By any age from twelve to twenty fewer of the sexual psychopaths had had premarital coitus than the other offenders. The differences were often great in the teens, the proportion of non-virgin sexual psychopaths sometimes being less than half that of the other offenders. By the early twenties the differences tend to decrease among the offenders vs. children and aggressors vs. adults, but among the other types of offense groups the differences remain substantial. This is particularly true of the homosexual offenders vs. children and the homosexual offenders vs. minors, where by age twenty-six 12 percentage points in the case of the former, and 20 percentage points, in the case of the latter, separate the sexual psychopaths from the other offenders: 90 vs. 65 per cent in one instance and 85 vs. 72 per cent in the other.
The same general picture is seen in the accumulative incidence of premarital coitus with prostitutes: the sexual psychopaths have fewer experienced individuals.
As one might anticipate from the foregoing, the sexual psychopaths had fewer coital companions than the other offenders. This is clearly shown by the proportion of men who had had coitus with over a score of companions. Among the offenders vs. children the proportions are 11 per cent for the sexual psychopaths and 34 per cent for the other offenders, for the aggressors vs. adults the equivalent figures are 24 vs. 34, incest offenders 18 vs. 26, exhibitionists 11 vs. 19, and among the two homosexual-offender groups 10 vs. 27 and 11 vs. 24 per cent. In terms of the median number of companions, the sexual psychopaths usually had 5 to 6 whereas the other offenders had from 12 to 15. Only among the aggressors vs. adults was the difference smaller: 12 for the sexual psychopaths and 15 for the others.
Interestingly enough, the differences in the numbers of prostitutes with whom they had coitus were small and inconsistent for four of the six sex-offense type groups. In the remaining two (exhibitionists and homosexual offenders vs. minors) the sexual psychopaths had markedly fewer prostitute coital partners than the other offenders. An age differential may explain the difference for the exhibitionists where, as the reader may recall, the sexual psychopaths were on the average ten years younger than the other offenders.
Before ending this discussion of coital partners, both companions and prostitutes, it is noteworthy that in our tabulation of the number and proportion of friends and associates at ages sixteen to seventeen we found that the sexual psychopaths had the largest proportions of individuals lacking female friends and the smallest proportions with numerous female friends. This paucity was especially noticeable in the sexual psychopaths among the homosexual offenders. For example, among the homosexual offenders vs. children nearly one third of the sexual psychopaths reported having no female friends or associates at ages sixteen to seventeen as against 11 per cent among those not adjudged sexual psychopaths. This seeming withdrawal from females by the sexual psychopaths among the homosexual offenders is a continuation of the trend visible back at ages ten to eleven when they had fewer girl playmates than did the other offenders.
Since the sexual psychopaths tend to begin premarital coitus later in life than the other offenders, and fewer of them have the experience, we examined their reports to find out what restrained them.
Moral considerations were more important to the sexual psychopaths than to the other offenders in five of the six sex-offense types, the exhibitionists being the exception by ten percentage points or more. The sexual psychopaths were also more restrained by the fear of causing a premarital pregnancy. This can be interpreted both as an indication of general heterosexual inhibition and of greater social consciousness. Lack of interest was given more often as a reason only by the sexual psychopaths among the homosexual offenders vs. children and minors. This finding is in accord with our other evidence that in these homosexual-offense groups the sexual psychopaths have a more pronounced homosexual orientation.
Disregarding marital status and simply calculating the proportions of sexual psychopaths and other offenders who had ever paid a prostitute for coitus, one finds such prostitute experience common among the latter by margins of from six to 24 percentage points. This difference cannot be wholly, or probably even chiefly, attributed to the fact that the sexual psychopaths are younger than the other offenders, for the difference exists in the two offense types (offenders vs. children and incest offenders vs. children) where there is little or no age difference. It would appear that the general heterosexual restraint typical of the premarital life of the sexual psychopaths exists also with respect to their lifetime experience with prostitutes. Calculation of the percentage of married males who had had extramarital coitus provided inconclusive and quite variable data. This is probably the result of very small sample size (e.g., there were only nine ever-married sexual psychopaths among the homosexual offenders vs. minors) coupled with lack of control over the variables of age and duration of marriage.
In studying the incidence of mouth-genital contact, we find that in four of the six sex-offense types a larger proportion of sexual psychopaths have experienced cunnilingus (mouth on female genitalia) than have the other offenders, in one instance the proportions are essentially equal, and in one instance (the exhibitionists) the sexual psychopaths had fewer experienced males. This relative predilection of the sexual psychopaths toward cunnilingus does not conflict with our prior findings regarding their lesser coital activity and their greater premarital restraint. We have seen that some groups with large numbers of premarital coital partners and high incidence and frequency of activity (e.g., the offenders vs. adults) may have relatively little mouth-genital contact. Also, in our previous volumes we pointed out that the better educated were not only characterized by greater inhibition as to coital activity but were more given to mouth-genital contact, and it is to be recalled that the sexual psychopaths (except, most significantly, the exhibitionists) were better educated than the other offenders.
Cunnilingus seems associated in a general way with a number of attributes, most of which are more characteristic of the sexual psychopaths than of the other offenders: better educated, therefore somewhat more emancipated and liberal in attitude; intellectual, therefore more experimental and curious; sensitive, and concerned with the enjoyment of the sexual partner. Lastly, there is an unnamed quality hard to separate from the above three attributes which leads some men to have more elaborate sexual techniques with few partners rather than simple techniques with many partners.
The male primarily concerned with his own gratification and who obtains much of his pleasure from adding new partners to his list of “conquests” is apt to be aggressive rather than sensitive, extrovert and single-minded rather than intellectual and introspective, and to have less education.
In contrast to cunnilingus, a study of fellation (female mouth on penis) shows no trend. In two of the six sex-offense types the sexual psychopaths have more males with fellation experience, in two other instances they have fewer, and in the remaining two instances the other offenders are essentially equal. This lack of trend is probably the result of various factors. Fellation is less taboo, insofar as being the recipient is concerned, than cunnilingus. Fellation may be instigated by the female. Fellation is a common technique of prostitutes.
These and other factors seem to override any differences associated with sexual psychopathy.
An examination of the age preference for female coital partners produced no clear findings. The tendency for the sexual psychopaths to prefer slightly younger females than do the other offenders appears to be a function of the difference in age at reporting.