Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anyone heard of Alfred Kinsey? - off topic

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Anyone heard of Alfred Kinsey? - off topic

    I was reading this article today and was quite intrigued. Anyone heard of this guy Kinsey ... Sorry, this is the first time I've heard of him. It would be interesting to hear different view points.
    dr. leela


    The Truth Behind Alfred Kinsey
    Susan Brinkmann on the "Scientist" and His Research

    PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, MAY 15, 2005.- Hollywood glorified sexologist Alfred Kinsey on the silver screen recently, but one critic warns that the film will continue the 50-year-old deception of the American public by portraying Kinsey as a trustworthy scientist.

    Susan Brinkmann, correspondent for the Catholic Standard & Times, the newspaper of the Philadelphia Archdiocese, is co-author of "The Kinsey Corruption: An Exposé on the Most Influential 'Scientist' of Our Time" with Judith Reisman.

    Brinkmann shared with ZENIT evidence of Kinsey's sexual deviance and hidden life -- and how his deceptive research and destructive ideas are still being perpetuated today.

    Q: Why is Kinsey a controversial character for some and a heroic figure for others?

    Brinkmann: The only difference between those who consider Kinsey controversial and those who consider him heroic is nothing more than a matter of education.

    Anyone who reads the work of Dr. Judith Reisman, whose research is the basis for my book, "The Kinsey Corruption," will see not only factual, written evidence of Kinsey's questionable background, they'll see photographs and letters he wrote to friends about his collection of homosexual pornography. None of the information about Kinsey's sordid background is "alleged"; it's out there in black and white. If you're not reading it, you don't want to.

    There are films depicting Kinsey and his staff engaging in all kinds of sex acts in the attic of the Kinsey home that still exist -- films that were made by professional cinematographers who have never denied their existence.

    There is also a documentary called "Kinsey's Pedophiles" that details Kinsey's involvement with pedophiles and other sexual miscreants from whom he gathered the data that supposedly supports his hypothesis that children are sexual from birth.

    The film was shown in England and even the far-left BBC Radio Times called it "deeply unsettling."

    How can such a notorious man continue to command hero status? Because of the lucrative financial awards available to those who promote the sexual revolution he started.

    Kinsey's two books -- "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male," published in 1948, and "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female," which followed in 1952 -- started what we now call the sexual revolution. This revolution is a lot more than just a change in attitude. It's a business -- a multibillion-dollar business.

    This contraceptive mentality was born in the kind of sexual license that Kinsey endorsed. He believed pornography was harmless, that adultery can enhance a marriage and that children are sexual from birth.

    Keeping these and other Kinsey "myths" alive is why the porn industry is thriving and why abortion and contraception providers rake in millions of dollars every year.

    And let's not forget the nation's sexual education industry, the spawn of Kinsey's so-called New Biology. With the exception of programs that are strictly abstinence-only, all other sex-ed programs used in the United States are based on Kinsey's flawed research.

    Most people are completely unaware of this, or of the connection between American sex-ed and the porn, abortion and contraception industries.

    For instance, Planned Parenthood's former medical director, Dr. Mary Calderone, was also a director of the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States, the sex-ed provider launched by the Kinsey Institute in 1964 with seed money provided by Playboy. And we wonder why our sex-ed classes are so graphic.

    Q: Why did Kinsey keep part of his life hidden from the public?

    Brinkmann: Kinsey had sexual appetites that were completely unacceptable to Americans in the 1940s.

    He was a pederast who enjoyed public nudity, made explicit sex films and eventually developed such an extreme sadomasochistic form of autoeroticism that some believe it caused his untimely death in 1956.

    This is not the sort of thing he wanted the public to know about. He maintained a meticulously engineered facade of a typical Midwestern family man at all costs because it was so critical to his success -- and to his financial backing from the Rockefeller Foundation.

    Q: Did Kinsey's religious background influence his research in any way?

    Brinkmann: Absolutely. Kinsey was born into a strict Methodist home in Hoboken, New Jersey, in 1894. Dancing, tobacco, alcohol and dating were all forbidden. He eventually severed all ties with his parents -- and their religion -- and lived the rest of his life as an avid atheist.

    After completing his undergraduate work in zoology at Bowdoin College in 1916, he went on to continue his studies at Harvard's Bussy Institution. His atheistic beliefs flourished at Harvard where Darwinism and the New Biology, which denied the existence of God, were enjoying immense popularity on campus.

    By the time Kinsey arrived in Indiana, he was an avowed atheist who embraced the science of eugenics, which called for the elimination of "lower level" Americans. For the rest of his life, he would permit no blacks, Jews or committed Christians on his staff.

    His books make no attempt to hide his "grand scheme," which was to steer society away from its traditional moral standards and toward "free love."

    Q: Were there any aspects of Kinsey's methods and research that were questionable?

    Brinkmann: Almost all of his methods were questionable. However, the fundamental flaw in Kinsey's research was that it was based on a sexually explicit and highly offensive questionnaire comprised of 350 questions that few "typical" Americans were willing to answer.

    This meant he had to rely on "volunteers" to answer his questionnaire, which included a variety of deviants such as incarcerated criminals, prostitutes, streetwalkers and other riffraff.

    Serious social scientists know that they can't rely on volunteers for sexual studies because it attracts a disproportionate number of "unconventional" men and women. Relying on these volunteers would produce results that showed a falsely high percentage of non-virginity, masturbation, promiscuity and homosexuality in the population.

    However, this is precisely what Kinsey did. Kinsey classified 1,400 criminals and sex offenders as "normal" on the grounds that such miscreants were essentially the same as other men -- except that these had gotten caught. The "human males" category could then include incarcerated pedophiles, pederasts, homosexual males, boy prostitutes and miscellaneous sexual predators.

    His studies concerning child sexuality are the most outrageous -- and some say criminal -- of all. Kinsey relied on pedophiles who sent him data from their crimes. He used this data to claim that children as young as 4 months are capable of sexual arousal.

    Kinsey staff member and co-author Paul Gebhard admitted that they were relying on information being sent to them by a man named Rex King, a serial rapist who was guilty of raping more than 800 children.

    Perhaps the most widely publicized connection between Kinsey and a known pedophile took place in Germany a year after Kinsey's death. Notorious Nazi pedophile Dr. Fritz Von Balluseck was on trial for the rape and murder of a 10-year-old girl when correspondence from Kinsey was found in his possession.

    Kinsey was encouraging the doctor to continue sending him "data" from his crimes and even urged him to "be careful" in one letter.

    The details of this aspect of Kinsey's work were made into a documentary film in 1998 and entitled "Secret History: Kinsey's Pedophiles." It aired in England but was never shown in the United States.

    Q: Did credentialed experts criticize Kinsey's works?

    Brinkmann: Several experts criticized Kinsey's work, such as W. Allen Wallis, the University of Chicago statistician and past president of the American Statistical Association who was one of the nation's most distinguished statisticians. Wallis found serious flaws in Kinsey's work, not the least of which was the fact that one-third of the men interviewed were sex offenders.

    Even the esteemed British medical journal, The Lancet, concluded that Kinsey "questioned an unrepresentative proportion of prison inmates and sex offenders in a survey of normal sexual behavior."

    Dr. Albert Hobbs, a sociologist and author at the University of Pennsylvania, accused Kinsey of violating all three precepts necessary for sound scientific method and procedure.

    First, the scientist should not have any preconceived hypothesis in order to present only the facts. Hobbs noted that "Kinsey actually 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."

    Second, Kinsey refused to publish the basic data upon which his conclusions rested. Third, he refused to reveal the questionnaire upon which he based all of his facts.

    Q: What effect did Kinsey's works have on American law?

    Brinkmann: This is particularly disturbing. Between the years of 1948 and 1952, two critical events were taking place in the United States -- the introduction of Kinsey's erroneous research into American society and the development of the Model Penal Code.

    One of the principal authors of the new MPC was Morris Ploscowe, a staunch supporter of Kinsey's research. Ploscowe argued that based on Kinsey's findings, "when a total cleanup of sex offenders is demanded, it is in effect a proposal to put 95% of the male population in jail ..."

    Therefore, Ploscowe wrote, "If these conclusions are correct, then it is obvious that our sex crime legislation is completely out of touch with the realities of individual living …."

    Unfortunately, he never investigated the "if," and instead plowed ahead with the MPC revision that resulted in the downward revision of penalties for 52 major sex crimes.

    Another big Kinsey supporter who argued for softening the nation's sex crime penalties was attorney Morris L. Ernst, a founding member of the American Civil Liberties Union.

    In addition to serving as Kinsey's attorney, he also represented Margaret Sanger -- the founder of Planned Parenthood -- the Kinsey Institute, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States and Planned Parenthood of America.

    According to Dr. Reisman's research, Ernst "advocated the legalization of adultery, obscenity and abortion throughout his career, as well as Kinsey's full panoply of sex law changes." According to Ernst, Kinsey's data first entered into the stream of law through the MPC tentative draft number four, dealing with sex offenses, on April 25, 1955.

    The good news is that in April of 2004, after five years of study, the American Legislative Exchange Council, a group of 2,400 lawmakers from 50 states, concluded that the work of Kinsey was a fraud and contained "manufactured statistics."

    The report outlined the influence these bogus numbers had on the weakening of 52 sex laws that once protected women, children and marriage. Methods for undoing the damage to America's social and legal systems are presently being studied.
    http://www.homeopathy2health.com

  • #2
    Hi Leela, Most people in the US will have heard of him or the Kinsey Institute. Kinsey did all sorts of research about sex -- forumlating all sorts of ideas and theories about sex that challenged the 'status quo'. He's a controversial figure amongst more conservative elements in the US, while he's lauded as a sexpert by more liberal thinking people there. Very strange person/man, in my opinion.

    Here are a few links on him but many more are found on google:
    http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/about/kinseybio.html
    http://www.gayhistory.com/rev2/factfiles/ffkinsey.htm
    http://www.cwfa.org/kinsey.asp
    http://health.discovery.com/centers/...edckinsey.html
    "The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
    Carroll Dunham

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Lisa,
      thanks. I'm interested in what people on this list/BB think about him and his controversial ideas though. How it may have affected American or Western Culture in general over the last few decades.
      Leela
      http://www.homeopathy2health.com

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi Leela,
        I posted the links because people on our list may, or may not know about the controversies that surrounded Kinsey and his Kinsey Report.

        In some of those links I posted, there are articles that address the far reaching affects on American and the broader Western Culture. Very interesting and thought-provoking to say the least.

        Lisa
        fellow list-member
        "The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
        Carroll Dunham

        Comment


        • #5
          Dear Lisa (fellow list member).
          Thanks a lot. I'll follow all those links tomorrow and read a little more.
          I hope more on the list read about this and post some of their opinions on how this may have affected them.
          Leela


          Hi Leela,
          I posted the links because people on our list may, or may not know about the controversies that surrounded Kinsey and his Kinsey Report.

          In some of those links I posted, there are articles that address the far reaching affects on American and the broader Western Culture. Very interesting and thought-provoking to say the least.

          Lisa
          fellow list-member
          http://www.homeopathy2health.com

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Anyone heard of Alfred Kinsey? - off topic

            Hi Leela,
            Originally posted by Leela
            I was reading this article today and was quite intrigued. Anyone heard of this guy Kinsey ... Sorry, this is the first time I've heard of him. It would be interesting to hear different view points.
            I read the Kinsey Report sometime in the sixties and was very surprised that there was such a to-do about it.


            I remember nothing else - just that surprise:-)

            Reading the article it seems that I must have been a terribly amoral person for such a reaction to occur :-o

            Regards

            Luise

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Anyone heard of Alfred Kinsey? - off topic

              I too remember it rather vaguely, but remember that there was indeed quite a to-do. My memory is that he named a whole bunch of behaviors that most of us would have considered either odd or at least not-quite-nice, and said Oh yeah, according to *my* studies, nearly *all* of you guys are doing this two or three times a day! Well, I exaggerate... I guess people like getting an "anything goes" frame of reference, to make their own little sins and guilts seem lighter? Or to give them wicked imaginings about the neighbors?
              :-)

              Comment


              • #8
                RE: Anyone heard of Alfred Kinsey? - off topic

                The value of Kinsey, it seems to me, is to bring into question our assumptions about what is righteous behavior and what is not. Consider the source of the criticisms. Not surprising that the Catholic Church's point of view is that sex is for procreation only and not to be enjoyed for the other benefits it offers (pair bonding, for example.) The question of interest to me is not how many of Kinsey's subjects had been imprisoned (not the same thing as guilty of any real or imagined sin) but how many of his subjects appeared to be mainstream orthodox religious types.

                Richard Knapp

                Comment


                • #9
                  Richard:
                  Not surprising that the Catholic Church's point of view is that sex is for procreation only and not to be enjoyed for the other benefits it offers (pair bonding, for example.)
                  Hi Richard,
                  Now where would you get this idea?

                  I was taught that (GOd created the) sexual act for procreation and we see that with ALL animals. But sexual intercourse in human beings, is an (ultimate) expression of love and bonding between two people (of the opposite sex) commited to each other, most obviously if they are married to each other.
                  So... I don't get what you mean??
                  I am Catholic ... in case that is a big surprise... :)

                  From what this article says, a majority of his subjects we NOT mainstream orthodox types, if one had to sincerely categorize them as such. We assume that mianstream orthodox types DO follow mainstream orthodox views?
                  Leela
                  http://www.homeopathy2health.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Luise:
                    Reading the article it seems that I must have been a terribly amoral person for such a reaction to occur :-o
                    Hi Luise, what does the word "amoral" mean for you?

                    I think in India, there is enough of clandestine abnormal sexual activity going on at various levels. But mainstream people are simple, sincere and straightforward. Good and evil is deeply ingrained soemtimes to the extreme, and women bear the brunt of it.

                    Leela
                    http://www.homeopathy2health.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Shannon:
                      I guess people like getting an "anything goes" frame of
                      reference, to make their own little sins and guilts seem lighter? Or
                      to give them wicked imaginings about the neighbors?
                      Yes i agree.

                      But I have yet to find any patient who has the "anything goes" standard in their families or personal life, tell me that they have found true happiness or fulfilment, as against those following "righteous behaviour". Somehoe the acts of "anything goes" commission seem to have had a more devastating effect on health (emotional, spiritual and physical) than acts of "righteous" ommission. Don't you think so?

                      Thanks,
                      Leela
                      http://www.homeopathy2health.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        RE: Re: Anyone heard of Alfred Kinsey? - off topic

                        Originally posted by Leela
                        From what this article says, a majority of his subjects we NOT mainstream orthodox types, if one had to sincerely categorize them as such. We assume that mianstream orthodox types DO follow mainstream orthodox views?
                        I read the (critical) article to say that up to 30% were "non-orthodox" types, not a majority. If I cared about the article, the first thing I would do is ask the author to support her numbers. Then, if they could be agreed upon, we could begin talking about interpretations and about all the things that were left out. By the way, the movie does not attempt to hide the fact that Kinsey experimented with homosexuality.


                        Richard Knapp

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Richard:
                          I read the (critical) article to say that up to 30% were "non-orthodox" types, not a majority. If I cared about the article, the first thing I would do is ask the author to support her numbers. Then, if they could be agreed upon, we could begin talking about interpretations and about all the things that were left out. By the way, the movie does not attempt to hide the fact that Kinsey experimented with homosexuality.
                          Hi RIchard,
                          What do you suggest could have been 'left out'?
                          Someone sent me a private mail telling me about how talking about sexual issues were a complete taboo at one point in history. Bu do you think accepting or validating Kinsey findings/report is the way to deal with sexual taboo?
                          I think Maturity and broadmindedness is. And blaming the Church for it is only escaping from that.

                          Do realise that I'm not setting up any of these questions against anyone's point of view. I'm seeking varied opinions about this which is helping me get a perspective.
                          One of the difficulties I've had with case analysis was to understand how people had so much of devastating trauma in their history - how much of it was part of teh culture and how much of it wasn't in each individual case.

                          HOllywood seems to give a very onesided picture to us in the East about Western culture. David once told me - just realise that that is not what happens in typical Americal homes - we have the saying here "That's Hollywood".

                          Also realise that being a Christian in India, I am automatically categorized as a person who adopts the "Western CUlture", and has loose moral values. When I mean "Western CUlture" I mean Hollywood culture, becasue that is all we're exposed to here.
                          If the average opinion in the US isthat India is a land of Elephants and jungles, poverty and diseases. Well, the reciprocal Image many Indians have of the US is Hollywood and the TV serials we're exposed to.
                          I wish that would change both ways.. :)
                          Welcome to India anyone.....
                          Dr. leela
                          http://www.homeopathy2health.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Lisa, thanks, I went through all the links below. It gives me a wider perspective. I too find the whole thing thought provoking, to say the least, especially that the whole research seems to focus on abnormal sexual behaviour and practices (as acceptable) rather than the widely different experiences in the 'normal' spectrum.
                            Leela

                            http://www.homeopathy2health.com

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Leela, That is what I remembered when I learned about Kinsey; that his focus was on the outer fringes of sexuality -- the deviations from what we've always known and thought to be the norm in society. Having said that, if yu look back in Roman or Greek history -- or others - you find a lot of 'deviant' sexual behaviou. Remembering that 'deviant' means "differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society."

                              Are you looking for personal accounts of what people think of the effects of Kinsey's research - how it's afffected them and shaped their views of sexuality? That's a deep question - and the topic has certainly made me stop and wonder how it's seeped into my own thinking.
                              Lisa
                              Originally posted by doctorleela
                              Lisa, thanks, I went through all the links below. It gives me a wider perspective. I too find the whole thing thought provoking, to say the least, especially that the whole research seems to focus on abnormal sexual behaviour and practices (as acceptable) rather than the widely different experiences in the 'normal' spectrum.
                              Leela
                              "The significance of a fact is measured by the capacity of the observer."
                              Carroll Dunham

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X