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.

In summary, although most of them had petted before marriage, it was with relatively few partners; a good many of them had petted to orgasm, but not very often.

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*

SEX & COLOUR: COLOUR IN THE BEDROOM

March 24, 2009

When it comes to absolute intimacy, whether shared or alone, there is one room which expresses your personality, the dreams for your romantic life, your level of contentment as well as your fantasies. It is your bedroom. The way you decorate your bedroom, the way you make the bed, the overall tidiness or messiness of the room, how clean and fragrant it is, how much time you like to spend in it when you are not asleep, whether you enjoy leaving the door open or closed, the colours and style of the room and the accessories, and the colour and style of the clothing you wear to bed all reveal your attitude to yourself, relationships and sex. Everything in your bedroom tells a story about the intimate aspects of your life.

When you change the look of the bedroom you change more than its colour and style. More importantly, you change how you feel about the room, how you feel about going to bed for sleep or seduction, how calm or agitated you feel. You can also change your partners feeling about intimacy. Do you think that the relationship is too far gone for cosmetic changes to make a difference? Perhaps. Perhaps not. What we can assure you is by understanding the subconscious messages hidden in your bedroom you will begin to see the path of your relationship in a new light.

*49\74\8 *

COLOURS IN YOUR BEDROOM: BLACK OR GREY

If the room is predominantly black

Black as the predominant colour in a bedroom can indicate a person who is trying to create a seductive, mysterious and sophisticated retreat. You are intent on luring your prey! It always suggests control and power over others. Black can also indicate someone who wishes to hide from the outside world, or perhaps someone who is going through the black bedroom an unhappy period in their life with a great deal of inner emotional turmoil.

If this is your choice of colour for a bedroom, it may be that you associate black with sophistication, seduction and sexiness, as in the black negligee, or you may be a secretive person who is prone to depression. It is wise to keep black, in large amounts, to clothing. It is a very intimidating colour wherever and whenever it is used. Combined with a lot of red, the black bedroom would indicate an aggressive person who wants to control and dominate. Unfortunately it may also frighten off a prospective lover.

Are you blinded by black? The predominantly black bedroom is usually associated with a Dramatic style bedroom. It is really inappropriate to have an almost all black bedroom. It is the negation of all colour, so black should be used as an accent and combined with other strong colours or white to balance its energies. Love would not be a factor in this bedroom. Domination would be.

If your room is predominantly grey

Grey is a colour used by those who look at life with too much realism and caution. In a bedroom it indicates someone who is cautious yet persistent in their sexual life. A colour of emotional control, it can indicate a person who is hiding true feelings since it is so neutral and colourless. To lessen the neutrality, if you are grabbing for grey, team it, depending on the base tone in the grey, with pink, blue, yellow, green, red, peach or apricot to enliven and enhance positive energy in your bedroom.

*66\74\8*

BEDROOM BEHAVIOURS: ROMANTIC WOMEN

Many Romantic women are curvy, from their curly (sometimes permed) or wavy lustrous longish hair to their full bodies. Some will be full busted and full hipped. Some, just full hipped and thighed. Some will be petite and still have curves. They are the finer boned version of the feminine goddess. Even for them however, the lashes are long and curvy (perhaps with the help of mascara) and the lips full. It is difficult to find a Romantic woman who does not wear perfume and make-up, especially eye make-up. The eyes express so much intimacy after all. Detail becomes them, from their detailed jewellery of small to medium size to their detailed clothing.

Men also have Romantic curves. Muscles, average height and wide shoulders lead down to a definite waist,- (well that’s when they were in their twenties and thirties) and a great backside -curved and shown off in well-fitting trousers. That is the focal point for Romantics of both genders. They do love to show off their bodies in well-fitting clothes. The men look suave and choose European-style clothing.

*86\74\8*

STRATEGY TO ENHANCE YOUR RELATIONSHIPS: ACCESSORIES FOR SENSUALITY

Now you are getting into the creative mode, consider the lighting in your room. Lamps are the most sensual lighting choice. Don’t turn on overhead lights or use fluorescent lighting. If you enjoy reading in bed, have good bedside lamps, at the right height. For romance don’t always read in bed. If you want to explore the link between colour psychology and lamp choices, realise that a lamp with a pink shade gives the colour of love throughout the bedroom,- blue creates calm and contentment,- green helps with rejuvenation and restoration of energy,- mauve and lilac increase the fantasy factor,- white or cream lampshades provide soft lighting and harmonise perfectly with the other colours in your room.

Candles certainly create a very sensual mood, but can be dangerous. If you want them in your bedroom, be safe and sensual. Keep them away from curtains and other objects and don’t use any candle with a paper cuff around it. It is possible to use candles safely before you get into bed. Have them lit in the bedroom to create the romantic atmosphere you want. Allow the drip to build up. It gives the look of sensuality rather than having a neat and clean candle and candle holder or modern candelabra.

One of the loveliest accessories you can add to your sensual bedroom are fresh flowers. Choose masses of flowers or single good relationships since they are dead items. We want your relationship to be alive, prosperous and joyous.

*106\74\8*

CREATE LOVING RELATIONSHIPS

Rule 1: Commitment

You both have to be committed to a loving long-lasting relationship or there is no hope of success. Discuss it. Ensure you both want the same thing. Commitment means putting your relationship ahead of everything else in your life, at the top of your priority list. It means being faithful to the partnership, supportive of your partner and enthusiastic about the relationship. It means working through the pain that inevitably occurs in any relationship, to find the pot of gold at the end.

Is it really good as it is? If your answer is ‘yes’, congratulations. Keep doing more of what you’re doing and perhaps take some ideas from this book to keep the partnership fresh. If your answer is ‘no’, are you at the boredom stage? Then it’s time to shake up the partnership and revamp it.

The Seducer’s Notebook’ and begin romancing all over again. If your sex life is in the doldrums, reread all three chapters in Section 3 to bring new energy to your bedroom and to your sensual and intimate life.

RULE 2: communication

Listen, talk, share, communicate. Don’t run away from your problems nor bury your head in the sand. Nagging by a female partner is a warning sign of problems. Avoiding time at home and with you is a warning sign from a male partner. Find out what the problem is. Don’t assume you know what your partner is thinking. Ask.

Negotiate, talk about what irritates you, without becoming over-critical, and without becoming defensive. This is the time to be honest in every way. Communicate, clear up misunderstandings, and don’t let the sun go down without making up after a disagreement. The silent treatment serves no purpose in a committed relationship.

*126\74\8*

Random Posts

• HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS VS. ADULTS: HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVITY
• AFTER CANCER: FEELINGS. DENIAL AND REPRESSION
• SYMPTOMS OF ARTHRITIS
• YOUR CANCER YOUR LIFE – RIGHT TO HAVE QUESTIONS ANSWERED (DIFFERENT PATIENTS)
• HERBS: EYEBRIGHT
• DO STARCHY FOODS CAUSE CONSTIPATION? (INTRODUCTION)
• NITRATES AND NITRITES
• AFTER CANCER: VACCINATION. PNEUMONIA SHOT. FLU VACCINE
• BENIGN RECURRENT HEADACHES
• VARIETIES OF SEX OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN: SITUATIONAL CASES

Newer Posts »