What are the Prostasia Foundation's thoughts on Alfred Kinsey?

So, recently I was looking at a subreddit known as r/SchoolSystemBroke which is designed for students to complain about their schools and America’s failing education system. It’s an ok sub, however, I came across a post on there which linked a video from a youtube channel called ‘‘Freedom Toons’’. The video’s topic was how the infamous sexologist Alfred Kinsey allegedly corrupted America’s sex-ed system.

For those unaware, ‘‘Freedom Toons’’ is a right-wing channel known for taking stories with iotas of truth and twisting them into right-wing propaganda. They peddle the whole QAnon conspiracy-sphere, including the allegation that the world economy is controlled by the Rothschild Banking Clan, which every single Jewish person is part of, of course. For this reason, I was very disappointed to see that the subreddit’s userbase was eating up the video as truth and my warning in the comment section was getting downvoted.

The video argues that modern sex-ed in American schools is riddled with sexual degeneracy that harms children, all a result of Alfred Kinsey’s efforts. This is a common complaint of the right who don’t seem to realize that they have kept American sex-ed quite conservative into the modern age.

Regardless, all of this has inspired to me wonder and ask what the Prostasia Foundation’s thoughts are on Alfred Kinsey. Was he Good? Evil? somewhere in between?

Ugh, I saw that video. And I have to say, alot of the myths behind him being a pervert started with a woman named Judith Riseman, whose failures are documented here. If anyone else wants to chip in, please do.

I don’t feel qualified to answer this, but the way that the alt-right invokes Kinsey’s name is feels very similar to the way they invoke George Soros. In both cases, it has less to do with the person and more to do with what they represent.


I share Malcolm’s optics.

For me, I personally don’t know enough about Kinsey, or his work, or their effects, to really make a decision on how to feel about him.

He could have been good and his work could have been good.
He could have been bad and his work could have been bad.
Maybe there isn’t enough data on the effects of his work was good or bad.

But sex-ed is necessary, in my opinion, to help reduce the rates of teen sexual violence and to help ensure that minors make safe, informed decisions with regard to their sexual health and practices which follow them into adulthood.
I don’t know how Kinsey has contributed to that, but considering how conservatives tend to liken anything that isn’t religious or abstinence-based to child grooming, I can’t really make any negative guesses either.
Again, I don’t know enough to make that call. I might look further into this later down the line.


According to Wikipedia:

Kinsey’s methodology used to collect data has received criticism. It has been suggested that some data in the reports could not have been obtained without collaborations with child molesters. The Kinsey Institute denies this charge, though it acknowledges that men who have had sexual experiences with children were interviewed, with Kinsey balancing what he saw as the need for their anonymity to solicit “honest answers on such taboo subjects” against the likelihood that their crimes would continue. Additionally, concerns over the sample populations used were later addressed by the Kinsey Institute. The conclusion of the Kinsey Institute was that none of Kinsey’s original estimates was significantly affected by these data sources.

More recent researchers believe that Kinsey overestimated the rate of same-sex attraction because of flaws in his sampling methods. Nonetheless, his work is considered pioneering and some of the most well known sex research of all time.


Kinsey said he also interviewed nine men who had sexual experiences with children and who told him about the children’s responses and reactions. Little attention was paid to this part of Kinsey’s research at the time, but where Kinsey had gained this information began to be questioned nearly 40 years later. It was later revealed that Kinsey used data from a single pedophile and presented it as being from various sources.

I do find this lack of scientific integrity somewhat troubling, and the fact that the Kinsey Institute says they removed the questionable data without changing the fundamental results of the reports as curious. Did they have any independent organization review these corrections?

1 Like

Or what those who have limited and/or second-hand opinions of their accomplishments think they represent.

Kinsey definently did a lot of horrible shit but I don’t think it’s fair to blame him for the current state of American sex-ed. I have yet to see any school that teaches Kinsey’s reports to minors.

I haven’t read Kinsey’s reports, but as I understand them, he established that people were having sex, a lot more than some guessed and there were some unusual sex practices going on. All of which apparently came as a surprise to many. I am pretty sure that his works were not meant for child sex education. And sound like they would be WAY too much information for children.

What is desperately needed is some simple, honest, clear facts for children that are in every curriculum, from about the 5th grade on, since parents can’t seem to have these conversations. If more children were educated on these issues and were told to look out for adults trying to take advantage of them, that they can say NO, CSA would be greatly reduced. IMHO.

1 Like