An analysis of letters from British correspondents to Alfred Kinsey, pioneering sexologist of the 1940s and 1950s, reveals that they had a ‘very idiosyncratic’ way of tackling the subject of sex.
Among the topics these “ armchair sexologists ” were eager to discuss were penis girth, homosexuality in the Boy Scouts, the religious implications of preserving bodily fluids, and the relationship between stuttering and oppression.
A typical letter Kinsey received was from a Bournemouth resident who wrote, “I am an amateur sexologist.”
And in 1951, a man claiming to be a police officer from Shepherd’s Bush, West London, declared that all Boy Scouts were ‘homosexual’ – and that the letter writer ‘never made the mistake of not recognizing an HS first. introduced ‘.
The letters show that post-war Britons were also fascinated by zodiac signs, sexual jealousy and the appearance of married virgins, according to a study of correspondence by historian Ruby Ray Daily, of Northwestern University, Illinois.
A West Midland letter writer told Kinsey in 1953 that sexuality was defined by astrological signs.
An analysis of letters from British correspondents to Alfred Kinsey (above), pioneering sexologist of the 1940s and 1950s, reveals that they had a ‘very idiosyncratic’ way of raising the subject of sex.
In the post-war era, British ‘armchair sexologists’ were eager to discuss penis girth, homosexuality in the Boy Scouts, the religious implications of preserving bodily fluids, and the relationship between stuttering and oppression. (Above center, Lieutenant General Baden-Powell, founder of the Boy Scout Movement among his young troops)
‘You will now understand’, he wrote, ‘why I am so deeply interested in your unique set of data … there are astrological configurations … that correspond to frigidity and promiscuity, but the verification of such tendencies is (as you are sure will appreciate) almost impossible to obtain ‘.
Ms. Daily said that, compared to Americans and Continental Europeans, British correspondents for Kinsey “may seem to suggest that the long-standing cliché of Britain as a particularly sexually oppressed nation is in fact correct.”
She wrote in the magazine Twentieth Century British History: “ The diversity of topics that British correspondents deliberately considered included the menstrual cycle, homosexuality in the Boy Scouts, the incidence of married virgins, the relationship between stuttering and oppression, penis circumference, sexual jealousy. and the religious implications of preserving bodily fluids.
“With this context, it is revealed that even the most eccentric and monomaniacal letters are typical in shape, if not content.”
As an example, Mrs. Daily also points to a letter written by an academic at Trinity College, Cambridge – who in 1950 asked Kinsey a series of questions about whether ‘the educated Englishman’ was ‘divorced’ at all-male universities and public schools. more likely than American men to be ‘initiated by older and more experienced women’.
Circumcision was a very popular topic among British letter writers, Ms Daily said.
Kinsey’s fascination with the human sex life would lead to the publication of two books: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). They were known as the ‘Kinsey Reports’ and conducted 18,500 face-to-face interviews. Although his analysis was carefully conducted, the studies were heavily criticized for sample irregularities and unreliability of personal communication
In February 1954, a Cardiff man wrote a report complaining about the lack of information about circumcision in Kinsey’s book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.
The Welshman blamed his own intact foreskin for the brief nature of his sexual encounters, ‘briefly, not only from my own point of view, but from the point of view of meeting my partners’.
He also asked Kinsey to send him information about the rate of premature ejaculation in uncircumcised and circumcised men.
Questions such as this one from the British contrasted sharply with the American view of sex.
Ms. Daily continued, “ Whether they responded with hostility, skepticism, or confusion to Kinsey’s work, the Kinsey correspondence indicates that most Americans were surprisingly comfortable with a functional understanding of sex as a spectrum of biology or a catalog of behaviors. . ‘
.