<< Techniques in Petting >>

Among most females and males, no union of genitalia is attempted before there has been a certain amount of sex play. We have pointed out that this is true of most of the infra-human species of mammals, as well as most human females and males. However, at some social levels in our own culture, and in some cultures elsewhere in the world, there may be a studied avoidance of pre-coital play, and a social mandate that sexual contacts be limited to genital unions which are directly carried through to orgasm for the male, with little if any attempt to arouse the female sexually.

In our own sample, it was only a very small portion (0.2 per cent) of the females who reported that they had abstained from any sort of petting in connection with their marital coitus. All of these cases represented females who were born before 1909. This they had done sometimes because their husbands had wanted it so, sometimes because they, the females, were psychologically offended by such activities, sometimes because neither the husband nor the wife recognized any advantage in such pre-coital play, and sometimes because one or both of the partners had adhered to some moral code which justified only those sexual activities which were specifically necessary for the accomplishment of procreation.

In some of the marriages (11 per cent) the petting had ordinarily been limited to some three minutes or less. In more than a third (36 per cent) of the histories, the petting had been extended for some four to ten minutes, and in another third (31 per cent) for some eleven to twenty minutes. A fair number (22 per cent) had regularly extended their petting beyond twenty minutes and sometimes to a half hour or an hour or more, especially among the better educated groups. There are some husbands and wives who may spend two to three hours out of each day in incidental or even intense erotic play.

We are not convinced that the data demonstrate that any limitations or extensions of pre-coital petting are of primary importance in establishing the effectiveness or satisfactoriness of coitus. The duration of the petting reflects the personalities of the sexual partners, and the patterns of behavior which they happen to have adopted. Some persons derive considerable enjoyment from any technique which can contribute to the prolongation of the erotic activity. Many persons also feel that the intensity of the ultimate orgasm is heightened by extended foreplay. But there are many females and males, particularly in the lower educational levels, who find the indefinite continuation of any type of sexual activity disturbing or even offensive, and their interest in coitus may be reduced by the use of such techniques. Marriage manuals have not sufficiently allowed for these differences in preferences, and have consistently recommended extended foreplay, primarily because they incorrectly believe that it increases the female's chances of reaching orgasm.
    For examples of the emphasis placed on the importance of pre-coital foreplay, see: Sturgis ca. 1908:3. Otto Adler 1911:194. Long 1922:68-69, 136. Fetscher 1928:70. Van de Velde 1930:167, 187. Hodann 1932:31-34. Stone and Stone 1937:219-222; 1951:205, 211, 214. Groves, Groves, and Groves 1943:176, 190. Kelly in Fishbein and Burgess 1947:94, 98. Faller in Hornstein and Faller 1950:239. Haire 1951:303.
    Reflecting this emphasis on prolonged activity, the usual time of intromission is reported as follows in: Dickinson and Beam 1931:221 (length of intromission: 0-3 minutes, 31 cases; 5-10 minutes, 57 cases; 15 minutes or more, 39 cases). Popenoe 1938:13 cites 5-10 minutes as typical of the duration of coitus in American marriages, but suggests that a longer time is probably desirable. Popenoe 1952:6 (10-15 minutes average duration based on case histories from Institute of Family Relations). Terman 1938:295 (a mean duration of 12.2 minutes for 698 wives).

If it is understood that sexual stimulation and response may involve, and usually do involve, a major portion of the nervous system (Chapter 5), and not merely that portion of the system which is located in or connected with the genitalia, it will be seen that any area of the body which is abundantly supplied with end organs of touch may become a center for erotic arousal and response. Such “erogenous zones” are most prominent on the lips, in the interior of the mouth and on the tongue, on the breasts of certain individuals, on certain portions of the genitalia of both males and females, and sometimes in the anal area.

There is, however, no part of the surface of the human body which may not be a source of sexual stimulation and response, for there is no appreciable area of the skin which is without end organs of touch. For different individuals, the erotic responsiveness of different areas may vary, depending in part on the psychologic conditioning of the individual as a result of his previous experience, but probably as often depending upon differences in the innervation of the same area in different individuals. The statement has been made by some psychiatrists that there is probably no portion of the body which could not be made an erotic area if there were sufficient psychologic conditioning for that area. While this is doubtful as applied to all individuals, our record shows that there is no part of the human body which is not sufficiently sensitive to effect erotic arousal and even orgasm for at least some individuals in the population.

While the genitalia include the areas that are most often involved in sexual stimulation and response, it is a mistake to think of the genitalia as the only “sex organs,” and a considerable error to consider a stimulation or response which involves any other area as biologically abnormal, unnatural, contrary to nature, and perverse. Mouth, breast, anal, or other stimulations involve the same nervous system (namely the whole nervous system) which is involved in a genital response, and the arousal and orgasm which are effected by stimulation of the other areas involve the same physiology (as far as we yet understand them) which is involved in arousal and orgasm effected through the stimulation of genital areas. That this is not generally understood is due to the considerable taboo in our culture on all non-genital sexual activity. The lower mammals, unrestricted by social convention, know and utilize oral and anal stimulations as well as genital (Beach 1947); and even the most restrained of the human animals give evidence of their positive response by blocking and becoming violently upset at the mere suggestion of such activities. The violence of our social and legal condemnations of these phenomena is testimony to the psychologist and to the biologist that it is a basic biologic urge that is being repressed. The “sophisticate” who utilizes non-genital stimulations is, like the “sophisticate” who accepts nudity in a sexual relation, returning to basic mammalian patterns of behavior (Chapter 6).

Pre-coital petting is limited in many of the lower level histories to the most perfunctory sort of body contact, or to a single kiss or two. In some cases even that much show of affection may be omitted. When this occurs at upper levels it is usually assumed to indicate some lack of affection, but it is unwarranted to make such an assumption for the great body of the population which regularly limits its pre-coital play. The average college-bred male is more likely to extend the pre-coital petting for a matter of five to fifteen minutes or more. Some individuals, especially younger persons in recent generations, may extend the pre-coital play regularly to a half hour, or to an hour or more—occasionally for several hours—before attempting coitus. In such a case the petting becomes the chief source of the satisfaction in the relationship, and the orgasm in which the activity finally culminates becomes significant as the climax, rather than as the whole of the relationship.

Table 73f. Incidence: Pre-Marital Petting Techniques Percentage
with experience among females prior to interview
Educ. Level Born before 1900 Born between 1900-1909 Born 1910 and after
Coital Experience Coital Experience Coital Experience
None Over 25
times		 None Less than
25 times		 Over 25
times		 None Less than
25 times		 Over 25
times
Simple Kissing
Total 100 100 100 99 100 100 100 100
9-12 99 100 100 100 100
13-16 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
17+ 100 100 100 98 100 100 100 100
Deep Kissing
Total 44 82 63 78 93 74 87 90
9-12 49 57 64 68 83
13-16 50 63 82 91 76 95 95
17 + 38 82 71 79 95 79 94 98
Manual Stimulation of Female Breast
Total 65 96 77 93 98 72 95 98
9-12 61 76 73 89 98
13-16 70 77 97 98 70 98 99
17+ 66 96 81 93 99 82 99 100
Oral Stimulation of Female Breast
Total 19 78 33 59 87 32 73 87
9-12 16 39 28 56 79
13-16 20 32 58 87 30 78 91
17+ 23 82 35 70 90 46 86 97
Manual Stimulation of Female Genitalia
Total 20 93 44 87 95 36 87 95
9-12 20 54 38 75 90
13-16 21 42 86 93 33 92 97
17+ 24 96 46 91 97 54 93 100
Manual Stimulation of Male Genitalia
Total 12 87 31 59 87 24 72 86
9-12 14 35 25 52 77
13-16 U 31 59 88 22 81 90
17+ 14 92 31 70 91 40 83 94
Oral Stimulation of Female Genitalia
Total 1 50 4 9 51 3 20 46
9-12 1 5 3 15 40
13-16 0 4 8 45 3 21 48
17 + 3 56 5 14 57 7 26 52
Oral Stimulation of Male Genitalia
Total — 38 3 5 42 2 16 43
9-12 1 1 2 8 37
13-16 0 4 3 40 2 17 45
17 + 0 40 3 7 47 5 23 49
Apposition of Genitalia
Total 8 38 22 40 52 17 56 55
9-12 9 18 19 38 44
13-16 5 25 47 51 16 65 62
17 + 10 40 24 43 53 23 59 64
Number of Cases
Total 286 89 353 150 263 2662 705 831
9-12 74 74 383 158 215
13-16 80 132 59 89 1936 386 391
17 + 107 50 129 57 124 313 134 187

“Educ. level 9-12” are those who had gone into high school, but never beyond.
“13-16” are those who had gone into college, but had not had more than four years of college.
“17+” are those who had gone beyond college into post-graduate or professional training.

The techniques which are utilized by American females and males in their pre-marital petting may, at one time or another, include every conceivable type of physical contact between two individuals of the opposite sex, except that they do not include actual genital unions which are, by definition, ruled out. Beginning with general body contact, lip kissing, and the deep kiss, it advances to a deliberate manipulation of the female breast, to mouth contacts with the female breast, to manual stimulation of the female genitalia, less often to the manual stimulation of the male genitalia, to the apposition of naked genitalia, to oral stimulation of the male genitalia, and finally to oral stimulation of the female genitalia (Tables 93, 94). Petting techniques usually expand in a more or less standard sequence, as the partners become better acquainted. In the sample, the petting had been most often prolonged and the techniques most varied among those who had had pre-marital coital experience, and particularly among those who had had the most coital experience. Table 73f compare the techniques used by females who had never had coitus, by females who had had coitus less than twenty-five times, and by females who had had coitus twenty-five times or more.

The pre-coital foreplay which may accompany pre-marital coitus may involve the same techniques which appear in pre-marital petting that does not lead to coitus. We have already noted that the pre-coital petting techniques were more limited among those females in the sample who had had the least experience in coitus, and more diverse among those who had had more extensive coital experience.
There is a detailed analysis of petting and pre-marital pre-coital techniques among college students in Ehrmann 1952 (unpublished data).

The pre-coital techniques in marriage are quite the same as those found in pre-marital petting which may or may not lead to coitus. In the sample, simple lip kissing between the spouses had almost always (99.4 per cent) been an accompaniment to the marital coitus. In order of descending incidences, the other techniques which were used at least on occasion had included the manual stimulation of the female breast by the male (in 98 per cent); the manual stimulation of the female genitalia by the male (in 95 per cent); the oral stimulation of the female breast (in 93 per cent); the manual stimulation of the male genitalia by the female (in 91 per cent); extended oral techniques in deep kissing (in 87 per cent); and finally the oral stimulation of the female genitalia by the male (in 54 per cent) and of the male genitalia by the female (in 49 per cent). Still other techniques had sometimes been utilized.

The incidences of the petting techniques in marriage had closely paralleled the incidences of the same techniques in pre-marital petting. In general, the pre-marital petting among the females who had had pre-marital coitus with some appreciable frequency had been more prolonged than the pre-coital petting in marriage. Marital coitus is more readily available and there is, in consequence, not as much reason for extending each contact indefinitely.

There were not a few of the married females and males in the sample who had accepted extra-marital petting even though they had refused to accept vaginal coitus. Such extra-marital petting seems to have increased within recent years, although we do not have sufficient data to establish this point statistically. However, such petting is not confined to younger persons, for it occurs not infrequently in middle-aged histories and even in some of the older married histories. Just as with pre-marital petting, extra-marital petting is accepted because of the satisfactions which are peculiar to it, or in order to avoid a possible pregnancy, or sometimes because the available facilities are inadequate for coitus but sufficient for petting. In fact, at dinner parties, cocktail parties, in automobiles, on picnics, and at dances, a considerable amount of public petting is allowed between married adults when coitus would be unacceptable. Apparently petting is considered less immoral than coitus, even though the petting techniques may be as effective in bringing erotic response and orgasm. Extra-marital petting is not infrequently carried on in social groups which may include the female’s husband, and he would usually be less inclined to allow the extra-marital relationships if coitus were involved.
Bernard 1938:357 found 49 per cent of females and 59 per cent of males, among 500 college students, tolerant of extra-marital petting.

Unfortunately our record on extra-marital petting is incomplete, for we did not realize the extent of such activity when this study first began. Information on this point is available, however, on 1090 of the married females in the sample. Of these, some 16 per cent had engaged in extra-marital petting although they had never allowed extra-marital coitus.

The techniques of the extra-marital petting are, of course, identical with those which are used in pre-marital petting and in the petting which precedes coitus both in marital and in non-marital relationships. Of those females who had done extramarital petting without coitus, more than half had accepted breast and genital contacts. In some cases they had accepted mouth-genital contacts. Something short of 15 per cent of the females in the sample had reached orgasm in this extra-marital petting, including 2 per cent who had petted to orgasm although they had never allowed extra-marital coitus. The accumulative incidences of all these activities would undoubtedly have proved to be higher, if our data had been more complete.

Table 93. Utilization of pre-coital petting techniques at three educational levels, in three generations of males
Technique Educ.
Level		 All Ages Adol.-25 26-45 46+
Cases % Cases % Cases % Cases %
Kissing, lip.
Marital.
Frequent		 0-8 457 88.4 73 95.9 252 90.1 132 81.1
9-12 267 93.2 80 98.7 149 94.0   
13 + 1071 97.7 225 99.6 689 97.5 157 95.5
Kissing, deep.
Marital.
Frequent		 0-8 455 40.5 73 54.8 252 42.4 130 28.5
9-12 267 56.2 80 60.0 149 58.4   
13 + 1069 77.3 225 86.7 687 78.3 157 59.2
Breast, manual.
Marital.
Frequent		 0-8 458 78.6 74 85.1 252 81.4 132 69.7
9-12 266 90.6 80 92.5 148 93.9   
13 + 1071 96.3 225 99.0 689 96.5 157 91.1
Breast, oral.
Marital.
Frequent		 0-8 458 33.2 74 32.4 252 36.1 132 28.0
9-12 266 57.5 80 57.5 148 62.9   
13 + 1071 81.6 225 92.5 689 81.1 157 67.5
Female genitalia,
manual. Pre-m.
Frequent		 0-8 235 79.1 151 82.2 63 76.2   
9-12 224 85.3 173 87.3      
13 + 566 91.0 439 91.8 118 90.7   
Female genitalia,
manual. Mar-
ital. Frequent		 0-8 457 74.8 74 74.3 252 78.2 131 68.7
9-12 266 79.7 80 77.4 148 85.1   
13+ 1071 89.6 225 94.6 689 89.2 157 83.4
Male genitalia,
manual. Pre-m.
Frequent		 0-8 235 66.4 151 65.6 63 69.9   
9-12 224 71.0 173 74.0      
13+ 566 75.1 439 74.7 118 78.0   
Male genitalia.
manual. Mar-
ital. Frequent		 0-8 457 57.1 74 54.1 252 58.0 131 57.3
9-12 266 60.9 80 65.0 148 63.5   
13 + 1069 75.3 225 84.0 687 74.5 157 66.2
Female genitalia.
oral. Pre-m.
Ever		 0-8 235 8.5 151 9.3 63 7.9   
9-12 224 10.3 173 11.6     
13+ 564 18.4 438 15.5 117 25.6   
Female genitalia,
oral. Marital.
Ever		 0-8 458 4.1 74 5.4 252 4.0 132 3.8
9-12 267 15.4 80 13.7 149 16.8   
13+ 1070 45.3 225 35.1 688 49.6 157 41.4
Male genitalia.
oral. Pre-m.
Ever		 0-8 235 22.1 151 21.8 63 25.4   
9-12 224 29.9 173 27.7 45 37.8   
13+ 564 38.6 438 34.5 117 51.3   
Male genitalia.
oral. Marital.
Ever		 0-8 458 6.6 74 9.5 252 6.8 132 4.6
9-12 267 15.3 80 12.5 149 18.1   
13+ 1070 42.7 225 38.7 688 45.5 157 36.3

“Educ. level 0-8” are those who had never gone beyond grade school.
“9-12” are those who had gone into high school, but never beyond.
“13+” are those who will ultimately go to college.

Ages shown represent ages of subjects at time of reporting.


Petting techniques at the grade school level rarely go beyond incidental breast and genital contacts; but a goodly portion of the petting at high school and college levels does arrive at more specific genital manipulation. A great many engaged couples go that far before they marry. It is a smaller portion of the population which includes mouth-genital contacts in its pre-marital history (Table 94).

In general the differences between the petting techniques employed by the females of the four educational levels represented in the sample were not so great as the differences between females of the same educational level who were born in different decades. A better sample of the grade school group might have shown a more restricted use of petting techniques there.

Table 94. Oral techniques at three educational levels among males
Age
Group		 Cases Oral Contacts: Accumulative Incidence
by Percents of Total Population
Any
type
Heterosexual Homo-
sexual
Ever,
Male
Ac-
tive		Ever,
Male
Pas-
sive		 Pre-
Mari-
tal,
Any		Pre-
Mari-
tal,
Male
Ac-
tive		 Pre-
Mari-
tal,
Male
Pas-
sive		 Mari-
tal,
Any		 Mari-
tal,
Male
Act-
tive		 Mari-
tal,
Male
Pas-
sive		Male
Act-
tive		 Male
Pas-
sive
All Educational Levels: U. S. Correction
16-20 1208 46.2 8.2 22.8 23.7 7.7 22.8     12.0 38.3
21-25 1502 49.1 8.4 27.2 26.7 6.9 26.5 16.7 12.1 12.6 14.1 36.3
26-30 653 55.9 12.3 40.0     22.3 15.8 21.3 13.5 36.6
31-35 370 55.2 15.3 40.6     19.2 15.8 13.8 15.4 32.0
36-40 317 58.9 16.7 46.7         11.5 29.8
Educational Level 0-8
16-20 176 44.9 8.0 22.2 21.0 8.0 21.0     15.2 38.2
21-25 123 41.5 4.9 22.8 21.0 6.5 21.0 8.2 3.3 6.6 10.6 30.9
26-30 109 45.0 5.5 37.6     9.3 2.7 9.3 4.6 33.0
31-35 74 40.5 6.8 29.7     10.5 7.0 7.0 10.8 27.0
36-40 88 44.8 9.1 35.2     10.8 6.2 9.2 5.7 24.1
41-45 67 34.3 1.5 28.8       0.0 0.0 5.9 13.2
46-55 84 22.6 1.2 16.7       3.0 4.5 6.0 14.5
56+ 77 23.1 5.2 18.2       4.5 4.5 6.3 15.2
Educational Level 9-12
16-20 228 54.8 9.6 26.8 28.9 8.8 27.5     12.4 46.5
21-25 142 57.0 9.1 30.1 31.0 6.9 31.0 14.3 10.7 8.9 18.0 45.8
26-30 104 64.4 10.6 40.4     21.7 15.0 21.7 21.4 45.7
31-35 62 66.1 14.8 47.5         21.3 42.6
36-40 49 77.6 16.3 61.2         20.4 42.9
Educational Level 13 +
16-20 802 15.8 3.2 8.8 9.5 3.0 8.7     3.6 6.6
21-25 1237 34.9 13.5 25.7 22.1 8.0 20.9 44.1 36.2 39.9 6.5 11.5
26-30 440 57.0 34.8 44.8 29.1 12.6 28.1 56.9 51.5 50.6 11.4 17.1
31-35 234 70.5 42.7 55.1     48.7 43.5 36.8 13.8 18.9
36-40 180 71.7 49.4 58.9     54.2 50.3 47.7 13.7 21.3
41-45 118 74.6 51.7 55.1     62.1 55.3 46.6 11.9 17.8
46-55 122 63.9 43.4 50.8     47.2 42.5 36.8 9.8 10.7
56+ 55 54.5 41.8 40.0     43.1 39.2 35.3 9.1 12.7

“Educ. level 0-8” are those who had never gone beyond grade school.
“9-12” are those who had gone into high school, but never beyond.
“13+” are those who will ultimately go to college.

Showing accumulative incidences.
Data derived from experience of each subject up to time of reporting.
Lower incidences in some older age groups may be due
to small size of samples and to possible cover-up,
but most probably to the fact that incidences were actually a bit lower in that generation.

Most of the action in a petting relationship originates with the male. Most of it is designed to stimulate the female. It is doubtful if a sufficient biologic basis could be shown for such a one-sided performance, and it may be that this great difference in the activity of the male and the female is, at least in part, another outcome of the patterns by which females are raised in our culture. The male in the petting relationship derives his stimulation through his own activity in contact with the female, and this is often sufficient, as already indicated, to lead to spontaneous ejaculation.

The social levels are furthest apart in their attitudes on petting and on pre-marital intercourse. The two items are related, for petting, among males of the college level, is more or less a substitute for actual coitus.

In the upper level code of sexual morality, there is nothing so important as the preservation of the virginity of the female and, to a somewhat lesser degree, the similar preservation of the virginity of the male until the time of marriage. The utilization of pre-marital petting at this level is fortified by the emphasis which the marriage manuals place upon the importance of pre-coital techniques in married relations; and the younger generation considers that its experience before marriage may contribute something to the development of satisfactory marital relations. Compared with coitus, petting has the advantage of being accessible under conditions where coitus would be impossible; it provides a simpler means of achieving both arousal and orgasm, it makes it possible to experience orgasm while avoiding the possibility of a pregnancy, and, above all, it preserves one’s “virginity.” Whether consciously or unconsciously, petting is chosen by the upper level because intercourse destroys virginity and is, therefore, unacceptable. It is significant to note what different values are attached, at that level, to erotic arousal and orgasm achieved through the union of genitalia, and to erotic arousal and orgasm achieved through physical contact of other portions of the body, or even through genital contact or genital manipulation which does not involve actual copulation. There are many males in the upper level who develop a fine art of achieving orgasm by petting techniques which avoid intercourse. The youth who may have experienced orgasm scores or hundreds of times in petting, and who may have utilized every type of petting technique, including mouth-genital contacts, still has the satisfaction of knowing that he is still a virgin, as his level defines virginity. There are even cases of males who effect genital union; but because they avoid orgasm while in such union they persuade themselves that they are still virgins. The illogic of the situation emphasizes the fact that the basic issue is one of conforming with a code (the avoidance of pre-marital intercourse, the preservation of one’s virginity), which is of paramount importance in the mores of this social level.

The lower educational levels see no sense in this. They have nothing like this strong taboo against pre-marital intercourse and, on the contrary, accept it as natural and inevitable and a desirable thing. Lower level taboos "are more often turned against an avoidance of intercourse, and against any substitution for simple and direct coitus. Petting involves a considerable list of techniques which may be acceptable to the college group, and to some degree to the high school group, but which are quite taboo at lower levels (as discussed above). It is just because petting involves these techniques, and because it substitutes for actual intercourse, that it is considered a perversion by the lower level.

In particular cases, older persons, even at upper levels, have objected to pre-marital petting; but individual objections do not have the force of long-established mores. Pre-marital intercourse is condemned by mores which go back hundreds and thousands of years. Such taboos are very different from the criticisms which lone individuals have levied against petting within the last few decades, and for the most part the younger generation has paid little attention to such criticisms.

There is nothing in the behavior of the upper level which is more responsible than petting is for the general opinion that college students are sexually wild. The lower level has many times as much pre-marital intercourse as the college male has, and it is not the intercourse of the college student which is the source of the lower level’s criticism. It is the fact that petting may be engaged in for many hours without arriving at intercourse—it is the fact that intercourse itself is not more often accepted as a pre-marital outlet by the upper social level.

The astonishment of the lower level at the petting behavior of the better educated groups has been recorded above. As there noted, petting is the particular activity which has led many persons to conclude that college students are sexually wild and perverted. On the other hand, the college level disapproves of the heterosexual intercourse which the lower level has, in some abundance, before marriage. The conflict is obviously one between two systems of mores, between two cultural patterns, only one of which seems right to a person who accepts the traditions of the group in which he has been raised. With the better educated groups, intercourse versus petting is a question of morals. For the lower level, it is a problem of understanding how a mentally normal individual can engage in such highly erotic activity as petting and still refrain from actual intercourse.

There is some indication that younger generations have become freer in making these contacts. They also seem to be becoming freer in petting in public places. On doorsteps and on street corners, and on high school and college campuses, general body contacts and more specific hugging and kissing may be observed in the daytime as well as in the evening hours. Similar contacts may be observed in automobiles, on double dates, at cocktail parties, at parties of other sorts, in taverns and in restaurants, in drug stores and inns, in reception rooms in college dormitories, in high school corridors, in the homes of many of the students, and wherever else young people congregate. More specific contacts may call for more privacy. On occasion, some nudity may be involved, and there are a few records of males who sleep nude with partners with whom they become involved in intensive petting, while never having genital intercourse. Sometimes naked genitalia are placed in apposition, again without effecting coitus.

To some extent, petting is the outcome of the upper level’s attempt to avoid pre-marital intercourse. The condemnation of petting on the ground that it may lead to something that is worse is quite unfounded, for there is no evidence that the frequency of pre-marital intercourse has increased during recent generations, even though petting has increased. In a number of cases, the specific record indicates that there would have been intercourse if petting had not supplied an outlet.

Table 74f. After-Effects of Petting Without Orgasm
Nature of
After-effects		 Total
Sample		 Educational Level Total
Sample		 Educational Level
9-12 13-16 17 + 9-12 13-16 17 +
Percent of females Cases
Nervous, ever 51 48 54 51 4878 875 2801 1018
Masturbate, ever 35 31 35 39 1005 229 508 240
Ache in groin, ever 26 27 24 30 1723 417 910 359
“Educ. level 9-12” are those who had gone into high school, but never beyond.
“13-16” are those who had gone into college, but had not had more than four years of college.
“17+” are those who had gone beyond college into post-graduate or professional training.

The physical outcome of petting has been a matter of some concern to educators, to parents, and to high school and college students themselves (as in Elliott and Bone 1929, Butterfield 1939, Rice 1946, Frank 1946). There is probably no sex question which is asked more often by the younger generation than this one concerning the physical outcome of their petting behavior. Consequently, it has been important to secure data on this point. The evidence is now clear that such arousal as petting provides may seriously disturb some individuals, leaving them in a more or less extended nervous state unless the activity has proceeded to the point of orgasm. If orgasm results, there seem to be no after-effects other than those which follow any other type of sexual activity. On the other hand, there is a portion of the males, perhaps as many as a third of those in the present sample, who may become involved in extensive petting which stops short of orgasm, and who are able to calm down without the specific release that sexual climax would provide. Many males who do not reach orgasm while in contact with the female resort to masturbation soon after they leave the girl. Pain which is ordinarily said to occur in the testes or in the groin (but which probably involves some other structures instead) is not uncommonly experienced by the male who fails to reach climax during the petting. It occasionally happens that a male who has gone through a prolonged period of arousal, extending perhaps for an hour or more, finds difficulty in achieving orgasm or, if that point is finally reached, may find that there is an insufficient nervous release, or that there is some localized pain following ejaculation.

>>