SEX OFFENDERS VS. MINORS: CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENSE
The average (median) offender vs. minors was nearly twenty-five at the time of his offense, almost twice the age of the female involved. This proportional discrepancy in age is a matter of social concern only when the younger person is a minor. Society is not distressed to know that a fifty-year-old man has a sexual relationship with a twenty-five-year-old woman, and even a 40-20 situation is readily understood, if not approved.
The majority of offenders were not married at the time of the offense: 44 per cent had never married and 28 per cent were separated, divorced, or widowed. We have, therefore, almost three quarters of these offenders as maritally unfettered males on the lookout (as are most unmarried males) for sex.
For roughly four fifths of them this was their first sex offense: a ratio in keeping with the concept of these offenders as “ordinary men” who were careless in the matter of age. This same idea is reinforced by the data concerning psychosis and neurosis: 2 per cent had a history of mental or emotional illness.
When the word “careless” was used in the foregoing paragraph, we did not mean to imply that the offense behavior was opportunistic. Actually 88 per cent of the offenses involved clearly premeditated behavior, and drunkenness was a quite minor element. Premeditation, however, does not necessarily indicate preference for immature females. The distribution of the ages of the females involved (grading from 15 per cent aged twelve to 40 per cent aged fifteen) shows the desire for more physically mature partners. One will recall that a relatively large number (17 per cent, the third largest percentage in this regard) of these offenders vs. minors stated that they preferred as sexual partners females aged sixteen or seventeen, while fewer desired females twelve to fifteen years old.
About three fifths of the girls were friends of the offenders, another fifth were strangers, and the remainder were acquaintances and relatives. The offenders can scarcely be accused of “victimizing” underage “pickups.” On the other hand, neither can the average offender claim ignorance of the girl’s age. The familiarity of the girl with the offender is reflected in her behavior: in the 110 cases where we have both the official version and the offender’s version of the offense, both agree that in 99 instances the girl did not discourage the sexual activity. This understatement conceals the fact that an undetermined number of girls actively encouraged it.
The locale of the offense was a residence in half the cases and an automobile in almost one quarter. This latter figure is high and probably is the result of the inconvenient youthfulness of the girl—she is too young to have a room or apartment of her own, and too conspicuously young for the man to feel comfortable about escorting her past the eyes of desk clerks, landladies, and neighbors. The auto is a solution to this problem, as most teenagers know.
Approximately two thirds of the cases involved coitus, and the remaining third involved either “heavy” petting or “necking,” the distinction between the two being whether or not there was genital stimulation. Obviously some of these would have progressed to coitus had the relationship been uninterrupted. The high percentage of coital activity is not so unexpected when one notes that while the girls ranged in age from twelve to fifteen inclusive, the average (median) girl was 14.6 years old.
In 15 per cent of the cases there was more than one male involved; this is a high percentage exceeded only by the aggressors vs. minors. At first one wonders why females aged twelve to fifteen should be particularly subject to such polyandrous attention, but a simple explanation exists: when society learns that a young girl has had some sort of sexual relationship with an adult male, not only that male, but any other adult male who was within a radius of one hundred feet is apt to be convicted. If there were copartners in the offense, there was usually one, less often two, and only rarely more. The traditional “line-up” or “gang bang” is essentially absent in the offenders vs. minors, but there does seem to have been a considerable amount of double-dating and of pairs of males hunting for girls.
As one would expect in a voluntary relationship, the risk assumed by the male centers chiefly on the ability of the girl to keep the relationship secret. We estimate that in 82 per cent of the cases there was no other form of risk. In only 4 per cent of the cases were there other factors that made getting caught a probability rather than a possibility. In brief, the offenders vs. minors took definitely less risk than did the offenders vs. children.
Who reported the sexual behavior to the authorities? The girl herself rarely did so directly. Usually the situation was discovered by friends or relatives who thereupon reported it. The suspicious mother and the garrulous girl friend are common sources of the offender’s downfall. An additional number of the cases came to light as a by-product of police investigation of other matters.
Slightly over three quarters admitted the sexual relationship to us without equivocation; 9 per cent made a qualified admission; and 13 per cent denied the behavior. These figures are close to those obtained by the authorities whose denial percentage was slightly higher. Since the ages of the females involved were closer to the age at which society considers a female a permissible sexual object, these offenders vs. minors could admit their behavior, not only to others but to themselves, far more easily than could the offenders vs. children.
*57\161\2*
Related Posts:
Tags: Erectile Dysfunction, Men’s Health
September 5th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
Buy:Viagra.Viagra Professional.Viagra Soft Tabs.Cialis.Super Active ED Pack.Levitra.Cialis Super Active+.Viagra Super Active+.Tramadol.Cialis Professional.Cialis Soft Tabs.Soma.VPXL.Zithromax.Propecia.Maxaman.Viagra Super Force….