Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen. Photo: GlennforStateRep.com
Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen. Photo: GlennforStateRep.com

GOP’s Gruenhagen calls for destruction of ‘filthy’ Kinsey research

"One of the most destructive things to a society... is when the male sex drive is released in an uncontrolled and undisciplined way"
By Sally Jo Sorensen
Thursday, March 10, 2011 at 9:27 am

While Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen‘s bill to halt implementation of the federal Affordable Care Act in Minnesota grabbed the attention of the capitol press corps, the freshman legislator’s homage to natural law wasn’t the only striking statement he made in committee Wednesday.

In a separate hearing, the conservative Republican from Sibley County condemned sexologist Alfred Kinsey as a “filthy, perverted unscientific liar” whose research needs to be “destroyed.”

Gruenhagen’s denouncement occurred during a Public Safety and Crime Prevention Policy and Finance committee hearing on HF853, introduced by Tony Cornish, which appropriates $17,500 for a human trafficking toll-free hotline for victims seeking assistance.

Linda Miller, Executive Director of Civil Society, had just finished leading the presentation of information about the hotline. Gruenhagen thanked her for her and her associates’ work before launching into a broadside against Kinsey’s mid-20th century studies of human sexuality:

I would make this comment. You know, I’ve been active — I did, well, I won’t go over my whole history, but I was thirteen years in jail ministry and I’ve seen some of the mess that you’re talking about, okay. And the perversions and the things that are being done to our young people. But you know…so I’ve done quite a bit of layman’s study on this. One of the things I would mention is that we need to destroy the so-called research basis for the justification of what’s going on in our culture and society with our young people, or the porn industry or whatever.

And that is Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s work, okay? He published the Male and Female Report in 1948 and 1956. That research is filled with fraud and lies. That research provided a so-called justification for sex with children down under the age of five years old. It is fraudulent, it is a lie, and yet the Kinsey Institute out of Bloomington, Indiana, continues to publish and promote their filth into our government and into our sex education programs in our public schools. Do the research, ok? We need to destroy his research. It is filled with lies and fraud. The person who has done tremendous research on this is Dr. Judith Reisman. All of this can be found on the Internet. So, what I’m saying is, I would appreciate it if organizations like yourselves who see the consequence of what’s being done to our young people, women and children in this society, would expose this lie that is out there that is providing the basis and justification for.

Finally I would just add: there is nothing more destructive — or, one of the most destructive things to a society in terms of our women and children and even having economic consequences — is when the male sex drive is released in an uncontrolled and undisciplined way. There — you can’t print up enough money to take care of the consequences of that. So I beseech you as a man to expose the lies that have been permeated through our schools and our culture and of course we know Hollywood is brainwashed disciples of Dr. Albert Kinsey. I use the word “doctor” reluctantly. He’s a filthy, perverted, unscientific liar and his research needs to be exposed. Other than that, I don’t have a lot of opinion on the subject [Laughter]

Gruenhagen cites the much debunked Kinsey debunker Judith Reismann. Described in 2004 by the New Yorker as “a sixty-nine-year-old independent researcher with a Ph.D. in communications and a former songwriter for Captain Kangaroo,” Reismann is the founder of the modern anti-Kinsey movement.

The Kinsey Institute has responded to Reisman repeatedly since she began publishing screeds against the group in 1981. According to the Institute’s website:

When The Kinsey Institute responded, Reisman filed suit in 1991 against The Kinsey Institute, then director June Reinisch, and Indiana University, alleging defamation of character and slander. In September 1993, Reisman’s lawyer withdrew from the case, and in June 1994 the court dismissed Reisman’s case with prejudice (which means that Reisman is prohibited from refiling the suit).

Watch the video here (Gruenhagen’s remarks begins at 37:42 ), or listen to the audio:

Comments

26 Comments

Kevin
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 11:12 am

Get me guess: Bachmann and Gruenhagen are the best of buds.

How on earth do these people get elected???


John
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 11:53 am

Wow, a religious fundalmentalist is attacking science. What a FREEKING MORON!!! I had written an analytical response to Gruenhagen’s statements but then realized that it does no good to show these religion nut jobs how stupid they sound when they attack science. HELLO, science polices itself unlike religion!!! Science actually encourages dissenting opinions when those opinions are relevant and intellegent. Science has not murdered MILLIONS of people because they have a different opinion. Religion WILL destroy the world. I can’t wait to hear the BS from Tim/Dennis when he tries to defend this one.

How the hell are these idiots getting elected??!! Are Americans really that stupid?


Carl
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 12:34 pm

So… The Rep. is saying that if we don’t like the science we need to have a good old fashioned book burning? Maybe we should hold federal hearings questioning the patriotism of non-Christian Americans while we’re at it. Oops Rep. King has already started on that one.

Stock up on candles people, here come the dark ages.

Praise Jebus, God hates human sexuality, Amen.


Olivia
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 12:58 pm

What about the budget? Where are the jobs?
Why are they working on crap that they have no business messing with?


Pickwick
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 2:08 pm

“What a day, what a day for an auto-da-fe!”


Wendy Leigh
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 3:23 pm

I’m certain it was the Papal Nazi who recently defended having sex with children and stated it was “natural.”

Better idea, let’s throw out the discredited and removed “research” of Paul Cameron currently being recycled by The Family religious mafia and cult against LGBTI’s in America.


Randy
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 3:55 pm

Anyone care to make a bet on where this crackpot will be arrested for soliciting? How about on whom he will have solicited (I’m giving 8-5 odds on “undercover cop posing as a transvestite hustler”)?


Eric
Comment posted March 10, 2011 @ 9:58 pm

Let there be no doubt: many religious and cultural conservatives see no need for research on sexuality, or a number of other things for that matter. The logic seems to be that if these pious hucksters have a religious or political disagreement with some area of academic inquiry, it’s best that our present state of ignorance be maintained.

“Intelligent Design” creationists have written about their desire to cut off funding for evolution research. Under Republican governor Schwarzenegger in California, education funding was cut off for labor research at UCLA and Berkeley. The Bush administration was notorious for its anti-science activism, cutting off money here, curtailing research there, and even rewriting language in scientific papers to make it more politically friendly. Large numbers of Republicans still think climate change is some kind of conspiracy among scientists and liberal activists to…usher in socialism?

Let’s also have no doubt about what underlies all this–the conservative movement in this country is deeply and even proudly anti-intellectual.

You may recall that a PEW poll after the 2008 election found that only _6%_ of scientists voted Republican. 6 fricking percent. There are no doubt multiple explanations for this, but certainly a partial explanation has to do with the realistic perception among scientists that many conservative Republicans are abysmally stupid when it comes to understanding science and its social importance.


Chayanov
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 1:06 am

So he has issues with research that was done 55 years ago? I guess it’s nice to see that some Republicans have finally moved from the 19th century to the 20th. In a few more decades they may even become part of the 21st.


jonerik
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 8:32 am

Given the timing and context of his remarks, Gruenhagen is obviously up to his neck in human sex trafficking.


john
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 10:20 am

Gruenhagen is right. His intensity is understandable given the personal and social devastation caused by the lack of moral restraint Kinsey has encouraged, which he has encountered firsthand during years of jail ministry. His critic’s’ denial of those consequences doesn’t make the consequences go away.


dr. ron
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 10:25 am

If ignorance is bliss, Mr. Gruenhagen must be in a perpetual state of ecstasy. His comments clearly demonstrate he has absolutely no understanding of either the history of the Kinsey Institute, its mission nor its considerable contribution to our understanding of human sexuality.


Juan
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 11:11 am

For those wanting more information:

“Alfred C. Kinsey and the Politics of Sex Research” by John Bancroft
http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/publications/PDF/Bancroft%20Kinsey%20and%20Politics%20of%20Sex.pdf

More info here:
http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/controversy.html


Dave
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 12:09 pm

How many people hate Obama so much that they voted for a neanderthal like Gruenhagen?


Carl
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 12:44 pm

So… these prisoners cited the Kinsey Report/line of research as a cause of their criminal behavior? Or is this some causal connection inferred by the “Minister/Rep?” Either way, Minister/Rep. Gruenhagen, reading descriptions of behavior does not cause the behavior, otherwise you would have embraced Christ’s actual teachings of love and tolerance and not the bizarre anti-knowledge mythology of the religious right.

Praise Jebus, God hates science, Amen.


johnny hoo
Comment posted March 11, 2011 @ 7:58 pm

I generally do not endorse the conserative right, but I can certainly understand their outrage with Kinsey using data obtained from pedophiles. Frankly, it is distrubing to me, that this data and the fact that children were abuse to obtain it, is largely ignored or dismissed.


What a fool. « yellowbelliedmarmot
Pingback posted March 12, 2011 @ 1:04 am

[...] Kinsey Institute posted this article about MN Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen today.  In the middle of a committee hearing, he gets up and [...]


LadyKofOlmsted
Comment posted March 12, 2011 @ 9:10 am

There is a saying that goes like this…”That which is repressed(Human sexuality and Sex)is often obssessed.”

To deny that males and females are not sexual beings with desires and needs, is to deny the sun rising in the East and setting in the West each day.

That is all I have to say on that.


Does holding political office lower one’s IQ and cognitive function? « Toward a Moral Life
Pingback posted March 12, 2011 @ 7:30 pm

[...] has he sponsored a bill to halt state funding of the Affordable Health Care Act, he has also gone on public record about famous sexologist Alfred Kinsey: “He published the Male and Female Report in 1948 and [...]


Lane
Comment posted March 13, 2011 @ 10:06 pm

> Other than that, I don’t have a lot of opinion on the subject [Laughter]

All this proves is that he is but another first-rate smooth-talking demagogue that we need to be wary of.


Dave
Comment posted March 14, 2011 @ 10:31 pm

Calling for the destruction of knowledge/literature…

Doesn’t this remind anyone of the dark ages??


Curtis
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 5:24 pm

Religious Fundamentalists are a danger, no matter what religion they possess. They deny facts and impose their beliefs on others. They go against the very foundation of freedoms this country was founded on. This guy is as dangerous as the Taliban.


Miro
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 10:57 am

That man Gruenhagen is talking about dirty, naughty things! He needs is diapered parts washed out with soap!


EricF
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 12:22 pm

johnny hoo, where else but pedophiles do you propose to get information about pedophiles?


Keith Wilson
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 6:09 pm

Try going to http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/controversy%202.htm and http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/cont-akchild.html for the other side of the story, one which I’m sure Rep. Gruenhagen did not bother to check with first.


Nancy Sessoms
Comment posted April 18, 2011 @ 5:50 am

Taking one point made by Kinsey as Judith Reisman has done, writing almost endless articles about it, and then presenting them to rightwing political and religious anti-sex audiences is not “tremendous research” that Rep. Gruenhagen claimed it was.

People who disagree with scientific research have an easy way to deal with it: better research. People who can’t deal with the research want to destroy it, which is the category in which Rep. Gruenhagen places himself.

Our society seems increasingly to produce a particular type of person who is obsessed with the idea of having sex with children. The way that they can handle their obsession and ward off attacks of conscience because of it is to oppose the sex, constantly, in endless detail, with incredibly hostile verbiage. To some of us this gives their obsession quite an exhibitionistic character as well.

Rep. Gruenhagen claims an expertise in the field based on his assertion of “thirteen years in jail ministry” and “quite a bit of layman’s study.” Given that the proper course would be to put his own self-identification on the line with a series of articles for the scientific press. It would have a far greater effect of undercutting Kinsey than his desire to destroy books he doesn’t like. But it would also mean opening himself to the same scrutiny he claims has been directed at Kinsey.

The fact that he hasn’t creates an impression that he is too lazy or too incompetent to do so. But, failing to challenge Kinsey scientifically, he wants a special entitlement to have the nanny state step in, hold his hand, and destroy things he doesn’t like, for no other discernable reason then he doesn’t like them..

For shame!


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.