~ Alfred C. Kinsey and Wardell B. Pomeroy are the evil godfathers of the hypersexualization movement. ~
This is the text of a speech given by the author on May 25, 2022, at an event called “The Hypersexualization of School Children,” sponsored by the Gray Republican Committee in Gray, Maine.
On May 20, 2022, Bill Maher, the host of “Real Time with Bill Maher” on HBO, spoke out very boldly against the LGBT community’s stance on children. He stated:
. . . it’s okay to ask questions about something that’s very new and involves children. The answer can’t always be that anyone from a marginalized community is automatically right. . . . End of discussion. Because we’re literally experimenting on children. Maybe that’s why Sweden and Finland have stopped giving puberty blockers to kids because we just don’t know much about the long-term effects. . . .
If we can’t admit that in certain enclaves, there is some level of trendiness to the idea of being anything other than straight, then this is not a serious, science-based discussion. It’s a blow being struck in the culture wars using children as cannon fodder.1
I think we should applaud Bill Maher for his defense of children. His comments also highlight one of the central questions of the twenty-first century:
Who should manage children? Their parents or the state?
As many parents have finally realized, the Marxist Left’s track record in Soviet Russia, China, North Korea, and now America demonstrates their belief that children are owned by the state.
But this is not a new phenomenon. It stems from the much larger controversy that has raged for millennia:
Does God own the world, or do humans?
When militant anti-theists state that there is no God and thus no basis for morality, unfettered arrogance and hell can quickly follow. As I wrote in the essay “Marriage and Family and the God Who Created Everything,”
This has tremendous relevance to marriage and family because, without God, anything goes, and truth is whatever you want it to be, but with God, one must consider the thoughts, feelings, hopes, intent, and designs of God, the source of life, love, and all things.
. . . In any discussion of marriage and family, children need to be the priority because we all were children once. Is there anyone who has never been a child? No one, of course. Then this is very personal to each of you! Everything starts with children, and the birth of sacred love should begin in our childhood.2
The Left pushes the idea that children have the right to be emancipated from the oppression of their parents. But they never suggest that children have sacred, inalienable rights that come from God—rights that must never be violated by a monolithic dictatorship or parents who want to bend reality for their own pleasure or convenience.
Children have many sacred rights, but two of the most important are these:
First, all children have the sacred right to be loved and raised by their own biologically male father and biologically female mother. Their birth was caused by the joining together of a sperm and egg produced by a specific male father and a specific female mother. Connected to this biological reality is the historical and spiritual truth that children have a deep-seated desire and need to be loved by their real father and mother.
Second, all children have the sacred right to experience a childhood that fosters a pure and sacred environment surrounding sexuality, gender, love, and marriage. Destroying a child’s sexual purity is a crime against that child’s heart and future. That destruction could be caused by rape, incest, pornography, sex trafficking, induced or supported gender confusion, hypersexualization, or other factors. In all cases, the theft of purity and innocence is a spiritual and physical tragedy.3
These are sacred rights, but they have also been the foundation for the maturation of emotionally healthy and loving children since the beginning of the human race. It is true that not every child sees these rights fulfilled. Some children lost their parents and had to be adopted. But unfortunate happenstance is very different from the normalization of systems in which the child is denied these fundamental rights because of the personal desires of adults.4
With the fulfillment of these two “Sacred Rights of Children,” children can grow into emotionally mature and healthy adults who have a better chance of finding love, getting married, and having beautiful children of their own.
The Marxist Left rejects the sacred rights of children entirely. As Maher stated, children are cannon fodder in a war waged for the total control of human life. Vladimir Lenin declared, “Give me four years to teach the children, and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”5
The Left is determined to own our children because then they will own them as adults. For example, how does the masking of our school children benefit children? It’s not for the prevention of Covid. It’s all about training children to submit to control. Seth Dillon, the CEO of the satire website The Babylon Bee, recently stated that satire is getting more difficult because reality has become increasingly absurd, like the real headline that he quoted: “Stanford students are more likely to wear masks on bicycles than helmets.”6
Forcing the wearing of masks is bad enough, but it pales next to the Left’s efforts to destroy sacred sexuality, gender, and the two-parent family structure. Now, in 2022, parents have become painfully aware of the evil and destructive hypersexualization content placed in front of their children in K-12 schools. I won’t go into those horrifying details here.
Instead, I will address two questions: Where did this rancid material come from and how did it happen?
The Left has been waging a scorched-earth war against sacred sexuality for decades. It’s also important to state that not all of the individuals and leaders who are complicit in the spread of hypersexualization are Marxists.
The primary messages in hypersexualization are that “children are sexual from birth” and “any and all sexual activity is normal.” There are no boundaries.
Those messages were given the weight of professorial documentation in the 1940s and ’50s, starting with Alfred C. Kinsey and Wardell B. Pomeroy. They co-authored the books Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Their books have had an enormous impact on sex education professionals, to such a degree that we can accurately state:
Alfred C. Kinsey and Wardell B. Pomeroy are the evil godfathers of the hypersexualization movement.
In their text on the human male, in Chapter 5, “Early Sexual Growth and Activity,” Kinsey and Pomeroy focused on “the activities of the younger, pre-adolescent boy.”7 Their research documented sexual activity with boys as young as five months old. They wrote (in describing the boys’ behavior during orgasm) that in some cases, there were symptoms of:
Extreme tension with violent convulsion: ... eyes staring or tightly closed ... mouth distorted, sometimes with tongue protruding .... violent jerking ... violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children) . . .8
Kinsey’s comment immediately following the above passage revealed his deep callousness to the children’s plight:
After-effects not necessarily more marked than with other types of orgasm, and the individual is often capable of participating in a second or further experience.9
One of Kinsey’s charts documents a four-year-old boy having twenty-six orgasms in a twenty-four-hour period.9 He wrote that “Even the youngest males, as young as 5 months in age, are capable of such repeated reactions.”11
The material in The Kinsey Reports is repugnant and shocking. What is worse is that the reports created a false academic legitimacy around aberrant sex that was then taught to so-called professional sex educators across the country. The Kinsey Institute has been going strong for seventy-five years11 and collaborates with many sex education organizations like AASECT, the American Association of Sexuality Educators, Counselors, and Therapists.13
AASECT’s Sexuality Educator Certification requires that educators attend a “Sexuality Attitude Reassessment” session, known as a “SAR.” Their website states:
The applicant will have participated in a minimum of fourteen (14) clock hours of structured group experience in which the major focus is on a process-oriented exploration of the applicant’s own feelings, attitudes, values and beliefs regarding human sexuality and sexual behavior [e.g., a Sexuality Attitude Reassessment (SAR)].14
What happens at a SAR session? George Leonard, a reporter, attended a SAR event forty years ago and wrote in an article called “The End of Sex,” published in Esquire in December 1982:
As we lounged on cushions in the darkness, the whole wall lit up with images of human beings—and sometimes even animals—engaging in every conceivable sexual act . . . some seventeen simultaneous moving pictures . . . over a period of forty minutes.
How did we . . . react? . . . By the end . . . the physical act . . . seemed commonplace. Nothing was shocking, but nothing was sacred either.15
After Kinsey died in 1956, Wardell B. Pomeroy became even more prominent and in 1982 promoted the SAR program in an interview with the British Journal of Sexual Medicine. He described the SARs this way:
As part of our intensive courses we project several films onto a series of screens simultaneously. They vary in context from “hard porn” homosexuality to milder loving themes.16
Lest anyone think, “That was forty years ago!” one of AASECT’s SARs vendors in 2022 is the Institute for Sexuality Education & Enlightenment. Their current description of the SAR program states: “This course has been developed and is based on a method first developed in the 1970s . . .”17
Earlier, in 1968 and 1970, Pomeroy had written two books, Boys and Sex and Girls and Sex, that were placed in many school libraries across the country. In Boys and Sex, he wrote:
By playing with girls sexually before adolescence, trying to understand how they are made and how they react, the chances are increased for a satisfactory sex life when a boy grows up . . . But it is too much to expect that parents will take that attitude.
Because it is done secretly, however, doesn’t mean it’s dirty. Too many parents tend to make their children feel that anything done in secret must be dirty. It isn’t. It’s simply private.18
In 1977, Pomeroy wrote an article called “A New Look at Incest.” In it, he stated:
. . . Incest between adults and younger children can also prove to be a satisfying and enriching experience . . .19
We can see then that the crisis in 2022 of the hypersexualization of school children has been building for a very long time. Sex educators in America who adhere to views like those articulated by Kinsey, Pomeroy, and AASECT are not our children’s friends.
To me, they are like drug pushers, but instead of pushing heroin, cocaine, and fentanyl, they are presenting innocent school children with sexual materials and practices that will damage many of them almost beyond repair.
In their attack on sacred sexuality, purity, and morality, this army of sexologists has created a civilization-shattering, existential crisis that parents and others must resolve.
When we examine the radical sexual materials and theories that are presented to our school children in 2022, are there action steps that we can take? Should we ban sex education that includes hypersexualization materials? Should all sex education be banned? Should it be banned for all age groups?
Even parents who oppose hypersexualization might think that banning all sex ed for all ages is extreme and that it’s enough to ban sex education from the lower grades.
The problem is that the sex education industry can’t be trusted in its current form. It’s almost impossible to have complete confidence that any particular school and set of teachers will not teach radicalized hypersexuality. Teaching radical sex education to seventh graders, as their hormones start to rage, is just as problematic as teaching that content to children under twelve years of age. It’s far safer to remove all sex education from schools until the entire hypersexualization industry can be dismantled.
Thus, I recommend these four action steps:
Whatever action steps parents feel are right for them, one thing is clear. Parents must take ownership of their children’s sex education. Our children are not “owned by the state.” Thus, it is far past the time for parents to push back against the Left’s war on sacred sexuality—to push back and to win.
Peter Falkenberg Brown is the author of the abstinence education curriculum: The True Love Thing to Do: An Interactive Workbook on Finding Love and Preparing for an Enduring Marriage, available at worldcommunitypress.com/tl.
Images: Girl: from Pixabay.com. No attribution required.
Kinsey and Pomeroy: from photo by Smithsonian Institution. 1953.
Acc. 90-105 - Science Service, Records, 1920s-1970s, Smithsonian Institution Archives. No known copyright restrictions.
1. Bill Maher, “New Rule: Along for the Pride | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO),” May 20, 2022
2. Peter Falkenberg Brown, “Marriage and Family and the God Who Created Everything,” May 9, 2022
6. Seth Dillon, remarks at the Freedom Center’s Wednesday Morning Club in Los Angeles, May 17, 2022
Quote from Maxwell Meyer, “Review Analysis: Stanford students are more likely to wear masks on bicycles than helmets,” September 29, 2021, The Stanford Review
7. Alfred C. Kinsey, Wardell B. Pomeroy, Clyde E. Martin, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, Chapter 5, “Early Sexual Growth and Activity,” W. B. Saunders Company, 1949, p. 157
8. Ibid. p. 161
10. Ibid. p. 180
11. Ibid. pp. 179-180
14. AASECT Requirements for Sexuality Educator Certification, page accessed on May 22, 2022
15. George Leonard, “The End of Sex,” December 1, 1982, Esquire
16. Eric Trimmer, “Sexology - therapy or titillation? Eric Trimmer speaks to Wardell B. Pomeroy,” January, 1982, British Journal of Sexual Medicine
17. Title of Workshop: SAR, https://www.aasect.org/sar / https://instituteforsexuality.com/
18. Wardell B. Pomeroy, Boys and Sex, 1968, Delacorte Press, p. 44
19. Wardell Pomeroy, Forum Variations Magazine, “A New Look at Incest,” 1977
Subscribe to our evening newsletter to stay informed during these challenging times!!