<< Significance of Pre-Marital Coitus >>

To have or not to have pre-marital intercourse is a more important issue for more males than any other aspects of sex. Heterosexual intercourse is the ultimate goal of all sexual thought and of all deliberately planned sexual activity for perhaps half or more of the unmarried male population; and it is a matter of considerable importance for a high proportion of the remaining males who, nevertheless, may get their actual outlet from other sources. Except for the 15 percent of the population which goes to college, most males actually accept pre-marital intercourse, and believe it to be a desirable part of a normal human development. Even among those who publicly uphold the taboos against pre-marital relations, including legislators and the law enforcement officers who sporadically impose legal penalties upon non-marital activities, there are many who demonstrate through their own histories that they consider pre-marital and extramarital intercourse acceptable and desirable. There is a not inconsiderable portion of the population which openly defends the value of such intercourse. This is particularly true at the lower educational levels, but it is sometimes true at top social levels. The general impression which is held by many students of social affairs that the middle class is the one which most rigorously upholds the social traditions is obviously based on the expressed opinions of this group, rather than upon the record of its actual behavior.

It should, however, be emphasized now that the intercourse varies considerably not only in frequencies but also in regard to the number of partners involved, in regard to the nature of the partners, and in regard to the times and places where the activity is had.

There are males, particularly of the upper social level, who may confine their pre-marital intercourse to a single girl, who is often the fiancée. There are males who have some dozens or scores of partners before they marry. In some cases, lower level males may have intercourse with several hundred or even a thousand or more girls in pre-marital relations. There are quite a few individuals, especially of the grade school and high school levels, who find more interest in the pursuit and conquest, and in a variety of partners, than they do in developing long-time relations with a single girl. Some males avoid all repetitions of experience with the same girl. Sometimes the interest which such a promiscuous male has in heterosexual coitus does not involve any interest in the girls themselves. Many a lower level male states quite frankly that he does not like girls, and that he would have nothing to do with them if it were not for the fact that they are sources of intercourse. There are vernacular phrases which precisely sum up this situation. Until such attitudes are comprehended by clinicians, and especially by public health officials, and until such professional groups understand the lower level’s ability to effect frequent contacts with such a variety of partners, the control of venereal disease is not likely to become more effective.

Unfortunately, data on the social levels of the girls with whom males have their pre-marital relations have not been systematically gathered in the present study. There is a popular opinion that most pre-marital intercourse is had with girls who are below the social status of the male. Such information as we have does not seem to confirm this opinion. Certainly, at the college level today, males find a great deal of their pre-marital intercourse within their own level. Although there is some reason for believing that older generations of college males more often resorted to town girls for their sexual contacts, the specific data are not available. Of course, the educationally lower level males have most of their pre-marital intercourse with lower level girls.

The upper level male has only a very small portion of his pre-marital contacts with professional prostitutes. The lower level male depends to a much greater degree upon the commercial source.

Most males have intercourse with girls of about their own age, or with girls who are only a few years younger. Only a few males have intercourse with very young girls, except when they themselves are equally young. There are not many males who have intercourse with women who are much older than themselves, although there are some cases of teen-age and even pre-adolescent boys who have intercourse with married women in their twenties, their thirties, or older. A few males develop long-time relations with older women, either single, married, or divorced women; but nearly all of the intercourse which the young, unmarried male has is with unmarried females.

Heterosexual incest occurs more frequently in the thinking of clinicians and social workers than it does in actual performance. There may be a good many males who have thought of the possibilities of sexual relations with sisters or mothers or with other close female relatives, but even this is by no means universal, and is usually confined to limited periods in the boy’s younger years. There are some psychoanalysts who contend that they have never had a patient who has not had incestuous relations; but such a statement is totally out of line with the specific records which have been obtained in this study or which, for that matter, have been obtained in any other survey of the general population. The clinician must beware that the select group of persons who come to a clinic does not color his thinking concerning the population as a whole. In the present study, such incestuous relations as have been recorded represent every social level, including males of the lower levels and males who belong to the socially top levels. Because the cases are so few, it would be misleading to suggest where the highest incidences lie. The most frequent incestuous contacts are between pre-adolescent children, but the number of such cases among adolescent or older males is very small.

The circumstances under which pre-marital intercourse is had differ again for social levels. Some of the intercourse which the college male has before marriage may be had on the college grounds, or in college buildings, but more of it occurs during vacation periods, often in the girl’s home town, and often under the girl’s parental roof. For all levels, intercourse is had in cars, some of it outdoors in the open, some in tourist camps and hotels, some in the homes of friends or in rented apartments, some in the male’s home, but much of it in the home of the girl. Special provisions for premarital intercourse are almost as commonly accepted in certain segments of the population as communal bachelors’ huts are in some primitive societies (Malinowski 1929, Murdock 1934, Reichard 1938, Mead 1939, Bryk 1944, Fehlinger 1945, Morley 1946).

While the upper social level has a high portion (90%) of its marital intercourse without clothing, not much more than half (55%) of its pre-marital intercourse is had under circumstances where that is possible (Table 95). The lower social level, which has less than half (43%) of its marital intercourse without clothing, has even less (32%) of its pre-marital intercourse in that fashion.

In Continental Europe, the acceptance of pre-marital intercourse is more general than it is in our American population, and European clinicians have contributed materially to an increasing opinion among professional groups in this country that there are social values to be obtained by pre-marital experience in intercourse. There are some clinicians who advise their patients to this effect, and there are histories of individuals who would have found it difficult to have made socio-sexual adjustments without such experience.

On the other hand, of course, there is no sort of sexual behavior which has been more often condemned than pre-marital intercourse. It has usually been condemned on strictly moral grounds (as in Jefferis and Nichols 1912, Armitage 1913, Exner 1914, Gallichan 1916, Bigelow 1916, Forbush 1919, W. S. Hall 1920, Coppens and Spalding 1921, U. S. Public Health Service 1921, 1937, Meyer 1927, 1929, 1934, Eddy 1928a, Clark 1928, Elliott and Bone 1929, Kirsch 1930, Gillis 1930, Amer. Soc. Hygiene Association 1930, Ruland and Rattler 1934, Hildebrand 1935, Martindale 1925, Bruckner 1937, Lowry 1938, A Catholic Woman Doctor 1939, Kelly 1941, H. Frank 1941, Moore 1943, Dickerson 1944, Griffin 1945, 1946, Davis 1946, Wood in Chivers 1946, Gartland 1946, McGill 1946, Redemptorist Father 1946).

More scientific issues are raised when pre-marital intercourse is condemned on the ground that it leads to unwanted pregnancies, to the birth of offspring outside of wedlock, to the acquirement and spread of venereal disease, to psychic upset for the individual, to social and legal difficulties, and to maladjustments with one’s spouse after marriage (W. S. Hall 1907, 1909, Liederman 1926, Eddy 1928a, 1928b, Amer. Soc. Hygiene Association 1930, Dickerson 1930, 1937, 1944, 1946, Exner 1932, Rice 1933a, 1933b, 1946, Meagher and Jelliffe 1936, Popenoe 1936, 1940, 1943, 1944, Stone and Stone 1937, Snow 1937, Clarke 1938, Butterfield 1939, Crisp 1939, Kirkendall 1940, Bowman 1942, Sadler and Sadler 1944, Adams 1946, Boys Club Amer. 1946, R. Frank 1946). The questions involved here represent physical situations and measurable social relationships which can be subjected to scientific investigation. Unfortunately, the few scientists who have written on these matters have treated them in much the same subjective fashion as have persons without scientific backgrounds. There have been pleas for polygamy and promiscuity and there have been pleas for chastity, written by biologists, by physicians, by psychologists, and by psychiatrists, quite without benefit from the scientific training on which they traded for their reputations.

Later we shall endeavor to make an objective study of premarital intercourse in its several social relations, and particularly in regard to its effect on subsequent marital adjustments. It may be pointed out now that simple correlations (as used in Terman 1938, Burgess and Cottrell 1939) cannot suffice to measure the effects of pre-marital experience upon marital histories. Simple two-way correlations are never wholly adequate for showing cause and effect. At the best they show a relation, but not necessarily a causal relationship. They are always inadequate unless the items that are correlated are well-defined units, rather than complexes of units which have varied effects as their ingredients vary.

It does not suffice to show that the persons who have had or who have not had pre-marital experience are the ones who make the best or do not make the best adjustments after marriage. For pre-marital intercourse is always a complexity of things. It is, in part, a question of the sort of individual who has the intercourse and the degree to which the pre-marital activity is acceptable or unacceptable in the individual’s whole pattern of behavior. It depends upon the extent of the psychic conflict which may be evoked for an individual who transgresses the ideals and philosophies by which he has been raised, and to which he may still subconsciously adhere. For a person who believes that pre-marital intercourse is morally wrong there may be, as the specific histories show, conflicts which can do damage not only to marital adjustments, but to the entire personality of the individual. For a person who really accepts pre-marital intercourse, and who in actuality is not in conflict with himself when he engages in such behavior, the outcome may be totally different.

Again, the effects of pre-marital intercourse depend upon the nature of the partners with whom it is had, and the degree to which the activity becomes promiscuous. It is a question of the nature of the female partners, whether it is had with girls of the same social level or with girls of lower social levels, whether it is had as a social relationship or as a commercial relation, whether or nor it is had with the fiancée before marriage. The effect of pre-marital intercourse upon the marital adjustment may depend upon the extent to which the female partner accepts the intercourse, and the extent to which the male accepts the idea of his wife’s having had intercourse before he married her. Even in those cases where both the spouses believe that they accept the idea, situations of stress after marriage may bring the issue up for recriminations.

The significance of pre-marital intercourse depends upon the situations under which it is had. If it is had under conditions which are physically uncomfortable and not conducive to a mutually satisfactory relationship, if it is had under conditions which leave the individuals disturbed for fear that they have been or will be detected, the outcome is one thing. If it is had under satisfying circumstances and without fear, the outcome may be very different.

The meaning of the pre-marital intercourse will vary with its relation to venereal disease. At the college level, nearly all of the relations are had with a condom. Most of the pre-marital intercourse is had with girls of the same level. Consequently the incidence of venereal disease acquired by these persons is exceedingly low. On the other hand, the incidence of venereal disease! resulting from pre-marital intercourse at the lower social levels, where condoms are not often used, is as high as and probably higher than is ordinarily indicated in the social hygiene literature.

The significance of pre-marital intercourse depends upon the success or failure with which the couple avoids an unwanted pregnancy. It is much affected even by the fear of such a pregnancy. At the college level where contraceptives are almost universally used, the incidence of pre-marital pregnancies is phenomenally low. Those pregnancies that do occur almost invariably represent instances where contraceptives were not employed. In segments of the population which rarely use contraceptives, the frequencies of pre-marital pregnancies are quite high.

At the other end of the correlation, it is, of course, equally inadequate to treat marital happiness as a unit character. There are many factors which may affect marital adjustment, and the identification of the part which the sexual factor plays must depend on an exceedingly acute understanding of the effects of all these other factors.

It is sometimes asserted that all persons who have pre-marital intercourse subsequently regret the experience, and that such regrets may constitute a major cloud on their lives. There are a few males whose histories seem to indicate that they have so reacted to their pre-marital experience, but a very high proportion of the thousands of experienced males whom we have questioned on this point indicated that they did not regret having had such experience, and that the pre-marital intercourse had not caused any trouble in their subsequent marital adjustments. It is notable that most of the males who did regret the experience were individuals who had had very little premarital intercourse, amounting in most cases to not more than one or two experiences. It will, of course, be particularly significant at some later time to compare the responses of the females who have had pre-marital experience.

For the individual who is particularly concerned with the moral values of sexual behavior, none of these scientific issues are, of course, of any moment. For such individuals, moral issues are a very real part of life. They are as real as the social values of a heterosexual adjustment, and the happiness or unhappiness of a marital adjustment. They should not be overlooked by the scientist who attempts to make an objective measure of the outcome of pre-marital intercourse.

Moral aspects
Under strictly Orthodox Jewish codes and the codes of a considerable segment of the Christian church, all coitus outside of marriage is judged to be morally wrong. For many persons that is an absolute which is not subject to scientific or any other type of logical debate. Like other principles in absolutist philosophies, such judgments are supposed to emanate from the innate capacities of the intelligent, moral man to know what is right and what is wrong; and there are many persons who are convinced that this is a valid method of dealing with moral problems.

That relatively few persons are absolutists in any realistic sense is evidenced by the fact that they rarely discuss the right or wrong of pre-marital coitus or, indeed, of any other type of sexual activity, without seeking some justification of their interpretations in practical or scientific experience. Anyone who considers pre-marital coitus in terms of possible pregnancies, abortion, or venereal disease, or the ultimate effects upon subsequent marital adjustments, demonstrates his or her belief in a moral philosophy which is the product of experience, and which continues to be justified only as long as it proves to be the best way of life for the individual and for the total social organization.
Jewish attitudes, with citations of sources, are well summarized in: Epstein 1948:167-170 (the code emphasizes the importance of virginity at marriage; although there has been no actual law against it, in Jewish history there has been a very strong public condemnation of pre-marital coitus for both female and male). See Deuteronomy 22:13-21. The Catholic viewpoint is presented in the following: Sanchez 1637:312 (And then it is evident among all, that contacts had on account of venereal pleasure arising from coitus are deadly sins between persons neither married nor betrothed, as also is coitus itself). Ballerini 1890(2):715-716 (It is generally the opinion of the DD. that rape offered to a virgin willing and consenting does not differ in species from fornication. For it is in fact the same wickedness of wantonness: intercourse, namely, which is outside of marriage. For the fact that the virginal seal, if there is any, is broken by means of the virile member, the virgin consenting, is not contrary to the special end of nature but rather is according to it; since this member was destined by nature for the use previously mentioned: therefore nature is offended only because the said rupture happens outside of marriage). Hieronymus Noldin, Summa Theologiae Moralis, 1905(2):472, 473; 1904(3):600, 609 (fornication is a sin, virginity is a blessing, coitus between betrothed persons is a sin. Fornication by an engaged man with a third party is not considered ‘"notable”; fornication by the engaged woman with a third party is so considered and her fiancé may withdraw from the betrothal). Arregui 1927:147-150 (any venereal pleasure outside of marriage is a sin). Davis 1946(2):238, 241 (fornication is bad because it is contrary to the order of nature and connotes an unstable union of parents which will lead to the neglect of offspring and is therefore opposed to the propagation of the human race. Rape is, in canonical law, called simple if it is the illicit deflowering of a virgin, but it is a sin against chastity and justice regardless of whether the woman is a virgin or not).

Actually, most persons compromise between an absolutist approach to the morality of pre-marital coitus and a practical consideration of the realities of human nature. In most cultures, throughout history, everywhere in the world, some sort of distinction has been made between the acceptability of pre-marital coitus for the male and the acceptability of such coitus for the female. This undoubtedly stems from the fact that it has always proved impossible to prevent the majority of males from having coitus before marriage; while females, who are less often sexually responsive at early ages and less often stimulated psychologically at any age, have proved to be more controllable. They are, therefore, the ones who are most often expected to adhere to the moral and social codes. This “double standard” is based in part on a recognition of actual differences between the sexes rather than on an absolutist’s determination of what is right or wrong.

These differences in the social attitudes toward pre-marital coitus among males and among females are also rooted historically in certain economic factors. Sexual activities for the female before marriage were proscribed in ancient codes primarily because they threatened the male's property rights in the female whom he was taking as a wife. The demand that the female be virgin at the time of her marriage was comparable to the demand that cattle or other goods that he bought should be perfect, according to the standards of the culture in which he lived. In the ancient Chaldean, Jewish, and other codes, the prohibitions were directed primarily against the female’s activity after she had become betrothed, and penalties for the violation of her sexual integrity involved the payment of goods equivalent to those which the fiancé had already turned over to the girl’s father. Goods were also demanded as compensation to the husband, father, or fiance for the depreciation in value of his interests in the female. At some points English marriage law still recognizes the property rights which the male has in the female whom he is planning to marry, or in his wife, but American law has more or less completely broken away from this concept of the husband having any property rights in his wife or prospective wife. Our moral judgments of pre-marital coitus for the female are, however, still affected by this economic principle which developed among the Chaldeans and other ancient peoples, three or four thousand years ago.
The property rights which the father and the fiance had in the female are illustrated by the following ancient codes: Exodus 22:16-17. Pritchard 1950: 162, Law of Eshunna [2000-1000 b.c., Mesopotamia] lf31 (a fine for coitus with another man's virgin slave girl). Pritchard 1950:171, Code of Hammurabi [2000 B.C.?] 11130 (death for the male having coitus with a betrothed female, no punishment for female). Pritchard 1950:185, Middle Assyrian Laws [1500-1200 b.c.] 1(55-56 (male seducing a virgin must pay three times her value to the father).

Many a male, particularly in certain social levels and in certain parts of the United States, is prone to seek coitus from every available girl, while insisting that the girl he marries should be virgin when he first has coitus with her. It is the male, rather than the female, who imposes this incongruity on the social code. He will defend his right and any other man’s right to try to secure coitus from another man’s sister or wife, but he may fight or kill the man who attempts to secure coitus from his own sister, fiancée, daughter, or wife. Interestingly enough, juries and the statute law in certain parts of the country are still inclined to grant him the privilege of defending what he now calls his honor, although it originated in the ancient codes as a property right.
The special interest of a male in the sexual sanctity of his close female relatives or fiancée is even today generally recognized by juries (see Wharton 1932(1) : 809) and judges, and even some state legislative bodies. See Texas Penal Code 1925: Art. 1220. See especially the Georgia Code 1933: Title 26 §1015 and 1016 and numerous cases decided under these sections. At common law and in many states, if a man takes the law into his own hands in defense or in vindication of his wife’s, sister's, daughter’s, or fiancée’s "honor," strong evidence of the seduction is considered sufficient provocation to reduce a killing from murder to manslaughter, and to mitigate the sentence or completely excuse mild assault and battery. See Clark and Marshall 1940:318.

Females are less inclined to demand that their husbands be virgins when they marry. In our own sample, something over 40 per cent of the males wanted to marry virgins, while only 23 per cent of the females expressed the same desire (Table 91f). There was a larger number of females (32 per cent) who were inclined to marry non-virgins, and another 42 per cent who were indifferent on the point.
Data on preferences for marrying a virgin are also in: Neely 1940:516-519 (1600 college students; between 1929 and 1936, a lessening of desire to marry a virgin. Shift more marked among males, but virginity in mate still more important to males than to females). Landis and Landis 1948:85 (among students at Michigan State College, 48 per cent of females, 67 per cent of males willing to marry a non-virgin). Gilbert Youth Research 1951:20 (72 per cent of females and 27 per cent of males in college survey willing to marry non-virgin).

In this attempt to resolve the conflict between the sexual nature of the human male and the pattern imposed by his code on the human female, the age-old institution of heterosexual prostitution has been widely accepted throughout history and in most parts of the world. A considerable portion of the pre-marital coitus which males secure in most Oriental, North African, Continental European, Mediterranean, and Latin American cultures is, apparently, secured from prostitutes rather than from girls who plan to marry males who have any social status. The strict way in which girls of socially respectable families are guarded by parents or by dueñas in Spanish and Latin American countries forces the male to become better acquainted with the ways of prostitutes and the sort of coitus that prostitutes provide than he ever does with the girl that he marries. So strict is the tradition against pre-marital coitus for girls of better families that we have histories of Spanish and some other European males who find it difficult to have coitus with their wives, because they hold them in something of the same respect that they held their mothers, sisters, and all “decent” girls before marriage. Consequently some males in such cultures may continue to secure much of their coitus after marriage from prostitutes or mistresses, rather than from their wives.

The second most widespread plan for controlling pre-marital coitus has been the attempt in Judeo-Christian cultures to impose pre-marital chastity upon both males and females. This has been the most important factor in restricting pre-marital activity in the United States; but the limits of the possible effectiveness of such suppression are shown by the incidence and frequency data which we have now given for the American male and female. Objections to a double standard have usually implied that the male should accept the same restraints which our culture has been imposing upon the female. The record indicates, however, that the double standard is being resolved by the development of a single standard in which pre-marital coital activities have become extended among females to levels which are more nearly comparable to those in the male.

Legal aspects
The statute law on pre-marital coitus largely reflects the moral codes from which it originated. This means that it is the product of the Jewish and Christian heritage in medieval and Renaissance Europe, of the sex law which evolved in the English ecclesiastic courts, and of the resultant laws and customs of the early American colonies.

While our forty-eight bodies of state law are derived largely from a single basic pattern, there is considerable diversity in the extent to which they try to limit pre-marital coitus, and the means by which they attempt to implement those laws. Almost universally throughout the United States coitus is prohibited for juveniles, both female and male. The age at which an individual ceases to be a juvenile varies in the several states from 14 to 21; it is set at 18 in some 23 of the states. While the court processes and subsequent confinement for juvenile delinquency are not supposed to be penal, in their actual administration they are often more severe and the penalties may be more extreme than those imposed upon adults. It is possible in most states for the judge to hold a delinquent in a juvenile institution—which is often more severely administered than the average institution for older persons—for the entire period between the child’s delinquency and the time he or she becomes adult. This in some instances may amount to six or eight years, and is not infrequently a matter of three or four years.
The definitions of delinquency in all states include ‘'immoral” conduct, acts, or life, or some such phrase; and even in the states where fornication is no crime, non-marital coitus is considered immoral. For detailed data on varying juvenile jurisdictions, see: Tappan 1949:14.

Some 35 of the states of the Union attempt to penalize as fornication pre-marital coitus which occurs between the age at which the individual becomes an adult and the age at which he or she marries. There are, however, 13 of the states which attach no criminal penalty to coitus which occurs in that period, provided that the activity is the product of mutual consent, and provided that no fraud, force, public display, or payment of money is involved.
The 13 states, containing more than 30 per cent of the U. S. population, which have no statute prohibiting fornication, are: Calif., Del., La., Md., Mich., Mo., N.M., N.Y., Okla., S.D., Tenn., Vt., and Wash. Sixteen states require aggravating circumstances such as cohabitation or repetition. There are only 19 which penalize any single act of coitus. In 6 of these 19, however, fines are the sole penalties. See Bensing 1951:69.

But whatever the statutes, the administration of the laws on premarital coitus differs widely at different times and places within any state, depending largely on local attitudes and upon the social backgrounds and moral codes of the law enforcement officers and of the judges in the courts. Courts are most inclined to become severe when the coitus involves youths under 20 years of age, when it involves persons of different social levels, and particularly when it involves persons of different racial groups, or an adult male and a minor girl. There are some jurists, chiefly among those who have originated from lower social strata, who comprehend the realities and who in consequence attach little significance to the cases which reach their courts. There are other jurists, chiefly those who come from upper level, better educated, or religiously more devout groups, who regularly denounce the girl or boy, or older female or male who stands before them on delinquency or fornication charges. Neither the judges, nor state legislators, nor the public at large seem willing to believe that it is only a minute fraction of one per cent of all pre-marital coitus which is ever brought to the attention of the court. It is difficult to convince any one except persons who have actually been involved with the law that it is usually nothing more than some caprice of circumstances which leads to the apprehension and trial of a certain few individuals out of all those who engage in such sexual activity.

The truth of this matter must become apparent if one (using the incidence and frequency data which we have given here) contemplates the considerable amount of coitus that must occur among his or her unmarried friends in the course of a year, or the total amount that occurs in one’s immediate neighborhood, or in the whole town, and considers how little of the activity is ever observed or in any other way comprehended by anyone except the immediate participants. The record in classical, later European, Oriental, and modern fiction would lead one to believe that persons involved in illicit coitus are frequently apprehended in the midst of their activities; but in actuality in a series of 2020 histories we have only 29 instances of the accidental discovery and observation of pre-marital coitus. This means that not more than 6 cases out of each 100,000 pre-marital copulations in our records were discovered while in progress. More surprising even than that is the fact that we have no instance of legal difficulty arising from the actual discovery of pre-marital coitus while in progress, although we do have histories of both females and males who were convicted and served penal sentences on the basis of other sorts of evidence that the coitus had occurred.

There is no aspect of American sex law which surprises visitors from other countries as much as this legal attempt to penalize pre-marital activity to which both of the participating parties have consented and in which no force has been involved. As we have already noted, there is practically no other culture, anywhere in the world, in which all non-marital coitus, even between adults, is considered criminal. Certainly most American youth do not consider it so, whatever they may think of it as a moral issue.

Arguments
Arguments for or against the acceptance of coitus before marriage have been based, for the most part, on emotional reactions which reflect the cultural tradition. However, these reactions are ordinarily supported or rationalized by arguments which may be summarized as follows:

Against Pre-Marital Coitus
Most marriage manuals, treatises on sex education, moral philosophies, and much of the technical literature agree in emphasizing the disadvantages and general undesirability of pre-marital coitus. They point out the damage it may do to the individual, to the sexual partner, and to the social organization. Specifically, they emphasize:
1. The danger of pregnancy
2. The danger if abortion is used to terminate a pregnancy
3. The possibility of contracting a venereal disease
4. The undesirability of a marriage which is forced by a pre-marital pregnancy
5. The traumatic effects of coitus which is had under the inadequate circumstances which are supposed to attend most pre-marital relations
6. The damage done by the participant’s guilt over the infringement of the moral law
7. The guilt at the loss of virginity, and its subsequent effect on marriage
8. The fear that males lose respect for and will not marry a female with whom they have had coitus
9. The damage done when guilt feelings are reawakened after marriage
10. The guilt resulting from fear of public disapproval
11. The risk and fear of social difficulties that may follow discovery of the relationship
12. The risk and fear of legal difficulties that may follow any discovery of the relationship
13. The possibility that pre-marital coitus which is satisfactory may delay or altogether prevent the individual from marrying
14. The possibility that the coitus may make one feel obligated to marry the sexual partner
15. The possibility that guilt over the coitus may break up an otherwise desirable friendship with the sexual partner
16. The overemphasis which pre-marital experience may place on the physical aspects of friendship and marriage
17. The likelihood that pre-marital irregularities will lead to later extra-marital infidelities, with consequent damage to the marriage
18. The possibility that the female will be less capable of responding satisfactorily in her marital coitus because of the traumatic effects of pre-marital experience
19. The fact that pre-marital coitus is morally wrong
20. The principle that abstinence from such activities may develop one’s will power

For Pre-Marital Coitus
The reasons for having pre-marital coitus have rarely been marshaled in any comparable order, perhaps because of the general disapproval in our culture of any extenuation of such behavior, or perhaps because those who do not disapprove consider that the reasons for having any coitus are self-evident. Nevertheless, the following advantages have been claimed for such experience:
1. It may satisfy a physiologic need for a sexual outlet
2. It may become a source of immediate physical and psychologic satisfaction
3. If there is no guilt, it may increase one's ability to function more effectively in other, non-sexual fields
4. It is more valuable than solitary sexual activity for developing one's capacity to make emotional adjustments with other persons
5. It may develop one's capacity to make the particular sorts of emotional adjustments which are needed in marital relationships
6. It may provide training in the sorts of physical techniques that may be involved in marital coitus
7. It may test the capacities of two persons to make satisfactory sexual adjustments after marriage
8. It is easier to learn to make emotional and physical adjustments at an earlier age; they are learned with greater difficulty after marriage
9. Failure in a pre-marital relationship is socially less disastrous than failure after marriage
10. Heterosexual experience may prevent the development of a homosexual pattern of behavior
11. Pre-marital coitus may lead to marriage
12. In at least some social groups, an individual may acquire status by fitting into the group pattern of behavior

All of these arguments, pro and con, are met by denials from those who believe to the contrary. There are obvious biases on both sides of the fence. On the one hand, it is claimed that the objections to premarital coitus are primarily moral, even when they are presented in ostensibly technical manuals emanating from professionally trained persons.
    Examples of strictly and strongly moral interpretations may be found in: Neumann 1936:105 (Ethical Culture approach). Banning 1937:1-10 (a widely circulated article full of unsubstantiated generalizations and exaggerated warnings). Kuhn in Becker and Hill 1942:226 (finds Terman data a ‘‘shocking picture”). Popenoe 1943:113-118. Duvall and Hill 1945:141-163. Kirkendall 1947:26-31. Dickerson 1947:57-69. Landis and Landis 1948:124-131. Christensen 1950:149-158. Foster 1950:66-69. Bundesen 1951:88-120.
    Examples of tolerant attitudes are presented in: Michels 1914:177-190. Gerling 1928:109-111 (German). Guyon 1933:124-133. Levy and Munroe 1938:1-46. Wilhelm Reich 1945:111-115 (child and adolescent training). Comfort 1950:89 ff. (English). Famham 1951:130-135. Stone and Stone 1952:246-259.
    Examples of mixed reactions or a middle ground in moral interpretations are in: Himes 1940:29-43. Folsom in Becker and Hill 1942:187. Bowman 1942:219-236 (lists arguments pro and con). Fenichel 1945:111 (the psychoanalytic attitude). Leuba 1948:94-104 (disposes of many false arguments). Stokes 1948:19. Harper 1949:83-87. Brown and Kempton 1950:134-139. Fromme 1950:80. Speigel 1951:385 (the psychoanalytic attitude). Sylvanus Duvall 1952:ch.9. Am. Assoc. Marr. Counselors, Round Table 1952:229-238.

On the other hand, it is claimed that arguments for premarital coitus are based on hedonistic desires rather than upon any consideration for the ultimate good of the participating partners or of the social organization. On the one hand, there is an insistence that the mores were born out of ancient experience which remains valid for the present day. On the other hand, it is claimed that conditions have changed, and that many of the older objections to pre-marital coitus are no longer valid in a world which has acquired the means of controlling conception and venereal disease, and some scientific understanding of the nature of the emotions and of the problems that underlie human relationships. There have been few attempts to accumulate anything like scientific data.

The resolution of these conflicting claims can come only through some recognition that certain of these problems lie in areas which belong to the biologic, psychologic, and social sciences, while others are moral problems which the student of moral philosophies must solve.
Attitudes on pre-marital coitus for the female are also surveyed in: Blanchard and Manasses 1930:262 (accepted by 55 per cent of 252 middle class females). Katz and Allport 1931:252 (30 per cent of more than 3000 female and male students at Syracuse University support double standard). Baber 1936:118 (accepted by 29 per cent of 321 college males). Fortune Survey 1937:188 (accepted by 17 per cent of females and 28 per cent of males). Bernard 1938:356 (accepted by 3 per cent of 250 females and 4 per cent of 250 males at University of Colorado). Pringle 1938:15, 49 (14 per cent of women accept, more often in urban, non-religious, single, and younger groups). Bromley and Britten 1938:71 (62 per cent of 772 college females accept). Cuber and Pell 1941:21 (22 per cent of 11 females and 53 per cent of 106 males accept). Fortune Survey 1943:20 (36 per cent of women accept). Rockwood and Ford 1945:40 (28 per cent of 191 males and females, 26 per cent of 73 males, and 12 per cent of 100 females at Cornell accept). Landis and Landis 1948:121 (at Michigan State, among 2000 students, 9 per cent of females and 31 per cent of males approve for female). Lanval 1950: 118 (82 per cent of 500 French and Belgian women accept). Christensen 1950:26 (a study of 234 college students). Friedeburg 1950:12 (65 per cent of 493 German females and males accept).

Even the scientific aspects are too many for any immediate solution; but the data brought together in the present chapter may contribute to a more objective understanding of certain aspects of the problem.

Physiologic Significance
There is no doubt that coitus, both before and after marriage, is had primarily because it may satisfy a physiologic need and may serve as a source of pleasure for one or both of the individuals who are involved. No appreciable part of the coitus, either in or out of marriage, is consciously undertaken as a means of effecting reproduction.
Some writers have tried to minimize physical satisfactions as a motivation for pre-marital coitus among females. They see such factors as inferiority feelings, a desire to be popular, excessive restrictions at home, crowded living conditions, and unhappy family situations, as the real reasons for coif us. See, for example: Popenoe 1943:121. Lion et al. 1945:63-^4. Strain 1948:185.

Our understanding of the physiology of sexual arousal and response makes it clear that most males and perhaps a third of the females find it difficult to resolve any considerable sexual arousal which is not carried through to orgasm. As we have already indicated, pre-marital coitus had provided the sort of resolution which orgasm can bring for the 20 per cent of the females in the sample who were having coitus with an average frequency of once in three to ten weeks during a period of some years before marriage.

Basing the calculations on the females who were married, and who, in consequence, had completed their pre-marital histories, we find that pre-marital coitus had been the source of the first orgasm experienced by some 8 per cent of the sample. The figure was lower for those females who were born before 1900, but ranged from 8 to 10 per cent in all the generations born since then. Among those females who had reached their first orgasm during a heterosexual contact, some 14 per cent had reached it in pre-marital coitus.

Psychologic Significance
By many persons, the psychologic effects of pre-marital coitus are considered more significant than the physical or physiologic aspects of such experience. As measures of these psychologic significances, we have data on the attitudes of the females in our sample toward having pre-marital coitus, the extent and nature of any regret which had been consequent on their coital experience, and the extent to which they had accepted their experience.

Table 91f. Attitude towards pre-marital coitus
Indicators of Attitudes Responses Given Cases in
Sample
Yes More
or less 		No Un-
decided
Percent Number
Intent to have, or to have more coitus
Single females without experience 7 2 80 11 2288
Single females with experience 53 6 30 11 879
Factors accounting for restraint
Moral objections 80 9 11 5735
Sexual unresponsiveness 32 13 55 4831
Fear of pregnancy 21 23 56 5727
Fear of public opinion 20 24 56 5646
Lack of opportunity 14 8 78 5653
Fear of venereal disease 5 9 86 5720
Desire to marry a virgin male
  Yes No pref-
erence		 No Un-
decided		  
Total sample 23 42 32 3 5449
Females born bf. 1900 29 45 15 11 365
Females born 1900-1909 22 45 28 5 708
Females born 1910-1919 17 45 36 2 1267
Females born 1920-1929 24 41 32 3 2985

Attitudes
Whether a female decides to begin pre-marital coitus, or to continue it after she has once had it, must depend on a multiplicity of physical, situational, social, and other factors, on some of which we have specific information and on others of which we do not yet have sufficient data for analyses. Interestingly enough, the most significant correlation seems to have been with the presence or absence of experience. Among the unmarried females who had never had coital experience, 80 per cent insisted that they did not intend to have it before marriage; but among those who had already had such experience, only 30 per cent said that they did not intend to have more (Table 91f). A selective factor must have been involved; but it may be noted again that experience dispels many of the fears that gather about the unknown, especially when it is an unknown type of sexual activity.

In their own analyses of the factors which had restricted their pre-marital coitus, 89 per cent of the females in the sample said that moral considerations had been of primary importance (Table 91f). Some of these individuals had identified these factors as moral. However, some of them insisted that they were not accepting the traditional codes just because they were the codes, and believed that they had developed their attitudes as a result of their own rational analyses of what they considered to be expedient; decent, respectable, fine, sensible, right or wrong, better or best. This represented an interesting attempt on the part of the younger generation to proclaim its emancipation from the religious tradition, but most of them were still following the traditions without having found new bases for defending them. It is to be noted that the females of the younger generations had recognized moral restraints on their pre-marital activities about as often as the females born some thirty or forty years before. But the increased incidences of coital activity, more than the expressed opinions, indicated that the moral codes had been less effective among the younger generations.

Some 45 per cent of the females in the sample recognized that their lack of sexual responsiveness had been a factor in limiting their premarital activity (Table 91f); but it seems clear that a lack of responsiveness or an inability to respond was even more important than the females themselves understood. As someone long ago recognized, it is easier to abstain from sin when one is not physically or physiologically endowed with the capacity—or with much capacity—to sin.

Fear of pregnancy ranked next, with 44 per cent of the females considering that this had been one of the factors which had limited their pre-marital coitus (Table 91f).

As many females (44 per cent) said that fear of public opinion had been an important factor in limiting their behavior (Table 91f). On the other hand, most of them were confident that no one except their sexual partners would know of any coitus which they might have.

Some 22 per cent frankly recognized that they had abstained from coitus, at least in part, because they had not encountered the opportunity to have it (Table 91f).

Fear of venereal disease had been only a minor factor in limiting the pre-marital coitus of the females in the sample. It was reported as a factor in only 14 per cent of the sample (Table 91f).

These were the expressed reasons which the females gave for their lack of coitus, or for their decisions to limit their further coitus. In many cases, these probably were the factors which had been involved; but in some cases these appeared to be nothing more than rationalizations of the real reasons. Taking all of our experience into account, we are inclined to list, in order of importance, the following as the primary factors which had limited the pre-marital activity of the females in the sample:
1. The sexual unresponsiveness of many younger females
2. The moral tradition of our American culture
3. Lack of experience, and the individual’s fear of engaging in an unfamiliar activity.
Various reasons given for avoiding coitus are also recorded by: Blanchard and Manasses 1930:262 (252 females, reporting parental disapproval, fear of venereal disease, later regrets, fear of pregnancy, future spouse's disturbance, supposedly lessened chances to marry, loss of self-respect, social disapproval, etc.). Bromley and Britten 1938:64 (among 375 college females, 50 per cent feared pregnancy, 45 per cent had moral and religious scruples, 34 per cent wished to avoid any serious relationship).

Regret After Experience
That pre-marital coitus is often unsatisfactory is commonly believed by most persons and asserted with considerable positiveness by many who consider such activity morally wrong. Many of those who have written on the subject (e.g., Margaret Culkin Banning, Robert Foster, Evelyn Duvall, and others noted elsewhere) assert that pre-marital activity always brings psychologic disturbance and lasting regrets. The positiveness of these assertions might lead one to believe that they were based on sufficient investigations of the fact, but data which might sufficiently support such statements have never been accumulated by these writers or by other students in this field.

Table 92f. Regret after pre-marital coitus
Factors correlated with regret No
regret		 Some
regret		 Definite
regret		 Cases in
sample
Percent Number
Marital status
Single 69 13 18 751
Married 77 12 11 1039
Extent of pre-marital experience
10 times or less 64 11 25 528
1 year or less 73 10 17 693
2-3 years 71 15 14 545
4-5 years 70 20 10 244
6-10 years 81 9 10 195
11-20 years 86 8 6 96
Number of pre-marital partners
1 partner 75 10 15 844
2-5 partners 69 17 14 646
6-10 partners 81 9 10 160
11-20 partners 77 17 6 82
Decade of birth
Before 1900 80 10 10 104
1900-1909 79 9 12 327
1910-1919 76 14 10 572
1920-1929 69 13 18 769
Pregnancy, a result
Yes 70 13 17 333
No 74 13 13 .1444
Venereal infection, a result
Yes 66 18 16 44
No 74 13 13 1709
Coitus with fiancé

“Fiancé” refers to the male whom the female ultimately married.

With fiancé only 81 10 9 465
With other males only 62 10 28 124
With both fiancé and other males 78 13 9 913
Religious background
Protestant
Devout 62 15 23 295
Moderate 69 17 14 376
Inactive 80 10 10 490
Catholic
Devout 50 15 35 86
Moderate 65 10 25 51
Inactive 84 7 9 90
Jewish
Moderate 75 13 12 93
Inactive 82 11 7 331

As a matter of fact, some 69 per cent of the still unmarried females in the sample who had had coitus insisted that they did not regret their experience (Table 92f). Another 13 per cent recorded some minor regret. An even larger proportion, some 77 per cent of the married females, looking back from the vantage point of their more mature experience, saw no reason to regret their pre-marital coitus. Another 12 per cent of the married females had some minor regret. These figures differ considerably from those usually presented in public discussions of such pre-marital activity. They illustrate the difference between wishful thinking and scientifically accumulated data. There are, of course, more cases of regret among the disturbed persons who go to clinicians for help.

The regret registered by a portion of the sample appeared to depend on the nature of the pre-marital experience (Table 92f). For the most part, those who regretted it most were the females who had had the least experience. Our data, for instance, show that 25 per cent of those "who had had the smallest amount of pre-marital coitus seriously regretted their experience, while only 14 per cent of those who had had such experience for two or three years, and only 10 per cent of those who had had it for something between four and ten years, registered such regret (Table 92f). This is borne out by the fact that the married females, with their more extended coital experience, regretted their pre-marital coitus in only 11 per cent of the cases. This is especially interesting because the statement is often made that the quality of a marital relationship is so far superior to a pre-marital relationship that married women usually regret such experience. That statement is not confirmed by our data.
The relation of lack of experience to guilt is also noted in: Landis et al. 1940:66, 291 (12 per cent of 266 females with guilt, especially if experience was limited). The data in Hamilton 1929:349 are not clearly interpretable.

Similarly, regrets were inversely correlated with the extent of the promiscuity in the pre-marital activity (Table 92f). Among the females in the sample who had confined their coital contacts to a single male, 15 per cent seriously regretted their experience. On the other hand, of those who had extended their coitus to something between eleven and twenty males, only 6 per cent regretted their experience. It may be that experience reduces the psychologic disturbance, or it may be that those females who are least inclined to worry are the ones who become most promiscuous. It is probable that both factors contribute to these correlations.

Whether pre-marital experience was regretted or not did not, interestingly enough, seem to depend upon the generation to which the individual belonged (Table 92f). Actually, the data show a larger number of the youngest generation regretting their pre-marital coitus, but this probably depends on the fact that they had had more limited experience at the time they contributed their histories. Initial regrets are often resolved as an individual matures and acquires more experience.

Whether one regrets her pre-marital experience seems to depend to only a small degree upon the complications which a pregnancy may produce. In the sample, some 17 per cent of those who had become pregnant as a result of their pre-marital experience seriously regretted that they had had coitus, while 13 per cent of those who had not become pregnant registered such regret (Table 92f). It is more surprising to find that 83 per cent of those who had become pregnant registered little or no regret.

Regrets were correlated to only a small extent with the complications which venereal infections had introduced. Although 16 per cent of the females who had had infections seriously regretted their pre-marital coitus, some 13 per cent of those who had not been infected registered similar levels of regret (Table 92f).

Pre-marital coitus which was had with the future spouse was least often regretted. Serious regret had occurred in only 9 per cent of the histories of the females who had had at least some of their pre-marital coitus with the males whom they subsequently married (Table 92f). But if the pre-marital coitus had not included the fiancé, there had been serious regret in 28 per cent of the cases.

There were no factors which were more closely correlated with guilt, among the females in the sample who had had pre-marital coitus, than their religious backgrounds, and the extent to which they felt that such experience was morally wrong. The data show, for instance, that 23 per cent of the devout Protestants but only 10 per cent of the inactive Protestants seriously regretted their pre-marital experience (Table 92f). Some 35 per cent of the devout Catholics but only 9 per cent of the inactive Catholics in the sample recorded such regrets. The more limited sample of Jewish females showed the same trends. The clinician might very well advise the individual who is strongly convinced that coitus before marriage is morally wrong to hesitate about having such experience, for she is more likely to be emotionally disturbed by it. We have also shown that the possibility of the pre-marital coitus reaching a satisfactory conclusion in orgasm is definitely lower for females who are religiously devout. It might be argued, however, that the religious attitudes were as responsible as the coitus for these psychologic disturbances.

Acceptance
That a considerable portion of the pre-marital coitus is psychologically satisfactory is, of course, evidenced by its continuation and considerable prolongation in the histories of many of the females who begin such activities. We have already noted that 69 per cent of the single females in the sample had accepted their coital experience, and 77 per cent of the married females had recalled their pre-marital experience without evident psychologic disturbance (Table 92f).

The psychologic significance of any type of sexual activity very largely depends upon what the individual and his social group choose to make of it. The disturbances which may sometimes follow coitus rarely depend on the nature of the activity itself, or upon its physical outcome. An occasional unwanted pregnancy, a rare instance of venereal disease, or a very rare instance of physical damage are about the only undesirable physical after-effects. But if the behavior leads to some open conflict with the social organization of which the individual is a part, then the consequences may be serious and sometimes disastrous. The so-called traumatic effects of sexual experience often depend on the individual’s inability or refusal to recognize the satisfaction that he or she actually found in the experience, or on his or her persistence in believing that the experience should not have been satisfactory, or that it must, in some way, have undesirable consequences; but these, again, reflect the attitudes of the community in which the individual was raised.

The truth of this thesis is abundantly evidenced by our thousands of histories which, among them, include every conceivable type of sexual behavior without subsequent psychologic disturbance, while the same sort of behavior in other histories may bring shame, remorse, despair, desperation, and attempted suicide. The simplest matter can be built into an affair of gigantic proportions. Failing to comprehend that their own attitudes and the social codes generated these disturbances, most persons identify them as direct evidence of the intrinsic wrongness or abnormality of the sexual act itself.

In one or another of the cultures of the world, nearly every type of sexual behavior has been condemned, while in other cultures the same activities have been considered desirable sources of pleasure and socially valuable. Heterosexual coitus is extolled in most cultures, but forbidden to Buddhist and Catholic priests. Homosexual activity is condemned in some cultures, tacitly accepted in others, honored as a religious rite in others, and allowed to Buddhist priests. Behavior which is accepted by the culture does not generate psychologic conflicts in the individual or unmanageable social problems. The same behavior, censored, condemned, tabooed, or criminally punished in the next culture, may generate guilt and neurotic disturbances in the non-conforming individual and serious conflict with the social organism. This seems to be the source of most of the disturbances which we have found in the histories of American females and males who masturbate, who engage in heterosexual petting, or in homosexual relations or animal contacts, or utilize sexual techniques which, biologically normal enough in themselves, are taboo in our particular culture. This is the explanation of most of the psychologic disturbances that come out of pre-marital coitus.

Social significance
The possibilities of pregnancies and venereal disease resulting from pre-marital coitus, and the emotional significance of pre-marital experience and its subsequent effects on sexual adjustments in marriage, are matters which many persons will consider of paramount importance.

Pre-Marital Pregnancy. Official estimates allow some 130,000 births out of wedlock each year in the United States. The actual facts might multiply the official figures several times. This problem is apparently more acute in various European and Asiatic areas, and was a factor of still greater importance in past periods of history. Attempts to control such pregnancies and to provide that children should have responsible parents were undoubtedly factors of considerable moment in the development of society's interest in controlling coitus outside of wedlock.
The present and past extent of illegitimate births is only suggested in European and American studies. The figures range from 7 to 45 per cent, the higher incidences appearing in surveys based on percent of first born to younger females. See, for example; Käser 1830:75-76, Tables A, B (8 to 42 per cent of all births, Southern Germany, 1770-1829). Fletcher 1849:205 (7 per cent of registered births, England and Wales, 1845). Sundt 1857:Table 4, Sec. 5 (43 per cent of first born, Norway, 1850-1851). Eberhard 1924:40 (cites Klumker, 38 per cent of first born; Geissler, 45 per cent of first born, Germany, 1875-1885). Comfort 1950:90 (20 to 40 per cent among brides under 21, Great Britain, 1938). For the United States, see: 16th Census of U. S., 1940 (Population, Differential Fertility, Women by Number of Children Ever Born) 1945.-2 (reports over 74,000 illegitimate births registered per year, and emphasizes the total inadequacy of the data). Dublin 1951:20 (an estimated 131,900 illegitimate births in U. S. in 1947, equaling 4 per cent of all births).

We have a sample of 2094 single, white females (adolescent to forty years of age) who had had coitus and on whom we have data concerning pregnancy. They had had 476 pregnancies. Nearly 18 per. cent had become pregnant. A fair number of the pregnancies had occurred after the couples had become engaged. Some 15 per cent of those who had become pregnant had become pregnant more than once.

However, the probability that a pregnancy may result from any particular act of coitus is actually low. The 2094 single females who had had coitus had had it approximately 460,000 times. This means, approximately, that one pregnancy had resulted from each 1000 copulations. But considering the effectiveness of modern contraceptives and the exceedingly few failures which we have recorded for the condom or diaphragm when properly used, there is, today, practically no necessity for such a pregnancy rate in pre-marital coitus.

Venereal Infection. In spite of the fact that our sample included older females who had had their pre-marital experience in the days before there were adequate controls of venereal disease, the incidences of such disease in the sample were exceedingly low. Among the white females in the sample who had had coitus before marriage, we have venereal disease data on 1753 cases. Of this group, only 44 females had ever had any type of venereal infection (Table 92f). Present methods of simple and rapid cures for both syphilis and gonorrhea make their spread through pre-marital coitus a relatively unimportant matter today. The incidences may be higher in some lower level groups, but even then the medical techniques which are now available can prevent venereal disease from becoming a matter of much social importance.

Emotional Significance. Because of its emotional connotations, premarital coitus, like any other type of socio-sexual experience, may have long-range effects which are of considerable social significance. In socio-sexual contacts, individuals may become acquainted with each other, learn to adjust physically and emotionally, come to understand each other, and come to appreciate each others qualities in a way which is not possible in any other type of social relationship. Learning to respond emotionally to a sexual partner may contribute to the effectiveness of one’s other, non-sexual, social relationships.

Effect on Marriage. The child is born with an uninhibited capacity to make physical contacts and to snuggle against other persons. Such contacts may contribute to its emotional development. As children grow, however, it is customary in our culture to teach them that they must no longer make physical contacts, and must inhibit their emotional responses to persons outside of the immediate family. Many persons believe that this restraint should be maintained until the time of marriage. Then, after marriage, the husband and wife are supposed to break down all of their inhibitions and make physical and emotional adjustments which will contribute to the solidarity of the marital relationship. Unfortunately there is no magic in a marriage ceremony which can accomplish this. The record indicates that a very high proportion of the females, in particular, and a considerable number of the males find it difficult after marriage to redevelop the sort of freedom with which they made contacts as children, and to learn again how to respond without inhibition to physical and emotional contacts with other persons.
The difficulty of eliminating the effects of pre-marital restraint is also noted, for example, in: Michels 1914:180-181. Lynd and Lynd 1929:112. Fisher in Folsom 1938:20. Popenoe 1938:5.

At least theoretically, pre-marital socio-sexual experience, whether in petting or in coitus, should contribute to this development of emotional capacities. In this as in other areas, learning at an early age may be more effective than learning at any later age after marriage. But many persons believe that pre-marital experience cannot be as rich emotionally as marital experience. It is even insisted that pre-marital experience distinctly decreases a female's chance to make satisfactory sexual adjustments in marriage.

It is impossible, at this point, to attempt an over-all evaluation of the effects of pre-marital coitus on marriage, but we have been able to make correlations between the incidences and frequencies of the female’s pre-marital experience in orgasm, and her subsequent capacity to respond to the point of orgasm in her marital coitus. The record on our sample of married females shows that there was a marked, positive correlation between experience in orgasm obtained from pre-marital coitus, and the capacity to reach orgasm after marriage.  Among those females who had never reached orgasm from any source prior to marriage, 44 per cent had failed to reach orgasm in any of their coitus in the first year of marriage. Among those who "had had pre-marital coitus but had failed to reach orgasm in that coitus, between 38 and 56 per cent had failed to reach orgasm in that first year of marriage. But among the females who had had pre-marital coitus in which they had reached orgasm at least twenty-five times before marriage, only 3 per cent had failed to achieve at least some orgasm in their coitus during the first year of marriage. Similar correlations were evident as long as fifteen years after marriage. Well over half (50 to 57 per cent) of the females who had had pre-marital coital experience which had led to orgasm, had reached orgasm in practically all of their coitus during the first year of marriage. Of those who had had no pre-marital coital experience and had not reached orgasm from any source before marriage, only 29 per cent had approached a hundred per cent response in the first year of marriage.

These correlations may have depended on selective factors, or they may have depended on causal relationships. The most responsive females may have been the ones who had had the largest amount of pre-marital experience and, because they were responsive, they were the ones who had most often reached orgasm in marriage. The females who had abstained before marriage may have been the physiologically less responsive individuals who, therefore, were the ones who had most often remained chaste, both before and after marriage.

But there are several reasons for believing that such selective factors could not have accounted for the whole of these correlations. There are psychologic and sociologic data which show the importance of early experience in the establishment of habits of thought and attitudes which are very difficult to alter or counteract in later years. That the capacity to respond to the point of orgasm may be developed is evidenced by a variety of data, but particularly by the fact that some women who are unresponsive in their early marriages may improve in the course of some years in their capacities to reach orgasm. There are women in our histories who were unresponsive for several years, and in some cases for as long as twenty-eight years after their marriages, before they began to respond to the point of orgasm.

There is the further evidence that the failure to respond sexually is often the product of inhibitions which prevent an individual from entering a sexual relationship with the abandon which is necessary before orgasm can be achieved. Inhibitions represent the development of habits of behavior, patterns of negative response, or intellectual processes which interfere with the autonomic and involuntary functions on which satisfactory sexual relations most depend.

When there are long years of abstinence and restraint, and an avoidance of physical contacts and emotional responses before marriage, acquired inhibitions may do such damage to the capacity to respond that it may take some years to get rid of them after marriage, if indeed they are ever dissipated. While pre-marital experience in orgasm attained in masturbation and petting also shows a positive correlation with the capacity to reach orgasm in marital coitus, there is no sort of experience which shows a higher positive correlation with orgasmic success in marriage than coitus before marriage.

Any determination of the social desirability or undesirability of pre-marital coitus might, then, take into account the emotional effects on the individual whenever he or she engages in any type of socially taboo behavior, the actual damage that such activity may do to the social organization, the desirability of resolving some of the conflicts between the biologically normal urge to have coitus and the social insistence on pre-marital chastity, and the effects of abstinence or of pre-marital experience on the ultimate success of a marriage.

Summary and Comparisons of Female and Male
Pre-Marital Coitus
  In FemaleIn Male
Mammalian Origins
Coitus attempted as soon as
neuromuscular coordination permits		 Less often
and later		 More often
and earlier
Anthropologic Background
In most primitive societies,
coital play among children permitted or tolerated		 Yes Yes
In primitive societies,
some adolescent coitus permitted		 In about 70% In virtually all
Relation to Age
Accumulative incidence
Experience 50% Educ.0-8 = 98%
Educ.9-12 = 85%
Educ.13+ = 68%
Experience with orgasm ± 40%± always

Active incidence, experience
Age:adol.-15 3% 40%
Age: 16-2020% 71%
Age: 21-25 35% 68%
Frequency of exper. (act. med.), per week
Age: adol.-20 0.1-0.2 0.6
After age 20 0.30.4
Regularity Little Some
Percentage of total outlet
In early twenties 26% 33%
In mid-forties 43%34%
Number of years involved
1 year or less 44% 
2 to 3 years 30% 
Pre-marital partners (in active sample)
With one partner 53% 
Coitus with fiancé only 46% 
Coitus with fiancé and others 41%  
Relation to Age at Marr. and Educ. Level
  Some Very marked
Accumul. incid. uniform for uniform age of marr.
  Yes No. Higher in less educated
Active incid., experience
Age:16-20
Grade school 38% 85%
High school 32% 76%
College and graduate 17-19% 42%
After age 20
  No relation Persistent relation
Frequency
  No relation Highest in lower educ. levels
Percentage of total outlet
Age:16-20 Lowest in college group Lowest in college group
After age 20 No relation Persistent relation
Relation to Parental Occupational Class
  Little Little
Relation to Decade of Birth
Accumulative incid., (e.g. at age 25)
Born before 1900 14% Little. Younger
gener. starts earlier
Born after 1900 36-39%
Active incidence, exper.
Born before 1900 Lower Higher in younger
generation of grade school,
high school sample
Born after 1900 2-3 times as high
Frequency
  No relation Some relation
Percentage of total outlet
  Marked increase
 since 1900		  
Relation to Age at Onset of Adolescence
Accumulative and active incidence Little relation Some relation
Frequency No relation Little or no relation
Relation to Rural-Urban Background
Accumulative incidence Higher in urban Higher in urban
Active incidence Higher in urban
after age 20		 Higher in urban
Frequency No relation Higher in urban
Relation to Religious Background
Accumulative incidence, experience
Devout 24-30%Lower
Less devout 55-63% Higher
Active incidence Lower in devout Lower in devout
Frequency Somewhat
lower in devout		 Markedly
lower in devout
Percentage of total outlet Lower in devout Lower in devout
Nature and Conditions of Pre-Marital Coitus
Place
Most often in own home Yes No
Techniques
More extended when coital experience most extensive Yes 
Oral contacts more accepted by younger generation Yes Yes
Time involved often greater than in marital coitus Yes Yes
Coital positions more limited than in marital coitus Yes Yes
Nudity more common in upper educ. levels Yes Yes
Physiologic Significance
Provides release of sexual tension Sometimes for 40% ± always for 68-98%
Psychologic Aspects
 Intention to avoid coitus
Among virgins 80% 
Among non-virgins 30% Almost none
Factors restraining coitus:
Moral 89%21-61%
Lack of desire 45% 19-45%
Fear of pregnancy 44% 18-28%
Fear of discovery 44% 14-23%
Fear of venereal disease 14% 25-29%
Lack of opportunity 22% 35-52%
Regret following coitus
No regret 69-77% Most

Most often regret if:
Experience limited Yes 
Not with fiance Yes 
Devoutly religious Yes 
Desire to marry virgin
  23% 39-47%
Acceptance depends primarily on social custom
  YesYes
Judeo-Christian codes condemn
  Yes Yes
Legal Aspects
Coitus among juveniles prohibited in nearly all states Yes Yes
Coitus among unmarried adults penalized in 35 states Yes Yes
Social Significance
Pregnancies as a result 18% 
Venereal infections as a result 2-3% Low in college level,
higher in lower educ. level
Effect on Marriage
Pre-marital restraint creates inhibitions,
difficult to break after marriage		 Yes Yes, to lesser degree
No orgasm, first year of marr., if:
No pre-marital coitus or orgasm 40% 
Pre-marital coitus without orgasm 46-56% 
Pre-marital coitus with frequent orgasm 3% 
Orgasm ± always, first year of marr., if:
No pre-marital coitus or orgasm 29% 
Pre-marital coitus without orgasm 17% 
Pre-marital coitus with freq. orgasm 57% 


>>