The Impact of Referencing Academics Who Have Defended and Exercised Pederasty

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The revisions requested have been adopted and overall the paper is now ready for publication in my view.

Author Response

Reviewer 1: The revisions requested have been adopted and overall, the paper is now ready for publication in my view.

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,

We greatly appreciate your thorough evaluation and constructive comments throughout the review process. We are pleased to hear that the requested revisions have been satisfactorily adopted and that, in your opinion, the paper is now ready for publication. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations I consider this manuscript very original and interesting however there are some flaws in the methodological part regarding the qualitative analysis of data so much more detail on information should be added also so software for qualitative information was used or treated.

For example the frequency of each theme that emerged among others...

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2: Congratulations I consider this manuscript very original and interesting however there are some flaws in the methodological part regarding the qualitative analysis of data so much more detail on information should be added also so software for qualitative information was used or treated.

For example the frequency of each theme that emerged among others...

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your positive feedback and for recognizing the originality and interest of our manuscript. We appreciate your constructive comments regarding the methodological section, specifically concerning the qualitative analysis of data. We understand the importance of providing detailed information about the methods used to analyze qualitative data, we have added a new paragraph to address this issue. However, for this study we did not employ any software for qualitative analysis, nor did we analyze the frequency of citations. Thus, we hope that the changes made are sufficient to understand the procedure.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think this is a very important and interesting manuscript (MS). It focuses upon the tendency of some in the intelligentsia not to criticise major figures in their fields who have allegedly committed and/or approved of child sexual abuse (CSA). If CSA is to be addressed, then we all need to condemn it and in all contexts. This, as these authors point out, has not been done by all people - and this includes some of the most influential individuals in society. 

In general, this manuscript (MS) is well-presented, but there are a number of ways in which it could, and should be, improved:

1. I have given the MS a quite good proofread. I hope the authors do not mind this. (English is my first language and it may not be theirs.)

2. I have provided other detailed feedback on the returned MS. I dont think the term 'reference' is always the most suitable term or it needs more explanantion.

3. The authors need to be more specific in places as to what it is they mean/they are writing/their point.

4. This is a very sensitive subject but the authors still need to be considered in their statements. On a related point, unless the intellectuals concerned have been convicted in a criminal court, it would be more usual to refer to their "alleged" actions. This would also be more objective.

5. The authors need to evidence all of the arguments/points they make but especially so when these are quite major points.

6. I also struggled with the term 'intellectuality'. I do not think this is a correct term for the group in question. I think the authors should use the terms 'intelligentsia' or 'academia'.

7. The authors make reference to major figures who 'defended and exercised pederasty'. I this this should be 'and/or' or even just 'or'.

8. I think the authors could have used a wider and more mainstream literature in places.

9. I also thought that there appeared to be some repetition in the MS, especially around reference to themes and categories. 

10. I also thought the Discussion and Conclusions could have been set in a broader context. In particular, it is true that that some intellectuals ignore or excuse child sexual abuse by authorities in their field, but then many people in society have ignored CSA - which is why it has perpetuated for so many years.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

See comments to author and returned MS

Author Response

Reviewer 3:
I think this is a very important and interesting manuscript (MS). It focuses upon the tendency of some in the intelligentsia not to criticize major figures in their fields who have allegedly committed and/or approved of child sexual abuse (CSA). If CSA is to be addressed, then we all need to condemn it and in all contexts. This, as these authors point out, has not been done by all people - and this includes some of the most influential individuals in society. 

In general, this manuscript (MS) is well-presented, but there are a number of ways in which it could, and should be, improved:

1. I have given the MS a quite good proofread. I hope the authors do not mind this. (English is my first language and it may not be theirs.)
2. I have provided other detailed feedback on the returned MS. I don’t think the term 'reference' is always the most suitable term or it needs more explanation.
3. The authors need to be more specific in places as to what it is they mean/they are writing/their point.
4. This is a very sensitive subject, but the authors still need to be considered in their statements. On a related point, unless the intellectuals concerned have been convicted in a criminal court, it would be more usual to refer to their "alleged" actions. This would also be more objective.
5. The authors need to evidence all of the arguments/points they make but especially so when these are quite major points.
6. I also struggled with the term 'intellectuality'. I do not think this is a correct term for the group in question. I think the authors should use the terms 'intelligentsia' or 'academia'.
7. The authors make reference to major figures who 'defended andexercised pederasty'. I this this should be 'and/or' or even just 'or'.
8. I think the authors could have used a wider and more mainstream literature in places.
9. I also thought that there appeared to be some repetition in the MS, especially around reference to themes and categories. 
10. I also thought the Discussion and Conclusions could have been set in a broader context. In particular, it is true that that some intellectuals ignore or excuse child sexual abuse by authorities in their field, but then many people in society have ignored CSA - which is why it has perpetuated for so many years.

Answer:

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your deep review and valuable feedback. We have carefully considered and implemented your suggestions. Below is a point-by-point response to your comments:

1. We greatly appreciate your careful proofreading of the manuscript, and we have done all the changes suggested.
2. We have reviewed the use of the term 'reference' throughout the manuscript and provided additional explanation where necessary.
3. We have revised the manuscript to be more specific about our points and clarifications, ensuring that our arguments are clear and precise.
4. We have modified our statements according to your suggestions.
5. We have added more evidence where you suggested to do so.
6. We have replaced the term 'intellectuality' with both: 'intelligentsia' or 'academia' as suggested.
7. We have revised the phrases to 'and/or' or 'or' to correctly reflect the intended meaning.
8. We have incorporated more literature to strengthen our references and support our arguments.
9. We have reviewed the manuscript, and this section has been modified.
10. We have broadened the context of the Discussion and Conclusions, highlighting the societal issues surrounding the ignorance or excusal of child sexual abuse by authorities and its long-term perpetuation.

We greatly appreciate your thorough evaluation.