Skip to comments.
Ban MGM/UA over Kinsey Film! (Hollywood Sinks to New Lows)
myself, after seeing EW Fall Movie Preview
| 8/16/2004
| Pyro7480
Posted on 08/16/2004 1:41:18 PM PDT by Pyro7480
This November, MGM/UA will be releasing a movie based on the life of Alfred Kinsey, an "academic" who released two "studies," Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, which legitimized the sexual revolution in the 1960s, and is still being used to legitimize sexually perverted behavior. Kinsey himself was a sexual pervert himself, being a homosexual, a probable pedophile, and a S&M freak.
In Entertainment Weekly's fall movie preview, the movie is previewed. Liam Neeson plays Kinsey, and from the companion picture, Neeson indeed looks like Kinsey. The director and producer, Bill Condon, describes Kinsey as "half scientist, half preacer," when Kinsey's own research has been thoroughly debunked. In the last paragraph of the article, it states that the cast and crew is "bracing for conservative reaction to the touchy content," which includes graphic images of human genitalia. Laura Linney, who plays Kinsey's wife in the movie, states that "[p]eople just flip out. They feel like the fabric of American society is coming undone" (which is the truth, Ms. Linney!)
Like the pressure CBS faced when they were planning to show their propaganda piece on the Reagans, we need to pressure both MGM/UA (to threaten to ban ALL of their flicks) and the MPAA (to rate the movie NC-17, undercutting the money the studio could make). Hollywood has sunk to a new low with this propaganda piece.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alfredkinsey; boycotthollywood; celebrateperversity; childabuse; childmolestation; childsexualabuse; criminalsubjects; culture; drkinsey; fraud; hollyweird; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; indiana; indianauniversity; indoctrination; itsjustsex; kinsey; kinseyinstitute; medicalexperiments; mgm; orgies; pedophilia; personalgain; pervert; playeddoctor; prisoners; pseudoscience; quack; revolution; sciencefiction; seduction; sex; sexcrimes; sexfarm; sexpositiveagenda; sexstudies; sexual; sexualabuse; sexualdeviant; sexualizingchildren; sexualmolestation; socialengineering; taxdollarsatwork; ua; witchdoctors; youpayforthis
1
posted on
08/16/2004 1:41:23 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
To: steplock; bvw; canuck_conservative; holyscroller; weegee; KC_Conspirator; Bahbah; Tamsey; ...
2
posted on
08/16/2004 1:42:10 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
To: Pyro7480
What a great idea! Draw attention to a crappy movie, and make people wonder what it is that those religious conservatives don't want you to see!
3
posted on
08/16/2004 1:45:21 PM PDT
by
Lunatic Fringe
(This tagline was censored by freerepublic.com!)
To: Pyro7480

"It's okay. I'm a licensed therapist. I know what I'm doing." :)
4
posted on
08/16/2004 1:46:06 PM PDT
by
KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
(I feel more and more like a revolted Charlton Heston, witnessing ape society for the very first time)
To: Lunatic Fringe
So you want people to do nothing?
5
posted on
08/16/2004 1:47:46 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
To: Pyro7480
Boycott, yes. Work to get it rated NC-17, yes. Ban? No. No matter how revolting you find it (and I would tend to agree with you, myself), banning is not the answer. People will see it anyway, and all banning does it give those behind it a martyr complex to use to their benefit. We simply cannot resort to banning that with which we disagree. We can work to show others how and why it is wrong, but banning is counterproductive, to say the least.
To put it another way, as my pop once told me, if you want to show people that a man who disagrees with you is dead wrong, you don't silence him. You give him a soapbox and invite others to hear him speak, then counter his claims and show how wrong he is.
6
posted on
08/16/2004 1:48:10 PM PDT
by
Jokelahoma
(Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
To: Pyro7480
a probable pedophile What's a probable peadophile? He either was one, or he wasn't.
7
posted on
08/16/2004 1:49:31 PM PDT
by
Happygal
(Liberals - fully au fait with their 'rights', utterly ignorant of their responsibilities)
To: Pyro7480
I know EXACTLY how to deal with the MGM/UA guys who decided this.
Put them and their children through the crap Kinsey put people through and then see how they feel afterwards.
Cruel and inhuman, but poetic irony/justice for thier decision.
Of course, common sense says we can't do that.
So we boycott them.
8
posted on
08/16/2004 1:49:45 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(I'll bayonet your snowmen and beat you down with a chinese yo-yo!!)
To: Pyro7480
It's a stupid-sounding film that no one will bother seeing
unless a big stink is raised about how no one should see it. There are more important things to worry about.
9
posted on
08/16/2004 1:50:06 PM PDT
by
TheBigB
(I'm more frustrated than a legless Ethiopian watching a doughnut roll down a hill.)
To: Pyro7480
Please take me off your ping list.
10
posted on
08/16/2004 1:54:38 PM PDT
by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
To: gcruse
I apologize. I saw your contribution to one of the past threads, and I thought you would be interested.
11
posted on
08/16/2004 1:57:57 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
To: Pyro7480
Please take me off your ping list.
12
posted on
08/16/2004 1:59:04 PM PDT
by
sharktrager
(The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And the paving contractor lives in Chappaqua.)
To: sharktrager
13
posted on
08/16/2004 2:00:19 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(Sub tuum praesidium confugimus, sancta Dei Genitrix.... sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper...)
To: TheBigB
Very intelligent decision!And effective.
14
posted on
08/16/2004 2:00:31 PM PDT
by
loboinok
To: Pyro7480; ItsOurTimeNow; little jeremiah; scripter; lentulusgracchus; ArGee; Bryan
15
posted on
08/16/2004 2:06:35 PM PDT
by
EdReform
(Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
To: Pyro7480
Laura Linney (yum!) and Liam Neeson? They don't have any better offers coming in?
16
posted on
08/16/2004 2:11:07 PM PDT
by
Rummyfan
To: Jokelahoma
I think you misread - he doesn't want to ban the movie, merely the entire MGM/UA studio and related companies. A much smaller undertaking than merely 'banning' a movie...
17
posted on
08/16/2004 2:19:12 PM PDT
by
flashbunny
(Click on my name!!! I dare you!!!)
To: Pyro7480
Kinsey was a mediocre zoologist with no qualifications at all for carrrying out the type of "study" he claimed to have done. His subjects were almost exclusively homosexuals, prostitutes and other low-lifes like himself.
To: flashbunny
Ah, I see. Well, never mind then! If one can ban an entire corporation, well more power to one! Once successful, if we could then move on to perhaps banning entire schools of thought, that would help, too. Then again, it would be much better for humanity to simply ban, say, disease, or perhaps hunger. :-)
Is it too late to say "I'm sticking to my original post on this"?
19
posted on
08/16/2004 2:31:04 PM PDT
by
Jokelahoma
(Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
To: Pyro7480
Are you sure it's not Bill Condom?
To: Pyro7480
Concerned Women for America have a campaign to force congressional hearings on the fraud Kinsey perpetrated on the American public. Hope it suceeds.
To: Pyro7480
Kinsey was a disgusting man who sexually abused very young children, even infants, as part of his 'research,' then was lauded for his findings as he extrapolated all of it into theory. God help us if we don't hold him accountable by proxy - MGM will do fine.
To: TheBigB
So we ignore this sickening propaganda piece glorifying a criminal pervert? Just like conservatives ignored the homosexual agenda for years? Ignoring it with the same success as firefighters ignoring a wildfire.
Evil ignored is evil promoted. Evil has to have the light of truth shone on it.
I plan to freep the movie if it arrives at my local theaters. Thinking about signs now.
23
posted on
08/16/2004 2:49:23 PM PDT
by
little jeremiah
(I am a proud pervertophile-phobe.)
To: Pyro7480
we need to pressure both MGM/UA (to threaten to ban ALL of their flicks
I had no idea MGM/UA made any movies anymore, other than James Bond flicks.
24
posted on
08/16/2004 2:52:11 PM PDT
by
Galactic Overlord-In-Chief
(Kerry, you have low poll numbers but I have good news. I just saved hundreds by switching to Geico.)
To: little jeremiah
Go right ahead. You'll accomplish nothing but to bring more attention to the film and give it a great tagline. The film THEY didn't want you to see!
25
posted on
08/16/2004 3:04:43 PM PDT
by
TheBigB
(I'm more frustrated than a legless Ethiopian watching a doughnut roll down a hill.)
To: TheBigB
Okay, I see your point. I'll just go back to sleep, after I check out what's on TV. If everyone ignored evil, we'd all be SOOOO much better off.
26
posted on
08/16/2004 3:12:32 PM PDT
by
little jeremiah
(I am a proud pervertophile-phobe.)
To: little jeremiah; MeekOneGOP; Flyer; Xenalyte; The Mayor; RonDog; kristinn
I plan on boycotting the movie myself.
If you or anyone else can come up with a one sheet on the facts regarding that pervert Kinsey to hand out when the film hits theaters, please let me know.
It's Freepin' Time!
27
posted on
08/16/2004 3:12:55 PM PDT
by
Houmatt
(I love my wife. You got a problem with that?)
To: Pyro7480
Hey! That's a great Idea! Let's get our knickers all a twisted over a movie most people would probably never go and see, and get them all excited about going to see it because we've got our knickers in a bunch...
Can you say "Last Temptation of Christ"? I know you can
To: little jeremiah
It's a movie. A film. Images on celluloid. It's no more "evil" than a gun. Inanimate objects have no capacity for good or evil, only people do. THINK!
Ignore it and I guarantee it'll be out of theaters in two or three weeks and then deservedly forgotten.
29
posted on
08/16/2004 3:37:40 PM PDT
by
TheBigB
(I'm more frustrated than a legless Ethiopian watching a doughnut roll down a hill.)
To: Lord_Baltar
If they were going to be consistent, I would think they'd be ready to picket any video stores than rent F911, or LToC, or that will carry this one.
Or they could picket the bookstores that carry and sell the Kinsey books. And MM's books, and occult books. If we're to confront evil, that would make sense, wouldn't it?
I mean, wouldn't it?
30
posted on
08/16/2004 3:41:55 PM PDT
by
TheBigB
(I'm more frustrated than a legless Ethiopian watching a doughnut roll down a hill.)
To: TheBigB
Well, if they were really going to be consistent, they'd hang a couple of sandwich boards around their necks that read "The End is Near, Repent", and take care of it all in one felled swoop...
To: Pyro7480

This is an excellent page that sums up important issues from her book. Kinsey was a homosexual pedophile. Out of 1,746 children abused in the "sexual studies", only 7 were girls. Kinsey's own notes show that infants were sexually stimulated until screaming, crying and in convulsions.
http://www.fathersforlife.org/kinsey1.htm
32
posted on
08/16/2004 4:37:12 PM PDT
by
Tamzee
(Tell me honestly, Honey... do these classified documents make me look fat?)
To: flashbunny
It's not as if the homosexual activists haven't done the same thing in the past to bring pressure to bear:
http://www.stopdrlaura.com/
What's next? A film championing the medical experiments of Dr. Josef/Joseph Mengele?
33
posted on
08/16/2004 8:19:51 PM PDT
by
weegee
(YOU could have been aborted, and you wouldn't have had a CHOICE about it.)
To: TheBigB
It's a movie. A film. Images on celluloid. It's no more "evil" than a gun. Inanimate objects have no capacity for good or evil, only people do. Then why did the Nazis spend so much effort producing films like Triumph of the Will and The Eternal Jew?
34
posted on
08/16/2004 8:22:52 PM PDT
by
weegee
(YOU could have been aborted, and you wouldn't have had a CHOICE about it.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson