Template:EGLConsent: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
File:PredictiveValidity2.jpg|Rind - CSA concept invalidity continued | File:PredictiveValidity2.jpg|Rind - CSA concept invalidity continued | ||
File:FinkelhorMoralFailure.png|[[David Finkelhor]] (Abuse Guru) and his failed moral circular argument | File:FinkelhorMoralFailure.png|[[David Finkelhor]] (Abuse Guru) and his failed moral circular argument | ||
Ehmanconsent.png|Robert Ehman on the failed circular "consent" argument | |||
Ehmanconsentbinary.png|Robert Ehman on the real reasons for consent vs no consent binarism | |||
File:Powerimbalance.jpg|[[Terry Leahy]]: Absence of an ethical argument against age-gap sex | File:Powerimbalance.jpg|[[Terry Leahy]]: Absence of an ethical argument against age-gap sex | ||
File:Power-imbalance-consent.jpg|[[Paul Okami]] on Power Imbalance argument (from ''Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)'') | File:Power-imbalance-consent.jpg|[[Paul Okami]] on Power Imbalance argument (from ''Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)'') | ||
Revision as of 11:57, 13 August 2022
-
Bruce Rind on CSA concept (in)validity -
Rind on lack of predictive validity for informed consent/CSA concept invalidity -
Rind - CSA concept invalidity continued -
David Finkelhor (Abuse Guru) and his failed moral circular argument -
Robert Ehman on the failed circular "consent" argument -
Robert Ehman on the real reasons for consent vs no consent binarism -
Terry Leahy: Absence of an ethical argument against age-gap sex -
Paul Okami on Power Imbalance argument (from Peer Commentaries on Green (2002) and Schmidt (2002)) -
Review of Sandfort and consent -
Scott De Orio on Queer Identities that don't fit the model of consent -
Liz Highleyman's review of Judith Levine's Harmful to Minors -
Liz Highleyman's review of Judith Levine's Harmful to Minors: Consent dogma
