Replies

They definitely don't demolish her credibility,they in fact confirm that when push came to shove they had to explain quite a bit of the data by claiming it was based on interviews with people who had observed children in these stages of arousal.These interviews were with parents and others who had observed (sex offenders) and it seems that they were "protected" identities.

He also states that some information was obtained from interviews with adults about their childhood memories of sexual experiences. Lots of holes and even a couple of admissions that Kinsey had intimated some things that were found to be untrue. Lot of it based on the observations of one man who Reissman,in her article,said was German and had either died in prison or was executed because after submitting all these observations he was later convicted of sexually abusing and killing a little girl,I believe.

I can tell you if I were defending my department,and most of the information came from the Chairman of the Kinsey Research Institute,I would have been embarrassed to have submitted so little of import. But I am sure he doesn't have to worry about funding because those who are intent on animalizing the world will continue to pour money into these psuedo-scientific studies that show what they want shown,true or not.

This is totally off the wall,but I would not be surprised if some of his data on children came right from Nazi files on experiments carried out in the concentration camps.Margaret Sanger was loosely connected somehow with Germany's pre-war plans for the Aryan nation.

Finally,there is one piece of information which does not look too good. The report says that Judith Reissman either sued or countersued the Kinsey Institute. The article says her lawyer dropped her and the suit was dismissed without prejudice,which it says means she can not file again. I would like to know the particulars on that.

The articles only dealt with the children and sex parts of the study,the poor research data and methodologies on adults was not addressed at all.

Which blog sites carried these articles?

Thanks for your critique - I tried to access these sites from work (where I am now) because I didn't really have time to look at them earlier while at home... I got the firewall not-so-gently telling me that I could not access the site.

Anyhow, the article and the person who thinks the linked articles demolish Dr. Reisman posted on Dominic Bettinelli's blogspot . Mark Shea's blogspot took it up a few days ago but that conversation seems to be over.

I'm going to try to find out more about that lawsuit... that is kind of weird.