I'm sure it's no surprise that I completely disagree on about a million levels.

For one thing, an erotic art contest is not rape and abuse...

For me as a non-Christian, and a political progressive, anything involving the "Concerned Women for America" is extremely suspect. What about this interview proves anything at all? On what evidence are they calling Kinsey a pederast, or pedophile? Am I going to have to go read one of this woman's books in order to take it apart piece by piece?

In fact, that interview with Reisman is a senseless homophobic rant. Reisman's accusations against Kinsey conflate child abuse and pedophilia with queerness and kink, when she calls him "a fanatic sexual psychopath, a bi/homosexual pornographically addicted adulterous sadomasochistic male with obvious proclivities for young boys".

Yes there are problems with sex research, in fact lots of other medical research and anthropological/sociological studies & ethics; with Viagra and big pharma, and with porn and feminism. However, let's keep our analysis smart and complicated.

As for what Reisman says about Kinsey choosing "disordered" people to do his research... Oh, great. What a huge distortion of things. Who should do sexuality research then? Bible-thumping fanatics? Yes, I'm mad, and I'm name-calling now, and hostile, because I feel personally attacked -- Am I disordered, and a psychopath, like Kinsey, for believing in sex education for children, in vaccinating boys and girls against HPV? Am I disordered and a psychopath for being bisexual, ("bi/homosexual") as Kinsey was? For advocating being an "ethical slut"? For all the ways someone like Reisman would consider me a "deviant" who should be locked up? For believing in exposing the truth of how real people behave, instead of how we think they should inherently "be"?

"Abstinence education" does not work. I stand with feminists like Jessica Valenti at Feministing, Pam Spaulding and Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon, and Pinko Feminist Hellcat ... I link to their posts just to get the nasty taste of Reisman's idiotic hatred out of my mouth... and in fact while I'm at it I'll just declare my enthusiastic approval of organizations like Planned Parenthood that provide sex ed and health care for teenagers and for all girls and women.

How depressing and disheartening, and shocking, to read this, right here in what I think of as my own community. On the other hand, if people think that way, I prefer to know it right up front.

----------------
Liz Henry
lizzard@bookmaniac.net
Badgermama - personal & mommyblog
http://liz-henry.blogspot.com

Wow,
thank goodness I read the above comment.

Now I don't have to write one.

Perhaps you should read her books!

I don't care if Kinsey was hetero/homo/bisexual or was tartan striped. I do care that his research into the sexual proclivity of infants and children was ethically wrong! Children as young as 2months old were restrained and 'sexually stimulated' - his conclusions that their screaming, crying and contortions (both bodily and facial) indicated that these infants were having orgasms was paedophilia related delusion.

His sample population was almost solely sourced from men imprisoned for sexual assault and paedophile related crimes (I guess these people could be considered disordered). In addition, one of his key researchers was a Nazi Doctor who provided evidence to Kinsey based on the 'experiments' conducted on prisoners.

What Reisman's research has found is that the basis of modern sexology is based on the denigration, degradation and molestation of children. The crux of her research was in revealing the false science behind his findings.

I agree that her interview read as homophobic, however the basis for her statements are sound and scientifically proven.

I certainly am not supporting all of Reisman's beliefs, not at all. I'm not homophobic in the least and that part of her interview was wrong in my eyes as well. I fully support love of any kind between consenting adults. Homosexual, hetrosexual, it makes entirely no difference to me whatsoever. None.

I also don't have a problem with any Erotic Art Show. I have no issues with the human body, with art expressing it in any way it sees fit. EXCEPT when it comes to children. Glorifying child porn will never be okay in my book, but I have no idea if that sort of thing has been or ever will be displayed in a public forum, whether at the Institute or not.

Furthermore, I also do not have a problem with sexual research, as long as consenting adults are the ones being observed.

What I take serious issue with is this Institute:

a) taking advantage of serious artists who DO want their work displayed but end up paying more than it's worth;

b) offering such a mediocre prize. Why not several prizes? Several categories? And what is with having one judge? How skewed.

c) the Institute's mere history disturbs me greatly, and as much as Reisman has judgements which I don't agree with, the facts are still there that Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues took advantage of people, young and old, who could not speak for themselves.

So please, Liz, step back and don't assume for one minute that I am any of those horrible things you basically just called me. I am not Dr. Judith Reisman. I am Karen Rani and I fully fight against pedophilia, in the name of research, or otherwise. Period.

One could argue that this is history, that the Institute likely does not participate in child sexual research anymore, but the fact that they have specific web pages defending Alfred Kinsey's work tells me that they have learned nothing as they lifted the carpet and swept it under.

The fact remains that until they hold the Institute's founder accountable (even in his memory), that they are basically shutting their eyes to what has happened.

THAT was my point.

--
Troll Baby

Motherless

Troll Baby Graphics

What are the three things you're never supposed to talk about in polite company?...oh... that's right..Sex, Religion, and Politics!...Boy this one hits on all three!

I am a christian. I believe in medically presented sex education. Discussion about biology, the purpose of physical orgns, how they function, how birth control works..etc. Information is never threatening or bad.

The problem is that sex and discussion about sex is a very subjective thing. Very often sex education goes from a learning-about-our-bodies class to a discussion group. In discussions people can say all kinds of things that many parents would deem inappropriate for their young teens.

As a culture we have become so obsessed with sex that it reaches into every nook and cranny of our lives. Every commercial uses it, every sitcom/drama feels it necessary to make their storylines revolve around it, even the news is laden with the sex scandals du jour.

Kinsey is not the person on which we should be basing our sex education or sexual standards. To disagree with him and his institue is not the same as personally attacking the people with which we come in contact.

I read through Karen's post last night and went to the Kinsey institute's site and read through all their material. If you're going to write about anything, you should take a fair look at all that's said and reach your own conclusions.

Liz...I am not personally offended when you call christians Bible-thumping fanatics, although you would probably think I am one. You don't know anything about me so why should I be offended? In the same turn, why does Karen's post about Kinsey so offend you? Can't she think he's completely wrong without it being a personal indictment against you?

Interesting topic to say the least.

Terri