Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Rape Rates

Rape Rates

Ratings: (0)|Views: 405|Likes:
Kinsey’s Junk Science &Other Unreported Sex Crimes
Kinsey’s Junk Science &Other Unreported Sex Crimes

More info:

Published by: Judith Gelernter Reisman, Ph.D. on Sep 11, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/27/2013

pdf

text

original

 
28 SALVOissue8
COLUMN
p
 
 //Hazmats_with Judith Reisman/
T
he world-famous science historianThomas Kuhn, in his work
The Structureof Scientific Revolutions,
warned that allbets are off in a science “crisis.” Displac-ing an accepted theory creates a scientific revo-lution, and a new “paradigm” emerges. So whenAl Kinsey’s
Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
 (1948) hit the nation, it did not just cause a sexu-al revolution, it caused a sex science revolution.
Rape Rates
Kinsey’s Junk Science &Other Unreported Sex Crimes
Kinsey’s sex “findings”displaced the common law andJudeo-Christian theories of hu-man sexuality, which had dic-tated our conduct, culture, andsex-crime penalties. The ideals ofdelayed rewards, complete absti-nence before and fidelity withinmarriage, said Kinsey, werescientifically false, constraining,repressing, and, (most condem-natory), “hypocritical.”The test of a good scien-tific theory is its predictability.Kinsey predicted that whenpeople believed his theories anddata, divorce, venereal disease,“illegitimacy,” sex crimes, and allsexual dysfunctions would de-crease. You many have noticedthat Kinsey’s predictions didn’tquite pan out. The science wasbad.Now we face the post-1950s skyrocketing rates of di-vorce, adultery, new and virulentstrains of “venereal disease,”“illegitimacy,” rape, statutoryrape, child sexual abuse, incest,abortion, juvenile sex crimes,schoolhouse sexual harassment,sex and pornography addictions,and, well, shall we say, a passelof “gender confusion.” Natural-ly, those defending Kinsey’s sexscience revolution have to denyreality, truth, facts. So they claimthat these erototoxic pandemicsare just “better reporting.”Which brings us to a re-cent
Wall Street Journal 
articleby Cark Bilik. Mr. Bilik notes thatfolks tend to think that releasedsex offenders will re-offend.He explains, however, that “re-searchers say” sex offendershave a “low” rate of re-offense,especially those who were violat-ing their own children.I wrote to Mr. Bilik at his“Dear Numbers Guy” email ad-dress as follows: “The avid claimsof lower sex offender recidivismrates (and 20–35 percent is hard-ly ‘low’ for the victims) reflectsthe hysterical defense of badsex science theory come hometo roost. Half the states in theunion allowed the death penaltyfor rape in 1950. But follow-ing Kinsey, that was consideredunjust. ‘Lower the penalty andyou lower the rape rate’ was theidea in the 1950s’ ‘post-KinseyEra.’”Right.Now, naturally, those whoembraced the post-Kinsey sexualfreedom science must deny itsdocumented results. This meansKinseyans
must claim
that sexuallives are better and sex crimerates and recidivism are lower;the numbers are high only be-cause of “better reporting.”“Just better reporting” ignoresthe frequent failure to report sex

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->