Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 285–297 | Cite as

Enjoyment and Emotionally Negative Reactions in Minor–Adult Versus Minor–Peer and Adult–Adult First Postpubescent Coitus: A Secondary Analysis of the Kinsey Data

  • Bruce Rind
  • Max Welter
Original Paper

Abstract

Using the original Kinsey sample, enjoyment and emotionally negative reactions to first postpubescent coitus were examined in relation to whether the coitus occurred as a legal minor (aged under 18) with an adult (5 or more years older), a minor with a peer (within 4 years of age), or an adult with an adult (both 18 or older). These responses were further examined in subdivisions of the minor–adult and adult–adult categories. Given widely held professional and lay assumptions that minor–adult sex is intrinsically traumatic or aversive, tested was whether reactions to minor–adult coitus were characteristically negative, irrespective of gender, and distinctly more negative than minor–peer and adult–adult coitus. In general: minors with adults enjoyed the event as much as minors with peers or adults with adults; boys (i.e., male minors) enjoyed it substantially more than girls, irrespective of partner age; and minors with adults did not have more emotionally negative reactions than the other groups. Younger boys (14 and under) with women (mean ages: 13.37 and 24.27, respectively; mean age difference: 10.90 years), compared to men with peer-aged women (mean ages: 21.76 and 21.58, respectively; mean age difference: 0.18 years), enjoyed the coitus a great deal (the top scale value) significantly more often (63 % vs. 44 %) and had emotionally negative reactions no more often (15 % vs. 12 %). Younger girls (14 and under) with men (mean ages: 13.19 and 26.42, respectively; mean age difference: 13.23 years), compared to women with peer-aged men (mean ages: 22.38 and 23.78, respectively; mean age difference: 1.41 years), enjoyed the coitus a great deal at the same rate (17 % vs. 18 %) and had emotionally negative reactions no more often (18 % vs. 16 %). Assumptions of characteristic trauma or aversiveness in minor–adult first coitus, as well as gender equivalence in response, were contradicted.

Keywords

Age-discordant sex Minor–adult sex Minor–peer sex Adolescence First coitus 

References

  1. Albright, T. (Ed.). (2006). The Kinsey interview kit: Code book (2nd ed.). Bloomington, IN: The Kinsey Institute.Google Scholar
  2. Angelides, S. (2004). Feminism, child sexual abuse, and the erasure of child sexuality. Gay and Lesbian Quarterly, 10, 141–177.Google Scholar
  3. Angelides, S. (2005). The emergence of the paedophile in the late twentieth century. Australian Historical Studies, 36, 272–295.Google Scholar
  4. Bekker, M. H. J., & Rademakers, J. (1997, Spring). Study examines Islamic virginity issues. Psychology International, 8, 1, 8.Google Scholar
  5. Blanchard, R., Lykins, A. D., Wherrett, D., Kuban, M. E., Cantor, J. M., Blak, T., et al. (2009). Pedophilia, hebephilia, and the DSM-V. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 335–350.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bullough, V. L. (1976). Sexual variance in society and history. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Carballo-Diéguez, A., Balan, I., Dolezal, C., & Mello, M. B. (2012). Recalled sexual experiences in childhood with older partners: A study of Brazilian men who have sex with men and male-to-female transgender persons. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 363–376.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Clancy, S. (2009). The trauma myth: The truth about the sexual abuse of children—And its aftermath. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Crapo, R. H. (1995). Factors in the cross-cultural patterning of male homosexuality: A reappraisal of the literature. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 178–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger: An analysis of the concepts of pollution and taboo. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ford, C., & Beach, F. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  13. Frayser, S. (1985). Varieties of sexual experience. New Haven: HRAF.Google Scholar
  14. Gebhard, P. H., & Johnson, A. B. (1979). The Kinsey data: Marginal tabulations of the 1938–1963 interviews conducted by the Institute for Sex Research. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  15. Gilmore, D. D. (1990). Manhood in the making: Cultural concepts of masculinity. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Goode, S. (2009). Understanding and addressing adult sexual attraction to children: A study of paedophiles in contemporary society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Graupner, H. (2000). Sexual consent: The criminal law in Europe and overseas. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29, 415–461.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Greenberg, D. (1988). The construction of homosexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hare, E. H. (1962). Masturbatory insanity: The history of an idea. Journal of Mental Science, 108, 1–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Hawes, Z. C., Wellings, K., & Stephenson, J. (2010). First heterosexual intercourse in the United Kingdom: A review of the literature. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 137–152.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jenkins, P. (1998). Moral panic: Changing concepts of the child-molester in modem America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jenkins, P. (2006). The decade of nightmares: The end of the Sixties and the making of Eighties America. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  24. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: Saunders.Google Scholar
  25. Lancaster, R. N. (2011). Sex panic and the punitive state. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Landis, J. (1956). Experiences of 500 children with adult sexual deviation. Psychiatric Quarterly, 30(Suppl.), 91–109.Google Scholar
  27. Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Malón, A. (2010). Onanism and child sexual abuse: A comparative study of two hypotheses. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 637–652.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Malón, A. (2011a). The “participating victim” in the study of erotic experiences between children and adults: An historical analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 169–188.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Malón, A. (2011b). Victimology, divergence, and disinformation in sexology: Commentary on Riegel (2011). International Journal of Sexual Health, 23, 161–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marascuilo, L. A. (1966). Large-sample multiple comparison. Psychological Bulletin, 65, 280–290.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Murphy, T. F. (2008). Brief history of a recurring nightmare. Gay & Lesbian Review, 15, 17–20.Google Scholar
  33. Nathan, D., & Snedeker, M. (1995). Satan’s silence: Ritual abuse and the making of a modern American witchhunt. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  34. Okami, P., & Goldberg, A. (1992). Personality correlates of pedophilia: Are they reliable indicators? Journal of Sex Research, 29, 297–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rind, B. (2003). Adolescent sexual experiences with adults: Pathological or functional? Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 15, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rind, B. (2009, May). Social response to age-gap sex involving minors: Empirical, historical, cross-cultural, and cross-species considerations. Paper presented at the meeting “Good sex, bad sex: Sex law, crime, and ethics,” Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
  37. Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (1998). A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples. Psychological Bulle-tin, 124, 22–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (2000). Condemnation of a scientific article: A chronology and refutation of the attacks and a discussion of threats to the integrity of science. Sexuality and Culture, 4, 1–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (2001). The validity and appropriateness of methods, analyses, and conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A rebuttal of victimological critique from Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001). Psychological Bulletin, 127, 734–758.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Salvador, A. M. (2009, May). The well of punishment: Sex legislation and the prosecution of gays and lesbians in the film narratives of Spanish fascism. Paper presented at the meeting “Good sex, bad sex: Sex law, crime, and ethics,” Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
  41. Vogt, H. (2006). Pädophilie: Leipziger Studie zur gesellschaftlichen und psychischen Situation pädophiler Männer [Pedophilia: The Leipzig study of the social and psychic situation of pedophilic men]. Lengerich, Germany: Papst Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. West, D. J. (1998). Boys and sexual abuse: An English opinion. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 539–559.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wight, D., Parkes, A., Strange, V., Allen, E., Bonell, C., & Henderson, M. (2008). The quality of young people’s heterosexual relationships: A longitudinal analysis of characteristics shaping subjective experience. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 40, 226–237.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations