[LCC] Journal of Homosexuality related complaint re intellectual freedom

[Andrew Lear]

Hi guys,
I just want to add into the discussion (without intending to make any
broader point) that Routledge recently published my book on
vase-painting, in which I make very clear that eromenoi may have been
prepubescent, so.....I guess if I have a point, it's that we shouldn't
generalize too much.  Andrew

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Kirk Ormand <kirk.ormand at oberlin.edu> wrote:
> For what it's worth, I don't think it's typical. I do think that it's
> important to note that Taylor & Francis is a private (i.e. non-university)
> press; they may have different standards, and probably don't get as uppity
> about academic freedom as we do.  It is also worth noting that this is
> something of a boundary condition.  That is, in the original special issue
> of J of H (several years ago) they were willing to publish a wide range of
> articles about ancient sexual practice.  The one that they balked at was
> about age-different same-sex relations, or, as it is sometimes known,
> man-boy love.  This is a topic about which the public is notably squeamish,
> and I'm sure that for the press it raises concerns about child pornography
> legal charges.
>
> (Of course, an awful lot has been published about ancient paederasty; but
> generally authors don't make too big a point of the fact that we're talking
> about 40-year old men having sex with 14-year old boys. As long as there's
> enough vagueness to suggest that the boys might have been 18, or at least 16
> (as many of them no doubt were) it doesn't hit the same hot button.)
>
> I'm not suggesting that this is justified, and obviously the press should be
> able to make a distinction between academic investigation of a known social
> phenomenon and participation in an illegal sexual act -- but, as Gayle Rubin
> pointed out many years ago, we live in an age of sexual hysteria.
>
> Best,
>
> Kirk
>
> On Jun 4, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Jones, Gregory S. wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I also support strong action in this case, especially Kirk's suggestion
>> that we co-opt full support from the APA.  This is the latest in a long
>> series of events I have witnessed over the past two years which suggest to
>> me, as a relatively young scholar, that academia is not the refuge of reason
>> and free thought I had once believed it to be, especially when it comes to
>> (homo)sexuality.  A conservative backlash, or is this typical?
>>
>> Greg J
>>
>> Quoting kmilnor <kmilnor at barnard.edu>:
>>
>>> Dear Kirk --
>>>
>>> How disappointing that this was NOT resolved as it seemed to have
>>> been. I'm inclined for the LCC to take a strong stance, but (as
>>> always!) I serve the will of the members. What do you guys think??
>>>
>>> klm
>>>
>>> On Jun 4, 2009, at 12:06 AM, Kirk Ormand wrote:
>>>
>>>> To the Lambda Classical Caucus,
>>>>
>>>> Enclosed are two documents (in one .pdf)  that pertain to the latest
>>>>  chapter in a multi-year conflict.
>>>>
>>>> The short version is this: the Journal of Homosexuality, which is
>>>> now published by Taylor and Francis (who also own the Routledge
>>>> Press imprint) has rather suddenly and without warning cancelled a
>>>> fully refereed and approved special issue that dealt with age-
>>>> differential same-sex love in the West.  Three of the essays in the
>>>> volume were to be by classicists.
>>>>
>>>> Needless to say, this raises a rather bleak spectre for those of us
>>>> in the field who work on topics that might be viewed as
>>>> controversial by some segments of the mainstream.  While Taylor and
>>>> Francis is a private corporation with the right to publish or not
>>>> publish what they see fit, they are also a press that sells to the
>>>> academic market.  If they are going to engage in a homophobic
>>>> editorial policy -- as appears to be the case here -- we scholars
>>>> should carefully evaluate whether or not we are willing to do
>>>> business with them.
>>>>
>>>> The enclosed document raises, I think, several questions for Lambda:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Should we get involved in this fight?  I think I will,
>>>> individually; Lambda needs to consider its corporate stance.
>>>> 2) If we do get involved, what kind of actions should we take? some
>>>> possibilities:
>>>>        a) letters to Taylor & Francis informing them that we will no
>>>> longer publish, as individuals, with Routledge, nor buy their books
>>>>        b) a letter from LCC to Taylor and Francis indicating our
>>>> corporate
>>>>  disapproval of their editorial policy
>>>>        c) a letter from LCC to the Professional Matters Committee of the
>>>> APA (and the CSWMG) urging the APA to deny Routledge a booth at the
>>>> convention, given the apparent editorial policy of their parent
>>>> company, which seems to violate the spirit if not the letter of the
>>>> APA Statement on Professional Ethics (see below).
>>>>
>>>> In any case, scholars should know that Routledge is no longer the
>>>> press that it once was.  As Tom Hubbard wrote to me in a recent e-
>>>> mail: "It is also important that classicists know that Routledge is
>>>> no longer a safe place to publish cutting-edge sexuality topics
>>>> before someone else wastes their time submitting a book to them only
>>>>  to have corporate management overrule the academic editor,
>>>> editorial  board, and referees."
>>>>
>>>> These are serious matters, and they demand both due deliberation and
>>>>  a certain swiftness of response.  I would urge the leadership of
>>>> Lambda to initiate a discussion as soon as is feasible.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Kirk Ormand
>>>> Oberlin College
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> <0715_001.pdf><mime-attachment.html>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> members mailing list
>>> members at lambdacc.org
>>> http://lambdacc.org/mailman/listinfo/members_lambdacc.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> members mailing list
>> members at lambdacc.org
>> http://lambdacc.org/mailman/listinfo/members_lambdacc.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> members mailing list
> members at lambdacc.org
> http://lambdacc.org/mailman/listinfo/members_lambdacc.org
>