Why Does No one Talk About Dr Kinsey's Nazi Paedophile?
Decades ago Alfred Kinsey was exposed as a fraud who collaborated with child abusers, including an actual... Nazi. The tactics used to salvage his reputation since then seem sadly familiar.
KINSEY: PART THREE. THE REALLY DARK STUFF
———————-
We left Alfred C Kinsey in my last post dangling from his testicles in the basement of the institution that gave us the sexual revolution. It’s a scenario that Lady Irony would reject as beneath her.
It was one that was also rejected by the scriptwriters of the bio pic ‘Kinsey’, which celebrates its twentieth anniversary next year. You may remember it. Liam Neeson played the ‘father of the sexual revolution’ as an infinitely curious and humane investigator who is forced by the evidence he has uncovered about human behaviour to become a champion of sexual freedom.
This has become the dominant narrative.
We can all guess why the scriptwriters were less than keen to include that nut-cracking scene in the basement. It’s not exactly a dignified look for a heroic protagonist. But if Oppenheimer was in the habit of hanging from his testicles, while he was developing the nuclear bomb, do we really think Christopher Nolan would have failed to work that into his script?
An even bigger issue is the way the movie downplayed Kinsey’s collaboration with paedophiles. The scene where the serial paedophile, “Mr Green” aka Rex King, is interviewed about his sexual behaviour gives just a hint of his life-long pursuit of child abuse. What you’d never guess is that King didn’t visit Kinsey in his office, as the movie suggests. In fact, Kinsey and his colleague travelled 1800 miles by car to meet up with King at a secret location in New Mexico. Kinsey had been courting King for months, pleading to meet up. He and his colleague, Clyde Martin, stayed for a full 4 days, recording 17 hours of interviews in which King described attacks on children as young as 2 months old. Unlike in the movie, Clyde Martin did not leave the room in disgust.
Indeed the only person in Kinsey’s team who ever did express disgust about this “research”, Vincent Nowlis, was “let go”. He was considered generally too puritanical by Kinsey. That sense was probably crystallised for Dr Kinsey after he invited Nowlis to a hotel room where he and another colleague, Wardell Pomeroy, offered to help Nowlis overcome his discomfort about homosexuality….by having sex with him. Astonished, Nowlis, understandably declined. You just can’t get the staff.
Another thing the Kinsey movie’s audience was never told about was Chapter Five of Kinsey’s 1948 Report: the one that detailed the “activities of the younger pre-pubescent boy”.
Kinsey himself never publicly acknowleged that Chapter Five was almost entirely derived from the diaries of that paedophile Rex King and his detailed accounts of the abuse of hundreds of children and infants, complete with stopwatch timings. That does not mean the movie’s producers did not know about it. It had all been exposed years before the movie was made and confirmed as true by Kinsey’s own colleagues and the Kinsey Institute itself.
At the time supporters of Kinsey tried to defend it by arguing …the abuse had all been historical. Yet they also admitted that Kinsey began to collaborate with King in 1944, his first Report was published in 1948 (on males), his second in 1953 (on females) and King was still abusing boys and girls in 1954.
The producers also knew it had been confirmed as true that Kinsey wrote to Rex King in terms that could surely only have boosted his ego and validated his behaviour:
“I congratulate your research spirit that has led you to collect data over so many years. Everything you have accumulated must find its way into scientific channels”