The American entomologist Alfred Charles Kinsey (1894-1956), who is called the “father of sexology” and the “father of the American sexual revolution”, established “scientific” foundation for medical recovery of homosexuality. Despite the frank delirium and obsolescence of Kinsey’s works, venerable scientists and ordinary propagandists continue to refer to his works up to now. In view of odiousness and significance of this person it is necessary to give review of his personality and activity.
As a child, Kinsey loved nature very much and by the age of twenty decided to devote himself to study insects. Very soon he paid his attention to gall wasps (either a fly or a wasp), which he “maniacally” studied for 20 years. By the age of forty, the “flies” had left Kinsey’s head and he became seriously interested in human sexual behavior. In the late 30s, after the first reports on sexology, he attracted attention of John Davison Rockefeller, Jr., who at that time was already active in reducing the birth rate, and since 1941 Kinsey has been receiving a lot of money from Rockefeller funds for his “researches” (1).
In 1948 he published the book “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male”, and in 1953 – “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female”, known today as “Kinsey Reports”. They became bestsellers, or rather, their patrons made them so in order to form public opinion. The report about men was sold in astonishing 200,000 copies within two months. For your information, the well-known propagandist of incest and pedophilia Wardell Baxter Pomeroy was a co-author of his books. In these reports a group led by Kinsey (it’s called as Kinsians) talked about the sexual behavior of children and adults, 13.5 thousand people took part in this analysis. (5.5 thousand of men, 6 thousand of women, 2 thousand children of both sexes). The books caused a storm in American society, some screamed about the revolution, others insisted on the inadmissibility and proved inconsistency of the results. There was a war of liberal reformers (client and patrons of the former entomologist) against conservatives (religious groups, adequate scientists and reasonable people). By the mid-70s it became clear to everyone that the former defeated the latter.
Some data taken from the reports:
- 95% of men practice “sexual perversions and illicit relationships” (note: at that time adultery was criminalized in the United States);
- 8% of men surveyed reported sexual contact with animals;
- 17% of farm boys had experienced sex with animals;
- 10% of men have practiced homosexual relationships for at least 3 years during their lifetime (between 16 and 55 years);
- 25% of men between the ages of 16 and 55 had several homosexual contacts;
- 18% had the same number of homo- and heterosexual contacts for at least 3 years;
- 4% of men are exclusively homosexuals;
- 37% of men had at least one homosexual contact with orgasm during their lifetime (only 48%);
- 19% of women under 40 had at least one homosexual contact, including 13% with orgasm;
- up to 3% of unmarried women aged 20 to 35 were exclusively lesbian;
- 1% of women are exclusively lesbians;
- 12% of women and 22% of men experience “erotic arousal from a sadomasochistic story”;
- 85% of men and 48 % of women said they’d had premarital sex;
- 50% of men and 40 % of women had been unfaithful after marriage;
- 69% of men had prostitutes;
- 25% of wives abort;
- 85% single pregnant women abort.
Implicit in Kinsey’s report was the notion that these behaviors were biologically “normal” and hurt no one. Therefore, people should act on their impulses with no inhibition or guilt (2).
Kinsey was particularly interested in children, the “child orgasm” was studied starting from infancy. There are six varieties of it: 1). Genital reactions – 22%; 2). Weak torso tension – 45%; 3). The strongest tension and sharp spasms – 17%; 4). The same as item 1 or item 2, but with hysterical laughter or chatter, sado-masochistic reactions – 5%; 5). The same as item 5, but at the peak of tension, strong trembling, exhaustion, exsanguination, some degree of fainting – 3%; 6). Painful, fearful encounter of orgasm – they fight off their partners, aggressively prevent orgasm, torment and even scream to meet the usual touch – 8%.
Kinsey claims that “orgasm” in children is noted at any age, in boys, starting at five months, and in girls – from four. It indicates a certain record – one 4-year-old boy experienced 26 orgasms per day, there is also a 13-year-old teenager with 30 orgasms per day.
In the article “Funding a Sexual Revolution: The Kinsey Reports”, posted on the Rockefeller Archive Center website, says: “The most well-known of the study’s conclusions asserts that only ten percent of the human population is fully heterosexual, and likewise only ten percent is exclusively homosexual. The rest of the population is spread across a “continuum” at points somewhere in between. This assertion transformed American society by challenging American attitudes toward sexual normalcy”. I note that the delusional myth about “10% homosexuals” still exists. In fact, only about 1% of the adult population (USA, France, Britain) demonstrates exclusively same-sex behavior (3).
Even for today’s reader such studies may seem shocking, imagine now what feelings the reports aroused among Americans in the middle of the last century. How did the Kinsians manage to get such results?
1. Inadequate sampling. Pseudo-scientists and LGBT agents hastened to impose (the principle of extrapolation) the results of the reports on the whole society and not only the American one. In other words, if Kinsey has 8% of the men surveyed told about intercourse with animals, then 8% of American men are zoophiles, if 10% of the male participants in the study reported long-term same-sex behavior, then 10% of the male population of the Earth are homosexuals. However, the sexologist Igor Kon notes (4): “it is impossible to give out purely local, scientifically untested views for implementation of the principles of the world medical community.”
It is known for certain that the participants (sampling) of the studies were volunteers who were recruited in prisons, psychiatric clinics, brothels, gay bars and other places of various kinds of declassified element. In 2004 the American Council on Legislative Exchanges (ALEC), representing 2,400 state legislators, noted that of the more than 5000 men who made up Kinsey’s research base: 2,446 were found convicted, 1,003 homosexuals, 50 transvestites, 117 mentally ill, 342 “Others”, 650 sexually abused boys. This gave 4608 n = Deviant and 873 n = “Normal” male subjects (5), including 5% of the sampling consisted of male prostitutes and 26% of men who committed sexual crimes. In total, the group consisted of conditionally “normal” men is only 16%.
In an attempt to justify such an inadequate sampling, the Kinsians claim that it was difficult to find suitable respondents during the World War. Do you believe in this kindergarten located in the meadow? I don’t. The war was only against the USSR and only in the USSR. Even France, which went down without any fight within two months, lived under the German “occupation”, and it got even more order, including in dirty French brothels. Moreover, the war in no way affected the territory of the United States. Moreover, the Rockefellers never spared money for “philanthropy”, and Kinsey had enough resources to form a sampling that met the scientific principles of that time.
When interpreting data, especially these ones, many fall into a trap that can be avoided if you know that there is homosexual behavior and homosexual passion. There are quite a few people who are attracted, but have never entered into contact. On the contrary, there are situations when people enter into contact without having homosexual attraction. For example, according to V. Ovchinnikov’s review 65% of convicts in high-security prisons had homosexual relations, while there were 2.5 times more active than passive ones (6). But propaganda knocks everything into a pile and gives out any homosexual relationships, sometimes forced, for homosexuality as such.
2. Kinsey’s pedophiles. Critics claim that data on children’s “orgasms” could have been obtained by Kinsey’s participation in pedophilic acts, including children being raped. When viewing reports, such an impression really arises, it’s too painful there everything is spelled out in detail. But in attempts to justify the Kinsians say that only materials provided by a group of real pedophiles (diaries, letters, etc.) were used.
It is known that Kinsey collaborated with at least 9 pedophiles, among them there was the Gestapo Fritz von Balluseck, an inveterate pedophile convicted of having carried out sexual violence against children for more than thirty years. There is also evidence that Kinsey directly encouraged pedophiles to “research child sexuality”. Kinsey calls “child orgasm” screams, resistance, an abundance of tears, a painful reaction, fear … what is it like a child’s reaction to violent actions? Did the Kinsians rape children, including infants, or did they contribute to it? Is this approach ethical?
3. Doubtfulness of revelations made by volunteers. As noted above, sampling consisted of conditionally “normal” men by only 16%. How can we consider these reports reliable? Normal person doesn’t want to tell the truth voluntarily about some secret episodes of his sexual biography, especially to a person of the early 40s of the last century. Obviously, this group of “normal” consisted of such people who had experience of various forms of sodomy and for one reason or another wanted to share it with the others.
By the way, modern rules for the formation of an adequate sampling exclude participation of respondents from a number of professions, for example, marketers, journalists and other people who intentionally or unwittingly may not say what they really think, but what is appropriate.
Critics of the Kinsey methodology report (7) that when the interviewees “answered negatively to questions about certain “progressive forms” of sexual behavior, stimulation measures were applied to them (censure of “secrecy” and encouragement for “frankness”), and if this did not help, the doctor personally edited the answers, making “statistical correction for denial”.
Familiarization with the sources confirms the version that the work of the Kinsey’s group had a secret component, including one in relation to children.
Famous scientists repeatedly warned the Rockefeller Foundation that Kinsey’s pseudoscience was a direct deception (8), but the generous sponsor did not listen to anyone.
The consequences of the activities performed by the Kinsians and their masters are destructive: the medical and legal recovery of homosexual relationship “Portrayed throughout the media and academic scholarship as a conservative, husband and father, Kinsey was in reality an obsessive bi/homosexual, a masturbator, adulterer, exhibitionist and pornographic “film maker” and addict whose research aim was to prove the normality of his many illegal obsessions. These truths are still hidden in mainstream and official scholarly publications,” said Judith A. Reisman and Mary E. McAlister (9).
Kinsian pseudoscience has also come in handy when changing the American legislation. When Kinsey was made quite famous, The American Law Institute (an NGO from large capital) was involved in the case, where in 1955, with the money given by the Rockefeller Foundation (a grant of 510 thousand USD), they developed the Model Penal Code (10) – this is a sample of criminal legislation for state governments. Code “called for the legalization of seduction, fornication, cohabitation, adultery, sodomy, and other practices that were largely illegal pre-Kinsey,” points out a historian Judith Reisman. Kinsey helped to weaken or gut 52 sex laws that had protected marriage and the family. From 1970 to 1980 48 states, using the false sexuality data, adopted forms of “no fault” divorce.
“A clear goal was set: to achieve the abolition or radical revision of laws, rules and legal norms concerning rape in all its forms, child molestation, prostitution, homosexuality, bestiality, exhibitionism, incest, polygamy and polyandry, hooliganism and profanity, pornography, adultery, extramarital cohabitation, etc. If, for example, a conviction for rape — a particularly serious crime according to the standard of customary law — in three states entailed the inevitable death penalty, in 20 states — the possibility of a death sentence, and in all others except one — at least a twenty-year sentence, then after the writings of Dr. Kinsey, everything changed dramatically,” said Mark Markish (11).
Yes, Kinsey’s followers “cleaned up” the sampling after 30 years, reducing it significantly. But who needs it, who will expose a “clean” group consisting of people with uncertain motivation? The job is done, Kinsey can rest in peace.
Historian of science Kersten Jacobson Biehn notes (12): “Behavioral science research in American universities was promoted and influenced by philanthropic foundations. In the 1920s and 1930s Rockefeller philanthropies in particular financed behavioral science research projects that promised to fulfill their mandates to “improve mankind”, mandates that foundation officers transformed into an informal, loosely defined human engineering effort. Controlling behavior, especially sexual and social `disfunction’, was a major priority.” In particular, grants are received by Yale University President James R. Angell (psychologist), Frank Ambrose Beach (ethologist) and Robert M. Yerkes (psychologist, primatologist). The latter received 500 thousand USD from the Rockefeller Foundation (8.5 million USD today, taking into account inflation), with this huge amount of money in 1929 he founded the Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center, where, investigating the sexual behavior of chimpanzees, he tried to understand how things work in humans (13).
Another well-known historian and sexologist Vern Leroy Bullough (a very influential LGBT activist, propagandist of sodomy, transsexuality and pedophilia) writes (14) – “This meant that much sex research had been done on a shoestring and had lacked the kind of financial or institutional support that research in other areas received. Both the government and private foundations had been reluctant to give money to what might be called a “delicate topic.” There were individual exceptions, such as Reed Erickson and the Erickson Foundation which supported some of my own research as well as that of others, but most importantly, both in terms of quantity and quality of the research, there had been the Rockefellers and their various funds. Their importance is hard to overestimate. In fact, in the period between 1914 and 1954 the Rockefellers were almost the sole support of sex research in the United States. The decisions made by their scientific consultants about nature of the research to be supported and how it was to be conducted, as well as the topics eligible for research support, shaped the whole field of sex research and, in many ways, still continue to influence it.”
In this example we see that the first American studies on sexuality were paid for by the Rockefellers, and I have a reason to believe that they did it on a global scale. So it turns out that John Davison Rockefeller, Jr., Bureau of Social Hygiene, Committee for Research in Problems of Sex and Rockefeller Foundation were at the origins of funding the “scientific” base for “sexology”, the sexual revolution and for the LGBT movement.
In conclusion, I propose to think over the question: Who originally needed sexology? Let’s turn to the Wikipedia and highlight the personalities up to the middle of the last century, who laid the foundation of this “science”. Very quickly you will come to the conclusion that I did.
Sexology as a “science” was created by pervert men to justify their deviant behavior, which they declared the “norm” under the mask of science. In the beginning the first “sexologists” normalized homosexuality, then – trassexualism, and now their followers are working on the legalization of pedophilia, bestiality, cadaverism, BDSM and other the most disgusting perversions.
1. Financing the Sexual Revolution: Reports by Kinsey, Rachel Wimpey and Teresa Iacobelli, Rockefeller Archive Center (https://resource.rockarch.org/story/funding-a-sexual-revolution-the-kinsey-reports)
2. Kinsey’s Secret: The Fake Science of the Sexual Revolution, by Sue Ellen Browder, CatholicCulture.org (https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6036)
3. Prevalence and stability of components of sexual orientation In adolescence and adolescence, Ritch S. Savin-Williams, Jeffrey Rome (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6605886_Prevalence_and_Stability_of_Sexual_Orientation_Components_During_Adolescence_and_Young_Adulthood)
4. On recovery of homosexuality, Igor Kon (http://www.pseudology.org/kon/Articles/NormaGomosexuality.htm)
5. Sexual violence. Kinsey’s Lies Shaped American Law, And Now What?, Judith Raisman, Salvo Magazine, Issue 12, Spring 2010 (https://www.lifeissues.net/writers/reis/reis_11kinseylies.html)
6. Ovchinnikov V.I. Features of homosexuality in places of imprisonment // Psychiatry at the turn of the millennium. – Rostov-n/A: LNC “Phoenix”, 1999. – pp. 449-451.
7. The rhetoric of the homosexual movement in the light of scientific facts, Viktor Lysov (http://nkras.ru/arhiv/2019/lysov.pdf)
8. Fighting Kinsey Fraud, Interview with Dr. Judith Raisman (http://www.whale.to/b/reisman3.html)
9. Destroying Dignity by Eradicating Shame: The Pernicious Legacy of Alfred Kinsey, Judith A. Raisman, Mary E. McAllister, Humanum: Problems of Family, Culture and Science (https://humanumreview.com/articles/deconstructing-dignity-by-eradicating-shame-the-pernicious-heritage-of-alfred-kinsey)
10. Frank, John P. (1998) “American Law Institute, 1923-1998″, Hofstra Law Review: Volume 26: Iss. 3, Article 4 (http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol26/iss3/4)
11. Hieromonk Makarii (Markish). Lessons of love. Danilovsky evangelist. 2008, 250 p.
12. Bean, K. J. (2008). Psychobiology, Sex and Chimpanzee Studies: A charitable foundation supporting Behavioral Sciences at Yale University, 1923-41. History of the Humanities, 21(2), 21-43 (https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695108091411)
13. Stepanov S.S. The Century of Psychology: names and destinies; Yerkes, Robert Mearns, Encyclopedia.com (https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/yerkes-robert-mearns)
14. Bullough, V. L. (1985). Rockefellers and sex research. Journal of Sexual Research, 21(2), 113-125 (http://www.jstor.org/stable/3812475)