It's a bit of a derrail, so I'll pm the argument to you when I have time to fully lay it out, or we can start a new thread. if you really want me to.
Probably somewhere later this week or beginning of the next. It's a controversial position and I don't believe it's true, but I want to do it justice and lay out the argument as well as I can.
edit: This thread revived some of my interest and I saw this tonight, where Reisman says Chinese professors contacted her in 2007 after a book about Kinsey was translated to Chinese and they saw considerable change in sexual behaviour in young Chinese people.
Make a thread.
2 .,16(<&5,0(6 &216(48(1&(6&+$37(5Helen Keller In 1910, Dr. Winfried Scott Hall, Professor of Physiology at the Northwestern University Medical School, catalogued some of the deleterious results of public toleration of adultery and prostitution:Statistics show that of the operations on women in the hospitals of New York City... for the removal of one or both ovaries, sixty-five per cent of those operations were brought about and necessitated because of gonorrheal infection [largely contracted by wives infected by their] lawfully wedded husbands.2Commenting on the growing influence of organized vice and crime in the merchandising of sex, the police chief of Des Moines, Iowa, reported that neighborhood “segregation” of brothel “cribs” cre-ated such a sex market that “Landladies... by reason of competition [put] red lights over the doors... displaying the charms of [girls] in the windows.”3In 1908, Edward Bok, editor of The Ladies Home Journal, implored parents to speak frankly to their children about sex, and to stress that “There can be but one standard: that of moral equity,” which requires that “the young man” be “physically clean” before being granted the privilege of matrimony.The famed Helen Keller, blind and deaf after a bout with scarlet fever in infancy, warned in the same magazine of the perils of “free love.” Her article, “I Must Speak,” candidly addressed marriage and family life issues:The most common cause of blindness is ophthalmia of the newborn. One pupil in every three at the institution for the blind in New York City was blinded by this disease. What is the cause[?]... [Her husband]... has contracted the infection in licentious relations before or since marriage. “The cruelest link in the chain of consequences,” says Dr. Prince Morrow,” is the mother’s innocent agency. She is made a passive, unconscious medium of instilling into the eyes of her newborn babe a virulent poison which extinguishes its sight.” ...It is part of the bitter harvest of the wild oats he has sown.4Miss Keller noted that blindness was by no means the most terrible result of this “pestilent sin.”5Diseased children reared in poorhouses, and scores of young, once-healthy women, died in great pain and misery as a direct result of their husbands’ sexual irresponsibility. Discussions of the effects of venereal disease were sorely needed, since “some surgeons attribute three-fourths of the surgical operations on women to this disease: one-fourth is a very conservative reckoning.”6Motivated by the Purity Movement, all states eventually required would-be brides and grooms to be “clean” of venereal diseases before marrying. Prior to publication of Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male volume, (hereafter Male) in 1948, and Sexual Behavior in the Human Femalevolume, (hereafter Female) in 1953, America witnessed a successful “Women’s War” against alcohol-ism and vice, as thousands of “women marched from church meetings to saloons where, with prayer and song, they demanded an end [to alcohol sales].” (During Prohibition, the per capita annual consumption of hard liquor plummeted from 2.6 to 0.97 gallons.7) While traffic in sex slaves, drugs, alcohol, obscenity, and child labor escalated in Europe, there were significant inroads against
KINSEY’S YOUTH TO FAMILY MAN 3Fighting the Traffic in Young Girlsurged restoration of social virtue and purity after an era of incivility. such vices in the U.S. Not until mid-century, with Kinsey’s help, would they flourish once again. Kinsey blamed “sexual re-pression” for everything from the “high” rate of divorce to rape and homosexuality. Yet he was in his own mid-20s at the start of the “Roaring 20s,” which was hardly a decade of sexual repression. Rather, it was a time when girls bobbed their hair, donned shorts, shortened their skirts, and rolled up their stockings, sometimes to attend risqué collegiate alcohol, drug, and sex parties. By 1930, at age 36, Kinsey would have been aware of the considerable success of ordinary citizens in overcoming state-sanctioned (or state-ignored) “commercial vice"
This whole block text undermines her thesis. So what she's saying is that Kinsey's research undid the Purity movement or that he just amplified the social current of "vice"?