-
lating in detail the in many ways fascinating, frustrating, and gratify. ing aspects of the attempts to secure both of these groups, I shall describe the homosexual and heterosexual samples of thirty individuals each finally obtained.
Each homosexual man is matched for age, education, and IQ with a heterosexual man. It would have been desirable to match for other variables, also, including occupation, but this was manifestly impossible. It should also be stated at the outset that no as sumptions are made about the ran dom selection of either group. No one knows what a random sample of the homosexual population would be like; and even if one knew, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain one. The project would not have been possible without the invaluable assistance of the Mattachine Society, an organization which
has as its stated purpose the develop. ment of a homosexual ethic in order to better integrate the homosexual into society. The members of the Mattachine Society not only made them. selves available as subjects but also persuaded their friends to become subjects. Because the heterosexuals were, for the most part, obtained from community organizations which must remain anonymous, I cannot describe further the way in which they were obtained.
Considerable effort was devoted to securing the 30 matched pairs of subjects, and the data in Table I indi-
cate that in most instances the match.
ing was unusually close.
The homosexuals, and thus the heterosexuals, ranged in age from 25 to 50, with an average age of 34.5 for the homosexual group and 36.6 for the heterosexual group. The IQ range, as measured by the Otis Self-Adminis
TABLE I
22
Education
Matched Pairs
Age
Homosexual IQ Education
Heterosexual Age IQ
Number
1
42
105
41
105
12
2
29
104
28
104
12
3.
29
109
9
31
109
12
4.
31
120
16
30
123
16
5.
44
127
18
15
126
17
6........
33
127
16
32
129
16
7
40
124
16
42
123
16
8.
33
124
16
36
122
16
9.
40
98
12
42
100
12
10.
33
101
14
32
105
15
11.
30
127
14
29
127
16
12.
42
91
12
39
94
14
13.
44
98
9
44
100
12
14.
36
114
16
36
117
16
15.
33
120
14
34
120
16
16.
40
106
12
44
107
12
17..
37
116
12
34
113
14
18.
36
127
16
36
127
16
19.
35
103
12
37
101
11
20.
26
133
18
27
133
18
21
33
124
13
36
122
16
22..
32
123
12
39
120
12
23..
26
123
16
133
16
24...
26
123
16
133
16
25...
41
135
16
39
119
16
26.
28
114
16
35
112
13
27...
27
118
13
48
119
13
27
110
14
48
113
16
57
95
14
46
100
12
30.
26
124
14
აი
129
12
~~*2*28229 8
34
mattachine REVIEW
tering Tests of Mental Ability, was from 90 to 135, with an average for the homosexual group of 115.4 and for the heterosexual group of 116.2. In education the range was from com. pletion of grammar school to the equivalent of a master's degree, with an average for the homosexual group of 13.9 years and for the heterosexual group of 14.3.
In both groups subjects were elim. inated who were in therapy at the time. If, in the preliminary screening, evidence of considerable disturbance appeared, the individual was eliminated (5 heterosexuals; 5 homosexuals). I attempted to secure homosexuals who would be pure for homosexuality; that is, without heterosexual experience. With three exceptions this is so. These three subjects had not had more than three heterosexual experiences, and they identified them. selves as homosexual in their patterns of desire and behavior. The heterosexual group is exclusively heterosexual beyond the adolescent period, with three exceptions; these three had had a single homosexual experience each. In the effort to control the pres ence of homosexuality, latent or otherwise, in the heterosexual group, cach potential subject was referred by a responsible leader of a community group, who described him as being a thorough-going heterosexual and well adjusted. This was an attempt to take precautions to eliminate as many men as possible with homosexual patterns of Behavior. It did not do so, and some individuals came who had to be eliminated because, though married and functioning in the commun. ity as married men, they had had extensive homosexual experience (four subjects).
The heterosexual subjects came because they were told that this was an opportunity to contribute to our understanding of the way in which the average individual in the community functions, since we had little data on normal men. They were told nothing
beforehand about the homosexual as pects of the project. When an indi vidual came to me, after describing to him the nature of the testing and the interview and securing his willing. ness to participate in the project, 1 then described very briefly the pur. pose of the study, including the homosexual group. It was impossible to avoid this explanation The commun. ity leaders who referred these men. were concerned about possible repercussions of a "sex study". They required that each man be informed that the total project involved a comparison of homosexual and heterosexual men. I had, therefore, to risk the effect of this information upon my subjects. So, having very briefly des cribed the project to him, I then asked whether he had had any homo. sexual inclinations or experience. This question was put in a matter-offact way and only after a good rela tionship of cooperation had been es tablished. If the individual seemed to be severely disturbed by the question, or responded in a bland way, or denied it vehemently, I did not include him in the sample of 30. It is possible, though I doubt it, that there are some heterosexuals in my group who have strong latent or concealed homosexuality.
Overt
The materials used for the com.
parative study of personality struc ture and adjustment of these two groups of men consisted of a battery of projective techniques, attitude scales, and intensive life history interviews. The material I am reporting on here is largely from an analysis of the Rorschach, TAT, and MAPS. with some references to life histories, the detailed analysis of which has not yet been completed.
I used the Rorschach because many clinicians believe it to be the best method of assessing total personality structure and, also, because it is one of the test instruments currently used for the diagnosis of homosexuality The 60 Rorschach protocols were
35