Alfred Kinsey- The Man Who Sexualized America

Click here to watch Revelation Redpill Episode 27

Millions of children today are sex slaves. Helpless, hopeless prisoners, they are treated as sexual chattel to gratify the despicable cravings of perverts. They are enslaved because of modern “enlightened” society’s “compromise with sin.” The breakout film Sound of Freedom starring Jim Caviezel has opened the eyes of a vast audience to the mind-numbing scope of this criminal assault on the most innocent and vulnerable members of our human family.

In a single year, as the film informs, more than 22 million new images of child pornography were posted to the internet — an increase of 5,000 percent over the past five years. The child slave trade has passed the illegal arms trade and will soon pass the drug trade. Caviezel notes that a bag of cocaine can be sold one time, but a child can be sold five to 10 times a day.

We have to stop this. Sometimes in order to go forward, you have to go back. Back to where something started and so over the next two weeks (this will be a  2 part series) we are going to pick up where we left off with Margaret Sanger and Eugenics…to 1948 when an atomic bomb of a book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male,  was published which would change the course of the world as we know it. 

My heart is heavy, breaking. I have tears stinging the back of my eyes but they won’t come. They won’t come because I am in a flux of emotion. Anger, righteous anger, driven like someone’s life depends on me getting you this information so there is no time to cry. Crying comes later when the victims come forward and you cry with them. Now, we fight. Fighters don’t cry in battle. We will end sex trafficking. We must and will end child pornography. We must end ALL pornography. We must end all sexual deviance and perversion and to do that we need to go back to the origins of the greatest moral scandal perpetrated upon the minds of American society. This is a vast not right wing or left wing conspiracy- but a “pervert wing” conspiracy that started with one man, a zoologist named Alfred Kinsey. (1894 – 1956) His “scientific study of sexulality permeated every corner of American life and law.He called himself a scientist, a pioneer, and the father of a “new biology” that eventually would morph into a worldwide sexual revolution. His work formed the foundation of modern “sex education,” and became the foundation for the 1955 Model Penal Code on reducing penalties for sex offences like rape and molestation, since, according to Kinsey’s “research,” about 95% of all males would be jailed  if what they participated in was made known. According to the legal database Westlaw, between 1980 and 2000, there were 650 citations of Kinsey’s work. Major law journals have cited him. So has the Supreme Court, particularly when they imposed abortion on the country.

Like with our Margaret Sanger Eugenics and Population Control Episode, I have prayed heavily on how to present this important information to you in a way that hits home the need to stop the takeover of children’s and adult’s minds, at the same time leaving you with a sense of purpose and assignment instead of resignation or defeat. Please pray with me that the Lord will show you what your part to play is in ending the exploitation of little minds and bodies and healing those already caught in the net of abuse, deception, and lies.
A professor at Indiana University, Kinsey was a zoologist by training and spent the early years of his career studying gall wasps, collecting thousands of specimens of the insects. Kinsey then transferred his obsessive and taxonomic approach of research to the study of human sexuality. Much like the gall wasps he collected, Kinsey and his colleagues gathered thousands of “interviews” in which he or his researchers asked detailed questions about the sexual backgrounds of research participants. Kinsey compiled the findings from these interviews into two books that were the opening salvos of the sexual revolution that soon swept the United States: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). Both works contain many sweeping assertions and often move quickly from tables full of data to moral speculation about the repressed sexual ethics of America.

Kinsey officially began sexual research in 1941 with the help of funds from the Rockefeller Foundation and the assistance of the National Research Council. In 1947 Kinsey founded the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University, now simply known as The Kinsey Institute. What has become clearer in the years since the publication of the Kinsey reports is that Kinsey was not merely gathering information about other people’s sexual experiences, but he was also engaging in assorted sexual practices with various members of the research team. Instead of the staid atmosphere most people associate with academia, the Institute for Sex Research became a kind of sexual utopia for the gratification of the appetites of Kinsey and his team. According to one biographer, “Kinsey decreed that within the inner circle men could have sex with each other; wives would be swapped freely, and wives too, would be free to embrace whichever sexual partners they liked.”[1] Kinsey himself engaged in various forms of heterosexual and homosexual intercourse with members of the institute staff, including filming various sexual acts in the attic of his home.

Judith Reisman

September 11, 2010

Reproduced with Permission

Prior to 1950, American common law criminalized non-marital sex as a costly burden on society and on the children of “illicit” unions. Society had an authentic interest in sexual conduct. Only marriage provided for progeny, secured the orderly generational passage of property, and created a stable community.

In 1997, biographer James Jones, Ph.D., wrote that the celebrated sex “researcher” Alfred Kinsey “was a crypto-reformer who spent his every waking hour attempting to change the sexual mores and sex offender laws of the United States.” He also noted that

There is no way that the American public in the 1940s and the 1950s would have sanctioned any form of behavior that violated middle class morality on the part of the scientist who was telling the public that he was disinterested and giving them the simple truth. . . . [A]ny feature of this private life that violated middle class morality would have been catastrophic for his career.

Kinsey married, said Jones, “to preserve his public image . . . at all costs.” Jones documented Kinsey’s homosexual, masturbatory, sadomasochistic, and pornography addictions.

In Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953), Kinsey justified decriminalizing fornication, cohabitation, seduction, alienation of affection, adultery, sodomy, abortion, and pornography. He also supported lowering the age of consent, trivializing rape, “no-fault” divorce, and sexually graphic sex education, among other things.

Kinsey & the Gestapo

This “most famous man in the world for a decade,” was exposed in a 1998 Yorkshire (England) television documentary called Kinsey’s Paedophiles for directing pedophile rapists who produced the infamous “Table 34” (see p. 7) on child sexuality in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. In his Yorkshire interview Jones admits that “kids” (as young as 2 months old, Table 31) were used by “nine” adult males for Kinsey Institute child experiments. Jones writes,

Kinsey . . . gives pretty graphic descriptions of their response to what he calls sexual stimulation. If you read those words, you will see that he is talking about kids who are screaming. Kids who are protesting in every way they can the fact that their bodies or their persons are being violated.

In his Male book, Kinsey callously wrote of what made for the most reliable research:

Better data on preadolescent climax come from the histories of adult males who have had sexual contacts with younger boys and who, with their adult backgrounds, are able to recognize and interpret the boys’ experiences. . . . 9 of our adult male subjects have observed such orgasm . . . on 317 preadolescents . . . observed in contacts with other boys or other adults.

One of those reliable adult males, according to the Yorkshire television investigators, was Dr. Fritz Von Balluseck – a member of the German Gestapo. In 1957 Balluseck, originally arrested (but acquitted) for a child sex murder, was tried and convicted in Germany for having “violated children over three decades.” According to the German newspaper National-Zeitung:

The Nazis knew and gave him the opportunity to practice his abnormal tendencies in occupied Poland on Polish children, who had to choose between Balluseck and the gas ovens. After the war, the children were dead, but Balluseck lived. (May 15, 1957).

Balluseck recorded data from his sex with children, just as did the Kinsey Institute “researchers.” In the year of his trial, Berlin newspaper headlines revealed that “Balluseck corresponded with the American Kinsey Institute for some time, and had also got books from them which dealt with child sexuality” (Tagespiegel, October 1, 1957).

Kinsey apparently was very interested in Balluseck’s “data” gleaned from raping Polish and, later, German children:

The connection with Kinsey, towards whom he’d showed off his crimes, had a disastrous effect on [Balluseck]. . . . [I]n his diaries he’d stuck in the letters from the sex researcher Kinsey, in which he’d been encouraged to continue his research. . . . He also started relationships to expand his researches. One shivers to think of the lengths he went to. (Tagespiegel, May 17, 1957)

As to adult males, Kinsey and his team stated that 95 percent of the men of “the greatest generation” engaged in what was considered “deviant” sex. Kinsey’s sample population? Paul Gebhard, Kinsey’s co-author and later director of the Kinsey Institute, explained that, since most of their interviews took place during World War II, their team used “inmates” and 1,400 sex offenders as their “normal” male population. Just after the Male volume was published, Kinsey told a California judicial sex-crime committee that their research represented “the population as a whole.” Really?

Deviant Research

In 2004, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which represents 2,400 state legislators, noted that, of the more than 5,000 men who made up Kinsey’s research base:

2,446 were designated as convicts, 1,003 homosexuals, 50 transvestites, 117 mentally ill, 342 “Other,” 650 sexually abused boys. This yielded 4,608 n=Aberrant, and 873 n=”Normal” Male subjects.

I was ALEC’s scientific advisor on junk science. After I proved the Kinsey Institute’s child abuse, ALEC published in its April 2004 issue of The State Factor a study by Dr. Linda Jeffrey called “Restoring Legal Protections for Women and Children: A Historical Analysis of the States’ Criminal Codes.” This issue of The State Factor called upon legislators to revisit all laws based on Kinsey’s “research.” California state Senator Ray Haynes, former ALEC president and California Republican Whip, wrote in the study’s Introduction:

Today Kinsey’s “junk science” is the unquestioned foundation for all the legal, legislative and media debate on marriage and civil unions. . . . [This report] reveals compelling evidence of illegal and criminal acts masquerading as science. . . . Professor of Constitutional law Dr. Charles Rice of Notre Dame concluded that Alfred Kinsey’s research was “contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty.”

Another ALEC finding noted how the American Law Institute’s “Model Penal Code” (ALIMPC) of 1955, which was largely based on Kinsey’s data, influenced the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned anti-sodomy laws:

The ALI Model Penal Code Reporters cite Kinsey’s junk science claiming that in 1955 . . . “37% of the total male population has at least some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm between adolescence and old age. This accounts for nearly 2 males out of every 5 that one may meet.” In spite of its reliance on junk science, this section of the Model Penal Code was cited favorably by the Supreme Court to normalize sodomy on June 26, 2003.

Bamboozled States

In a 1952 issue of the Harvard Law Review, Herbert Wechsler called for Kinsey’s data to become part of the law, saying that common law penal codes were ineffective. Also in the 1950s, major state sex-offense commissions suddenly appeared, quoting Kinsey that all sex crimes were “normal,” so all sex offenders warranted therapy and parole. The 1955 ALIMPC called for the legalization of seduction, fornication, cohabitation, adultery, sodomy, and other practices that were largely illegal pre-Kinsey. Such measures would turn “public morals” into private battles of “he says?she says.” Also, the new “privacy” view meant that all sex acts should be legitimated – even rape and sado-masochistic abuse – unless a victim could prove non-consensual injury with witnesses and within a designated time.

The “sexual offenses” reforms called for in the ALIMPC eventually led bamboozled judiciaries and legislatures in every state to eliminate or lighten sexual and reproductive common law standards. By 1980 the ALIMPC was carried partially or totally by all state legislatures.

With sex laws thus gutted, radical sex educators proceeded to mug marriage and the family. Experts demanded school sex education, ostensibly to reduce crime. Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Union, which became Planned Parenthood, joined with groups like SIECUS (the Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S.) to spread Kinseyan school sex-education programs under the guise of “health” or “family life education” (less threatening to parents and teachers).

By the late 1960s, Kinseyan “sex educators” were beginning to teach schoolchildren capricious sex (“make love not war”), thus spawning bloated rates of sexual disease, crime, and misery, with accompanying public health costs. Pornographers teamed up with radical feminists, homosexual activists, and sex educators to spread their poisonous influence, even going so far as to proclaim marriage as “legalized rape” and prostitution.

Haynes said that Kinsey helped to weaken or gut 52 sex laws that had protected marriage and the family. From 1970 to 1980, 48 states, using the bogus sexuality data, adopted forms of “no fault” divorce, resulting in the impoverishment of single mothers and ongoing tragedy for children.

Legislative Push

In 2004 ALEC told legislators that its April issue of The State Factor was

a valuable reference and resource for your work in government. . . . Understanding how junk sex science deformed our thinking and laws is vital. . . . Only if enough legislators call attention to Kinsey’s questionable findings can we start to reverse the misguided assault on American law and way of life . . . [and] repeal laws and public policies based on “junk science.”

But this was only the most recent appeal to reverse Kinseyan policies. In 1995, a bill was introduced in Congress, the “Ethics in Education Act,” that had 51 federal legislative co-sponsors. The summary statement for H.R. 2749 indicated that the purpose of the bill was

To determine if Alfred Kinsey’s “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male” and/or “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” are the result of any fraud or criminal wrongdoing. Directs: (1) the Comptroller General to complete such study and report to the Congress by May 1, 1996; and (2) the Secretary of Education, if the Comptroller General’s determination is in the affirmative, to ensure that for FY 1997 and subsequent fiscal years no Federal funds are provided to any persons or institutions for any educational purpose which instruct in Kinsey’s work, derivative Kinseyan scholars, or scholarship without indicating the unethical and tainted nature of the Kinsey report.

Will anyone dare resurrect H.R. 2749 today, demanding justice for children and the exposure and rejection of Kinsey’s fraud?

Many years have passed since hundreds of abused children – here in America, in Germany, and in the concentration camps in Poland – became Kinsey’s child sexuality “data,” but justice demands repudiation of the man, his lies, and the laws that were based upon his lies.

Here we go …
The woman who wrote the above article is Dr. Judith Reisman. A little lady on a mission.
This woman here pretty much single handedly exposed the abject corruption of Alfred Kinsey and the Kinsey Institute. We will be leaning heavily on her countless hours of pain staking research of the  man, the myth, and the organization that has led to the moral destruction we see around the world. Just a little information about Dr Reisman. In 1966 her 10-year-old daughter was raped by a 13 neighbor boy.  “She told him to stop, but he persisted. He knew she would like it, he said, he knew from his father’s glossy magazines, the only “acceptable” pornography of the time. The boy left the country a few weeks later, after it came to light that my daughter was but one of several neighborhood children he had raped, including his own little brother” Dr. Reisman’s daughter fell into a long depression and Dr. Reisman set out on a decade long quest to understand what happened and why.  She even returned to college to get her M.A. and PhD in communications from Case Western.

From Dr. Reisman “ During the Reagan years, as a Ph.D. in Communications, I was appointed to serve as the Principal Investigator for a US Department of Justice study for which I used the military intelligence method of Content Analysis to document the quantity and quality of “Images of Children, Crime and Violence” in mainstream pornographic publications.[2]( Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler)  These Justice Department findings have been cited in briefs filed in numerous venues, including the U.S. Supreme Court.[3] Dr. Jeffrey and I also used Content Analysis to measure the influence of Kinsey’s junk science on American penal law.

 In March 1981 I received a reply to my letter to The Kinsey Institute from Kinsey’s coauthor, Dr. Paul Gebhard. I had written to ask about the child data in Tables 30-34. Gebhard, who succeeded Dr. Kinsey as the Kinsey Institute Director, wrote to me that the children in Kinsey’s tables were obtained from parents, school teachers and male homosexuals, and that some of Kinsey’s men used “manual and oral techniques” to catalog how many “orgasms” infants and children could produce in a given amount of time.
Armed with Gebhard’s letter and admissions, on July 23, 1981, I created an uproar in Jerusalem at the Fifth World Congress of Sexology when I lectured on Dr. Kinsey and his child data. I was confident my sexology colleagues would be as outraged as was I by these tables and the child data describing Kinsey’s reliance on pedophiles as his child sex experimenters. Perhaps worst of all for me, as a scholar and a mother were pages 160 and 161 where Kinsey claimed his data came from “interviews.” How could he say 196 little children— some as young as two months of age—enjoyed “fainting,” “screaming,” “weeping,” and “convulsing”? How could he call these children’s responses evidence of their sexual pleasure and “climax”? I called it evidence of terror, of pain, as well as criminal. One of us was very, very sexually mixed up”

She dropped an atomic bomb on the conference but the room was filled with Kinseites who believed children could have relationships with adults. However, she continues “In 1982, shortly after the confrontation in Jerusalem over Kinsey’s Table 34, 1 was invited by the U.S. Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, to return to America from Israel. I was appointed to a Full Research Professor rank at American University as the principal investigator of an $800,000 grant to investigate Kinsey’s role in child sexual abuse and his link to children appearing in mainstream pornography, specifically, Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler.”
The Kinsey Syndrome Doctumentary

Part 2
Dr. Judith Reisman Kinsey & Hugh Hefner

Phil Donahue to young people “Kinsey was to sexuality what Freud was to psychiatry, what Madame Curie was to radiation, what Einstein was to physics. Comes along this woman [Reisman] saying, Holy cow! E doesn’t equal mc2. We’ve based an entire generation of education of sexologists on Kinsey, and Kinsey was a dirty old man”
Dr. Judith Reisman on the Phil Donahue Show

1998 BBC Documentary

Time stamps 2:30 – “researcher” Paul Gebhard- “Taboos, animal contact, ect”
4:00- memorize the questions
5:00-5:15 using pedofiles
6:45- Kinsey’s main “researcher”- sex with men, women, animals- first “intercourse” was with his GRANDMOTHER” – “Mr. Green” Rex King 800 boys and girls
Told about Green by Dr. Robert Dickenson- taught Mr. Green how to “record”
Gave “training”
Clarence Tripp- defending Mr. Green as having a “wonderful relationship with children”
14:00- screaming, kicking
15:00- Table 31, 315 infacts to adolecnce
Table 34- as young as 5 months- repeated reactions- children abused over a 24 hr period
“experience sexual activity with adult help from infancy”
17:00- Dr. Judith Reisman
17:30- It was illegal and “we knew it was illegal” – Paul Gebhard
18:25- Vincent Nowlis- researcher who questioned the research
19:00- Tripp says Nowlis was “damaged in childhood with all this morality”
22:30- Staff encouraged to have sex with each other- asked Vincent to have sex with him, Vincent declined- (further reports say that a group of men came to Vincent)
24:30- made “films” with staff- wanted to make 2,000- pain, masturbation, homosexuality. “more than a little masocism”
28:10- Kinsey should have reported Mr. Green but the Kinsey Institute pushes back and refuse to release Mr. Green’s diaries
Johnathan Gathrone Hardy’s research shows Mr. Green was actively abusing children 10 yrs after the information was collected. Kinsey’s book came out in 1953

31:00- pedofile information from criminals and pedofilia groups
33:00- Dr. Fritz von Balluseck- Nazi researcher
37:00- Esther White
42- abuse of children for
44:30-47:00 using adults, what is “pedophilia” “causing children paranoia”

Who Was Kinsey?

Born in Holboken NJ in 1894, he was raised in a very religious Methodist household with strict morals. At the time the country was dealing with dirty and immoral cities and there was a purity movement to combat prostitution, alcholism, sexually transmitted diseases ect. Congress passed the Comstock Laws to clamp down in immorality in 1873. 

Kinsey, Scouting, and “the boys”
Kinsey was very involved with camping and scouting. He didn’t seem to have a way with the ladies but he was a hit with boys. He was a particular hit with sharing his “nature” magazines which were nude publications. His whole life he was enamored with the male physic.
Judith Reisman lays out the case for his penchant for boys, especially young boys in her book Kinsey, Crimes, and Consequences. The founder of the nudist or “physical culture” movement was Dr. Heinrich Pudor. He published the pamphlet Naked Humanity, Jubilant Future in 1893, followed by a monthly nudist journal entitled Strength and Beauty. Critics of the movement feared that it would ultimately weaken nations by promoting the “Greek vice.” Nevertheless, fully one-third of German youth, prior to Hitler, were staunch supporters.32 Advocates of nudism perceived it to be a “physical expression of the modern spirit, free of the dark influences which cause the human body to be called ugly or immoral.” They advocated the “viewing of the opposite sex with clear eyes and no shameful or hidden thoughts.”33 (Some psychologists would argue that this may reveal the origin of Kinsey’s nudist, nature, pornography collection at Indiana University, discussed further on). Biographer James H. Jones confirms that Kinsey received nudist magazines at the family home-certainly an interest in conflict with his public “conservative” persona.Years later, Kinsey would write a curious letter to an old Scouting friend, perhaps one of the boys with whom he had shared his “nature library,” or to whom he devoted so much attention during his adolescent, college, postgraduate, and even married years.35 Kinsey wrote, “We did have good times together, and you must understand from that Scout troop I began to learn some of the things that made it possible for me to do some of the research that we are now engaged in.” 

In Male, Kinsey claims that children are sexual from birth. He argued that most American boys engage in some form of sexual activity with other boys, that adolescent homosexuality is “a common phenomenon,” and that males reach their sexual “peak” as teenagers. A report by Patrick Boyle, author of Scout’s Honor: Sexual Abuse in America’s Most Trusted Institution, describes Kinsey’s role in removing a warning about masturbation removed from the Scout handbook. According to Boyle, an early edition of the handbook advised Scoutmasters: Because boys of Scouting age are naturally curious about sex, you may… discover or hear about incidents of sexual experimentation among troop members…. Incidents of sexual experimentation call for a private and thorough investigation, and frank discussion with those involved.40 Boyle recalls Kinsey’s response when the BSA sought his advice for updating the manual in 1947: Our years of research have failed to disclose any clear cut cases of harm resulting from masturbation, although we have thousands of cases of boys who have had years of their lives ruined by worry over masturbation…. We should be glad to serve wherever the Boy Scouts can use factual material,” he wrote. The BSA later dropped the discussion of masturbation from its handbook.

Kinsey and the Cowboys
He wrote often about how natural it was for men and boys to have sexual relations with women (when they were avalible) but out in the wilderness camping, on the range, farmers, cowboys…
His professorship at Indiana University, as well as his field research in zoology, placed him in close contact with young male students. One was Ralph Voris, a friend whom Kinsey nicknamed “Mr. Man.” From as early as 1926 the two shared intimate correspondence. Sex historian and friendly Kinsey biographer Paul Robinson depicts Voris as Kinsey’s most intimate, though possibly latent, homosexual companion. Robinson recalls Kinsey’s low regard for effeminate, “citified” homosexuals and his apparent admiration for so-called “cowboy homosexuals”: Elsewhere Kinsey argued that the affections associated with homosexuality were in fact the exclusive property of certain urban homosexual groups, which, he maintained, represented only “a small fraction” of the males with homosexual experience. He contrasted these citified homosexuals with a type that he apparently considered no less prevalent: what might be called cowboy homosexuals: “hard-riding, hard-hitting, assertive males,” who enjoyed sexual relations with women (when they were available), but who turned to other males when “outdoor routines” brought them together in exclusively male society.

Kinsey quote on homosexuality in rural areas “fair amount of sexual contact among the older males in Western rural areas. It is a type of homosexuality, which was probably common among pioneers and outdoor men in general. Today it is found among ranchmen, cattlemen, prospectors, lumbermen, and farming groups in general—among groups that are virile, physically active. These are men who have faced the rigors of nature in the wild. They live on realities and on a minimum of theory. Such a background breeds the attitude that sex is sex, irrespective of the nature of the partner with whom the relation is had. Sexual relations are had with women when they are available or with other males when outdoor routines bring men together into exclusively male groups. Such a pattern is not at all uncommon among preadolescent and early adolescent males in such rural areas, and it continues in a number of histories into the adult years and through marriage.
Kinsey had no actual data on the sexual proclivities of “pioneers,” yet implied that homosexuality was common among them. And if he had data on American “ranchmen, cattlemen, prospectors, lumbermen, and farming groups in general,” it was so sparse that he failed to include it in his 1948 Male volume. 

Interviewed for the 1996 Yorkshire program, “Kinsey’s Paedophiles,” Jones described how, [T]wo male students, Brayland and Coons, worked under Kinsey’s supervision in 1934/35. There were numerous episodes, nude and whatnot nude. [There is an explicit] photograph of Kinsey in the buff. On that trip [they engaged in] masturbation sessions, group masturbation. Both of the young men were trying to keep Kinsey at arm’s length. Asked what Brayland’s wife thought about it, Jones recalled: “I can tell you that she didn’t like Alfred Kinsey. [She responded] that they were just kids from Mississippi and that Alfred Kinsey hurt them.” And in his recent biography, Jones notes, Kinsey bathed with his students… striding about camp naked… [Confided one student] “You’d see him… going to the bathroom, and all that sort of thing… He’d just take a leak right there in front of us…” Professors simply did not engage in that sort of behavior with their graduate students. Yet Kinsey seemed totally oblivious to sexual taboos… as though he was determined to flaunt them… Kinsey had become a sexual rebel… manipulative and aggressive, a man who abused his professional authority and betrayed his trust as a teacher… [O]nly… a compulsive man would have taken such risks.

Alfred and Clara were married on June 3, 1921. She gave birth to their first son, Donald, in mid 1922. A diabetic, he died at a young age. They had three other children: daughters Anne (1924) and Joan (1925), and son Bruce (1928). Little is known about the Kinsey children, other than that one took piano lessons, they were forbidden to receive confirmation despite attending church and that they eventually gave their sex histories to Pomeroy and their father. Jones reports that Kinsey led his family on nudist vacations to the Smoky Mountains, and that nudist magazines were perused in the home. Kinsey himself would often shave in the nude in the presence of the children.56 We are not told at what age this practice ended, or if it ended.

Kinsey’s “Formal Research”
Kinsey’s formal sex research, under cover of the “marriage course,” began in 1938. According to the University’s official account, he was asked by the Association of Women Students to create the course in which he enrolled several hundred students to give their sexual histories. The Rockefeller foundation was very intrigued with the research and helped fund it. 

Kinsey as the scantily clad gardener– Kinsey would often garden in a loincloth- 

Jones reports that Clyde Martin, Kinsey’s coauthor and erstwhile lawn boy, occasionally joined Kinsey in similarly scanty garden attire.  And the latter became even more unconventional when hunting gall wasps. Jones quotes a student with whom Kinsey worked in the field: “He would go naked if we were in a campground,” Homer T. Rainwater recalls. “He just didn’t give a damn. Nor did he show any inhibitions about his bodily functions.” Kinsey’s eagerness to talk about sex was more disconcerting. After several nights, Rainwater discerned a pattern. Kinsey would begin by sharing intimate details about his own private life. “He’d talk about his wife, and what a good sex partner she was, and then he’d go from there. He had a pretty wife, and apparently she was very accommodating, and he talked about that to us, I thought, more than was appropriate.” Much to Rainwater’s embarrassment, Kinsey would then ask about his sex life.12 It is instructive to compare a segment of Kinsey’s letter to Voris, describing his (Kinsey’s) slim waist, “bleached blond” hair, tan, short shorts, and “glorious” feeling on his skin, with a fragment of another letter revealed by Pomeroy, in which Kinsey wrote (regarding Greek pederasty), Knowing what I do of the human animal, I cannot believe that the love and affection which the older males bestowed upon Greek boys, and their aesthetic admiration for the bodies of Greek youth, could have failed to arouse specific sexual response [sic] which found their outlet in overt sexual relations.13 Regarding “aesthetic admiration for the bodies of Greek youth,” Kinsey wrote to Voris about his collection of “gorgeous” male homosexual photographs14 in a manner somewhat reminiscent of Scouting founder Sir Robert Baden Powell’s remarks about young male nudes:15 What I would have done without your earlier help, I do not know. . . . I have whole albums of photographs of their friends, or from commercial sources-fine art to putrid. Some of the art model material is gorgeous. I want you to see it….16

The Kinsey Institute and the University contend to this day that Kinsey began gathering sexuality data after 1938 so that he could accurately answer questions posed by students about marriage and family life. Public documents confirm that Kinsey’s “sex research” actually began much earlier than 1938. Former Kinsey Institute librarian Cornelia Christenson, writing in Kinsey: A Biography, recalls a sexuality lecture delivered by Kinsey in April, 1935, three years before “the call” to become a marriage/sexuality instructor. As summarized by Christenson: This is a strongly worded but thoughtful exposition of the influence of social institutions on sexual and reproductive behavior. It predated the marriage course by three years, and it provides convincing evidence of his early interest in and concern for the problems arising from the social restrictions on man’s biological nature. On page ten he cites “the ignorance of sexual structure and physiology, of the technique fundamental in the normal course of sexual activities and the prudish aversion to adequate participation in the one physiologic activity on which society is most dependent, as the chief sources of psychic conflict and resulting broken marriages.”33

Europeans and Germans were also moving forward with “sexology- see Reisman’s book

The “Sexology Researcher Friend- Dr. Dickinson”
There are other early indications of Kinsey’s interest in sex, and familiarity with the available research. Consider, for example, his acquaintance with one of America’s first sex researchers, Dr. Robert Dickinson, a gynecologist and author of A Thousand Marriages (1931). Kinsey arranged to have Dickinson visit Indiana University to lecture on his work. According to Pomeroy, Dickinson was to talk about a massive study he had made of the physiologic effects of masturbation on the sexual organs of women to be illustrated with slides showing shots of the (insert word here for nakedness) of his (female) subjects. Quite naturally the lecture hall was jammed to the doors... Dickinson’s work was one of the original sources of inspiration for his [Kinsey’s] own study.35 Clarence Tripp, Kinsey’s early sex photographer and colleague, explained during his 1998 (British) Yorkshire television interview that Dickinson, Kinsey’s inspirational “mentor in sex research,” had “collaborated with [a] pedophile for several years, and taught him how to record his child abuse in scientific detail.

Writing to Dickinson in 1941, Kinsey claimed that he had abandoned his interest in wasps by around 1930. “It was your own work which turned my attention to the purposes of research in this field some 10 or 12 years ago,” he recalled, although “circumstances were not propitious for starting the work until three years ago.”36 In h i s 1 9 7 3 d o c t o r a l dissertation, James Jones records Kinsey’s assertion that he had been working on sexual studies since 1912-1913, while a teenager

Rockefeller Funding- $1,755,000 in annual grants running from $75,000 to $240,000. Beginning about 1941, a considerable portion of these funds was supplied to Dr. Kinsey’s studies, and one grant was made direct to Dr. Kinsey

Kinsey’s Team
Jones stated in his Yorkshire interview that “Kinsey wants [his staff] to understand that as scientists they are not bound, okay, by bourgeois morality… [H]e builds a staff where there is some wife-swapping… gay contacts… [for] both professional and private [needs]
Kinsey selected men who were not “prone to moral evaluations” 60 in the area of human sexuality. He hired no “prudes,” Jews, Blacks, or committed Christians. Pomeroy explains:
“As usual, when we considered anyone we might hire, we took his [sexual] history first. Kinsey and I did this one together. When we were finished, Kinsey put down his pen and said, “I don’t think you want to work for us.” “But I do,” the researcher insisted. “Well,” Kinsey observed, “you have just said that premarital intercourse might lead to later difficulties in marriage, that extramarital relations would break up a marriage, that homosexuality is abnormal and intercourse with animals ludicrous. Apparently you already have all the answers. Why do you want to do research?”61

Kinsey controlled the team and made them record  sexual scenes but one researcher left- Vincent Nowlis, the only “straight” guy.

Yorkshire television documentary, “Kinsey’s Paedophiles,” Jones recalls that “Kinsey and other [male] members of the Institute staff show[ed] up in Vincent Nowlis’ room, inviting him to disrobe with the clear understanding that sexual activity would follow.” Nowlis resigned quietly. Until the Jones interview, he never revealed the tainted research team, or the child sex abuse underpinning Kinsey’s chapters on child sexuality.

How did his books reach the masses? The Rockefeller media machine
The Rockefeller-connected mass media to effusively hype the book and its culturally corrosive message. Kinsey and his benefactors set in motion massive publicity campaigns preceding release of both the Male volume in 1948 and the Female volume in 1953.86 Journalists were briefed and courted, and as publication date approached, wined and dined (occasionally at taxpayers’ expense).

. Many revealing facts paint a picture of a man who grew into exploring all aspects of sexuality with a scale of 1-6
As Kinsey and his colleagues tabulated the data, they used a novel approach to defining human sexuality and employed a graded scale to define a person’s sexuality. Prior to Kinsey, people were generally considered to be either heterosexual or homosexual. Instead of this binary approach, Kinsey saw sexual behavior on a continuum which rarely described individuals as either strictly homosexual or heterosexual. The Kinsey Scale is as follows:

0- Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual

1- Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual

2- Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual

3- Equally heterosexual and homosexual

4- Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual

5- Predominantly homosexual, but incidentally heterosexual

6- Exclusively homosexual[2]

On the Kinsey scale, six out of the possible seven scores could be interpreted as indicating some level of homosexual attraction. In this way, the Kinsey scale normalizes homosexuality and helped contribute to inflated percentages in some findings. The Kinsey scale has since been widely used in numerous research projects related to sexuality.
On the Kinsey scale, six out of the possible seven scores could be interpreted as indicating some level of homosexual attraction. In this way, the Kinsey scale normalizes homosexuality and helped contribute to inflated percentages in some findings. The Kinsey scale has since been widely used in numerous research projects related to sexuality.

The most disturbing and hotly debated part of Kinsey’s research is chapter 5 of Sexual Behavior in the Human Male titled, “Early Sexual Growth and Activity.”  Kinsey gathered data from people who can only rightly be called child molesters. Describing the source of some of his data on small children he said, “Better data on pre-adolescent climax come from the histories of adult males who have had sexual contacts with younger boys and who, with their adult backgrounds, are able to recognize and interpret the boys’ experiences.”[20] Kinsey then goes on to say that “9 of our adult male subjects have observed such [pre-adolescent] orgasm. Some of these adults are technically trained persons who have kept diaries or other records which have been put at our disposal; and from them we have secured information on 317 pre-adolescents who were either observed in self masturbation, or who were observed in contacts with other boys or older adults.”[21] This disturbing description of child molestation is accompanied by a statistical chart that documents the observation of pre-adolescent experiences in orgasm for children between the ages of 2 months and 15 years old. Later on in the book, Kinsey discusses masturbation and says, “Of course, there are cases of infants under a year of age who have learned the advantage of specific manipulation, sometimes as a result of being so manipulated by older persons; and there are some boys who masturbate quite specifically and with some frequency from the age of two or three.”[22] Another chart in the male report titled “Speed of Adolescent Orgasm” records the length of time it took for children to reach climax and includes the notation, “Duration of stimulation before climax; observations timed with a second hand or stop watch. Ages range from five months of age to adolescence.”[23] Perhaps the most painful reading in the male report is the description of children who supposedly experienced orgasm, a description supplied from adults who had sex with children, describing the children “groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children)” and also children who “will fight away from the partner.”[24] This final description sounds like a terrified child being molested.[25]

What do we make of the data on children in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male? John  Bancroft, former director of the Kinsey Institute, contends all of Kinsey’s data concerning children and adolescents came from one man. If Bancroft is correct, then Kinsey is at least guilty of lying in his research by asserting the data came from several people when in actuality it came from one man who can only be described as a serial child molester. Furthermore, Bancroft protests that Kinsey did not encourage child molestation, but this seems to be a weak defense. Recently, Joe Paterno was fired from Penn State because he did not report a child molester to the police, which is the same thing Kinsey failed to do. What is most disturbing is Kinsey’s refusal to make any moral judgment concerning the “data” he obtained about children. Notice the terms he uses for child molestation: the observers were “technically trained,” the molesters are called “adult observers,” and the molesters are actually called the child’s sexual “partner.”  Perhaps Kinsey’s own distorted view of child sexuality is best found in Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in which he says, “It is difficult to understand why a child, except for its cultural conditioning, should be disturbed at having its genitalia touched, or disturbed at seeing the genitalia of other persons, or disturbed at even more specific sexual contacts.”[26] Kinsey could not sympathize with the reaction of the children to being molested. The inability to sympathize with victims is a character trait associated with a person whose conscience is seared and non-functional.

One of Dr. Judith Reisman’s last presentations on Kinsey

Esp 22 mins laws

Min 26- priest scandals handled by Kinsey 

Min 35-40 criminal behavior accellerated 

46- won in Croatia, disbanded sex ed

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x