Laws | Posted: August 15, 2005
In Exposé: The Failure of Family Courts to Protect Children from Abuse in Custody Disputes
How Junk Sex Science Created a Paradigm Shift in Society, Legislation and the Judiciary
By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
Published by Our Children Our Future Charitable Foundation in 1999.
The quality and health of a society is measured by the treatment of its most vulnerable populations: its women and children. 1 Many facts support the conclusion that we are living in an increasingly violent era. For example, current data on violent crimes, suicides, out of wedlock births, sexually transmitted diseases, domestic violence, and child abuse support observations of increasing rates of dysfunction, brutality and perversion in our society. If we are to remedy the violence toward women and children currently found in our bedrooms, classrooms, courtrooms, streets and cinemas, we must first understand "that something happened on the way to the forum."
Source material for this article includes my most recent book, Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences (1998) which documents Kinsey's role in weakening laws penalizing obscenity, and brutality towards women and children. The 1997 book by Kinseyan fan and researcher James Jones, Alfred Kinsey A Public/Private Life, also validates my twenty years of research on this topic. Additional support for the claims made in this chapter can be found in the BBC Arts & Entertainment: Biographies television production Reputations (aired on August 14, 1996, and August 10, 1998), and British Yorkshire Television program Kinsey's Pedophiles, produced and directed by UNESCO and Amnesty International award-winning producer/director Tim Tate.
Many of the chapters in this Exposé address specific judicial circumstances and events regarding the violation of children by a rogue or indifferent judiciary. This chapter demonstrates how we have come to this point and discusses the judiciary's role in this current tragedy. This chapter focuses on two synergistic national change-agents: "formal" and "informal" sex education. Each appears to share the same cynical view of life and love which has helped spawn the judicial cadre which appears to increasingly betray justice. I will also establish the seminal connection between "sex science" (formal) and pornography (informal) in sex education begun in Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey's attic where he obsessively performed in amateur pornographic movies. I will also identify some of the key issues and players that helped this change become embedded in our society.
Background: Alfred C. Kinsey, Ph.D.
On April 15, 1998, the Discovery Channel joined the British Broadcasting Company in declaring Indiana University zoologist Alfred C. Kinsey the "father of the sexual revolution." Gore Vidal intoned to the camera, "Kinsey was the most famous man in the world for a decade." From 1948 to 1958 a man many young people have never heard of dramatically coarsened our world, our sexual experiences, and the attitudes and conduct of most post-1948 Americans.
During the 50s, the world read that Kinsey had impartially revealed America's big "H"--moral hypocrisy. Kinsey claimed his sex survey data found that 95% of American men were sex offenders given the current laws, and that roughly 50% of women had experienced pre-marital sex prior to 1948, the pre-birth control pill era. Kinsey alleged that his research proved that 10% to 37% of American men were sometime homosexuals, that most humans were naturally bisexual, that children were sexual from birth, and that but for our Judeo-Christian repressiveness, children could engage in sexual activity with adults without harm.
The 60s "flower-power generation" did not simply wake up one morning to individually or collectively decide that their parents were "hypocrites"-- and to thus exchange virginity, love, marital fidelity and valuing and respecting children and elders, for "sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll." Kinsey's books Sexual Behavior in the Human Male published in 1948, and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female published in 1953, brought an exciting justification for a "swinging" era.
The 60s sexual revolution, spurred by the birth control pill in 1968, was followed by no-fault divorce, the gay rights movement, classroom sex education, and sex therapy as a growth industry. Massive increases in crimes against woman and children also followed suit. Alongside these societal shifts came the introduction of decreased penalties for sex crimes, a tolerance for violence against women and children and an avalanche of pornography that invaded our town squares, bedrooms, living rooms, classrooms, museums, concert halls, cinemas, libraries and courtrooms.
The evidence is now clear that Kinsey's research was fraught with lies, deceit, and fraudulent data. His "scientific" methodology was anything but scientific. The means by which he and his colleagues conducted research and gathered data was oftentimes criminal according to the laws of the time, and even by the laws of today. Contrary to the benevolent publicity accorded him, Kinsey and his hand-picked co-authors and colleagues fit the classic definition of "sexual psychopath" according to Dorland's Medical Dictionary: "an individual whose sexual behavior is manifestly anti-social and criminal" (1981, p. 1091).
Kinsey's deviant sex life appears to have been hidden from the public by Indiana University and The Rockefeller Foundation, a financial and philosophical supporter of Kinsey's research. However, James H. Jones, an Indiana University scholar and Kinsey Institute grantee, reveals some insider information about Kinsey and his research team in the 937-page biography, Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life (1997, WW Norton).
Kinsey's Research Team
Jones' data confirms other reports that Kinsey was a sexist, racist and atheist who excluded women, Jews, blacks, and moral traditionalists from his staff and hired only homosexuals and bisexuals (with one short-term exception). Kinsey only hired sexual deviants on whom he could rely to keep his secrets -- including his fraud, his "uncommon desires," and the child molesters he used to conduct child sex experiments. Jones also reported that Kinsey: coerced his wife into participating in acts of adultery and sodomy with his staff and co-authors (which were filmed), seduced male students at Indiana University (and bullied their wives into participating), filmed sex with his male co-workers (who were rewarded by promotion to co-authorship), and filmed himself participating in sado-masochistic sex rituals.
Kinsey's Research on Children
Not only was Kinsey's research on adult sexuality based on his own homosexual and sadomasochistic perversions, but the data he collected on the alleged sexuality of children were based on brutal sex crimes against children. For example, part of Kinsey's research protocol involved "orgasm" experiments on children, some as young as 2 months of age.
The pedophilic experimenters claimed that the 317 to 2,045 (reports vary) abused infants and children were unharmed by the masturbation, sodomy and rape perpetrated to test these alleged "orgasmic" responses (see: British Yorkshire Television's Kinsey's Pedophiles). On pages 160-161 of Kinsey's Male volume, the children's "screams," their "convulsions," their "hysterical weeping," "fighting," and "striking the partner" (the adult) are judged by Kinsey as reflecting "definite pleasure from the situation."
My book Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000) details how children were obtained and experimented upon, and how Kinsey used such child sex experimental data as part of an on-going collegial, cross-cultural, multinational, "fact-finding" research project. For example, some of Kinsey's data was derived from sexual experiments performed on children by Dr. von Balluseck, a Nazi collaborator in Germany who Kinsey described as an educated man of a "scientific bent."2 It should be noted that Kinsey corresponded with Dr. von Balluseck during a time in history when Nazis were conducting similar human experiments en masse.
Based on his allegedly scientific data, Kinsey claimed that children enjoyed sex and the real harm of adult-child sex stemmed from "hysterical" parents, teachers and professionals who reacted with anger and horror to children's disclosures. Based on his findings, many legislatures lightened or eliminated penalties for sexual offenses -- reversing the judiciary's traditional leniency toward women as the "weaker sex" in cases of sex abuse and betrayal, and toward children as "victims" in cases of incest and child molestation. Since this time, the courts have been increasingly distrustful and punishing of victimized women and children.
Kinsey's Research on Adults
Kinsey also used a bogus methodology in his studies of the sexual practices of adults. Although Kinsey Institute members told courts and legislatures that they used a "random" sample of Americans, in actuality, Kinsey surveyed 1,400 male sex offenders, 200 sexual psychopaths and hundreds of radical male homosexuals and then reported their sexual proclivities as the norm. Roughly 86% of Kinsey's male subjects are now documented as aberrant, abnormal compared to male conduct in the 40s and 50s.
In order to find "normal" American married women, Kinsey redefined "married" to include any woman who said she lived more than a year with a man. Thus his large female prostitute population would be average married women by edict. Further, he could claim that 50% of his female subjects had sex prior to marriage and roughly 30% committed adultery--while of 4,441 women subjects none ever suffered from a rape..
These false data were then used to provide evidence for the hypothesis that women's claims of valuing their chastity and disavowing adultery, and their children's fears of sexual molestation and rape were exaggerated -- even deceitful. Unfortunately, such unsupported conclusions continue to be viewed as "science" by many judges at all levels of our legal system.
Indiana University Honors Kinsey
In 1998, in honor of Kinsey's 50th jubilee, Indiana University re-issued Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. They celebrated Kinsey's dubious research despite the ample documentation of Kinsey's criminal behaviors in both my and Jones' (1997) work.
"Formal" Influences on Human Sexuality
Human Sexuality Institutes
Kinsey's disciples founded and have largely shaped and directed the field of human sexuality. Today a cadre of admitted pedophiles, pederasts, pornography addicts and other assorted sexually dysfunctional individuals influence and control the field of sexology through the nation's several human sexuality "accrediting" agencies. These include the Center for Sex Research at California State University, Northridge (CSUN) and the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. CSUN, was founded by a pedophile editor and promotes pornography as pedagogy.
CSUN has been dubbed the "Kinsey Institute of the West." At these accrediting agencies, viewing "Sexual Attitude Restructuring" pornographic films and videos is mandated course work. By 1988, approximately 100,000 students at the San Francisco institute had been "desensitized" and accredited as sexology graduates. Many of these former students now appear regularly on talk shows and in courtrooms as expert witnesses.
World Pornography Conference
Academics need money and have respectability. Pedophiles and pornographers need respectability and have money. The relationship between academic institutions and pornographers and pedophiles, which began with Playboy's funding the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, continues today at CSUN. The following example demonstrates the link between pornographers and academia.
In August 1998, CSUN used its state-supported offices to organize a "World Pornography Conference." Led by former Kinsey Institute researcher James E. Elias, pornography industry leaders and performers met with "academics" to discuss and shape national pornography and pedophile strategies to be implemented in schoolrooms, newsrooms, bedrooms and courtrooms.
James Elias, CSUN's Sex Research Director received his doctorate from the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality of which Wardell Pomeroy was the former Academic Dean. As noted in Kentucky v. Happy Day (1980), Wardell Pomeroy was a Kinsey co-author and sex partner who publicly sought funds from the pornography industry to produce child pornography (Jones, 1997).
The conference featured Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia editor Vern Bullough and his pedophile editorial colleagues: John DeCecco, Daniel Tsang and Wayne Dynes -- all professors at major American colleges.3 Chairing the CSUN "Erotic" section on "Child Pornography" was Harris Mirkin, an associate professor of political science at the University of Missouri, Kansas City. Mirkin's 1999 article, "The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia" (Journal of Homosexuality, Vol. 37) describes the steps pedophiles need to take to gain social acceptance. He advises pedophiles to advocate for the elimination of words like "child molestation" and "child abuse."
Ralph Underwager was a featured speaker during the section on child pornography. Underwager is a psychologist and theologian who frequently testifies as a defense expert in child sexual abuse cases. In 1993, Underwager and his wife, Hollida Wakefield, were featured in an interview in Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia (Winter 1993, p.3). In his interview, Underwager stated: "Pedophiles can boldly and courageously affirm what they choose. They can say that what they want is the best way to love..." Conference speaker Ted McIlvenna, founder of the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco, contributed an article in December 1977 to Hustler magazine 4 in which he urged legalization of incest and adult-child sex.
No "science" appears to have a greater track record of scientific fraud, criminal activity and psychopathology than that of "sex science." While the British medical journal The Lancet exposed Kinsey's child abuse methodology (March 2, 1991, p. 547), American scholarly journals have lauded Kinsey for decades. The conclusions of the following researchers parallel those of Kinsey and Kinsey Institute researchers Clyde Martin, Wardell Pomeroy, and Paul Gebhard, all of whom have promoted the "normalization" of pedophilia.
Rind, Bauserman and Tromovitch
In July 1998, the American Psychological Association's (APA) Psychological Bulletin published "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples." Authors Bruce Rind, Ph.D., Robert Bauserman, Ph.D., and Philip Tromovitch cite Kinsey's research favorably and conclude that adult-child sexual relationships may not harm children who "consent" to this relationship. Like Kinsey's research, Rind et al.'s research is methodologically and statistically deceitful; researchers have recently found serious errors in Rind et al.'s reports of the meta-analysis studies. The errors were consistently in the direction of finding child sexual abuse less harmful than the original studies suggested. (See: Dallam, S.J., Gleaves, D. H., Cepeda-Benito, A., Kraemer, H.C., & Spiegel, D. (in review). "The effects of childhood sexual abuse: A critique of Rind, Tromovitch and Bauserman (1998)."
Co-authors Rind and Bauserman are members of the Paidika: Journal of Paedophilia cadre. For example, Bauserman wrote an article for the Summer 1989 issue legitimizing sex with children. A similar article by Rind appeared in the Winter 1995 issue. Their co-authored article entitled "Adult-Nonadult Sexual Interactions" was promoted in that publication's Winter 1995 issue.
Bauserman, Money, Bullough and Constantine
Rind et al. cite pedophile-friendly authorities such as Bauserman, Kinsey, Money, Bullough, and Constantine as child sex authorities. In 1991, writing for The Journal of Homosexuality, Bauserman approved of promoting man-boy sex in "Male Intergenerational Intimacy." In an interview in Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, professor emeritus John Money, a Johns Hopkins pediatric psychoendocrinologist and Penthouse Forum consultant, called for an organized crusade to end age of consent laws.5,6 It was John Money who promoted the word "paraphilias" in order to refer to aberrant sexual conduct such as necrophelia, sexual sadism, bestiality, coprophilia, urophilia and pedophilia in a manner less clear and offensive to readers.
Paidika: Journal of Pedophilia editor, Vern Bullough, a professor emeritus at CSUN, has suggested the same "harmlessness" mantra. Psychologist Larry Constantine, another Penthouse contributor, advocated legalizing child pornography so as to provide better paying jobs for children (Cook & Wilson, Pergamon Press, Oxford,1978). Like Kinsey, these authors misrepresent data to substantiate their call for the reduction of legal protections for children victims of sexual abuse.
Although he has been dead for four decades, Kinsey is the most often-cited sex expert in the Science Citation Index and the Social Science Citation Index with (as of 1997) 5,796 laudatory cites versus Masters and Johnson's 3,716 citations. Kinsey is cited more often and more favorably than Maslow, Freud, Mead, Toffler, Paiget or Skinner. This is also true for "Westlaw," the on-line database for law journal citations. Since 1982, Westlaw lists over 700 citations of Kinsey compared to approximately 100 of Masters and Johnson and even fewer for Freud.
In its 1994 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV (DSM-IV), the American Psychiatric Association removed pedophilia as a sexual perversion.
Informal" Sex Educators
Hugh Hefner: "If Kinsey was the researcher, I became his pamphleteer." 7
The media played a considerable role in launching Kinsey's "sexual revolution" and in overturning America's sexual mores. Following a well-financed public relations campaign, by August 1947, an unprecedented 70%-plus of a cross-section of daily newspapers carried stories about Kinsey's upcoming book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.
In an era of Internet pornography including child pornography and other sexual perversions, it is instructive to recall that in December 1953, alongside Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953), and just following Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948), a sex magazine entered American college dorms and bedrooms across America. Playboy soon became the "USA's most widely read men's sex education resource." Since its inception, Playboy has been transmitting its tinsel-wrapped brand of sexism to future husbands, fathers, brothers and uncles who would control our destinies as politicians, judges, attorneys general, prosecutors, doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, clergy, social workers, writers, filmmakers, media movers and shakers, law enforcement officers, and military personnel.8
Another high-profile sex magazine influencing American society is Hustler. It is interesting to note that Larry Flynt's May 1984 Hustler 9 "Chester the Molester" cartoon of a father sexually abusing his daughter helped convict Hustler editorial cartoon director, Dwaine Tinsely, of felony child sexual abuse of his own daughter in 1989. Tinsley had contributed 145 cartoons to Hustler, many of which depicted violent child kidnapping and celebrated child rape.
The findings of my U.S. Department of Justice study, Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler (including a study of child pornography and incest promotions in Playboy) were reported on a Christian Dutch television station, EO Tijdein TV. The station reported that Playboy was, at that time, perhaps the world's largest child pornographer -- facilitating child sexual abuse and incest en masse. The television station was subsequently sued by Playboy which alleged libel and defamation.
In its defense, I provided the Dutch court with photographs, illustrations, cartoons, letters, and stories depicting "positive" portrayals of sex between adults and children and "positive" incest in Playboy from 1954 to 1984. I also submitted to the court my Department of Justice and Soft Porn Plays Hardball (1991), which documents Playboy's role in child pornography and incest promotions.
On October 27, 1994, history was made, and quickly suppressed, when an Amsterdam court found in favor of the defendants who had stated that on the evidence:
1. Playboy magazine published child pornography and incest materials, and
2. Playboy could cause "copy-cat" crimes, wherein consumers criminally acted out Playboy sadosexual and child abuse scenarios.
The Dutch ruling against Playboy is highly significant as Amsterdam is considered to be the Western world's child pornography and pedophile epicenter. Although, the court's ruling was widely reported in the Netherlands, it was spiked by the American press.
The Continuing Impact of "Informal" Sex Education
"Informal" means of sex education such as pornography appears to be having an effect on American men. For example, the FBI Uniform Crime Rate from 1972-1991 found a 128% increase in reported rapes,10 with both offenders and victims increasingly younger.
A 1989 study by Briere and Runtz surveyed male college students concerning their sexual interest in children.11 They report that 21% of 193 male undergraduate students admitted a "sexual interest in children." Nine percent confessed child sex fantasies and 7% revealed they would have sex with children were they sure not to be caught.
In 1991, an article in The Police Chief stated: "Soft-core erotica to hard-core pornography ... serve identical purposes -- to desensitize the child and lower his or her inhibitions."12 The Police Chief also reported that pornography was recovered in 87.9% of child sex abuse cases."13
Pro-pedophila Efforts to Influence Laws and Judicial Decisions
The move by the U.S. Department of Justice to weaken child pornography laws 14 came after decades of efforts by magazines such as Playboy and Hustler as well as pedophile-friendly experts to lower or eliminate the age of sexual consent. While the pedophile movement appears statistically insignificant, its leadership is allied with a powerful mass of pornography/sexual freedom apostles whose ideas, interests and economic clout have reshaped law and public policy nationwide.15
Consider the effect of the pedophile movement in corrupting the Netherlands. Holland is the home of the international Paidika: Journal of Paedophilia, and a notorious haven for child rapists. Former Senator Edward Brongersma, an "outed" Dutch pedophile, reported that the Dutch media were increasingly "satisfactory ... interviewing children having sexual relationships with adult friends; consenting parents." Law enforcement, Brongersma explained, had followed suit.16
Brongersma notes that few Dutch public prosecutors will prosecute child abusers. In cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam, "94% of the known cases [are] not prosecuted," he claims. Brongersma states, "The chief inspector of the Rotterdam vice squad was, in 1977, one of the speakers at a congress seeking the abolition of all age limits in the Penal Code sections on sexual crimes and offenses."16
The American-Dutch publication, Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, claims that the Netherlands lowered its age of consent from 16 to 12 years,17 but in an interview with the spokesperson for the Dutch embassy, this author was told that the lower age was restricted to certain ethnic groups.
Under the umbrella of the sexual freedom movement, influential pedophiles work to remove all age of consent laws. The pedophile movement has long campaigned for "consent" as the sole criteria for determining harm. It should be noted that such a change would leave child victims open to charges of participation, thus rendering the crime "harmless." Prior laws on vice (fornication, cohabitation, adultery, prostitution), criminalized non-marital consensual sex, with no appeal to the "right" to engage in said acts. By raising the issue of "consent," all sex criminals including rapist-murderers 18 and child molesters, have been able to argue that their behavior was natural, ethical, legal and "consensual."
The Legal Impact of "Formal" and "Informal" Sex Education
The North American Man-Boy Love Association,19 the Rene Guyon Society and others, are internationally organized.20 There has not been a visible equal effort within the US Department of Justice to protect children. State legislation has emerged with new terms such as "sexual or affectional orientation" as special rights protection. This terminology would cover pedophilia as defined by John Money:
Paedophilia is...affectional paedophilia in layman's terms...the straight forward affectional attraction to children... a paedophilic attraction to children...an overflow of parental pairbonding into erotic pair bonding... The affectional relationship, in male paedophilia at least, is a fatherly relationship...with erotic or lover-lover pairbonding...a combination of affectionate love as well as the lust factor...[until] puberty. (Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia) 21
Proposed Minnesota Legislation H.B. 585, introduced in February 1993, would have legally protected "sexual or affectional orientation, or familial status." It was deleted from the "gay rights" statute on September 20, 1994, at the last moment after I made state senators aware of Money's definition of pedophilia (see above).
Oregon, Kentucky and California
Oregon, Kentucky and California appear to have had similar language moving through the process within "gay rights" statutes. In the early 90s, Oregon proposed a law, Oregon H.B. 3573, which would have permitted the state to award children to adults who "made available to the child, food, clothing, shelter... and which relationship continued on a day-to-day basis, through interaction, companionship, interplay and mutuality."
Texas: A Case Study
A recent case in Texas shows how pedophilic legislation is often hidden in "child-friendly" legislation. On March 1, 1998, Bill 208 was on the fast track for passage in the Texas Senate. The bill, purported to be a tool to further protect battered women and children, would actually permit criminals to receive sole legal custody of the children they deserted, battered and sexually violated.
Jan Barstow of the Texas Women's and Children's Coalition asked me to testify against Family Violence Bill No. 208. In reviewing the bill, I confirmed that several words in the contested section turn a purportedly child-friendly law into an abuser-friendly law. Excerpts from the bill follow the statement "past or present child neglect, or physical or sexual abuse by one parent directed against the other parent, a spouse or a child."
(c) The court shall not appoint as sole managing conservator a party who has a history of committing family violence as defined by Section 71.004 unless the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that:
(1) the party has successfully completed a battering intervention and prevention program as provided by Section 85.022 or, if such a program is not available, has successfully completed a course of treatment pursuant to Section 153.010;
(2) the party is not currently abusing alcohol or a controlled substance as defined by Chapter 481, Health and Safety Code; and
(3) appointing the other party as sole managing conservator would endanger the physical or emotional welfare of the child.
The use of the term "party" is problematic. Just as Kinsey described a child's rapist as his or her "partner," the term "party" would equalize victim and abuser as parties in a controversy, rather than a parent protecting a child from a criminal whose "history" includes sexual or physical violence against the "parent, a spouse or a child" as victims.
Thus, the use of the word "party" annuls decades of effort by victims' rights advocates to standardize terms in the family violence literature that establish "fault" in domestic crimes. For example, rather than referring to individuals as "parties" in family violence crimes, the seminal 128-page Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence, Final Report 22 describes them as "victims" and "abusers."
The proposed Texas bill states, "sole" child custody will be denied an abuser with a "history of committing family violence ... unless" the "preponderance of evidence" finds an abuser has "successfully completed a course of treatment," and is not "currently abusing" drugs and alcohol.
The word "unless" creates a loophole that would enable those who physically or sexually abuse a child to gain sole child custody if they pass a violence course. It should be noted that there is no credible evidence which shows that a six to twelve week "course of treatment" will cure violent abusers. Moreover, the professional literature on child molestation confirms that there is no known cure for pedophiles.23
In her testimony on the Texas bill, Jan Barstow stated:
Wording about abusers attending court-assigned classes doesn't consider the extreme denial and need for control that is part of an abuser's character. This becomes a revolving door in which the offender abuses, submits to a protective order including assignment to classes, and is legally eligible for sole custody six weeks later.
The bill also states that abusers cannot be "currently abusing" alcohol and drugs, which is appropriate as abuse often takes place while the offender is under the influence. However, substance abuse is often non-responsive to treatment. Moreover, as alcohol is rapidly excreted in urine, it is difficult to verify that an offender is actually abstaining from alcohol and drugs without daily testing and monitoring.
Another problem with the bill is the fact that it enables a judge to award abusers sole custody if the judge decides the other parent might "endanger the physical or emotional welfare of the child." It should be noted that this bill does not require the protecting parent to actually be convicted of endangering the child. Thus, no evidence is required to remove a child from a protective parent in order to award sole custody to the child's abuser. At best, the bill assumes that possibly endangering the children by placing them in the custody of an abuser is a better plan than placing such children in foster care or orphanages.
Many women have testified under oath regarding the forced removal of their children based on the scientifically inept theory of Parental Alienation Syndrome promulgated by Kinseyan-adherent Richard Gardner and his disciples. This suggests that few judges have read the following excerpt from the report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence.
Judges should treat incest and molestation as serious criminal offenses.... Incarceration, whether in hospitals, treatment centers or prisons, is absolutely essential to the protection of the nation's children. The only true protection for children from a pedophile is incapacitation of the offender.25
Ignored by much of the media and the court system, the 1984 Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence found pornography deeply involved in episodes of battery, incest and non-kin child molestation. Texas Bill 208 would allow sole child custody to incest offenders although pornography junkies would not be required to stop "currently abusing" pornography. State Legislative Recommendation 5 of the Attorney General's Task Force strongly advocates that "States should enact legislation to enable ... access to sexual assault, child molestation or pornography arrest or conviction records" in order to remove all such persons from "contact with children."
Proposed Texas Senate Bill No. 208 would create a "no fault" battery and "no fault" child sex abuse, akin to the judicially enacted "no fault divorce" laws which have driven hundreds of thousands of full-time homemakers and their children into poverty.
Ever since Indiana University zoologist Kinsey began to weaken child protection efforts by classifying children as the "partners" of their adult abusers, the leveling of abusers and victims via language has continued both formally and informally. Although new statutes are often framed in the assertion "Children are not the property of their parents," there appear to be no official data collections underway by any institution to ascertain the status of such pedophile-friendly laws.
An overwhelming body of research confirms the testimonies of hundreds of thousands of adult, child, homosexual and heterosexual victims of junk sex science and pornography. Like Big Tobacco, Big Pornography has used the mass media for decades to lie to the polity about the harm of their toxic products. This review raises several key questions:
1. What well-funded American pedophile/pederast lobby, using its credentialed members, works behind the scenes to lower and end the age of consent and protective parents' rights?
2. Why is the media silent about the role of pornography and fraudulent sex science in the massive increases in sexual violence, including child sexual abuse?
3. What is the U.S. Department of Justice doing to protect children from junk sex science, pornography, sexual abuse and a judicial system that awards child victims to perpetrators?
The "Kinseyan philosophy" has tainted researchers, the media, legislators and justice officials -- and we have all borne the consequences. The "Kinseyan philosophy" and its consequences have not been seriously evaluated -- until now.
About the Author
Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., is president of The Institute for Media Education, and author of the U.S. Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice study, Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler (1989); Kinsey, Sex and Fraud (Reisman et al, 1990); Soft Porn Plays Hardball (1991); Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation (Reisman & Johnson, 1995) and Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences (1998). Two documentaries were built on her work: "The Children of Table 34" (1995) and "Kinsey's Paedophiles" (1998) produced by UNESCO and Amnesty International award-winning producer, Tim Tate of England's prestigious Yorkshire Television. Dr. Reisman has been a consultant to the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as well as three U.S. Department of Justice administrations.
Dr. Reisman is listed in Who's Who in Science & Engineering, International Who's Who in Sexology, International Who's Who in Education, Who's Who of American Women and The World's Who's Who of Women. Her scholarly findings on "junk science," visual pornography as non-speech, and child protection have had international legislative and scientific impact in the United States, Israel, South Africa, Canada and Australia. Based on her pioneering exposé of Kinsey, The German Medical Tribune and the British medical journal, The Lancet, called for an immediate investigation of the Kinsey Institute. The investigation has not been forthcoming and to-date, Dr. Reisman's findings remain ignored by major U.S. science journals.
Dr. Reisman is sought worldwide to speak, lecture, and testify, and to counsel individuals, organizations, professionals and governments regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. The special emphasis of her work has been, and continues to be, the influence of "junk science," imagery and media change agents upon adults and children. The author may be contacted at 1-800-837-0544.
1. Christopher Lash, The Culture of Narcissism, W.W. Norton, New York, 1979. Lash's earlier work, Haven in a Heartless World: The Family Besieged also is part of the body of writings during the 1970s that identified this tragic shift in American character.
2. "Dr. Von Balluseck....corresponded with the American Kinsey Institute for some time, and had also got books from them which dealt with child sexuality" (Tagespiegel, October 1, 1957).
The nazis knew... [he] practiced his abnormal tendencies in occupied Poland on Polish children, who had to chose between Balluseck and the gas ovens. After the war, the children were dead, but Balluseck lived. Today the court has four diaries ...[where] he recorded his crimes against 100 children ....He sent the detail of his experiences regularly to the US sex researcher, Kinsey. The latter...kept up a regular and lively correspondence with Balluseck." (NZ National Zeitung, May 15, 1957). "Dr. Balluseck...[made measurements] of his crimes committed against children...while in correspondence with the American sexual researcher Kinsey" (Frankfurter Allegemaine Zeitung, May 22, 1957).
3. Founder Vern Bullough is an editor of the Journal of Paedophilia. As of June 1999, the Internet site continues to post the premier issue in which all of its editors (past, present and future) are listed in its initial "Statement of Purpose," as "paedophiles."
4. McIlvenna's Institute supplied Hustler's consumers with graphic, nude photographs that were published alongside the article. In 1977, the photos were re-published in an Institute book entitled Meditations on the Gift of Sexuality. A nude Professor McIlvenna appears in photographs alongside his nude Institute faculty, staff and students in varied combinations of group sexual congress.
5. Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, The Netherlands, Spring 1991, pp. 7-8.
6. See Vern Bullough, Dean, Department of Natural and Social Science, State University College at Buffalo; John DeCeccco, Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University, editor of the Journal of Homosexuality; Wayne Dynes, Department of Art, Hunter College, editor-in-chief of the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality; Hubert Kennedy, Center for Research and Education in Sexuality, San Francisco State University.
7. Judith A. Reisman's Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences, IME, Arlington, Va., 1998, 2000.
8. See Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., Soft Porn Plays Hardball, Huntington House, Lafayette, LA., 1991 for full documentation of citations on the pornography issue. See especially Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, 1954-1984, (Institute for Media Education, Arlington, VA, 1989, Prepared Under Grant No. 84-JN-AX-K007, U.S.Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention).
9. The peer-approved study required researchers to examine each page of every magazine (126) from Hustler's 1974 inception to 1984 that, in 1983, reached over four million consumers, numerically on a par with Psychology Today readership.
10. See Emily Buchwald et al., Transforming A Rape Culture (Milkweed, Minneapolis, MN, l993, p. 7) and Judith Reisman, SoftPorn Plays Hardball, (p. 15).
11. John Briere, Marsha Runtz, "University Males' Sexual Interest in Children: Predicting Potential Indices of "Pedophilia" in a Nonforensic Sample" in Child Abuse & Neglect, (Vol. 13, 1989, pp. 65-75).
12. The Police Chief, February 1991, p. 19.
13. Detective Ralph Bennett of the Sexually Exploited Child Unit and Chief Daryl Gates of the Los Angeles Police Department in California; in The Police Chief, (February 1991, p. 19).
14. See The Miami Herald, November 12, 1993 for coverage of Paul Bender, top aide to Drew Days III, solicitor general, who was said to have written the brief. Bender was a member of the anti-enforcement majority of the old 1967-1970 Presidential Commission on Obscenity and Pornography that called for elimination of all pornography laws. The Senate voted 100-0 to reject Attorney General Reno's attempt to weaken the child pornography laws in 1993 -- U.S. v. Knox.
15. See contract requiring signature of students attending The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco, California.
16. Magpie, The Journal of the Paedophile Information Exchange, Spring 1981, p. 3.
17. Beyond foreign and homosexual press reports, see Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia (Winter 1993) and citations in the last page of this report.
18. The "rough sex defense" has been successfully used in the courts, claiming the dead victim "consented" to being brutally murdered as part of the sexual ritual. Dr. John Money advocated for this "right" in his Paidika The Journal of Paedophilia interview, (Spring 1991, p.7-8).
19. Currently, the following citations from Kinsey's Male volume appear at the website of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). "ALFRED KINSEY...It is ordinarily said that criminal law is designed to protect property and to protect persons...[but the laws are merely for] protecting custom: When children are constantly warned by parents and teachers against contacts with adults... they are ready to become hysterical as soon as any older person approaches, or stops and speaks to them in the street, or fondles them, or proposes to do something for them, even though the adult may have had no sexual objective in mind. Some of the more experienced students of juvenile problems have come to believe that the emotional reactions of the parents, police officers, and other adults who discover that the child has had such a contact, may disturb the child more seriously than the sexual contacts themselves. The current hysteria over sex offenders may very well have serious effects on the ability of many of these children to work out sexual adjustments some years later.... Alfred Kinsey on "The Social Control of Sexual Behavior"" [to which NAMBLA adds: Copyright © NAMBLA, 1999. All rights reserved].
20. Leo, John, "Pedophiles in the Schools," U.S. News & World Report, (October 11, 1993, p. 37).
21. Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, Spring, 1991, p. 3.
22. Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence, Final Report (Washington, D.C., September 1984).
23. See all cited works by Reisman where this is discussed in depth.
24. See a summary of this case by Darcy O'Brien, Power to Hurt: Inside a Judge's Chambers: Sexual Assault, Corruption, and the Ultimate Reversal of Justice for Women (Harper Paperbacks, New York, 1997).
25. The Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence report (Washington, DC., September 1984, pp. 33-43).
The Growing Power of Pedophile Advocates
By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.
We are piecing together the players in the pedophile puzzle for examination by people concerned with child welfare and protection. This addendum is intended to urge the reader to ponder whether the growing power of pedophile advocates represents a threat warranting your attention and action.
1977: The British Psychological Society Conference on Love and Attraction, Swansea, Wales.
This author delivered a research paper on child pornography entitled "Playboy 1954-1977." Conference academicians hired by pornographers presented "scientific" papers advocating the legalization of child pornography, prostitution and an end to age of consent. They promoted their "scientific" claims for early childhood sexuality to lawmakers and fellow academicians via both legitimate and pornographic media. Following these disturbing academic papers advocating sex with children, Reisman began years of study of pedophile-related ideas in popular and academic writings. Three key research findings emerge.
1. The Kinsey Reports (1948, 1953), the "scientific" basis of modern sex education and liberalized sex laws are based on fraud and the sexual abuse of between 317 and 1,025 (reports vary) infants and children. See Kinsey, Crimes & Consequences (1998, 2000).
2. Playboy was Kinsey's "pamphleteer" teaching "heterosexual" sex with children and an end to age of consent laws with children via photographs, cartoons and illustrations, beginning in May 1954. (See second paragraph of "Note" at the end of this Addendum).1
3. The Advocate, America's mainstream homosexual periodical, teaches "homosexual" sex with children since the early 70s and seeks an end to age of consent laws. (See: A Content Analysis of Two Decades of The Advocate; Reisman, 1992).
Playboy and Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia
Research on Playboy's role in mainstreaming child sexual abuse as humorous and acceptable has long been ignored by the media elite. The following chronology addresses public links between Playboy, the pedophile movement and U.S. law and public policy. Children appeared on average 8 times per issue (96 times a year) in visuals and cartoons.
1953 December, Playboy is launched: Publisher Hugh Hefner claims Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948)2 radicalized, inspired and instructed him on human sexuality. Hefner began the Playboy empire, bringing Kinsey's "scientific" view of human sexuality from academia to Joe College. By 1954 child abuse was glamorized in cartoons, by the 70s in photographs, and by 1977 the nude "Playmate" also appeared in child biography photographs (3,042 child characters, 1,323 photographs, 1,196 cartoons, 523 illustrations) typically in sexual scenes.
1975 Playboy: Playboy Press publishes child pornography: In Playboy's publication Sugar and Spice, explicit photos of a 10-year-old Brooke Shields were displayed "nude ... her face erotically made up ... a young vamp and a harlot, a seasoned sexual veteran ... erotic ... sensual sex symbol." 3
Brooke Shields was provocatively displayed as "Pretty Baby" (a film in which she was scripted to be a child prostitute) in several subsequent Playboy issues.
1976 November Playboy:4 Playboy advisor James Petersen is described as "USA's most widely read men's sex education resource." 5 Petersen publishes a letter he says is written by a "high school" girl who has sadistic sex with a boyfriend while her mother watches. Mr. Petersen applauds, noting ways to make the youngster's sexualized pain more intense.
1977 June Playboy: Alongside the adult centerfold Playmate, a little girl appeared as "Little Playmate"-- a baby to toddler to teen to adult. That is, Playboy's photo layout began with a baby and concluded with the nude, adult Playmate. This little-to-big or big-to-little "biography," written in child's scrawl, became a regular feature. When readers opened Playboy to the centerfold, they opened to a child. Roughly 30% of the children in these "Child Strip Tease" inserts in 1977 were girls between 3- and 7-years-old, the common age of incestuous sexual assault, and over half were under age 16. Some Playmate child photos showed the small playmates partially dressed or nude.
1985-86 Playboy: Playboy prints articles protesting the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography's plan to require nude models to be at least 21-years-old. Congress did end up voting to establish the legal age for nude models at 18. (There was no known lobby of 18-year-olds fighting in Washington for the right to be pornography models.)
1985: After the 1985 leak of Reisman's Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention report, Images of Children, Crime & Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, which fully documents Playboy's child rape jokes, cartoons and photographs by strangers and kin, the post-1977 photographs of children disappeared temporarily.
1986 April 10: Citing this author's research, Southland Corporation, the owner of 7/11 stores, discontinued selling Playboy and Penthouse. In response, a group called "The Media Coalition" , representing Playboy and Penthouse, employed Gray & Company, a well-connected Washington, D.C. lobbying firm to:
...discredit...the organizations and individuals who have begun to seriously disrupt [pornographers]...Quiet efforts must be undertaken to persuade the Attorney General, the White House and the leaders of both parties...they should shy away from publicly endorsing the document."
Gray & Company charged the Media Coalition between $50,000 and $75,000 for the campaign. Much of the cost was borne by Playboy; Penthouse also provided funding. Playboy mounted an attack on this author claiming that their publication never sexualized children. The cartoons depicting child molestation and child centerfolds disappeared.6
1986 July: The Attorney General's report is published. While accepting the report's "hard core" pornography findings, Attorney General Edwin Meese declared that by today's standards Playboy and "would seem quite tame" and not "obscene." He noted that he read Playboy as "a youth."7
1987: Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia is launched. Its editors include famous U.S. academic "sexuality experts," many serving as professors within the California university system. Paidika's "Statement of Purpose" reads: The starting point of Paidika is necessarily our consciousness of ourselves as paedophiles....It is our contention that the oppression of paedophilia is...[a] dangerous...part of the larger repression of sexuality....But to speak today of paedophilia, which we understand to be consensual intergenerational sexual relationships, is to speak of the politics of oppression...Visual images that are a part of a paedophile sensibility are also being assailed...[Signed] The Editors
1987 Autumn: Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia.8 Pedophile editor Lawrence Stanley wrote," The Hysteria Over Child Pornography and Paedophilia" asserting, "Children have enjoyed... adult-child sexual encounters...[and] being nude before a camera."9
1988 September: Lawrence Stanley's "The Child Pornography Myth" is published by Playboy as a factual report.10 Playboy concealed Stanley's Paidika editorship, saying only: "The author began researching the issue of child pornography in 1984...He talked with lawyers...ex-researchers...law enforcement...in Europe and the United States" (p. 44).
1990 Sept/Oct: Debbie Nathan (unidentified as to credentials) nominated and presented pedophile editor Lawrence Stanley with the 1989 Free Press Association Investigative Reporting Award for his Playboy article," The Child Pornography Myth." Free Press Association journalism chairman Professor C. McDaniel contested Stanley's award since his article was "advocacy" and Stanley had a "special interest" in the "outcome of the investigation." It was "not necessary" said Playboy, for the Free Press Association or Playboy readers to know Stanley was the editor of Paidika:
The Journal of Paedophilia.
1991 March: The Department of Defense Report on Homosexuality and Personnel Security: Kinsey, Pomeroy, Gebhard, Martin, Ford and Beach, Bell and Weinberg along with Paidika: The Journal of Pedophilia 11 advocates Money and Bullough, are cited by the Department of Defense as scientific experts for healthy, normal, human sexual conduct.
1991 Spring: Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia: John Money stated that pedophilia is an "overflow of parental pairbonding into erotic pairbonding." He created his sexual disorders clinic to give "leeway to judges" to free pedophiles. American University's pedophile president, Richard Berendzen, became "physically and psychologically sound" after three weeks at Money's clinic.12
Holding pedophilia as normal, Money advocates the end to age of consent laws and suggests the legalization of sex by pedophiles when "consent" of the child victim was obtained. Money stated, "If I were to see the case of a boy aged 10 or 11 who's intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his 20s or 30s, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual, then I would not call it pathological in any way" (p. 5).
Money also argued that if one member of a couple who has made a "sadomasochistic...death pact...[should] finally die... in one of their] ceremonies" that this should not be considered criminal as the surviving member would have obtained prior consent (pp. 7-8).13
1991 September: Bill Andriette, editor of the North American Man-Boy Love Association's NAMBLA Newsletter and affiliate of Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia in his Playboy article, "Are You A Child Pornographer?" warned, "The Feds have now also criminalized a range of images that no one could possibly view as harmful to society or to children." Playboy concealed Andriette's pedophilia and said only that he was "features editor of The Guide, a Boston-based gay magazine" (p. 56).
1992 March: Playboy again describes pedophile Lawrence Stanley as a child abuse expert. Andriette, Petersen and Stanley cite each other in seeking to reverse the US. vs. Stephen A. Knox child "panty pornography" conviction. Petersen in Playboy conceals Stanley's and Andriette's pedophilia, warning: "When the government looks at [Knox's] innocent material with a pedophile's eyes, justice suffers" (p 46). A year later Attorney General Reno asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse Knox.
1992 June: In Playboy's "Presumed Guilty," unidentified (as to credentials) author Harry Stein said child abuse is a fantasy and that later recall of childhood sexual abuse is false. (By eroticizing the home, Playboy eroticized children for those in the home, thereby facilitating "copy cat" child molestation, incest and divorce.)14 Stein exploits Playboy readers' concerns about child sex abuse charges in divorce, saying "sexual abuse of children is the dirtiest, deadliest trick in divorce court" (p. 74).
1992 October: In Playboy's "Cry Incest," Debbie Nathan (Stanley's advocate) asserts incest is trivial and blames children and their own alleged sexuality for sex abuse stating: "Such tales express people's anxieties about their own infantile aggressive and sexual impulses.... [children feel] guilt about normal sexuality" (p. 162).15
1993 March: In Playboy, vampire novelist Anne Rice says, "I do love violence, I absolutely love it" (p. 53). In Rice's later book her 13-year-old heroine dresses like a child, has sex with male relations -- young, middle-aged and elderly -- in a graveyard, has sex with her 15-year-old cousin and later that night has sex with another cousin's husband.16
1993 March: In Playboy author Matthew Childs (unidentified as to credentials) insisted, "Adolescence doesn't exist ....[Age of consent laws] signaled a separation of sexuality from human behavior." Minors are healthier if they "don't have to let their parents know about their [sexual] lives." Age of consent laws reflect the "social-purity league" (p. 41).
1993 November: Congress unanimously condemned Janet Reno's view that a child be required to be "engaged in the conduct of lasciviously exhibiting their (or someone else's) genitals or pubic areas" before a film or photo could be considered illegal.17
1993 December: Playboy's "centerfold as a child" triptych returned as a little "Brownie." The child playmate was again displayed at ages 3 to 7. In this same issue a man had sex with his friend's daughter; youthful anal sodomy was "thrillingly" reported by women and men, and pseudo-lesbian sadism imagery dominated.18 This issue signaled that the child protection gains made in the 80s by the U.S. Department of Justice's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section were to be reversed. The Reno Department of Justice ignores obscenity as a public issue.
1. Reisman, J. (1990). Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, U.S. Department of Justice, Grant No. 84-JN-AX-K007.
2. Both the 1948 and the 1953 Kinsey Reports included data (as previously noted, this data was methodologically and statistically flawed) supporting Kinsey's idea that children are sexually active from birth. These Reports have been cited by the academic pedophile movement as a basis for legitimizing adult-child sexual relationships.
3. US Magazine, January 19, 1982, p. 68.
4. This issue also included an interview with then presidential candidate, Jimmy Carter.
5. USA Today, September 27, 1985. See also SoftPorn, p. 95.
6. Trento, S. (1992). The Power House. New York: St. Martin's Press, p. 197. Dr. Reisman's child pornography research was conducted at American University (AU) in Washington, D.C. During her 1983-85 tenure, AU president Richard Berendzen and psychology department chairman Elliot McGinnies were criminally charged with, and confessed to, crimes of a pedophilic nature. The media largely ignored McGinnies' confession to statutory rape of a 9-year-old girl in his trailer at a Maryland nudist colony. McGinnies is a professor emeritus at AU. As of June 1999, Berendzen continued to serve on the faculty after receiving roughly a $1,000,000 to step down from the presidency.
7. The Baltimore Evening Sun, January 29, 1987.
8. Published by The Stichting Paidika Foundation, a non-profit organization in The Netherlands. The post office box for the Uncommon Desires Newsletter is registered in Stanley's name (Kincaid, C. . The Playboy Foundation: A Mirror of the Culture? WA, DC: Capitol Research Center, p. 43).
9. Pp. 16-27.
10. In the May 1987 issue, Playboy advisor Peterson instructed male readers to have sex with "virgins," or "very young lovers" to avoid exposure to AIDS.
11. Paidika: The Journal of Pedophilia's "Statement of Purpose" reads, "The starting point of Paidika is necessarily our consciousness of ourselves as paedophiles..."
12. Excerpted from the May 16, 1990, evaluation report of Berendzen by Paul R. McHugh, M.D., chairman of the psychiatry department at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
13. Retrieved from the World Wide Web, June 1999: http://www.bekknet.ad.jp/jp/ro/fresh/paidikaa.html. As previously noted, John Money is a Penthouse Forum advisor, a Johns Hopkins University professor emeritus, and founder of the Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.
14. As previously noted, Playboy International filed a defamation suit in the Netherlands against a Dutch televisions station for this author's statements. A Dutch court declared in their favor on October 27, 1994. See also SoftPorn, Chapters 5 and 7.
15. See: Softporn, p. 23, 100, 101, 148, 149, 160, 164-165, 171.
16. The News & Observer, November 21, 1993, p. A1.
17. The Washington Times, November 25, 1993, p. A1-20.
18. In the Playboy interview of Rush Limbaugh, ACLU President Nadine Strossen urges readers to buy "Sex Maniacs" (trading-card sets designed for teen and young adult consumers) to challenge a New York law that prohibits selling "Serial Killer" trading cards to minors.
NOTE: This is an addendum to a chapter by Judith Reisman, Ph.D., entitled, "Implications of Kinsey Research on Child Custody Cases: How Junk Science Create a Paradigm Shift in Society, Legislation and the Judiciary" in Exposé: The Failure of Family Courts to Protect Children from Abuse in Custody Disputes published by Our Children Our Future Charitable Foundation in 1999.
For additional information on mainstream child pornography see Dr. Reisman's book "Soft Porn" Plays Hardball, and her report prepared for the Department of Justice: Images of Children, Crime and Violence in Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler, 1954-1984 , or contact her at 1-800-837-0544.