NARTH came to the rescue:
I don't know if you remember, but a number of years ago a prestigious journal of the American Psychological Association reported a study, and the conclusion was that boys are not necessarily harmed by sexual contact with an older man, and in fact in many cases, the boys remembered the experience positively, and considered it beneficial. So the authors of the article said we should stop using judgmental terms like "sexual abuse" to describe "positive" childhood experiences like these.
We protested this conclusion. As psychologists, shouldn't we know that what feels, to the child, beneficial, can in fact be very harmful? Dr. Laura Schlesinger got involved in condemning the study—even Congress got involved. The APA had to issue a clarification and a partial disclaimer. That was the biggest public-relations crisis of the American Psychological Association, and it was NARTH that brought it to public attention. Before we got involved, no one in our profession had noticed the harmfulness and simplistic conclusions of the study...there seemed to be the typical prevailing attitude, "Who's to say...???" Not surprisingly, that study had already begun to be used in legal cases as justification for excusing some same-sex child abusers from responsibility.
Read the whole article: Living in Harmony with One's Biological Design - Joseph Nicolosi.