Pharmacy Links
- Generic Pharmacy
- Medications Without a Prescription
- Online Pharmacy – Levitra – cheap prescriptions
- prescription medications. information, side effects, interactions
Tags
Categories
- Allergies
- Anti Depressants-Sleeping Aid
- Anti-Infectives
- Anti-Psychotics
- Arthritis
- Cancer
- Epilepsy
- Gastrointestinal
- General health
- Healthy bones Osteoporosis Rheumatic
- Herbal
- HIV
- Hormonal
- Men's Health-Erectile Dysfunction
- Skin Care
- Weight Loss
- Women's Health
HERBAL TREATMENT: NERVES, STRESS AND INSOMNIA
March 30, 2009
Anxiety
For general anxiety, nervous tension or worry:
1 part Chamomile flowers
1 part Lemon Balm leaves
1 part Skullcap herb
1 part Valerian root
1 part Vervain leaves
Infusion: 1/2-1 ñèð as required, not to exceed 3 cups per day
3 parts Skullcap herb
1 part Hop flowers
1 part Valerian root
Infusion: 1/2-1 ñèð as required, not to exceed 3 cups per day
For general use from day to day, any of the nervine or sedative herbs can be used. A useful formula for minor cases is:
1 part Chamomile flowers
1 part Lemon Balm leaves
1 part Vervain leaves
Infusion: up to 3 or 4 cups per day
For anxiety associated with indigestion or flatulence:
2 parts Chamomile flowers
1 part Hop flowers
1 part Lemon Balm leaves
1 part Meadowsweet herb
For anxiety associated with heart and circulation problems:
4 parts Motherwort herb
4 parts Skullcap herb
1 part Valerian root
1 part Hawthorn berries
Infusion: 3 cups per day
For anxiety associated with female problems:
2 parts Chamomile flowers
2 parts Cramp Bark
2 parts Lemon Balm leaves
2 parts Motherwort herb
1 part Valerian root
1 part Ginger root
Combined decoction and infusion: 3 cups per day
Depression
Lemon Balm leaves
Infusion: 3 cups per day
1 part Lemon Balm leaves
1 part Skullcap herb
1 part Vervain leaves
Infusion: 3 cups per day
The above herbs, useful in the treatment of depression, are most effective when taken for an extended period of time. A typical programme, for example, might be 4-6 week courses of the treatment alternated with breaks of 2-3 weeks during which no herbs are taken.
Oats, as well as being nutritious, also have an antidepressant effect, and should be included in the diet on a regular basis.
*79/66/5*
HERBAL TREATMENT: COLDS, FLU AND FEVER; CRAMP AND SPASM
Colds, flu and fever
The classic herbal treatment for colds and flu uses sweating therapy with diaphoretic herbs:
2 parts Elder flowers
2 parts Peppermint leaves
1 part Yarrow herb
Infusion: 1 cup every 4 hours during acute phase, otherwise 3 cups per day
Catnip or Lemon Balm (or any other diaphoretic herb) may be substituted for any of the above. Take one or more cups of the hot infusion and, if possible, follow immediately with a hot bath. Then rest in bed with warm covers, taking regular doses of the infusion every 4 hours.
Countless cases have shown that this treatment, begun at the first sign of a cold, flu or fever, will minimize symptoms and hasten recovery.
To the basic formula, highly effective in itself, can be added Garlic Oil (1/2 teaspoon every 4 hours) and Composition Essence:
1 part Cayenne Pepper (powdered)
1 part Cinnamon bark (powdered)
1 part Clove buds (powdered)
Decoction: 1 tablespoon every 4 hours during acute phase, otherwise 3 tablespoons per day
One of the famous formulations of the nineteenth century herbalists, Composition Essence is used for general debility and convalescence, and can be taken at the first sign of any acute illness, cold, flu or fever.
For colds in babies and small children, use only the mildest of herbs: Lemon Balm, Catnip, Chamomile or Raspberry Leaf, infused, sweetened with a little honey, and given a teaspoon at a time, keeping the child warm and well covered.
Cramp and Spasm
An excellent remedy for relieving all types of cramp and spasm, severe and mild:
1 part Ginger root
Decoction: 1/2-1 ñèð as required, not to exceed 3 cups per day
Other formulas which can be used:
Valerian root
Infusion: 1/2 -l cup as required, not to exceed 3 cups per day
3 parts Skullcap herb
1 part Hop flowers
1 part Valerian root.
Infusion: 1/2-1 ñèð as required, not to exceed 3 cups per day
3 parts Chamomile flowers
1 part Vervain leaves
1 part Ginger root
Infusion: 1/2-1 ñuð as required
Combining a small amount of a stimulant herb such as Cayenne Pepper, Cinnamon or Ginger with antispasmodic herbs will provide warming qualities and a quicker-acting effect.
*62/66/5*
HERBS: RASPBERRY
Rubus idaeus
Action: Uterine tonic, antispasmodic, astringent, diaphoretic.
Systems Affected: Uterus and female reproductive system, digestive tract, mucous membranes. Preparation and Dosage (thrice daily): Dried leaves, dose 1-5 grams by infusion.
Known and used since prehistory for its delicious fruit, the Raspberry is a native of Eurasia. Called Batos Idaia by the Greeks and Rubus Idaea by the Romans, its name reflects its origins, rubus being from the Latin for red and idaea, meaning ‘of Mount Ida’ referring to the mountain in Asia Minor where it grew in natural profusion.
Apart from the fruit, the leaves of the plant have long been esteemed as a female tonic, being especially of benefit when taken as an infusion during the course of pregnancy to ensure an easy, trouble-free birth. As the Australian herbalist Dorothy Hall explains in her Herb Tea Book:
A cup of this tea each day during the first few months of pregnancy can provide folic acid, iron and copper salts, plus vitamin A and Ñ in good proportion . . . During the last few months of pregnancy, raspberry leaf tea tones and strengthens the pelvic muscles and ligaments to help with an easy, normal birth. Should a rash appear around your pregnant middle, you could be taking too much . . . Curb your enthusiasm and reduce the number of cups you drink each day.
Taken regularly and in small doses as a tonic during pregnancy, it often serves to remove any tendency towards morning sickness. It regulates contractions and reduces pain during labour, providing easy and speedy parturition. It helps to prevent haemorrhage, assists milk secretion and hastens post-partum recovery.
Taken in larger doses, it is of benefit in painful menstruation, vaginal discharge (either as a tea or as a douche) and prolapse of the uterus, where its effect is to tone and strengthen the muscles and ligaments which support the uterus.
It is employed in treating a variety of female complaints, for which purpose it is often combined with other herbs. Part of its effect is attributable to fragarine and other substances, which act as both uterine muscle stimulants and relaxants.
Raspberry leaf will allay nausea and is useful in chronic and acute diarrhoea. It is also a reliable treatment for colds, flu and fever.
The herb is mild and safe to use with children. The expressed juice of the fruit is nourishing in convalescence and for weak stomachs.
*45/66/5*
HERBS: EYEBRIGHT
Euphrasia spp.
(E. rostkoviana, E. brevipila)
Action: Anti-inflammatory, anti-catarrhal, astringent, alterative, tonic. .
Systems Affected: Eyes, mucous membranes of the upper respiratory tract, liver, blood. Preparation and Dosage (thrice daily): Dried flowering plant, dose 2-5 grams by infusion.
Eyebright is the best known of all herbs used for treating eye conditions. The plant, native to poor meadowland in Europe, is partially parasitic on certain grass species and cannot easily be cultivated unless grown in close association with the grass roots from which it obtains nutrients. The Swedish botanist Linnaeus listed Eyebright as Euphrasia officinalis, but his classification is a mixture of a number of species and the term is an ambiguous name with no real standing. Only Euphrasia species possessing glandular hairs on the calyx have medicinal value.
An infusion of the plant is used as an eyewash or lotion for conjunctivitis, eye weakness, opthalmia and other eye complaints. For this purpose it is often combined with other herbs such as Fennel, Witch Hazel and Golden Seal (Hydrastis canadensis). The tea can also be taken liberally and on a daily basis as an adjunct to external treatment for eve problems.
Eyebright contains various glycosides, a volatile oil and astringent principles, the combined effect of which is anti-inflammatory for mucosae: the infusion, taken as a tea (or as a nasal douche), is an effective treatment for sinusitis, head colds and nasal catarrh.
*28/66/5*
HERBS: ANGELICA
Action: Tonic, stimulant, antispasmodic, emmenagogue, carminative, aromatic, expectorant, diaphoretic.
Systems Affected: Circulation, heart, lungs, stomach, intestines, uterus.
Preparation and Dosage (thrice daily): Dried rhizome and root, dose 1-2 grams by infusion.
Angelica, native to northern Europe and western Asia, is introduced and cultivated elsewhere. Used in earlier times in northern Europe for medicinal and magical purposes, its Christianized name hints at its deep associations with early Nordic magic. The plant appears to have come into more general culinary and medicinal use during the Middle Ages. Angelica improves the circulation and warms the body. It is one of the best herbs to use for coldness in winter. An excellent general tonic, it is used for anaemia, anorexia nervosa, loss of appetite, dizziness and faintness. Because of its warming and antispasmodic properties, it relieves spasms of the stomach and intestines and dispels gas; it also helps to make difficult menstruation easier and less painful.
Angelica is of great benefit in the treatment of colds, coughs, pleurisy and all lung ailments. A highly effective liquefacient and expectorant, it is recommended in cases of nervous asthma, chronic bronchitis, smoker’s cough and respiratory catarrh. Externally the leaves have an anti-inflammatory effect and are used in compresses, especially for pleurisy and bronchitis and also for rheumatism.
Angelica has wide culinary and confectionery use, and is an important ingredient of liqueurs such as Benedictine. Other species of the plant exist in various parts of the world, Angelica sinensis being an important emmenagogue and female tonic in Chinese medicine.
Cautionary Notes: Angelica is a strong emmenagogue and should not be taken by pregnant women. It should never be used by diabetics as it tends to increase blood sugar levels. Care should be taken not to exceed normal dosages, as too strong a dosage can over-stimulate the central nervous system and, especially if taken at night, may cause insomnia.
*11/66/5*
HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS VS. ADULTS: HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVITY
March 27, 2009
In all measurements the homosexual offenders vs. adults appear as the most homosexually oriented of all groups. Ninety-eight per cent had, after puberty, sexual contact with other males. Furthermore, by any age, more of them had had homosexual experience than any other group: 69 per cent by age fourteen; 78 per cent by sixteen; 87 per cent by eighteen; 88 per cent by twenty; and 93 per cent by age twenty-six. By the time they attained their majority this group had accumulated more homosexually experienced members than any other group accumulated in a lifetime. They also had their initial postpubertal homosexual experience at the youngest age; the average (median) individual began when he was 14.1 years old. This “early start” is partly because the average homosexual offender vs. adults reached puberty earlier than the average member of any other group, but it is more obviously the result of pre-existing homosexual interest and activity that carried over from prepubertal life.
Whereas in most groups the proportion of individuals with more than incidental homosexual experience is substantially less than the proportion of those with any degree of homosexual experience, the homosexual offenders vs. adults are unique in having the proportions more nearly equal (98 vs. 93 per cent). The group contains very few men whose experience was a matter only of brief schoolboy experimentation, rare lapses during intoxication, attempts born of curiosity or a desire for novelty—all of which are common among nonhomosexual-offender groups.
In age-specific incidence the homosexual offenders vs. adults naturally lead all other groups. Among the single males following age-period puberty-15, when 69 per cent were involved, between 84 and 93 per cent of them had sexual activity with other males in every age-period up to age forty-five. To dramatize these figures one can point out that these proportions, in any one five-year period, exceed the proportions that individuals of groups other than homosexual offenders accumulated throughout their fives. Even among those married between 41 and 60 per cent had homosexual activity in all age-periods up to forty. These figures are always far in excess of those of the second ranking group (usually a homosexual group). Similarly, the proportions for the separated, divorced, or widowed are always the largest, generally ranging from three fifths to four fifths.
The distinctiveness of the homosexual offenders vs. adults is again emphasized by the frequency of homosexual activity. After puberty they averaged 85 experiences a year outside institutions—a frequency almost double that of the homosexual offenders vs. minors, and 25 times that of the control group. In frequency of homosexual activity to orgasm during various age-periods, the unmarried homosexual offender vs. adults is second to none. His average (mean) frequencies range from 1.27 per week between puberty and age fifteen to 2.29 between twenty-one and twenty-five. The median individual displays frequencies of from 0.56 to 1.15 over the same span of time.
The married homosexual offenders vs. adults who continued homosexual activity had frequencies far beyond those of any other group. The average (median) individual had sexual contact with other males between twice a month and 7 times a month. The mean frequencies are more stable: 1.15 to 1.59 during age-periods 16-20 and 36-40 inclusive. While the number of cases in any of these age-periods is very small (ranging from six to 12) the differences are sufficiently large to indicate that marriage is no “cure” for homosexuality.
The proportion of total outlet derived from homosexual behavior is much greater among the homosexual offenders vs. adults than among any other groups. The unmarried drew from 16 to 59 per cent of their outlet from this source in various age-periods, and the married 8 to 19 per cent. These latter two figures seem small until one realizes no other group, not even the other homosexual offenders, ever attained even the 8 per cent level, and none of the heterosexual offenders exceeded a 1 per cent figure.
Our attempt to calculate the average (median) number of male sexual partners was frustrated by the extraordinary promiscuity of the homosexual offenders vs. adults. Many of them judged their partners as numbering in the hundreds and some in the thousands, and we could obtain only rough estimates rather than precise figures from them. All that we can say is that 63 per cent had over 75 male partners. To the reader unacquainted with homosexual life such large numbers may be incredible, and a word of explanation is necessary. First, one must realize that the homosexual is often as interested in sexual activity for its own sake as he is interested in achieving his own orgasm—in fact, he is sometimes more interested in the former. This is particularly true of the homosexual who is desirous of fellating other males. Consequently, if he has the opportunity to have sexual contact with a number of males in a short period of time, he will do so, either delaying his own orgasm until he has had contact with every available male or continuing his sexual activity after having his own orgasm. Thus in one evening under ideal circumstances, as in a Turkish bath catering to those interested in homosexuality, he may tally more sexual partners than many purely heterosexual males may accumulate in a lifetime. This is not to say that the homosexual is radically different from the heterosexual male in his desires, attitudes, and general sexual philosophy—the heterosexual would count as many partners if females were as eager and accessible as males. The heterosexual’s fantasy of an evening in a harem is precisely analogous to the homosexual’s actual evening in the steam room.
A study of the age of the youngest partner in homosexual activity since the subject (the homosexual offender vs. adults) was age eighteen reveals that these men are not interested in prepubescents. Nine per cent reported contact with a male under twelve years of age, while 33 per cent had had contact with males twelve to fifteen; 29 per cent with males sixteen to seventeen (the largest percentage); 23 per cent with males eighteen to twenty-four; and only 5 per cent with males twenty-five and older. This is not necessarily indicative of age preference; the distribution seems more probably due to the fact that the great majority of individuals were homosexually active at and after age eighteen. An active eighteen-year-old would probably have partners ranging, say, from four years his junior to four years his senior, thus accounting for the large percentages whose youngest partner (since they themselves were eighteen) was in the 12-15 and 16-17 age-categories. The tiny percentage whose youngest partner was twenty-five or over is the simple consequence of the fact that virtually all the homosexual offenders vs. adults had homosexual experience before that age.
As to the preferred age, we not unexpectedly find that of the .three homosexual-offender groups the offenders vs. adults incline most strongly to older partners of from twenty-five to thirty-four, an age-range that includes the average (median) age of the homosexual offenders vs. adults themselves. A substantial number (40 per cent) preferred males eighteen to twenty-four. Fewer men than in either of the other two homosexual groups expressed interest in anyone below eighteen: 15 per cent said sixteen to seventeen, 8 per cent said twelve to fifteen, and 1 per cent said they would prefer boys under twelve. This pattern essentially duplicates the age preferences expressed for females; the disparity in age preference according to gender that was so pronounced among the homosexual offenders vs. minors does not exist here.
In their attitude toward male homosexuality in general, the homosexual offenders vs. adults showed the greatest approval of any group. In many cases (40 per cent) their approval seemed so self-evident that we unfortunately did not question them on the matter. Even so, their position is clear: of all groups, fewest of the homosexual offenders vs. adults expressed disapproval or neutrality; the largest number expressed definite approval. We are sure that if we had asked the opinion of that 40 per cent whom we did not question on this point, the proportion who approved would have been even greater.
*209\161\2*
HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN
Homosexual offenders vs. children are adult males who made homosexual overtures to, or had sexual contact with, boys under twelve. Since extremely few of the boys were relatives of the offender, it has not been considered worthwhile to establish a category of homosexual incest; this same situation obtains among all the homosexual-offender groups. Force or threat is also minimal in homosexual offenses and accordingly has not been made the basis for separate categories; we shall simply tabulate the instances in which force or threat are known.
Like the incest offender vs. children, the homosexual offender vs. children has broken not one but two taboos, in this case the taboo against homosexuality as well as that against sexual contact with children. He is also the logical counterpart of the heterosexual offender vs. children; just as some heterosexual males may select or accept an unsuitably young female, so may the homosexually oriented male turn to an unsuitably young male.
While we shall later discuss the age preferences of the homosexual offender vs. children, it is worth mentioning now that few seem particularly interested in boys under twelve; our impression is that they seek out adolescent or young adult males, but if these are unavailable at the moment, they will turn toward preadolescents. If the homosexual offender vs. children is convicted of another kind of sex offense, it is most commonly a homosexual offense involving a boy aged twelve to fifteen. The homosexual offenders vs. children also show a relative predisposition toward heterosexual offenses with girls under sixteen. In brief, most of them are interested sexually in young people, preferably but not necessarily male, and their minimum age limit is quite elastic and can be stretched to suit the immediate circumstances.
There are numerous reasons why these offenders are attracted to young males, and some of these reasons may be touched upon here before a more detailed analysis. Some homosexually oriented males do not want an adult partner who would not only have his own ideas but could insist successfully upon following them. A selfish or insecure person does not find a satisfactory partner in someone of equal or greater dominance. Moreover, with an older partner there is less likelihood of being able to cast oneself in the ego-satisfying role of a teacher; in fact, an adult (i.e., experienced) partner may be in a position to make unflattering comparisons or to make demands upon one. Precisely this same sort of thing lies at the core of the desire of some heterosexual males for inexperienced or virginal females. There are also homosexually oriented males who prefer feminine physical attributes in their homosexual partners, a not uncommon preference in men who are not exclusively homosexual. A prepubescent boy is feminine in that he lacks adult male characteristics such as body hair, masculine voice, and prominent musculature. The jokes and quips in our masculine folklore about the sexual desirability of fat little boys are based in part upon reality insofar as some males are concerned.
In still other instances one finds men who are interested primarily in reaching orgasm with any warm-blooded animal; they may prefer some specific sort of partner but are willing if necessary to utilize whatever is convenient, whether male, female, young, old, human or nonhuman. Males of such a broad range of acceptability are uncommon, but it is not rare to find males who, in special situations, can be almost equally polymorphous in their activity.
Disregard for age, sex, and species need not be regarded as biologically pathological; it is precisely what we see in various animals, particularly in certain monkeys. The polymorphous sex offender can be said to be operating at a primate level with the philosophy that necessity is the mother of improvisation. To return to the immediate subject, the homosexual offenders vs. children include more such polymorphic individuals than most other categories of sex offenders.
*167\161\2*
INCEST OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN: HETEROSEXUAL PETTING
All our sample of incest offenders vs. children had petted before marriage; the median individual began at 14.8 years of age, which is relatively young. In consequence of this early start they rank third in the proportion who had petted by age fourteen (65 per cent), but have moderate figures thereafter. In age-specific incidence they rank fifth in the percentage (74 per cent) who petted between puberty and age fifteen; the other incest offenders, who began later, rank near the bottom. At older ages, however, their age-specific incidence is not distinctive.
Despite their precocious beginning, the incest offenders vs. children resemble the other incest offenders in having had relatively few petting partners. Among those with two to five partners the incest offenders rank first, third, and fifth—the last being the incest offenders vs. children with 18 per cent. In numerically higher categories of numbers of partners they rank low. The average offender had 18 partners, a rather small number.
In contrast to the age-specific incidence of petting in general, the incidence of petting that resulted in orgasm is high in an older as well as in a younger age-period. These offenders rank third in age-period 16-20, when 34 percent of their members petted to orgasm, and rank first in age-period 26-30 with 39 per cent. In both instances they are just below or just above the control group. They also rank rather high in accumulative incidence of petting to orgasm, once again being just below the control group from age sixteen on; ultimately over half had this experience.
Too few incest offenders vs. children had reached orgasm in premarital petting to allow us to calculate meaningful average frequencies for any age-period except the years from sixteen to twenty. Within that period those who did achieve orgasm in petting did so with relatively low frequencies—3 (median frequency) to 5 times (mean frequency) per year. Even lower frequencies typify the incest offenders vs. minors; hence there is reason to believe that a low frequency of petting to orgasm is a trait of incest offenders in general.
Of all the groups under consideration, more of the incest offenders vs. children had experience in fellation and cunnilingus. Even the aggressors, typified by their emphasis on mouth-genital contact, do not match them in this respect. Sixty-six per cent of the incest offenders vs. children had placed their mouths on female genitalia, and the same percentage had done so with their wives. These are huge figures in comparison to other groups: the next highest percentage for cunnilingus is 48 per cent, and for marital cunnilingus 46 per cent. The incest offenders vs. children also rank first (6 per cent) in cunnilingus with prostitutes and third with extramarital and postmarital partners (25 per cent). It is noteworthy that the incest offenders vs. adults rank second and fourth in these classifications.
As mentioned above, the incest offenders vs. children rank first (73 per cent) in having experienced fellation by a female. Sixty-six per cent—a far greater per cent than that of any other group—had been fellated by their wives. The aggressors vs. minors are in second rank with 50 per cent. They rank first (32 per cent) in the number who had been fellated by extramarital or postmarital sexual partners. In regard to fellation by prostitutes they rank sixth with 50 per cent.
In summary, the incest offenders vs. children are seen as a group extraordinarily interested in mouth-genital contact. They seem to have in large measure held this interest in check until after marriage (they rank fourth in premarital cunnilingus and seventh in premarital fellation), but then utilized the technique to an extraordinary degree with their wives and with other women. In most groups a larger proportion was fellated by prostitutes than by their wives, but the reverse is true of the incest offenders vs. children: this might be regarded not as a virtue, but as an ominous tendency to keep their taboo sexual activity within the family. Among the other incest offenders, about the same number had been fellated by their wives as by prostitutes; among other groups the prostitutes clearly dominate.
Lastly, the oral interest of the incest offender vs. children is mirrored in the proportion (43 per cent) who bit or nibbled in conjunction with sexual activity. This is the third largest proportion recorded.
*125\161\2*
HETEROSEXUAL AGGRESSORS VS. CHILDREN: CRIMINALITY
The aggressors vs. children might be described as the most criminal of all the sex offenders. Forty-eight per cent had been convicted of some nonjuvenile offense by age twenty, 76 per cent by age twenty-six (a figure close to that of the prison group), and 92 per cent by age forty—moderate to somewhat large percentages. The average (median) aggressor was twenty-three when he was first convicted of any crime, and he was first convicted of aggression against a child at thirty-six—a lengthy gap.
The extensive criminality of the aggressors vs. children is best seen in the total number of convictions per capita: 5.5, by far the largest figure of any group. The prison group can boast of only 3.5. These aggressors also have the largest number of felonies: 2.6, and the second largest number of sex offenses: 2.2.
While most of their sex offenses were aggressions vs. female children, they were not infrequently convicted of sexual activity with children where force or duress had not (or not yet) been applied.
Despite their 2.2 sex offenses per man, they had more nonsexual convictions (59 per cent) than sex-offense convictions (41 per cent)— the only group of sex offenders in which other crime clearly outweighed sex offenses. Similarly, they had the smallest proportion of men convicted only for sex offenses: 12 per cent.
Their nonsexual crimes were largely crimes against property (about one third of all their convictions) and a mixture of vagrancy and disorderly conduct (another third). These aggressors are the only group that averaged one or more crimes against property plus one or more vagrancy-disorderly conduct offenses per man. No other group could boast as much as one specific nonsexual crime per man. In addition, the aggressors vs. children had a fairly large number of convictions for crimes against the person: 15 per cent.
They are obviously quite recidivistic in their criminal behavior; 28 per cent had seven or more convictions and 48 per cent had from four to six. This leaves a mere 8 per cent each in categories of one, two, and three convictions.
*83\161\2*
VARIETIES OF SEX OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN: SITUATIONAL CASES
This category is unsatisfactory in that it leaves unanswered the reasons for the offense behavior. In certain cases the individual was under stress, but why the stress led to (or was followed by) sexual activity with children is unknown. Perhaps one offender vs. children in a dozen could be classed as situational. Such offenders have no conscious sexual interest in children, who may be any age; deprivation seems involved in only about half of the cases, and the same is true of feelings of inferiority and shyness. Generally the offense behavior is of brief duration, often occurring only once, although an occasional male will get caught in a gratifying pattern of behavior and continue it for several months.
While the situational variety of offenders vs. children is so diverse in content that no one history can serve as typical, the following case of a twenty-seven-year-old male could be matched by many. After a rather restrained premarital life this shy and dependent young man married a girl who was more aggressive than he. She held a job, spent money freely, and went out frequently without her husband, leaving him at home to care for their child. He was periodically unemployed and felt perpetually jealous and inferior; the marriage continued to deteriorate. In a moment of depression he tried suicide. Not long thereafter while he was alone at home watching television some neighborhood children came in. One, a girl of ten, sat next to him and, according to him, hugged him. He became sexually aroused (coitus with his wife had become scant) and ultimately he took her into the bedroom and attempted coitus.
Leaving the “sane” varieties of offenders vs. children, there remain those whose mental functioning was either temporarily or permanently impaired.
*40\161\2*
