Kinsey

[SkydivingNurse 0]

Challenging social mores is one thing. What I want to know is what scientific value does his "study" of young children have? This isn't an attack against you or any other poster here. I'm just curious what value the findings have? How does knowing how many orgasms can be induced in a 5 month old baby enrich us? I'm sure that I could come up with a study of the effects of being electrocuted with a wire inserted twelve feet into a person's lower intestine, I could couch it in the language of science, provide my own version of table 34, but how would that further the cause of humanity?
Human sexuality is a wonderful thing, a glorious thing (so I'm told ), and we should enhance our knowledge of it. I just can't see Kinsey as a free thinker or courageous. The ends don't always justify the means. Was it worth it? I'd rather live in a society that is a bit on the prudish side than one that places value on a study like this. Just my opinion. Humanity has always had a working knowledge of human sexuality, babies have always been born. My idea of a courageous scientist pursuing thoughts that were unpopular is closer to Galileo or Copernicus or Heisenberg.
Just my $0.02

[billvon 3,067]

>What I want to know is what scientific value does his "study" of
>young children have?

Parents are often challenged when it comes to teaching their adolescents about sexuality, sex, commitement etc. I think it helps to have a little bit of real data instead of guesses. A lot of parents think "oh, she's 12, I have a few years before I have to worry about sex or anything." A lot of 13 year old mothers result.

> I'm sure that I could come up with a study of the effects of being
> electrocuted with a wire inserted twelve feet into a person's lower
> intestine, I could couch it in the language of science, provide my own
> version of table 34, but how would that further the cause of humanity?

If most people had 12 feet of electrified wire inserted in their intestine at some point in their lives, then that would indeed be a worthwhile study. Since most people have sex at some point in their lives, sexuality studies are often worthwhile.

>Humanity has always had a working knowledge of human sexuality,
>babies have always been born.

That's instinct, not knowledge. Put a male and a female together and instinct will drive them to mate, even if they know zero about the possible results.

>My idea of a courageous scientist pursuing thoughts that were unpopular
>is closer to Galileo or Copernicus or Heisenberg.

I'd go with Giordano Bruno, myself.

[Steel 0]

Challenging social mores is one thing. What I want to know is what scientific value does his "study" of young children have?
==============================
I would say that his study of specifically that was worthless. But there was so much more that he researched and I see value in many other facets that he covered. For instance adultary. I am glad to know that males are so very likely to participate in this activity. {It gives me value as one of the few that doesn't}. I wouldn't say I was glad to know how many women were unfaithful. But I certainly prefer to know the truth and therefore know what to expect. Being that masturbation is as it always has been the norm for males, I think its better for most to know that they are not freaks of nature. I am sure the women can appreciate what his studies found on the female orgasms. And as a guy I certainly appreciate evidence that women gives blow jobs will not end up in a tragedy. So you see there was a lot of good that came from his studies.

If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass.
Can't think of anything I need
No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound.
Nothing to eat, no books to read.

[wmw999 2,532]

While studying physical sexuality in children is treading on VERY thin ice, knowing that it's real in children is, in fact, valuable.

Not because it can be exploited (which is unfortunate), but because it means that parents whose children show signs of sexual awareness or thought will have more information.

Kids can ask some astounding questions. Knowing that they really can come from kids' own experience or that of their same-age friends can help parents to answer appropriately, and not assume that all questions are evidence of sexual abuse.

There is no acceptable adult-child sex in modern Western society. I kind of like that. I don't want to see Kinsey's studies replicated with new children, but we shouldn't discard the knowledge.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

There is no acceptable adult-child sex in modern Western society. I kind of like that. I don't want to see Kinsey's studies replicated with new children, but we shouldn't discard the knowledge.

It's important to remember that this idea of protecting children from sex is a relatively new idea.

The "natural" ideas of god's will stating that sex be purely a form of reproduction afforded children little protection. Pregnant 12 years olds were not uncommon.

Strangely, it's exactly this notion that Kinsey was trying to disprove.

Ironic.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[wmw999 2,532]

I don't remember seeing a lot of references to sex by adults with small children being acceptable; pubescent boys and girls aren't really children in that sense.

Sexual play among children is quite natural. Combined with bullying it's a real problem, but, well, probably not a new one. And it's a lot "worse" these days with all the baggage we have around sex. All that baggage makes just about any sexual studies of children very difficult right now.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[diverborg 0]

Quote

A lot of parents think "oh, she's 12, I have a few years before I have to worry about sex or anything." A lot of 13 year old mothers result.

Do you think this is really because of lack of teaching sexualtiy or other factors. I would say our openmindedness and education on this topic are higher than they've ever been. Yet, teen pregnancies sure aren't less than they were when this talk was taboo. Hell, I remember learning about penises and vaginas and babies in the 5th grade. Is this really necessary?

[SkydivingNurse 0]

Quote

>What I want to know is what scientific value does his "study" of
>young children have?

Parents are often challenged when it comes to teaching their adolescents about sexuality, sex, commitement etc. I think it helps to have a little bit of real data instead of guesses. A lot of parents think "oh, she's 12, I have a few years before I have to worry about sex or anything." A lot of 13 year old mothers result.

Point well taken. I've never had to try to teach kids about the birds and the bees (I don't have any kids) and hadn't thought of that.