Healthpharmablog. About Health & Medicine

The average homosexual offender vs. minors was 32.6 years old at the time of his first offense of this nature. He was apt to be unmarried, inasmuch as 71 per cent of the offenses were committed by never-married men and nearly one quarter were committed by the separated, divorced, or widowed, leaving a mere 5 per cent married at the time of offense. No group had fewer married men at this strategic point in time.

For 44 per cent it was their first sex offense, for about one quarter it was their second, for 17 per cent their third, for 9 per cent their fourth, and 4 per cent had five or more sex-offense convictions before being convicted of a homosexual offense vs. a minor.

As a group only a moderate proportion had prior histories of mental or emotional illness (5 per cent), relatively few were drunk at the time of offense, and none were under the influence of narcotics.

A number large both relatively and absolutely (87 per cent) of the offenses were clearly premeditated and very few were wholly opportunistic (3 per cent). In only three instances were there copartners involved.

The average minor, the object of the offense, was 14.1 years old. Slightly over half of the offenders regarded the boys as friends (third rank) and 13 per cent (again third rank) regarded them as acquaintances. In one third of the cases the two were strangers, a moderate proportion, and in only two cases were they related.

In about one offense in ten there was no physical contact—the relationship ended before contact occurred. In the cases where contact took place a relatively very large proportion, somewhat over half, involved fellation; about one fifth consisted of masturbation; 11 to 12 per cent involved anal coitus; and 8 per cent consisted only of nongenital contact. In comparison to the other homosexual groups these offenders vs. minors have the largest proportion of anal coitus, an incidence of fellation equal to that of the homosexual offenders vs. adults, and moderate amounts of genital and nongenital petting.

The minor objects of these homosexual offenses showed a somewhat higher degree of participation than did the younger objects of the homosexual offenders vs. children. Among the 83 cases where we have both the official and the offender’s version, 83 per cent agreed that the minor boy was either encouraging or passive and 6 per cent agreed that he resisted. In another 6 per cent the official record reports resistance while the offender claimed otherwise.

In only eight instances was force employed, and it appears to have been mild to moderate, never severe. Three cases of threat appear, but two of these were in conjunction with the force cases just mentioned. By and large, it is quite clear that force and threat are infrequent and quite atypical of homosexual offenses against minor males.

As usual in homosexual acts involving minors and children, the probability that the activity will attract legal attention is almost wholly dependent upon the minor or child. In only a small minority of cases were the circumstances such that arrest was probable for intrinsic reasons. The object of the offense reported it directly in nearly 15 per cent of the cases (the other homosexual-offender groups having fewer such complaints), while friends and relatives of the boy accounted for 43 per cent of the arrests. All in all, over half of the convictions stemmed directly from voluntary or involuntary reporting by the minor boy. A comparatively high percentage (12 per cent) of arrests came from witnesses who were neither friends nor relatives of the boy. A full quarter resulted from police investigations, most of which originally had nothing to do with the offense.

Full admissions of guilt were made in from three quarters (to the officials) to four fifths (to us) of the cases. These proportions are quite similar to those of the homosexual offenders vs. adults. From 11 to 16 per cent stoutly denied the behavior, a handful gave qualified admissions, and only 1 per cent claimed they were unable to confirm or deny their guilt because of amnesia induced by alcohol or emotion.

In final pleas, 77 per cent pleaded guilty, 18 per cent not guilty, and nearly 5 per cent made no plea. All homosexual offenders are remarkably uniform in this matter, the percentages of those pleading guilty being 78, 77, and 78 per cent (homosexual offenders vs. children, minors, and adults, respectively), and the not guilty being 18, 18, and 17 per cent.

*196\161\2*

Relatively few (76 per cent) of the incest offenders vs. adults had ever had nocturnal emissions; this is next to the smallest percentage reported by the various groups. By almost any age fewer had had nocturnal emissions than the members of other groups. For instance, only 30 per cent had had this experience by age sixteen as against 68 per cent of the control group, and 54 per cent by age eighteen as against 78 per cent of the controls. Because this group reached puberty considerably later than the others, the median age for the first nocturnal emission is quite late: eighteen years.

A disinclination toward sexual dreams is manifest in an examination of dream content. Sixteen per cent, the fourth largest percentage, of the incest offenders vs. adults reported their nocturnal emissions were not accompanied by dreams. All who had ever dreamed reported ordinary heterosexual dreams and only 6 per cent, the second smallest percentage, reported homosexual dreams. None had sadomasochistic dreams or dreams of animal contact, and only one had bizarre dreams. The lack of sadomasochistic dreams accords with the lack of any conscious sexual response to sadomasochistic stories and pictures. All in all, dreams played a quite minor role in the lives of the incest offenders vs. adults, which is somewhat surprising; in such an inhibited and restrained group one might have expected a compensatory increase in dreams and nocturnal emissions. Indeed, the unmarried males have essentially the lowest age-specific incidence figures of any group up until age twenty-five, when so many had married that our calculation ceases. The age-specific incidence among the married males was moderate to somewhat low in all age-periods where we have a substantial number of cases.

While we have little data on the frequency of premarital nocturnal emissions of the incest offenders vs. adults, no compensatory trend can be seen in the average (mean) frequency. True, the average (median) incest offender vs. adults is in second place in the rank-order of frequency at ages sixteen to twenty, but it is hard to view this as compensatory since the highest frequency of nocturnal emission in this age-period is displayed by the average control-group individual whose sexual outlet exceeds that of the incest offender vs. adults. Moreover, since the median frequency was but 3 to 4 orgasms per year more than the frequencies of other groups, talk of compensatory increase is almost ludicrous.

Paralleling these frequencies, a relatively large proportion of the total outlet of these offenders was from nocturnal emissions during their premarital years up to age twenty; thereafter the proportions are moderate. Among the married the proportions are large until age thirty-five (because of low frequencies of marital coitus), and thereafter become small with increasing age, when, as is usual, nocturnal emissions are rarer.

*154\161\2*

In the rank-order of percentages of those with homosexual experience in or out of prison, the aggressors vs. adults are in sixth place (57 per cent), just below the prison group, and in sixth place in a rank-order of those with more than incidental homosexual experience in or out of prison. They owe this moderately high position to their prison experience, as is evident when one examines the percentages of those with homosexual experience outside prison; here the aggressors vs. adults occupy an intermediate position (45 per cent) in the rank-order.

In accumulative incidence, they remain in intermediate positions from ages fourteen to twenty-six. The average (median) aggressor vs. adults had his first homosexual contact when he was nearly fifteen and one half.

In age-specific incidence, the proportion of single aggressors vs. adults who had homosexual activity outside prison is moderate (28-30 per cent) up to age twenty-five. In age-period 26-30 they drop to a low-intermediate level in the rank-order with 14 per cent, and then fall to the bottom of the rank-order with 10 per cent in age-period 31-35. The married men display low-intermediate to high-intermediate percentages up to age thirty and thereafter, like the single men, drop to the bottom of the rank-order in age-period 31—35. (with 0 per cent). In postmarital life the figures vary from low to intermediate.

The aggressors vs. adults are undistinguished in terms of frequency of homosexual contacts (3.4 per year), proportion of total outlet, and number of partners.

When one calculates the frequencies for all unmarried males with homosexual activity during the various five-year age-periods from puberty on, one finds the aggressors vs. adults displaying markedly low frequencies. They had next to the lowest average (mean) frequency before age twenty, and a moderate frequency at twenty-one to twenty-five: the average (median) aggressor vs. adults uniformly ranked next to the lowest in frequencies (about 3 to 5 times a year) from puberty on to age twenty-five, which is as far as our data can be carried for unmarried males.

This group is more tolerant of male homosexuality than most groups (aside from the homosexual offenders, they are the third most tolerant) with 47 per cent disapproving, 12 per cent approving, and with the second largest number (41 per cent) expressing neutrality.

*112\161\2*

Aside from the control group, the heterosexual offenders vs. adults showed the smallest proportion that had specifically sexual contact with animals; actually the figures for the offenders vs. adults and the control group are identical (8 per cent). In age-specific incidence these offenders also display the smallest or next to the smallest figures. Beginning with 5 per cent in age-period puberty-15, the figures decline to 4 per cent (age-period 16-20), 1 per cent (age-period 21-25), and finally to zero.

Although few had animal contacts, those few had them with an unexpectedly high frequency: for the median individual between puberty and age fifteen it amounted to once every two or three weeks, which represents the highest median frequency. The mean frequency is the same, but earns the offenders vs. adults only an intermediate status in rank-order. The proportion of total sexual outlet derived from this activity was always moderate and also less than that of the control group. The term “moderate” is, of course, used relatively: the actual figures are tiny, being under 1 per cent.

Contact with animals was confined chiefly to early postpubertal life; there were too few after age fifteen to permit meaningful calculation of frequencies.

The animal-contact history of the heterosexual offender vs. adults is puzzling in that, despite the fact that their background is, relatively, strongly rural, the incidence is low; moreover, despite the low incidence the frequencies among those with the experience are high. As far as masturbatory fantasy and dreams of animal contact are concerned, the offenders vs. adults rank intermediate to low.

*70\161\2*

The heterosexual offenders vs. children present a rather nondescript picture of premarital petting. In terms of accumulative incidence, the percentage with postpubertal petting experience by a given age, they are unexpectedly near the top of the rank-order scale by age twelve with slightly more than half of their members having petted. At later ages, however, they occupy low-middle positions; their early promise of Don Juanism was not fulfilled. At sixteen to seventeen they had somewhat fewer female companions than the men in the control group but were about average compared to other sex offenders except for the four most heterosexually active groups. The number with any petting experience and the number who petted within a given five-year age-period is not far from that of the control group, and again falls in the middle of the rank-orders of all types of sex offenders. In terms of the number of female companions (excluding prostitutes) with whom they petted, the offenders vs. children are again in no way unusual and are frequently similar to the control group, the average (median) man having petted with 21 females. In the techniques employed in petting the heterosexual offenders vs. children are once more lacking in distinctive characteristics except for a definite tendency for more of them to have performed cunnilingus on companions than to have experienced fellation by companions; this holds true for premarital, marital, extramarital, and postmarital activity.

The frequencies of reaching orgasm in petting are not unusual, the offenders vs. children being intermediate in the rank-orders. They generally rank fifth in accumulative incidence of petting to orgasm, nearly two fifths having ultimately had this experience. About one fifth to one fourth reached orgasm through petting in a given five-year period-somewhat large proportions that earn them second to fourth place in rank-order at various ages. All in all, however, they appear to be average to slightly below average in heterosexual petting activity.

*27\161\2*