-14-year-olds Ipce].</ref>

	==A friend to MAPs?==		==A friend to MAPs?==

Prue at 23:15, 5 October 2023

2023-10-05T23:15:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:15, 5 October 2023
Line 30:		Line 30:
	==Is pedophilia a mental illness?==		==Is pedophilia a mental illness?==

	Using the same criteria he had earlier used to successfully argue for the depathologization of homosexuality, in 2002 Green initiated a debate in a special issue of the [[Archives of Sexual Behavior]] regarding the extent to which preferential attraction to people before puberty (i.e. [[pedophilia]]) should be classified as a mental disorder / mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association. Without impinging on the legal status of pedophilic age-disparate sexual contact, he argued that sexual arousal to pre-pubescent individuals is subjectively reported "in a substantial minority of "normal" people", that pedophilic sexual contact is normative in the animal kingdom via non-human primates, and reviewed sources indicating a much higher level of social acceptance of pedophilic attraction in the past.<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://www.ipce.info/library_2/files/green_asb_2002.html Is pedophilia a mental disorder?]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 2002.</ref> He stated that such observations do not entail cultural or legal acceptance today, and his article inspired a large number of replies from many of the most famous figures in sexual science: [[Robert Spitzer]] (the father of the modern DSM), [[Fred Berlin]], [[Michael Seto]], [[Bruce Rind]], [[Paul Okami]], and [[Vern Bullough]]. Their responses were collected and published in a single article entitled ''Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)'', and we at Newgon strongly recommend Okami and Rind's contributions.<ref>[https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020603214218 Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 6, December 2002, pp. 479–503.</ref> Green published a short reply to these commentaries in a "Rejoinder" article (2002).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020655231056 Rejoinder]. Arch Sex Behav 31, 505–507.</ref>		Using the same criteria he had earlier used to successfully argue for the depathologization of homosexuality, in 2002 Green initiated a debate in a special issue of the [[Archives of Sexual Behavior]] regarding the extent to which preferential attraction to people before puberty (i.e. [[pedophilia]]) should be classified as a mental disorder / mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association. Without impinging on the legal status of pedophilic age-disparate sexual contact, he argued that sexual arousal to pre-pubescent individuals is subjectively reported "in a substantial minority of "normal" people", that pedophilic sexual contact is normative in the animal kingdom via non-human primates, and reviewed sources indicating a much higher level of social acceptance of pedophilic attraction in the past.<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://www.ipce.info/library_2/files/green_asb_2002.html Is pedophilia a mental disorder?]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 2002.</ref> He stated that such observations do not entail cultural or legal acceptance today, and his article inspired a large number of replies from many of the most famous figures in sexual science: [[Robert Spitzer]] (the father of the modern DSM), [[Fred Berlin]], [[Michael Seto]], [[Bruce Rind]], [[Paul Okami]], and [[Vern Bullough]]. Their responses were collected and published in a single article entitled ''Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and [[Gunter_Schmidt\|Schmidt]] (2002)'', and we at Newgon strongly recommend Okami and Rind's contributions.<ref>[https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020603214218 Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 6, December 2002, pp. 479–503.</ref> Green published a short reply to these commentaries in a "Rejoinder" article (2002).<ref>Green, R. (2002). [https://sci-hub.wf/10.1023/a:1020655231056 Rejoinder]. Arch Sex Behav 31, 505–507.</ref>

	The paper also raised specific concerns about the DSM-IV definition, some of which were later acknowledged by Ray Blanchard in his literature review for the DSM-5 workgroup, which proposed a more general distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. This has since been accepted in the case of pedophilia, where pedophilia (the attraction) is distinguished from pedophilic disorder ("acting on" sexual attraction). With revisions to the DSM-5-TR, the "acting on" criteria for pedophilic disorder now specifically refers to interpersonal, physical sexual contact, not individual activities such as viewing pornography intended to (or actually depicting) minors.<ref>Seto, M.C. (2022). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02336-1 Clinical and Conceptual Problems With Pedophilic Disorder in the DSM-5-TR.] Arch Sex Behav 51, 1833–1837.</ref> Pedophilia is therefore no longer a mental illness according to the DSM.		The paper also raised specific concerns about the DSM-IV definition, some of which were later acknowledged by Ray Blanchard in his literature review for the DSM-5 workgroup, which proposed a more general distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. This has since been accepted in the case of pedophilia, where pedophilia (the attraction) is distinguished from pedophilic disorder ("acting on" sexual attraction). With revisions to the DSM-5-TR, the "acting on" criteria for pedophilic disorder now specifically refers to interpersonal, physical sexual contact, not individual activities such as viewing pornography intended to (or actually depicting) minors.<ref>Seto, M.C. (2022). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02336-1 Clinical and Conceptual Problems With Pedophilic Disorder in the DSM-5-TR.] Arch Sex Behav 51, 1833–1837.</ref> Pedophilia is therefore no longer a mental illness according to the DSM.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:07, 15 March 2026
Line 49:		Line 49:
	All those years ago in Paris, Richard and his wife Melissa Hines, a neuroscientist, put me at ease immediately, joining me on a conference-organised canal-boat excursion, where they introduced me to their ten-year-old son, Adam. More than anything else they could have done, this friendly gesture (fully visible to other conference participants on the trip) convinced me that neither of them shared the popular prejudice that paedophiles must be shunned as pariahs.		All those years ago in Paris, Richard and his wife Melissa Hines, a neuroscientist, put me at ease immediately, joining me on a conference-organised canal-boat excursion, where they introduced me to their ten-year-old son, Adam. More than anything else they could have done, this friendly gesture (fully visible to other conference participants on the trip) convinced me that neither of them shared the popular prejudice that paedophiles must be shunned as pariahs.
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

			== External links ==
			* Review of the chapter on intergenerational sexuality in ''Sexual Science and the Law'' (by Richard Green) [https://www.nambla.org/greensci.html Expert Testimony — A Researcher Speaks Out], by Peter Reed (1994)

	==See also==		==See also==