SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SmoothSail who wrote (492250)6/22/2012 3:47:50 PM
From: Oblivious  Respond to of 793928
 
You can have stats say anything you want.



To: SmoothSail who wrote (492250)6/22/2012 3:55:37 PM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793928
 
Lately, the error of some other of Kinsey's conclusions is beginning to show up. According to Kinsey's results, 10% of white American males are "more or less exclusively homosexual" (ie, near the right end of Kinsey's "scale") for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55; 8% are "exclusively homosexual" (6 on the "scale") for the same period; and 4% are exclusively homosexual throughout their lives (Male Report, p. 651). These data have been used by the Centers for Disease Control and others (including the New York City Department of Health) to prepare forecasts of AIDS-virus infection rates (since the early spread of AIDS has been largely among the homosexual population).

According to Bruce Lambert in The New York Times (July 19, 20, 1988), the estimate of the number of homosexual/bisexual men in New York City, which was based on Kinsey's 1948 data, has had to be revised downward (based on observations of the spread of AIDS) from 500,000 to 100,000-a massive reduction, by any measure. And on a national level, the Federal Government's estimate - first made in 1986-of up to 1.5 million Americans infected with the AIDS virus, based largely on Kinsey's data, may have to be revised downward to 1 million or less, four years later!

Kinsey's statistics on the prevalence of homosexuality in society have been grossly in error, which would probably be no surprise to Kinsey - he knew the bias he was building into his research. He even presented his homosexuality numbers deceptively, counting as "adult" homosexual experience the isolated same-sex experimentation of adolescent heterosexual males. More recently, published surveys of male sexual behavior have indicated that the occurrence of exclusive homosexuality has been significantly overestimated (see chapter 6).



To: SmoothSail who wrote (492250)6/22/2012 3:59:32 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 793928
 
Robinson added: ... in undermining established categories of sexual wisdom... .Kinsey assigned [prominence] to masturbation and homosexuality, both of which were objects of his partiality... [He had a] tendency to conceive of the ideal sexual universe according to a homoerotic model [ibid. pp. 54,64,70].

Wardell Pomeroy states in his Kinsey biography that some of Kinsey's best friends were scientists like himself who, in one way or another, were part of his "grand scheme" (Pomeroy, 1972, p. 155).4 Kinsey's research was in fact the scientific base which Kinsey and colleagues hoped to use in their effort to change society's traditional moral values. The specific tactics for implementing the "grand scheme" are examined in later chapters.

Essentially, Kinsey initiated a two-part strategy. First, he advocated the establishment of bisexuality as the "balanced" sexual orientation for normal uninhibited people. In effect, this would encourage heterosexuals to have homosexual experiences. This was the basic step in obliterating the existing heterosexual norm of sexuality with its traditional protective family structure, values and conventional sexual behavior (spousal heterosexual intercourse implied). This would open the way for the second and more-difficult-to-implement step - creating a society in which children would be instructed in both early peer sex and "cross-generational" sex (adult sex with children).

The problem with Kinsey's "statistically common behavior" (or statistical morality), however, is that it was defined by using data from a sample of interviewees that was unrepresentative of society - that contained, in the case of the male sample, for example, a high percentage of prisoners and sex offenders. Present and former prison inmates made up as much as 25% of the group of men Kinsey used to find out what "normal" male sexual behavior was!

The entire make-up of Kinsey's samples was such as to undermine the credibility of his research findings (see chapters 1 and 2). His conclusions on sexual behavior in society, it turns out, corresponded more closely with his philosophy of what that behavior should be than with what it actually was. If even some of the information we now have of Kinsey's research methods had come out 40 years ago, the Kinsey team would have become scientific pariahs instead of instant celebrities.

peterjblackburn.net