It is my hope and prayer that these allegations, in spite of all of the evidence supporting them, are not true. The Kinsey Institute has claimed it has evidence that proves them false, but has yet to produce any evidence. We ask the Kinsey Institute to come clean and to produce any evidence to prove these allegations incorrect. Beverly LaHaye
QUESTION #1: Did Alfred Kinsey and his associates rape and molest children in the name of science?
Kinsey and his associates, at the very least, encouraged the rape and molestation of children in the name of science. Dr. Paul Gebhard, Kinseys co-author and a former director of the Kinsey Institute, said in a 1992 phone interview that several pedophiles timed child orgasms with stop watches, at our suggestion . . . we would ask them to watch it, and take notes, and . . . report back to us.
When asked during this interview about releasing the names of the children who were sexually abused, Gebhard said that was not possible. However, he did admit that the Kinsey Institute has possession of some names of the sexually abused children that were experimented on by pedophiles.
The fact that recording these criminal acts was suggested and encouraged–coupled with the fact that the criminals were actually trained by Kinsey and his associates–makes Dr. Alfred Kinsey a collaborator and a partner in the rape and molestation of these children. Kinsey also, according to Wardell Pomeroy, collected ejaculate from young boys, and stated that all of the data he provided in his volumes was validated by Kinsey himself.
QUESTION #2: Where did Kinseys subjectssome of whom were babiescome from?
JB: None of Dr. Kinseys subjects was a baby. His research relied on interviewing volunteers. Information on sexual responses in babies and young children reported in the two volumes was based on the observations of adults interviewed by Kinsey and his colleagues. These were either parents, teachers who had simply observed children, or adults who had engaged in sexual activity with children.
This response is a vain attempt to avoid the question of the babies by focusing on those doing the molesting. Table 31 in Kinseys own book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, (1948) clearly shows that babies as young as 2 months were criminally sexually abused. (A two-month-old is not capable of masturbation and therefore must have been molested.)
Dr. C.A. Tripp, a photographer at the Kinsey Institute, talked of trained observers on the Phil Donahue Show. Tripp said, Kinsey would only listen to responsible pedophiles who used stop watches to time their thing. Kinsey writes of trained observers in his 1948 study.
Gebhard admitted to the knowledge of some names of the children and all names of the pedophiles who raped the children as part of this study. The Kinsey Institute has also maintained that the Institute complies with all requests for information. However, Dr. Judith Reisman and other Kinsey critics have been denied access time and time again.
Dr. Paul Gebhard, the Institutes second director, responded personally to Dr. Reismans questions in 1981 on how Kinsey collected these data:
Some. . . were parents, mostly college educated. A few were nursery school owners or teachers. Others were homosexual males interested in older, but still prepubertal, children. One was a man who had numerous sexual contacts with male and female infants and children and, being of a scientific bent, kept detailed records of each encounter. Techniques involved were self-masturbation by the child, child-child sex play, and adult-child sexual contacts -chiefly manual or oral. [emphasis added]
At CWA we expect the doors of a university dedicated to academic freedom to be open to us. However, the doors of the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University have not been open to those devoted to and concerned about Americas Bible-based moral system, or, indeed, to any who might be critical of Kinsey Institute activities.
QUESTION #3: How did Kinsey get access to these children? Who, if anyone, gave consent?
JB: Kinsey did not have access to these children.
All four Kinsey Institute Directors, Drs. Kinsey, Gebhard, Reinisch and Bancroft, have conflicting stories regarding Kinseys role in child sexual abuse for his research. Lets find out how each of the Kinsey Institutes directors have responded to the question of the pedophile(s):
- Kinseys own skillfully crafted words imply that many technically trained pedophiles were involved. An excerpt from Kinseys Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948), page 177: Better data on preadolescent climax come from . . . adult males who have had sexual contacts with younger boys and who . . . recognize and interpret the boys experiences . . . 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 preadolescents who were either observed in self masturbation, or who were observed in contacts with other boys, or older adults.
- Paul Gebhard, Kinseys co-author, said in a 1992 phone interview that several pedophiles timed child orgasms with stop watches at our suggestion . . . we would ask them to watch it, and take notes, and . . . report back to us. Here Gebhard has admitted that Kinsey and his associates actually encouraged pedophiles to molest children in the name of science.
- Contradicting Dr. Gebhard, Dr. June Reinisch has testified that there were no grounds for Dr. Judith Reismans charges that Kinsey relied upon pedophiles as his trained child sex researchers. If the former director is speaking truthfully, then who did Kinsey rely on for his scientific information on infants orgasms? Her statement begs the question of who trained Kinseys technically trained child sex researchers. For Kinseys research to be considered scientifically valid, the research must have been conducted with the same methodology and under the same circumstances. Only Kinsey tells us the researchers were, in fact, trained. So, the obvious question is, who trained them? Dr. Gebhard admits Dr. Kinsey and his associates did.
- Dr. John Bancroft has told the pro-family community, I do not know how you reach the conclusion that modern sex education in the United States is based on these specific observations of pedophiles.
But Bancroft then contradicted himself, claiming that one scientific pedophile provided the orgasm data on the 317 infants and children. He told the Indianapolis Star (9-19-95): I have looked at the data on which these tables appear to be based, and I am fairly confident that the data for all 317 cases [of child orgasms] appear to be based on the observations of one man.
Later, Bancroft flatly denied his earlier admission of pedophiles and claimed (Herald Times, 9/15/95) that an elderly scientist was Kinseys lone child rapist. He also stated that the nation should blindly accept his assurance that that was not the case.
A mere three months later Bancroft demoted the scientist to a man trained in forestry (Washington Post, 12/8/95 and 12/28/95). The Washington Post (12/8/95) also quoted Bancroft as saying that Kinsey intentionally misled or lied: Kinsey gives the impression that the data came from three or four men, but it was just the one. Bancroft also surmised that Kinsey did not want that information revealed because the public might not react well to his use of data from a sex criminal. So now were back to the pedophile.
In a subsequent interview with The Washinton Post (12/28/95), Bancroft said that Kinseys report made it clear that the data came from a sex criminal . . . a pedophile.
QUESTION #4: Where are the Children of Table 34 today? Did they suffer? Are they still suffering emotionally and/or physically from his human experiments?
JB: The Children of Table 34 are children whose sexual responses had been documented by one man since 1917 and before Kinsey first met and interviewed him. This man subsequently made this documentation available to Kinsey. The identity and whereabouts of these children was never known to Kinsey or the Institute. Today, the youngest of these children would be well into their 50s, and many will have died.
James Jones, Kinseys newest biographer, admits that Kinsey asked the pedophiles to get him specific sex data.
Dr. Gebhard, Kinseys co-author and a former director of the Kinsey Institute, seems to think that Kinsey did know the identity of these children who were being abused. In a 1992 telephone interview, Gebhard admitted to the use of pedophiles to get child sex data, and he also admitted to the possession of the names of the sexually abused children that were experimented on.
So now why has Bancroft (who was not in the United States while Kinsey was compiling his research) just replied to CWAs allegations so emphatically that the 317 children of Table 34 were abused by just one pedophile? If there were many pedophiles (as Kinsey tells us), then someone must have trained the pedophiles and led them through the scientific experiment. Bancroft vehemently denied this charge. He decided to review Kinseys source, leading him to discover that there was, indeed, only one pedophile, and that the Kinsey Institute had no part in training the pedophiles as Dr. Gebhard has personally admitted.
In a Canadian television interview, Bancroft was asked if Kinsey was being academically dishonest by misleading people into thinking that the sexual abuse was conducted by several pedophiles, as opposed to just the one as Bancroft claims. Bancroft replied, When I got to the Kinsey Institute and these accusations were continuing, ah, some people were expressing, ah, some otherwise reasonable people were beginning to worry . . . People were beginning to express that concern therefore I decided to look more closely at the source of information and thats when I realized that actually, as far as the tables were concerned, that the information all came from this one man who had been collecting this information in an extraordinary methodological way throughout his life, since about 1917. . . . There is no reason to say that Kinsey has been dishonest. He probably had a good reason for obscuring whether it was one or three men, that is a minor detail. . . .
Historian Paul Robinson wrote in his 1976 pro-Kinsey book, The Modernization of Sex, nine adult males who had sexual relations with younger boys provided Kinsey with his data on the sexual response of 317 preadolescents (NYC: Harper & Row p. 88).
In December, 1990, C. A. Tripp, Ph.D., a Kinsey colleague, tried to control the damage caused by Dr. Reismans discovery of criminal child sexual abuse in Table 34. On the Phil Donahue Show, Dr. Tripp said in response to Reisman, yes, she is upset about the pedophiles, but they were responsible pedophiles -they used stop watches to record their thing.
Most recently, The Washington Post (December 8, 1995), quoted Dr. Bancroft, present Director of the Kinsey Institute on Kinseys child orgasm data: The material in the tables came from one man, an extraordinary man with incredible numbers of sexual experiments on which he kept very careful notes. Bancroft calls this extraordinary man an omniphile.
However, Kinsey, who directed the research, said he had nine adults observing little boys orgasms. Kinsey and co-author Paul Gebbard, say nine male sources, some technically trained, observed children in orgasm, for Kinseys research. Dr. Bancroft says it was not nine as Kinsey and Gebhard said, and it was not none, as Director June Reinisch said. Dr. Bancroft says it was just one omniphile.
When something so heinous as defiling infants occurs, it must be hard to get your story straight. Dr. Bancroft is morally responsible to release all of the information he has relating to these children and to the pedophiles who abused them. Come clean, Dr. Bancroft! America deserves the truth!
The over one-half million members of Concerned Women for America call upon the Kinsey Institute to release the names and whereabouts of these children (now mature adults) so they may be ensured of restitution. Like the victums of the infamous Tuskegee experiments, they, too, deserve restitution and answers regarding their inhumane treatment.
QUESTION #5: In the name of science, are similar experiments of adult-child contacts . . . chiefly manual and oral still being practiced on children at the Kinsey Institute?
JB: Experiments of adult-child contacts have never been practiced at the Kinsey Institute or anywhere else under the auspices of the Kinsey Institute.
It is quite possible that the Kinsey Institute is still encouraging human experiments on children. In 1995, Former Kinsey Institute Director Paul Gebhard made a statement to the Herald Times, (9/6/95) regarding the importance of pedophiles to child sexuality research: Of course we knew when we interviewed the pedophiles that they would continue the activity, but we didnt do anything about that.
Gebhard has admitted their collaboration! Directions for their sex crimes were given, said Gebhard, by their team.
Does the Kinsey Institute, located on the beautiful state-supported Indiana University, have bigger things than the sexual abuse of infants to hide from the unenlightened sensibilities of mainstream America today? Are the doors barricaded to an inquiry by the American people because we would not understand the greater sacrifice other subjects are making to fulfill the Kinsey Institutes mission today? Does the Kinsey Institutes scientific mission involving reproductive technologies continue to provide even greater freedom through research conducted no matter what? And American taxpayers are subsidizing the Kinsey Institute!
Come clean, Dr. Bancroft! America deserves the truth!
WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?
Dr. Bancroft himself referred to those who performed these human experiments as pedophiles, although he is now using the more palatable term, volunteers. He said that only one man contributed the research for Table 34. However, the other contributors, or trained observers, are contained in the other tables.
This brings up more questions we would like Dr. Bancroft to answer: If the observers were trained, who trained them? How were they trained? What was their research protocol? Why did no one consider the moral implications of training pedophiles and then releasing them to prey on innocent children?
In spite of the Kinsey Institutes policy of encouraging and assisting pedophiles, Indiana University President John Ryan stated that Kinseys integrity and research were a stellar acheivement in which all interviews were conducted with great integrity and guided by strict ethical standards.
No one from the Kinsey Institute has ever denounced their immoral policies. In light of its full support for pedophiles and other criminals, one must question whether similar experiments are occurring at Indiana Universitys Kinsey Institute today.
Can we trust anyone connected to Indiana Universitys Kinsey Institute? It certainly doesnt look like it. Since its inception, concerned men and women across America have been asking questions of the Kinsey Institute and have not received any satisfactory replies to our concerns.
This is why America needs Congress to step in and get to the bottom of this. If science is the search for truth, Congress clearly needs to lead this search for science.
Come clean, Dr. Bancroft! America deserves the truth!