The Alfred Kinsey cover-up
Sex researcher Alfred Kinsey is credited with “revolutionizing” American sexual thought and practices in the 1950s and 60s, including normalization of homosexuality, porn, pedophilia, and abortion.
In reality, Kinsey was a pedophiliac homosexual sado-mashocist who likely died of self-inflicted wounds at age 62. His “ground-breaking” books, The Kinsey Reports contained data obtained from pedophiliacs, which he did not report.
Dr. Judith Reisman has been at the forefront of exposing Kinsey for years. Yesterday she released a 2-part YouTube video, The Kinsey Coverup.
[HT: Dr. Frank; photo courtesy of JAMD]
Jul.02, 2008 10:13 am |
GLBT, Industry watch, Pop Culture |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
The real tragedy of this Jill is that many people were led away from the truth by Kinsey, lived, died and are now experiencing their eternal destinies based on their chosen lifestyle.
The proverb: “You reap what you sow” is especially relevant in this situation.
One can only imagine how many lives were destroyed by this one man’s teachings.
Similarly, when people believe the lies of Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and the like, they too will experience the same destruction.
That is why I appreciate this blog so very much Jill….because you so tirelessly and faithfully present the truth of abortion to a lost world.
Hisman,
..your comments are always very insightful…
The other tragedy I see here is that even when confronted with the TRUTH people still choose to cling to the lies told by PP and their ilk…
HisMan, thanks for the words of encouragement. In fact, Kinsey probably has greater influence than ever, since a 2nd and 3rd generation have fallen for his “scientific findings.”
Matthew 18:6 “but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
Mark 9:42 “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea.”
Luke 17:2 “It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble.”
Since Kinsey has been dead for 52 years, it is not likely he will come back to challenge the alleged “coverup”.
This posting makes your daily attack on Margaret Sanger, who has only been dead for 42 years, seem fresh and new by comparison…
Did Kinsey address abortion? Sorry if I’m missing something obvious – don’t have sound on this compiter.
I heard Judith Reisman reveal this truth 10 years ago.
The wheels of justice grind slowly!
Thanks Jill, for getting these blockbuster videos
out. Prayers that they help stop the madness.
I think Kinsey was a convenient excuse more than the cause of the sexual excesses of the 60’s and 70’s. Indulged, bored, pampered Baby Boomers acted like most indulged, pampered, and bored people do, they chased thrills, whether sex, drugs, or rock ‘n roll. Kinsey was more cover than cause.
Bystander:
I assume you think it’s wrong to expose the truth about anyone even if they’ve been dead for a period of time and what they taught is an Immoral Weapon of Mass Destruction?
You think it wrong to reveal the truth about Kinsey? Are you for pedophilia as well as being in favor of baby murder? I hope not but if that’s true, in God’s eyes, makes you just like him and a partner with whatever he did. In fact, you’ll get what he got.
I also assume we should never, ever talk about Adolf Hitler? Huh?
I mean most of you pro-aborts diss Jesus Christ and while we believers know He is not dead and that He is the precious Messiah, non-believers still diss him to this day. How do you feel about that? I don’t think I have ever seen you post for Jesus Christ. How about a little consistency here even though I know that this is extremely difficult for word twisting, truth bending pro-aborts.
John S,
Interesting insight.
His Man, you are off your medication again.
Go sell crazy somewhere else, we’re all stocked up here…
PIP and John S
A valid point indeed. Just take a look at some of those spoiled celebrity brats to see what overindulged pampered people do. Or check the latest sex video on the internet. Likely its some spoiled pampered celebrity.
I am a baby boomer and I heard the name Kinsey once as a teenager. Didn’t have a clue who he was. I finally read about him well into adulthood.
At this same time the word “pregnant” couldn’t be said on “I Love Lucy” and TV married couples slept in twin beds. Lucy and Ricky were allowed to share a bed on TV because they were in fact married.
Obviously repressive measures didn’t do much to keep the baby boomers in line.
I think JohnS has it nailed.
JUDTIH REISMAN ISN’T A RESEARCHER OR MEDICAL DOCTOR, NOR EVEN A HISTORIAN.
There, now that I’ve got your attention, Judith Resiman is a failed singer of children’s songs, who turned to a career of bashing Kinsey. No serious Kinsey researchers take her seriously and none have found corroboration of her accusations.
She makes a living at it because the Christian right is always looking for and willing to pay anyone to support their agenda, no matter how weak the credentials or questionable the argument.
So, to respond to Hisman’s post, which said:
“I assume you think it’s wrong to expose the truth about anyone even if they’ve been dead for a period of time and what they taught is an Immoral Weapon of Mass Destruction?”
I find it much more productive to expose the truth about the living who spread malicious lies just to make a buck and pander to groups with idiotic agendas, like Reisman.
Regarding:
Since Kinsey has been dead for 52 years, it is not likely he will come back to challenge the alleged “coverup
posted by bystander.
Bystander, because he was a so called researcher we should be able to understand his research and his methodologies. If we are acting on his research today (I will address this below), we should be confident his information is still true.
Where to begin with Kinsey….
Well, first he is a pedophile. His research conclusions stated sex with children was clearly acceptable. Judith Reisman researched and wrote her book because her daugher was molested by a 13 year old adored and trusted friend. After her aunt and Judith’s college friend both said “She may have been looking for this herself. You know children are sexual from birth”. Judith wondered how 2 different people so geographically separated had the same conclusion. As Judith states in her preface, ‘I had entered the world according to Kinsey’.
He also stated that most boys have sexual relations with other boys before they are adults. We are talking about 75% to 90%, not be mention animals.
He did not include any data from black women or women prisoner, but used many interviews from male prisoners.
He claimed 25 percent of married women had abortions and as did 89 percent of single, pregnant women.
Judith’s book is a full of pages of this sick stuff. It is a hard book to read, to see this man having children molested in the name of science.
Judith’s book has an entire chapter on Kinsey’s impact on American Law. Kinsye has more than 6000 citations in law, social science and science journals certainly attested to his influence.
Get the facts, read Judith’s book and see if you think this guy is worth the attention he has been paid. I am currently reading this and it just sickens me. But to understand where we have come to as a nation, we have to see who influenced our laws and perceptions.
Good call, Phylo. Reisman is a nutball whose “work” has been universally condemned by scientists. Her Phd is in communications, not medicine or science.
Seems she reached her level of incompetence as a singer on “The Captain Kangaroo Show”.
This suggests the wisdom of googling anyone who Jill presents as a “scientific authority”.
Kinsey was a sick, sick man!!
God bless the diligence of Judith Reisman!!
Just read the post from: phylosopher.
Judith may not be researcher as you say, but each chapter in her book has 3 to 4 pages of citations, EACH CHAPTER.
As well, the BBC did a documentary entitled ‘Secret History: Kinsey’s Pedophiles’ which was broadcast in Great Britian on August 10, 1998. Seems crediable to me!
This is not a direct answer to your question, Doug, but here’s a quote from Part 2, which, by the way, goes into detail how Kinsey enabled the Abortion movement to gain foothold.
“Alfred Kinsey worked with Planned Parenthood to create SICUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States. And so the Kinsey model of child sexuality derived from the actual molestation of kids became the animated principal behind most sex education until abstinence programs came along.”
Given the enthusiasm PP has shown to “educate” children about their sexuality, this doesn’t surprise me at all.
I read that he interviewed pedophiles and talked to them about the sex they had with children and then DID NOT turn these sicko’s into the police. That is deplorable enough for me that I don’t really need to know anything else. But I don’t think he died of self-inflicted wounds. What I read said he had a pre-existing heart condition as a child and then died of heart disease and pneumonia.
I must say, those videos were difficult to watch.
I sometimes wonder if swine have better morals than these individuals.
Carder,
I found them hard to watch as well. Children preyed upon from ages 2 months on up for RESEARCH?? Lord help us.
Bystander and Phylo seem to have no problem with that but seek to discredit Reisman and honor Kinsey.
Bystander,
Kinsey was a pervert, and pro-abortionists (today) love him, his ideals, and his disgusting and reprehensible research.
Planned Parenthood celebrates his birthday on their website, just like they do for Margaret Sanger. What kind of people celebrate a birthday in honor of pervert like Kinsey, or a eugenicist like Sanger, in your opinion?
Her Phd is in communications, not medicine or science.
Why is that important? There are intellligent people beyond the scientific world who can also put two and two together to make four.
Janet, 4:20PM
An excellent point. What difference does it make? If the woman can source what she says and back it up and no one can disprove what she says, why does it matter what her PhD is in?
By the way, is any issue made of the fact that Kinsey was a zoologist? His credentials to study human sexuality arose from watching the monkeys or what?
I feel ill after watching that. :(
I heard some snippets of this when I was in my college psych courses (12 years ago), but that was just awful. God help us.
“By the way, is any issue made of the fact that Kinsey was a zoologist? His credentials to study human sexuality arose from watching the monkeys or what?”
Well, Mary, if you believe in evolution from apes to humans, perhaps it just becomes a “logical” progression (since people start acting like animals once they believe they’re no different than animals)? (Just a guess on my part.)
Interesting, at the same time Kinsey was doing his research on homosexuality another researcher was looking into this same area. They found only 1 percent of the population to be homosexual. If you read Judith’s book, you will see that Kinsey’s researchers determined if an individual was homosexual, not the individual. And they determined you were homosexual if you were molested/attacked by someone of the same sex even if you were not a willing party.
janie, you mentioned her citations but you can take the most random things, cite them, and spin them to say what you want.
HisMan wrote,
“Matthew 18:6 “but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
I could cite this as saying non-Christians who have children should be drowned, because bringing a baby into this world into a non-Christian life is leading them down the wrong path.
See I cited HisMan. Now everyone is going to hate me for Bible bashing. I really don’t have a problem with the Bible I just wanted to make a point. I’m sorry if I hurt anyone’s feelings.
Also, that was the quoted from Jesus? I’m assuming it is, but if it is why are there three different versions of it? I feel like over time and translations some of the real meanings and messages have gotten a bit muddled.
Janie, while I believe Kinsey’s research was vastly over exaggerated, I wanted to point out that today researchers differentiate between homosexuals, which are people who are self-identified as preferring a same sex partner over opposite sex, and men who have sex with men (MSM) or women who have sex with women (WSW).
The reality is that humans often do engage in sexual acts with persons of the same gender, while not identifying as gay or bisexual. Kinsey made the mistake of identifying them as homosexuals, which led to his very high numbers, contrasting those of other researchers who sought out self-identifying homosexuals rather than persons who perform homosexual acts.
Also, I think the fact that Reisman used citations to back up her information is fine enough. One does not need to be a doctor or historian to compile sources and write an article, as we journalists do all the time. It is the duty of such writers to understand the subject matter and have credentialed research backing up the points he or she is trying to make.
If the only credible sources we could use had to be experts in the field, a good percentage of our media would disappear. Doctors and historians often don’t have the time or passion to write books and articles to fill our world with information, which is why journalists do it.
I haven’t read anything by Reisman (and the videos won’t play on my computer for some reason) so I don’t know if she is a trusted source of information, but I wouldn’t write her off just because her degree is in Communications. If anything, that makes her more credible in my eyes, since she knows what good research is and how to communicate effectively.
But I make no judgments. I’ll have to see what she’s written first.
“The reality is that humans often do engage in sexual acts”
not with children though…not normal humans.
http://www.cwfa.org/kinsey.asp
FYI Edyt:
Some of the Net-articles on Reisman from supporters identify her as a psychiatrist. There are a few, not just causal commentors, but the “official” pages themselves. While one can’t be responsible for everything written about oneself, I can’t help but wonder why she hasn’t sought correction of those “official” items.
It also seems Reisman has a very emotional ax to grind. She had a child who was molested by another child. Molester’s home had Playboy in it. Resiman’s child dies years later of a brain aneurysm – Reisman blames Kinsey.
There is another not-all-favourable book out there on Kinsey by James H Jones. A side by side comparison would be interesting.
from: http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/controversy%202.htm
“Allegations about Childhood data in the 1948 book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
Allegations against Alfred Kinsey and his research on children’s sexual responses, as reported in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, were first made in 1981 by Dr. Judith Reisman. She subsequently enlarged on these ideas in a book written jointly with Edward Eichel and published in 1990 (Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud). When The Kinsey Institute responded, Reisman filed suit in 1991 against The Kinsey Institute, then director June Reinisch, and Indiana University, alleging defamation of character and slander. In September 1993, Reisman’s lawyer withdrew from the case, and in June 1994 the court dismissed Reisman’s case with prejudice (which means that Reisman is prohibited from refiling the suit).
Below is a reiteration of these accusations, recently reported, and the Institute’s response.
The act of encouraging pedophiles to rape innocent babies and toddlers in the names of “science” offends. The act of protecting them from prosecution offends. The act of falsifying research findings which, in turn, open the floodgates for the sexual abuse of children, offends. (from Dr. Laura’s (Schlesinger) website)
This would be a cause of great concern if it were true. Kinsey was not a pedophile in any shape or form. He did not carry out experiments on children; he did not hire, collaborate, or persuade people to carry out experiments on children. He did not falsify research findings and there is absolutely no evidence that his research “opened flood gates for the sexual abuse of children.” Kinsey did talk to thousands of people about their sex lives, and some of the behaviors that they disclosed, including abuse of children, were illegal. In fact, many sexual behaviors, even those between married adults, were illegal in the 1940’s and 1950’s. Without confidentiality, it would have been impossible to investigate the very private lives of Americans then, and even now.”
Visit the site, read the facts.
“Table 34. Examples of multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males. Some instances of higher frequencies” (Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, 1948). How were these figures gleaned?
AGE NO. OF ORGASMS TIME INVOLVED
5 mon. 3 ?
11 mon. 10 1 hr.
11 mon. 14
7 38 min.
9 min.
2 yr. 11 65 min.
2.5 yr. 4 2 min.
4 yr. 6 5 min.
4 yr. 17 10 hr.
4 yr. 26 24 hr.
7 yr. 7 3 hr.
8 yr. 8 2 hr.
9 yr. 7 68 min.
10 yr. 9 52 min.
10 yr. 14 24 hr.
11 yr. 11 1 hr.
11 yr. 19 1 hr.
12 yr. 7 3 hr.
12 yr. 3
9 3 min.
2 hr.
12 yr. 12 2 hr.
12 yr. 15 1 hr.
13 yr. 7 24 min.
13 yr. 8 2.5 hr.
13 yr. 9 8 hr.
13 yr. 3
11
26 70 sec.
.8 hr.
24 hr.
14 yr. 11 4 hr.”
http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/reisman.html
How do you think they were gleaned, Phylo?
And, even if Kinsey didn’t hire people to molest children to glean the results, but only relied on the testimony of pedophiles…who trusts a pedophile to give them accurate and reliable information on the sexual reactions of a child to being molested? And who asks those kinds of questions?
did you hear the description of the so called “orgasm’s” the children experienced? Sounded terrifying.
“Extreme tension with violent convulsion”… “mouth distorted ……. tongue protruding” … “eyes staring”… “violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children)”. . . “extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting of subject” . . . “excruciating pain and may scream if movement is continued” . . . “will fight away from the partner.”
And who, when given this type of information, considers the above description to be a response of “ORGASM”??? It’s just disgusting. Disgusting. Disgusting.
“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.”
This is from the page you brought up, “defending” Kinsey, Phylo. How does this make him look better? He interviewed pedophiles so that he could use their lies to bring forth “data” to make other people believe that children somehow ENJOY the experience of being molested. What a sicko!
Bethany:
This information can be found in the link I posted. It’s from the Indiana U/Kinsey Institute. But here’s the excerpt:
“Where did Kinsey’s information about children’s sexual responses come from?
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.”
Remember, this was the 1930’s and early 40’s. There were parents who punished infants for
sexual self-stimulation, e.g touching themselves or rubbing on their crib. And we’ve all heard those silly stories promulgated in the past about masturbation = blindness. Punishment for a natural behavior is harmful, like hitting a left handed child until they use their right hand. I mean, how do you “punish” an infant anyway?
I didn’t say the Jones’ book defended Kinsey, just that it was possible to write critically without demonizing as Reisman has done.
Phylosopher, I already read the link you cited. All I saw was “the say this, but we say that.”
There was no evidence of anything they stated, and I thought it was a very poor rebuttal all in all. Especially since they ADMIT that he used pedophiles in his research!
They surely could have done better if Kinsey was indeed innocent of the claims.
By the way, it isn’t “demonizing” if it’s true.
I mean, how do you “punish” an infant anyway?
Maybe by molesting them for a survey.
Phylo, does this sound like an orgasm to you?
Extreme tension with violent convulsion”… “mouth distorted ……. tongue protruding” … “eyes staring”… “violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children)”. . . “extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting of subject” . . . “excruciating pain and may scream if movement is continued” . . . “will fight away from the partner.”
Here
Bethany, look at what we each posted. The part about “from parents observations and adults recalling their own childhood” was right above what you (selectively)posted.
The Kinsey Institute at Indiana University holds all of Kinsey’s documents. The page is a summary for the casual reader – not a footnoted dissertation.
He didn’t experiment on children, he took reports -in some cases, he didn’t have direct contact with the individual.
Want more info, read the Institute site yourself- with an open mind, if that’s possible.
Bethany, look at what we each posted. The part about “from parents observations and adults recalling their own childhood” was right above what you (selectively)posted.
And?
He didn’t experiment on children, he took reports -in some cases, he didn’t have direct contact with the individual.
He took reports from PEDOPHILES, Phylo. Yes or no?
What kind of a sicko does that?
By the way, you have not answered my question about whether the above sounds like an “orgasm”.
from parents observations and adults recalling their own childhood
Yeah, cause most adults recall their 5 month and 1st year clearly!
Want more info, read the Institute site yourself- with an open mind, if that’s possible.
An open mind? Towards pedophilia?
Bystnader,
If I didn’t have to spend so much time running two businesses, doing ministry support and the like I’d spend my time debating your inane logic and path to insanity.
I ask valid questions and you return with insults. Why? Because you have no relevant answer to the truth.
That’s what all you pro-abort leftists ever do because you have no answer for the truth.
You see, Bi-stander, truth is truth, it is not relative, it is not subjective, it is not dependent on the the times or the seasons, nor is it based on popular opinion. Abortion is wrong because it is the taking of an innocent life and an affront to the the expression of God’s will. No matter how you try to twist, mold, bend, and distort that truth it will always be wrong and a grievous sin against the heart of God.
When you finally come to a point in your life when your body and soul and conscience no longer have the strength to deny the truth, you will either seek mercy from Him in humility and repentance or, it is you who will be seeking out medication, either consciously or unconsciously, to calm the inexorable fear in your heart about facing a Holy God.
Phylo, why does Paul Gebhard (a later director of the Kinsey Institute) admit that pedophiles were being timed with stopwatches to do their surveys?
Why would he lie about that?
Interviewer: “So, do pedophiles normally go around with stopwatches?”
Dr. Paul Gebhard: “Ah, they do if we tell them we’re interested in it!”
*********
Interviewer: “And clearly, [the orgasms of] at least 188 children were timed with a stopwatch, according to….”
******
Dr. Gebhard: “So, second hand or stopwatch. OK, well, that’s, ah, you refreshed my memory. I had no idea that there were that many.”
Interviewer: “These experiments by pedophiles on children were presumably illegal.”
Dr. Gebhard: “Oh yes.”
********
Also C.A. Tripp, who was close colleague of Kinseys, admitted on Phil Donahue:
[Reisman is] talking about data that came from pedophiles, that he [Kinsey] would listen only to pedophiles who were very careful, used stopwatches, knew how to record their thing, did careful surveys….[T]hey were trained observers.
(emphasis mine)
“from parents observations
By the way, obviously, the “parent observations” could easily be another way to cover up for “pedophile”. After all, many pedophiles are indeed the parents.
Also, were the adults recalling their childhood experiences, themselves past victims of abuse?
Bethany,
Thank you for your info although the charting of “orgasms” in children and the descriptions makes me ill. Dear Lord, who can defend this man and what he has done in the name of “research”???
Well, a couple people can.
Hisman 10:33 I have no interest in debating people who are delusional and think they are God or speak for God.
Please direct your rants at others, as I will not read or address them.
“Did Kinsey address abortion? Sorry if I’m missing something obvious – don’t have sound on this computer.”
Carder: This is not a direct answer to your question, Doug, but here’s a quote from Part 2, which, by the way, goes into detail how Kinsey enabled the Abortion movement to gain foothold.
“Alfred Kinsey worked with Planned Parenthood to create SICUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States. And so the Kinsey model of child sexuality derived from the actual molestation of kids became the animated principal behind most sex education until abstinence programs came along.”
Given the enthusiasm PP has shown to “educate” children about their sexuality, this doesn’t surprise me at all.
Thanks, Carder. I don’t think what was said there necessarily follows, i.e. that his model was from molested kids (and from nothing else), and that it became the “animated principle,” but I’ll try and listen to it myself.
Do you think there is no value in studying pedophiles, to better understand their behaviors and prevent future abuse?
Let’s see, fairplay. A study that shows that children supposedly feel “pleasure” when they’re molested. is that likely to reduce or help along future abuse?? Think about it.
Besides, the study wasn’t about pedophiles, it was about the VICTIMS. Pay attention.
Thank you for your info although the charting of “orgasms” in children and the descriptions makes me ill.
Carla, me too. It makes me want to vomit.
Bethany, Thanks for your comments.
My questions to anyone who supports Kinsey’s work:
What good came of these studies? (Not that these people would even recognize anything “good”.)
Were criminal charges brought upon any of these alleged sex offenders?
Could we blame Kinsey’s reports in part for the sexual abuse scandals that occurred in the Catholic Church in the 1960’s and 1970’s? (That never occurred to me until just now, but why not?) Kinsey brought the reality of sexual deviance to the attention of mainstream America, in a way making it acceptable behavior.
Fair play, Studying pedophiles and putting them in the position to commit a crime are two different things. Kinsey obviously crossed the line. How anyone could allow what he allowed to go on in the name of science is beyond me and inexcusable. Scientists today still wonder why their motives are questioned?
Phylo, Do you have a personal interest in Kinsey’s studies? How would you answer my questions?
Good questions, Janet. :)
I’ve finally watched both videos. Reisman has an agenda, and nothing she said about abortion really pertained to the Roe case.
One the biggest misconceptions I frequently see is that “10% of the population is homosexual.” That did come from Kinsey and resulted from his methods of research which were certainly not always scientifically valid.
I think it’s now said to be around 3%.
Janet, the good that came from Kinsey’s work is that it at least made us think more about ourselves, rather than have our heads in the sand, as a good bit of society did for a long time concerning sex.
I certainly do think he was wrong in not turning in child abusers.
Nothing Kinsey did was good. It was not concerning sex. It was concerning the physical reactions of children when raped by pedophiles!!!
But use a stopwatch, a chart and some written observations and you’ve got yourself some scientific research.
Thinking more about ourselves should not come at the cost of the lives of children at the hands of perverted adults.
Janet, the good that came from Kinsey’s work is that it at least made us think more about ourselves, rather than have our heads in the sand, as a good bit of society did for a long time concerning sex.
So we all know more about perverted sex. Who cares? Isn’t the well-being of our children more important?
Carla, Amen!
“Janet, the good that came from Kinsey’s work is that it at least made us think more about ourselves, rather than have our heads in the sand, as a good bit of society did for a long time concerning sex.”
So we all know more about perverted sex. Who cares? Isn’t the well-being of our children more important?
But of course in no way was that all it was.
But of course in no way was that all it was.
Posted by: Doug at July 4, 2008 9:37 AM
What else was it? And was that more important somehow than the well-being of our children?
And was that more important somehow than the well-being of our children?
Janet, you’d have to quantify just how much good and bad was accomplished, a mighty subjective thing. Kinsey did bring some things to light that were helpful to some people, and for many people to know.
That said, I agree the guy was a weirdo, and he shouldn’t have dealt with child abusers without turning them in.
What else was it?
He wrote ‘Sexual Behavior in the Human Male’ and later the one for the ‘Female’ and Wikipedia says they are the best-selling scientific books of all time. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but many people’s eyes were opened at a time when they needed opening.
Again, not saying it was good for everyone, but it was for many.
He was a sick, sick man.
Grouch.