Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life.

Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life. By James H. Jones. New York: W. W. Norton, 1997, 937 pages. Cloth, $39.95.

Reviewed by Vern L. Bullough, Ph.D.,. R.N. S.U.N.Y Distinguished Professor Emeritus, 17434 Mayall St., Northridge, CA 91325; e-mail: [e-mail].

This, the third biography of Kinsey to appear, is by far the most comprehensive and exhaustive, as it should be given that Jones has been researching Kinsey for over 25 years. He states that he is writing a combination biography and history because he wants to place Kinsey in a historical context. For the most part, he succeeds. He tries to give a brief background in which Kinsey grew up and events that took place throughout Kinsey's life. Jones describes the genealogy of Kinsey's family, the movement of his father from working class to professional, the residences of the Kinsey family, the schools he attended from grade school through graduate school, and even lectures that some of his professors gave. Jones provides descriptions and brief biographies of individuals who appear even slightly important in Kinsey's life. Among the massive number of oral interviews are those with Kinsey's old acquaintances from grade school, high school, and college. In short, Jones's book is comprehensive and, for the most part, authoritative. Yet, I do not think it is the final word on Kinsey.

Its weakness lies in Jones's lack of real understanding of human sexuality: In the case of Kinsey, he either sensationalizes it or misses the mark. In Jones's mind, Kinsey was a repressed homosexual with sadomasochistic tendencies. His argument for this is based on guess work or, in the case of Kinsey's later years, on anonymous sources. I also believe that Jones, in the course of writing the biography, came to dislike his subject and the dislike shows throughout the book.

Let me illustrate. Kinsey grew up in a fundamentalist religious household with a strong and dominating father whose word was regarded as law. Early on, Kinsey was a sickly, unathletic child and compensated for this by being a good student. In his youth he was a devoted Christian, taught Sunday school classes, became an Eagle Scout, and never dated. When he was not studying, he spent time hiking. He had a strong sex drive, felt guilty about masturbating, and apparently punished himself for it. He remained celibate until his marriage at 27 and then, in spite of the attempts of both husband and wife, the marriage was unconsummated for several months (Clara, his wife, had what was diagnosed as an adherent clitoris). Finally, Kinsey and Clara sought medical help, something Kinsey was loath to do. Based on Kinsey's failure to engage in sexual intercourse before marriage, and with little supporting data, Jones claims that Kinsey had strong homosexual urges. This theme, in part, dominates his discussion of Kinsey's sexuality throughout the book.

Jones is on more solid ground when he emphasizes Kinsey's later rebellion from the rigid fundamentalism of his youth in which sex was rarely discussed and, if it was discussed, it was condemned. In a letter to the New York Times Book Review (Nov. 30, 1987), Jones said this was essentially the theme of the first part of his book. If so, his emphasis. on Kinsey's homoerotic tendencies and, in a sense, his attempts to sensationalize detract from this message.

What Jones does not say directly is that Kinsey essentially approached his subject as a taxonomist, the same way he did gall wasps. It was by collecting sufficient numbers of gall wasps, 100,000 or more from various parts of the world, that Kinsey felt he could then describe gall wasps and in the process point out the errors of all of his predecessors in the field. He approached sex in the same way, this time compulsively collecting histories and sexual paraphernalia rather than specimens. Kinsey hungered for fame and a scientific reputation. He was arrogant, dominating, and accustomed to having his own way, but also a surprisingly loving parent. He also had a single-track mind: As Jones indicates, the only real attention he paid to World War II was on the difficulties it caused for his research.

He believed in the methods of science and the ability of science to reveal reality. He felt that all he needed to do was present the real data and they would be accepted. This was his primary motivation for studying sexual activity, something to which there was an answer based in reality, not what individuals thought about sex, or imagined while they were having sex, or how they described themselves. In spite of the current mistrust of science, Kinsey was essentially vindicated, although not in his lifetime. His data ultimately changed opinions, but only after a storm of controversy, which Jones describes well. Jones sees Kinsey as a sex reformer at heart. For example, he felt strongly about people imprisoned for sexual activities. He believed that masturbation was natural and that there was a tremendously wide spectrum of sexual practice. He stayed clear, however, of any reformist group and remained a conservative Republican, at least according to Jones.

Kinsey insisted that his research associates not be shocked by any sexual report they received in their interviews, and he established a kind of SAR (a seminar using sexually explicit materials) to test them, although whether this included actual sexual activities among an in-group is something that Jones only surmises. Kinsey, however, as many investigators in the field might well be, was a voyeur. He encouraged people to make movies of themselves engaging in sex, and if he heard of a person with an unusual collection of sexual materials or an unusual sex life, he tried to contact him or her. He collected everything that he could about sex.

In retrospect, only a person with the qualities of Kinsey could have broken through the barriers. The Rockefeller Foundation had almost given up funding studies of sexuality because of the inability of the Committee for Research in the Problems of Sex (CRPS) to study human sexuality. They found the researcher they needed in the former Eagle Scout and Sunday school teacher who had rejected his youthful religious indoctrination and had become an atheist who wanted to look at sex quantitatively. As both the CRPS and the Rockefeller Foundation soon discovered, Kinsey was sometimes like a bull in a China shop, but he could also be charming, providing he was not crossed. During his last few years (after the volume on males appeared), he was a man obsessed (Jones calls him paranoid) about the importance of continuing to find out more about sex.

In what can be regarded as his magnum opus, Jones seems to have become almost as obsessed as Kinsey in completing his study. He had worked on the book for about 15 years, although he was reluctant to talk about it or present papers on it. He succeeded in his attempt to write a comprehensive book: There are more than 700 pages of text and more than 100 pages of end notes. The result is that we perhaps know more about Kinsey than we really want to know. All future studies will look to Jones for data but not, I hope, for sexual analysis, the psychology of Kinsey, or a sympathetic insight into the personal foibles of the man.