[LCC] Fwd: Taylor and Francis

[Kirk Ormand]

I've written Beert Verstaete (one of the editors of the special  
volume) and asked him to send me the full text of the e-mail from  
Kathryn Rutz (editor at Taylor & Francis) declining the issue.  Here,  
evidently, is the e-mail in full:

> Dear Dr DeCecco and Dr Verstraete:
>
> After review of the manuscripts of your guest edited special issue
> Sexual Intimacy between Adult and Adolescent Males, which was sent  
> to us
> by Jay Harcourt as intended for publication in the Journal of
> Homosexuality 56 (5/6), a decision has been made not to publish this
> material. We appreciate the opportunity to consider the articles for
> publication, but choose not to proceed.
>
> We are grateful to have had the chance to look at this work, and wish
> you the very best.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Kathy
> Kathryn Rutz
> Acquisitions Editor, Behavioral Science and Social Work
> Taylor and Francis Group
> 325 Chestnut Street, Suite 800
> Philadelphia, PA  19106
> Tel: 607-222-0169
> Kathryn.rutz at taylorandfrancis.com
>
Not much to go on there.

Prof. Verstaete goes on to describe several phone conversations with  
Ms. Rutz as follows:
> As I mentioned in my letter to the ALA, Rutz would not disclose the
> specific reason(s) for the refusal to publish, simply saying in a
> subsequent e-mail that T&F had exercised their "judgment." However, in
> the one telephone conversation I had with her, she did say that the
> management of T&F was aware of the controversy created in the early  
> Fall
> of 2005 by the special issue of the JofH entitled, Same-Sex Desire and
> Love in Greco-Roman Antiquity and in the Classical Tradition of the  
> West
> (which was eventually published by the Haworth Press, albeit with  
> Bruce
> Rind's article removed), and that one could "infer" from this that  
> they
> were concerned about a repetition of the controversy.

I'm not all that comfortable (personally) leading a charge on the  
basis of an inference authorized by hearsay.

Kristina has, I believe, written Ms. Rutz and asked for  
clarification; I take it she hasn't heard back yet.  It would be good  
to be in full command of the facts before LCC takes any action.

I should also say that Andrew Lear's comments (earlier to this list)  
are well-taken. We have little leverage in a case like this.  While  
my immediate instinct, if we are convinced that the editorial  
decision was based on homophobia, is that we should bring financial  
pressure to bear on Taylor and Francis (i.e. by a boycott of  
Routledge), this would probably have unintended effects, and not  
necessarily good ones.  Do we want T&F to drop Routledge's line of  
studies of ancient sexuality?  Surely not.  But this is one possible  
result of such action.

Much to consider here.

Kirk