Bauserman R
Graduate Program, Syracuse University, NY.
J Homosex. 1990;20(1-2):297-312; discussion 313-8. doi: 10.1300/J082v20n01_17.
Three critiques of Theo Sandfort's research on man-boy sexual relationships in the Netherlands are examined and evaluated. Three types of criticisms--methodological, speculative, and moral--are identified. Specific criticisms of the study are evaluated on the basis of their validity and, where appropriate, their underlying assumptions. It is argued that moral condemnation of such relationships, combined with a prevailing ideology of boy "victims" and adult "perpetrators," results in efforts by Sandfort's critics to attack and discredit his research rather than evaluate it objectively.
对西奥·桑德福特关于荷兰男性与男童性关系研究的三种批评进行了审视和评估。确定了三种批评类型——方法论、推测性和道德性。基于其有效性以及在适当情况下基于其潜在假设，对该研究的具体批评进行了评估。有人认为，对这种关系的道德谴责，加上普遍存在的男孩“受害者”和成年“施害者”的观念，导致桑德福特的批评者试图攻击并诋毁他的研究，而不是对其进行客观评估。
