This is a heavily edited and (in equal parts) expanded version of a post I wrote back in the days of #steemit. As I've shared it a couple of times, I am setting all rewards to be burned. My reason for sharing is that it adds a deeper layer of context to part three and the impending part four of my new series.
Liberation?
My focus is on abuse, subversion, deception, and manipulation, wherever I see it, and irrespective of its reception, you can be sure I'm going to call it out.
Whilst we live in a highly sexualised environment, many concurrently retain the latent memories of sexual repression and connotations of sin. This can lead to feelings of shame and guilt, which in turn can feed the entrapment of the addiction cycle. Whilst sex is still equated with sin, we now live in an age where the "sins of the flesh" are used to sell the sexual commodity. Certainly, sin has been successfully repackaged as edgy and cool. Still, is lust liberation? Or can it become a self-perpetuating prison of insatiable desire? If you relinquish self-control, then who is the one that's in control?
I'm certainly not telling anyone how to live and the sexual proclivities of consenting adults are neither my concern nor my business. As a heterosexual male with a hedonistic past, I'd be a liar if I painted myself as a bastion of purity, a cyber monk sitting atop my ivory desk tower. That said, you don't have to be religious to discern that the prevalence of STDs and STIs highlight the validity of monogamous intimate relationships. We can of course (to a degree) protect ourselves, but at the physical level, we can also observe how nature points to a more conventional state of being.
That said, what's pertinent to this series of posts is the fact that in our drive towards "sexual liberation," the majority remain woefully illiterate to the malfeasance of the manipulator, and willfully ignorant of the dark underbelly that's obscured by our idealisms. Over the course of the next few chapters, I am going to offer an insight into the networks and promoted individuals that have shaped the sexual perceptions and confused identities of modernity.
You didn't think that human society was engaged in an organically evolving progression - did you??
Rockefeller Sex Research
The Rockefellers both financed and were interconnected with the National Research Council (NRC), and (from 1925-1965) held associated connections with the committee for research in problems of sex. The latter of which was born of a merger between the NRC and John D Rockefeller's Bureau of Health & Social Hygiene. In combination with the medical division of Rockefeller University and the creation/financing of the Population Council, areas of Rockefeller funded sex research include: birth control, endocrinology, morphology, physiology, psychology, biology, hormone therapy, psychopathology, sociology, and anatomy.
The NRC is the "operating arm" of the National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the latter of which continues to be the recipient of Rockefeller grants and is currently chronicling the redefinition of both gender and sexual identity.
Clandestine elements associated with Rockefeller sex research include the Guatemala syphilis experiments. Indeed, the Rockefeller Foundation, the (Rockefeller connected) John Hopkins University, and Bristol Myer Squibb, are currently the subject of a $1 billion dollar lawsuit for their connections to the associated historical abuses.
Doctors infected soldiers, prostitutes, prisoners and mental patients with syphilis and other sexually transmitted diseases, without the informed consent of the subjects. The experiment resulted in at least 83 deaths.[1] Serology studies continued through 1953 involving the same vulnerable populations in addition to children from state-run schools, an orphanage, and rural towns. Source
The Guatemala experiments echo the infamous Tuskegee experiments. Between 1932 - 1972, 600 (399 men with latent syphilis and a control group of 201 that were uninfected) impoverished African-Americans were told they were being treated for bad blood and given placebos instead of medicine. When the experiment began syphilis was untreatable, relatively early into the study penicillin was found to be a successful treatment. Despite this breakthrough, in order to track the disease’s full progression researchers provided no effective care and simply observed the men die, go blind, insane, and/or infect their wives and children.
Alfred Kinsey
Research into sex, including grants to fund the study of endocrinology and the work of Alfred Kinsey, was subsequently taken up by the RF. Source
So let’s take a look at the Rockefeller-funded Alfred Kinsey, a man “affectionately” known as the father of the sexual revolution. The two books informing the philosophical foundation of the revolution are “Sexual behaviour in the human male” and its subsequent counterpart “Human Female”. The books took the world by storm and subsequently led to Kinsey advising governments (the world over) on sex laws and sexual education. Ensuring that to this day, ever increasingly, educational bodies use the findings of Kinsey within the core of their sexual curriculum's.
It's not an exaggeration to state that the work of Kinsey (and the Kinsey Institute) has influenced social and cultural values at an international scale.
In Hindsight, Kinsey's analysis was found to over-represent prisoners, sex offenders, prostitutes, and child molesters. The survey also noted solo participants as married, single mothers as married, included a disproportionate number of homosexuals, and underrepresented religious conservatives, the working class, and African Americans. A further glaring omission being the relationship between love and sex. Indeed, as a former zoologist, Kinsey often referred to individuals as“human-animals.” A perspective that led sociology professor Edward Laumann to argue that whilst Kinsey’s work was focused on the biology of sex, it lacked the required psychological analysis. In essence, Kinsey had created a self-justifying biased view of the sexuality he was supposed to be objectively documenting.
Below are some reported statistics from Kinsey’s 1948 Male volume: • 95% of men are sex offenders • 50% are adulterers • 85% are fornicators • 69% use prostitutes • 10% to 37% men are bi-homosexual at some point in their lives • 100% of children are sexual from birth • 100% of children could climax with adult “help” • 50% of women fornicate • 26% of wives are unfaithful • 25% of wives abort • 85% single pregnant women abort.
Ever wondered why there appears to be no comparable justice for child sex abuse victims? Well, Kinsey also influenced legislation that focused on the reduction of sex crime penalties.
Over the years, law review articles and court opinions cited the Kinsey studies thousands of times. Kinsey worked with Columbia University law professor Herbert Wechsler to promote the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code (1955). Most states cited the code, which is largely based on Kinsey’s findings, as the blueprint to ease penalties for sex offenses, resulting in less protection for women and children from sexual predators. Linda Jeffrey, Ed.D, Col. Ronald D. Ray, J.D., A History of the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code: The Kinsey Reports’ Influence on Science-based Legal Reform 1923-2002, (Crestwood, Kentucky: First Principles Press, 2003). Source
Throughout his research, Kinsey had been funded by the Rockefeller foundation. Prior to the release of his 2nd book, there was already a growing array of warnings (from other scientists) that his work was inherently flawed. As highlighted within their own history, and amidst a cloud of controversy, in 1954 the Rockefeller Foundation withdraw their funding.
The Kinsey reports were used against the RF in congressional investigations. Citing Kinsey, one congressional committee accused the RF of helping to weaken American morality, thereby aiding the cause of communism.
Both worn down by the controversial nature of Kinsey’s research and influenced by Kinsey’s financial success, RF funding for sex research projects came to an end in 1954. Source
Kinsey’s Paedophiles
Although Kinsey’s “Sexual Behaviour In The Human Male” had taken the world by storm, in the furore the readers, the media, and his sponsors, were seemingly prepared to overlook the disturbing subject matter recorded within it. Throughout its now infamous chapters, Kinsey documented what can only be called child abuse. The abuse of 100’s (some estimations as high as 1800) of children and babies (aged from 2 months to 15 years) reduced to data and statistical analysis. Creating a framework and code that utilised stopwatches and enabled the abusers to (callously) document their perversions in scientific detail, equating orgasm with crying, convulsing, and fainting.
Rockefeller Foundation Trustee and President Elect Chester Barnard
Not only did Kinsey hypothesised that infants are orgasmic from birth, but he also suggested that incest relationships and paedophilia benefit children. In his writing, Kinsey asserted that there was no proven medical or other reason to forbid incest or adult-child sex. “Children are sexual and potentially orgasmic from birth (womb to tomb), are unharmed by incest, adult/child sex, and often benefit thereby,” Source
For a deeper layer of context, further archives, references, interviews, and transcripts can be found here. Equally, Kinsey's books also unashamedly document the abuse that continues to inform educational practices. Indeed, from 2014, the Kinsey Institute now hold special consultative status at the United Nations - the sexual education policies of which, will be discussed in a subsequent chapter.
Page 39: The Deliberate Dumbing Down Of America by Charlotte Iserbyt.
The Kinsey Institute proclaims that the vast majority of this information was derived from a paedophile named Rex King, an individual who meticulously documented over 800 cases of his abuse. That said, further investigation begins to portray a different story. Another Kinsey collaborator being the infamous Nazi paedophile Dr Fritz Von Balluseck. At Von Balluseck’s trial for the murder of a young girl, the judge went as far as criticising Kinsey for remaining silent and not reporting the atrocities to the police.
The presiding judge exclaimed, Instead of answering his sordid letters, the strange American scholar should rather have made sure that Mister von Balluseck was put behind bars.” Morgenpost, May 16, 1957
Of note is the fact that in 2004 the New York Times went as far as stating that although Von Balluseck was a suspect he never faced trial. As you can see from page 165 of the Reisman archives here and again here, not only did a previously jailed Balluseck face trial, but it was widely covered within the German press.
As highlighted within these transcripts and these archives, Kinsey also collaborated with paedophile rings and organisations. Witness testimony further claimed Kinsey collected data and financially compensated fathers who were abusing their children. In this Yorkshire television documentary, we can hear witnesses also allude to the possibility that Kinsey was not only collecting data but instructing and directing the type of abuse he required.
When I asked him what the word “orgasm” meant, he told me exactly what it meant. He said that was why he was using a stopwatch to time our “making love.” The words sex and incest were never used, nor did I have any knowledge of those words. Source
After the interview, my grandfather reminded Kinsey about the check. I saw Mr. Kinsey hand the check to my grandfather and my father. He said it was made out to both of them because he didn’t know how they wanted to split it up. Source
In the below episode of the Donohue show, from 0.38 minutes you will hear Kinsey associate Clarence Tripp trying to justify child abuse, also note former Penthouse writer Philip Nobile defending his article on "positive incest". The fact both Tripp and Donohue make light of the situation is deeply disturbing. If you want to know how people get away with such overt declarations, listen to audience members laugh. Cognitive dissonance enables the truth to be hidden in plain sight, this is occurring right now!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-JXSqhBcVQ
An Attempt To Justify The Unjustifiable
Far from relaying these statistics as the actions of perverts and sick minds, Kinsey used this analysis to embolden his belief that children are born as fully functioning sexual identities. That they're unharmed by incest and that sexual relations between a child and adult can be to the benefit of the child. Disturbingly, this is not an abhorrent historical aberration, it is an evolving (advancing/retreating) movement and body of academia - one that is infiltrating the educational system, law system, and the domain's of child psychology and cognitive development.
In 1949, for example, he testified before the California General Assembly’s Subcommittee on Sex Crimes, urging them to liberalize sex offense statutes. He argued specifically for granting immediate paroles to suspected child molesters and warned that societal “hysteria” does more harm to children than the actual molestations.
Kinsey wrote: “It is difficult to understand why a child, except for its cultural conditioning, should be disturbed at having its genitalia touched, or disturbed at seeing the genitalia of other persons, or disturbed at even more specific sexual contacts.” Testimony before California Legislative Assembly Subcommittee on Sex Crimes, 1949, cited in Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences, p. 213 Source
The work of Kinsey gave psuedo scientific legitimisation to aligned academics, the elitist connected paedophile information exchange, and the associated "conspiracy against public morals" that I have documented within previous articles - a conspiracy that is now becoming increasingly self-evident. Equally, I have no hesitation in stating that the perverse foundations of Kinsey