PREPUBERTAL SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADULTS
To be considered in this study of prepubertal sex life is the infrequent phenomenon of prepubertal sexual relations with adults. The term “relations” includes not only physical contact but also solicitation by words, gestures, or other sexual approach. These may be psychologically quite as important as physical contact. The term “adult” is here meant to signify anyone fifteen or over who, in addition, was at least five years older than the interviewee at the time of the relationship.
Adult females only rarely encourage sexual activity with prepubertal males: such behavior is completely at odds with our cultural picture of the male as the instigator of activity and the sexually dominant partner. Furthermore, the vast majority of adult females have not entertained the idea that a prepubescent male could make a satisfactory, or even adequate, sexual partner. Our impression is that the females who do encourage small boys are generally sexually experienced females (at least in relation to the male) who are either hard pressed for heterosexual activity or who have an odd, in some ways almost maternal, desire to impart to the boy some knowledge of the pleasures of adult sexuality. Such a female seems to envision herself in the role of a kindly tutor, the experienced woman guiding the boy into the “proper” paths, the priestess presiding over the initiation of a neophyte.
Between 0 and 16 per cent of the members of different groups had had some sexual relationship with an adult female prior to puberty. Since such a relationship more often than not is instigated by the female, it is not surprising to find no particular trends in the percentages—for example, all tripartite groups are scattered widely. The control group is next to the bottom of the rank-order.
Solicitation or encouragement by females is generally quite effective: the great majority of boys who had any sexual relationship with an adult female had physical contact with her. Again no particular patterns are visible. However, in a study of what percentage had coitus, an act in which real participation by the boy is required, some interesting facts emerge. The prison group had the second largest number of boys (7 per cent) who had prepubertal coitus with adult females, and in third place are the heterosexual offenders vs. minors who, be it noted, had the highest percentage of boys with any sort of sexual relationship with adult females. In fourth place are the heterosexual aggressors vs. adults. Then follow six groups (including all the homosexual offenders and two of the three incest offenders) in the 4 per cent area. Toward the bottom of the list are the heterosexual offenders vs. adults and the control group. At the very bottom with no members involved are the heterosexual aggressors vs. minors, the peepers, and the exhibitionists. The latter are of special interest, since 12 per cent (the second largest percentage recorded) had some sexual relationship with adult females, but only 8 per cent (a rather marked decrease) had physical contact, and none had coitus. This discrepancy between opportunity and activity is uniquely large. The aggressors vs. minors and the peepers had so few members involved with adult females that the absence of coitus is not too surprising.
It is of interest to note (despite sample size and small range) that the three groups that rank high in prepubertal coitus with adult females (the prison group, the heterosexual offenders vs. minors, and the heterosexual aggressors vs. adults) also rank high or fairly high in measures of postpubertal coitus, e.g., median number of premarital partners and accumulative; incidence of premarital coitus in the early and middle teens.
In our society sexual overtures toward boys are much more often made by adult males than by adult females. From 8 to 35 per cent of the members of the various groups had been thus approached. The three groups whose members were most commonly approached are the homosexual offenders. While such overtures by adults may have reinforced the boys’ homosexual inclinations, in the majority of cases the boys had had previous homosexual experience with other boys; one cannot wholly blame the adults for the boys’ subsequent sexual orientation. Indeed, an experienced homosexual adult can through preliminary conversation and observation rather readily determine what boy among a number would be most receptive; thus one can say that in many cases the boy’s pre-existing homosexuality brought on the solicitation. It is also possible that the poor relationship which existed between the homosexual offenders and their fathers may have rendered the boys more vulnerable to friendly overtures by adult males.
Following the homosexual offenders, the prison group and the heterosexual aggressors vs. minors had the next largest proportion who were solicited by adult males. Note that both groups also rated just below the homosexual offenders in the percentages with homosexual prepubertal play with other boys—i.e., they too were relatively “ripe” for an approach. The group with the fewest members solicited was the control group.
Obviously an approach does not always result in a physical sexual relationship. Overt physical contact with an adult male was experienced by from 4 to 28 percent of our comparative groups. Again the three homosexual-offender groups lead, followed by the prison group. The heterosexual aggressors vs. minors, however, had physical contact less often despite the relatively large number of approaches made to them; in fact, only 1 out of every 3 continued to that point. This is a low ratio. The corresponding ratio for the homosexual offenders vs. adults and minors is about 8 out of 10. In other groups the ratio varies chiefly from 2 to 7 out of 10. Clearly, while more homosexual than heterosexual approaches are made to boys by adults, the homosexual approaches are more often rejected.
Only a small number of the incest offenders had prepubertal contact with adult males, and the control group fewest of all; these groups also experienced relatively few approaches.
As in the case of prepubertal sexual relationships with adult females, there is a positive correlation between prepubertal relationships with adult males and subsequent behavior after puberty. The five groups with the most experience before puberty (the three homosexual-offender groups, the prison group, and the heterosexual aggressors vs. minors) also occupy the five top positions in a rank-order of those ever experiencing homosexual contact after puberty. The reticence exhibited by the aggressors vs. minors in following up prepubertal homosexual opportunities with adults seems to vanish when they themselves become adult—especially in prison.
*267\161\2*
