Share this page
Follow Salvo online
Prior to 1950, American common law criminalized non-marital sex as a costly burden on society and on the children of “illicit” unions. Society had an authentic interest in sexual conduct. Only marriage provided for progeny, secured the orderly generational passage of property, and created a stable community.
In 1997, biographer James Jones, Ph.D., wrote that the celebrated sex “researcher” Alfred Kinsey “was a crypto-reformer who spent his every waking hour attempting to change the sexual mores and sex offender laws of the United States.” He also noted that
There is no way that the American public in the 1940s and the 1950s would have sanctioned any form of behavior that violated middle class morality on the part of the scientist who was telling the public that he was disinterested and giving them the simple truth. . . . [A]ny feature of this private life that violated middle class morality would have been catastrophic for his career.
Kinsey married, said Jones, “to preserve his public image . . . at all costs.” Jones documented Kinsey’s homosexual, masturbatory, sadomasochistic, and pornography addictions.
In Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953), Kinsey justified decriminalizing fornication, cohabitation, seduction, alienation of affection, adultery, sodomy, abortion, and pornography. He also supported lowering the age of consent, trivializing rape, “no-fault” divorce, and sexually graphic sex education, among other things.
Kinsey & the Gestapo
This “most famous man in the world for a decade,” was exposed in a 1998 Yorkshire (England) television documentary called Kinsey’s Paedophiles for directing pedophile rapists who produced the infamous “Table 34”(see p. 7) on child sexuality in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. In his Yorkshire interview Jones admits that “kids” (as young as 2 months old, Table 31) were used by “nine” adult males for Kinsey Institute child experiments. Jones writes,
Kinsey . . . gives pretty graphic descriptions of their response to what he calls sexual stimulation. If you read those words, you will see that he is talking about kids who are screaming. Kids who are protesting in every way they can the fact that their bodies or their persons are being violated.
In his Male book, Kinsey callously wrote of what made for the most reliable research:
Better data on preadolescent climax come from the histories of adult males who have had sexual contacts with younger boys and who, with their adult backgrounds, are able to recognize and interpret the boys’ experiences. . . . 9 of our adult male subjects have observed such orgasm . . . on 317 preadolescents . . . observed in contacts with other boys or other adults.
One of those reliable adult males, according to the Yorkshire television investigators, was Dr. Fritz Von Balluseck—a member of the German Gestapo. In 1957 Balluseck, originally arrested (but acquitted) for a child sex murder, was tried and convicted in Germany for having “violated children over three decades.” According to the German newspaper National-Zeitung:
The Nazis knew and gave him the opportunity to practice his abnormal tendencies in occupied Poland on Polish children, who had to choose between Balluseck and the gas ovens. After the war, the children were dead, but Balluseck lived. (May 15, 1957).
Balluseck recorded data from his sex with children, just as did the Kinsey Institute “researchers.” In the year of his trial, Berlin newspaper headlines revealed that “Balluseck corresponded with the American Kinsey Institute for some time, and had also got books from them which dealt with child sexuality” (Tagespiegel, October 1, 1957).
Kinsey apparently was very interested in Balluseck’s “data” gleaned from raping Polish and, later, German children:
The connection with Kinsey, towards whom he’d showed off his crimes, had a disastrous effect on [Balluseck]. . . . [I]n his diaries he’d stuck in the letters from the sex researcher Kinsey, in which he’d been encouraged to continue his research. . . . He also started relationships to expand his researches. One shivers to think of the lengths he went to. (Tagespiegel, May 17, 1957)
As to adult males, Kinsey and his team stated that 95 percent of the men of “the greatest generation” engaged in what was considered “deviant” sex. Kinsey’s sample population? Paul Gebhard, Kinsey’s co-author and later director of the Kinsey Institute, explained that, since most of their interviews took place during World War II, their team used “inmates” and 1,400 sex offenders as their “normal” male population. Just after the Male volume was published, Kinsey told a California judicial sex-crime committee that their research represented “the population as a whole.” Really?
In 2004, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which represents 2,400 state legislators, noted that, of the more than 5,000 men who made up Kinsey’s research base:
2,446 were designated as convicts, 1,003 homosexuals, 50 transvestites, 117 mentally ill, 342 “Other,” 650 sexually abused boys. This yielded 4,608 n=Aberrant, and 873 n=“Normal” Male subjects.
I was ALEC’s scientific advisor on junk science. After I proved the Kinsey Institute’s child abuse, ALEC published in its April 2004 issue of The State Factor a study by Dr. Linda Jeffrey called “Restoring Legal Protections for Women and Children: A Historical Analysis of the States’ Criminal Codes.” This issue of The State Factor called upon legislators to revisit all laws based on Kinsey’s “research.” California state Senator Ray Haynes, former ALEC president and California Republican Whip, wrote in the study’s Introduction:
Today Kinsey’s “junk science” is the unquestioned foundation for all the legal, legislative and media debate on marriage and civil unions. . . . [This report] reveals compelling evidence of illegal and criminal acts masquerading as science. . . . Professor of Constitutional law Dr. Charles Rice of Notre Dame concluded that Alfred Kinsey’s research was “contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty.”
Another ALEC finding noted how the American Law Institute’s “Model Penal Code” (ALIMPC) of 1955, which was largely based on Kinsey’s data, influenced the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned anti-sodomy laws:
The ALI Model Penal Code Reporters cite Kinsey’s junk science claiming that in 1955 . . . “37% of the total male population has at least some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm between adolescence and old age. This accounts for nearly 2 males out of every 5 that one may meet.” In spite of its reliance on junk science, this section of the Model Penal Code was cited favorably by the Supreme Court to normalize sodomy on June 26, 2003.
In a 1952 issue of the Harvard Law Review, Herbert Wechsler called for Kinsey’s data to become part of the law, saying that common law penal codes were ineffective. Also in the 1950s, major state sex-offense commissions suddenly appeared, quoting Kinsey that all sex crimes were “normal,” so all sex offenders warranted therapy and parole. The 1955 ALIMPC called for the legalization of seduction, fornication, cohabitation, adultery, sodomy, and other practices that were largely illegal pre-Kinsey. Such measures would turn “public morals” into private battles of “he saysshe says.” Also, the new “privacy” view meant that all sex acts should be legitimated—even rape and sado-masochistic abuse—unless a victim could prove non-consensual injury with witnesses and within a designated time.
The “sexual offenses” reforms called for in the ALIMPC eventually led bamboozled judiciaries and legislatures in every state to eliminate or lighten sexual and reproductive common law standards. By 1980 the ALIMPC was carried partially or totally by all state legislatures.
With sex laws thus gutted, radical sex educators proceeded to mug marriage and the family. Experts demanded school sex education, ostensibly to reduce crime. Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Union, which became Planned Parenthood, joined with groups like SIECUS (the Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S.) to spread Kinseyan school sex-education programs under the guise of “health” or “family life education” (less threatening to parents and teachers).
By the late 1960s, Kinseyan “sex educators” were beginning to teach schoolchildren capricious sex (“make love not war”), thus spawning bloated rates of sexual disease, crime, and misery, with accompanying public health costs. Pornographers teamed up with radical feminists, homosexual activists, and sex educators to spread their poisonous influence, even going so far as to proclaim marriage as “legalized rape” and prostitution.
Haynes said that Kinsey helped to weaken or gut 52 sex laws that had protected marriage and the family. From 1970 to 1980, 48 states, using the bogus sexuality data, adopted forms of “no fault” divorce, resulting in the impoverishment of single mothers and ongoing tragedy for children.
In 2004 ALEC told legislators that its April issue of The State Factor was
a valuable reference and resource for your work in government. . . . Understanding how junk sex science deformed our thinking and laws is vital. . . . Only if enough legislators call attention to Kinsey’s questionable findings can we start to reverse the misguided assault on American law and way of life . . . [and] repeal laws and public policies based on “junk science.”
But this was only the most recent appeal to reverse Kinseyan policies. In 1995, a bill was introduced in Congress, the “Ethics in Education Act,” that had 51 federal legislative co-sponsors. The summary statement for H.R. 2749 indicated that the purpose of the bill was
To determine if Alfred Kinsey’s “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male” and/or “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” are the result of any fraud or criminal wrongdoing. Directs: (1) the Comptroller General to complete such study and report to the Congress by May 1, 1996; and (2) the Secretary of Education, if the Comptroller General’s determination is in the affirmative, to ensure that for FY 1997 and subsequent fiscal years no Federal funds are provided to any persons or institutions for any educational purpose which instruct in Kinsey’s work, derivative Kinseyan scholars, or scholarship without indicating the unethical and tainted nature of the Kinsey report.
Will anyone dare resurrect H.R. 2749 today, demanding justice for children and the exposure and rejection of Kinsey’s fraud?
Many years have passed since hundreds of abused children—here in America, in Germany, and in the concentration camps in Poland—became Kinsey’s child sexuality “data,” but justice demands repudiation of the man, his lies, and the laws that were based upon his lies. •
If you enjoyed this article from Salvo magazine, please consider contributing to our matching grant fundraising effort. All gifts will be matched dollar for dollar! Thanks for your continued support.
© 2014 Salvo magazine. Published by The Fellowship of St. James. All rights reserved.