Tag Archives: alfred kinsey

Yale hosts workshop teaching sensitivity to bestiality

Yale hosts workshop teaching sensitivity to bestiality
Katherine Timpf
On Saturday afternoon, Yale hosted a “sensitivity training” in which students were asked to consider topics such as bestiality, incest, and accepting money for sex.

Sexologist Dr. Jill McDevitt.

During the workshop, entitled, “Sex: Am I Normal,” students anonymously asked and answered questions about sex using their cell phones, and viewed the responses in real time in the form of bar charts.

The session was hosted by “sexologist” Dr. Jill McDevitt, who owns a sex store called Feminique in West Chester, Pa.

Survey responses revealed that nine percent of attendees had been paid for sex, 3 percent had engaged in bestiality, and 52 percent had participated in “consensual pain” during sex, according to an article published in the Yale Daily News on Monday.

Event director Giuliana Berry ’14 told Campus Reform in an interview on Monday that the workshop was brought to campus to teach students not to automatically judge people who may have engaged in these sorts of activities, but rather to respond with “understanding” and “compassion.”

“People do engage in some of these activities that we believe only for example perverts engage in,” she said. “What the goal is is to increase compassion for people who may engage in activities that are not what you would personally consider normal.”

McDevitt referred to the range of activities discussed in the workshop as “sexual diversity.”

“It tries to get people to be more sensitive … to sexual diversity,” McDevitt told Campus Reform in an interview on Monday. “We’re not all heterosexual, able-bodied folks who have standard missionary sex.”

Several students submitted discussion topics about having incestuous sexual fantasies. Attendee Alex Saeedy ’15, told the News that he at first found this surprising, but then “thought it might be more of a psychological thing we all might have.

“I think that’s what the point of the workshop was — to bring up things we thought we so taboo and desire or urges we criticize are just regular parts of sexual psychology,” he said.

During the workshop, McDevitt taught the approximately 40 students that just because people think something is deviant does not mean that it is bad.

“It’s sensitivity training,” McDevitt told Campus Reform. “Don’t judge other people, because we all have something we are embarrassed about.”

The event was part of Yale’s Sex Weekend, which ran from Feb. 28 through March 3. Sponsors included Yale Women’s Center, Undergraduate Organizations Committee, the Sexual Harassment and Assault Response Education Center at Yale, and SeLF: The Sexual Literacy Forum.

A Guide to Casual Sex

A Guide to Casual Sex

“Studies” are skewed to normalize self-destructive behavior. The perennial Luciferian (i.e. Communist) goal is the abolition of marriage and family through promiscuity and gender bending. And, on an occult level, nothing is more degrading & dehumanizing than anonymous sex.

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

Let’s see how modern sexual depravity is studied and sanctioned by the latest “academic research.”

On Friday, The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality made the discovery that the “one night stand” had multiplied into a variety of distinctive relationships.

Moreover, the University of Ottawa-based study decided that the nuances governing different types of anonymous sex are widely understood and never the cause of hurt or embarrassment.

In fact, the sex researchers actually think casual sex is an excellent preparation for love and marriage. The following description is abbreviated from the study. Tell me if this behavior is “empowering”, as the researchers claim, or degrading and disgusting:

The “Booty Call”
A “booty call,” is usually requested late at night while the caller is impaired, often through a text message. If there is no response, there is no feeling of rejection.

The partners know each other and at least one has the other’s phone number, but they are not friends.

Monogamy is not discussed or expected. There are few or no emotionally intimate acts such as hand-holding or kissing. There is no need to terminate the relationship. It’s over when one or the other partner decides not to call, or to ignore a call.

F*** buddy

A long-term booty call may evolve into a F*** buddy relationship, and this may develop into a friendship. (“I think a booty call is once in a while. If it’s more often than that, say a couple of times a week or more than that, then I think you would call it a f*** buddy,” said one participant.)

A f*** buddy is considered a closer relationship than a booty call. The partners may engage in social activities such as going to a movie.

There is no need for a formal termination of the relationship. If there is a friendship, it is likely to lapse. As the partners meet more than once for sex, the possibility of a dating relationship (hand-holding, romance, dinner) decreases.


Friends with benefits

Partners had a pre-existing friendship before the sexual relationship. The parameters of the relationship are discussed before sex is initiated. Although there is an expectation that the relationship won’t become romantic, it is understood that this possibility may create problems.

Friends with benefits are not necessarily monogamous, but they must inform the other partner if they get involved with someone else. Alcohol may be involved in the initiation of the sexual relationship. Discretion is expected. The partners may terminate their sexual relationship if mutual friends find out about it because the relationship may endanger the group dynamic.The partners can socialize with each other without any intention to have sex.

The Traditional One Night Stand

The partners are not already friends or acquainted. There is no discussion of what each partner wants out of the relationship. Staying overnight is acceptable but that’s it. (“You wake up and leave. You don’t stay and have coffee and breakfast or anything like that,” said one participant.)

Typically, there is no further contact and no need to terminate the relationship, although on occasion these develop into committed relationships. If the partners meet again for sex, the relationship is considered a booty call.

Read This Without Throwing Up

Alex McKay, research co-ordinator at the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada, believes these relationships are widespread throughout North America. He says there has been a “liberalization of sexual norms” in Western culture, which has led to an increasing feeling of “empowerment on the part of both young men and women to make controlled decisions about sexuality.”

Spoken like a true sex educator. Anonymous sex makes you feel empowered?

“You wake up and leave. You don’t stay and have coffee and breakfast or anything like that,” said one participant.

There’s more. “It enables them to make good choices in term of long-term relationships,” McKay says.

Clearly sex education is state-sanctioned psychological sex abuse.

A Moment of Nostalgia

Let’s reflect on sexual relationships before the triumph of liberalism, freemasonry and progress, a.k.a, thinly-disguised satanism led by the illuminati.

To begin, we were not a society of sex addicts feeding our habit with readily available cocaina (porn.)

We were not constantly sexually-titillated by the media. Obscenity was not an option; it was banned. Sex was not a compulsive recreational activity divorced from love, marriage and procreation.

On the contrary, sex was consecrated for marriage and most people were happy with this arrangement, despite what the Illuminati media and scholars tell us.

Women had an honored life-long status as wives and mothers. They were not taught to seek status as porn stars and prostitutes.

Women were far more “empowered” because men had to court and marry them to get sex. In other words, men had to establish a profound relationship and treat women as human beings, as opposed to a dog’s lamp post.

Women who consecrated themselves for marriage were far more likely to stick with it than veterans of a long string of f*** buddies. Men could rely on a chaste committed woman to be a good wife and fit mother for their children.

CONCLUSION

This tawdry study of casual sex befits a university located in Ottawa, the capital city of Canada, which sports the satanic sign “666″ from every street sign, bus, park and city vehicle.

That’s right folks, the city logo is a stylized O with three tails. The logo proclaims secret Luciferian dominion to all who can decipher the not-so-hidden message.

We are living in a toxic secular (re. satanic) age, getting darker. (Reject God, who’s left?) They will maintain prosperity until their police state is consolidated using the pretext of “terrorism.” (They need a world police state to protect their monopoly on credit.) Then, they will take away the cookie jar. Never forget, in their eyes, we are useless eaters.

Wealth is not compatible with powerlessness, and the middle classes are complacently relinquishing all power. 50% of the world’s population lives on $2 a day and that number is increasing.

“Studies” like the above are skewed to normalize self-destructive behavior. The perennial Luciferian (i.e. Communist) goal is the abolition of marriage and family through promiscuity and gender bending. And, on an occult level, nothing is more degrading & dehumanizing than anonymous sex. Alfred Kinsey would be proud.

Happily human instincts and common sense are often stronger than Illuminati social engineering.

SOURCE

Does Sex Ed Undermine Parental Rights?

Does Sex Ed Undermine Parental Rights?

By ROBERT P. GEORGE and MELISSA MOSCHELLA

IMAGINE you have a 10- or 11-year-old child, just entering a public middle school. How would you feel if, as part of a class ostensibly about the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, he and his classmates were given “risk cards” that graphically named a variety of solitary and mutual sex acts? Or if, in another lesson, he was encouraged to disregard what you told him about sex, and to rely instead on teachers and health clinic staff members?

That prospect would horrify most parents. But such lessons are part of a middle-school curriculum that Dennis M. Walcott, the New York City schools chancellor, has recommended for his system’s newly mandated sex-education classes. There is a parental “opt out,” but it is very limited, covering classes on contraception and birth control.

Observers can quarrel about the extent to which what is being mandated is an effect, or a contributing cause, of the sexualization of children in our society at younger ages. But no one can plausibly claim that teaching middle-schoolers about mutual masturbation is “neutral” between competing views of morality; the idea of “value free” sex education was exploded as a myth long ago. The effect of such lessons is as much to promote a certain sexual ideology among the young as it is to protect their health.

But beyond rival moral visions, the new policy raises a deeper issue: Should the government force parents — at least those not rich enough to afford private schooling — to send their children to classes that may contradict their moral and religious values on matters of intimacy and personal conduct?

Liberals and conservatives alike should say no. Such policies violate parents’ rights, whether they are Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist or of no religion at all. To see why, we need to think carefully about the parent-child relationship that gives rise to the duties that parental rights serve and protect.

Parents are responsible for bringing new people into the world, bound to them by blood and, ordinarily, deep feeling. These people are incapable of developing their uniquely human capacities on their own, giving parents an obligation to their children and to society to help them reach maturity — one that requires attending not only to children’s physical and emotional needs, but their intellectual and moral growth as well.

Parenting, especially in moral and religious matters, is very important and highly personal: while parents enlist others’ help in this task, the task is theirs. They are ultimately responsible for their children’s intellectual and moral maturity, so within broad limits they must be free to educate their children, especially on the deepest matters, as they judge best. This is why parental rights are so important: they provide a zone of sovereignty, a moral space to fulfill their obligations according to their consciences.

The right to parent is rather like the right to exercise one’s religion. Like parental duties, religious duties are serious and highly personal. This is why, absent the most serious reasons, it would be a grave violation of individual rights if the state prevented people from honoring what they regarded as their religious obligations. To subject children to indoctrination in deeply personal matters against their parents’ consciences is no less a violation than forcing Muslim parents to send their children to a Catholic Mass.

True, the state needs to protect children from abuse and neglect. It is also true that the state has a legitimate interest in reducing teenage pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. But it is not abuse or neglect to protect the innocence of preteenage children or to teach one’s children more conservative, as opposed to more liberal, moral values. Nor is it wrong or unreasonable to limit the state’s control over what one’s children learn and think about sensitive issues of morality. On the contrary, that is just what is required if parents are to fulfill their duties and exercise their legitimate rights.

Unless a broader parental opt out is added, New York City’s new policies will continue to usurp parents’ just (and constitutionally recognized) authority. Turning a classroom into a mandatory catechism lesson for a contested ideology is a serious violation of parental rights, and citizens of every ideological hue should stand up and oppose it.

Robert P. George is a professor of politics at Princeton and the founder of the American Principles Project. Melissa Moschella is a doctoral candidate in political theory at Princeton.

SOURCE

The Institutional Sexualization of Children


Mandatory Sex Ed Details May Be Too Racy for Parents: Report

Details about the new sex education curriculum in New York City public schools are out — and some are concerned the lessons are too racy.

The New York Post obtained workbooks that will be used for the new recommended curriculum, which begins in middle schools and high schools around the city next spring. Parents, they say, may be shocked by details of the work.

Middle school students will be assigned “risk cards” that rate the safety of different activities, the paper says, from French kissing to oral sex.

The workbooks for older students direct them to a website run by Columbia University, which explores topics such as sexual positions, porn stars, and bestiality. The lessons explain risky sexual behavior and suggest students go to stores to jot condom brands and prices.

The Department of Education says the curriculum “stresses that abstinence is the best way to avoid pregnancy and STD/HIV” and reminded the Post that parents have the option to exclude their kids from lessons on “methods of prevention.”

When given details of the new programs, one Manhattan mom — who has a child in middle-school — was surprised.

“I didn’t know how much detail they would get,”
she said.

In August, Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs commended the return of mandatory sex ed, saying the DOE wants to give students the correct information about sexual activity if they do choose to engage in it.

“We want to help kids to delay the onset of sexual activity, and if they choose to engage in sexual activity, to do it in a healthy way,” she said.

The classes will be coeducational, and can be incorporated into existing health education courses.

SOURCE

Mainstreaming pedophilia

They’re mainstreaming pedophilia

Judith Reisman attends confab pushing orientation ‘Minor-Attracted Persons’

By Judith Reisman
WorldNetDail

Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.

Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.

Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.

Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”

However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.

In 1973, our “post Kinsey era,” a small APA committee of psychiatrists, quite terrified by homosexist public harassment, agreed to rely on Kinsey’s fraudulent human sexuality “data” to redefine homosexuality as normal, removing it from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of mental disorders.

The APA decision was hyped in college textbooks, law journal articles, judicial rulings, and by 1974 pitched as high-school sex education. Soon the homosexist lobby would sail into primary schools and kindergartens by agitating recurring AIDS “prevention,” “bullying” and “hate” panics.

To redefine homosexuality as a normal “orientation,” nature not nurture, researchers were told to ignore all data of early sex abuse or other trauma. This hoax was followed by the 1999 U.S. Department of Justice data that found 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims to be boys under age 12.

For after claiming 10 percent to 37 percent of men were sometime homosexual, Kinsey also said children are sexual from birth and so deserve to have sex with adults or youths (taught as a 1974 Planned Parenthood sex ed doctrine).

The APA path to pedophile norms follows the success of the homosexual anarchy campaign. Arguably, the pedophile media lobby directed the passionate boy-boy kisses on the TV series “Glee,” to enable fellow “Minor-Attracted Persons” to increasingly be seen as a boy’s sex “friend.”

B4U-ACT claims to “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma, and fear.” While the group claimed they want to teach pedophiles “how to live life fully and stay within the law,” no one suggested how to stop their child lust or molestation.

Barber asked what “age of consent” the group proposed and what role pornography plays as a causative factor in child sex abuse. No one would answer the first question, and all denied any harm from pornography.

Arguably, due to our presence, Dr. Berlin (who sat next to me during the entire event) admitted that occasionally pornography could trigger sexual acting out. He also expressed a personal belief that pre-pubescent children (that is, under about age 10) cannot consent, and that perhaps even teenagers might be sexually vulnerable.

All speakers focused on pedophiles as healthy, normal and unfairly victimized by stigma and mean words. Following repeated assertions that pedophiles never force children, are gentle and loving, one researcher did cite a child “victim” who was raped and sodomized.

One speaker laughingly compared doing an obscene act “on” a child to doing the same obscene act on a shoe. No one protested, and some chuckled. One young female suggested pedophiles might be helped by engaging in “sex play” using naked pictures of pseudo children, allied with some sadism, bridal gowns, etc. This Ph.D. social worker candidate proudly noted her objection to any “repression.

For their attendance, the pedophile political activists could earn 6.0 units of continuing education credits by the “Maryland Board of Social Work Examiners.” These 12 board members credentialed this pedophile academic farce, giving higher education credits to allow felons and near-felons to advance their child sexual abuse agenda by using bogus and fraudulent research. I would encourage people to complain to the board at this link.

Committed to quietly monitoring this meeting, I offered a few unwelcome closing remarks. I noted the arrogance of this group’s conclusion that Americans’ fear for child safety is due to a puritanical “sex panic.” Since the Department of Justice found 58,200 children kidnapped by non-family members in 1999, such fear seems well-placed.

Before leaving the issue of stigma and hate speech, note a few excerpts from BOYCHAT April 15 by some of these “social worker” credentialed pedophiles:

“Judith Reisman” is “with the worst of them … dehumanizing hate speech … extreme christian [sic], right wing … alarmist … creating gross distrotions [sic] … no genuine integrity … a harlot. … Judith did, in fact, make [Kinsey’s sexual stimulation of infants and toddlers] sound like horrendously violent, child sexual assault … [she is a] horrible, wretched scumbag … pathetic, sorry excuse for a human being. … The world will become a less wretched place, the second Judith Reisman drops dead [from natural causes, of course, though I’d not complain if she got accidentally ran over by a semi]. … With Love, Stevie-D.”

Love? What was that about stigma and hate speech?

SOURCE

Sexual anarchy: The Kinsey legacy

Sexual anarchy: The Kinsey legacy

by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D. and Mary E. McAlister, Esq.

On August 17, 2011, more than 50 activists attended a conference for “minor-attracted adults,” i.e., pedophiles, which sought to eliminate the “stigma” attached to pedophilia and to redefine pedophilia as a normal “sexual orientation.” The United States Department of Justice has determined that 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims are boys under the age of 12 and that 58,200 children were kidnapped by non-family members in 1999.

So-called “experts” in the field of human sexuality claim that children are sexual not only from birth, but even in the womb and are willing participants in sexual acts with adults.

Children are encouraged to experiment with sex early and often and to engage in sex with members of the same-sex as well as the opposite sex. Sexually transmitted diseases among teenagers are at epidemic proportions, and new and sometimes fatal strands of diseases are being reported. More than 50,000 teens have contracted HIV which has advanced to full blown AIDS and by 1992 more than 7,000 boys and 1,500 girls have died from HIV/AIDS.

How did we get here? How do we stop the madness before we lose an entire generation?

The question of how we got here can be answered by two words: Alfred Kinsey. Even 55 years after his death, Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey continues to profoundly affect American culture. Two of his most ardent supporters, Dr. Carol Vance, Columbia University anthropologist and lesbian activist, and Dr. John Money, an “out” pedophile advocate and pioneer of transgender surgery at Johns Hopkins, have cogently summed up Dr. Kinsey’s legacy – a legacy they consider sexual “progress” but is in reality sexual anarchy.

Speaking at a 1998 Kinsey symposium of fellow sexologists at San Francisco State University, Dr. Vance said, “Biography is the battleground.” Should Kinsey be discredited, she warned, “200 years of sexual progress can be undone.”

Dr. Vance’s statements echo comments made in 1981 by Dr. Money at the 5th World Congress of Sexology in Israel. They also agreed that the information contained in Table 34, below, and the other data chronicling Kinsey’s and his team’s widespread child abuse, described in detail in Kinsey’s 1948 study on male sexuality, would be the undoing of the “Pre and Post Kinsey eras” globally and in the USA.

In fact, Dr. John Bancroft, director of the Kinsey Institute said at the 1998 conference, which commemorated the 50th anniversary of Kinsey’s studies, that he “prayed” that a British television program, “Secret History: Kinsey Paedophiles,” would never be shown in the United States because the public would not understand the “science” involved in Kinsey’s publication of tables 30-34. He understood that should those tables be widely publicized in the United States, then the whole field of human sexuality and human sex education would be destroyed.

This field of human sexuality and human sex education and 200 years of “sexual progress” that these elite “scientists” were so worried would be destroyed is better described as sexual anarchy. This sexual anarchy that has given these scientists and their followers prestige, money, credibility and control over the deconstruction of the Judeo-Christian civil society was crafted by Dr. Kinsey.

A gall-wasp zoologist at Indiana University from 1920 to his death in 1956, Dr. Kinsey is most famous for his earth-shaking books, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948)[2] and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953),[3] funded by Indiana University and the Rockefeller Foundation. Dr. Kinsey said that his mission was to eliminate the sexually “repressive” legal and behavioral legacy of Judeo Christianity. He claimed that this “repressive” sexual legacy was responsible for socio-sexual ills like divorce, rape, illegitimacy, venereal disease, juvenile delinquency, promiscuity, homosexuality, adultery, and child sexual abuse.

Furthermore, he argued that if we Americans would admit that we really were engaged in widespread licentious conduct, instead of hypocritically denying it, then these socio-sexual ills would be dramatically reduced.

In large measure, Dr. Kinsey’s mission has been accomplished, mostly posthumously, by his legion of true believers–elitists who have systematically brainwashed their fellow intellectual elites to adopt Kinsey’s pan-sexual secular worldview and jettison the Judeo Christian worldview upon which this country was founded and flourished.

The result of Dr. Kinsey’s mission has been totally antithetical to the utopia he predicted. Instead of reducing the socio-sexual ills that he claimed were rampant in pre-Kinsey America, the implementation of the Kinsey worldview has increased extant global sexual trauma while ushering in a host of new ills that are objectively defined as sexual anarchy. Like a cancer spreading throughout the body, sexual anarchy has spread throughout the fabric of society, affecting every aspect of American life and every man, woman and child.

According to the Rockefeller-funded Kinsey “study,” his “science” proved that humans had all along been copulating like insects or monkeys but systematically and hypocritically lying about their conduct. Adults claimed they were virgins, or maritally faithful, but, according to Kinsey, the truth was that most people were promiscuous and the widespread promiscuity had done no harm to the civil society.

Therefore, Kinsey said, all of the laws restraining sexual behavior–the laws that had favored and protected women, children and the family for generations –were simply old-fashioned leftovers from an uninformed and hypocritical era. Such sex laws were no longer valid in a “sexually enlightened and honest era.”

LIES: The TRUTH about Dr. Alfred C Kinsey
Enter “Kinsey’s pamphleteer,” Hugh Hefner and his Playboy magazine. At Kinsey’s urging, the country’s laws were gutted to resemble the free love, free life style Kinsey alleged Americans were living all along, and could finally live out with a free and open spirit–no more lies or pretense. Thus the 1955 American Law Institute Model Penal Code jettisoned the “common law” sexual standards that were based upon Biblical authority/precedent for “scientific law” based on Kinsey’s allegedly “objective data.”

The ALI recommended laws trivializing rape and allowing fornication, cohabitation, sodomy and adultery. Shortly thereafter, fornication, cohabitation and adultery were decriminalized so that they would become common, normal, and harmless, as Kinsey said they had been all along. In 1957, the United States Department of Defense used Kinsey and his team to conclude that homosexuals do not pose a security risk.

The ALI also recommended changing the definition of obscenity, which the Supreme Court did in 1960. That same year Kinsey’s claim that 10% to 37% of the male population is at least sometimes homosexual was used to promote “gay rights” in elite professions, e.g., medicine, psychiatry, social work, education, etc.

In 1961, Illinois became the first state to legalize heterosexual sodomy. In 1962 Ralph Slovenko wrote in the Vanderbilt Law Review that four or five year olds are provocateurs: “Even at the age of four or five, this seductiveness may be so powerful as to overwhelm the adult into committing the offense.”

That same year, the United States Supreme Court declared prayer in public schools unconstitutional[4] and the following year declared that Bible reading in public schools was unconstitutional.[5] The Judeo-Christian worldview was expunged from the classroom. Schools could no longer teach that fornication, adultery or cohabitation were illegal, nor could the health teachers imply that sex should be confined to marriage because that would reflect a “religious,” thus allegedly a non-scientific, worldview.

The only avenue remaining for the teaching of human reproduction was the “scientific,” i.e., Kinseyan, secular worldview.

By 1968 over 51,000 sex professionals had been trained by the unaccredited IASHS (Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality) to teach Kinseyan sexuality in schools and medical schools and to design school sex education curricula. In 1975, the IASHS began to accredit sex educators in “safe sex” through the Ph.D. level.

Contraception became a necessity in the face of the radical changes in the sexual landscape, and so it was legalized in 1965.

As evidence of lack of “consent” became the only criteria for sex crimes, alleged rape victims were commonly challenged as “liking” the rough sex and as consenting to the sexual activity. Prostitution and rape were increasingly referred to as “victimless crimes” in the courts and in the media.

Thus, the right to have sex for ‘fun’ and profit became the justification for a sex industry, inaugurated by Kinsey’s publicist, Hugh Hefner, that includes child and adult pornography, exhibitionism, prostitution and strip clubs, to name a few. That industry has grown to a multi-billion dollar market, giving its purveyors the resources and clout to negotiate grants to sexology research groups and organizations that create the sex education curricula for the nation’s schools, as well as access to lobbyists and, arguably, to state and federal legislators to continue to change the law to favor the sex industry’s interests.

Playboy, et. al also have funded Planned Parenthood, Sex Information & Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), the Kinsey Institute, and other “sexology” institutions. In 1967, Playboy provided the first of many grants to the ACLU to support drug use, pornography, abortion, homosexuality, school sex [mis]education and the elimination or reduction of sex offender penalties. Beginning in 1970, Playboy officially granted funds to NORML, the National Organization for the Repeal of Marijuana Laws.

The year 1969 brought about significant events related to the systematic effort to normalize homosexuality as championed by Kinsey 21 years earlier. The Gay Liberation Front was formed at the New York Alternative University. The American Sociological Association officially stated that homosexuality is normal, citing Kinsey’s “research.” The National Institutes of Mental Health Task Force on Homosexuality recommended legalizing private consensual homosexual acts (sodomy) citing to Kinsey’s “data.”[7] In 1972, the NIMH Task Force, led by Kinseyan disciples, urged that homosexuality be taught as a normal sexual variation in the nation’s schools.

“No fault” divorce was ushered in by California in 1970. By 1985, no fault divorce was the law in 49 states. This triggered a massive increase in the divorce rate and the impovertization of women and children, increasing the need for welfare and abortion, with the latter legalized in 1973.[8]

The absence of fathers in the home decreased the economic, social, emotional and spiritual home life, which triggered epidemic child sexual abuse, increased promiscuity, increased criminality–including rape and prostitution–increased venereal diseases and sterility in young women. With no father in the home, children were significantly more vulnerable to molestation by older children, which was redefined as “harmless” peer sex play by Kinsey. This “harmless” sex play led to increased rates of venereal disease, promiscuity, homosexual acting out and suicide.

These disorders then opened the door to additional, more virulent forms of mandated sex [mis]education couched as “pride” in one’s sexual “orientation,” anti-bullying, AIDS prevention and more instruction in “safe sex,” including mutual masturbation, oral and anal sodomy and viewing pornography.

By 1981 Dr. Mary Calderone, SIECUS president and past medical director of Planned Parenthood, took Kinsey one step further, asserting that children are sexual in the womb (Kinsey said children were sexual from birth).

Calderone announced that awareness of childhood sexuality was a primary goal of her organization. This set the “scientific” standard for distributing condoms to children nationwide. Therapeutic interventions were instituted to aid the now increasingly traumatized youth. Pharmocological intervention also increased, including mandated Hepatitis B vaccines for infants and HPV vaccines for elementary age children as STD “protections,” both of which were advocated in a 1977 “Child Rights” pedophile manifesto.

Hundreds of pages could be written on these issues and the additional fallout from Kinsey’s successful promiscuity propaganda that plummeted Reagan’s shining City on a Hill into a state of sexual anarchy.

We must focus now on how we stop the madness – not by ignoring the problem or by giving up in despair. God is on our side, just as He was on the side of those who founded this country. God used 56 God-fearing men to stand up to the largest imperial force in the free world and birth this great nation. He can use us to stand up against the current state of sexual anarchy, return this nation to our Judeo-Christian roots and rescue our children from the enemy who seeks to steal, kill and dstroy. As beneficiaries of God’s miraculous creation of these United States we cannot do anything less. Kinsey and his disciples at the Kinsey Institute have had more than 60 years to re-shape American culture. With Dr. Reisman’s decades of research we have the weapons to gain the upper hand, and we must band together to create the Judeo-Christian answer to the Kinsey Institute. We have the backing of the God of the universe. We can and must win this battle.

Notes:

1
“Biography has become a battleground as moral conservatives like Dr. Judith Reisman strive to discredit
Alfred Kinsey in order to revisit another America era” warned Professor Carole Vance. Another infamous sexologist stated, “I have some problems, and I’m sure several of us do, with the use of the word “normal.” If you look at sexual abuse in children, the problem with defining it is, to what extent are we talking about aspects of behavior that we would call wrong….we don’t know really how harmful those experiences are….” (November 6, 1998, San Francisco State University seminar, “Kinsey At 50: Reflections On Changes In American Attitudes About Sexuality Half A Century After The Alfred Kinsey Studies,” lionizing Kinsey and addressing anarchist strategies for a new global sexual future).

2
In the same year, Carnegie Foundation funds the ABA/ALI Legal Education Committee. Other pro-Kinsey
books are published calling for sex law reforms and leniency for perpetrators.

3
In that year, the Reece congressional committee was prohibited from investigating Kinsey’s data. Also, Planned Parenthood is founded in Washington, D.C.

4
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962).

5
Abington School District v. Schempp, 372 U.S. 203 (1963).

6
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) (married couples), Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972)
(unmarried couples).

7
The Supreme Court upheld the criminalization of sodomy in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), but
then overturned Bowers and found that homosexual sodomy could no longer be criminalized in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). Lawrence was based largely on the 1955 ALI Model Penal Code, which has been widely referred to as a Kinsey document.

8
Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973). As Justice Kennedy noted in the Lawrence opinion, Griswold and
Eisenstadt were part of the background for the opinion in Roe. Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 565. This illustrates how Kinsey’s legacy has permeated every aspect of society.

SOURCE