An alternative explanation is that sociologists are, in fact, responding precisely to the empirical record available regarding diversion. That record suggests that although some research reports positive effects of diversion, it is difficult to ignore the data which show that diversion programs may either have no effect or may possibly even be harmful. That record indicates that diversion may not be achieving its stated goal of diverting offenders away from the juvenile justice system, but instead may be a device for expanding both the size of the juvenile justice system and the forms of behavior that come under its control. An argument can be made grounded in data which suggests that diversion programs may be taking on particular functions with respect to girls, and thus may be leading to unanticipated forms of hidden sexism. In gathering data and in making these arguments, sociologists may not be engaged as much in some antidiversionist frenzy as they are expressing their concern for the drift of an important policy away from its intended course. (Author abstract)