|
Implications of the Kinsey Reports on Child Custody Cases -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How Junk Sex Science Created a Paradigm
Shift in Society, Legislation and the Judiciary
By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
INTRODUCTION
The quality and health of a society is measured by the treatment
of its most vulnerable populations: its women and children.1 Many facts support
the conclusion that we are living in an increasingly violent era. For example,
current data on violent crimes, suicides, out of wedlock births, sexually transmitted
diseases, domestic violence, and child abuse support observations of increasing
rates of dysfunction, brutality and perversion in our society. If we are to
remedy the violence toward women and children currently found in our bedrooms,
classrooms, courtrooms, streets and cinemas, we must first understand "that
something happened on the way to the forum."
Source material for this article includes my most recent
book, Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences (1998) which documents Kinsey’s
role in weakening laws penalizing obscenity, and brutality towards women and
children. The 1997 book by Kinseyan fan and researcher James Jones, Alfred Kinsey
A Public/Private Life, also validates my twenty years of research on
this topic. Additional support for the claims made in this chapter can be found
in the BBC Arts & Entertainment: Biographies television production Reputations
(aired on August 14, 1996, and August 10, 1998), and British Yorkshire Television
program Kinsey’s Pedophiles, produced and directed by UNESCO and Amnesty
International award-winning producer/director Tim Tate.
Many of the chapters in this Exposé address specific
judicial circumstances and events regarding the violation of children by a rogue
or indifferent judiciary. This chapter demonstrates how we have come to this
point and discusses the judiciary’s role in this current tragedy. This chapter
focuses on two synergistic national change-agents: "formal" and "informal"
sex education. Each appears to share the same cynical view of life and love
which has helped spawn the judicial cadre which appears to increasingly betray
justice. I will also establish the seminal connection between "sex science"
(formal) and pornography (informal) in sex education begun in Dr. Alfred C.
Kinsey’s attic where he obsessively performed in amateur pornographic movies.
I will also identify some of the key issues and players that helped this change
become embedded in our society.
Background: Alfred C. Kinsey, Ph.D.
On April 15, 1998, the Discovery Channel joined the British
Broadcasting Company in declaring Indiana University zoologist Alfred C. Kinsey
the "father of the sexual revolution." Gore Vidal intoned to the camera,
"Kinsey was the most famous man in the world for a decade." From 1948
to 1958 a man many young people have never heard of dramatically coarsened our
world, our sexual experiences, and the attitudes and conduct of most post-1948
Americans.
During the 50s, the world read that Kinsey
had impartially revealed America’s big "H"—moral hypocrisy. Kinsey
claimed his sex survey data found that 95% of American men were sex offenders
given the current laws, and that roughly 50% of women had experienced pre-marital
sex prior to 1948, the pre-birth control pill era. Kinsey alleged that his research
proved that 10% to 37% of American men were sometime homosexuals, that most
humans were naturally bisexual, that children were sexual from birth, and that
but for our Judeo-Christian repressiveness, children could engage in sexual
activity with adults without harm.
The Sixties
The 60s "flower-power generation"
did not simply wake up one morning to individually or collectively decide that
their parents were "hypocrites"— and to thus exchange virginity, love,
marital fidelity and valuing and respecting children and elders, for "sex,
drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll." Kinsey's books Sexual Behavior in the Human
Male published in 1948, and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female published
in 1953, brought an exciting justification for a "swinging" era.
The 60s sexual revolution, spurred by the birth control
pill in 1968, was followed by no-fault divorce, the gay rights movement, classroom
sex education, and sex therapy as a growth industry. Massive increases in crimes
against woman and children also followed suit. Alongside these societal shifts
came the introduction of decreased penalties for sex crimes, a tolerance for
violence against women and children and an avalanche of pornography that invaded
our town squares, bedrooms, living rooms, classrooms, museums, concert halls,
cinemas, libraries and courtrooms.
Kinsey’s Data
The evidence is now clear that Kinsey’s research was fraught
with lies, deceit, and fraudulent data. His "scientific" methodology
was anything but scientific. The means by which he and his colleagues conducted
research and gathered data was oftentimes criminal according to the laws of
the time, and even by the laws of today. Contrary to the benevolent publicity
accorded him, Kinsey and his hand-picked co-authors and colleagues fit the classic
definition of "sexual psychopath" according to Dorland’s Medical Dictionary:
"an individual whose sexual behavior is manifestly anti-social and criminal"
(1981, p. 1091).
Kinsey’s deviant sex life appears to have been hidden from
the public by Indiana University and The Rockefeller Foundation, a financial
and philosophical supporter of Kinsey’s research. However, James H. Jones, an
Indiana University scholar and Kinsey Institute grantee, reveals some insider
information about Kinsey and his research team in the 937-page biography, Alfred
C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life (1997, WW Norton).
Kinsey’s Research Team
Jones’ data confirms other reports that Kinsey was a sexist,
racist and atheist who excluded women, Jews, blacks, and moral traditionalists
from his staff and hired only homosexuals and bisexuals (with one short-term
exception). Kinsey only hired sexual deviants on whom he could rely to keep
his secrets — including his fraud, his "uncommon desires," and the
child molesters he used to conduct child sex experiments. Jones also reported
that Kinsey: coerced his wife into participating in acts of adultery and sodomy
with his staff and co-authors (which were filmed), seduced male students at
Indiana University (and bullied their wives into participating), filmed sex
with his male co-workers (who were rewarded by promotion to co-authorship),
and filmed himself participating in sado-masochistic sex rituals.
Kinsey’s Research on Children
Not only was Kinsey’s research on adult sexuality based on
his own homosexual and sadomasochistic perversions, but the data he collected
on the alleged sexuality of children were based on brutal sex crimes against
children. For example, part of Kinsey’s research protocol involved "orgasm"
experiments on children, some as young as 2 months of age.
The pedophilic experimenters claimed that the 317 to 2,045
(reports vary) abused infants and children were unharmed by the masturbation,
sodomy and rape perpetrated to test these alleged "orgasmic" responses
(see: British Yorkshire Television’s Kinsey’s Pedophiles). On pages 160-161
of Kinsey’s Male volume, the children’s "screams," their "convulsions,"
their "hysterical weeping," "fighting," and "striking
the partner" (the adult) are judged by Kinsey as reflecting "definite
pleasure from the situation."
My book Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000)
details how children were obtained and experimented upon, and how Kinsey used
such child sex experimental data as part of an on-going collegial, cross-cultural,
multinational, "fact-finding" research project. For example, some
of Kinsey’s data was derived from sexual experiments performed on children by
Dr. von Balluseck, a Nazi collaborator in Germany who Kinsey described as an
educated man of a "scientific bent."2 It should be noted that Kinsey
corresponded with Dr. von Balluseck during a time in history when Nazis were
conducting similar human experiments en masse.
Based on his allegedly scientific data, Kinsey claimed that
children enjoyed sex and the real harm of adult-child sex stemmed from "hysterical"
parents, teachers and professionals who reacted with anger and horror to children’s
disclosures. Based on his findings, many legislatures lightened or eliminated
penalties for sexual offenses — reversing the judiciary’s traditional leniency
toward women as the "weaker sex" in cases of sex abuse and betrayal,
and toward children as "victims" in cases of incest and child molestation.
Since this time, the courts have been increasingly distrustful and punishing
of victimized women and children.
Kinsey’s Research on Adults
Kinsey also used a bogus methodology in his studies of the
sexual practices of adults. Although Kinsey Institute members told courts and
legislatures that they used a "random" sample of Americans, in actuality,
Kinsey surveyed 1,400 male sex offenders, 200 sexual psychopaths and hundreds
of radical male homosexuals and then reported their sexual proclivities as the
norm. Roughly 86% of Kinsey’s male subjects are now documented as aberrant,
abnormal compared to male conduct in the 40s and 50s.
In order to find “normal” American married women, Kinsey
redefined “married” to include any woman who said she lived more than a year
with a man. Thus his large female prostitute population would be average married
women by edict. Further, he could claim that 50% of his female subjects had
sex prior to marriage and roughly 30% committed adultery--while of 4,441 women
subjects none ever suffered from a rape..
These false data were then used to provide evidence for the
hypothesis that women’s claims of valuing their chastity and disavowing adultery,
and their children’s fears of sexual molestation and rape were exaggerated —
even deceitful. Unfortunately, such unsupported conclusions continue to be
viewed as "science" by many judges at all levels of our legal system.
Indiana University Honors Kinsey
In 1998, in honor of Kinsey’s 50th jubilee, Indiana University
re-issued Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in
the Human Female. They celebrated Kinsey’s dubious research despite the ample
documentation of Kinsey’s criminal behaviors in both my and Jones’ (1997) work.
"Formal" Influences on Human Sexuality
Human Sexuality Institutes
Kinsey’s disciples founded and have largely shaped and directed
the field of human sexuality. Today a cadre of admitted pedophiles, pederasts,
pornography addicts and other assorted sexually dysfunctional individuals influence
and control the field of sexology through the nation's several human sexuality
"accrediting" agencies. These include the Center for Sex Research
at California State University, Northridge (CSUN) and the Institute for the
Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. CSUN, was founded by a pedophile
editor and promotes pornography as pedagogy.
CSUN has been dubbed the "Kinsey Institute of the West."
At these accrediting agencies, viewing "Sexual Attitude Restructuring"
pornographic films and videos is mandated course work. By 1988, approximately
100,000 students at the San Francisco institute had been "desensitized"
and accredited as sexology graduates. Many of these former students now appear
regularly on talk shows and in courtrooms as expert witnesses.
World Pornography Conference
Academics need money and have respectability. Pedophiles
and pornographers need respectability and have money. The relationship between
academic institutions and pornographers and pedophiles, which began with Playboy’s
funding the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, continues today at CSUN.
The following example demonstrates the link between pornographers and academia.
In August 1998, CSUN used its state-supported offices to
organize a "World Pornography Conference." Led by former Kinsey Institute
researcher James E. Elias, pornography industry leaders and performers met with
"academics" to discuss and shape national pornography and pedophile
strategies to be implemented in schoolrooms, newsrooms, bedrooms and courtrooms.
James Elias, CSUN’s Sex Research Director received his doctorate
from the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality of which Wardell
Pomeroy was the former Academic Dean. As noted in Kentucky v. Happy Day (1980),
Wardell Pomeroy was a Kinsey co-author and sex partner who publicly sought funds
from the pornography industry to produce child pornography (Jones, 1997).
The conference featured Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia
editor Vern Bullough and his pedophile editorial colleagues: John DeCecco, Daniel
Tsang and Wayne Dynes — all professors at major American colleges.3 Chairing
the CSUN "Erotic" section on "Child Pornography" was Harris
Mirkin, an associate professor of political science at the University of Missouri,
Kansas City. Mirkin’s 1999 article, "The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism,
Homosexuality and Pedophilia" (Journal of Homosexuality, Vol. 37) describes
the steps pedophiles need to take to gain social acceptance. He advises pedophiles
to advocate for the elimination of words like "child molestation"
and "child abuse."
Ralph Underwager was a featured speaker during the section
on child pornography. Underwager is a psychologist and theologian who frequently
testifies as a defense expert in child sexual abuse cases. In 1993, Underwager
and his wife, Hollida Wakefield, were featured in an interview in Paidika: The
Journal of Paedophilia (Winter 1993, p.3). In his interview, Underwager stated:
"Pedophiles can boldly and courageously affirm what they choose. They can
say that what they want is the best way to love..." Conference speaker
Ted McIlvenna, founder of the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality
in San Francisco, contributed an article in December 1977 to Hustler magazine
4 in which he urged legalization of incest and adult-child sex.
Kinseyan Research
No "science" appears to have a greater track record
of scientific fraud, criminal activity and psychopathology than that of "sex
science." While the British medical journal The Lancet exposed Kinsey’s
child abuse methodology (March 2, 1991, p. 547), American scholarly journals
have lauded Kinsey for decades. The conclusions of the following researchers
parallel those of Kinsey and Kinsey Institute researchers Clyde Martin, Wardell
Pomeroy, and Paul Gebhard, all of whom have promoted the "normalization"
of pedophilia.
Rind, Bauserman and Tromovitch
In July 1998, the American Psychological Association’s (APA)
Psychological Bulletin published "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed
Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples." Authors Bruce
Rind, Ph.D., Robert Bauserman, Ph.D., and Philip Tromovitch cite Kinsey’s research
favorably and conclude that adult-child sexual relationships may not harm children
who "consent" to this relationship. Like Kinsey’s research, Rind et
al.’s research is methodologically and statistically deceitful; researchers
have recently found serious errors in Rind et al.’s reports of the meta-analysis
studies. The errors were consistently in the direction of finding child sexual
abuse less harmful than the original studies suggested. (See: Dallam, S.J.,
Gleaves, D. H., Cepeda-Benito, A., Kraemer, H.C., & Spiegel, D. (in review).
"The effects of childhood sexual abuse: A critique of Rind, Tromovitch
and Bauserman (1998)."
Co-authors Rind and Bauserman are members of
the Paidika: Journal of Paedophilia cadre. For example, Bauserman wrote an article
for the Summer 1989 issue legitimizing sex with children. A similar article
by Rind appeared in the Winter 1995 issue. Their co-authored article entitled
"Adult-Nonadult Sexual Interactions" was promoted in that publication’s
Winter 1995 issue.
Bauserman, Money, Bullough and Constantine
Rind et al. cite pedophile-friendly authorities
such as Bauserman, Kinsey, Money, Bullough, and Constantine as child sex authorities.
In 1991, writing for The Journal of Homosexuality, Bauserman approved of promoting
man-boy sex in "Male Intergenerational Intimacy." In an interview
in Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, professor emeritus John Money, a Johns
Hopkins pediatric psychoendocrinologist and Penthouse Forum consultant, called
for an organized crusade to end age of consent laws.5,6 It was John Money who
promoted the word "paraphilias" in order to refer to aberrant sexual
conduct such as necrophelia, sexual sadism, bestiality, coprophilia, urophilia
and pedophilia in a manner less clear and offensive to readers.
Paidika: Journal of Pedophilia editor, Vern Bullough, a professor
emeritus at CSUN, has suggested the same "harmlessness" mantra. Psychologist
Larry Constantine, another Penthouse contributor, advocated legalizing child
pornography so as to provide better paying jobs for children (Cook & Wilson,
Pergamon Press, Oxford,1978). Like Kinsey, these authors misrepresent data to
substantiate their call for the reduction of legal protections for children
victims of sexual abuse.
Kinsey Citations
Although he has been dead for four decades, Kinsey is the
most often-cited sex expert in the Science Citation Index and the Social Science
Citation Index with (as of 1997) 5,796 laudatory cites versus Masters and Johnson’s
3,716 citations. Kinsey is cited more often and more favorably than Maslow,
Freud, Mead, Toffler, Paiget or Skinner. This is also true for "Westlaw,"
the on-line database for law journal citations. Since 1982, Westlaw lists over
700 citations of Kinsey compared to approximately 100 of Masters and Johnson
and even fewer for Freud.
Pedophilia De-Diagnosed
In its 1994 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV (DSM-IV),
the American Psychiatric Association removed pedophilia as a sexual perversion.
IInformal" Sex Educators
Hugh Hefner: "If Kinsey was the researcher,
I became his pamphleteer."7
The media played a considerable role in launching Kinsey’s
"sexual revolution" and in overturning America’s sexual mores. Following
a well-financed public relations campaign, by August 1947, an unprecedented
70%-plus of a cross-section of daily newspapers carried stories about Kinsey's
upcoming book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.
Playboy
In an era of Internet pornography including child pornography
and other sexual perversions, it is instructive to recall that in December 1953,
alongside Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953), and just
following Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948), a sex magazine entered
American college dorms and bedrooms across America. Playboy soon became the
"USA's most widely read men's sex education resource." Since its inception,
Playboy has been transmitting its tinsel-wrapped brand of sexism to future husbands,
fathers, brothers and uncles who would control our destinies as politicians,
judges, attorneys general, prosecutors, doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists,
clergy, social workers, writers, filmmakers, media movers and shakers, law enforcement
officers, and military personnel.8
Hustler
Another high-profile sex magazine influencing American
society is Hustler. It is interesting to note that Larry Flynt's May 1984 Hustler
9 "Chester the Molester" cartoon of a father sexually abusing his
daughter helped convict Hustler editorial cartoon director, Dwaine Tinsely,
of felony child sexual abuse of his own daughter in 1989. Tinsley had contributed
145 cartoons to Hustler, many of which depicted violent child kidnapping and
celebrated child rape.
The findings of my U.S. Department of Justice study, Images
of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler (including
a study of child pornography and incest promotions in Playboy) were reported
on a Christian Dutch television station, EO Tijdein TV. The station reported
that Playboy was, at that time, perhaps the world’s largest child pornographer
— facilitating child sexual abuse and incest en masse. The television station
was subsequently sued by Playboy which alleged libel and defamation.
In its defense, I provided the Dutch court with photographs,
illustrations, cartoons, letters, and stories depicting "positive"
portrayals of sex between adults and children and "positive" incest
in Playboy from 1954 to 1984. I also submitted to the court my Department of
Justice and Soft Porn Plays Hardball (1991), which documents Playboy’s role
in child pornography and incest promotions.
On October 27, 1994, history was made, and quickly suppressed,
when an Amsterdam court found in favor of the defendants who had stated that
on the evidence:
1. Playboy magazine published child pornography and incest materials, and
2. Playboy could cause "copy-cat" crimes, wherein consumers criminally
acted out Playboy sadosexual and child abuse scenarios.
The Dutch ruling against Playboy is highly significant as
Amsterdam is considered to be the Western world’s child pornography and pedophile
epicenter. Although, the court’s ruling was widely reported in the Netherlands,
it was spiked by the American press.
The Continuing Impact of "Informal"
Sex Education
"Informal" means of sex education such as pornography
appears to be having an effect on American men. For example, the FBI Uniform
Crime Rate from 1972-1991 found a 128% increase in reported rapes,10 with both
offenders and victims increasingly younger.
A 1989 study by Briere and Runtz surveyed male college students
concerning their sexual interest in children.11 They report that 21% of 193
male undergraduate students admitted a "sexual interest in children."
Nine percent confessed child sex fantasies and 7% revealed they would have sex
with children were they sure not to be caught.
In 1991, an article in The Police Chief stated: "Soft-core
erotica to hard-core pornography … serve identical purposes — to desensitize
the child and lower his or her inhibitions."12 The Police Chief also reported
that pornography was recovered in 87.9% of child sex abuse cases."13
Pro-pedophila Efforts to Influence Laws and
Judicial Decisions
The move by the U.S. Department of Justice to weaken child
pornography laws 14 came after decades of efforts by magazines such as Playboy
and Hustler as well as pedophile-friendly experts to lower or eliminate the
age of sexual consent. While the pedophile movement appears statistically insignificant,
its leadership is allied with a powerful mass of pornography/sexual freedom
apostles whose ideas, interests and economic clout have reshaped law and public
policy nationwide.15
Consider the effect of the pedophile movement in corrupting
the Netherlands. Holland is the home of the international Paidika: Journal of
Paedophilia, and a notorious haven for child rapists. Former Senator Edward
Brongersma, an "outed" Dutch pedophile, reported that the Dutch media
were increasingly "satisfactory ... interviewing children having sexual
relationships with adult friends; consenting parents." Law enforcement,
Brongersma explained, had followed suit.16
Brongersma notes that few Dutch public prosecutors
will prosecute child abusers. In cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam, "94%
of the known cases [are] not prosecuted," he claims. Brongersma states,
"The chief inspector of the Rotterdam vice squad was, in 1977, one of the
speakers at a congress seeking the abolition of all age limits in the Penal
Code sections on sexual crimes and offenses."16
The American-Dutch publication, Paidika: The
Journal of Paedophilia, claims that the Netherlands lowered its age of consent
from 16 to 12 years,17 but in an interview with the spokesperson for the Dutch
embassy, this author was told that the lower age was restricted to certain ethnic
groups.
Under the umbrella of the sexual freedom movement,
influential pedophiles work to remove all age of consent laws. The pedophile
movement has long campaigned for "consent" as the sole criteria for
determining harm. It should be noted that such a change would leave child victims
open to charges of participation, thus rendering the crime "harmless."
Prior laws on vice (fornication, cohabitation, adultery, prostitution), criminalized
non-marital consensual sex, with no appeal to the "right" to engage
in said acts. By raising the issue of "consent," all sex criminals
including rapist-murderers 18 and child molesters, have been able to argue that
their behavior was natural, ethical, legal and "consensual."
The Legal Impact of "Formal" and "Informal"
Sex Education
The North American Man-Boy Love Association,19 the Rene Guyon
Society and others, are internationally organized.20 There has not been a visible
equal effort within the US Department of Justice to protect children. State
legislation has emerged with new terms such as "sexual or affectional orientation"
as special rights protection. This terminology would cover pedophilia as defined
by John Money:
Paedophilia is...affectional paedophilia in layman's terms...the straight forward
affectional attraction to children... a paedophilic attraction to children...an
overflow of parental pairbonding into erotic pair bonding... The affectional
relationship, in male paedophilia at least, is a fatherly relationship...with
erotic or lover-lover pairbonding...a combination of affectionate love as well
as the lust factor...[until] puberty. (Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia)
21
State Legislation
Minnesota
Proposed Minnesota Legislation H.B. 585, introduced in February
1993, would have legally protected "sexual or affectional orientation,
or familial status." It was deleted from the "gay rights" statute
on September 20, 1994, at the last moment after I made state senators aware
of Money’s definition of pedophilia (see above).
Oregon, Kentucky and California
Oregon, Kentucky and California appear to have had similar
language moving through the process within "gay rights" statutes.
In the early 90s, Oregon proposed a law, Oregon H.B. 3573, which would have
permitted the state to award children to adults who "made available to
the child, food, clothing, shelter… and which relationship continued on a day-to-day
basis, through interaction, companionship, interplay and mutuality."
Texas: A Case Study
A recent case in Texas shows how pedophilic legislation is
often hidden in "child-friendly" legislation. On March 1, 1998, Bill
208 was on the fast track for passage in the Texas Senate. The bill, purported
to be a tool to further protect battered women and children, would actually
permit criminals to receive sole legal custody of the children they deserted,
battered and sexually violated.
Jan Barstow of the Texas Women's and Children's Coalition
asked me to testify against Family Violence Bill No. 208. In reviewing the bill,
I confirmed that several words in the contested section turn a purportedly child-friendly
law into an abuser-friendly law. Excerpts from the bill follow the statement
"past or present child neglect, or physical or sexual abuse by one parent
directed against the other parent, a spouse or a child."
(c) The court shall not appoint as sole managing
conservator a party who has a history of committing family violence as defined
by Section 71.004 unless the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence
that:
(1) the party has successfully completed a battering intervention
and prevention program as provided by Section 85.022 or, if such a program is
not available, has successfully completed a course of treatment pursuant to
Section 153.010;
(2) the party is not currently abusing alcohol or a controlled
substance as defined by Chapter 481, Health and Safety Code; and
(3) appointing the other party as sole managing conservator
would endanger the physical or emotional welfare of the child.
The use of the term "party" is problematic. Just
as Kinsey described a child’s rapist as his or her "partner," the
term "party" would equalize victim and abuser as parties in a controversy,
rather than a parent protecting a child from a criminal whose "history"
includes sexual or physical violence against the "parent, a spouse or a
child" as victims.
Thus, the use of the word "party" annuls decades
of effort by victims' rights advocates to standardize terms in the family violence
literature that establish "fault" in domestic crimes. For example,
rather than referring to individuals as "parties" in family violence
crimes, the seminal 128-page Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence,
Final Report 22 describes them as "victims" and "abusers."
The proposed Texas bill states, "sole" child custody
will be denied an abuser with a "history of committing family violence
... unless" the "preponderance of evidence" finds an abuser has
"successfully completed a course of treatment," and is not "currently
abusing" drugs and alcohol.
The word "unless" creates a loophole that would
enable those who physically or sexually abuse a child to gain sole child custody
if they pass a violence course. It should be noted that there is no credible
evidence which shows that a six to twelve week "course of treatment"
will cure violent abusers. Moreover, the professional literature on child molestation
confirms that there is no known cure for pedophiles.23
In her testimony on the Texas bill, Jan Barstow
stated:
Wording about abusers attending court-assigned
classes doesn't consider the extreme denial and need for control that is part
of an abuser's character. This becomes a revolving door in which the offender
abuses, submits to a protective order including assignment to classes, and is
legally eligible for sole custody six weeks later.
The bill also states that abusers cannot be "currently
abusing" alcohol and drugs, which is appropriate as abuse often takes place
while the offender is under the influence. However, substance abuse is often
non-responsive to treatment. Moreover, as alcohol is rapidly excreted in urine,
it is difficult to verify that an offender is actually abstaining from alcohol
and drugs without daily testing and monitoring.
Another problem with the bill is the fact that it enables
a judge to award abusers sole custody if the judge decides the other parent
might "endanger the physical or emotional welfare of the child." It
should be noted that this bill does not require the protecting parent to actually
be convicted of endangering the child. Thus, no evidence is required to remove
a child from a protective parent in order to award sole custody to the child's
abuser. At best, the bill assumes that possibly endangering the children by
placing them in the custody of an abuser is a better plan than placing such
children in foster care or orphanages.
Many women have testified under oath regarding the forced
removal of their children based on the scientifically inept theory of Parental
Alienation Syndrome promulgated by Kinseyan-adherent Richard Gardner and his
disciples. This suggests that few judges have read the following excerpt from
the report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence.
Judges should treat incest and molestation
as serious criminal offenses.... Incarceration, whether in hospitals, treatment
centers or prisons, is absolutely essential to the protection of the nation's
children. The only true protection for children from a pedophile is incapacitation
of the offender.25
Ignored by much of the media and the court system, the 1984
Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence found pornography deeply involved
in episodes of battery, incest and non-kin child molestation. Texas Bill 208
would allow sole child custody to incest offenders although pornography junkies
would not be required to stop "currently abusing" pornography. State
Legislative Recommendation 5 of the Attorney General’s Task Force strongly advocates
that "States should enact legislation to enable ... access to sexual assault,
child molestation or pornography arrest or conviction records" in order
to remove all such persons from "contact with children."
Proposed Texas Senate Bill No. 208 would create a "no
fault" battery and "no fault" child sex abuse, akin to the judicially
enacted "no fault divorce" laws which have driven hundreds of thousands
of full-time homemakers and their children into poverty.
CONCLUSION
Ever since Indiana University zoologist Kinsey began to weaken
child protection efforts by classifying children as the "partners"
of their adult abusers, the leveling of abusers and victims via language has
continued both formally and informally. Although new statutes are often framed
in the assertion "Children are not the property of their parents,"
there appear to be no official data collections underway by any institution
to ascertain the status of such pedophile-friendly laws.
An overwhelming body of research confirms the testimonies
of hundreds of thousands of adult, child, homosexual and heterosexual victims
of junk sex science and pornography. Like Big Tobacco, Big Pornography has used
the mass media for decades to lie to the polity about the harm of their toxic
products. This review raises several key questions:
1. What well-funded American pedophile/pederast
lobby, using its credentialed members, works behind the scenes to lower and
end the age of consent and protective parents’ rights?
2. Why is the media silent about the role of
pornography and fraudulent sex science in the massive increases in sexual violence,
including child sexual abuse?
3. What is the U.S. Department of Justice doing
to protect children from junk sex science, pornography, sexual abuse and a judicial
system that awards child victims to perpetrators?
The "Kinseyan philosophy" has tainted researchers,
the media, legislators and justice officials — and we have all borne the consequences.
The "Kinseyan philosophy" and its consequences have not been seriously
evaluated — until now.
About the Author
Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., is president of The Institute for
Media Education, and author of the U.S. Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice
study, Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler
(1989); Kinsey, Sex and Fraud (Reisman et al, 1990); Soft Porn Plays Hardball
(1991); Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation
(Reisman & Johnson, 1995) and Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences (1998).
Two documentaries were built on her work: "The Children of Table 34"
(1995) and "Kinsey’s Paedophiles" (1998) produced by UNESCO and Amnesty
International award-winning producer, Tim Tate of England’s prestigious Yorkshire
Television. Dr. Reisman has been a consultant to the U.S. Department of Education
and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as well as three U.S. Department
of Justice administrations.
Dr. Reisman is listed in Who’s Who in Science
& Engineering, International Who’s Who in Sexology, International Who’s
Who in Education, Who’s Who of American Women and The World’s Who’s Who of Women.
Her scholarly findings on "junk science," visual pornography as non-speech,
and child protection have had international legislative and scientific impact
in the United States, Israel, South Africa, Canada and Australia. Based on her
pioneering exposé of Kinsey, The German Medical Tribune and the British medical
journal, The Lancet, called for an immediate investigation of the Kinsey Institute.
The investigation has not been forthcoming and to-date, Dr. Reisman’s findings
remain ignored by major U.S. science journals.
Dr. Reisman is sought worldwide to speak, lecture,
and testify, and to counsel individuals, organizations, professionals and governments
regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior.
The special emphasis of her work has been, and continues to be, the influence
of "junk science," imagery and media change agents upon adults and
children. The author may be contacted at 1-800-837-0544.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENDNOTES
1. Christopher Lash, The Culture of Narcissism,
W.W. Norton, New York, 1979. Lash’s earlier work, Haven in a Heartless World:
The Family Besieged also is part of the body of writings during the 1970s that
identified this tragic shift in American character.
2. "Dr. Von Balluseck....corresponded
with the American Kinsey Institute for some time, and had also got books from
them which dealt with child sexuality" (Tagespiegel, October 1, 1957).
The nazis knew... [he] practiced his abnormal tendencies in occupied Poland
on Polish children, who had to chose between Balluseck and the gas ovens. After
the war, the children were dead, but Balluseck lived. Today the court has four
diaries ...[where] he recorded his crimes against 100 children ....He sent the
detail of his experiences regularly to the US sex researcher, Kinsey. The latter...kept
up a regular and lively correspondence with Balluseck." (NZ National Zeitung,
May 15, 1957). "Dr. Balluseck...[made measurements] of his crimes committed
against children...while in correspondence with the American sexual researcher
Kinsey" (Frankfurter Allegemaine Zeitung, May 22, 1957).
3. Founder Vern Bullough is an editor of the
Journal of Paedophilia. As of June 1999, the Internet site continues to post
the premier issue in which all of its editors (past, present and future) are
listed in its initial "Statement of Purpose," as "paedophiles."
4. McIlvenna's Institute supplied Hustler's
consumers with graphic, nude photographs that were published alongside the article.
In 1977, the photos were re-published in an Institute book entitled Meditations
on the Gift of Sexuality. A nude Professor McIlvenna appears in photographs
alongside his nude Institute faculty, staff and students in varied combinations
of group sexual congress.
5. Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, The
Netherlands, Spring 1991, pp. 7-8.
6. See Vern Bullough, Dean, Department of Natural
and Social Science, State University College at Buffalo; John DeCeccco, Department
of Psychology, San Francisco State University, editor of the Journal of Homosexuality;
Wayne Dynes, Department of Art, Hunter College, editor-in-chief of the Encyclopedia
of Homosexuality; Hubert Kennedy, Center for Research and Education in Sexuality,
San Francisco State University.
7. Judith A. Reisman’s Kinsey, Crimes &
Consequences, IME, Arlington, Va., 1998, 2000.
8. See Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., Soft Porn
Plays Hardball, Huntington House, Lafayette, LA., 1991 for full documentation
of citations on the pornography issue. See especially Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.,
Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, 1954-1984,
(Institute for Media Education, Arlington, VA, 1989, Prepared Under Grant No.
84-JN-AX-K007, U.S.Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention).
9. The peer-approved study required researchers
to examine each page of every magazine (126) from Hustler's 1974 inception to
1984 that, in 1983, reached over four million consumers, numerically on a par
with Psychology Today readership.
10. See Emily Buchwald et al., Transforming
A Rape Culture (Milkweed, Minneapolis, MN, l993, p. 7) and Judith Reisman, SoftPorn
Plays Hardball, (p. 15).
11. John Briere, Marsha Runtz, "University
Males’ Sexual Interest in Children: Predicting Potential Indices of "Pedophilia"
in a Nonforensic Sample" in Child Abuse & Neglect, (Vol. 13, 1989,
pp. 65-75).
12. The Police Chief, February 1991, p. 19.
13. Detective Ralph Bennett of the Sexually
Exploited Child Unit and Chief Daryl Gates of the Los Angeles Police Department
in California; in The Police Chief, (February 1991, p. 19).
14. See The Miami Herald, November 12, 1993
for coverage of Paul Bender, top aide to Drew Days III, solicitor general, who
was said to have written the brief. Bender was a member of the anti-enforcement
majority of the old 1967-1970 Presidential Commission on Obscenity and Pornography
that called for elimination of all pornography laws. The Senate voted 100-0
to reject Attorney General Reno’s attempt to weaken the child pornography laws
in 1993 — U.S. v. Knox.
15. See contract requiring signature of students
attending The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco,
California.
16. Magpie, The Journal of the Paedophile Information
Exchange, Spring 1981, p. 3.
17. Beyond foreign and homosexual press reports,
see Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia (Winter 1993) and citations in the last
page of this report.
18. The "rough sex defense" has been
successfully used in the courts, claiming the dead victim "consented"
to being brutally murdered as part of the sexual ritual. Dr. John Money advocated
for this "right" in his Paidika The Journal of Paedophilia interview,
(Spring 1991, p.7-8).
19. Currently, the following citations from
Kinsey’s Male volume appear at the website of the North American Man-Boy Love
Association (NAMBLA). “ALFRED KINSEY...It is ordinarily said that criminal law
is designed to protect property and to protect persons...[but the laws are merely
for] protecting custom: When children are constantly warned by parents and teachers
against contacts with adults... they are ready to become hysterical as soon
as any older person approaches, or stops and speaks to them in the street, or
fondles them, or proposes to do something for them, even though the adult may
have had no sexual objective in mind. Some of the more experienced students
of juvenile problems have come to believe that the emotional reactions of the
parents, police officers, and other adults who discover that the child has had
such a contact, may disturb the child more seriously than the sexual contacts
themselves. The current hysteria over sex offenders may very well have serious
effects on the ability of many of these children to work out sexual adjustments
some years later.... Alfred Kinsey on "The Social Control of Sexual Behavior"”
[to which NAMBLA adds: Copyright © NAMBLA, 1999. All rights reserved].
20. Leo, John, "Pedophiles in the Schools,"
U.S. News & World Report, (October 11, 1993, p. 37).
21. Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, Spring,
1991, p. 3.
22. Attorney General's Task Force on Family
Violence, Final Report (Washington, D.C., September 1984).
23. See all cited works by Reisman where this
is discussed in depth.
24. See a summary of this case by Darcy O’Brien,
Power to Hurt: Inside a Judge’s Chambers: Sexual Assault, Corruption, and the
Ultimate Reversal of Justice for Women (Harper Paperbacks, New York, 1997).
25. The Attorney General's Task Force on Family
Violence report (Washington, DC., September 1984, pp. 33-43).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADDENDUM
The Growing Power of Pedophile Advocates
By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
We are piecing together the players in the
pedophile puzzle for examination by people concerned with child welfare and
protection. This addendum is intended to urge the reader to ponder whether the
growing power of pedophile advocates represents a threat warranting your attention
and action.
BACKGROUND
1977: The British Psychological Society Conference
on Love and Attraction, Swansea, Wales.
This author delivered a research paper on child pornography
entitled "Playboy 1954-1977." Conference academicians hired by pornographers
presented "scientific" papers advocating the legalization of child
pornography, prostitution and an end to age of consent. They promoted their
"scientific" claims for early childhood sexuality to lawmakers and
fellow academicians via both legitimate and pornographic media. Following these
disturbing academic papers advocating sex with children, Reisman began years
of study of pedophile-related ideas in popular and academic writings. Three
key research findings emerge.
1. The Kinsey Reports (1948, 1953), the "scientific" basis of modern
sex education and liberalized sex laws are based on fraud and the sexual abuse
of between 317 and 1,025 (reports vary) infants and children. See Kinsey,
Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000).
2. Playboy was Kinsey’s "pamphleteer" teaching "heterosexual"
sex with children and an end to age of consent laws with children via photographs,
cartoons and illustrations, beginning in May 1954. (See second paragraph of
"Note" at the end of this Addendum).1
3. The Advocate, America’s mainstream homosexual periodical, teaches "homosexual"
sex with children since the early 70s and seeks an end to age of consent laws.
(See: A Content Analysis of Two Decades of The Advocate; Reisman, 1992).
Playboy and Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia
Research on Playboy's role in mainstreaming
child sexual abuse as humorous and acceptable has long been ignored by the media
elite. The following chronology addresses public links between Playboy, the
pedophile movement and U.S. law and public policy. Children appeared on average
8 times per issue (96 times a year) in visuals and cartoons.
1953 December, Playboy is launched: Publisher
Hugh Hefner claims Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
(1948)2 radicalized, inspired and instructed him on human sexuality. Hefner
began the Playboy empire, bringing Kinsey's "scientific" view of human
sexuality from academia to Joe College. By 1954 child abuse was glamorized in
cartoons, by the 70s in photographs, and by 1977 the nude "Playmate"
also appeared in child biography photographs (3,042 child characters, 1,323
photographs, 1,196 cartoons, 523 illustrations) typically in sexual scenes.
1975 Playboy: Playboy Press publishes child pornography: In Playboy's
publication Sugar and Spice, explicit photos of a 10-year-old Brooke Shields
were displayed "nude … her face erotically made up … a young vamp and a
harlot, a seasoned sexual veteran … erotic ... sensual sex symbol." 3
Brooke Shields was provocatively displayed
as "Pretty Baby" (a film in which she was scripted to be a child prostitute)
in several subsequent Playboy issues.
1976 November Playboy:4 Playboy advisor James
Petersen is described as "USA's most widely read men's sex education resource."
5 Petersen publishes a letter he says is written by a "high school"
girl who has sadistic sex with a boyfriend while her mother watches. Mr. Petersen
applauds, noting ways to make the youngster’s sexualized pain more intense.
1977 June Playboy: Alongside the adult centerfold
Playmate, a little girl appeared as "Little Playmate"— a baby to toddler
to teen to adult. That is, Playboy’s photo layout began with a baby and concluded
with the nude, adult Playmate. This little-to-big or big-to-little "biography,"
written in child’s scrawl, became a regular feature. When readers opened Playboy
to the centerfold, they opened to a child. Roughly 30% of the children in these
"Child Strip Tease" inserts in 1977 were girls between 3- and 7-years-old,
the common age of incestuous sexual assault, and over half were under age 16.
Some Playmate child photos showed the small playmates partially dressed or nude.
1985-86 Playboy: Playboy prints articles protesting
the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography’s plan to require nude models
to be at least 21-years-old. Congress did end up voting to establish the legal
age for nude models at 18. (There was no known lobby of 18-year-olds fighting
in Washington for the right to be pornography models.)
1985: After the 1985 leak of Reisman's Department
of Justice, Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention report, Images of Children,
Crime & Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, which fully documents
Playboy's child rape jokes, cartoons and photographs by strangers and kin, the
post-1977 photographs of children disappeared temporarily.
1986 April 10: Citing this author’s research, Southland Corporation, the owner
of 7/11 stores, discontinued selling Playboy and Penthouse. In response, a group
called "The Media Coalition" , representing Playboy and Penthouse,
employed Gray & Company, a well-connected Washington, D.C. lobbying firm
to:
…discredit...the organizations and individuals who have
begun to seriously disrupt [pornographers]…Quiet efforts must be undertaken
to persuade the Attorney General, the White House and the leaders of both parties...they
should shy away from publicly endorsing the document."
Gray & Company charged the Media Coalition
between $50,000 and $75,000 for the campaign. Much of the cost was borne by
Playboy; Penthouse also provided funding. Playboy mounted an attack on this
author claiming that their publication never sexualized children. The cartoons
depicting child molestation and child centerfolds disappeared.6
1986 July: The Attorney General’s report is
published. While accepting the report's "hard core" pornography findings,
Attorney General Edwin Meese declared that by today’s standards Playboy and
"would seem quite tame" and not "obscene." He noted that
he read Playboy as "a youth."7
1987: Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia is
launched. Its editors include famous U.S. academic "sexuality experts,"
many serving as professors within the California university system. Paidika’s
"Statement of Purpose" reads: The starting point of Paidika is necessarily
our consciousness of ourselves as paedophiles....It is our contention that the
oppression of paedophilia is...[a] dangerous...part of the larger repression
of sexuality....But to speak today of paedophilia, which we understand to be
consensual intergenerational sexual relationships, is to speak of the politics
of oppression…Visual images that are a part of a paedophile sensibility are
also being assailed…[Signed] The Editors
1987 Autumn: Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia.8
Pedophile editor Lawrence Stanley wrote,"The Hysteria Over Child Pornography
and Paedophilia" asserting, "Children have enjoyed… adult-child sexual
encounters…[and] being nude before a camera."9
1988 September: Lawrence Stanley's "The
Child Pornography Myth" is published by Playboy as a factual report.10
Playboy concealed Stanley’s Paidika editorship, saying only: "The author
began researching the issue of child pornography in 1984…He talked with lawyers…ex-researchers...law
enforcement...in Europe and the United States" (p. 44).
1990 Sept/Oct: Debbie Nathan (unidentified
as to credentials) nominated and presented pedophile editor Lawrence Stanley
with the 1989 Free Press Association Investigative Reporting Award for his Playboy
article," The Child Pornography Myth." Free Press Association journalism
chairman Professor C. McDaniel contested Stanley's award since his article was
"advocacy" and Stanley had a "special interest" in the "outcome
of the investigation." It was "not necessary" said Playboy, for
the Free Press Association or Playboy readers to know Stanley was the editor
of Paidika: The
Journal of Paedophilia.
1991 March: The Department of Defense Report
on Homosexuality and Personnel Security: Kinsey, Pomeroy, Gebhard, Martin, Ford
and Beach, Bell and Weinberg along with Paidika: The Journal of Pedophilia 11
advocates Money and Bullough, are cited by the Department of Defense as scientific
experts for healthy, normal, human sexual conduct.
1991 Spring: Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia: John Money
stated that pedophilia is an "overflow of parental pairbonding into erotic
pairbonding." He created his sexual disorders clinic to give "leeway
to judges" to free pedophiles. American University’s pedophile president,
Richard Berendzen, became "physically and psychologically sound" after
three weeks at Money's clinic.12
Holding pedophilia as normal, Money advocates
the end to age of consent laws and suggests the legalization of sex by pedophiles
when "consent" of the child victim was obtained. Money stated, "If
I were to see the case of a boy aged 10 or 11 who’s intensely erotically attracted
toward a man in his 20s or 30s, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the
bonding is genuinely totally mutual, then I would not call it pathological in
any way" (p. 5).
Money also argued that if one member of a couple
who has made a "sadomasochistic…death pact…[should] finally die… in one
of their] ceremonies" that this should not be considered criminal as the
surviving member would have obtained prior consent (pp. 7-8).13
1991 September: Bill Andriette, editor of the North American Man-Boy Love Association's
NAMBLA Newsletter and affiliate of Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia in his
Playboy article, "Are You A Child Pornographer?" warned, "The
Feds have now also criminalized a range of images that no one could possibly
view as harmful to society or to children." Playboy concealed Andriette's
pedophilia and said only that he was "features editor of The Guide, a Boston-based
gay magazine" (p. 56).
1992 March: Playboy again describes pedophile
Lawrence Stanley as a child abuse expert. Andriette, Petersen and Stanley cite
each other in seeking to reverse the US. vs. Stephen A. Knox child "panty
pornography" conviction. Petersen in Playboy conceals Stanley's and Andriette's
pedophilia, warning: "When the government looks at [Knox's] innocent material
with a pedophile's eyes, justice suffers" (p 46). A year later Attorney
General Reno asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse Knox.
1992 June: In Playboy’s "Presumed Guilty,"
unidentified (as to credentials) author Harry Stein said child abuse is a fantasy
and that later recall of childhood sexual abuse is false. (By eroticizing the
home, Playboy eroticized children for those in the home, thereby facilitating
"copy cat" child molestation, incest and divorce.)14 Stein exploits
Playboy readers’ concerns about child sex abuse charges in divorce, saying "sexual
abuse of children is the dirtiest, deadliest trick in divorce court" (p.
74).
1992 October: In Playboy’s "Cry Incest,"
Debbie Nathan (Stanley’s advocate) asserts incest is trivial and blames children
and their own alleged sexuality for sex abuse stating: "Such tales express
people’s anxieties about their own infantile aggressive and sexual impulses....
[children feel] guilt about normal sexuality" (p. 162).15
1993 March: In Playboy, vampire novelist Anne
Rice says, "I do love violence, I absolutely love it" (p. 53). In
Rice’s later book her 13-year-old heroine dresses like a child, has sex with
male relations — young, middle-aged and elderly — in a graveyard, has sex with
her 15-year-old cousin and later that night has sex with another cousin's husband.16
1993 March: In Playboy author Matthew Childs
(unidentified as to credentials) insisted, "Adolescence doesn't exist ....[Age
of consent laws] signaled a separation of sexuality from human behavior."
Minors are healthier if they "don't have to let their parents know about
their [sexual] lives." Age of consent laws reflect the "social-purity
league" (p. 41).
1993 November: Congress unanimously condemned Janet Reno's view
that a child be required to be "engaged in the conduct of lasciviously
exhibiting their (or someone else's) genitals or pubic areas" before a
film or photo could be considered illegal.17
1993 December: Playboy’s "centerfold as
a child" triptych returned as a little "Brownie." The child playmate
was again displayed at ages 3 to 7. In this same issue a man had sex with his
friend's daughter; youthful anal sodomy was "thrillingly" reported
by women and men, and pseudo-lesbian sadism imagery dominated.18 This issue
signaled that the child protection gains made in the 80s by the U.S. Department
of Justice’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section were to be reversed. The
Reno Department of Justice ignores obscenity as a public issue.
ENDNOTES
1. Reisman, J. (1990). Images of Children,
Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, U.S. Department of Justice,
Grant No. 84-JN-AX-K007.
2. Both the 1948 and the 1953 Kinsey Reports
included data (as previously noted, this data was methodologically and statistically
flawed) supporting Kinsey’s idea that children are sexually active from birth.
These Reports have been cited by the academic pedophile movement as a basis
for legitimizing adult-child sexual relationships.
3. US Magazine, January 19, 1982, p. 68.
4. This issue also included an interview with
then presidential candidate, Jimmy Carter.
5. USA Today, September 27, 1985. See also
SoftPorn, p. 95.
6. Trento, S. (1992). The Power House. New
York: St. Martin’s Press, p. 197. Dr. Riesman’s child pornography research was
conducted at American University (AU) in Washington, D.C. During her 1983-85
tenure, AU president Richard Berendzen and psychology department chairman Elliot
McGinnies were criminally charged with, and confessed to, crimes of a pedophilic
nature. The media largely ignored McGinnies' confession to statutory rape of
a 9-year-old girl in his trailer at a Maryland nudist colony. McGinnies is a
professor emeritus at AU. As of June 1999, Berendzen continued to serve on the
faculty after receiving roughly a $1,000,000 to step down from the presidency.
7. The Baltimore Evening Sun, January 29, 1987.
8. Published by The Stichting Paidika Foundation,
a non-profit organization in The Netherlands. The post office box for the Uncommon
Desires Newsletter is registered in Stanley’s name (Kincaid, C. [1992]. The
Playboy Foundation: A Mirror of the Culture? WA, DC: Capitol Research Center,
p. 43).
9. Pp. 16-27.
10. In the May 1987 issue, Playboy advisor
Peterson instructed male readers to have sex with "virgins," or "very
young lovers" to avoid exposure to AIDS.
11. Paidika: The Journal of Pedophilia’s "Statement
of Purpose" reads, "The starting point of Paidika is necessarily our
consciousness of ourselves as paedophiles…"
12. Excerpted from the May 16, 1990, evaluation
report of Berendzen by Paul R. McHugh, M.D., chairman of the psychiatry department
at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
13. Retrieved from the World Wide Web, June
1999: http://www.bekknet.ad.jp/jp/ro/fresh/paidikaa.html. As previously noted,
John Money is a Penthouse Forum advisor, a Johns Hopkins University professor
emeritus, and founder of the Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.
14. As previously noted, Playboy International
filed a defamation suit in the Netherlands against a Dutch televisions station
for this author‘s statements. A Dutch court declared in their favor on October
27, 1994. See also SoftPorn, Chapters 5 and 7.
15. See: Softporn, p. 23, 100, 101, 148, 149,
160, 164-165, 171.
16. The News & Observer, November 21, 1993,
p. A1.
17. The Washington Times, November 25, 1993,
p. A1-20.
18. In the Playboy interview of Rush Limbaugh,
ACLU President Nadine Strossen urges readers to buy "Sex Maniacs"
(trading-card sets designed for teen and young adult consumers) to challenge
a New York law that prohibits selling "Serial Killer" trading cards
to minors.
NOTE: This is an addendum to a chapter by Judith
Reisman, Ph.D., entitled, "Implications of Kinsey Research on Child Custody
Cases: How Junk Science Create a Paradigm Shift in Society, Legislation and
the Judiciary" in Exposé: The Failure of Family Courts to Protect Children
from Abuse in Custody Disputes published by Our Children Our Future Charitable
Foundation in 1999.
For additional information on mainstream child
pornography see Dr. Reisman's book "Soft Porn" Plays Hardball, and
her report prepared for the Department of Justice: Images of Children, Crime
and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, 1954-1984 , or contact her at
1-800-837-0544.
|
