Sexual Abuse Damaging Generations of Children Funded by Rockefeller on Far Left of This Picture
Sunshine215.0 out of 5 stars The Pervert behind the 60’s Sex Revolution Reviewed in the United States on August 25, 2018Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase Ever wonder how they knew that boy babies and girl babies had orgasms? Everything you never wanted to know about creepy pedophile science behind the modern-day movement of free sex of the 60s!
Excerpt of Another Review
Dr. Reisman gives evidence that Alfred Kinsey may have been directly involved in child sex abuse (for his “research”), and she shows that he did work closely with pedophiles, even hiding the identity of a child murderer in a police investigation.
MR P GABEL5.0 out of 5 stars . I haven’t got around to reading it but … Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 15, 2015Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase .I haven’t got around to reading it but I am aware of Dr Judith Reismans lifetime campaign to raise awareness and to prosecute the Kinsey Institution for their fabricated data and child abuse. The FBI were ordered to stop supporting her case.Alfred Kinsey based his science on lies rape and torture.He also had laws changed..
“As a parent, it is absolutely chilling to me that these are the people who advise our education dept. on what is appropriate to teach our children regarding sexualality. “
Dr. Hany5.0 out of 5 stars A Great Research. Reviewed in the United States on January 4, 2017Format: Paperback
I tracks the satanic experiments performed by Kinsey who is the Dr. Jekyll of the sexual experimentation, on toddlers and very young Kids. These so-called experiments have been proven by the newest Neuropsychopathology research done at Harvard and Oxford University separately to cause severe damage to the dopaminergic receptors in the Nucleus Accumbens in the Septal Nuclei in the Prefrontal Cortex which in turns leads to a dysfunction in the cognitive capabilities of the person involved coupled with severe damage in the Prefrontal-Thalamo-Limbic Pathways that lead the person to become mentally and psychologically unable to form healthy relationships coupled with increase in perverted excessive sexual desires that lead in many cases to rape, sexual assault , inordinate desire for same sex relationships and severe violence in the sexual relationships.
Kinsey the Father of Child Sex Abuse and of Protecting Rapists/Pedophiles by Laws Citing His Research ALL Funded by Satanic Rockefeller
Stephen Hitchings4.0 out of 5 stars The Father of child abuse Reviewed in the United States on April 20, 2006Format: Paperback Many of us have wondered, as we behold the explosion of pornography, contraception, abortion, sexual abuse of children, the AIDS crisis and the legal “right” to all kinds of immoral practices over the past 50 years, “How did it come to this? How has our nation become so corrupted?” This is the book that answers that question.
Judith Reisman was a singer/songwriter/producer for American children’s television whose life seemed to be going wonderfully until she discovered that her 10-year-old daughter had been sexually abused by the 13-year-old son of family friends; but what horrified her almost as much as the abuse itself was the attitude of a respected aunt and an old friend, both of whom responded in almost identical words: that the girl may have been looking for it, because “children are sexual from birth”.
This set Reisman to search deeper into sexual abuse, until she found the source: the researches of Alfred Kinsey.
Kinsey was an unlikely revolutionary: a zoologist who studied wasps. In the 1930s he decided to apply the methods he had used with wasps to the study of human sexuality. His stated aim was to report on the sexual behaviour of normal Americans.
He interviewed thousands of people, asking them intimate and detailed questions about every aspect of their sexual lives. He was supported by generous grants from Indiana University, and later by grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. He published his findings in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in 1953.
Kinsey’s methods violated almost every principle of scientific research. He was so vague and even contradictory about his methods that his results could never be checked by independent scientists. He only published summaries of his results, never his actual data. He never even published his questionnaires, although he wrote that “The interviewer should not make it easy for a subject to deny his participation any form of sexual activity… We always assume that everyone has engaged in every type of activity.” He gave an example: “Yes, I know you have never done that, but how old were you the first time you did it?” This mode of questioning was designed to greatly inflate his figures for all kinds of practices.
Years later some men confessed they had told Kinsey the wildest stories they could think of, because that was what he wanted to hear.
He always claimed that his subjects were a representative sample of normal white Americans, but who were these “normal” subjects?
His first subjects were volunteers from a “marriage course” that he ran at the university. Psychologist Abraham Maslow warned him that most volunteers would be “high dominance”. In other words, people who volunteered to talk about their sexuality – especially in the relatively innocent 1940s – would be more unconventional and sexually aggressive than average students. When Kinsey refused to listen, Maslow encouraged his own students to volunteer for Kinsey’s survey, and found that over 90% of volunteers were “high dominance”, but still Kinsey ignored his advice.
The second group consisted of approximately 1400 prisoners, though he did not record whether a subject was a prisoner, a college student, or whatever. Even more seriously, he did not take a random sample of prisoners but specifically sought out sex offenders, particularly those who committed rarer (and thus more extreme) sexual crimes. He argued that criminals are no different from normal men – they are just the ones unlucky enough to get caught.
He also recruited hundreds of subjects through homosexual bars and bathhouses. In addition, he interviewed men and women from several institutions, including a number of “feeble-minded” subjects.
Less is known about his female subjects, though he admits to interviewing “burlesque performers”, models, artists, and “taxi dancers”. His difficulty in finding normal women is reflected in his decision to classify a “married” woman as a woman who had lived with a man for at least a year, even if she is a prostitute living with her pimp.
Instead of employing experienced researchers to help him, he selected young students who would be totally dependent on him. He would not employ anyone, even a cleaner, without first taking his sexual history. He put enormous pressure on his co-workers and their wives to allow themselves to be filmed in explicit sexual encounters. This not only gave him enormous power over them through the implicit threat of blackmail, but further skewed his results for “married” men and women.
Kinsey claimed that he was simply collecting data, but it is clear that he had an agenda: he wanted to prove that sexual behaviour in humans was the same as in animals, that all behaviours are normal, that there is no medical or other reason for forbidding incest, that all moral codes are wrong and all laws against sexual practices should be abolished.
His prejudice is reflected in his use of language. In well over a thousand pages of data on sexuality, he does not refer to love or childbirth, nor does he use the terms “mother” and “father”. The only time he uses the word “perversion” is to describe women sleeping in nightgowns!
There is little or no mention of jealousy, rape, venereal disease, pregnancy, abortion – anything that could give a negative impression about unbridled sex. Kinsey reduces everything to “contacts” with “partners”. Even a rape is classified as a “contact”. Any sexual activity involving children is classified as “sex play”, even if the child was raped.
His presentation of his results is a hopeless muddle. Page 5 of his first book has a map of the United States showing the location of approximately 21,350 subjects. However, on p.10 he says he interviewed 12,214 people. According to Clyde Martin, his statistician, the team interviewed 18,000 but only used data for about a quarter of them. Kinsey also gives figures of “about 6300 males”, of which 5300 are white males, and 7789 females, of which 1849 were removed because they were non-white or prison inmates – a total of about 12,240 subjects. According to a table showing their occupations, there are 4940 male subjects, while other tables show totals of 4120 and 4069. If Kinsey cannot be trusted to present something as simple as a consistent number of subjects, how can his results have any credibility?
The head of the Rockefeller Foundation’s Natural Science Division was appalled at the team’s sloppy statistical methods, yet the Foundation continued to finance the project. The American Statistical Association produced a 318-page book detailing the problems in Kinsey’s research, but this too appears to have been largely ignored.
The most sickening aspect of Kinsey’s research is his work on children. One table in his book is entitled “Pre-adolescent experience in orgasm”, based on the observations of 317 males aged 2 months to 15 years. (His description of “orgasm” in young children sounds more like extreme distress.) He also has tables labelled “Speed of pre-adolescent orgasm” and “Multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males”.
Incredibly, these were accepted simply as “scientific data”, with little or no recognition that Kinsey could only have obtained them through the abuse of hundreds of children. Kinsey even added: “The observers emphasise that there are some of these pre-adolescent boys (estimated by one observer to be less than one quarter of the cases), who fail to reach climax even under prolonged and varied and repeated stimulation.”
Kinsey’s associate Paul Gebhard later wrote of the child data: “Most of it was done by one individual, a man with scientific training, and not a known scientist. The other cases were done by parents, at our suggestion, and… by nursery school personnel.”
Kinsey regarded this “individual” as a hero because he had collected detailed data on sexual contacts with 800 children without getting caught, and offered him a substantial amount of money for his records.
Gebhard wrote that they had refused to cooperate with the police after interviewing a paedophile (possibly the individual already mentioned) who was responsible for the sex murder of a child.
Yet Kinsey wrote that it is difficult to understand why a child should be disturbed by sexual activity with an adult, and that a child molester “may have contributed favourably to their later sociosexual development.” He said that adult sexual approaches to children were harmless: of 1075 girls who had been sexually approached, only one had suffered a serious injury, “which, however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage.” Most of his data on this topic came from the paedophiles; Kinsey made no attempt to follow up on the children’s welfare.
The team asked for men having sexual contacts with young girls to keep records to help science. Although most of these victims are unknown, Reisman contacted a woman who had been abused from the age of 4 to12 by her father and grandfather, who both sent their observations to Kinsey. Her father took her to meet Kinsey, who asked her if she was happy; she said yes, as her father had instructed her. Her father later gave her a signed copy of Kinsey’s report to see her “contribution to science”.
Kinsey’s results are possibly what we would expect from a collection of sexually aggressive college students, active homosexuals, convicted sex criminals and paedophiles, especially given Kinsey’s fraudulent methods and creative statistics. The problem was that he insisted that these were “normal” Americans. His clear intention was to make homosexuality, incest and other perversions look respectable.
He asserted that 95% of American men had violated the law – 85% had premarital sex, 69% had patronised prostitutes, 45% had committed adultery, 10-37% had committed homosexual acts, and 17% had sex with animals! His most absurd claim was that only 4-6% of men are exclusively heterosexual, while 10% are exclusively homosexual and everyone else is somewhere in between.
He told the world that most women engaged in petting, premarital sex, adultery, masturbation and oral sex. Without any evidence at all, he argued that masturbation and premarital sex helped achieve a satisfactory sexual adjustment in marriage, especially for women. He was disappointed that so few girls had sex with animals.
In 1960 Drs Phyllis and Eberhard Kronhausen, who were fans Kinsey’s research, tried to validate it by interviewing 200 male college students; they found that the students considered premarital intercourse highly objectionable, that oral sex was very rare, sodomy and bestiality were unheard of, and that one student out of 200 was homosexual. An earlier investigation had found that even prostitutes were unwilling to engage in oral sex. Kinsey’s conclusions were completely invalid. And yet the world took him seriously.
The Rockefeller Foundation launched the Kinsey reports with unprecedented publicity. Suddenly everyone was talking about Kinsey. He was in constant demand as a speaker to groups of all sorts, often to massive audiences. He was called to give expert legal advice on sex crimes to courts and legislatures, and helped to reduce criminals’ sentences.
Kinsey’s influence on American law-making is profound. His name has been cited approximately almost 6000 times articles in American law journals since 1948 – far more often than any other social scientist. In 1989 a publication of the National Research Council divided America’s legal history into the “Pre-Kinsey” and “Post-Kinsey” eras.
He had scientifically “proven” that women are promiscuous, and that women, girls and even infants are unharmed by rape and sexual offences, so laws designed to protect them were pointless and even hypocritical. He had also proven that 95% of American men were sex offenders according to the current laws, and so the only alternatives were to prosecute 95% of the male population or to change the laws.
In 1955, the American Law Institute (ALI) released its “Model Penal Code”, using Kinsey as an authority to try to abolish or relax all laws relating to sexual offences, making the ridiculous claim that the sex offender is not likely to be a repeat offender. This Code has formed the basis of most of the changes to laws in the United States over the past fifty years, particularly in the areas of marriage, family and sexual behaviour – which in turn has acted as an inspiration to other countries around the world, including Australia.
Soon laws began to fall or become softened: laws against fornication, adultery, contraception, abortion, under-age sex, incest, rape, homosexuality.
Kinsey’s other major achievement was in the area of sex education, which he knew would play an essential role in converting the nation to his ideology. In 1964 the Kinsey Institute launched SIECUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States, which has been responsible, directly or indirectly, for almost all the sex ed programs of the last 30 years.
Other effects followed. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1973, followed by sadism and paedophilia in 1995, deciding that the desire to have sex with children is only a disorder if the paedophile feels guilt or anxiety about his desires.
All of this had enormous effects on the behaviour of Americans, particularly the young. Girls who did not want to have sex with their boyfriends were made to feel that they were abnormal, as were boys who did not keep up with the furious rates of sexual behaviour proclaimed by Kinsey’s figures. Others, confused about their “sexual identity”, were easily persuaded that they were homosexual. Men who were sexually attracted to children found that their attraction was harmless. The ghastly legacy of the Kinsey reports is that their false statistics are now coming true.
One of the most telling results of the Kinseyan revolution is the increase in violent sexual crime. In the 1930s in New York, an average of 108 women were murdered per year, and 6% of these cases involved suspected rape; in 1995, 4654 were murdered, and 3333 of these were raped – an increase of 55 000%.
What is astonishing is that it has taken half a century for the details of this man’s deception, fraud and criminal behaviour to come to light, and they are still strenuously denied.
This is a tremendously important book, and yet it is not easy to recommend. Reisman has censored many of her quotes and references, but the nature of the subject matter is so perverse that it is often difficult to read. It is also, unfortunately, very repetitive and sometimes poorly organised and confusing. Nevertheless, for anyone wanting to know the truth about what has happened to our society, it is essential reading.
The Kinsey Institute’s web site still appeals for funds for the “scientific” study of “sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancy, sexual abuse, assault and harassment” – failing to admit, of course, that their founder was a major cause of these problems. The appeal ends: “Your gift does make a difference.” Kinsey’s research certainly has made a difference – to the millions whose lives have been ruined by homosexuality, venereal disease, rape, incest and sexual abuse. 46 people found this helpful
