Ken Plummer
Ken Plummer (Born in Palmers Green, London, April 4, 1946; Died November 2022, Essex) was a British sociologist and humanist academic who pioneered the sociological study of sexuality, including non-normative sexualities and the study of minor-attraction. He worked as an academic at the University of Essex from 1975 to 2005, where he took early retirement because of the need for a liver transplant.
Plummer joined PIE (The Paedophile Infomation Exchange) as a member in order to interview paedophiles, and his writings about them are notable for their non-sensationalist and non-hostile approached. He attempted to set a research agenda on the topic by constructing “a sociological baseline” for future research, and reviewed many relevant publications such as Wilson & Cox’s study of PIE members, “Childlovers: A Study of Paedophiles in Society”, and [with Vern Bullough] reviewed Edward Brongersma’s magnum opus on Boy-Love. [links and short quotes will be added]
Excerpts from Plummers most relevant MAP/youth related publications: [I will update this - Prue]
“Understanding Childhood Sexualities” (1999), where he gives a social constructionist account of childhood sexuality.
Interview with Ken Plummer in Paidika
In 2015, Plummer was interviewed about such topics as the Kinsey institute https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BUdOPKYI3g, and how he self-censored his own interviews with paedophiles, sadomasochist, and other “sexual variations” which have never been published in full https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r4OtcYX6aY
Tributes to Ken are here: https://www.essex.ac.uk/news/2022/11/07/tributes-to-professor-ken-plummer
Plummer's most unsympathetic comments relating to minor-attraction relate to his ostensible regret over his publications post in 2014: https://kenplummer.com/2014/07/27/child-abuse-and-paedophilia-an-open-letter/ On his paedophilia research, he wrote:
“These early papers from the 1970’s are of some historical interest, but given the changes in the wider world, I believe their conclusions are no longer tenable. I am saddened to think they might have been used to justify child abuse.”
Note what’s not said: he doesn’t disavow his child sexuality writings, his book reviews, his use of moral panic to frame the discussion of paedophilia. He just says “I believe their conclusions are no longer tenable” without telling us why.