> My goodness, suppose I paraded a number of court decsions in the south in
> which blacks were convicted, their testimony disallowed, etc.
> What would such cases prove?
But I think you missed the point. In two of three of the cases I cited, the person who was originally supposed to have been molested by parents was subsequently suing the therapist who persuaded her to make those charges (and there are many more such cases, follow the link). In your anaolgy the therapists and social workers are being persecuted by courts biassed in favour of women who feel that they have been duped. That is the kind of bias I think we need.
> The stuff we have been seeing here isn't social science, it's ideology.
Well, as Terry Eagleton said, ideology is what you think, what I think is social science. Your weakness is that you do not understand the movement to punish abusers has its own ideological biasses - against working class families, against parents, in favour of greater state intervention into domestic life, masking the exercise of state power by manufacturing an ideological figure of the victimised child.
To quote Cornel West and Sylvia Ann Hewlett:
'Over the last 30 years, thousands of professionals associated with our burgeoning child welfare bureaucracy have developed what can only be described as a parent-bashing mentality'. Many professionals 'are now firmly convinced that the American family is largely dysfunctional' and 'that a majority of parents have the potential to abuse children'. The War Against Parents