金赛报告

File:Kinsey-Male.jpg

The 1948 first edition of Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, the first of the two Kinsey reports.

金赛报告是由阿尔弗雷德·金赛（Alfred Kinsey）及华地·帕姆洛依（Wardell Pomeroy）等人所写的关于人类性行为的两本书，分别是男性性行为(1948)及女性性行为(1953)。金赛是一个在印第安那大学（Indiana University）的动物学家以及性学研究中心的创立者。

由于这个研究结果挑战公众对于人类性行为的传统信念，以及它们讨论以往被视为禁忌的话题。所以这个研究使公众感到震惊，及即时引起争论和轰动。

研究结果

性倾向

金赛报告中最广泛被引用的是不同性倾向的普遍性－特别是支持10%人口是同性恋的说法。事实上，这报告的研究结果并非明确的。金赛避免以及不赞成使用同性恋以及异性恋等术语去形容个体，主张性倾向是倾向随时间而改变的，以及性行为可以理解为物理性的接触，以及纯心理性的现象（欲望、性吸引力，幻想）。 金赛采用分为七个类别的系统来代表三个类别的系统（异性恋、双性恋及同性恋）。金赛量表把性行为分为 0 至 6 七个等级。0 代表完全异性恋，而 6 代表完全同性恋。1 代表主要为异性恋，只偶有同性恋行为，2 代表主要为异性恋，但也有同性恋行为， 3 代表异性恋与同性恋倾向相同，如是者。一个附加的类别 X 代表未经历性欲望。

这个报告亦指出，近 46% 男性在成年阶段曾对两性皆有性反应，而 37% 至少有一次同性性经验。 11.6% 白人男性（20至35岁）被评级为 3（异性恋与同性恋倾向相同）在整个成人阶段。 研究亦报告 10% 受访美国男性“至少三年介乎 16 至 55 岁，或多或少是完全同性恋”（在评级 5 至 6 ）

7% 单性女性（介乎 20 至 35 岁）及 4% 曾婚的女性（介乎 20 至 35 岁）在这段生命被评级为 3（异性恋与同性恋倾向相同）。 2 至 6% 介乎 20 至 35 岁的女性，或多或少是完全同性恋。 1 至 3% 介乎 20 至 35 岁的未婚女性是完全同性恋。

婚后性行为

根据受访女性报告，年轻的一群平均婚后性行为的频率为每周 2.8 次；在 30 岁之前为 2.2 次；在 50 岁之前为 1.0 次。.

婚外性行为

金赛预测大约 50% 己婚男性在婚姻生活中有一些婚外的性经验。. 在研究样本中，26% 女性在40岁之前有婚外性行为。介乎六分之一至十分之一，年龄介乎 26 至 50 岁的女性层参与婚外性行为。.

性虐

12% 女性及 22% 男性指出对性虐（俗称施虐与受虐）的故事有性反应。.

Biting

对 bitten 的反应:

性反应	女性	男性
绝对和/或频繁	26%	26%
有些反应	29%	24%
永不	45%	50%
个案数目	2200	567

方法

数据起初是透过面谈收集的。为保持机密，数据经过加密。其它资料来源包括认罪的儿童性骚扰者的日记。之后，这些数据电脑化进行处理。所有这些材料，包括原来的研究人员的笔记，保存在金赛性学研究中心使得只有有需要检视这些材料的合资格研究人员才可以检视这些材料。研究中心亦允许研究员递交SPSS程序去对这些数据执行运算。

这份报告的题材引来不少哗众取宠的说法。基于这份报告的收据及结果，有人声称 10% 人口是同性恋，以及女性为增加婚姻的满足感而仓促地自慰。这些说法也不是来自金赛的。

Criticism

Objections on moral grounds

The books have been widely criticized by conservatives as promoting degeneracy. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male has been on two paleoconservative lists of the worst books of modern times. It was #3 on the Intercollegiate Studies Institute's 50 Worst Books of the Twentieth Century and #4 on Human Events' Ten Most Harmful Books of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries.

Objections to statistical approach

In addition to moral objections, academic criticisms pertain to sample selection and sample bias. In 1948, the same year as the original publication, a committee of the American Statistical Association, including notable statisticians such as John Tukey condemned the sampling procedure. Tukey was perhaps the most vocal critic, saying, "A random selection of three people would have been better than a group of 300 chosen by Mr. Kinsey." Criticism principally revolved around the over-representation of some groups in the sample: 25% were, or had been, prison inmates, and 5% were male prostitutes.

A related criticism, by some of the leading psychologists of the day, notably Abraham Maslow, was that he (Kinsey) did not consider the bias created by the data representing only those who were willing to participate in discussion of taboo topics. Most Americans were reluctant to discuss the intimate details of their sex lives even with their spouses or close friends; the Kinsey database was derived from the possibly atypical minority who would tell their secrets to total (if learned) strangers.

In a response to these criticisms, Paul Gebhard, Kinsey's successor as director of the Kinsey Institute for Sex Research, spent years "cleaning" the Kinsey data of its purported contaminants, removing, for example, all material derived from prison populations in the basic sample. In 1979, Gebhard (with Alan B. Johnson) published The Kinsey Data: Marginal Tabulations of the 1938-1963 Interviews Conducted by the Institute for Sex Research. Their conclusion, to Gebhard's surprise he claimed, was that none of Kinsey's original estimates were significantly affected by this bias: that is, prison population, male prostitutes, and those who willingly participated in discussion of previously taboo sexual topics had the same statistical tendency. The problem of getting unbiased population samples in socially taboo subjects were discussed by Professor Martin Duberman, who wrote

Instead of Kinsey's 37% (men who had at least one homosexual experience), Gebhard and Johnson came up with 36.4%; the 10% figure (men who were "more or less exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55"), with prison inmates excluded, came to 9.9% for white, college-educated males and 12.7% for those with less education. And as for the call for a "random sample," a team of independent statisticians studying Kinsey's procedures had concluded as far back as 1953 that the unique problems inherent in sex research precluded the possibility of obtaining a true random sample, and that Kinsey's interviewing technique had been "extraordinarily skillful". They characterized Kinsey's work overall as "a monumental endeavor."

Organized opposition

Some conservative groups including RSVPAmerica, headed by Dr. Judith A. Reisman, and the Family Research Council have stated that they aim to discredit the Kinsey Reports. These groups often accuse Kinsey's work of promoting unhealthy sexual practices or morals.

RSVPAmerica advertises publications such as Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences and Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People, both by Reisman, and the video "The Children of Table 34", funded by the Family Research Council. The campaign website states that the video "presents the story of Dr. Reisman's discovery of Dr. Alfred Kinsey's systematic sexual abuse of 317 male children."

In its 1998 response to the core allegations made by Reisman, Kinsey Institute director John Bancroft stated that the data on children in tables 31–34 of Kinsey's Sexual Behavior of the Human Male came largely from the journal of one adult pedophile, who had illegal sexual interaction with these children. The man's journal started in 1917, long before the Kinsey Reports. Bancroft further stated that Kinsey explicitly pointed out the illegality of the man's actions, but that he granted his source anonymity. In addition, Bancroft reiterated the Kinsey Institute's claim that Kinsey never had any sexual interaction with children, nor did he employ others to do so, and that he interviewed children in the presence of their parents.

Other attacks have centered on the sex life and motives of Kinsey himself (see Alfred C. Kinsey), or have claimed that the Kinsey Reports are themselves responsible for a "decay in society."

Conjecture of child abuse

In the Kinsey Reports are data concerning pre-adolescent orgasms. Particularly controversial are tables 30 through 34 of the male volume. For example, table 34 is, "Examples of multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males. Some instances of higher frequencies." A typical entry indicates that a certain 7 year-old had seven orgasms in a three hour time period. Kinsey's critics state that data such as these could have only been obtained by direct observation of or participation in child abuse. In particular they point to the information given in table 32, "Speed of pre-adolescent orgasm; Duration of stimulation before climax; Observations timed with second hand or stop watch," and say that the only way such precise data could have been collected was through cooperation with child molesters.

The Kinsey Institute states unequivocally on its website, "[Kinsey] did not carry out experiments on children; he did not hire, collaborate, or persuade people to carry out experiments on children." It goes on to say, "Kinsey clearly stated in his male volume the sources of information about children's sexual responses. The bulk of this information was obtained from adults recalling their own childhoods. Some was from parents who had observed their children, some from teachers who had observed children interacting or behaving sexually, and Kinsey stated that there were nine men who he had interviewed who had sexual experiences with children who had told him about how the children had responded and reacted. We believe that one of those men was the source of the data listed in the book."

Context and significance

The Kinsey Reports are associated with a change in public perception of sexuality. Despite the fact that Kinsey did not explicitly claim that his sampling subjects are representative of overall population of U.S.; and in fact explicitly stated that he was fully aware of the fact that his sample was not representative, many uninformed, whether in support or criticism, did. In the 1960s, following the introduction of the first oral contraceptive, this change was to be expressed in the sexual revolution. Also in the 1960s, Masters and Johnson published their investigations into the physiology of sex, breaking taboos and misapprehensions similar to those Kinsey had broken more than a decade earlier in a closely related field.

To what extent the Reports produced or promoted this change and to what extent they merely expressed it and reflected the conditions that were producing it is a matter of much debate and speculation.

See also

• Alfred Kinsey
• Kinsey, the movie based on the life of Alfred Kinsey
• Kinsey scale
• Kinsey Institute
• Masters and Johnson
• Judith Reisman

References

• M. Duberman [1]
• A.C. Kinsey, W.B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, (Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 1948). ISBN 0-253-33412-8.
• A.C. Kinsey, W.B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin, P.H. Gebhard, Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, (Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 1953). ISBN 0-253-33411-X.
• J.A. Reisman, E.W. Eichel, J.H. Court, J.G. Muir, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, (Lafayette, LA: Lochinvar-Huntington House Publishers, 1990).
• Katz, Jonathan Ned (1995) The Invention of Heterosexuality. NY, NY: Dutton (Penguin Books). ISBN 0-525-93845-1
• The Kinsey Institute Data from Alfred Kinsey's Studies. Published online.

External links

• The Kinsey Institute Website