• Dr. Alfred Kinsey, dedicated SCIENTIST or sexual DEVIANT.

    From Andrew Dycke@21:1/5 to All on Wed May 31 02:17:53 2017
    XPost: uk.philosophy.atheism, uk.media.tv.misc, alt.gossip.royalty
    XPost: alt.connecticut

    The major motion picture "Kinsey", starring Liam Neesen and
    Chris O'Donnell, opened on November 12th. It purports to be an
    accurate portrayal of the life and work of Dr. Alfred Kinsey
    (1894-1956), the famed sex researcher whose work has had an
    incredible influence on attitudes toward sexual mores and
    behavior.

    IgnatiusInsight.com spoke about Kinsey, his work, and his
    influence with Dr. Benjamin D. Wiker prior to the opening of the
    movie. Dr. Wiker is co-author, with Dr. Donald De Marco, of
    Architects of the Culture of Death (Ignatius Press, 2004) and a
    Lecturer in Science and Theology at Franciscan University. He is
    also the author of Moral Darwinism (InterVarsity).

    WARNING: Some of the material discussed in this interview is not
    suitable for younger readers.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: Who was Alfred Kinsey and what is he known
    for?

    Benjamin Wiker: Well, interestingly enough, who Alfred Kinsey
    was and what he was known for are two very different things.
    Let’s begin with the latter. Kinsey was known as the great
    scientist of sex, the man who fearlessly and dispassionately
    sorted out the true nature of our sexuality from the false,
    unscientific beliefs that have for so long hidden the truth from
    us. The standard picture of Kinsey depicted during his lifetime
    was the dour scientist dressed in a lab coat, patiently sorting
    through reams of data with his equally reputable and objective
    coworkers.

    That picture of Kinsey does not reveal who Kinsey really was,
    however. In fact, such pictures were carefully staged by Kinsey
    and his "research" team as part of their ongoing propaganda
    campaign. Behind the scenes, we find the real Kinsey: a
    homosexual and a sado-masochist, bent on using the trappings of
    science to force his perversions upon society.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: Why do you think a movie would be made of
    his life? Do you think there is a particular message or agenda
    held by the makers of the film?

    Wiker: We have just seen in the presidential election that the
    culture is seriously divided. Part of the culture has been
    pushing pro-homosexual, sexual freedom agenda. No one doubts
    where Hollywood lines up on these issues. They have been using
    their immense resources for some time, along with the other
    liberal-dominated media, to compel Americans to accept every
    sexual deviation as natural and good. Of course, in doing so,
    they were only following Kinsey’s lead, and so we should not be
    surprised that they would make a movie lionizing Kinsey as their
    prophet and martyr.

    We can expect the message of the movie to be something like
    this: Kinsey the persecuted homosexual fights fearlessly to
    throw off the chains of sexual repression, but dies a kind of
    martyr who selflessly sacrificed himself for those who would
    come after.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: What was the relationship between Kinsey's
    private life and his influential studies?

    Wiker: The sole purpose of Kinsey’s various studies was to
    legitimate any and every kind of sexual activity, from adultery
    and homosexuality, to pedophilia and bestiality. Kinsey himself
    was, from his very early youth, a sado-masochistic homosexual.
    His father, Alfred Sr., was a staunch, no-nonsense Protestant
    who ran the household with an iron fist. Of course, young Alfred
    hid his sexual perversions from his father, and the
    contradiction between his outward moral uprightness and his
    inward, hidden sexual distortions caused him great anxiety. But
    by the time he went to graduate school, Kinsey was determined to
    use science to eliminate this anxiety. How? By eliminating the
    distinction between natural and unnatural in regard to
    sexuality. He wanted to use science to "prove" that every sexual
    desire, no matter how bizarre, is natural.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: What have been some of the more serious
    charges brought against Kinsey's research, methodologies, and
    goals?

    Wiker: To take up on the last point, Kinsey began with the
    belief that every sexual desire is natural, and that it is only
    society that labels things like adultery, homosexuality,
    pedophilia, and bestiality as unnatural. Therefore, he would
    gather "sexual data" precisely from those people who engaged in
    such practices. For example, rather than gather data from the
    population at large, Kinsey preferred to interview prison sex
    offenders. This method would be akin to interviewing convicted
    thieves on what they think of private property, or serial
    killers about the sanctity of life.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: In the trailer for "Kinsey" the researcher
    is shown saying to an unseen research subject: "I've learned
    that the gap between what we assume people do sexually and what
    they actually do is enormous." Does this reflect the findings of
    objective research or Kinsey's personal bias?

    Wiker: First and foremost, Kinsey’s personal bias. As biographer
    James Jones points out, Kinsey long believed that human beings
    were naturally "pansexual," that is, they had no natural
    goal–such as heterosexuality–but if left to themselves in a kind
    of state of nature would satisfy their sexual desires in
    whatever way happened to strike their fancies. Society restricts
    this natural pansexuality, causing individuals all kinds of
    anxiety. Kinsey therefore believed that while we assume that
    people follow society’s sexual rules, they secretly want to act
    upon their natural pansexuality, and very often do. This
    deviation from social sexual rules–be it in adultery or
    homosexuality–is really not a deviation at all, but our natural,
    pansexuality reasserting itself.

    Kinsey’s mode of argument was then quite simple, and the logic
    of it went something like this: we assume that X is abnormal;
    but we have found out that X occurs all the time; what occurs
    all the time cannot be abnormal, therefore it must really be
    normal; what is normal is also natural, and what is natural
    cannot be wrong.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: In another scene in the trailer, a
    character (apparently sympathetic to Kinsey's work) exclaims,
    "The enforcers of chastity are massing once again." How might
    the movie try to make connections between the 1940s/50s and
    modern day conflicts over sexual mores?

    Wiker: We’ve all seen the recent surge to sanction gay marriage.
    Kinsey is an especially useful figure to support this effort. He
    has the status of a venerable scientist; he can be promoted as a
    martyr. And the lesson Hollywood wants us to draw is quite
    simple: the "enforcers of chastity" belong to the forces of
    darkness. How long, O how long, must they rule over us
    (sympathetic violins playing in the background).

    IgnatiusInsight.com: A preview review of the movie on the MSNBC
    site states: "For a movie so frank and explicit, 'Kinsey' has a
    soft spirit. Violins swell. The warmth of the Kinsey's
    unconventional marriage shines through. It's easy to imagine an
    edgier movie, but 'Kinsey' is a celebration of diversity; it's
    about the solace knowledge can bring." How does that compare
    with the reality of Kinsey's life and work?

    Wiker: Ah yes, the violins. Well, Kinsey’s marriage will surely
    not be portrayed as it was, and therefore we can forget about
    getting any "solace knowledge can bring." Will they show Kinsey
    talking his wife into having sex with his homosexual bedmates?
    And then there’s the little matter of the pornographic films.
    Kinsey’s Institute spent much of its time filming its staff of
    "scientists," including Kinsey, having homosexual sex with each
    other, masturbating, and engaging in sado-masochistic acts.
    Kinsey’s wife Clara was pushed–for the sake of science, of
    course–into "acting" in these sexually sordid films. Will they
    show his wife having to engage in every manner of sexual
    perversion, both alone and with others, in front of Kinsey’s
    camera? I doubt they will.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: The MSNBC review claims: "It was his own
    sexual problems with his new wife, Clara , that first got
    [Kinsey] thinking [about sexual behaviors]." Is that accurate?
    Why or why not?

    Wiker: No, not at all. Kinsey engaged in horribly distorted
    homosexual sado-masochism from the time he was a youth. After he
    graduated from Harvard, he landed a job at Indiana University.
    At the time, he was a bachelor, but being a bachelor for too
    long would bring suspicion upon Kinsey. Kinsey needed a wife. He
    soon met and married Clara Bracken McMillen, an intelligent,
    boyish-looking chemistry student. Of course, he did not reveal
    his homosexuality until much after the wedding. Clara did have a
    physical defect that affected her sexuality, but that was taken
    care of by surgery. The real problem with the marriage lay in
    getting Clara to accept his homosexuality. Apparently she did so
    dutifully.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: The Kinsey Institute web site poses the
    question, "How has the data held up, over 50 years later?" and
    responds, in part, by saying that a 1979 study validated
    Kinsey's original research: "Interestingly, most statistics,
    such as homosexual behavior, did not change significantly from
    the original reports." Are there any problems with this
    statement in light of more recent studies that indicate
    homosexuals make up 1-3% of the population, as opposed to
    Kinsey's famous claim of 10%?

    Wiker: As is now clear, Kinsey inflated the data, and he did so
    precisely because he didn’t care about scientific truth first
    and foremost, but only about his sexual agenda. For Kinsey,
    science must be bent to serve that agenda, and data inflation
    was the best way to do it. As was said above, Kinsey interviewed
    sex offenders to find out what was normal in regard to
    sexuality. Even worse, Kinsey flooded the interview pool not
    only with convicted sex offenders but also several hundred male
    prostitutes. Hardly "objective" research.

    In another respect, however, Kinsey’s data have held up–not
    because the data represent the truth, but because they his
    "results" have largely remained unchallenged.

    IgnatiusInsight.com: What about Kinsey’s association with
    pedophilia?

    Wiker: In the Kinsey report (consisting of two books, the Male
    and Female reports), Kinsey argued at length for the
    legitimization of pedophilia. Like bestiality and homosexuality,
    pedophilia was, according to Kinsey, natural. The only problem
    with pedophilia is caused by the hysterical reactions of those
    who think it is unnatural. "It is difficult to understand why a
    child, except for its cultural conditioning, should be disturbed
    at having its genitalia touched, or disturbed at seeing the
    genitalia of other persons, or disturbed at even more specific
    sexual contacts," states Kinsey in the Female report. In sum,
    Kinsey actively promoted pedophilia as natural.

    In his reports, Kinsey offered quite explicit data on
    pedophilia, including the effect of sexual acts performed on
    children ranging all the way down to six months old. Where did
    he get this data? In part, from a man of epic sexual
    perversions, who had had sex with over 800 preadolescents, as
    well as with 33 of his relatives (including his grandmother and
    father) and animals of many different species. We also suspect
    that Kinsey did his own "studies" at his Institute at Indiana
    University, but we will not know until the archives (including
    all his films) are opened to the public. One wonders how much of
    this will make it into the film?

    IgnatiusInsight.com: What do you think is Kinsey's true legacy?

    Wiker: He is one of the great architects of the culture of
    death, a man who saw his liberation in the destruction of every
    sexual restriction, and who methodically misused science to
    achieve his goal. Sadly, too many people didn’t see through his
    ruse, or worse, were happy to join his revolution, and his
    studies have, almost single-handedly, formed the foundation for
    contemporary sex education. Is it any wonder that we are now
    experiencing the darkness of sexual chaos in our society?

    Related article: "Deadly Architects", a two-part interview with
    Wiker and Dr. Donald De Marco.

    Benjamin Wiker, Ph.D., is a Lecturer in Science and Theology at
    Franciscan University and a Senior Fellow with Discovery
    Institute, focusing on Intelligent Design.

    He has contributed to various Catholic publications and writes
    regularly for Crisis magazine, and is the author of Moral
    Darwinism (InterVarsity).

    Visit him online at www.benjaminwiker.com.

    http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features/bwiker_kinsey_nov04.asp
     

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)