The heterosexual offenders vs. adults are one of the least homosexual of all the comparative groups. Only 23 per cent (the third smallest percentage and less than that of the control group) had overt homosexual experience either in or out of prison, and only 21 per cent (again the third smallest percentage) had homosexual experience outside prison. Twelve per cent had more than incidental homosexual activity; this, too, is a small proportion. Psychologically they are also minimally homosexual: 94 per cent (a figure surpassed only by the incest offenders ) had never been sexually aroused by thinking of or seeing another male.
The percentage who had had overt homosexual experience, since puberty, by any given age (the accumulative incidence) is always relatively small—usually the second or third smallest percentage recorded by any age and less than that of the control group. Beginning with 12 per cent who were experienced by age fourteen, the proportion slowly increases to 20 per cent by age twenty-six. One statistical curiosity demands explanation: a small number of individuals had reached puberty by age twelve, but of these few a rather substantial proportion (23 per cent) had postpubertal homosexual experience. Thus we have the odd situation that the accumulative incidence by age twelve is greater than it is by any other age. The median offender vs. adults had his first postpubertal homosexual experience when he was fifteen and a half, an age neither unusually young nor old in terms of initial experience.
The number who were involved in homosexual activity during any five-year age-period (the age-specific incidence) is likewise always small, never exceeding 14 per cent among the single, nor 8 per cent among the married offenders up to age forty-one. These are moderate figures, neither large nor small in relation to other sex offenders. Between ages forty-one and forty-five the proportion of married men with homosexual activity unexpectedly rises to 10 per cent, which is the highest figure aside from those of the homosexual offenders, and far in excess of the prison and control groups. Considering the size of sample, this high percentage may be a vagary. Since in no age-period does the sample of married males with homosexual activity (within that age-period) exceed six, and in most cases is even fewer, it is obvious that no meaningful frequencies can be calculated. In postmarital life the age-specific incidence of homosexual activity is always small, sometimes less than in premarital life.
Despite the relative inactivity indicated above, the heterosexual offenders vs. adults are well within the upper half of the rank-order of frequency of homosexual contacts per year outside prison. Their rate, 4.6 per year, is lower than that of the prison group but higher than that of the controls (3.4). In the various age-periods prior to marriage the contacts of the average (median) offender vs. adults with homosexual experience decreased in frequency from 10 a year in the early teens to 4 a year in age-period 21-25. This again points up this group’s disinterest in homosexuality. One can calculate mean frequencies of activity among those with homosexual experience up to age twenty-five. These frequencies are moderate (about once in two weeks) up to age twenty, then at ages twenty-one to twenty-five drop to the lowest frequency (once a month) shown by any group. All in all, the offenders vs. adults had lower frequencies of homosexual experience than the control group and markedly lower than the prison group.
The median offender vs. adults with homosexual experience had contact with five males, a moderate number. In numbers of partners they usually exceed the control group but fall below the prison group. For example, 41 per cent had six or more partners, while the equivalent percentage for the control group is 25, and for the prison group 53. However, the offenders vs. adults and the prison group have about the same proportion (9-10 per cent) of quite promiscuous individuals who had over 75 homosexual partners, while the control group reported only 6 per cent.
This situation where an above-average number of partners exists despite relatively low incidence figures is no real contradiction in male homosexual lfe as it would be in male heterosexual life. One must remember that a reasonably presentable male can obtain male sexual partners almost as easily as a reasonably presentable female can. Moreover, a relative disinterest in homosexuality can sometimes result in a low frequency of activity coupled with a large number of partners. A classic example of this would be a male who is receptive to homosexuality only when intoxicated or bereft of girl friends. Let us say this hypothetical male therefore has three homosexual contacts a year, usually with strangers encountered in bars. It is quite possible that in ten years’ time he will have had only 30 homosexual contacts but will have had these with 30 different partners—an impressive number for someone relatively disinterested in homosexuality.
Directly connected with this disinterest is the above finding that 94 per cent of this offender group reported no sexual arousal from seeing or thinking of males. About 4 per cent reported strong arousal, which is a little less than one half of the proportion reporting more than 75 male partners.
The offenders vs. adults, being our most heterosexually oriented group, are correspondingly the most censorious of male homosexuality. Eighty-one per cent (the largest proportion recorded) disapproved as againt 5 per cent (the smallest proportion recorded) who approved. Obviously very few were neutral or ambivalent; the offenders vs. adults were either pro or con.
*69\161\2*
