SUBSCRIBE:
Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2015/04. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

“Child Sexuality” and the Fraud of the Alfred Kinsey Reports

by
Posted on October 21 2010 12:00 pm
Rob Taylor has a Master of Arts degree from Wesleyan University. He blogs at Greenville Dragnet.

Pages: 1 2

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • PDF
Print This Post Print This Post

A 70-year-old woman going by the pseudonym “Ether White” has claimed that she was sexually abused for years by her father and grandfather, and that the pair was paid by Dr. Alfred Kinsey as part of his bizarre sexual experiments. The findings from this “research,” which included producing charts on how long it took children as young as two months old to achieve orgasm with adult partners, became the foundation for how we view healthy sexuality in this country.

In other words, Kinsey used data from child rapists in his reports which are even now used to define what normal, healthy sexual behavior is.

Kinsey defenders have long attacked this assertion as the work of the “religious right” and anti-sex moralists, but even the Kinsey Institute itself has admitted that the Alfred Kinsey’s sources for information were child rapists.

Their own “debunking” of the charges Kinsey had children raped in the name of science still contains shocking admissions:

Kinsey clearly stated in his male volume the sources of information about children’s sexual responses. The bulk of this information was obtained from adults recalling their own childhoods. Some was from parents who had observed their children, some from teachers who had observed children interacting or behaving sexually, and Kinsey stated that there were nine men who he had interviewed who had sexual experiences with children who had told him about how the children had responded and reacted. We believe that one of those men was the source of the data listed in the book.

Kinsey produced charts showing the exact time it took for children to orgasm – and he relied on the reports of people raping children and the fanciful musings of adults to produce those charts? At the very least this should be considered the scientific fraud it is, but people still look to Kinsey’s child sex studies as authoritative.

And on the charges that his infamous child orgasm charts were the result of sexual experiments on children, the Kinsey Institute published this excerpt from the 1998 reprint of Sexual Behavior in the Human Female:

Having commented on the extent to which adults had recalled orgasmic experiences from their own childhoods, Kinsey pointed out that such recall might well be vague or inaccurate, particularly of an experience which the child may not have understood at the time. He was, therefore, especially interested in information obtained from those of his interviewees who had observed orgasms occurring in children.

Whereas he had some information of this kind from parents and teachers simply observing children, he obtained more from men who had been sexually involved with young boys and who had in the process observed their orgasms.

Teachers and parents just happened to walk in on children engaged in sexual activity, stopwatch in hand, and took notes on how long it took for children to reach orgasm? This debunking is harder to believe than the charges of child experimentation. But it gets worse:

Having therefore made it clear that he was referring to adults who had been involved in illegal sexual interactions with children; he went on to say, “nine of our adult male subjects have observed such orgasm. Some of these adults are technically trained persons who have kept diaries or other records which they have put at our disposal; and from them we have secured information on 317 pre-adolescents who were either observed in self-masturbation, or were observed in contacts with other boys or older adults.”

[…]

I decided to check on the sources of this information and found that, without any doubt, all of the information reported in Tables 31-34 came from the carefully documented records of one man. From 1917 until the time that Kinsey interviewed him in the mid-1940s, this man had kept notes on a vast array of sexual experiences, involving not only children but adults of both sexes.

Kinsey was clearly impressed by the systematic way he kept his records, and regarded them as of considerable scientific interest. Clearly, his description in the book of the source of this data was misleading, in that he implied that it had come from several men rather than one, although it is likely that information elsewhere in this chapter, on the descriptions of different types of orgasm, was obtained in part from some of these other nine men.

I do not know why Kinsey was unclear on this point; it was obviously not to conceal the origin of the information from criminal sexual involvement with children, because that was already quite clear. Maybe it was to conceal the single source, which otherwise might have attracted attention to this one man with possible demands for his identification (demands which have now occurred even though he is long dead).

This academic double speak, which is intended to debunk claims made by people like Esther White, literally means that not only did Kinsey use pedophiles for his research, but knew of one who was conducting horrible sexual experiments on children and protected him. Is the defense of Kinsey really that he didn’t experiment on children … he just used the research of his friend who did?

Continue reading page: 1 2

14 Responses leave one →
  1. October 21, 2010

    Why defend it? For the same reason an old male judge might consistantly go easy on pedophiles and perverts…..kindred spirits.

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2015/04. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 21, 2010

      You're probably right.

  2. October 21, 2010

    Rob, this was an amazing piece. The movie horribly misrepresented him…

  3. October 21, 2010

    That much became painfully obvious when almost every one of them defended Polanski.

  4. October 21, 2010

    Sick bastards… This is also disgusting–
    http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/

  5. October 22, 2010

    This is a scandal that should be shouted from the rooftops. Unfortunately, only about half the American public is listening…but then half is better than nothing.

  6. October 22, 2010

    The Kinsey Institute has little debunking for that. They just hope you’ll accept the idea that a crying, screaming, trembling child who is violently trying to push a rapist off him is having an orgasm.

    The notion that orgasm can be achieved by a victim during non-consensual sexual intercourse has been repeatedly verified by subsequent scientific research.

    See: Sexual arousal and orgasm in subjects who experience forced or non-consensual sexual stimulation — a review

  7. October 22, 2010

    Great piece. I have seen a couple of documentaries about the Kinsey Institute and apparently the current employees are prepared to destroy the 'codes' that unlock the 'data' if authorities show up with a warrant. In that case, I say lock them all up as complicit to felony rapes. Sexual assault has to be one of the most horrific things that can happen to a child – present day fallout from this 'research' speaks volumes to its devilish origin.

  8. October 23, 2010

    Many years ago, I worked at Indiana University, in a building next to the Kinsey Institute. Back then, all I knew about the institute was that it studied sexuality. Later on, I learned about the shoddy science and academic BS that launched Kinsey into the pop culture stratosphere. But now that I've read this….Ew!!!!

  9. October 23, 2010

    Time for a new film, maybe?

    Wouldn't it be wonderful if finally filmmakers would step forward to investigate and report upon the mentality in the profession during the sexual revolution..? Doesn't it make you wonder why it has taken the professionials so long before they were willing to reconsider or criticize the enlightened view of pedo'philia' ?
    Educated. sophisticated people up until the eighties were unwilling to consider the fact that sexual behavior toward children are harmful, brutal or immoral, let alone criminal. It was a sure sign of backwardness to judge pedophiles; only uninformed prudes, bigots and the sexually repressed would ever think or say they were freaks of nature

    A lot of these professionals must have known about and read the chapters on 'child-sexuality' in Kinsey's work – so why were they so quiet?
    There is going to be a great uproar when the lid comes off of this very nasty and funky kettle of fish..

  10. October 24, 2010

    "Observe orgasms occurring in children??!" Not normally. Pre pubescent children are asexual by nature.

    I think the man was daft to imagine all this and even more whacko to present his body of ideas for acceptance by the general American public…and Yet he was made to be an authoritative source in the many arguments for lessening our sexual standards, at great cost to society in my opinion.

  11. October 25, 2010

    "Accepting pedophiles’ word that their victims enjoyed their assaults is an outrageous attack on the scientific method. "

    That is an immense understatement. It's the whole shooting match. The uncorroborated testimony of a child rapist is not data. It's just a story. Kinsey knew this. He didn't rely on testimony. He was a participant in this satanic barbarism.

    If there is a hell, that dirty sonofabitch is there.

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2015 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry