Intrinsic harm: Difference between revisions
The Admins (talk | contribs) |
BLueRibbon (talk | contribs) m Fixed link |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
'''[[Michael Bailey]]''': | '''[[Michael Bailey]]''': | ||
<blockquote>''Indeed, the best scientific evidence suggests that the most typical experiences considered childhood sexual abuse may not be as harmful as most people think. Specifically, sexual activity that children engage in voluntarily (albeit illegally) with adults is nearly uncorrelated with undesirable outcomes.''<ref>[https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/JMichael-Bailey/articles/MJOCarrollReview. | <blockquote>''Indeed, the best scientific evidence suggests that the most typical experiences considered childhood sexual abuse may not be as harmful as most people think. Specifically, sexual activity that children engage in voluntarily (albeit illegally) with adults is nearly uncorrelated with undesirable outcomes.''<ref>[https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/JMichael-Bailey/articles/MJOCarrollReview.pdf Bailey, J. M. Bailey (2011). Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(6), 1329–1332. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9842-1 ]</ref></blockquote> | ||
'''[[Alfred Kinsey]]''': | '''[[Alfred Kinsey]]''': | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
*[[Research: Double-Taboo CSA]] | *[[Research: Double-Taboo CSA]] | ||
*[[Research: The effects of pornography]] - With respect to so-called "online harms". | *[[Research: The effects of pornography]] - With respect to so-called "online harms". | ||
*[[Scarred for life]] | |||
===Encyclopedia and debate articles=== | ===Encyclopedia and debate articles=== | ||
Latest revision as of 14:58, 2 September 2024
The dilemma of intrinsic harm concerns whether or not (or to what extent) harm is an unavoidable consequence of voluntary sexual contact between legally adult, and much younger people, usually classified as Child Sexual Abuse. Said question is frequently broached online when the topic of controversial research such as Rind et al is invoked.
Intrinsic harm is also one of the major debating points among MAPs and Academics concerned with minor-adult sex. Views on intrinsic harm are a primary factor in determining whether such a person is anti-contact, contact-neutral, or alternatively, pro-c.
Experts on intrinsic harm
The research is much more consistent with the conclusion that harm is caused instead by coercion, manipulation, secrecy, and by courting kids who already have problems, not the sexual interactions per se.[1]
Indeed, the best scientific evidence suggests that the most typical experiences considered childhood sexual abuse may not be as harmful as most people think. Specifically, sexual activity that children engage in voluntarily (albeit illegally) with adults is nearly uncorrelated with undesirable outcomes.[2]
It is difficult to understand why a child, except for its cultural conditioning, should be disturbed at having its genitalia touched, or disturbed at seeing the genitalia of other persons, or disturbed at even more specific sexual contacts.[3]
See also
We touch on this subject frequently throughout our detailed research sections. Some anthologies of particular relevance:
- Research: Secondary Harm
- Research: Family Environment
- Research: Association or Causation
- Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes
- Research: Double-Taboo CSA
- Research: The effects of pornography - With respect to so-called "online harms".
- Scarred for life