school attendance then the general population, indicating that the general level of intelligence and ability is high. Along with this is the interesting showing that a large percentage of TVs participated in some active masculine sport in school 56 5% in fact Another large group, 42% which undoubtedly includes some of the sports group contributed their talents in such activities as drama. music, school offices etc. Both of these factors show that TVs can hold their own on grounds of intelligence, ability, artistic appreciation and cultural

contributions

Orthodox medical explanations of TV give childhood exper iences such as dressing a boy aɛ a girl, not cutting hair, parents wanting a girl, petticoat punishment, etc. the blame for subsequent events. Along with these are such famil al 'causes" as a dominant mother or a bad male example due to broken homes father away a lot or being an alcoholic. Yet these results show only a relatively small percent of TVs as having had any of these classical childhood experiences It should also be remembered that some of these classifications duplicate each other.. a boy kept in curls might very well also be kept in dresses, and if parents wanted a girl they might dress the son femininely so these 4 catagories are not additive

Parental contribution shows no pattern either there are many more united families than seperated ones The dominant character of parents is about equally divided so that unless it could be argued that more than 55% of fathers are dominant in the rest of the population (which is doubtful) this casts no light on causation, Neither is the poor father figure dub to absence or drunkenness very strongly supported

Along these same lines the age of first TV experience is interesting With only 8% occurring before the age of 5, real early childhood events do not seem very common. It might be contended that poor memory would contribute to the low figures prior to 5 year of age, but even totalling 0-5 and 5 10 we get only 45% before 10 years, leaving 55% for later ages. This high figure and particularly that of 13% after age 18 further discredits the theory of early childhood experiences as causes. Psychologists will fall back on the "latency" bit of course