-Caveat Lector-
Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.
-- Euripides
Folks, What follows in this multi-part Post has been censored by the Media
Lords; as you read it you will understand why they have suppressed it.
It is essential you read the Part which contains the "Interview".
An Issue this Important requires you give your full attention and COMPLETE
read of these Posts.
Also, and needless to say, you should do your Duty as a Concerned American
and distribute this Series as far and wide as humanely possible.
Caution: You may not like what your about to read, including subsequent
parts.
Bard
*****end of commentary*****
PART I
The Crime of the Century
by Fr. James Thornton
Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences, by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., Arlington, VA:
Institute for Media Education, 1998, 324 pages, paperback, $24.95.
Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences by Reisman - $24.95
Dr. Judith A Reisman presents voluminous and convincing evidence that Alfred
Kinsey, father of the American sexual revolution, was a fraud. Beware that
the author uses explicit language in order to critique Kinsey's specific
methodology and data. (1998 ed, 324pp, pb) [Order]
The greatness of truly great men comes from the fact that they do great
things and make great changes in the course of history, motivated in their
labors by high, noble, honorable purposes. For these reasons, their
achievements produce lasting effects for the good.
There are men of an entirely different stripe, however, who by their cunning
and ruthlessness also affect the course of history, yet who by no means can
be called great. In modern times, Marx, Lenin, and Stalin were such men. As
with great men, the impact on the world of such figures is tremendous, but
unlike great men these other men leave behind them vast stretches of ruin:
ruined souls, ruined lives, ruined societies, ruined nations. They possess
no higher purpose and no noble goals, and the upheavals they inspire are
destructive in nature, producing lasting change in the direction of evil. In
this second category of men falls Alfred C. Kinsey, the man whose life is
evaluated in the present work.
Patriarch of Perversion
Kinsey, the founder of the Kinsey Institute for Sex Research at Indiana
University in Bloomington, was born in New Jersey in 1894. He began his
professional career as a zoologist, with a special interest in insect
taxonomy. Later he branched out into "researching" human sexuality, and
through his well-known books, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and
Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953), he was touted as "the father of
the American sexual revolution."
Indeed, since the appearance of those two books, and most particularly after
the popular media took up Kinsey’s banner and disseminated, in
propagandistic fashion, distillations of the supposedly scientific material
from his volumes, attitudes in American society about human sexuality have
undergone rapid, revolutionary changes. And while Americans received a
systematic indoctrination in Kinsey’s radical sexual ideology, traditional
views of human sexuality and traditional sexual mores came under incessant
attack by Kinseyans, who characterized them as repressive and unhealthy, and
who heaped scorn on them as obsolete, pharisaical, and "unscientific."
Moreover, in contrast to the ceaseless drumbeat of support for Kinsey and
his ideology by the mainstream media and the educational establishment,
serious questions by honest scientists and scholars about Kinsey’s
procedures, methodology, statistics, evidence, and motives have been largely
ignored. Yet, putting aside traditional morality for the moment, there are
some grave problems with Kinsey and his studies, problems that a relentless
media whitewash campaign has done little to allay.
Dr. Judith A. Reisman, having studied Kinsey’s life and work for many years,
has made some startling judgments, among which are that, insofar as his sex
studies are concerned, Kinsey was a scientific quack, that his research was
rife with fraudulent statistics and scientifically worthless data, and that
many of his methods, involving a significant portion of the data he
collected, were blatantly criminal.
"Looking back 50 years with the benefit of hindsight," writes Reisman, "it
seems astonishing that the American public accepted any of Kinsey’s
revolutionary findings, all of which not only conflicted dramatically with
the public health report data but also with what Americans saw, heard,
touched and knew about their homes, schools, friends and neighbors,
children, wives, husbands, mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers." What
seems to have happened was that many Americans allowed their critical
faculties to be anesthetized by the word "science," which they had been
conditioned to believe was synonymous with truth, hard facts, and accuracy.
Fraud as Science
It is an elementary principle of the scientific method that scientific
results, based on particular formulas, procedures, or methods, can always be
duplicated by other scientists, as long as the prescribed formulas,
procedures, or methods are followed precisely. That any experiment can be
repeated, with the same results, by another scientist is what makes an
experiment scientific. Such is not the case with Kinsey’s findings, however,
for the simple reason that they are fraudulent. Were one to duplicate what
Kinsey claims were his methods, wholly different results would be obtained.
One might begin by noting that the results of Kinsey’s research were
officially asserted to be based on a representative sampling of the American
population. That, however, was a lie. The truth is that a substantial
portion of the study was based on material collected in interviews with
criminals, prison inmates, and sex offenders. Kinsey and his cohorts sought
out and interviewed the worst sex deviates and insisted, without the
slightest justification, that with regard to sexual habits and experiences,
sex criminals were no different than normal men and women. Accordingly, as
Dr. Reisman writes, Kinsey "inserted well over 1,400 males — abnormal by
definition, certification, and judicial rule — into his database as normal."
These 1,400 males, Dr. Reisman reports, may comprise as much as 34 percent
of the total number of persons interviewed by the Kinsey team, data from
whom was used in the Kinsey volumes. I say "may comprise" since there is
much guesswork involved as to the number of persons from whom data was
gathered, guesswork that Kinsey and his institute never cleared up.
Kinsey’s Male volume may have been based on responses from 12,214 males,
6,200 males, 6,300 males, or 4,120 males and his Female volume possibly
7,789 females or some unknown portion of a grand total of the 4,500 males
and females reported by one researcher. The two published volumes themselves
contain conflicting information about this and no one seems sure today how
many persons were actually interviewed or questioned. With respect to this
statistical shell game, Dr. Reisman comments that "deception seems more
probable than confusion or negligence."
Regarding the deceptive practices of Kinsey, the author quotes Dr. Albert H.
Hobbs of the University of Pennsylvania who, at the time the Male volume was
published, criticized Kinsey and the unscientific nature of his methodology
in the following words: "Kinsey, in his studies of sexual behavior, violated
all three of the precepts necessary to scientific procedure. He denied,
flatly and repeatedly, that he had any hypothesis, insisting that he merely,
in his words, ‘presented the facts.’ Yet to any observant reader, Kinsey
obviously had a two-pronged hypothesis. He vigorously promoted, juggling his
figures to do so, a hedonistic, animalistic conception of sexual behavior,
while at the same time he consistently denounced all biblical and
conventional conceptions of sexual behavior. He refused to publish his basic
data. He kept secret not only his hypothesis, but also refused to present
the basic facts on which his conclusions rested. He also refused to reveal
the questionnaire which was the basis for all of his facts. In addition, it
is possible to derive conclusions opposite to Kinsey’s from his own data."
Not surprisingly, Dr. Hobbs was "subjected to severe persecution at the
University of Pennsylvania for criticizing the Kinsey data," writes Dr.
Reisman.
"Cover-up" and "Correction"
We learn from Dr. Reisman that at least two other major problems stand out
in Kinsey’s statistics and conclusions. Psychologist Abraham Maslow, who the
author notes "was not at odds with Kinsey ideologically," nevertheless
warned Kinsey that the use of volunteers for his studies would automatically
bias the results. By relying on volunteers to provide data, Maslow
cautioned, Kinsey would attract sexually aggressive and unconventional men
and women "with high rates of unhealthy and disapproved sexual activity."
Normal men and women — the overwhelming majority of Americans — tend to be
private about their sexual lives (and this would have been especially so in
the 1940s), while abnormal subjects tend to want to talk about their
experiences, and so readily volunteer. Thus, sex studies that rely on
volunteers will inevitably produce false data. Maslow, though a libertarian
in outlook on sexual matters, was apparently a man of some intellectual and
scientific integrity and therefore broke with Kinsey over his use of
valueless volunteer data. That data only served to legitimize the
proclivities of, in Dr. Reisman’s words, "a dysfunctional male and female
group whose sexual conduct did not at all reflect normal Americans circa
1948."
But even if we should wish to discount the statistical effect of using
criminals, sex offenders, and sexually aggressive volunteers, there is still
ample reason to dismiss the validity of Kinsey’s findings. The author tells
us that Kinsey claimed to believe that there was a high incidence of
"cover-up" in the sexual histories he gathered by interview. To "correct"
for this phenomenon, Kinsey used several techniques. If the answer desired
by Kinsey and his team members was not forthcoming, that is if the subject
denied committing certain sexual acts, the subject would be verbally
intimidated, and, conversely, if the interviewer got the answer he wanted he
"courted and smiled" on the subject. If the subject persisted in denying
certain sexual acts, the interview would be terminated and the data
disregarded. Sometimes, writes Reisman, "if his subject stubbornly refused
to say that he committed acts recited by the interviewer, the team could
just change the answers to what they thought ‘really’ happened." With that
kind of methodology, one can obviously prove anything and reach whatever
preconceived conclusions one wishes. This was outright statistical
chicanery.
Criminal Abuse
Now let us address the most controversial aspect of Kinsey’s "research":
child sex experimentation. First, we learn from Kinsey: Crimes and
Consequences that there exists considerable evidence that Kinsey himself,
along with some of his associates, participated in, or observed, sexual
experiments involving children. Dr. Reisman calls these incidents "genital
experiments" and remarks that they involved "observing, recording, and
filming of adults, and, yes, of infants and children."
Furthermore, Kinsey himself was involved in some sort of sexual activities
involving pre-adolescent and early adolescent boys and, though the exact
nature of that involvement is not absolutely clear, one can gather a great
deal from Kinsey’s own statements. Dr. Reisman quotes the book Human
Sexuality, by John Gagnon of the Kinsey Institute, in which that writer
admits that, with regard to the child sex experiments, "A less neutral
observer than Kinsey would have described these events as sex crimes, since
they involved sexual contact between adults and children."
Pediatrician Dr. Lester Caplan of Baltimore, after reading Kinsey’s
discussions of child sexuality in the Male and Female volumes, affirmed that
the data collected by Kinsey about children "was not the norm — rather was
data taken from abnormal sexual activities, by sex criminals and the like."
He went on to say that "these children had to be held down or subject to
strapping down, otherwise they would not respond willingly." Dr. Reisman
summarizes Dr. Caplan’s full statement by saying, "First, at least some if
not all children were physically forced into these experiments. Second, a
team of men — not a lone pederast or pedophile — would have carried out
these laboratory experiments, and third, only such a team could test the
child, time the child, record the time and — in some cases — film the
activity at the same time."
In addition to child sex experiments carried out by Kinsey and his
associates, Kinsey collected data on "child sexuality" from what is called
"scientifically trained observers." What is meant by this outrageous
euphemism is that Kinsey collected material from (quoting Dr. Reisman)
"perverts of all sorts [who] kept detailed records of their child
molestations and sent them to Kinsey for inclusion in his studies."
Kinsey instructed pedophiles in the use of certain basic scientific jargon
so that they could relate their sexual experiences with children in a manner
Kinsey could understand and use, and so an ongoing correspondence between
Kinsey and these "scientifically trained observers" ensued. The
correspondence would often include detailed questionnaires about sexual
encounters, which the child molesters were required to complete. This,
needless to say, made Kinsey an accessory to the criminal activity of the
pedophiles. To know that children are being sexually abused by specific
persons and to fail to notify authorities is not only monstrous, but grossly
criminal.
Even worse, the correspondence and questionnaires from Kinsey had the effect
of actively encouraging further criminal activity. Pedophiles were given the
impression by Kinsey that they were not engaged in criminal actions, but in
"scientific research." One such man, who boasted of having had sexual
relations with at least 800 children and infants, was treated by Kinsey
(according to Kinsey’s biographer James H. Jones) as "a colleague, a fellow
seeker of truth who had compiled valuable scientific data." Kinsey actually
sent a letter to this man congratulating him "on the research spirit which
has led you to collect data over these many years." In a subsequent letter
Kinsey offered to use the public funds that (along with funds from the
Rockefeller Foundation) were subsidizing his research to bring this man to
his home in Bloomington, Indiana, adding, "Mrs. Kinsey and I should be glad
to entertain you in our home." He also offered the man a salary from public
funds, so that he could devote full time to his work for Kinsey.
For all the sheer bunkum from Kinsey and his companions-in-crime about
"scientific data," "research," "trained observers," and the like, the
information obtained from the child molesters actually possessed no
scientific worth whatsoever. Just as rapists often claim that their victims
are "willing" and that they delight in being raped, so Kinsey’s perverts
were predisposed to report all kinds of distortions about their helpless
victims. Yet, though of no value, the information gathered by the pedophiles
was compiled and duly reported in Kinsey’s books as "normal" and "typical"
of American child sexuality.
Cultural Cave-in
Kinsey sought by his "research" and books radically to alter the American
view of human sexuality, and to some extent he has succeeded. Even a cursory
look at contemporary music, language, television programs, movies, and
novels makes clear that standards have drastically fallen in the 50 years
since Sexual Behavior in the Human Male appeared. But the American people
have not yet achieved the ultimate Kinsey Model, for Kinsey’s agenda was far
more comprehensive than anything we have thus far seen.
We can begin to grasp the extent of Kinsey’s objectives by considering a
list of his "Alleged Basic ‘Findings,’" as presented by Dr. Reisman. I will
mention only six from the author’s eleven:
• All orgasms are "outlets" and equal between husband and wife, boy and dog,
man and boy, girl, or baby — for there is no abnormality and no normality.
• The more orgasms from any "outlet" at the earliest age the healthier the
person.
• Sexual taboos and sex laws are routinely broken, thus all such taboos and
sex laws should be eliminated, including that of rape and child rape, unless
serious "force" is used and serious harm is proven.
• Since sex is, can, and should be commonly shared with anyone and anything,
jealousy is passé.
• Human beings are naturally bisexual. Religious bigotry and prejudice force
people into chastity, heterosexuality, and monogamy.
• There are no medical or other reasons for adult-child sex or incest to be
forbidden.
Such, reports Dr. Reisman, is the "socio-sexual paradise" envisioned in the
sick minds of Alfred Kinsey and his followers, though, as the author points
out, "each one of these ‘findings’ has been disproven by honest research and
real human experience over the past fifty years." Why then, we may ask
rhetorically, if Kinsey is a fraud and his findings bogus, is it that (to
quote Dr. Reisman again) "almost all AIDS and sex education in elementary,
secondary, college, graduate and post-graduate schools base their sex
education curricula on the Kinseyan ‘variant’ sex model as reflected in the
above findings"?
In the years following Kinsey’s sexual revolution, divorce, venereal
diseases (including AIDS), rape, sexual brutality towards children,
illegitimacy, suicide, psychological maladies, and hosts of other individual
and social disorders have increased sharply, while the birth rate among
middle-class Americans has fallen below replacement level. Those are some of
the consequences of Kinsey’s crimes. Our entire society has become coarse,
tasteless, rude, and tawdry to an extent that would have been utterly beyond
the imagination of the citizens of this land in the halcyon days of 1948.
Temporary Condition
There are other consequences. The rising moral anarchy of our time, which
has been and is actively encouraged by a corrupt and corrupting ruling
elite, can never be a permanent situation. Anarchy is always a temporary
condition. Before imposing a dictatorship on Russia, the Communists
countenanced just such moral chaos, releasing hordes of criminals from
jails, making divorce easy, and abolishing laws against adultery,
homosexuality, and various sexual crimes. That anarchy served to justify the
subsequent repression. A totalitarian scenario, if it comes to pass here,
will be the final consequence of Kinsey’s crimes. Dr. Reisman has performed
a magnificent service in writing her book and in exposing Kinsey for the
charlatan he unquestionably was.
It must be emphasized that, although this overview of Kinsey: Crimes and
Consequences is lengthy as book reviews go, we have only touched the surface
of the numerous issues discussed by the author, and of the many aspects and
ramifications of Kinsey’s sex revolution and its disastrous influence on
modern American life. The book is published in large-format, is composed of
ten chapters, and includes numerous photos, tables, and charts, along with
footnotes citing the author’s sources.
Finally, it is necessary to warn readers that Dr. Reisman has been forced by
circumstances to present information in her valuable book that is clinically
explicit, and often shocking, repugnant, and horrifying. Unhappily, there is
no way to present the case against Kinsey and his Institute, and expose
their crimes, without such details. It would appear that our poor country
has sunk so deeply into slime that, in order to pull her out, we are
compelled to put aside our squeamishness.
© Copyright 1999 American Opinion Publishing Incorporated
http://thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/01-04-99/kinsey.htm
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
