Kinsey's Research Research Articles

Low on the Kinsey scale: Homosexuality in Swedish and Finnish sex research, 1960s–1990s

This article addresses the history of sociological sex research and its reception in Sweden and Finland. It describes the background and implementation of the first study in Sweden in 1967, and how the methodology of this study was adopted in Finland in 1971. Both of these studies were followed up in the 1990s with surveys that documented the changes in sexuality, 1992 in Finland and 1996 in Sweden. As the studies were labelled ‘Kinsey studies’ of their respective countries, the article examines the effect that the work of Alfred Kinsey's research group had on them. In particular, the article pays attention to the role of homosexuality in the studies and their reception, both in the mainstream media and in lesbian and gay organizations’ magazines. The article argues that, even though the studies recognized their position on the continuum of sex research stemming from Kinsey's work, they did not have a similar role in normalizing homosexuality. On the contrary, the studies showed diminishingly small numbers of homosexual respondents, even in the 1990s, when lesbian and gay rights were rapidly developing, and the studies were used to argue against equality and minority rights.

Kinsey, psychoanalysis and the theory of sexuality

Summary In this paper, I will take up questions about the historical epistemology of sex research and the theory of sexuality, and about the impact of Kinsey's epistemological break with sexology and the Freudian theory of sexuality — and of the damaging results for both Freudian theory and Kinsey's research program. The Kinsey Reports challenged the cognitive order of the field of research on sexuality in general and as a “discipline”. Such a state, according to Thomas Kuhn, often marks the start of a scientific revolution and leads to a process of rebuilding and the formulation of dramatically new theoretical and empirical approaches, thus issuing in a new dominant paradigm. This did not take place in the wake of the Kinsey Reports. Original psychoanalytic thinking about sexuality virtually stopped, and while Kinsey was seen as the successor of ‘empirical sexology’ a la Havelock Ellis, few if any of his analytical innovations (such as the measurable concept of sexual outlet, the ‘Kinsey’ interview, and the Kinsey scale) were adopted by his successors. The Kinsey approach not only failed to replace Freudian theory with any sophisticated theory of its own, but it also failed to establish a viable research tradition or a more robust empirical account of the individual's sexual behavior. The encounter between the Freudian paradigm and the Kinsey research program had severely damaged both sides. Neither side seemed to recognize that the basic incommensurability of the two approaches was the real scientific challenge.

A hypersexual society: sexual discourse, erotica, and pornography in America today

Sexual Materials and Pornography in Today's Society Theoretical Foundation and Conceptual Tools Repression and Censorship: Early and Continuing Attempts to Suppress Sexual Materials and Pornography Sex on the Printed Page: From Literary Classics to X-rated Comics Sex in Academe: From Kinsey's Research to Porn Studies Sex Therapy: The Profession, the Business, the Hucksters, and the Spammers Sex on Film: Stag Movies, Porn Flicks, Hollywood NC-17, Videos and DVDs Radio and Television: From Cautious Beginnings to Shock Jocks and Anything-Goes Cable and Satellite TV Sex on the Internet: Unlimited and Uncontrolled The Hypersexual Society: Where We Are and What Lies Ahead

Kinsey and the Politics of Bisexual Authenticity

This article examines the epistemological status of bisexuality in North America since the mid-20th century. It argues that the status of bisexuality remains marginal because of its capacity to destabilize a monosexual order. Using Alfred Kinsey's research to anchor the discussion, the author demonstrates that the persistent rejection of bisexuality as a sexual identity category (and as a critical perspective) acts to contain the crisis of identity that haunts the supposed naturalness of the two privileged subject positions: homosexuality and heterosexuality. It also demonstrates how that same order is upheld by the epistemological and material banishment of the intersexed.

Bisexuality in the Kinsey–Klein Continuum: An Interview with Kinsey Institute Scholar Dr. John Bancroft

In this interview for the 60th anniversary commemoration of the Kinsey Male report, Kinsey Institute director emeritus Dr. John Bancroft answers questions about Alfred C. Kinsey's research on bisexuality, compares the Kinsey Scale and Klein Grid and considers Kinsey's continued legacy in terms of conservative backlash against him for his influence in initiating sexual liberation movements of the late 20th century.

The Science of Sex: T. C. Boyle on his Inner Circle, Alfred Kinsey, and the Fine Line Between Fact and Fiction

In an interview following the publication of The Inner Circle, T. Coraghessan Boyle's 2004 novel about Alfred C. Kinsey, the novelist discusses his book's semihistorical 1940s/1950s background of the Kinsey research team and compares the novel's themes with his other fictionalizations of U.S. historical figures. Boyle considers the dramatic aspects of Kinsey's bisexuality, and how his public image as detached purveyor of scientific knowledge about sex may have conflicted with his private taboo and experimental bisexual behavior. Professor Boyle has been a member of the English Department at the University of Southern California since 1978, and his work, including 19 books of fiction, has been translated into more than two dozen foreign languages. The article, reprinted from L.A. Weekly (Sept. 3–9, 2004), was retrieved August 1, 2007 from http://tcboyle.com/page2.html?4.

Alfred C. Kinsey: Pervert, prophet, or patsy?

Loosely based on Jonathan Gathome-Hardy's biography Kinsey: Sex--The Measure of All Things, Bill Condon's recent film about the famous sex researcher will hopefully do a great deal to restore Kinsey's reputation, slightly tarnished of late. As a matter of fact, it's surprising we had to wait so long for major film to take Kinsey as its subject, since in many ways his life and work make such a fitting match with Hollywood's odd combination of prurience and prudishness. But the fact is Kinsey's contribution to our modem understanding of sexual behavior has been either widely overlooked, or else misunderstood. It now appears to be an undeniable fact that, apart from his other achievements, Kinsey's research has led to the tacit acknowledgment that sexual proclivities have nothing to do with morality, and perhaps this film's box-office success will help to audiences to understand the enormous historical significance of Kinsey's work. Having said that, of course, Kinsey is a fairly conventional Hollywood biopic, and, as in all such movies, the protagonist's life and story is shaped and revised to fit the appropriate narrative arc. Liam Neeson cuts a noble figure as Alfred C. Kinsey, who was surely never this handsome or charming, and Laura Linney endows his understanding wife, Clam, with an almost saintly patience

Alfred C. Kinsey and the politics of sex research.

In view of the recent phase of political opposition to sex research and intense public interest in Alfred C. Kinsey, this paper considers the impact that Kinsey's research has had on the political process in the past 50 years. Initial reactions to Kinsey's research that remain relevant today include "normal" people don't participate in sex surveys, sex surveys are intended to promote homosexuality, and asking people about their sex lives in a nonjudgmental fashion promotes immorality. Episodes of political opposition are documented, and the long-running anti-Kinsey campaign and its impact on the political process are described and discussed. Reasons why people might still oppose sex research are considered, and conclusions are reached about how sex researchers might deal with this problem.

Masturbation: Vice or virtue?

The Kinsey research team has clearly defined masturbation as "deliberate self stimulation which effects sexual arousal."1 This term is commonly used by social scientists in spite of its etymology. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, "masturbate" is a compound from the Latin roots manus (hand) and stuprare (to defile). Accordingly it is defined in that standard work as "to practice self abuse." That was certainly the meaning of the term when it was first used two centuries ago. Social scientists who are sensitive to etymology realize that the word "masturbation" carries too much manual association to be fully descriptive and, of more concern, has traditionally carried a negative moral judgment. Consequently, neologisms have been created for the phenomenon in recent years. But they also have their limitations and have not been accorded full acceptance. "Automanipulation" is too mechanical and vague; "autoerotism" is too broad, for it can also describe, for example, one's response to sensuous works of art; and "auto-orgasm" incorrectly assumes that orgasm is always the aim of this endeavor. Even though masturbation has a value-loaded etymology, it will be presumed that its original connotation can be disregarded?even as "manu facturing" is no longer associated with making by hand. It is often wrongly stated that masturbation is dealt with in the Bible. Kinsey, for example, claims that it is there treated as a greater sin than engaging in coitus outside of marriage.2 Also, the Catholic-edited Dictionary of Moral Theol ogy pronounced: "Direct voluntary pollution is properly called masturba tion. ... In the Holy Scriptures it is condemned as a sin which excludes a person from the Kingdom of Heaven."3 Actually masturbation is not mentioned in the Jewish Scriptures or in the New Testament. Why is it that that nonpru dish literature, which frankly refers to zo?philia, homosexuality, and other sexual variations, does not discuss masturbation? It is safe to assume that its omission displays that its practice was of no moral or cultic concern to the many writers of books now called the Bible. In this essay I shall first review in historical sequence the treatments of masturbation as a vice in the postbiblical Judaeo-Christian tradition. Then I shall focus attention on some benefits that can result from masturbation.

Extramarital Sexual Intercourse: A Methodological Note

EXTRAMARITAL sexual involvement is one of the most frequently cited sources of difficulty in couples undergoing divorce (Udry, 1966: 433). In fact, in every state in the United States and all western European nations which permit divorce, adultery is given as grounds for divorce. The Kinsey research extimates that by the age of 40, approximately half of all married men (Kinsey et al., 1948:583-594) and more than a quarter of all married women (Kinsey et al., 1953:440) have sexual intercourse, during the course of their married life, with a partner other than their spouse. It would seem logical, therefore, to suspect that research scientists would have a considerable amount of knowledge about the etiology, frequency and implications of individuals who have had an affair. Realistically, however, the topic of extramarital sexuality has received scant attention and either has been omitted from family analyses, treated as a pathologically based anomaly or only polemically discussed. Presumably, research scientists as well as marriage counselors have been content with the Kinsey data. This, in full view of the fact that the original purpose of Kinsey's two volumes on human sexual behavior was intended to be taken only as a progress report, limited in many respects and incomplete in others. Many investigators maintain that it is pointless to replicate a project as extensive as Kinsey's because of the complexities involved in obtaining a representative sample of the population. These critics maintain that because of the volunteer bias introduced into Kinsey's study, any claim to representativeness is unjustified (See Crespi, 1948 for an argument supporting Kinsey's method). Moreover, it is assumed that if one confines their attention to clinician's case records, or captive audiences such as prisons,

Social Change as Reflected in the Kinsey Studies

In this paper I shall discuss some of the major sociological implications of the Kinsey findings, with special emphasis upon social change. In approaching this task, one is confronted at once with intriguing questions of causation. Why the Kinsey research? What ingredients in our cultural soil nourished this endeavor? The usual explanation follows the great-man interpretation of history, namely, that Dr. Kinsey felt very unhappy as he surveyed the vast sea of sexual ignorance in which mankind was floundering and decided to do something about it. To those accustomed to an emphasis upon social forces, this heroic interpretation of events is not altogether satisfactory. Such a program of research can also be interpreted as a cultural phenomenon, growing out of a sexual morality in transition. In its current phase the transition is marked by a steady decline of the ascetic tradition and the rise of biological realism as a counter-movement. This ideology places unprecedented stress upon physical sex, from pictorial displays of the feminine figure through real or fictional accounts of sexual adventures to the latest