Despite the fact that the homosexual offender vs. adults was not infrequently an only child or the youngest child in the family, lie got along very badly with his father and not well with his mother. Nevertheless, there are evidences that he was unusually partial to his mother.

His social life during childhood was quantitatively good: he had numerous friends of both sexes. He also engaged in a good deal of prepubertal sex play which even at this early date was preponderantly homosexual. An even more impressive omen is the fact that over a quarter of these offenders had, as children, sexual contact with adult males.

Two other childhood phenomena probably played an important role in their lives. First, their childhoods were often marred by illness, and second, they reached puberty earlier than any other group. This latter fact may be of extreme importance, for it means that these boys were faced with strong sexual urges at an age when society makes no provision for any expression of sexuality.

The homosexual offenders vs. adults seem to have had the strongest sex drive of any groups if frequency of activity is taken as a measure. This is particularly evident in adult life in the amount of masturbation, which suggests an urgency that could not brook the delays inherent in obtaining any sociosexual activity.

The adult heterosexual lives of these men were comparatively stunted. Petting began at a late date, there was little of it, and the techniques were rather restrained. Only two thirds had had premarital coitus, a percentage surpassed by other groups at far younger ages. The relative lack of heterosexual activity stemmed in large part from disinterest, which is also reflected in the small proportion who ever married.

These offenders were strongly homosexual: nine out of ten had had more than incidental homosexual contacts and three quarters had had extensive experience, which not infrequently was quite promiscuous.

The homosexual offenders vs. adults, as a group, do not appear particularly criminal or dangerous. They do not damage society, they merely do not fit into it.

*216\161\2*

Again like all homosexual offenders, relatively few of the homosexual offenders vs. children had extramarital coitus: 42 per cent of those who ever married, and the age-specific incidence is moderate to low. The age-specific incidence of extramarital coitus with prostitutes is quite low and frequently zero.

On the basis of our small sample, it appears that the average (median) offender with extramarital coitus had a moderate number of partners (five to six).

Too few cases are available to permit statements concerning the frequency of extramarital coitus among these offenders.

Being somewhat less heterosexually inclined than most, only about three quarters to four fifths of the currently separated, divorced, or widowed homosexual offenders vs. children had postmarital coitus—a rather low incidence. Their frequency was also relatively low in most age-periods. In consequence, the proportion of total outlet derived from postmarital coitus, either with companions or with prostitutes, tends to be small, ranging from 33 to 46 per cent in the former instance and from 2 to 4 per cent in the latter. The emphasis on prostitution seen in premarital life is absent in postmarital behavior.

Examination of the percentages of individuals whose first coital companions were of specified ages does not reveal anything meaningful. The homosexual offenders vs. children have intermediate percentages in the categories of girls under twelve, twelve to thirteen, and fourteen to fifteen. However, they display a low percentage (16 per cent) of persons whose initial coitus was with females of sixteen to seventeen; their low position in this particular rank-order is shared by the other homosexual offenders. In partners aged eighteen to twenty, however, the homosexual offenders vs. children unexpectedly rank second with 26 per cent—a sudden increase not seen in the other homosexual offenders. Nothing in our various statistical measurements explains this. With respect to first coital partners aged twenty-one and over, they occupy an intermediate rank.

The tabulation of the verbally expressed age preference does not indicate that the homosexual offender vs. children is in any way unusual, and the same may be said of the data regarding incestuous behavior.

*174\161\2*

In our analyses of sexual arousal from seeing or thinking of males and females, or from viewing pornographic or sadomasochistic materials, the incest offenders are outstanding in two respects. First, more of them responded sexually to thinking of or seeing females than was true of any other group. Only 4 per cent reported little or no arousal from these stimuli, while most of our comparative groups had four or five times as many unresponsive members. In this respect the incest offenders vs. children differ markedly from the other incest offenders, of whom about one quarter reported little or no response. The responsiveness of the incest offenders vs. children fits in with their preoccupation with sex, which is typical of the dependent variety of incest offender. However, only a moderate proportion of incest offenders vs. children reported strong arousal from sight or thought of females. Their second salient feature is one shared with the other incest offenders: an extremely small proportion (4 per cent) responded to the sight or thought of males.

These incest offenders had the second largest (23 per cent) proportion of alcoholics. They also have the distinction of having among their number the fewest teetotalers—only 4 per cent. The importance of alcohol to this group of sex offenders is obvious.

*132\161\2*

The heterosexual aggressors vs. minors rapidly acquired masturbatory experience after puberty. By age fourteen a full 92 per cent were experienced, and 96 per cent by age sixteen. This is the most rapid cumulation seen in any group. In age-specific incidence the single aggressors had the largest proportion (96 per cent) who masturbated from puberty to age fifteen. However, in the following period (16-20) the figure is a moderate 86 per cent. Like all aggressors, they show a tendency toward high maximal frequencies: most sex offenders never exceeded twice a week, but more of the aggressors had their maximal “records” in the 3 to 5 per week category than in any other category of frequency.

This tendency toward high maximal frequencies foreshadows the masturbatory frequencies in premarital life, at least up to age twenty, which is as far as our data permit analysis. The aggressors vs. minors display the second highest average (mean) frequency between puberty and age fifteen (3.6 per week) and the fourth highest (2.3, exceeded only by the three homosexual-offender groups) between ages sixteen and twenty. The other measure of average, the median, shows the average aggressor vs. minors ranking high-intermediate in masturbatory frequency between puberty and age fifteen, and in third rank between ages sixteen and twenty, both frequencies being 1.5 per week. In brief, the aggressors vs. minors have high frequencies of masturbation prior to marriage, second only to those of the homosexual offenders. Too few married aggressors vs. minors exist in our sample to permit calculation of their masturbatory frequencies.

In masturbatory fantasy the aggressors vs. minors are quite outstanding. More of them (96 per cent) fantasied than did the members of any other group. A high percentage of individuals who fantasy is characteristic of all aggressors. The fantasy content also provides an interesting insight into the aggressors vs. minors: every one of the 96 per cent had had heterosexual fantasies and 17 per cent (the largest percentage) had had sadomasochistic fantasies. Note only 2 per cent of the control group had sadomasochistic fantasies. The aggressors vs. adults ranked in second place. The fact that the men in these two aggressor groups were ultimately convicted of heterosexual offenses involving force or threat is in keeping with their fantasy life. The emphasis on fantasy is, of course, related to their general psychological responsiveness.

The aggressors vs. minors, like the aggressors vs. children, reported that for almost half of the years during which they masturbated they worried about it. This places both groups in fourth rank of a rank-order of “worriers.”

Comparatively few (18 per cent, the third smallest percentage) first learned of masturbation from talking or reading rather than through self-discovery. An above-average number (30 per cent) learned by being masturbated by someone else. The figure for being masturbated (which greatly exceeds that of the aggressors vs. children) may be the result of the abundance of prepubertal sex play that characterizes the aggressors vs. minors as compared to the aggressors vs. children. This sex play, with its opportunities to observe masturbation or to be masturbated, when coupled with the beginning of masturbation at an early age makes the aggressor vs. minors rank high in the categories of learning by seeing, and by being masturbated; consequently the percentage who learned by talking or reading is correspondingly reduced.

*90\161\2*

The heterosexual offenders vs. minors, like the offenders vs. children, show no salient features in their sexual behavior or dreams during sleep. About all that one can say is that they are less inclined than most offenders to have nocturnal emissions. This is more noticeable in early life: by age fourteen, for example, only 15 per cent had had that experience contrasted with the control group’s 44 and the prison group’s 28 per cent. This may be largely the result of their unusually successful search for heterosexual outlet; a group with considerable coital activity can be expected to have fewer nocturnal emissions and sexual dreams. It could equally well be the result of the unimaginative-ness associated with the lower intelligence they manifest.

The frequency of nocturnal emission is correspondingly moderate to low, as is seen in the median frequencies within various age-periods: the median individual had 4 or 5 per year from puberty on, a frequency much lower than that of the control group. The erratic behavior of the mean frequencies is due to one extremely unusual individual; if one disregards him, the mean frequencies are also moderate to low.

The age-specific incidence of nocturnal emissions among the single males is always low to moderate, hovering around 60 per cent (except for a very low 25 per cent during the years from puberty to fifteen), but from thirty-one to thirty-five this 60 per cent figure earns them fourth rank because the incidence figures of the other groups have decreased while the offenders vs. minors maintain their remarkable stability of incidence. As for the married offenders vs. minors it is of interest to note that they had a low age-specific incidence of nocturnal emissions: only between one fifth and two fifths experienced nocturnal emissions in any five-year period.

The small number of males experiencing nocturnal orgasms includes one single male and one married male with extraordinarily high frequencies; in consequence the calculations for percentage of total outlet derived in sleep are misleading. Were it not for these two persons the percentages would be in no way unusual. The separated, divorced, or widowed males display, in general, moderate percentages, usually the same as or less than those of the control group.

*48\161\2*