The Child Experiments
<< The Little Boy Experiments >>

The number of male infants and young boys observed undergoing sexual stimulation, as reported in the Male volume, is between 317 and 1,739 (seven girls were similarly tested). The child-subject totals may be calculated several ways, depending on the manner in which chart figures are tallied. In Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy, Volume II (1980), influential sexologists Masters, Johnson, Kolodny, and Weems present a series of papers reprising the history of the research on the “Ethics of Sex Research Involving Children and the Mentally Retarded.” One important essay, by Albert Jonsen and J. Mann, states that Kinsey “included observational reports on the speed of reaching orgasm in 1,888 boys, ages 5 months to adolescence, who were timed with a stop watch,” and “147 pre-adolescent” girls, for a total of 2,035 children.6 The authors cite their “personal communication” with Kinsey and co-author Wardell Pomeroy, who validated the 1,888 boys in the Kinsey reports.7
      6. Albert Jonsen and Jay Mann, “Ethics of Sex Research Involving Children and the Mentally Retarded,” in Masters, Johnson, Kolodny, and Weems, Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy, Volume II, Little Brown & Co., Boston, Massachusetts, 1980, p. 71. Albert Jonsen is Professor of Ethics in Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco. Jay Mann is Associate Clinical Professor of Medical Psychology, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco and Stanford University.
      7. Ibid., p. 106.

The 1,746 children in the Table above represents a cumulative total of the children Kinsey cites as sex subjects for the team's Male and Female volumes. The second column cites to the page number in the Female volume for 7 small girl test subjects. The next column represents 350 children mentioned in Pomeroy, and the remaining columns are data from Kinsey's Male volume with the page (:) or Table (T) numbers cited below the bar. Shadowed data are by Jonsen and Mann from “personal communication” with Kinsey and Pomeroy.


Since 1981, when this author exposed at the Fifth World Congress of Sexology the Kinsey team’s collaboration with and/or involvement in child sexual experiments, the most frequently asked questions have been: Where did the children in Kinsey’s Male and Female volumes come from, and where are the children of Table 34 today? And how did Kinsey’s “technically trained observers” gain access to 1,888 (or even 317) boys and nearly 200 girls for illegal genital experiments in the 1930-40s?10-4 To this date, the Kinsey Institute and Indiana University have refused to reveal the names of any subjects or experimenters. Far beyond Bloomington, a network of scientists worked and collaborated, some of whom were Kinsey’s friends and colleagues and part of his “grand scheme.”10-5
      10-4. Masters, Johnson et. al, Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy and Research, Volume 2, Little Brown and Company, Boston, 1980, p. 71.
      10-5. Pomeroy, p. 155.

The who, where, how, and why of the child “orgasm” data have haunted this author since discovering Table 34 in 1977. The Kinsey team claimed to have “interviewed” children in the “ghetto,” and at the Chicago Randall School for Negro Boys, the Delaware Kruse School for Negro Girls, the Mishawaka Indiana Children’s Home, and several other orphanages or reformatories.10-6 But filming and concealing child orgasm experiments en masse, “using manual and oral techniques” as reported by Dr. Gebhard, would have been extraordinarily difficult at the time. Many reputations would have been placed at risk.
      10-6. Frederic Lilge, The Abuse of Learning: The Failure of the German University, Macmillian Company, New York, 1948.

Where could the Kinsey team have found from 1,746 to 2,035 boys and girls for “instrumental measurement” of “erotic arousal” data, “timed with a stop watch,” from infancy to teen years, without parental objection? And what about Kinsey’s “trained observers”? The Male volume tells us virtually nothing, except, “Better data on pre-adolescent 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. Unfortunately, not all of the subjects with such contacts in their histories were questioned on this point of pre-adolescent reactions; but 9 of our adult male subjects have observed such orgasm. Some of these adults are technically trained persons who have kept diaries or other records, which have been put at our disposal; and from them we have secured information on 317 pre-adolescents who were either observed in self-masturbation, or who were observed in contacts with other boys or older adults.”8 [Emphasis added.]
      8. Male, p. 177.

Dr. John Bancroft, current director of the Kinsey Institute, insists that Kinsey was a pioneer and, above all, an honest scientist. But where could a team of honest scientists obtain access to more than 2,000 children for sex experiments apparently filmed under laboratory conditions?10-7
      10-7. See Gebhard letter to Reisman, March 11, 1981 (in this author’s archive), in which Gebhard, then-director of the Kinsey Institute, writes: “”Some of these sources have added… photographs and, in few instances, cinema.”

Kinsey’s record of what he perceived to be infant and child orgasmic potential is presented in Table 30 of the Male volume.9 Explanatory notes for Table 30 state, “All data based on memory of older subjects, except in the column entitled “data from other subjects.” In the later case, original data gathered by certain of our subjects were made available for use in the present volume. Of the 214 cases so reported, all but 14 were subsequently observed in orgasm.”10
      9. Male, p. 175.
      10. Male, p. 175.

Before reviewing the alleged child sexuality “data” about “preadolescent climax,” let us take a brief look at some new information about “Kinsey’s Paedophiles” that was uncovered in 1998 by the Yorkshire Television investigators. We will meet a few of the “adult males” whom Kinsey enlisted for his research team when compiling data for the chapters on “Early Sexual Growth and Activity” and “Pre-Adolescent Sexual Development” in his Male and Female volumes, respectively.

The Yorkshire documentary, entitled Secret History: Kinsey’s Pedophiles, was broadcast in Great Britain on August 10, 1998. In a review, England’s BBC Radio Times wrote that “this deeply unsettling documentary... makes a strong case that Kinsey cultivated [pedophiles whose crimes] he presented as scientific data.” London’s Daily Mail for August 11, 1998, agreed: “An academic study admitted the... repugnant... evidence of a child abuser as though this were a respectable scientific contribution.” In the Yorkshire interview, Gebhard confirmed that “certain of our subjects,” who joined Kinsey’s child sexuality research team, were child molesters:
       Interviewer: How did Kinsey come in contact with, say, the paedophiles?
       Gebhard: That was rather easy. We got them in prisons, a lot of them.... We’d go after them.... Then there was also a paedophile organization in this country... not incarcerated... they cooperated... You had one in Britain... a British paedophile organization.

So, the Kinsey team found pedophile organizations and asked them to help with its child sex experiments. James Jones, in his Yorkshire interview, admitted the pathology of the man he called “Mr. X,” or “Mr. Green” but who was in fact the U.S. federal government land surveyor named Rex King: “Kinsey relied upon Mr. Green for the chapter on childhood sexuality in the male volume... I think that he was in the presence of pathology at large and... Kinsey... elevated to, you know, the realm of scientific information... what should have been dismissed as unreliable, self serving data provided by a predatory pedophile... I don’t have any doubt in my own mind that man wreaked havoc in a lot of lives. Many of his victims were infants and Kinsey in that chapter himself gives pretty graphic descriptions of their response to what he calls sexual stimulation. If you read those words, what he’s talking about is kids who are screaming. Kids who are protesting in every way they can the fact that their bodies or their persons are being violated.”

The interviewer asked, “Do you think it is right that the Kinsey Institute continues to protect him? Which is more important, confidentiality or those children?” Jones replied, “In my mind those children,” and continued, “I don’t think the Christian right is wrong on that. I think they have their right to be outraged... political ideology really doesn’t have much to do with people’s reactions to child abuse.”

Countering the Kinsey Institute’s defense that the children did not “complain” about their abuse, Jones asked, “How did they know they didn’t complain? The person who was rendering that information is the same person who abused them. It seems to me that they have as much credibility as a rapist would have, saying that the victim enjoyed the rape.”

Herman and Hirschman made this comment in Father-Daughter Incest:  “Kinsey ... though he never denied the reality of child sexual abuse, did as much as he could to minimize its importance. Some 80 per cent of the women who had experienced a childhood sexual approach by an adult reported to Kinsey’s investigative team that they had been frightened and upset by the incident. Kinsey cavalierly belittled these reports. He hastened to assure the public that children should not be upset by these experiences. If they were. this was the fault not of the sexual aggressor, but of prudish parents and teachers who caused the child to become “hysterical””12-4
      12-4. Female, p. 16.

Wardell Pomeroy apparently still maintains the view that adults having sex with minors is not a problem. This information comes to light following a custody battle in California between a homosexual father and a Christian mother (Pomeroy was an expert witness on behalf of the father). Warren Farris, attorney for the mother, has described a conversation during which Pomeroy stated he “would not counsel one of his patients who was having sex with a minor to stop, but would ask why [the person] felt guilty about such activities.”12-5
      12-5. Personal communication from Warren Farris to Edward Eichel, December 1989.

Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy, a recent Kinsey biographer (Sex the Measure of All Things; A Life of Alfred C. Kinsey, London: Chatto & Winds, 1998), reveals that Kinsey Institute Director John Bancroft secretly allowed him to read and copy Kinsey’s pedophile team reports: “[Kinsey] was deeply affected by five paedophile headmasters who... had... loving relationships with young adolescent boys of twelve or thirteen.... The reason the Kinsey Institute is so careful....is that... they have... evidence of sexual behaviors that even now are illegal. They are nervous that sons or grandsons will sue them if they let this information out. So they had to be very, very careful that names are not revealed in that way”.

Gathorne-Hardy perused Rex King’s records. He confirmed that King was indeed the individual whom Wardell Pomeroy said raped at least 800 infants, children, kin, and strangers: “Eight or nine typewritten volumes typed up by Kinsey’s wife... prior to 1945, which was, you know, before Kinsey admitted... Green went on having sex with everybody until the end... long after Kinsey got the journals. The material in that chapter almost entirely came from journals which Kinsey got in 1944/45. I daren’t put this on film. I did read but Bancroft doesn’t want me to say I read them. Bancroft says that if the people know I read them they will go to him and say, you’ve let one scholar have them, and I’m not going to do that. So what I had to say in my book is that I closely questioned Bancroft and Gebhard about the contents of the journals, but I didn’t read them. In fact, I did read them. But I can’t say I read them.”

Kinsey photographer, psychologist, and implicit sex partner Clarence Tripp said that such pedo-phile researchers were cooperative and happy to demonstrate and share their activities: “You don’t find out about what pedophiles think and do [unless] you talk to a man who has done pedophile... there is nothing like going to first sources and photographing you see.... I photographed everything in the human animal when we could arrange it.... If the FBI were to come, demand to see our histories, I would destroy them first.”

After graphically describing his own hands-on sexual activity with dogs, Tripp said, “I got hold of a young German boy prostitute... who I photographed with one of the younger ones.... This is the picture. This would probably be the epitome of child corruption in Reisman’s mind.... Kinsey had a huge store of films done by myself, Bill Dallenbeck and other people.... Kinsey... would say “Show me,” or “Do you mind if I watch?” Or “Let me come over.”...Whenever possible Kinsey did validate it.”
       Interviewer: what you’re saying then is that it is possible that Kinsey personally validated [King’s] material [the sex with children]?
       Tripp: Almost always... there is no mention of his observing people. But he did. He wanted to see everything. This is a hands-on scientist... he had to see it to really believe it.... He poked into, he looked at everything. He often had to have these things photographed because he simply didn’t have time.... He was in the market for everything... people who are into special things, love to document it. And it seems to rev them up if they mark it down on a calendar.

Until the Yorkshire investigators located the reports in Berlin, only a few knew about Dr. Fritz Von Balluseck, the Nazi pedophile who contributed his child abuse data (from roughly 1936-1956) to Kinsey’s research database. Their exchange of information is discussed later in this chapter. Meanwhile, Tripp confirmed Pomeroy’s claim that Kinsey was collecting “early adolescent sperm” to study motility, and “had at least ten motility studies going.”

As noted earlier, “motility” studies entail the microscopic evaluation of sperm to pin point the earliest age at which boys are fertile. This required that Kinsey and/or his aides masturbate young boys and/or monitor the self-masturbation of older boys for ejaculate to be examined for sperm count and motility. Paul Gebhard testified that their group recruited pedophiles and pederasts to collect child “orgasm” data wherever they could: “Green had sex with men, women, children and animals.... Nursery school people... parents... couldn’t give us the extraordinary detail that Green did. It was illegal and we knew it was illegal and that’s why a lot of people are furious... they say we should have turned him in instantly... If we had turned him in it would have been the end of our research project.”

During his Yorkshire interview Tripp said that “we” ought to “rev up” children sexually “at an early age.” He and his colleagues hoped that it would “fix” people like this author by “proving” that children have orgasms, thereby reducing disapproval of, and eliminating laws against, “molestation,” “abuse,” and the like: “If we could only get those children with some kind of masturbation or something that would rev up their sexual substrate at an early time it would fix people like Judith Reisman immediately because then they’d respond and then they’d know what the rest of the world was like....”

Neither Kinsey nor members of this team used the terms “molestation” or “abuse” in a negative manner; they believed that their experiments were entirely acceptable, added Tripp: “Paedophilia is an almost non-existent kind of crime.... For instance they use words like child molestation. What is that? Nobody knows. Abuse of children? Are they talking about boxing them against the ear or hitting them with a stove pipe? Are they talking about tickling them a little? Are you talking about fondling? I hesitate to even call Gree a paedophile.”

Based on the evidence, child sex abuse was a prominent research protocol for the child “data” from Kinsey’s two volumes authoritatively cited as fact, worldwide.

TABLE 30: “PRE-ADOLESCENT EROTICISM AND ORGASM”
Table 30 deals with “first” orgasm data. Pomeroy asserts that “age of first orgasm” was “one of the most important parts of the sex history.”11 Child developmental professionals prior to Kinsey pin-pointed puberty-related physiological factors as signs of budding sexual maturation. For Kinsey, sexual maturation was evident on the occasion of first “orgasm” experienced by the 214 little boys listed in Table 30. For his entire male sample, Kinsey reported a (for him) disappointing 93 percent who did not answer the interview question about when they had their first orgasm. Only 7 percent, he lamented, recalled orgasms prior to age 14.
      11. Wardell Pomeroy, Carol Flax, and Connie Wheeler, Taking a Sex History, The Free Press, New York, 1982, p. 5.

Kinsey’s conclusion from these skimpy and unsupported data was that most pre-adolescents can experience orgasm. He writes of the “normality” of orgasm for little boys (despite the absence of memories or ejaculate), claiming that it is “not at all rare among pre-adolescent boys, and it also occurs among pre-adolescent girls.” He defines this as a “significant fact” which is not “well established in scientific publication,” therefore “profitable to record here…in some detail.”12
      12. Male, p. 175.

Kinsey quickly rebounded from this numerical setback by reporting that children who cannot experience orgasm are have probably been rendered psychologically incapable due to environmental (read, parental) inhibitions: “The observers emphasize that there are some of these pre-adolescent boys (estimated by one observer as less than one quarter of the cases), who fail to reach climax even under prolonged and varied and repeated stimulation; but even in these young boys, this probably represents psychological incapacity more often than physiologic incapacity.”13
      13. Male, p. 178.

Neither sexology’s ethical guardians nor most of Kinsey’s critics have sought further details about the “prolonged and varied and repeated stimulation” to which the children were exposed. And when the children did not respond with orgasm,” how did they respond? When this author’s 1981 paper, “Child Sexuality or Child Sexual Abuse: A Critical Evaluation of the Kinsey Reports,” was retrieved from the Kinsey Institute files during the 1993 deposition of their then director, one of the many handwritten “corrections” found on that trip was that child orgasm tests were for the orgasmic “capacity” and not the “potential” of infants and children.

The Kinsey team embellished the data even further, stating that the toddlers required a fresh social climate, and concluding that, in an “uninhibited” society, the majority of boys could be having orgasms by three or four years of age: “In the population as a whole, a much smaller percentage of the boys experience orgasm at an early age, because few of them find themselves in circumstances that test their capacities; but the positive record on these boys who did have the opportunity makes it certain that many infant males and younger boys are capable of orgasm, and it is probable that half or more of the boys in an uninhibited society could reach climax by the time they were three or four years of age, and that nearly all of them could experience such a climax three to five years before the onset of adolescence.”14 [Emphasis added.]
      14. Male, p. 178.

Evolutionarily speaking, what use would infants or young children ages three to four years have for an orgasmic capacity without a physiological basis for early sexual maturity? Even current Kinsey Institute Director John Bancroft acknowledges that there is a “biological basis” for the genitals, and that it is generative. Testosterone is inhibited in the male until roughly 12 years of age and, Bancroft says, a young boy’s “first ejaculation occurs” at about 13 years of age.15 To sexualize toddlers and young children without any “biological basis” for doing so renders them freaks of nature.
      15. John Bancroft, M.D., Human Sexuality and its Problems, Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1989.

TABLE 31: “PRE-ADOLESCENT EXPERIENCE IN ORGASM”
Kinsey believed that human beings and their responses could be categorized like the gall wasps he had collected earlier. This taxonomic technique is evident in Table 31 of the Male volume, “Pre-adolescent experience in orgasm,” which is a carbon copy in theory, structure, and groupings of his 1936 insect table on “Cynips.” In Table 31, Kinsey reported the little boys’ ages and “orgasm” responses to stimuli.16 Bancroft claims that Kinsey’s “meticulous” boy tables report the “data” Kinsey received from King, who he called an old “technically trained” forester17 and who, Pomeroy and others claim, had sexual relations with 800 children of both sexes).
      16. Male, p. 176.
      17. The Washington Post, December 8, 1995, p. F1-4.

Kinsey stated that “some of the younger boys who have contributed to the present study” also described their “orgasm.” However, the charts show that 28 of Kinsey’s “younger boy” contributors/ participants were infants, so unable to speak. Kinsey claimed in Table 31 that “orgasm” was “observed” in a male infant of five months, although the table further notes failure to produce orgasms in male babies of two, three, four and nine months. Each age category included children tested for orgasm; that is, Kinsey confirmed 22 toddlers up to two years old, were test subjects. He claimed that 11 of these tykes “reached climax,” while 11 others did not. These could have been some of Rex King’s little victims, described by Gathorne-Hardy in his Yorkshire interview. “Two three-month-old babies were tested and coded as not having reached “climax.” Of twelve four-year-olds, Kinsey claims five were anorgasmic while seven were successfully orgasmic.”

Such is the view of those collecting sex “data” on 317 boys in Table 31, men engaged in “actual observation” of the children. Some of the little boys were tracked for years. Kinsey writes, “In 5 cases of young pre-adolescents, observations were continued over periods of months or years, until the individuals [child subjects] were old enough to make it certain that true orgasm was involved.”18 In other words, at least five little boys continued to be subjected to experimentation “over periods of months or years” so that scientists and/or technically trained observers could know if what these men called “true orgasm was involved.”
      18. Male, p. 177.

TABLE 32: “SPEED OF PRE-ADOLESCENT ORGASM”
Table 32 details the “speed of pre-adolescent orgasm.”19 The table’s legend states: “Duration of stimulation before climax: observations timed with second hand or stopwatch. Ages range from five months of age to adolescence.” We read in Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy, Volume II, that Wardell Pomeroy confirmed the “observation” data on these boys and that the 1,888 boys from age five months to fifteen years were observed being “erotically stimulated” in order to record “speed of reaching orgasm” while “timed with a stop watch.”20 In an audio-taped interview, Kinsey associate Paul Gebhard was asked who collected such illegal data?
      19. Male, p. 178.
      20. Masters, Johnson, Kolodny, and Weems, Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy, Volume II, Little Brown and Company, Boston, 1980, p. 71.

       Gebhard: …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, let’s see, then there were some that were done by nursery school personnel.
       Interviewer: Was that at your suggestion too?
       Gebhard: Yes… we would ask them to watch, and take notes, and if possible, time it and report back to us.… Once we asked people about giving us their observations, we would ask them later too. If [the pedophiles] got in contact with us later we would ask them more about it. We follow up by re-interviewing people occasionally…
       Interviewer: So, do pedophiles normally go around with stop watches?
       Gebhard: Ah, they do if we tell them we’re interested in it.… When we interview pedophiles, we would ask them, How many children have you had it with? What were their ages? Do you think they came to climax or not?… Are you sure it really was climax or not?

Gebhard was unusually candid for a member of the Kinsey team. A former director of the Kinsey Institute, he admitted collaborating in the child abuse. The Institute has understandably been extremely protective of the data, and refuses to reveal who collected them. Additionally, Gebhard admits that the team collaborated and interacted with their “observers” before and after the commission of criminal acts against children.

As recorded in Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy and Research, Volume 2, Gebhard was asked about the ethics of coercing people of all ages to participate in the Kinsey research: “Incidentally, Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues conducted their research by first convincing the leader of a group to agree to participate, then getting the leader to persuade the members of his or her peer group.” He replied that the Kinsey team did indeed coerce people, and that he would have no qualms about doing it again. He asserted: “Well, it is definitely coercion, but I don’t feel it’s any worse than the coercion that is sometimes used by salesmen or Hari Krishnas or anyone else. I think a certain amount of coercion is acceptable in the interest of encouraging research participation. I wouldn’t hesitate to employ that tactic again—though I might not spell it out in my proposal to the committee on human subjects.”21
      21. Masters, Johnson, Kolodny, and Weems, Ethical Issues in Sex Therapy, Volume II, Little Brown and Company, Boston, 1980, p. 256.

Whether or not coercion is part of a sex-research protocol, child responses remain subject to interpretation by the adult, for as Kinsey himself admitted, “Pre-adolescent boys, since they are incapable of ejaculation, may be as uncertain as some inexperienced females in their recognition of orgasm.”22 He claimed that he and his team could precisely interpret a child’s response, and could unerringly recognize orgasm without ejaculation.
      22. Male, p. 176.

Kinsey testified that it had “been necessary to test the reliability of every… technique, at every point of the program.”23 How, then, did he and his team “test the reliability” of child “orgasms” and the competence of their “technically trained observers”?
      23. Male, p. 11. Note that the author has removed the word “other” and inserted ellipsis to aid the reader in avoiding the language maze constructed by Kinsey in his two reports. Kinsey told readers that he verified all of his data, not just “some” or “other” parts it.

TABLE 33: “MULTIPLE ORGASM IN PRE-ADOLESCENT MALES”
Kinsey’s Table 33 presented data about the number of orgasms among 182 pre-adolescent boys, as well as the time between orgasms for another 64. The legend for the table reads: “Based on a small and select group of boys. Not typical of the experience, but suggestive of the capacities of pre-adolescent boys in general.”24 Kinsey wrote, “The most remarkable aspect of the pre-adolescent population is its capacity to achieve repeated orgasm in limited periods of time. This capacity definitely exceeds the ability of teen-age boys who, in turn, are much more capable than any older males.…It is certain that a higher proportion of the boys could have had multiple orgasm if the situation had offered.… Even the youngest males, as young as 5 months in age, are capable of such repeated reactions.”25
      24. Male, p.179.
      25. Male, p. 179.

Kinsey’s “interviewers” allowed a “time lapse” of from 2.25 minutes to 6.28 minutes between orgasm trials, which suggests that they were stimulating the boys to bring about “orgasms” as swiftly as possible. Just as Kinsey described adult sexual abuse of children as “sex play,” Tripp saw such tests on young boys as play: “If you have paedophilia between an older male and a young boy is that homosexual?... It’s that they are playing in a way.”

Kinsey colleague Dr. Clarence Tripp, sexologist and psychologist-author of The Homosexual Matrix (1975), during his interview for the August 1998 Yorkshire documentary “Kinsey Paedophiles” Dr. Tripp candidly stated, “If you go out and masturbate dogs—I was very good at this when I was a boy—the dog will love you to pieces because the dog has no efficient way to masturbate. He loves the orgasm as much as anybody else but he can’t self-produce it. Now you just do this a time or two. The dogs do various... things. You try this on all the neighborhood dogs.... Some dogs will always expect or try to talk you into doing it.... Other dogs will come to any human and say, please touch me here in a certain kind of way.” That snippet from the interview was not broadcast, but the documentation is in this author’s archive.

TABLE 34: “EXAMPLES OF MULTIPLE ORGASM IN PRE-ADOLESCENT MALES”
Gebhard acknowledged during his Yorkshire interview that “science” was not part of Kinsey’s agenda for the child chapters. He cited Table 34, admitting that they used the records of Kinsey’s though the deviates involved were ordinary parents and physicians. “Judith Reisman... [saw] this famous table 34 that had the data on children... [She] hit the ceiling... [A] good piece of it came from Green.”

Table 34 was truly grotesque. It reported around-the-clock experimental “data” on infants and young boys.26 The Kinsey team seemed completely at ease when describing the extraordinary data: “Even the youngest males, as young as 5 months of age, are capable of such repeated reactions. Typical cases are shown in Table 34. The maximum observed was 26 climaxes in 24 hours [in a 4-year-old and a 13-year-old], and the report indicates that still more might have been possible in the same period of time.”27
      26. Male, p. 180.
      27. Male, p. 180.

Gathorne-Hardy recalls that the “five month old boy in table 34 Green did with a woman... Kinsey, however, did not use all of his figures.” What figures did Kinsey disregard? Table 34 is said to show typical instances of the orgasmic “capacity” of male infants and children. As with the adults, however, the precise number of children subjected to testing is impossible to determine. Kinsey states there were “some instances of higher frequencies” than those shown.

Why were they not given? A two-, 12-, or 13-year-old may have been tested more than once. Also lacking is an explanation of why orgasms claimed for the five-month infant are recorded, but not the time required to attain them. Moreover, Kinsey reports in detail, as an observer, about a “fretful babe” “distracted [from] other activities” by the experimenter. The “weeping” and “convulsive action” of the baby is labeled “orgasm” by the Kinsey team.

Kinsey admits that some of the children were tracked for months or years: “A fretful babe quiets down under the initial sexual stimulation, is distracted from other activities, begins rhythmic pelvic thrusts, becomes tense as climax approaches, is thrown into convulsive action, often with violent arm and leg movements, sometimes with weeping at the moment of climax. After climax the child loses erection quickly and subsides into the calm and peace that typically follows adult orgasm. It may be some time before erection can be induced again after such an experience. There are observations of 16 males up to 11 months of age, with such typical orgasm reached in 7 cases. In 5 cases of young pre-adolescents, observations were continued over periods of months or years, until the individuals were old enough to make certain that true orgasm was involved; and in all of these cases the later reactions were so similar to the earlier behavior that there could be no doubt of the orgiastic nature of the first experience.”28 [Emphasis added]
      28. Male, p. 177.

In Kinsey’s Pedophiles, the camera moved in for a close up of Rex King’s (Green’s) records of “the orgiastic nature” of infant, child, and juvenile responses to manipulation. “Willy Price” is cited as one of King’s 15-year-old victims. Gebhard stated in a phone interview that the Kinsey Institute has “names” of some child victims. Willy Price would be in his late 60s by now and may still be alive. Gathorne-Hardy reads, on camera, from hard copies of King’s reports. The interview appears in the transcript of the Yorkshire documentary. Some of the brutally graphic language spelt out in Hardy’s reading from the original has been excised for this book. “Out of 317 cases Green records having to force cooperation on five occasions: aged 2, 4, 7, 10, 15 (Willy Price).... He likes to arouse boys... Green records in the history the color, taste and smell of the semen. Also, when he can, examines adolescent semen for sperm.... Does it with mother and son... Some of his women masturbate their children for him....” [Gathorne-Hardy reads from record] “Experimented with baby.... Could take head of penis in mouth easily.... His success in getting his huge range was, like Kinsey that he not only did not disapprove, he was happy to join in... seducing boys and men.... In a few minutes [the boy] was laughing and did not hold it against me. Fact is he seemed proud he had done it. I praised him and told him he was some kid to take a 7” fuck down his throat and up his ass the same night.... [Got boys] round to discussing sex... excited them... [show graphic sex]. Listened.... They felt safe and warm and happy.”

Such activity easily qualifies as the delusional frenzy of a dangerous sexual psychopath. For Kinsey, his team and his disciples, including Dr. Bancroft, current Kinsey Institute president, Kinsey’s was quality “scientific research” that deserves “public respect.”

CHILDREN OF KINSEY
Alfred Charles Kinsey (June 23, 1894 – August 25, 1956) and Clara Braken McMillen (2 October 1898 – April 1982), whom Kinsey called “Mac,” were married on June 3, 1921. She gave birth to their first son, Donald (Don), in mid 1922. A diabetic, he “died after an operation for exophthalmic goiter, just three months before his fourth birthday” *. They had three other children: daughters Anne (1924) and Joan (1925), and son Bruce (1928). Little is known about the Kinsey children, other than that one took piano lessons, they were forbidden to receive confirmation despite attending church and that they eventually gave their sex histories to Pomeroy and their father. Jones reports that Kinsey led his family on nudist vacations to the Smoky Mountains, and that nudist magazines were perused in the home. Kinsey himself would often shave in the nude in the presence of the children.1-56 We are not told at what age this practice ended, or if it ended.
      *. Wardell Pomeroy, Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research, Harper & Row, New York, 1972, p. 39.
      1-56. James H. Jones, “Dr. Yes,” The New Yorker, September 1, 1997, p. 103.

“He had a particular empathy with children. Perhaps one factor in it was the loss of his firstborn, Donald, who died at the age of four. When anyone asked him about his family, he would always say, “I have had four children, Don, Anne, Joan and Bruce.” He never failed to include Don. At his insistence, his last three children had been given one-syllable names; nicknames, he believed, could be a psychological handicap, although that had not seemed to affect Prok and Mac.”
      Pomeroy, p. 218.

“During this time, his family life was, by and large, a happy one, marred only by the early death (juvenile diabetes) of his older son. His two daughters (Anne, tall and rangy like ProK, and Joan, small and round like Mac) and remaining son Bruce lived in a charming Craftsman-style house under a persimmon tree, full of nooks and hiding places, playing ping-pong in a "secret" attic room (later made "unsecret" and used by the Institute as a photographic studio), eating outdoors at a picnic table, sunbathing in their back yard, and accompanying their parents on wasp-collecting expeditions. Kinsey was a doting, if somewhat eccentric, father, gardening (his iris collection was held to be one of the best in the country) in a loincloth while neighbors filed to church in their Sunday best (Vitamin D, he'd explain with a sly twinkle; privately, he considered Nature his true faith), discussing his daily findings at the dinner table ("Sex was something like the family business," one daughter recalled. "We knew other families didn't talk about it, but then, most people I knew thought ticks were insects."), and teaching them every kind of craft or game a former Scoutmaster was likely to know. Their own sex education was not only thorough, but age-appropriate, though "Kinseyized", to an extent: early on acclimated to the differences between male and female (both Miss Mac and the ProK enjoyed sunbathing and nude swims in camp, to which their children were cordially invited) by six, all of them had seen pictures and movies of mating animals (lessons the ProK reinforced by object lessons in the garden), at ten, developing breasts, and for Bruce, descending testicles, were the subject of informed anticipation, announced, duly noted and counseled individually. From then on, menses, masturbation, and the behavior of dates were noted on worksheets specially coded for each child, and care was taken (to show respect for others' beliefs) to preserve as decorous a facade as possible: no matter if they knew better, he joked, they were expected to behave like ladies and gentlemen. Sexual activity (other than masturbation) was forbidden until eighteen, but encouraged afterwards: one daughter recalls a letter asking when she and her boyfriend of two months would commence sexual intercourse, with helpful hints to make her first time comfortable and pleasurable. Mac, though a classic stay-at-home mom, typed Kinsey's manuscripts, helped mount wasps, hosted home concerts on Kinsey's beloved piano, baked persimmon pie, and dispensed sex and childrearing knowledge among the neighbors, in between leading troops of Girl Scouts. Throughout their marriage, she said, she and the ProK never stopped loving each other.”
      1-56.Gathorne-Hardy, Jonathan, Kinsey: Sex the measure of all things, Indiana University Press, 1998.

“People often wondered, incidentally, about the sex education of Kinsey’s children, and they would write him nasty or sarcastic letters about it, which he never answered. In fact he did not neglect the subject. The Kinsey children learned from frank and open discussions at the dinner table and elsewhere. They knew about the work their father was doing, and they grew up treating sex as a natural part of ordinary communication. All the children gave him their histories, and said later they were not in the least embarrassed by it because they had grown up to accept sex naturally. They grew up, in short, with the same attitudes toward sex as their father, and in spite of the worst prophecies of the more indignant and outraged letter writers, all of the children are happily married and have children of their own.”
      Pomeroy, p. 30.

Kinsey does not define rape, incest, pederasty, bestiality, sodomy, peeping, exhibitionism, sadism, or masochism as perversions “of what is, in a biologic sense, normal sexuality.” But this “scientist” and his colleagues (and by implication his funders) agreed that women who wear nightgowns during sex are guilty of “a perversion” of “normal sexuality.” (You will recall his claim on other occasions that, sexually speaking, there is no such thing as “normal” or “abnormal.”)

In the Male volume, Kinsey claimed that roughly 30 percent of married males slept in the nude “frequently.”80 Are we to believe that more than 20 percent of married women were sleeping nude “regularly” while their inhibited husbands wore pajamas? Were 20 percent of American women less inhibited than their men? Men masturbate more, earlier and have more illicit and homosexual sex with adults, children, and animals, but are less “perverted” than women who wear pajamas?
      6-80. Male, p. 372.

Applying Kinsey’s method of analysis, it could be assumed that the Kinseys slept naked. Jones notes that he and Clara had separate bedrooms.6-81 He recalls an anonymous visitor to the Kinsey household (now identified as Earle Marsh): “During his visits to Bloomington, Mr. Y always stayed at the Kinsey’s.… Kinsey’s relationship with Clara was no longer passionate.… “They slept in different bedrooms,” he continued. “I don’t think he had sex with Mac to have sex, but if I was there we’d all have sex.” Elaborating, Mr. Y. revealed, “Kinsey and I’d be having sex upstairs and I’d go down[stairs] and have sex with Mac in the same house. She accepted what went on, you know.” Indeed, Mr. Y was surprised by how liberated Clara was sexually…. “She looked like she was a little pip-squeak, you know. Her hair was straight and she didn’t look like she was all loose or open and she was open as hell.” …Not that Clara had much choice, [says Jones] not if she wished to remain with her husband.”6-82
      6-81. Jones, Kinsey: A Private/Public Life, p. 604.

James Jones confirms that she was filmed masturbating and engaging in varied forms of sex with Alfred Kinsey’s young coauthors and assistants, including Wardell Pomeroy and Clyde Martin. There is no information as to whether Mrs. Kinsey was expected to act out sexually with the team’s wives: “No one felt the force of [Kinsey’s] unyielding demands more strongly than Clara [who] went along with the filming... as befitted the wife of the high priest of sexual liberation. Clara was filmed masturbating, and she was also filmed having sex with Pomeroy... Martin and his wife, Alice, flatly refused to be filmed as a couple.... [O]ne of the staff wives refused to have sex with Kinsey. Perhaps it was Alice [Martin’s wife].... One staff wife had an even stronger reaction. Complaining of “the sickening pressure” she was under to have sex on film with her spouse and other staff members, she told an interviewer, “I felt like my husband’s career at the Institute depended on it.” I saw some of the films.... when I took Paul Gebhard’s class on human sexual behavior, when I was a graduate student... [After Reisman’s] charges were made that Kinsey was a pedophile I was asked by the director of the Kinsey Institute at that time, to investigate those charges and report back to her... I did see films of Kinsey masturbating. I saw films of Mrs. Kinsey masturbating. If memory serves, I saw some films of staff having sex.”4-32
      4-32. Jones, p. 607.

As is common among women married to “bisexual” or homosexual males, Clara would accept sodomy—the only form of sexual union possible in a homosexual union. In Kinsey’s case, Jones reports that Clara would be subject to all forms of sodomy, as well as any other perversions Kinsey chose for film, live performance, or as an “outlet.” And it is indeed possible that she, like many of those catalogued in her husband’s “nature library,” slept nude as well.

Appearing on the 1996 BBC program “Reputations,” Kinsey’s two (by then elderly) daughters claimed that their father was a typical middle-class dad who was thoughtful in all things. Surviving son Bruce has repeatedly refused interviews with anyone writing about his father.

“As one who had a genuine fondness for young children, Kinsey was cross with them only when they disturbed his garden. When my wife and I brought our children on visits to Kinsey’s house and we strolled in the garden, he was uneasy and even irritable if my children were not particularly respectful of his flowers and shrubs. Now that I have grandchildren, I understand his anxiety a little better.”
      Pomeroy, p. 218.

DARWIN VERSUS KINSEY: INTERPRETING PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES
The Kinsey Institute insists that Kinsey’s pedophiles were “technically trained” adult “observers” who could reliably “interpret the boys’ experiences.” From King’s descriptive entries, Kinsey teased out the numbers that appear in the descriptions which follow. Kinsey described the “erotic stimulation” of 196 children to create “erections,” which he reported as orgasms. The standard definition of for normal male “orgasm” includes ejaculation: “The highest point of sexual excitement, characterized by strong feelings of pleasure and marked normally by ejaculation of semen by the male and by vaginal contractions in the female. Also called climax.”29 [Emphasis added.]
      29. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992.

While adults supplied the following “data” about the boys’ experiments, the six types of “orgasm” described refer only to boys, not men. Kinsey’s repeated references to “adult males” is deliberately confusing. There are no “adult males” in the group of pre-adolescents he studied, so each mention of “older males” refers to boys under 13-years of age. Since Kinsey claimed that Charles Darwin was his methodological, scientific, and “biologic” mentor, a study of Darwin’s Expressions of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1904), in regard to Kinsey’s descriptions of “orgasm” is very illuminating. Darwin’s negative descriptions of children’s rage, terror, anger, and fear, etc., mirror and conflict with Kinsey’s positive descriptions of “orgasm” in children.30 The Male volume states, “Our several thousand histories have included considerable detail on the nature of orgasm; and these data, together with the records supplied by...older subjects who have had sex…with younger boys, provide material for describing the different sorts of reactions which may occur. In the pre-adolescent, orgasm is, of course, without ejaculation of semen.31 In the descriptions which follow, the data supplied by adult observers for 196 pre-adolescent boys are the sources for the percentage figures indicating the frequency of each type of orgasm among such young males....six types are listed....”[Note, no “adult males” are studied.]
      30. Charles Darwin, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, John Murray, London, 1904, pp. 65-67.
      31. Male, p. 160. Orgasm in the normal male is specifically defined as including ejaculation. “The highest point of sexual excitement, characterized by strong feelings of pleasure and marked normally by ejaculation of semen by the Male and by vaginal contractions in the Female. Also called climax.” This is not possible for boys prior to physical/sexual maturity. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 1992.

       1. Reactions primarily genital: Little or no evidence of body tension… penis becomes more rigid and may be involved in mild throbs, or throbs may be limited to urethra alone; semen (in the adult) seeps from urethra without forcible ejaculation; climax passes with minor after-effects. A fifth (22%) of the pre-adolescent cases on which there are sufficient data belong here, and probably an even higher proportion of older males. [Recall, no “adult males” are studied.]
       2. Some body tension…twitching of one or both legs, of the mouth, of the arms, or of other particular parts of the body... rigidity of the whole body and some throbbing of the penis; orgasm with a few spasms but little after-effect... involving nearly half (45%) of the pre-adolescent males, and perhaps a corresponding number of adult males. [Recall, no “adult males” were studied.]
       3. Extreme tension with violent convulsion: Often involving the sudden heaving and jerking of the whole body… that the legs often become rigid, with muscles knotted and toes pointed, muscles of abdomen contracted and hard, shoulders and neck stiff and often bent forward, breath held or gasping, eyes staring or tightly closed, hands grasping, mouth distorted, sometimes with tongue protruding; whole body or parts of it spasmodically twitching, sometimes synchronously with throbs or violent jerking of the penis… still more violent convulsions of the whole body; heavy breathing, groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children), the orgasm or ejaculation involving several minutes (in one case up to five minutes) of recurrent spasm… the individual is often capable of participating in a second or further experience. About one sixth (17%) of the pre-adolescent boys, a smaller percentage of adult males. [Recall, no “adult males” were studied.]
       4. As in either type 1 or 2; but with hysterical laughing, talking, sadistic or masochistic reactions, rapid motions (whether in masturbation or in intercourse), culminating in more or less frenzied movements which are continued through the orgasm. A small percentage (5%) of either preadolescent or adult males. [Recall, no “adult males” were studied.]
       5. As in any of the above; but culminating in extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting of subject. Sometimes happens only in the boy’s first experience, occasionally occurs throughout the life of an individual. Regular in only a few (3%) of the pre-adolescent or adult males. [Recall, no “adult males” were studied.] Such complete collapse is more common and better known among females.
       6. Pained or frightened.… The genitalia… become hypersensitive…some males suffer excruciating pain and may scream if movement is continued or the penis even touched. The males in the present group become similarly hypersensitive before the arrival of actual orgasm will fight away from the partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax, although they derive definite pleasure from the situation. Such individuals quickly return to complete the experience, or to have a second experience if the first was complete. About 8 per cent of the younger boys are involved here, but it is a smaller percentage of older boys and adults [Recall, no “adult males” were studied] which continue these reactions throughout life.32
      32. Male, pp. 160-161. [Emphasis added.]

Gathorne-Hardy states that Rex King (Mr. Green) constructed the “six kinds of orgasm” stated above by Kinsey as fact. Hardy also claims that Kinsey (himself a clinically defined sado-masochistic sexual psychopath) then “verified” King’s descriptions of orgasm, apparently including the fainting, convulsing, and striking of the “partner:” “Kinsey... has a thing in there defining six kinds of orgasm... alerted to by Green. Then he looked for himself... and it turned out that observations were terribly feasible.... So, before the book was published, they packed off the galleys to Green... he patched it all up again.... Kinsey was himself a super-expert at child sexuality, a super observer.... Green was the only man I ever knew who could, who was more sensitive than Kinsey at looking at that material... Green had sex with all these relatives and brothers and sisters and aunts... but nobody is objecting. He makes it pleasant... He rented himself out as a baby sitter part of the time... Most of this material eventually got transferred to the Institute for Sex Research.”

In the Male volume, Kinsey refers to another aspect of the sexual maturation of young boys, gleaned “from certain of our subjects who have observed first ejaculation in a list of several hundred boys.”33 Pomeroy has noted that the Kinsey team tested for sperm motility, with microscopic examination of seminal fluid for “mature” sperm, and Kinsey claimed to locate “11 out of 4,102 adult males in our histories” who allegedly had “orgasm” without ejaculate.34
      33. Male, p. 185.
      34. Male, p. 158.

If Kinsey’s “trained observers” are to be believed, such orgasmic but non-ejaculating men are either freaks of nature or men who have severe psychological and/or physical maladies. We are left to wonder what Pomeroy meant when he wrote that Kinsey believed students in the sexology field had all been “too prudish” to make an actual investigation of sperm count in early adolescent males.35 Even Kinsey’s harshest critics failed to realize, or did not understand, that the young ejaculate-less subjects were fainting and/or convulsing in pained response to sexual molestation.
      35. Wardell Pomeroy, Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research, Harper & Row, New York, p. 315.

(“In another letter Kinsey discussed the subject of male fertility with Dr. Frank K. Shuttleworth, of the Institute of Child Welfare, University of California at Berkeley. He believed that students in the field had all been “too prudish” to make an actual investigation of sperm count in early-adolescent males. His own research for the Male volume had produced some material, but not enough. He could report, however, that there were mature sperm even in the first ejaculation, although he did not yet have any actual counts. The research showed further that males were rarely responsible for pregnancy until they were in their late teens, even though they might have an abundance of intercourse earlier than that without making any attempt at contraception. This subject was one of the detailed studies Kinsey hoped to make later but never completed.”
      35. Pomeroy, p. 315.)

SOME CHILDREN STRAPPED OR “HELD DOWN”
A review of the child data by prominent pediatricians and other health professionals confirms what most mothers and fathers know instinctively: children, especially the very young, would not willingly submit to such abuse. Dr. Lester Caplan, a Baltimore physician and member of the American Board of Pediatrics, confirmed in a letter to this author that the children could not have been voluntary participants in the Kinsey research protocol:
       “Dear Dr. Reisman:
       I have done a review of your paper ... based on an examination of the Kinsey data and its effects . .. upon ... the child, and I have come to the following conclusions:
       1. That the data was not the norm—rather was data taken form abnormal sexual activities, by sex criminals and the like.
       2. Unnatural stimulation was used by the researchers to get results.
       3. The frequencies and the number of orgasms in 24 hours was not normal nor the mean.
       4. One person could not do this to so many children—these children had to be held down or subject to strapping down, otherwise they would not respond willingly.” 36
      36. Letter to Dr. Judith Reisman from pediatrician Lester Caplan, M.D., November 29, 1983.

Dr. Caplan was merely confirming common sense, empirical observation, and pediatric training. During their Yorkshire interviews, both Gathorne-Hardy and Gebhard stated that Kinsey’s books were meant to convince the public that we are all sexual, womb to tomb, so Kinsey had to “prove” infants were lustful, even if it meant tying them down and labeling their “hysterical weeping” an “orgasm”:
       Gathorne-Hardy: Green would masturbate little boys, tiny little boys, babies at 15 or 16 months. People don’t normally do that.... Very small children can have orgasms, tiny children. There are even scans of a boy sort of playing with his cock in the womb. Kinsey knew the material would be less scientifically considered if he did reveal his source.
       Gebhard: Children are sexual beings... [L]ittle males get erections even in the uterus. They are sexual from the word go.... Green contributed a fair amount to our knowledge... and medicine’s knowledge of sexuality in children. We made our point that children are sexual from birth.

“Well, are you going to take Teddy away from him, or shall I?”

Hustler Humor, April 1982, Shawn Kerri, p. 5


Crooks and Baur's 1983 college human sexuality text, Our Sexuality (Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.), a typical example of such works-cites the Kinsey team’s findings on child sexuality as applicable to today’s children: “In many Western societies, including the United States, it has been traditional to view childhood as a time when sexuality remains unexpressed and adolescence as a time when sexuality needs to be restrained.... However, with the widespread circulation of the research findings of Alfred Kinsey and other distinguished investigators, the false assumption that childhood is a period of sexual dormancy is gradually eroding. In fact, it is now widely recognized that infants of both sexes are born with the capacity for sexual pleasure and response. Signs of sexual arousal in infants and children, such as penile erection, vaginal lubrication, and pelvic thrusting, are often misinterpreted or unacknowledged. However, careful observers may note these indications of sexuality in the very young. In some cases, both male and female infants have been observed experiencing what appears to be an orgasm. The infant, of course, cannot offer spoken confirmation of the sexual nature of such reactions.... The following two quotations [from Kinsey's Male and Female Reports] are offered as evidence for this conclusion.”
      37. Female, pp. 410 and 570. [Emphasis added.]

Actually, the “misinterpretation” of certain physiological reactions in infants and children is entirely the authors'. The placing of a sexual connotation on these reflexive nervous and vascular reactions reflect hurtful, unethical, illegal and, consequently, invalid research. But the acceptance of infant and childhood sexuality is powerfully entrenched in sexology circles. The “given” factor can be clearly seen in statements from Mary Calderone (past president and co-founder, with Lester Kirkendall, of SIECUS). Speaking before the 1980 annual meeting of the Association of Planned Parenthood Physicians, Dr. Calderone reportedly explained that providing today's society “very broadly and deeply with awareness of the vital importance of infant and childhood sexuality” is now the primary goal of SIECUS.38 In 1983, Calderone wrote of the child's sexual capacities that, [these should] “be developed—in the same way as the child's inborn human capacity to talk or to walk, and that [the parents'] role should relate only to teaching the child the appropriateness of privacy, place, and person—in a word socialization.39
      38. Obstretical Gynecological News, December 1, 1980, p. 10.
      39. [SIECUS Report, May-July 1983, p. 9. [Emphasis added.]

Or, in a typical Christian set education resource, “Children are Sexual Beings, Too”: “It may be surprising to realize that our children are sexual beings from birth. For instance, a parent changing a male infant’s diaper may accidentally stimulate the child and be shocked to realize the child is having an erection. Similarly, researchers tell us that baby girls have vaginal lubrication regularly. In fact, a little girl being bounced on her parent’s knee may feel pleasant sensations and begin to make natural pelvic thrust movements.40
      40. (Lenore Buth, How to Talk Confidently with Your Child about Sex, Concordia, 1998, page 23. [Emphasis added.]

Which “researchers tell us” these things about children? Who is Buth's source? Only those trained by “sexologists” “tell us” about “child sexuality.” The author first read the above dogma, eroticizing a baby girl's “vaginal lubrication” and a baby boy's erection in a 1977 pro-pedophile essay. But, all mucosal exit/entry organs; ears, mouth, vagina, anus, (even eyes) “have lubrication regularly,” while the reflexive nervous and vascular reactions of the penis, “erectile tissue,” respond to many biological stimuli; urinary build-up, friction, infections, (or fear), all wholly unconnected to libido. Clearly, Buth relies upon Freud's discredited child sexuality theories but, like Kinsey, Buth guts Freud's latency period.

Yes, children can be sexually abused and prematurely disturbed and aroused, by fear-sex stimuli like pornography as well as genital trauma due to antibiotics, medication or yeast infections and (more likely) pinworms. Even Webster states that ejaculation is required for the male “orgasm” and that eliminates babies, prepubertal children, from this category. Would God so mock His people so as to, or nature, the animal world, make little children “sexual” when an early libido could cripple the child's development?

Kinsey's anonymous tour guide into New York's homosexual milieu. After obtaining the most intimate details about his subject's sexual lives, Kinsey never published their data on homosexual incest and child sexual abuse.

“SCIENTIFICALLY TRAINED OBSERVERS”
So, Kinsey was not merely an “interviewer” as his supporters would have us believe. He and his team had long conducted laboratory experiments on human sexual response. Kinsey acknowledged that they had “unpublished gynecologic data that have been made available for the present project... some special data on the... detailed anatomy... involved in sexual response... physiologic experiments on the sexual activities of... the human animal.”41 The experiments occurred both in the field and at Indiana University, where perverts of all sorts kept detailed records of their child molestations and sent them to Kinsey for inclusion in his studies. As Kinsey explains in the Female volume, “It is difficult... to acquire any adequate understanding of the physiology of sexual response from clinical records or case history data, for they constitute secondhand reports which depend for their validity upon the capacity of the individual to observe his or her own activity, and upon his or her ability to analyze the physical and physiologic bases of those activities. In no other area have the physiologist and the student of behavior had to rely upon such secondhand sources, while having so little access to direct observation. This difficulty is particularly acute in the study of sexual behavior because the participant in a sexual relationship becomes physiologically incapacitated as an observer. Sexual arousal reduces one’s capacities to see, to hear, to smell, to taste, or to feel with anything like normal acuity, and at the moment of orgasm one’s sensory capacities may completely fail. It is for this reason that most persons are unaware that orgasm is anything more than a genital response and that all parts of their bodies as well as their genitalia are involved when they respond sexually.… The usefulness of the observed data to which we have had access depends in no small degree upon the fact that the observations were made in every instance by scientifically trained observers. Moreover, in the interpretation of these data we have had the cooperation of a considerable group of anatomists, physiologists, neurologists, endocrinologists, gynecologists, psychiatrists, and other specialists. The materials are still scant and additional physiologic studies will need to be made.”42
      41. Female, p. 570.
      42. Female, p. 570.

We’ve shown that Kinsey and his pedophiles reported on the sexual “responses” of between 317 and 1,739 or 1,888 male infants and children.

The child sexuality data purportedly came from two sources: memories of persons interviewed and “[b]etter data on preadolescent climax ... 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 boy’s experience.” This latter source apparently consisted mainly of the “technically trained persons” and Pomeroy’s “quiet, soft-spoken, self-effacing” sex offender, who started his sex life with his grandmother (or possibly his father). Despite these bizarre sources, the Kinsey team applied their conclusions to “the population as a whole”. One of the major conclusions was that [it is] “certain that many infant males and younger boys are capable of orgasm, and it is probable that half or more of the boys in an uninhibited society could reach climax by the time they were three or four years of age, and that nearly all of them could experience such a climax three to five years before the onset of adolescence” [emphasis added].
      Male, p. 178.

Kinsey's preset views on child sexuality are strongly suggested by his use of prison inmate/sex offender experience and records as if these could provide knowledge of a normal population. Looking to sexual molesters for information on childhood sexuality is like drawing conclusions on the sexuality of adult females from the testimony of rapists. Kinsey's bias, furthermore, was clearly revealed by his approach to the criminal element among his sample. According to Pomeroy, the Kinsey team took pains to reassure offenders of their feeling that all sex was normal and of their ability to share the offenders' satisfactions and frustrations.
      Pomeroy, Flax and Wheeler. Taking a Sex History: Interviewing and Recording, The Free Press, 1972, p. 6.

Let us now turn to Kinsey’s treatment of little girls.

>>