Dizziness

For dizziness and faintness:

2 parts Angelica root

4 parts Motherwort herb

4 parts Skullcap herb

1 part Cayenne Pepper

Infusion: 1/2-1 ñèð as required, not to exceed 3 cups per day

1 part Cayenne Pepper (powdered)

1 part Cinnamon bark (powdered)

1 part Clove buds (powdered)

Infusion: 1 tablespoon as required

1 part Rosemary leaves

1 part Sage leaves

1 part Peppermint leaves

Infusion: 1/2 ñèð every 2 hours, not to exceed 3 cups per day

Hypochondria

Valerian root

Infusion: 3 cups per day

3 parts Lemon Balm leaves

1 part Valerian root

2 parts Vervain leaves

Infusion: 3 cups per day

Insomnia

1 part Hop flowers

1 part Valerian root

Infusion: 1/2 cup before retiring (repeat in 2-4 hours if required)

4 parts Skullcap herb

2 parts Hop flowers

2 parts Valerian root

1 part Lemon Balm leaves

Infusion: 1 cup before retiring (repeat in 2-4 hours if required)

1 part Skullcap herb

1 part Valerian root

1 part Chamomile flowers

1 part Vervain leaves

1 part Catnip herb

Infusion: 1 cup before retiring (repeat in 2-4 hours if required)

 

For sleeplessness in babies and small children, use only the mildest herbs, adjusting dosage to the weight of the child: Chamomile, Catnip, Lemon Balm, and Vervain. Prepare an infusion of the herb. For small babies, allow it to cool a little and put a dessertspoonful in a feeding bottle. For older babies and small children, the dose may range from 1 to 2 dessertspoons up to 1/2 cup. Sweeten with a little honey if necessary.

 

*80/66/5*

There are several different types of headaches and many different causes which produce them, and as there is-a variability of response among individuals to different remedies, some people will find certain of the following more effective than others.

For internal use:

1 part         Skullcap herb

1 part         Valerian root

1 part         Rosemary leaves

1 part         Chamomile flowers

1 part         Peppermint leaves

Infusion: 1/2 cup every hour, not to exceed 3 cups per day

 

2 parts         Lemon Balm leaves

1 part         Skullcap herb

1 part         Valerian root

1 part         Rosemary leaves

Infusion: 1/2 cup every hour, not to exceed 3 cups per day

 

3 parts     Yarrow herb

3 parts     Elder flowers

3 parts     Meadowsweet herb

2 parts     Cinnamon bark (cut or powdered)

1 part     Cayenne Pepper

Infusion: 1/2 ñuð every hour, not to exceed 3 cups per day

http://www.herbs-med.com/ 2 parts     Skullcap herb

1 part     Valerian root

1 part     Hop flowers

1 part 1/2 ñuð every hour, not to exceed 3 cups per day

1 part     Yarrow herb

1 part     Skullcap herb

1 part     Vervain leaves

Infusion: 1/2 ñuð every hour, not to exceed 3 cups per day

 

1 part Sage leaves

1 part Rosemary leaves

1 part Peppermint leaves

Infusion: 1/2 ñuð every hour, not to exceed 3 cups per day

For external use:

Apply an essential oil with stimulant properties to the forehead or temples. Rub in a few drops of any oil such as Rosemary, Lavender, Peppermint, Wintergreen, Thyme or Ginger, or apply a commercial preparation such as Tiger Balm or Olbas Oil.

One of the most effective treatments for headache and migraine is often overlooked in this drug-conscious age: a hot bath. Take a bath at the hottest temperature you can comfortably stand, relaxing in it for 20-30 minutes with the lower body and limbs immersed. This treatment, which induces relaxation, sweating and the dilation of blood vessels in the lower body, has relieved severe headaches and even migraines unaffected by other treatments.

Many people find several of the above remedies effective for treating different types of headache, including migraine.

As a further note on migraine treatment, modern research has found that the use of Feverfew (Chrysanthemum parthenium) may provide significant relief in many cases.

Feverfew leaves

Typical dose: 1, 2 or 3 medium-sized leaves (fresh or dried) eaten daily as a preventive measure – same amount is also effective for some people if taken at the first sign of onset to prevent an attack. (N.B. A small percentage of people have an adverse reaction to Feverfew, typically with some irritation and/or slight ulceration of the mouth, in which case desist from taking the herb.)

*63/66/5*

Trifolium pratense

Action: Alterative, vulnerary.

Systems Affected: Blood, skin.

Preparation and Dosage (thrice daily): Dried flowers, dose 0.5-4.0 grams by infusion.

Red Clover is of great importance as a forage crop in temperate zone agriculture. The flowers are a deep red or rose-purple, but in some cases appear paler and even white in colour. (White Clover, however, is another species, Trifolium repens.)

The herb was known to the ancients but was not used medicinally except occasionally as a vulnerary. Introduced to America, it soon became naturalized and the American Indians found it useful externally for sores and internally for skin disease. It then became a part of American and European herbalism.

The strong metallic flavour of Red Clover results from its high concentration of iron, copper and trace elements such as molybdenum. It also contains various glycosides, flavonoids and a plant oestrogen, coumestrol.

Red Clover functions as a blood tonic and ‘blood cleanser’ or alterative: according to the Australian herbalist Dorothy Hall ‘it can improve the blood’s hemoglobin levels and the quality of blood platelets’. It is useful in treating anaemia and is specific for chronic skin diseases such as eczema and psoriasis, for which purpose it is usually combined with Burdock, Yellow Dock and other herbs.

The flowers are used externally for their vulnerary or healing action, applied as a poultice, compress or ointment to ulcers, burns, sores and skin complaints.

Cautionary Notes: Because of its high concentration of minerals and other constituents, Red Clover should not be taken in very large doses for indefinite periods of time. It is best used with other herbs as part of a formula for treatment of a particular problem.

*46/66/5*

Foeniculum vulgare

Action: Aromatic, carminative, stomachic, expectorant, anti-catarrhal, alterative, galactagogue.

Systems Affected: Stomach, intestines, pancreas, lungs, eyes, female reproductive system. Preparation and Dosage (thrice daily): Dried seed, dose 1-4 grams by infusion.

Fennel has been used for culinary purposes for at least 2000 years. Special varieties have been developed, giving bulbous stalk bases (Florence Fennel), large stalks (Carosella) and decorative foliage (Bronze Fennel). The seed flavour also varies considerably from the Bitter or Wild Fennel and the less bitter German or Saxon Fennel to the Sweet or Roman Fennel.

The plant is a hardy biennial or perennial growing up to 2 meters in height. Native to the Mediterranean region, it has been introduced and naturalized elsewhere, and is often found growing wild on wasteland in temperate zones.

Fennel is a valuable herb combining several medicinal properties. The infusion is used to relieve stomach pains, flatulence, intestinal colic and cramps; to normalize appetite and sluggish digestion; and to treat inflammation of the internal mucosae (bronchitis, gastritis, enteritis, cystitis, etc.).

Fennel helps to break up and expel mucus, and is often included as an ingredient in cough mixtures.

Its reputation as a ‘slimming herb’ results from its action in stimulating and normalizing the pancreas which, together with the liver and gall-bladder, plays a major role in metabolism, especially of fats and sugars. Thus Fennel may help in losing weight gained because of difficulty in absorbing fats and sugars, but is unlikely to be of benefit with weight problems due to fluid retention, endocrine imbalance or other causes.

The infusion is also used as a lotion or wash to relieve fatigued and inflamed eyes. Fennel is particularly effective for yellowing of the whites of the eyes, a condition which often occurs when there is difficulty in absorbing fats: the infusion can be applied locally for symptomatic treatment, but is most beneficial when taken internally for this problem because of its effect on the digestive organs.

Fennel contains oestrogen-like compounds and has been used throughout history to stimulate milk flow in nursing mothers. It is also used to prevent colic in babies, and the effect of the herb in this respect tends to flow on to her baby when Fennel is taken by a nursing mother.

A rubbing oil prepared by soaking the crushed seed in olive oil (or any vegetable oil) for a week or so, is used for relief from lumbago and rheumatic pain.

Extract of Fennel is sometimes included as a flavouring and anti-griping agent in medicinal preparations, and all parts of the plant have culinary uses: the roots and stalks as a vegetable, the leaves as a garnish for fish and as an addition to salads, soups and sauces. The seeds are used in the manufacture of liqueurs and as a condiment.

Cautionary Notes: Very large doses may disturb the nervous system.

*29/66/5*

Action: Carminative, aromatic, stomachic, pectoral, liquefacient, expectorant, sedative, antispasmodic, galactagogue.

Systems Affected: Lungs, sinuses, stomach, pancreas, intestines, and female reproductive system.

Preparation and Dosage (thrice daily): Dried seed, dose 2-5 grams by infusion.

Anise, one of the most ancient of spices, was cultivated by the Egyptians and later by the Greeks and Arabs. In the Middle Ages it was used as a spice and carminative medicine, but also entered into the composition of several classic mixtures as an aphrodisiac and galactagogue. Modern research has confirmed this latter function, establishing the presence of oestrogen-like compounds in both Anise and Fennel, another traditional galactagogue.

Anise is important commercially as a flavoring for food and liqueurs. The fresh leaf is sometimes used in salads. The seed is added to vegetable curries, or chewed to sweeten the breath. The plant occasionally enters into perfumery, in one well-known instance as a constituent of eau de Cologne.

Anise is particularly useful for breaking up mucus. It is thus of value in bronchial catarrh, especially for hard dry coughs where expectoration is difficult. It is also excellent for naso-pharyngeal catarrh, and will relieve the miseries of congested sinuses, blocked nose and difficult breathing attendant upon a head cold. It is sometimes employed in bronchitis and in spasmodic asthma, for which it is immediately palliative when used in hot water.

Anise aids digestion and stimulates the appetite by promotion of gastric secretions. It is especially effective for colic and flatulence. Added to laxative formulas, it will reduce griping (cramping of the bowels).

*12/66/5*

Slightly more than three quarters of the homosexual offenders vs. adults had had contact with more than 20 males since puberty. This proportion is 22 times that of the control group, also nearly six times that of the prison group, double that of the homosexual offenders vs. children, and half again as much as that of the homosexual offenders vs. minors. While other groups may be said to contain a core of males extensively experienced in homosexuality, the homosexual offender vs. adults group consists almost entirely of such males. This is to be expected: few men in the prison and control groups were interested in homosexual activity, and while many of the homosexual offenders vs. children and minors were interested, their age preferences limited their promiscuity. The male desirous of sexual activity with adult males, and who knows which situations are advantageous and which are unprofitable or dangerous, is in a unique position to fulfill his desires. Omitting prostitution, the most promiscuous heterosexual male would find it difficult to find seven female coital partners in one week even in a large city, whereas a knowledgeable homosexual could find as many males in two days or, with a bit of luck, in one.

The following discussion and comparison under this heading of “extensive homosexuality” will be confined to only those individuals who had over 20 male sexual partners.

Their promiscuity is reflected also in the high percentage of their partners who were “pickups”: nearly half said that over 80 per cent were “pickups,” and a full two thirds reported that over 60 per cent were. Unlike females, many males are interested simply in a rapid gratification of their sexual desire with as few preliminaries as possible and no emotional involvement; in brief, they are looking for a “pickup” or “one-night stand.” If such men are exclusively heterosexual, they have considerable difficulty in finding females willing to accept them on these terms without payment. However, if they are homosexually inclined, they can easily find other males with the same desire for a rapid and brief sexual encounter. Indeed, a minority of males, known colloquially as “oncers,” are not interested in continuing a sexual relationship beyond the first act—they are interested in new conquests only. Their reaction is analogous to that of the average person who has the opportunity to see again a motion picture he has already seen once: the initial experience was pleasurable, but why go through it again?

Since many of the partners of the homosexual offenders vs. adults are “pickups” and since the great majority are adults, it is not surprising to find more mutuality in the question of who initiated the sexual relationship than in the case of the homosexual offenders vs. children and minors. Forty-three per cent of the homosexual offenders vs. adults habitually made the first moves, 32 per cent usually let the other male make the overtures, and one quarter were equally balanced between these two alternatives. The pattern is in contrast to that of the homosexual offenders vs. children and minors who usually took the initiative, and also in contrast to that of the prison group who, despite their extensive homosexual experience, were strongly inclined to let the other males make the initial moves.

There is nothing unusual about the commercial, homosexual activity of the homosexual offenders vs. adults, of whom 70 per cent had paid or had been paid. Like the other homosexual offenders, rather few had been prostitutes (16 per cent). One quarter had paid, but had never been paid; the reverse was true of slightly more; and nearly one fifth had both taken and given payment. The division of those who paid but had never received pay and those who received pay but had never paid is a singularly efficient method of estimating the degree of homosexual interest. In a rank-order of those who only paid, the homosexual offenders lead and the prison group is last; in a rank-order of those who were only paid, the prison group leads the homosexual offenders.

Deep emotional involvements reported as love by the interviewees typify the homosexual offenders vs. adults with extensive homosexual histories. Eighty-one per cent of them said they had loved another male (a larger proportion than in any other group), and 63 per cent had loved more than one male—again the largest proportion. One can say that multiple homosexual love affairs are a characteristic of the group under discussion.

Of the groups involved in this comparison of individuals with extensive homosexual experience, the homosexual offenders vs. adults had the largest number (60 per cent) of persons who betrayed their homosexuality through behavior or dress. Half of those persons who reported or revealed homosexual mannerisms of any sort had mannerisms that were quite obvious. A detailed study of mannerisms has no place in this volume, but a. brief discussion is worth including. At one end of the range are the blatant mannerisms that for the most part are imitations of what our society regards as female behavior and dress. Because of historical factors and a primitive basic concept that all sociosexual activity must have one partner in a “masculine” and the other in a “feminine” role, a substantial number of males who are predominantly homosexual feel impelled to adopt what they consider female characteristics—for example, a high voice, fluttering hand gestures, long hair, plucked eyebrows, a hip-rolling walk, etc. The result in many cases is closer to caricature than imitation. It is ironic that in a sexual situation from which females are excluded (and even involving males who may be completely devoid of heterosexual interest) these allegedly feminine traits are employed despite their being logically incongruous. In some cases wherein a male construes his homosexual interest as evidence of a feminine component within himself, these obvious mannerisms express his feeling that he is acting according to his “true nature.” In other cases die behavior seems purely a matter of conforming to a stereotype, and the individual assumes or drops the mannerisms to suit die immediate situation. The efficacy of obvious mannerisms in obtaining sexual partners is dubious: many males, including predominantly homosexual males, are repelled rather than attracted. One of the illogicalities of homosexual life is that many of these men would like sexual relations with what they call “normal” or “straight” (i.e., heterosexual) partners. A homosexual male with this desire will express revulsion, in derogatory terms, at the idea of sexual contact with a known homosexual. On the other hand, obviousness has certain advantages: it clearly identifies the person as receptive to homosexual advances, and it does attract certain predominantly heterosexual males who regard him as being partly female. Indeed, some predominantly heterosexual males do not consider such a sexual liaison really homosexual.

At the other end of the range are subtle mannerisms that can be detected only by those who know a great deal about homosexuality. These mannerisms are for the most part slight exaggerations of, or departures from, socially acceptable behavior or dress. Any single item has little significance, but if a number exist, they form a symptom-syndrome that is quite diagnostic. Such subtle items are frequently associated with upper socioeconomic level tastes and behavior: over-meticulous dress, too well-groomed fingernails, a gentle modulated voice, an interest in aesthetics, etc. Such things have, in our culture, a vague feminine significance: women pay attention to clothes, men are less concerned; women tend their nails, men are careless about them; women are supposed to have quiet modulated voices, men are loud and assertive. In brief, we have the old stereotype of males being rough and coarse while women are gentle and dainty. Some less obvious mannerisms, however, have no social class association—for example, the glance that is maintained a fraction of a second too long, or the absence of the appraising look that predominantly heterosexual males automatically bestow on passing or nearby females.

Among the homosexual offenders with extensive homosexual experience, the homosexual offenders vs. adults expressed the least regret concerning their homosexuality; 46 per cent said they regretted it, including 27 per cent who reported much regret. Both percentages are considerably less than the equivalent figures reported by the other homosexual offenders. However, the members of the prison group with extensive homosexual experience expressed even far less. Again one wonders how much regret the homosexual offenders vs. adults would have expressed had we interviewed them prior to their initial convictions. Asking an offender to discount his conviction in evaluating whether or not he is sorry about his sexual way of life is almost asking the impossible.

*210\161\2*

There is nothing distinctive about the homosexual offenders vs. children with respect to whether they were only children or whether or not they had older or younger siblings. Like the other homosexual offenders, however, they did not get along with their fathers at ages fourteen to seventeen; in fact, the homosexual offenders as a whole had the worst paternal relationship of any tripartite group, though the homosexual offenders vs. children had a somewhat better relationship than the other two homosexual groups.

The reverse is true in regard to their mothers, with whom they had one of the worst relationships of any of the groups, while the homosexual offenders vs. minors and adults had a better (though still below-average) record.

Nevertheless, the homosexual offenders vs. children exhibit a strong partiality for their mothers: 56 per cent reported they got along better with their mothers, 29 per cent got along equally well with both parents, and 15 per cent preferred their fathers, this strong maternal preference typifies all the homosexual offenders, a preference they share with the exhibitionists and the heterosexual aggressors. Partiality, especially if pronounced, would seem an ill omen.

A higher percentage (62 per cent) of homosexual offenders vs. children than of any other sex offenders came from broken homes, except the heterosexual aggressors vs. children, who have 64 per cent. The breakup occurred early in their lives, in 44 percent of the cases before the boys were ten. Moreover, the homosexual offenders are unique in that a relatively large number of their homes were broken up before they were five. These offenders had the second youngest average age at the breakup of the home—4.8 years.

Consequently our question, “How did your parents get along together when you were in your middle teens?” applies primarily to subsequent family units. The parents in these later marriages did not have satisfactory relationships: 45 per cent (a relatively small proportion) got along well and 35 per cent (a relatively large proportion) got along badly, giving in summary the next-to-worst interparental relationship of any group. This unfortunate parental situation is characteristic of all homosexual offenders.

The high percentage of broken homes is necessarily mirrored in a tabulation of the number of years that the subjects spent in homes in which both a husband and wife were present; here they are below most sex offenders in this respect, but above them in the number of years spent in all-female households.

At ages ten to eleven the homosexual offenders Vs. children present a curious picture as far as the number and sex of their playmates are concerned. They rank second among those with numerous male and female companions, and again second among those with numerous female companions, yet one third of them completely lacked female playmates at this age. To put it another way, one third had no heterosexual social life but the remaining two thirds socialized unusually well with females. The tendency for all the homosexual offenders to have had numerous girl playmates (they rank first, second, and third in this respect) suggests a “sissy” situation. The homosexual offenders vs. children are unlike the other homosexual offenders in that such a large proportion of them had no female companions; relatively few of the homosexual offenders vs. minors and adults share this lack.

Like the other homosexual offenders, the homosexual offenders vs. children were quite apt to have had prepubertal sex play: 56 per cent had heterosexual play and 60 per cent had homosexual play. Significantly, the homosexual offenders are the only groups in which homosexual experience outweighs heterosexual experience. Also, more of the homosexual offenders (almost one quarter) confined their prepubertal sociosexual activity to males: in a rank-order of those whose sex play was exclusively homosexual they rank first, second, and third. However, the homosexual offenders vs. children are unlike the other homosexual offenders in that nearly one fifth of them engaged exclusively in heterosexual play; the other homosexual groups do not exceed 15 per cent. This heterosexuality was of short duration in comparison to the homosexuality: one quarter of the future homosexual offenders vs. children experienced three or more years of heterosexual play, whereas over half had three or more years of homosexual play.

Similarly, the percentage with well-developed heterosexual techniques (mouth-genital contact and coitus) is small in comparison with other types of sex offenders, while the number with elaborate homosexual techniques is comparatively large. In general, this holds for all homosexual offenders. For example, in a rank-order of those with heterosexual mouth-genital contact and coitus, the homosexual offenders are in the lower half of the scale, whereas in rank-orders of homosexual masturbation, mouth-genital contact, and anal coitus they tend not only to be in the upper half, but to monopolize the first, second, and third ranks. These comparisons tend to make the homosexual offender vs. children seem more homosexual in his early life than he actually was; in terms of absolute numbers essentially the same number had heterosexual coitus as had homosexual anal activity.

More of the homosexual offenders were, while preadolescent, the recipients of approaches by adult males than were the members of any other sex-offender group: roughly a third had such experience. Note that only 8 per cent of the control group were similarly approached. The approaches turned into overt physical contact for between 20 and 28 per cent of the three homosexual-offender groups—higher percentages than exist for other groups. So few adult females are interested in preadolescent boys that the percentages in this category are so small as to render comparisons of modest value. Nevertheless, the homosexual offenders tend to be low or intermediate in this type of experience.

The record of the homosexual offenders’ childhood contacts with adult males immediately suggests that their experiences may have predisposed them to subsequent homosexual activity and, ultimately, to committing the acts that resulted in their convictions. This suggestion leads one into a chicken-egg paradox: was the experience with adults a causative factor of the homosexuality or a by-product of pre-existing homosexuality? Both explanations are probably true. It is, however, worth noting that the contact with adults ordinarily came later than homosexual experience with other children. Yet, physical sexual contact with an adult male would be a graphic demonstration to the child that some adult males can find sexual gratification with boys, and this concept could be of importance when the child himself becomes adult, particularly if he recalls the experience as having been pleasurable.

The homosexual offenders vs. children, like all homosexual offenders, had relatively poor childhood health, 60 per cent reporting good health (the second smallest proportion recorded), and 14 per cent (the second largest percentage) reporting ill health. In short, the homosexual offenders vs. children were the next to the most unhealthy group, the unhealthiest being the homosexual offenders vs. adults.

The homosexual offender vs. children ranks fifth (with 47 per cent) in order of those with prepubertal masturbatory experience. This high incidence is typical of homosexual offenders, who also tend to have begun such masturbation at an early age: the homosexual offenders vs. children rank second along with the homosexual offenders vs. adults in the percentage (60 per cent) who began before age ten. This record, coupled with their relatively high incidence of sex play, makes the homosexual offenders vs. children one of the most sexually active groups in preadolescence—again a distinction shared by the two other homosexual-offender groups.

*168\161\2*

A “middle of the road” tendency is seen in the accumulative incidence of premarital coitus displayed by the incest offenders vs. children. However, since in all groups marriage is frequently preceded by coitus with the fianc?e, and since all the incest offenders married, ultimately 96 per cent of the incest offenders vs. children had premarital coitus.

This increase in coitus as marriage nears is seen in the age-specific incidence of premarital coitus with companions. The proportions for these offenders are moderate until age-period 21-25 when they rise to fourth place with a figure of 86 per cent, and in the following period every male still single was having coitus.

The age-specific incidence of premarital coitus with prostitutes is moderate except from twenty-one to twenty-five, when these offenders rank second with 77 per cent of their members involved.

Early in life their coital frequencies before marriage are moderate; subsequently they developed higher frequencies, especially between ages twenty-six to thirty, when the average (median) incest offender vs. children ranks second with a frequency of slightly over once a week. The great bulk of this was with companions.

The frequency of premarital coitus with prostitutes was relatively high at ages sixteen to twenty, putting these offenders in second rank in mean frequency (about once in three weeks) and fourth in median frequency (6 per year). At other ages their frequencies are unexceptional, often being close to or less than those of the control group.

The incest offenders vs. children are not distinctive in the average (median) number of companions and prostitutes with whom they had had coitus. However, they are unusual in two other respects. First of all, they had coitus with a very large number of prostitutes prior to marriage (18, a number shared only by the aggressors vs. children). However, they show no early predilection for paid contacts, for only a moderate number (21 per cent) had their first coitus with a prostitute.

Second, the average number of extramarital partners is low (four) despite the fact that such a large proportion of them had extramarital coitus.

In their early teens these offenders derived a quarter of their total sexual outlet from premarital coitus with companions, far exceeding the other incest offenders in this respect. Indeed, in early life these men tend to rank fairly high—fourth or fifth—and in age-period 26-30 they obtained nearly half of their orgasms from this source, consequently ranking second.

Concerning proportion of total outlet drawn from premarital coitus with prostitutes, these offenders rank second in age-period 16-20 with 9 per cent; third in the following age-period with 13 per cent; and occupy intermediate positions in the rank-orders thereafter. It is worth noting that between ages sixteen and twenty-five all three of the incest-offender groups rank high in the proportion of total outlet constituted by premarital coitus with prostitutes.

While we find nothing unusual in the circumstances of their first coitus, more of these offenders than those of any other group reported that their initial coitus was unpleasant. Only 46 per cent (the smallest recorded proportion) recalled it as definitely enjoyable, while 37 per cent (the largest proportion) found it either unpleasant or only slightly pleasurable. Even the most homosexually oriented group, the homosexual offenders vs. adults, found more pleasure in their first coitus.

An examination of the restraints on premarital coitus reported by these offenders reveals only one fact worth noting: they were strongly desirous of coitus; only 9 per cent reported a lack of interest or satiation—the smallest percentage in this category. Fifty-seven per cent, a moderate figure, stated that lack of opportunity was a strong factor in restraining their activity. This does not mean that, as a group, they were socially inept, since they reported an average number of petting and coital partners and an average number of female companions including sexual partners. Nor did any particularly large or small number report moral restraints or fear of consequences.

*126\161\2*

While our analyses of sexual response to the sight or thought of females, males, and pornography showed nothing noteworthy about the aggressors vs. children, we did find that a relatively large (but absolutely small) proportion of them (12 per cent) were sexually aroused by pictures or stories with sadomasochistic content. In this they rank fourth, and below the other aggressors.

They have the dubious distinction of including by far the largest proportion of alcoholics—a full 40 per cent, a figure almost double that of the next highest ranking group and over six times that of the control group. It will later be seen that many of their offenses were committed while they were drunk and, naturally, alcoholics often are.

Almost as many had used drugs or marijuana. This is again the largest proportion, but whereas these aggressors were unrivaled in alcoholism there are two other groups (the aggressors vs. minors and the prison group) who nearly match their total drug record. The aggressors vs. children should not be regarded as drug addicts—there were none among them; rather they owe their drug status to an unusually strong predilection for marijuana. Nearly 38 per cent smoked marijuana experimentally or occasionally (none were habitual users), a figure more than double that of any other group. Similarly a relatively large number (8 per cent, a figure equaled only by the prison group) experimented with opiates, but none became addicted. In brief, these aggressors present a curious picture of extensive experimentation with drugs but without addiction, which may stem from the fact that alcohol and drugs are seldom used at the same time. It is almost as though these men experimented extensively and widely with chemical escapes from reality and chose alcohol.

In many respects gambling is like the use of drugs or alcohol—it seems to stimulate, it is an escape from drab or oppressive reality, and it can be psychologically addicting. Hence, it is no surprise to find that the aggressors vs. children are rather ardent gamblers. They and the prison group had more men with gambling experience (about three fifths) than any other group, and they rank below only the prison group and the offenders vs. minors in the number who gambled for income rather than sport, about one fifth of them having derived a significant portion of their income from this source.

Lastly, the aggressors vs. children were one of the dullest groups in the sense that a relatively large proportion of them rated below our category of average intelligence.

*84\161\2*

The mental defectives constitute the largest variety of offenders vs. children except for the pedophiles; perhaps as many as one seventh to one fifth of the offenders vs. children fall into this classification. While they are not immune from other problems, their offense behavior is due chiefly to their mental deficiency: they rate no higher than middle-grade moron, and quite a few have been in institutions for the feebleminded. The great majority are not troubled by feelings of shyness or inferiority, nor does sexual deprivation seem an important factor, although about a third of the men have rather blank sociosexual histories —defectives often have low sex drive and expectations.

Their offense behavior sometimes appears to be the consequence of lack of appreciation of or thought for social rules—a sort of unthinking simple-minded opportunism. In other instances one feels the offender was for all practical purposes an overgrown child indulging in prepubertal sex play. Data concerning duration of activity with children are hard to obtain, but in most instances such activity continues sporadically over a period of years. When the defectives become aged they tend to blend with the senile deteriorates.

They are apt to have very little sexual activity of any sort, and their petting with children seems as much a matter of seeking attention and affection as of seeking specifically sexual gratification. As an illustration, we have the case of a feeble-minded man of nearly sixty whose heterosexual activity with adults consisted solely of experiences with prostitutes plus one brief marriage. He had been fond of young children and babies for some time and took to petting little girls who came around the shack he inhabited as a railroad flagman. On the other hand, a similarly feeble-minded male in his thirties had had coitus with a hundred companions and several hundred prostitutes, supplementing this with substantial outlet from masturbation and nocturnal emissions. This ample sexual activity did not prevent him from approaching young boys and girls when he encountered them in parks and motion-picture theaters. One has the impression that he regarded any human of reasonable physical size as a sexual object.

*41\161\2*

Related Posts:

• HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS VS. ADULTS: EXTENSIVE HOMOSEXUALITY
• HOMOSEXUAL OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN: EARLY LIFE
• INCEST OFFENDERS VS. CHILDREN: PREMARITAL COITUS
• HETEROSEXUAL AGGRESSORS VS. CHILDREN: OTHER FACTORS
• COLOUR IN YOUR BEDROOM:IF YOUR ROOM IS PREDOMINANTLY RED
• BEDROOM BEHAVIOURS:IF YOUR ROOM IS PREDOMINANTLY WHITE OR SOFT WHITE
• BEDROOM BEHAVIOURS: TYPICAL ROMANTICS
• STRATEGY TO ENHANCE YOUR RELATIONSHIPS: BEGIN THE CREATIVE MAKE-OVER OF YOUR BEDROOM
• SEX AND RELATIONSHIPS: THE RULES FOR CREATING LOVING INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS
• GROWING OLD – IMMUNITY

Newer Posts »