... and perform this manoeuvre on a daily basis

Well, you are quite proficient yourself. You must be on T1. For you are as fast as your name.

I think many and the mods here give all a chance... it's the fair thing to do. Freedom of speech is important to an open and free society. As is freedom of religion. Individual rights (which includes sexuality preferences).

You won't hear any of the above on a feminist board...

I may be tortoise... but we know who won the race.

"Freedom of speech is important to an open and free society"

you could have written those turgid speeches for Kennedy ha ha

" ask not what your country can do.."

see how "free" the society is in the feminits Family Courts

this forum is for promoting mens issues and highlighting the tyranny of the feminits laws on mens lives not to encourage feminits twittering about their application of b/s feminits doctrine as they see it should apply to mens lives

my quotes are concise by and large not likethe page after page of tera's cant

Why should it be? Please explain. Do you feel that YOUR opinions should be left unchecked but this person's should be?

To whit;

"The way I see it, MRA's are so anti-everything that they narrow the scope of whom will be drawn to support them...alienating gays, women, feminists, liberals, non-religious folk, minorities...."

Hi OHSO ... You will understand we have had imposters and disrupters and posers and no end of trolls here before, excuse us - trust takes a long time. I should say from the outset we are NOT extremists here.

Lets hear what the man has to say. I have to say my patience with the state the media and feminist dominance has ended.
shazam
Indeed and by and large its been done with reason and good nature in spite of the horrific sufferings of members.
Sadly we have had women on a mission to divert the discourse too.
They dont fully understand the extent of the crisis.
They dont understand that this is a war.
Not a cosy chat forum about relationships
This is not chit chat this is men's lives shattered destroyed.
Employment wrecked..
grotesque divorce laws , Mass suicide....read the forum....

Free speech here and responsible and adult with it..Other forums ban
for contradicting pc speech codes and unfeminist thoughts. The puerile tactics typically mobbing,or just derailing the subject with childish jibes


As for lurkers and imposters who think to try it we are not stupid.
We have been around a long time and are very adept at spotting spies.

Just Gotta Be You...

Quote:

Originally Posted by KellyMac You had me until you implied that homosexual = boy rapist. Kind of closed-minded...Or is it just me?

Yes - It is just you. Your misquotation of my position is actually a standard party line scam used by the Thought Police - who when confronted with Ungood information feel they must somehow discredit it, even if they can not factually contradict it.

Hence your employment of a really weak syllogism failed to do anything save expose the paucity of your 'argument' - which was really more of an ad hominem attack posing as a question... For Starters - I did not say that "All Homo-Anal Perverts are Boy Rapists" - But I certainly did reference the Historical Fact that the founders of the Nazi Party Were!

Lets see if we can put it all in more 'womyn friendly' terms for you... How about this: 'Because some Women abduct and murder pregnant women, in order to cut their babies out and claim the child as their own - This Does Not mean that All New Mothers Are Murderers...' as you would 'logically deduce'...

HOWEVER - While All Homo-Anal Males may not rape Boys, I submit that ALL Males who Rape Boys are Homosex Perverts, Tim Dailey's work notwithstanding.

I shall start a later thread on the subject of the "War Against Boys" - but in the interim shall suffice it to add a few relevant posts to this thread just to bolster this reply.

Ohso
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hitler Homosex Spin Out

The Homosex Roots of the Nazi Party and its Leadership have been known since its earliest days, although it is still one of the least studied or remarked upon aspects of these hate driven perverts. The so called ‘mainstream’ media have studiously ignored these facts for decades, if only because the Truth is so Ungood that it might cause the ‘Vanilla’ (clueless voters / taxpayers) to question the entire Radical Homosex agenda being pushed by said media.

Thus the release of a documentary [“The Hidden Fuhrer – Debating the Enigma of Hitler’s Sexuality” – Strand Releasing 2004] based on the outstanding book by German Author Lothar Machtan {“The Hidden Hitler” – Basic Books 2001} offers a rare and insightful look in to the Core Value of Nazism and its Leaders – Homo-Anal Perversions and Ephebophilia (Rape of adolescent Boys), albeit with a slightly different spin than Machtan’s book.

As was clearly shown in by Authors Lively and Abrams in their important work (“The Pink Swastika”) – the Nazi Party was founded by the butch wing of Homo-Anal Perverts active in Germany during the decline of the post WW-1 Weimar Republic.

Its real founder was the Notorious Boy Raping former leader of the “Freikorps” (a paramilitary gang) named ERNST RÖHM, who as leader of the Jackbooted Brown Shirt Homosex Thugs of the “Sturm Abteilung” (Storm Troopers) was instrumental in the rise of his Homosexual Protégé / Boy Toy - Adolf Hitler.

The documentary “The Hidden Fuhrer” follows up on Machtan’s book and features interviews with Machtan and others, including prominent German Homosex Activist / Apologists, and also includes archival footage that many may not have seen, or ever had explained to them.

For example, the frequently shown clip of Nazis ‘Burning Books” is presented and explained for what it truly was – the Destruction of incriminating and embarrassing Medical / Psychiatric Records detailing the various Sick Perversions that were common to the Nazi Leadership at the time.

However, an added bonus to this documentary is the inclusion of what were probably intended as ‘serious’ rebuttal from German and other Homosexual propagandists, such as Machtan’s former teacher Rudiger Lautman, which becomes so Orwellian in its attempted Doublethink as to actually be humorous. For example, although Rohm and Hitler were both Notorious Homo-Anal Perverts with a long and intimate relationship, Lautman would have us believe that they were not sex partners / buggery buddies because: “Rohm was rather unattractive.”

As anyone who has ever seen pictures of the Sado Masochistic Homo-Anal Bondage and Buggery festival known as the Frisco ‘Folsom Street Fair’ can certainly attest, the standards of ‘beauty’ amongst this crowd are not shared by many outside the cult. Rohm was indeed a battle scarred piggish brute of a man, but this is just peachy keen to Hitler’s type of pervert, and Hitler showed himself to be every bit as bent as any of his subordinates.

In fact, it was only when Rohm became a rival to Hitler and threatened to expose him as a Coprophile Pervert of the rankest sort, that it became necessary to eliminate him and other knowing allies in what was referred to as: “The Night of the Long Knives” (also the title of an insightful History Channel Documentary).

It should be noted that the first (of the few thousand) Homosex Inmates of the Concentration Camps were mostly Homosex Storm Troopers still loyal to Rohm after the execution – although most were let loose and allowed to join the army later on.

For the rest – the documentary does a good job of paralleling Machtan’s book, and although many homosex radicals attack his work, none are able to make a dent in his presentation. It also does a good job of distinguishing between the Butch and Fairy (what one old German Pouf called the “Yoo Hoo” boys) camps of the Homosex cult, and how only those homosexuals who were considered a danger to Hitler were targeted by the Reich, while those who cooperated were rewarded just like the rest.

“The Hidden Fuhrer” is an outstanding accompaniment to Machtan's outstanding work, and when read in conjunction with the “Pink Swastika” actually provides a historically accurate, if massively politically incorrect, understanding of the Homosex Perverts who made the Nazi Hate Machine the nightmare it was.

Study of Catholic Priests and Child Abuse:
The Boy Scouts Were Right about the Risks of Homosexual Youth Leaders

Feb. 28, 2004: With the skill and determination of a modern-day Houdini, the mainstream media has been struggling to escape what appears to be an inescapable conclusion from the national scandal of sexual abuse among Catholic priests. Sadly, those chains just won't come off, but with enough misdirection, maybe we won't notice they are there.

Maybe we'll overlook the inescapable conclusion that the Boy Scouts of America were right. They have been vindicated in their cautious policies that make it difficult for gay men to serve as respected leaders of young boys and young men. Based on what we now know about the scandal with priests, the concern that some homosexual men might seek access to young victims has been entirely borne out with tragic experience.

My state of Wisconsin and many other states have been rocked by the scandal of child molestation among Catholic priests. The scandal, however, is far larger than most people have imagined or could have imagined. We've been told that the molesting priests represent a few scattered pedophiles--that's the preferred term, one that conjures up an image of rare sickos with no particular relationship to the gay community, mentally ill creatures going for tiny little kids.

Some journalists have even claimed that a majority of the victims were girls, and that homosexuality was not an issue in the scandal. When was the last time a major media outlet dared to say that the molesters were homosexual men or that the victims were typically teenage boys? And how often has the press dared to say that large numbers of homosexual men have naturally been drawn to the Catholic clergy, where they can use their positions of authority to gain sexual access to youths?

Two new reports may help the world see the reality behind the media-created illusion. The reports were commissioned by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, who asked the National Review Board, a panel of Catholic lay people, to investigate the abuse crisis. The National Review Board study includes information on molestation claims from 1950 to 2002. There is also a companion study about the nature of the problem, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. Recent news stories on the topic are available at AP.org, Reuters, Wavy.com, the Baltimore Sun, the San Antonio Express-News, and other news outlets. For details on the studies, see the information at the Website for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

While it is well known that sexual molestation is typically highly underreported, the numbers are still shockingly large. Nearly 4% of all priests have been accused of sexual molestation. About 44% of the accused priests have been accused by more than one person. And contrary to the insinuations of the media, the victims have not been little kids, but are typically teenage boys, as shown in the figure to the right from the Associated Press (The Post-Crescent, Feb. 28, 2004, p. A-4). In fact, only 5.8% of victims were under age 7; 16% percent were between ages 8-10; and over 78% were ages 11-17. Of course, there were men ages 18 and older who were also exploited, but that is too old for child molestation and beyond the scope of these studies.

Recent trials of some of these priests have shown that they used their position of trust and influence as adult leaders to exploit their access to boys, particularly teenagers. What can we say about males that sexually abuse young men? Why is the word "homosexual" so rarely heard in media discussions of this crisis? Fortunately, a few voices have dared to say the "h" word. One is Julia Duin of the Washington Times in her article, "Gay Priests Cited in Abuse of Boys," Feb. 28, 2004 (available online):

Eighty-one percent of sex crimes committed against children by Roman Catholic priests during the past 52 years were homosexual men preying on boys, according to a comprehensive study released yesterday on the church's sex abuse crisis. (emphasis mine) Many studies show that homosexuals represent only about 1 to 3% of the population, but if we assume it is 10%, as the gay community would have us believe, and if we assume that gay men are just as likely as heterosexuals to be child molesters, then we might expect about 10% of the victims to be boys.

But 81% of the victims are boys, and not just small children, but mostly teenagers. There is no longer any doubt that the problem of sexual abuse among priests has been predominately a problem of homosexual men who have used their positions of authority to gain access to boys and young men. The body of Catholic clergy has become a hot bed for that minority of homosexual men who are also child molesters.

All this leads to an inescapable conclusion: the Boy Scouts are right. Not only should they have a right to choose who the role models are in their private organization, but they should have a right to protect young boys and young men from the type of abuse that has devastated so many Catholic families. Though most homosexuals are not child molesters, those who are may naturally seek to enter into organizations like the Boy Scouts or the clergy, where access to potential victims is easier. It's a reality that must be faced. As painful as it is to gay men and women who would never hurt a child, those who share their orientation but not their respect for the young are a danger that must be faced.

Part of the Houdini-like efforts in the media involve the claim that the problem of child molestation not a homosexual problem, and that homosexuals are no more likely to pose a risk than anybody else. That's another assertion that doesn't necessarily fit reality. Again, most homosexuals are not molesters, no question! And many molesters are heterosexual. But if you look at those who are convicted for child molestation, the number of men who abuse boys relative to those who abuse girls is far too high if homosexuality did not increase the likelihood of child molestation.

In fact, there are several other types of evidence that point to a much higher that homosexual men will be child molesters. See "Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse" by Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D., "Homosexuality and Pedophilia," and "How Pedophiles Have Targeted the Boy Scouts of America."

Most child molestation is done by men, and I'm a man. That puts me in the high risk group. I should not be upset if an organization like the Girl Scouts decides to exclude men from leadership roles because I am in a higher risk group. I can understand that. And if parents don't want to hire my boys as babysitters because of the higher risk, I consider that wise, and hope my own boys won't take it personally. We men are more likely to be problems, let's face it--but that doesn't make us all guilty or inherently vile.

When it comes to molestation of boys, homosexual men are a much greater problem than heterosexual men. Even if I had homosexual leanings, I hope I would have the understanding to acknowledge that and understand why a private organization might exclude me in order to reduce risks to young boys. The Catholic Church would be wise to exercise great caution regarding priests who consider themselves homosexual. And United Way and others who have opposed the Boy Scouts' policies ought to stop their self-deception and face reality: the Boy Scouts were right.

Jeff Lindsay, Feb. 28, 2004

Although regularly censored by the 'mainstream' media, author Tammy Bruce (www.Tammy Bruce ) long ago provided the essential insights in to the Catholic Church's problems with Ephebophile Chicken Hawks targeting Boys for Homosex Rape - in her book THE DEATH OF RIGHT AND WRONG.

Particularly relevant to this topic are two passages worthy of further discussion, and I present them here in order to further the debate.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"If the Catholic Church had been as eager to defend its principles as the Boy Scouts have been, so many lives would not have been damaged or destroyed. Frankly, even before the depth of the Catholic Church's problem became known, it was common knowledge that many gay men pursue sexual relationships with adolescent boys.

Why? Based on my experience in the gay community, I believe it's due to the fact that so many gay men had their first sexual experience as an adolescent with an adult male.

That is a traumatic experience, and as long as the wound remains untreated, the victim feels compelled to continually reenact the experience so as to master it or project it on to others...

The other reason actually discussed in the community is that, because of the Aids crisis and the emergence of drug resistant strains of contagions like herpes and gonorrhea, gay men are compelled to seek new, untouched young men."

"Almost without exception, the gay men I know (and that's too many to count) have a story of some kind of sexual trauma or abuse in their childhood - molestation by a parent or an authority figure, or seduction as an adolescent at the hands of an adult.

The gay community must face the truth and see sexual molestation of an adolescent for the abuse it is, instead of the 'coming of age' experience many regard it as being."

Tammy Bruce.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The Sadomasochistic Roots of Justice Kennedy's Opinion Sodomy Decision Based On Fraudulent 'Science' By Judith Reisman

Subject: Kinsey's role in as authority in the Lawrence Decision http://www.humaneventsonline.com/index.php


In his distinguished book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas S. Kuhn, the late MIT philosopher of science, noted that scientists were not always disinterested, "objective" scholars. Too often, bogus research findings become "fashionable" as scientists and society embrace a revolutionary new paradigm based on deceptive "scientific findings." Consider the "science" of "phrenology," so popular a century ago, which specifically linked intelligence and character traits to skull shape and cranial size.

Lawrence v. Texas is a flagrant, indeed chilling, example of just such a bogus "scientific" revolution, one in which the U.S. Supreme Court is driving the junk science bandwagon, marching America and the world into snake-infested swamps .For many reasons, any revisionist investigation of history brings to mind Thomas Jefferson, who warned, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

Rick Perlstein noted this ignorance in his ecstatic essay for the Washington Post, "What Gay Studies Taught the Court." Perlstein observed, "commentators may have skipped their homework in reporting on the historical foundations of the majority's decision," for, although Lawrence was a "momentous" shift in America's moral economy, "[w]hat hasn't been explained is the basis for Kennedy's landmark ruling. "He was correct up to there. The Court based its disastrous sodomy ruling on fraudulent scholarship that deceived six justices. Their ignorance of junk "sex science" and junk history led directly to a grotesque decision that will further promote sex acts that sicken and kill countless people.

Perlstein offered an insider's awareness that conservative lawyers or pundits seldom grasp. The justices, too, "skipped their homework" in considering "the foundations of the majority's decision." Inconceivably, the Court brazenly cited only secondary "scientific" authorities for their sodomy ruling. In fact, tracing Kennedy's opinion back to its origin reveals that the majority relied on only one sex "science" resource as the Court's primary authority on sex and sodomy namely, the bi/homosexual, sadomasochistic, proven fraud, Prof. Alfred C. Kinsey.

The evidence shows that Justice Kennedy genuflected to "facts" about sodomy as documented by the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code (ALIMPC) of 1955. Yet the primary source for the sodomy "data" codified as "fact" by the Court in the ALIMPC was Kinsey alone.Actually, not only did the majority rely on Kinsey as its primary sex science authority, but the "gay studies" historical revisionists the majority cited also relied on Kinsey as their primary sex science resource.

But let's go back to the ALIMPC. Kennedy opined: "In 1955 the American Law Institute promulgated the Model Penal Code and made clear that it did not recommend or provide for 'criminal penalties for consensual sexual relations conducted in private.'
It justified its decision on three grounds: (1) The prohibitions undermined respect for the law by penalizing conduct many people engaged in; (2) the statutes regulated private conduct not harmful to others; and (3) the laws were arbitrarily enforced and thus invited the danger of blackmail." [Emphasis.]
In his Lawrence v. Texas Amicus Curiae brief to the Court, Kentucky lawyer Ronald E. Ray reported: 'Regarding homosexuality, [ALI Reporter] Schwartz cited the Kinsey Reports as evidence of the frequency of homosexual activity and the senselessness of trying to control it.' Indeed, upon the Kinsey 'research,' many state sodomy laws have been changed or overturned."

Experts? Hardly. Meticulous scholarly study reveals that all of ALIMPC's assertions about the "right" to sodomy came from one alleged "expert" Kinsey in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). Chapter 8 of my book, Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000, 2003) fully documents Kinsey's total domination of the "Sex Offenses" section of the 1955 ALIMPC.

But on June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court enshrined Kinsey's fraudulent data as the revolutionary moral law of our land, even though it derived from crimes of sexual torture inflicted on at least 317 and as many as 2,035 infants and children, who "convulsed," "fainted" and tried to escape their abusers. The "expert" Prof. Kinsey, who himself was a barbaric sadomasochist, reported that the little victims "enjoyed" being sexually tortured (Male, see esp. pp. 160-161 and p. 180).

Although Kinsey was cited throughout the "Sex Offenses" section of the 1955 ALIMPC six times in 12 pages, the eight pages on "Sodomy and Related Offenses" quoted extensively from Kinsey's Male volume, with 19 of the 21 quotations in "Frequency of Sexual Deviation" taken from Kinsey. His sex science data on sodomy are the only ones cited.
The ALIMPC writers quoted Kinsey's junk science in order to overthrow the Judeo-Christian sexual morality of The Greatest Generation and replace it with Kinsey's ideology of sexual anarchy. Kinsey falsely stated in his 1948 book (quoted in the ALIMPC) that 72% of males practice oral sex, 40-50% of farm boys have sex with animals, and that "37% of the total male population has at least some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm between adolescence and old age. This accounts for nearly 2 males out of every 5 that one may meet."

And where did Kinsey get these "data" that the illustrious Model Penal Code authors and six U.S. Supreme Court justices so willingly took at face value? It turns out that Kinsey, famed for his sexual "statistics," knew nothing about statistics, simply making up what he needed, while passing his young boyfriend off as his "statistician. "In fact, roughly 86% of Kinsey's total male subjects were sexually, criminally or mentally aberrant.

For example, Wardell Pomeroy, co-author (with Kinsey) of the Male volume, stated:

"By the end of 1940 [Kinsey] had recorded more than 450 homosexual histories ... His Chicago and St. Louis contacts began to spread ... like the branches of a tree. With 700 histories recorded at this point, his tabulations, curves and correlation charts began to be impressive ... Inautumn of 1940 he describes his prison work: 'I have 110 histories from
inmates there and can get as many hundreds more as I want.'"

Moreover, the Court's reliance on foreign laws to justify its demolishing our own laws had roots in the 1955 ALIMPC's citation of "Foreign Countries" (p. 162). Among many other ALIMPC references to experts who relied on Kinsey we find an emergent plea to replace the penitentiary with psychotherapy.
Kennedy also stated, for the Court:
"In 1961 Illinois changed its laws to conform to the Model Penal Code. Other States soon followed ... The sweeping references by Chief Justice Burger to the history of Western civilization and to Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards did not take account of other authorities pointing in an opposite direction. A committee advising the British Parliamentrecommended in 1957 repeal of laws punishing homosexual conduct. The
Wolfenden Report ... Parliament enacted the substance of those
recommendations 10 years later." [Emphasis added.]

Kinsey made a hush-hush trip to England to serve as sex science advisor for the Wolfenden Report (even though he is absent from the Wolfenden" Witnesses" list), which extolled The Kinsey Reports on its book jacket and quoted his false homosexual data throughout. The ALIMPC and Wolfenden were the key sex/sodomy authorities that Kennedy cited for the Court.

Justice Scalia noted the importance of the ALIMPC: "In relying, for evidence of an 'emerging recognition,' upon the American Law Institute's 1955 recommendation not to criminalize 'consensual sexual relations conducted in private,' ante, at 11, the Court ignores the fact that this recommendation was 'a point of resistance in most of the states that considered adopting the Model Penal Code.'"

The Court needs to revisit this decision in the light of new facts displacing our ignorance: the knowledge that a duplicitous sexual deviant was the primary source used by the United States Supreme Court as their "sex science" authority in Lawrence v. Texas.
Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy, one of Kinsey's recent hagiographers, writes in
Sex, The Measure of All Things (1998) that "The American Law Institute's
Model Penal Code of 1955 is virtually a Kinsey document!"

Dr. Reisman is author of Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences and Soft Porn Plays Hardball. Her website is http://drjudithreisman.org/

'Uncle Kinsey' Sado Masochistic 'Scientific' Boy Rapist
.................................................. .............................

On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court enshrined Kinsey's fraudulent data as the revolutionary moral law of our land, even though it derived from crimes of sexual torture inflicted on at least 317 and as many as 2,035 infants and children, who "convulsed," "fainted" and tried to escape their abusers.

The "expert" Prof. Kinsey, who himself was a barbaric sadomasochist, reported that the little victims "enjoyed" being sexually tortured (Male, see esp. pp. 160-161 and p. 180).

Dr. Judith Reisman: "Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>.

Consider - the same hollywierd that is trashing marriage is cheering Kinsey - based on his groundbreaking Pederast "Science" - telling the world that an 11 month old boy can have 10 orgasms (as defined by their rapists) in one hour - and a four year old child can have 26 in a 24 hour span.

Remember - this is not 'theoretical' data (like a lot of the stuff Kinsey Deliberately Fabricated) but the actual recordings of the diaries of Kinseys stable of homosex chicken hawks and pederasts, as lovingly interpreted by 'uncle' Kinsey and presented as "Science"... Ohso
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>

"Table 34. Examples of multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males. Some instances of higher frequencies" (Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, 1948 - Kinsey).

How were these figures gleaned?
AGE / NO. OF ORGASMS / TIME INVOLVED
5 mon. 3 ?
11 mon. 10 in 1 hr.
11 mon. 14 in 7 38 min.
2 yr. 11 in 65 min.
2.5 yr. 4 in 2 min.
4 yr. 6 in 5 min.
4 yr. 17 in 10 hr.
4 yr. 26 in 24 hr.
7 yr. 7 in 3 hr.
8 yr. 8 in 2 hr.
9 yr. 7 in 68 min.
10 yr. 9 in 52 min.
10 yr. 14 in 24 hr.
11 yr. 11 in 1 hr.
11 yr. 19 in 1 hr.
12 yr. 7 in 3 hr.
12 yr. 3 in 93 min.
12 yr. 12 in 2 hr.
12 yr 15 in 1 hr.
13 yr. 7 in 24 min.
13 yr. 8 in 2.5 hr.
13 yr. 9 in 8 hr.
13 yr. 3
14 yr. 11 in 4 hr.


Kinsey's Research on Child Orgasm
Dr. Alfred Kinsey's research on child orgasm is described in Chapter 5 of his book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948).[7]

Some of the observations are summarized in Tables 30-34 of the book. The numbers of the children in the five tables were, respectively, 214, 317, 188, 182, and 28.

The minimum ages were, respectively, one year, two months, five months, (ages of children not recorded for Table 33), and five months. The tables identify sex experiments; for example, Table 32 speaks of: "Speed of pre-adolescent orgasm; Duration of stimulation before climax; Observations timed with second hand or stop watch."

Did Kinsey instigate or encourage these practices? And did he actually use pedophiles to obtain the data for Tables 30-34? In his book, acting as the on-site reporter, Kinsey did not clearly describe his own role. However, Kinsey's close colleague, C. A. Tripp, made a revealing