- ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

T
«my

 

ABSTRACT
SEXUAL IDENTITY AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT IN
"NORMAL" HOMOSEXUAL MALES
BY

Ronald C. Batain

Many explanations of male homosexual behavior have
been postulated. First,homosexua1 males are believed to
be more feminine than heterosexual males. Second, homo-
sexual males are believed to express a preference for the
stereotypically female sex role. Third, homosexual males
are assumed to be pathological individuals who are more
neurotic than heterosexual males in the general population.
Fourth, it is often assumed that homosexual males are apt
to be less self-accepting than heterosexual males. Finally,
homosexual males are supposedly pathological and therefore
less self-actualizing than heterosexual males. The present
investigation was designed to examine the validity of these
stereotypes.

The neuroticism scale of the Eysenck Personality
Inventory, nine subscales of the Personal Orientation Inven-
tory, the Fe scale of the California Psychological Inven-

tory, and four subscales of the Sex Role Preference

Ronald C. Batain

Inventory developed by the present author were administered
to 60 males divided into two groups: 30 homosexually ori-
ented and 30 heterosexually oriented males. It was hypothe-
sized that the two groups would differ in test performance
on all variables.

The subjects in the present study, both heterosexual
and homosexual, were selected on the basis that each could
meet the criteria of normality. The criteria advanced
stipulated that no subject was ever incarcerated for an
offense related to his sexual orientation or any felonious
offense, nor had he ever sought or received psychiatric or
psychological treatment, and showed no gross signs of psycho-
logical disturbance. Additional selection criteria was
discussed.

No statistical support was found for the hypothe-
sized differences between groups on 15 of the variables
which included four of the specific hypothesized variables.
Homosexual males did differ from the heterosexual males on
the femininity (Fe) variable. The ability of homosexual
males to express feminine interests and traits such as
.gentleness and sensitivity was discussed as a possible
explanation for the differences between the groups on this
variable. In addition, the critical differences between
homosexual and other males with various levels of sexual

preference were discussed.

Ronald C. Batain

The results of this study may have important impli-
cations both for the understanding of homosexual behavior
among men and for changing societal attitudes and reactions,

which are very often negative, toward a homosexual mode of

sexual expression.

SEXUAL IDENTITY AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT IN

"NORMAL" HOMOSEXUAL MALES

BY
Ronald C. Batain

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Psychology

1977

 

 

 

 

 

Emir a
final--
"" A; "
wean
iSSLSta
4. ._-

buds
1:91:

Statlt

Ejha

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express his gratitude to
Drs. Andrew Barclay and Dozier Thornton who served as
chairmen of his thesis committee on separate occasions.
Their comments and suggestions helped enormously in the
final--and final is the word--completion of this thesis.
Special thanks are extended to Dr. Frank Schmidt for his
assistance with the experimental design. Very sincere
thanks are given to Ms. Gali Edon and Dr. Neal Schmitt for
their statistical consultation. My appreciation and
_gratitude is also extended to Dr. Norman Abeles for his
many services in addition to serving on the thesis com-
mittee. The financial assistance of the Department of
Psychology, which helped make it possible to obtain the
subjects who participated in the study, is gratefully
acknowledged.

To my mom and friends, whose love and understanding

enhanced my work, to you I dedicate this thesis.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABIIES O O O 0 O O O O O O O O I O O O O 0
INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gender Identity and Gender Role Acceptance
Sex Role Preference in Homosexual Males . .
Homosexuality and Psychopathology . . . . .
Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

METHOD 0 O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results of Cluster and Factor Analyses
Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RESULTS 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Results of Analyses Over All 16 Variables
Hypothesis A . . .
Hypothesis B . . .

Hypothesis C . .
Hypothesis D . .

Hypothesis E . . . . . . . .
Relationships Between the 16 Variables

Race of the Subject as a Relevant Factor

DISCUSSION 0 O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
Discussion of the Levels of Sexual Preference
Discussion of the Cluster Analyses . . . . .
Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . .

TIEORET ICAI‘ IMPLICATIONS O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GENEML “FERENCES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

APPENDIX 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

iii

Page
iv

18
21
22
27

28

28
30
33
35

40

40
40
41
42
43
43
45
46

52
57
60
62
64
66
7O

71

Table

1.

10.

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Distribution of SS by sexual orientation and
race, mean chronological age (CA), and mean
educational level (EL)- . . - . . . . . . . . . 32

Blind multiple groups solution with the corre-
lations between items and clusters, items in
the clusters, and the factor loadings . - . . . 37

Relationships among the clusters from the

cluster analysis.‘ Correlations between the

four clusters derived from the item analysis

of the Sex Role Preference Inventory. Alpha
reliabilities in parentheses . . . - . - . . . 39

Means and standard deviations for homosexual

and heterosexual males on all 16 variables- . 48

Summary table for the multivariate analyses

of variance on the 16 dependent variables . . 49

Intercorrelation matrix of the 16 dependent
variables - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Means and standard deviations for black and

white homosexual males on all 16 variables . 79

Means and standard deviations for black and

white heterosexual males on all 16 variables 80

Summary table for multivariate analysis of

variance of eight dependent variables.

Multivariate test for race and sexual

orientation . . . o . o . . . . . . o o o . . o 81

Summary table for multivariate analysis of

variance of eight dependent variables.

Multivariate test for race and sexual

orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

iv

 

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the present study is to verify recent
studies which have reported male homosexuals to be indi-
viduals whose psychological well-being is no different from
their heterosexual male counterpart. These studies have
found support for the theory which describes homosexuality
as an alternative in sexual expression that is unrelated to
the disease concept commonly advanced (Freedman, 1971;
Hooker, 1958; Miller, Bradley, Cross and WOod, 1968; Wein-
berg, 1972; Weinberg and Williams, 1974). In addition,
this investigation is designed to test the strength of
those arguments which hold that homosexual males show evi-
dence of feminine psychosexuality atypical of heterosexual
males and exhibit a clear preference for the female sex
role during sexual activity. It appears that another
common explanation found among the homosexual stereotypes
is that homosexuality, unlike heterosexuality, is inherently
pathological.

First, there has been little evidence to support the
theory which suggests a relationship between homosexual
behavior and psychological disturbance. The sexual object

choice of an individual does not necessarily indicate

"mental illness". It is the manner of sexual expression
which differentiates the homosexual and heterosexual male.
Psychopathology (in this case neuroticism) is no more
characteristic of male homosexuals than male heterosexuals.
Second, male homosexuals have not been found to
present a picture of femininity as some theory assumes.
Theories which imply psychological similarities usually
attribute male homosexuality to an excessively strong
maternal or feminine identification and/or to failure to
.gain masculine identification. Feminine or maternal identi-
fication may be the product of an excessively close re-
lationship with the mother but is not necessarily peculiar
to male homosexuals exclusively or sufficient rationale to
explain a homosexual orientation in males. Fenichel (1945)
asserted that the probability of homosexuality is increased
with increased maternal identification. Such generali-
zations have caused a good deal of confusion in both scien-
tific and lay circles. Yet, there is little doubt that
there are homosexual males who are feminine in manner and,
perhaps psychosexuality, but there are also heterosexual
males who could be characterized in the same manner. The
hypothesized similarity between females and male homosexuals
has been explored and tuna not been found to have convincing
empirical proof (Dickey, 1961; West, 1968; westwood, 1960).
Finally, it has been found that male homosexuals do

not respond sexually to any particular sex role or show a

preference for the typical male or female sex role in

their sexual practices. In those cases where male homo-
sexuals express a preference, research has shown that such
preferences for a predominant sex role are seldom permanent
but very often change with time (Hoffman, 1968; Hooker,
1965; West, 1968; Westwood, 1960). However, considering
the heterogeneous nature of male homosexuals as well as the
diversity in commitment to a homosexual preference, it is
hypothesized that the male homosexual sample will respond
differently from male heterosexuals on a measure of sex
role preference.

Instruments measuring masculinity-femininity of
interests by Gough (1957), neuroticism by Eysenck and
Eysenck (1963), self-acceptance by Gough (1957), and self-
actualization by Shostrom (1963) already existed at the
time that this research began. However, instruments
measuring sex role preference did not exist and therefore
had to be developed for the present study. A description
of all the instruments used as well as a description of the
procedure employed to develop the Sex Role Preference Inven-
tory by Batain (1975) is presented in the Method section.

To facilitate understanding and avoid unnecessary
confusion regarding many of the terms used in the present
study, the author has defined several terms which are per-
haps unfamiliar and redefined others as they relate to this

investigation of homosexual behavior among men.

1... if?“ flaw—1

 

The specific research hypotheses generated by the
preceding discussion concerning existing research findings
and common homosexual stereotypes and theory are presented

following the Literature Review.

Definitions

 

Homosexual - an individual who is, or reports to be,

 

erotically and emotionally attracted to, and reports a
preference for and active engagement in overt sexual be-
havior exclusively or predominantly with other individuals
of the same sex (here used to refer exclusively to males
and the term refers to males throughout the body of the

study).

Gender identity - one's psychological or social feelings of

 

masculinity or femininity. Gender identity starts with the
knowledge and awareness, whether conscious or unconscious,
that one belongs to one sex and not the other, though as

one develops,_gender identity becomes much more complicated,
so that, one may sense himself as not only a male but a
masculine man. Male gender identity refers to all that dis-
tinguishes males from females: dress and adornment, be-
havioral aspects such as_gestures and demeanor, emotional

expression, and sexual behavior. Gender role is the overt

 

behavior one displays in society, the role which he plays,

especially with other people, to establish his position with

 

them insofar as his and their evaluation of his gender is

concerned.

Sexual identity - concept which refers to those character-

 

istics and behavioral patterns that are ascribed to one
biological sex in contrast to the other biological sex.
Whereas gender identity refers to a sense or feeling of
maleness (masculinity) or femaleness (femininity), sexual
identity refers to characteristics which result from the
designation "I am male" or "I am female" because of a bio-

logical determination. Sex role refers to that behavior

 

which is socially prescribed and expected of the individual
due to his or her status as a biological male or female.

Sex role then refers to the prescription "I am male" or "I
am female" as Opposed to the gender connotation "I am mascu-
line" or "I am feminine" which may be quite independent of

biological sex.

Sex role preference - the selection of one sex role in

 

sexual activity as Opposed to choosing the other sex role.
It is the preferred or expected mode and condition for
achieving sexual gratification which is unrelated to feel-

ings of masculinity or femininity.

Sexualgpattern - the range of erotic sensitivity which cul-

 

minates in sexual satisfaction. The mode or activity in

sexual intercourse which produces sexual pleasure, such as

in many homosexual practices: anal intercourse, fellatio,
mutual masturbation, body friction (tribadism), and/or any

combination of these or other practices.

Literature Review

 

An abundance of research and theory have attempted
to clarify the nature and origins of homosexual behavior.
Elaborate suppositions concerning homosexuality have been
accumulated by almost every relevant discipline such as
psychoanalysis, psychiatry, psychology, and sociology.
However, in the face of the large number of published re-
search and theory investigating homosexuality, theories
regarding its origins and develogment are only vaguely com-
prehended as a contemporary topic. Of particular note is
the fact that early research and theory were based on case
reports of homosexual patients and incarcerated homosexuals.
It was not until the Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, and Gebbhard
(1948) study that the many aspects of "normal" homosexual
behavior were uncovered, and homosexual males other than
"disturbed" homosexuals were afforded proper attention.

The most prolific scientific investigation of homo-
sexual behavior was to be found in the research of Kinsey,
et a1. (1948) which provided the most reliable and informa-
tive material concerning the nature of these phenomena

which was published in the two volumes Sexual Behavior in

 

the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human

 

 

Female (1953). Prior to the Kinsey, et a1. studies (1948,
1953) many clinicians had presented detailed descriptions
of "the homosexual personality", and in many cases identi-
fied a variety of environmental influences and emotional
conflicts which were assumed to be present in homosexuals.
These clinicians (Fenichel, 1945; Freud, 1962; Rado, 1940)
have postulated the existence of an intimate and regular
relationship between sexual preference and personality, and
even physique and physical mannerisms. As Kinsey et al.,
(1948) have observed:

It is quite generally believed that one's prefer-
ence for a sexual partner of one or the other sex is
correlated with various physical and mental qualities,
and with the total personality which makes a homosexual
male or female physically, psychologically, and perhaps
spiritually distinct from a heterosexual individual.

It is generally thought that these qualities make a
homosexual person obvious and recognizable to anyone
who has a sufficient understanding of such matters.
Even psychiatrists discuss "the homosexual personality"
and many of them believe that preference for sexual
partners of a particular sex are merely secondary
manifestations of something that lies much deeper in
the totality of that intangible which they call the
personality. (Kinsey, et al., 1948, p. 637)
Similar characterizations have been made of males
with homosexual preferences in recent years. Storr (1964)
asserts that "an excessive fear of physical injury is more
commonly found in male homosexuals than in heterosexuals
(p. 40). Many psychoanalysts and psychiatrists believe that
homosexual males have "identified" with their mothers, or

some other significant female in the early environment, and

from this proceeded to "play a feminine role". These

_generalizations are believed by many clinicians and are
often found in the psychiatric and psychological literature.

For example, Karpman (1962) says, "the homosexual
male shows a feminine carrying angle of arm, long legs,
narrow hips, large muscles, deficient hair on face, chest,
and back, feminine distribution of pubic hair, high-pitched
voice, small genitals, scrotal fold. Often he has excess
fat on shoulders, buttocks, and abdomen. Occasionally the
penis is very large, the hips unusually wide" (p. 154). It
is obvious that such a statement may apply to homosexuals
who have underlying endocrine problems. However, assuming
this observation is accurate, it would appear to be unrelated
to the males' gender or sexual identity but rather to some
endocrine disturbance. Such hormonally-controlled secondary
sex characteristics could be found in any male with a hor-
monal imbalance regardless of his sexual preference.

Recent investigations have dispelled many, if not
all, characterizations which are often attributed to homo-
sexual males. Churchill (1967) concludes that homosexual
males do not present feminine psychosexuality. Their sexual
pattern, except for choice of partner, is typical of males.
He goes on to state that almost all males react in terms of
their biological sex and are masculine beings both psycho-
logically and physically. The notion that homosexuality in
males is akin to feminine identification is further dis-

pelled when an understanding is acquired to the nature of

homosexuality in contrast to sexual inversion. Brown (1958,

 

1961) suggests that the term sexual inversion be applied to

 

those individuals who have an "identification with, prefer-
ence for, and adoption of the sex role of the other sex"
(p. 424). The term "homosexual" should only refer to indi-
viduals who seek sexual satisfaction predominantly with
members of his own sex. West (1968) has remarked that most
homosexuals do not actually identify themselves with the
opposite sex. Instead, ”men who mimic girls' manners or
put on female dress to excite their homosexual friends do
not usually wish to lose their boyish figures or change
their genitals." (West, 1968, p. 62). Indeed were such a
transformation to occur they would immediately cease to
attract other male homosexuals. In other words, their ef-
feminacy remains rather less than skin deep, an indication
of the kind of sexual attention they are seeking rather
than of any genuine desire to become women. Such established
crossfgender identification is a condition quite different
from homosexuality and is commonly known as trans-sexualism.
Since there are homosexuals with unusually strong
identifications with certain aspects of femininity, many
psychologists and psychiatrists mistakenly consider male
transvestism and trans-sexualism to be simply homosexual
variants. After very careful investigation of the nature
of these conditions, however, it becomes fairly obvious that

there are rather clear differences. The transvestite, for

10

example, is an individual who habitually prefers to wear
the clothes of the opposite sex for the purpose of sexual
pleasure, and who considers himself a male wanting inter-
mittently to take the feminine role. The trans-sexual, on
the other hand, is an individual who feels himself, con-
sciously and unconsciously, to belong to the Opposite sex
while never denying his sexual anatomy. He actively seeks
a sex transformation Operation, that is, a surgical proce-
dure to change primary or secondary characteristics to the
appearance Of those of the opposite sex. The homosexual is
different, in that, he does not feel himself to be a female
nor does he get sexual pleasure from feminine attire
(Stoller, 1965; Benjamin, 1966).

Stoller (1968) differentiates transvestism from the
conditions of homosexualism and trans-sexualism. He points
out that the fundamental difference is the fetishistic
character Of transvestism and marked confusion in gender
identity. In addition, he states that "confusion in and out
of the literature is caused if all people who cross-dress
are called 'transvestites', for this disregards major differ-
ences clinically, psychodynamically, and etiologically"

(p. 178). The transvestite has no question that he is male
and that he wants to remain a male. However, he alternates
periods of comfortable masculinity with episodes of feminine
behavior in which cross-dressing occurs. An essential part

of his pleasure is knowing that while dressed as a woman he

11

has a penis, sometimes to think of himself as a phallic
"woman", and to reveal himself to others as a male. Like
the homosexual, he would never sacrifice his penis in order
to become a female. Yet unlike both the homosexual and the
trans-sexual, he is a fetishist. It is believed that due to
feeling that women and their bodies are dangerous, his sexual
excitement is to some degree dependent on his having an in-
animate substitute for a human sexual object; in this con-
dition the fetishes are women's clothing (Benjamin, 1966).
The transvestite's primary sexual object are generally
women but conscious urges for men are occasionally apparent,
and unconscious homosexual urges are more nearly emergent
than in men with less strong feminine identification.

The trans-sexual represents an extreme manisfes-
tation of psychosexual inversion, wherein the individual
attempts to disregard and reverse his biological sex, and
pass into and maintain the Opposite gender role identifi-
cation (Pauly, 1965). These biological males identify with
the feminine role to such an extent that they attempt to
share feminine interests, attitudes, behavior, dress, sexual
object choice, and desperately strive to approximate the
female anatomical structure. The trans-sexual male hopes
by means of sex transformation procedures, to convert his
normal male body to female. He feels he is essentially
female though "trapped" in a male body. He learns to suc-

cessfully pass as a woman, unknown to friends and relatives

12

 

to be a male. He does not alternate between a masculine

and a feminine role, as does the transvestite; he is not
secretly thrilled with the thought of possessing a penis
secreted beneath his dress, he gets no real sexual pleasure
from his penis, and does not maintain a sense of masculinity
by knowing it is part of his body ego. His major goal in
life is to become totally female. Whereas the homosexual's
sex relations are those of a man to another man, the sex
relations Of the male trans-sexual are those of a woman with
a man, hindered only by the anatomical structure that a sex
transformation is to alter.

Benjamin (1966) believes that the most evident dis-
tinction between these three conditions is the sex partner.
In this respect, a male sex partner, his existence or non-
existence and his significance is paramount. Homosexual
activity is not feasible without him, because he is a
primary factor. The homosexual is a man and wants to be
nothing else. He is merely emotionally and sexually aroused
by another man. Even if he is of the noticeable effeminate
.group, he is still in harmony with his male sex and his
masculine gender. The transvestite and the trans-sexual
are not in such harmony. For the transvestite no sex partner
is required for sexual enjoyment, since during those periods
when he cross-dresses, erotic pleasure is derived from the
act itself. The trans-sexual is chiefly concerned with ob-

taining a sex transformation. When such procedure is complete,

 

13

l

a male sex partner may be desired more or less urgently,
but he is a secondary factor, often enough dispensable and
by no means constant. In short, in a society that condemns
deviation in sexual behavior from conventional heterosexual
behavior, it might be appropriate to conclude that homo-
sexualism is often viewed as a sex problem, affecting two
persons, a sex partner of the same sex being primary and
.generally an indispensable prerequisite. Trans-sexualism,
on the other hand, is believed to be a sex and gender
problem, the trans-sexual being primarily concerned with
himself, and the sex partner being of secondary, although
occasionally, vital importance. Transvestism is viewed as
a social problem with a sex and gender implication, the
transvestite requiring no sex partner in acting out his
cross-dressing behavior.

Another very common misconception surrounding homo-
sexual behavior is the assertion that male homosexuals
express preference in sex role resembling those of females.
Some theorists have indicated that male homosexuals often
have sexual fantasies typical of the female and act these
out in their homosexual activities (Rabinovitch, 1951).
This view is commonly found in many psychiatric and psy-
chological writings. However, Hooker (1957, 1958), in a
study of the relation between sexual patterns and_gender
identity, did not find a sex role differentiation in her

sample. Hooker states that a sizeable proportion of this

 

14

sample expressed no preference in sexual practices and
engage in most or all of the major forms of homosexual
practices. It is usually among the effeminate homosexual
_group, from which many stereotypes arise, that there Often
are clear predominant roles. The theory which assumes that
male homosexuals are essentially feminine in manner and
interest as well as in sex role preference fails to see

that while homosexuals do not constitute what sometimes has
been called a "third sex", neither male nor female but some-
thing else, they do have their own kind of character patterns
and they do engage in sexual activity according to that
pattern, not according to some supposedly dominant female
pattern.

Bieber, Dain, Dince, Drillich, Grand, Gunglach,
Kremer, Rifkin, Wilbur, and Bieber (1962) reported similar
findings in their study of 106 homosexual patients. Their
sample was composed of "bisexuals" as well as exclusive
homosexuals. Twenty-five percent of their group, which
included the bisexuals, expressed no preference and could
not be assigned to the categories of being predominantly
"dominant" or "submissive" during the sexual act. Westwood's
study (1960) of 127 predominantly homosexual males also
corroborates the finding that a sizeable proportion of these
individuals cannot be readily assigned a preference in sex
roles. Curran and Parr (1957) found that homosexuals in“

volved in psychotherapy will engage in a variety of sexual

 

15

acts despite any preferences they might have. West (1968)
and Hoffman (1968) have questioned the validity of the
traditional masculine-feminine, active-passive dichotomies.
They found that homosexual sex role preferences, where they
exist, may change over time since homosexuals show great
variability in their sexual responsiveness during their
lifetime.
Perhaps the most fashionable view of a homosexually-
oriented object choice is that it is a "mental illness" or
a symptom of some major form of mental illness. The most
recognized advocate of this view today is probably the
psychoanalyst Irving Bieber (1962). Bieber, et al. (1962)
begin with the hypothesis that male homosexuals are mentally
ill individuals and, unsurprisingly, find that their clinical
findings support their assumption. They concluded that of
106 male homosexuals and 100 male heterosexuals studied:
The capacity to adapt homosexually is, in a sense,

a tribute to man's biosocial resources in the face of

thwarted heterosexual goal-achievement. Sexual_grati-

fication is not renounced; instead, fears and inhibitions

associated with heterosexuality are circumvented and

sexual responsivity with pleasure and excitement to a

member of the same sex develops as a 'pathologic' al-

ternative (p. 303).
Bieber (1962) finds support for his findings by emphasizing
that "all psychoanalytic theories assume that adult homo-
sexuality is psychopathologic... Theories which do not
assume psychopathology hold homosexuality to be one type of

expression of a polymorphous sexuality which appears patho-

logic only in cultures holding it to be so" (p. 18). However,

 

 

16

Freud (1962) has remarked that:

Inversion is found in people who exhibit no other
serious deviation from the normal. It is similarly
found in peOple whose efficiency is unimpaired, and
who are indeed distinguished by specially high intel-
lectual development and ethical culture. (Freud, 1962,
P- 4)

Another psychoanalyst who has discarded the concept
of mental illness among homosexuals is Ernest van den Haag
(1963). He has concluded that homosexual behavior is, in
and of itself, not a form of mental illness. Homosexual
behavior can be a symptom of illness but so can hetero-
sexual behavior. Many homosexuals are neurotic or psychotic
as are many heterosexuals. That homosexuality is necessarily
associated with clinical symptoms or disturbance is a false
assertion. Miller, Bradley, Gross, and Wood (1968) reviewed
the literature on theories and studies concerning homo-
sexuality and reported that there exists more Objective
evidence supporting the fact that homosexuals do not exhibit
any more pathology than nonhomosexuals.

The problem is that these clinicians are usually
reporting conclusions based on homosexual clients in treat-
nent. It is understood that the homosexual clients are
neurotic, or worse, but so are most clients. These cli-
nicians have, seemingly, dismissed those homosexuals who
:annot be labeled "neurotic perverts". Admittedly there
are some homosexuals who engage in behavior which is neurotic

and even psychotic but such behavior is found among a small

percentage of the homosexual population. For example,

 

 

 

17
Hoffman (1968) describes the homosexual who clearly demon-
strates what in our culture is defined as pathological
behavior. He states that "the compulsive fellator might
perform fellatio on what he believes to be an especially
masculine male, he feels he is incorporating some of this
masculinity and vitality into his own person. Obviously
his sense of his own masculinity must be at a chronically
low ebb in order for him to engage in this kind of magical
behavior. This would account for the inexplicable nature
of his search for sexual partners...His search for a sexual
partner is therefore a search for replenishment of his own
vitality, and it is uncannily like the primitive search for
the sacred animal whom he must consume in order to engage in
a renewal of his own powers." (Hoffman, 1968, p. 103). To
assume that all homosexual behavior is characterized by such
behavior would represent considerable misinterpretation and
misunderstanding of homosexuality. An evaluation of the
Kinsey, et a1. (1948) data, along with other supporting data,
refutes this assumption and suggests that the majority of
homosexuals are well-adjusted individuals who are as hetero-
_ geneous as nonhomosexual males. To understand the nature
of homosexual behavior among men one must find homosexuals
who are representative of the total homosexual population.
The kind of unwarranted generalizations for which psycho-
analysts and psychiatrists have been justifiably criticized

can be found among those studies which use patient and prison

 

 

18

populations (Bieber, et al., 1962; Freud, 1962).
Gender Identity and Gender Role Acceptance

The psychosexual identity of male homosexuals has
been a bewildering topic to sex researchers. It appears
that much of the bewilderment can be attributed to those
theories which have assumed an inherent psychosexual femi-
ninity in the personality structure of homosexual males.
There is a meager amount of research which has sought to
clarify this issue. However, recent study has tended to
indicate that this is not an accurate assessment in the
major segment of the homosexual community.

Lindner (1956), a practicing psychoanalyst, stressed
that in the fgay" world it is exactly those qualities asso-
ciated with masculinity that are found attractive and hence
cultivated. Femininity is to be avoided in the homosexual
circles, and the swishy homosexual or "queen", from whom
the mass stereotype derives, is often as much an Object of
contempt among many homosexuals as among heterosexuals. The
facts indicate that homosexuality and femininity have nothing
to do with each other, that is, the concepts are not syn-
onymous in nature. The homosexual is not feminine, nor does
femininity betray homosexuality any more so than it betrays
heterosexuality. Cory (1957) expresses the view that ef-
feminacy in male homosexuals is psychologically induced and

that it is found to a marked extent only in a small

 

 

l9

proportion of homosexuals. "Actually the effeminate invert
usually forms a subgroup within the group, for he is

persona non grata among the more virile" (p. 92). West

 

(1968) reported similar conclusions in his extensive writings
on the subject. He concluded that the affectedly effeminate
homosexual group is a minority which attracts undue public
attention and gives rise to a stereotyped idea of the male
homosexual that is about as unfair as the anti-Semitic
stereotype of the beak-nosed, moneyj—grabbing Jew or the
shiftless and lazy Black.

To expand the argument that female psychosexuality
is not inherent in male homosexuality, Dickey (1961) found
a somewhat distinctive element in the attitudes of her sample
of male homosexuals. She found that homosexuals who report
_greater self-satisfaction and more adequate job functioning
were also those who saw themselves as more similar to the
heterosexual male than to the stereotypical homosexual male
and would prefer leisure time company with heterosexuals
over that of homosexuals. Dickey (1961) interpreted this
finding to indicate that the homosexual, in her sample,
admires and identifies with the typical heterosexual male.

Misconceptions about physique readily arise on
account of a minority of male homosexuals who affect ex-
aggerated feminine mannerisms amounting to a rather crude
caricature of femininity. The diversity which exists in

the homosexual group, as in the heterosexual group,

 

20

corroborate the fact that homosexuals display all types of
physique and character. In an American study of 342
psychotic male patients, thirty—seven of whom were known

to be repeatedly and persistently indulging in homosexual
practices, no significant peculiarities in height, weight,
torso length, hip-shoulder measurements, or other physical
measurements could be discovered among the homosexual group
(Barahal, 1939). In another series of measurements, Henry
and Galbraith (1941) found that physique measurements were
further from the feminine average in a group of homosexuals
than in a comparison group of heterosexual men. These
results seem to indicate that body type measurements are
highly unreliable measures in assessing the "misconceived"
notion that homosexuals are not unlike females in physique.
Sheldon (1949), in an attempt to Observe the stereotype
pertaining to feminine character of the homosexual physique,
found that the homosexuals among his sample of young male
criminals had no distinctive contours which differentiated
them from the other criminals. In fact he found that the
homosexuals, like the corresponding nonhomosexuals, were of
the "muscular, athletic or mesomorphic physical type which
was correlated with a vigorous, outgoing temperament such
as what might be regarded as ideally masculine" (p. 756).
Coppen (1959) concluded that the peculiarity in body measure-
ments was not directly related to sexual "abnormality", but

was one associated with all kinds of psychiatric disturbance.

 

21
Sex Role Preference in Homosexual Males

The male homosexual supposedly has copied his mother
too closely and thus has incorporated her and, after incor-
porating her, he comes to resemble her in his tastes as an
adult, including his sexual responsivity. NO evidence has
been generated to date, at least no scientific support out-
side mere speculation, which would support such a notion.

In a further exposition on the topic of homosexuality, West
(1968) observed that a great many homosexuals, possibly the
majority, prefer mutually reciprocated sex activity where
neither partner dominates. Many adopt the so-called "active"
or ”passive" sex role as occasion demands. Curran and Parr
(1957) found that homosexuals being seen in private psycho-
therapy will engage in a variety of sexual acts despite any
preferences they might possess. Bieber et a1. (1962) found
that 36% of their sample of homosexuals were predominantly
what they termed "inserters" while another 31% preferred the
"insertee" role. Such results do not support the idea that
male homosexuals, like the female, have incorporated a
female sex role. On the contrary, these findings tend to
indicate that male homosexuals possess a sexual responsive-
ness that is quite unlike the "passivity" supposedly charac-
teristic of females. The homosexual male must be understood
as a masculine being, indeed, as a typical masculine being
*with a sexual pattern, excluding object-choice, that is also

typically masculine.

 

91-. -__

 

’5‘—

22 '

f

The literature appears to be insufficient in the area
of sex role preference in male homosexuals, but it seems
clear that no relationship is to be found between a mascu-
line Or feminine gender identity and the sexual activity
of male homosexuals. What does seem clear is that the
consciousness of masculinity or femininity on the part of
homosexuals appear to bear no clear relation to particular
sexual patterns, and that for the majority of homosexuals
studied; there is no apparent relationship between a con-
scious masculine or feminine identity and preferred sex

role during the sex act.
Homosexuality and Psychopathology

Psychological research on homosexuality has been
founded on the a_priori assumption that individuals who
engage in homosexual behavior are emotionally disturbed and
that homosexual behavior itself is something undesirable.
Those studies following the psychoanalytic tradition tend
to be based on psychoanalytic concepts such as "unresolved
Oedipus complex", "fixation", and "faulty identification".
Other studies on homosexuality have concentrated on finding
psychometric measures to identify homosexual "characteristics"
of an individual's personality. The investigations were
often generalized from limited and distorted samples of
individuals who engage in homosexual activity; the samples

were very often drawn from prison and patient groups. Such

23

research is of dubious value since the assessment is
actually an assessment of the deviant character of the
homosexually-oriented individual rather than his homo-
sexuality.

The publication of Kinsey et al. (1948) have sup-
ported the fact that homosexuality is unrelated to mental
illness or is frankly not a disease. These researchers
have concluded that aberrant behavior such as homosexuality
can be viewed as a general capacity of all human beings,
originating in an inherent capacity for indiscriminate
sexual responsiveness. For example, some theory holds that
the best available evidence indicates that the human being
learns sexual responses in social interaction with his
parents and peers. This learning is possible because of an
”undifferentiated sexual potential" in the child. This
might be thought of as an unformed drive which is not
attached to any particular love object, but which develops a
”content" by very complicated learning processes or condi-
tioning experience (Kinsey, 1948; Churchill, 1967; Hoffman,
1968). Churchill (1967) has expanded this argument by stating
how the conditioning of sexual behavior might occur:

Generally speaking, if a young person is introduced

to any type of erotic situationiJlthe absence of
strong learned avoidance by a kind and sympathetic
person of his own age, or older, the chances are great
that the young person will respond positively and

will tend to repeat the same behavior in the future.
The reverse may be equally true; early experiences

with an unsympathetic or Obnoxious person may bring
about avoidance of such experiences in the future.

24

Some early seductions, for example, condition the

child negatively rather than positively. This may

be the case whether the seduction involved homosexual

or heterosexual contact (Churchill, 1967, p. 107).
Only as a result of conditioning and social pressures does
the sexual potential become channeled in the direction of
accepted or desirable social behavior. The same view has
been voiced in the respected WOlfenden Committee Report
(1957), which asserted that a particular type of aberrant
behavior cannot be regarded as a manifestation of disease,
if there are no other associated symptoms and if the exis-
tence of deviant behavior is compatible with full mental
health in other respects.

Perhaps the most solid piece of research against the
"disease" concept of homosexuality was a study on the
psychological concomitants of homosexuality by Evelyn
Hooker (1957). She administered a battery of tests to 30
homosexual and 30 heterosexual males, matched by pairs for
age, education, and intelligence. The battery of tests
'were analyzed by expert clinical psychologists, who rated
each subject on a five-point scale of personality adjustment
without any knowledge of the subject's sexual orientation
from their "blind" analysis of the test protocols. Inter-
estingly, the results indicated that the judges were unable
to identify the sexual orientation of the subject at better
than a chance level, and that the ratings of the experi-

mental group were not significantly different from those of

the control group. Hooker concluded that homosexuality as a

25

clinical entity does not exist, and that its forms are as

mg.
.

varied as those of heterosexuality. In addition, she
Observed that homosexuality may be a deviation in sexual
patterns that is within the normal range, psychologically.
Curran and Parr (1957) concluded that the homosexuals
they studied were "on the whole successful and valuable
members of society, quite unlike the pOpular conception of
such persons as vicious criminals, effete or depraved"
(p. 800). It should be noted that the subjects in their
study were homosexuals seeking psychological treatment and
these generally positive conclusions were based on these
persons. Chang and Block (1960) reported that they were
unable to find differences between samples of homosexuals
and a heterosexual control group. They used a comparison
of self-ratings with ideal self-ratings; and, the degree
of correspondence was interpreted as a measure of "self-
acceptance". The self-acceptance scores for the homosexual
_groups were not significantly different from the scores for
the control group. They concluded that the homosexual
_group was not emotionally or psychiatrically disturbed.
Similarly, using an experimental group of 40 college-
educated "overt male homosexuals" and a matched “hetero-
sexual" control group, Dean and Richardson (1964) found that,
on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI),
"the profiles of the two groups were very similar with

regard to both their shape and general elevation" (p. 485).

26

The investigators also found that the "homosexual" profile
fell within what has been defined as the "normal" range,
below a T score of 70, as well as being slightly elevated
above that of the comparison group. They concluded that
their results indicated that homosexually oriented §s who
are "bright" and functioning effectively do not manifest
disturbance on the MMPI. It has been generally concluded
that homosexuals do not constitute a homogeneous group

and that there is ng_priori connection between homosexual
behavior and personality disturbance (DeLuca, 1966; Doidge
and Holtzman, 1960; Liddicoat, 1957; Freedman, 1971; Saghir,
1970a; Schofield, 1966; Simon and Gagnon, 1967; Weinberg and

Williams, 1974).

HYPOTHESES

Homosexual males obtain significantly higher femininity
scores on the Gough (1957) femininity (Fe) scale than

heterosexual males.

Homosexual males express_greater preferences for the
stereotypical female sex role as measured by the Sex
Role Preference Inventory (Batain, 1975) than do hetero-

sexual males.

Homosexual males obtain significantly higher neuro-
ticism scores than heterosexual males as measured by
the Neuroticism scale of the Eysenck Personality Inven-

tory (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1963).

Homosexual males express less self-acceptance and
Obtain significantly lower scores on the self-accept-
ance scale of the California Psychological Inventory

by Gough (1957) than heterosexual males.

Homosexual males Obtain significantly lower self-
actualization scores as measured by the self-actual-
izing value scale and other components of self-
actualization of the Personal Orientation Inventory

by Shostrom (1963) than heterosexual males.

27

Tim-:1“-

 

METHOD

Subjects

The SS were 30 males with a predominantly homosexual
orientation and 30 heterosexually oriented males. The
homosexual males were selected from a sample of homosexuals
who indicated a willingness to participate in the study.

The homosexuals were initially contacted by several homo-
sexual males known to the author who were requested to con-
tact and supply the names and telephone numbers of homo-
sexual acquaintances and friends who would be interested in
participating in the study. After lists of potential homo-
sexual §s were obtained, the author contacted each individual
and made an appointment to interview and discuss the pur-
pose of the study and §s' eligibility. Each potential S

was interviewed to determine his commitment to a homosexual
preference and received a questionnaire, found in the
.Appendix, to assess gross signs of psychological disturbance.
.Approximately 70 individuals were interviewed from the lists
obtained and, of these 70, forty-five individuals confirmed
that.they were exclusively or predominantly homosexual and
‘were:committed to a homosexual preference. Thirty homo-

sexual §s were finally selected with the remaining individuals

28

29

being rejected due to their inability to meet the criteria

of normality as defined by the author. The following

 

criteria were implemented to judge normality. It was
determined that no S reported that he was ever incarcerated
for any offense related to his sexual orientation or any
felonious offense, he had never sought and was not currently
seeking psychiatric or psychological counseling, and showed
no_gross signs of psychological disturbance on the question-
naire or during the interview. These criteria were imple-
mented for both the homosexual and heterosexual samples.

The heterosexual subjects were selected from a sample
of heterosexual males volunteering to participate in the
study, both undergraduate and graduate students, and under-
.graduate introductory psychology students. The heterosexual
subjects also received a questionnaire to assess gross signs
of psychological disturbance and were interviewed but were
not questioned concerning their heterosexual preference.

All subjects in the homosexual and heterosexual samples were
university students.

The research instruments were administered in the form
of a seven page test booklet containing a Personal Data Sheet,
Instruction sheet, and the four test booklets described
under Instruments, to both samples. The subjects were noti-
fied of the research either verbally or by posted written
announcements. The study was described to potential sub-

jects as a "study of sex role perception and attitudes toward

30

various personality variables." Beyond this, subjects

were told the possible length of the testing session, one
and onehhalf to two hours, and how much compensation they
would receive for their participation in the research. All
subjects were renumerated for their participation with cash
or class research credits. Subjects other than undergraduate
introductory psychology students were paid three dollars for
their time; while the psychology students received four
research credits for their participation. Research credits
were awarded to the undergraduate psychology students since
each student is required to participate in research studies
as part Of the course requirements. A summary of the sub-

jects' background data is presented in Table 1.

Instruments

 

The test booklet consisted of three personality
inventories and an inventory designed to measure sex role
preference. These inventories were chosen because of their
reliability and validity, as reported by the authors and
reviews in the Mental Measurements Yearbook, and the wide-
spread use of these instruments by psychologists interested
in the study of the homosexual phenomenon.

The Personal Orientation Inventory (POI) was designed
to measure the components of "self-actualization" and a
level of positive mental health. This inventory consists
cxf twelve scales measuring time competency, inner-di-

:rectedness, self-actualizing value, existentiality, feeling

31

reactivity, spontaneity, self-regard, self—acceptance, view
of the nature of man, synergy, acceptance of aggression,
and capacity for intimate contact. The present study
excluded the two scales, view of the nature Of man and
synergy, since these scales were not pertinent to the ob-
jectives of the study. Also, the self-acceptance scale was
excluded since it duplicated a scale taken from the Cali-
fornia Psychological Inventory. The POI was deemed appro-
priate because of the test's reported ability to measure
both a level of positive mental health and psychOpathology
(Shostrom, 1963).

The Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) was the
second instrument selected. The EPI was derived from the
Maudsley Medical Questionnaire and the Maudsley Personality
Inventory. The Neuroticism scale from this inventory was
chosen as a supplemental measure of psychopathology. Neu-
roticism, in both Maudsley instruments, is defined in terms
Of emotional over-responsiveness, general emotional insta-
bility, overreactivity, and a predisposition for neurotic
behavior or breakdown under stress (Eysenck and Eysenck,
1963).

The overt masculinity-femininity measure used was
the Fe scale from the California Psychological Inventory (CPI)
by Gough (1957). The Fe scale consists of items that are
somewhat obvious in their relationship to cultural stereo-

types of masculinity and femininity. The Fe scale is

32

TABLE 1

DISTRIBUTION OF SS BY SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND RACE,
MEAN CHRONOLOGICAL AGE (CA), AND MEAN
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL (EL).

 

 

Sexual Orientation* Mean CA Mean EL**
Homosexual 22.25 15.13
(N=l6)
Black Male gs
(N=29) Heterosexual 21.70 16.07
(N=13)
Homosexual 25.07 15.43
(N=l4)
White Male gs
(N=31) Heterosexual 20.70 14.58
(N=l7)

 

*Homosexual totals:
Mean CA = 23.66
Mean EL = 15.28

Heterosexual totals:
Mean CA 21.20
Mean EL 15.32

**There were six males in
the homosexual sample who
had returned to school
after a leave of absence
due financial difficulties.
None of the heterosexuals
had done so. This explains
the CA and EL discrepancy.

33 L

designed to assess masculinity and femininity of interests.

The final instrument was a questionnaire designed to
measure sex role preference in homosexual and heterosexual
males. Particular emphasis was placed on the instrument's
ability to assess sex role preference in homosexual males.
This inventory consists of items that are very candid in
assessing whether a subject shows a preference for one sex
role as Opposed to the other sex role or whether a prefer-
ence exists in the subjects' sexual patterns.

The Sex Role Preference Inventory (Batain, 1975)
constructed for the study initially consisted of 20 items.
Subjects were asked to respond to each of the 20 items -
statements with either a response indicating that the item
was "true" or "false" about them. weights of 1 (true = 1)
or 0 (false = 0) were assigned to the two categories. To
determine the reliability of this measure, the data generated
by the subjects was analyzed using the computer program
PACKAGE designed by Hunter and Cohen (1969) available in

the computer tape library at Michigan State University.

Results of Cluster and Factor Analyses

 

Hunter and Cohen (1969) developed the computer program
PACKAGE making it possible for one to both cluster analyze
as well as factor analyze data. Basically the program com-
putes a correlation matrix and offers several options, for
example, blind ordering procedures, computations of communi-

ties, multiple grouping of variables, etc., enabling one to

34

cluster analyze the data. In addition to these options,
the program offers an item analysis solution which is auto-
matically generated by the computer program.

Initial runs included all 20 items contained in the
Sex Role Preference Inventory. However, two items were
deleted because the variance of these items was zero. The
remaining 18 items were rerun and 15 items were retained.
These 15 items were sorted according to their correlation
with the empirical factors. Items which had communalities
below .10 were discarded since they added little to the
reliability or the meaning of a cluster.

From the item analysis of the remaining 15 items
four empirical clusters were derived. The empirical
clusters were given titles in terms of the content of the
items contained in each cluster. The items in each cluster
as derived from the blind multiple groups program are pre-
sented in Table 2. Included in this table are the corre-
lations between items and their respective cluster and the
factor loadings.

The computer routine which computes a principle com-
ponents solution and then rotates using the Varimax method
with the Kaiser criterion Option for stopping the factoring
was used with the present data. However, this routine
produced a set of four factors exactly the same as the blind
multiple groups program; therefore, the factors are identical

to the clusters presented in Table 2 and are not included.

 

35
Table 3 shows the intercorrelations between the cluster
scores of the four empirical clusters. The standard score
coefficient alpha reliability Of these clusters are_given
in parentheses down the diagonal of the correlation matrix
in this table. A description of the four empirical clusters
or subscales of the Sex Role Preference Inventory is given

in the Appendix.

Procedure

 

When the selection of subjects was complete, each
subject was tested in a group setting. Female subjects were
selected from undergraduate psychology classes which required
research participation as a course requirement. The female
subjects, like the male heterosexual undergraduate psychology
students, received four research credits as renumeration for
their participation in the study. The female subjects were
included to protect against any possibility of the homosexual
males gaining knowledge of the specific nature of the study.
Assignment to groups was arranged in two ways. First,
several testing periods were scheduled and during the initial
interviews both homo and heterosexual males were requested
to choose a time period convenient to be tested. When only
homosexual males chose a time period, the author rescheduled
one or two subjects so that each time period consisted of
both homo and heterosexual subjects. Second, the female
subjects were contacted by telephone and assigned to testing

sessions where both homo and heterosexual subjects were

36

previously scheduled. Great pains were taken to assure

that homosexual gs, heterosexual SS and female gs were
included during each group testing session. Each group of
S5 to be tested included from five to nine subjects, and a
total of eight testing sessions were arranged. The data
Obtained from the female gs who participated in the study
was deleted since the data was not relevant to the study.
The dates, place, and times of testing were available to all
subjects so that the testing would run as smoothly and ef-
ficiently as possible.

At the beginning of each testing session a statement
explaining the purpose of the study was given, excluding
any mention of homosexuality, and questions concerning the
instructions were entertained. The subjects were adminis-
tered the inventories in booklet form and recorded their
answers on IBM answer sheets or the test booklet. The
answer sheets and the Personal Data Sheet were coded for
each subject and this number served as the only means of
identification. After each subject had completed and re-
turned the test materials, he was paid $3.00 or received
four research credits if he or she was an undergraduate
psychology student. Each subject was thanked for his or her
participation and was informed that the findings would be

available when the data analyses was completed.

37

.omusooumucH Hmsxom mcfluso

 

om.| gm. cmEO3 m ocean mo mwfimmucmm on: o>m£ H ma
.mocmfiummxo
Hmsxom oceuso me How cumocoo mumseum m we
mm.| vv. mcflmemloHOH msoflomcoo umgu Homm no: on H ha
.Emnu ma moans zoom oHsonm
mos» ocm .umzvo on» no mcoflumuommxw o>mn
mm. mm. pasonm mocowummxm Hmsxmm M GA Hosanna zoom ma
.ucmuuomeflcs we mocmuommnm Hmsxmm we: no
O>HumOHocfl we muHGHcHEmm we: Hmsuonz .cms mum:
mm. mm. Iflfiommo on own on we on mcwumsmmflo we OH H
.oumcfieoo Hosanna we Ho: o8
mm.1 mm. Hoauwoc muons wufl>fluom Hmsxom >Oflcm H OH
mflsmcoflumamu
o no uoommm Hmsxom may mo omhmno
mo. mo. oxou pasonm Hmcuuom ucmcwsoo OHOE OSB om
.>UH>wuom Hosxom
mo. mv. ouneuwcfi anonm Hocuuwm mumcfieoo one m a
ocwomoq umumsao osm EODH EouH .02 .Oz
uouomm cmo3uom coflumaouuou EmuH umpmsao

 

024

.mOZH040A m0904h mmB QZ< .mmmembau mmfi ZH mSMBH .mmmBmDAU
mZMBH zmmzfimm ZOHBdAmmmOU mmB mfiHz ZOHBDAOm mmDOMO mAmHBADS QZHAm

N mqm¢8

 

38

.OOOOHuomxo Hmsxom m
Hm. em. OH OHou o>Hmmmm m oossmmm um>mc o>m£ H NH

.OOGOHHome Hmsxom
mm. gm. oopmooumHooucs .O>Hmmmm Homoum m>m3Hm H h v

.mHHmsxom 0o
om.| mm. oHOOB o3 umnz omoHooo mm: Hosanna >82 m

.moocwHHomxm Hmsxmm mCHHSO
mmsHHmou Hmocou >HO> mmoumxm on new

mm. we. .Eumz .OHucwm on on we now >mmo mH pH 0
.oocm
IHHmmxm Hmcxom m msHHso OHOH m>Hmmmm

mm. vs. whoa m oxmu on cam mmEHumEOm mH uH m

.mumussoocw Hmsxom mcHuso
mm.1 mm. Hosanna ucmcHsoo on» mwmsz an H VH m

.Em H can» >HH>HuOm Hmsxom
wo.n mm. mcHuso o>HuOm OHOE mH umcuumm >8 moEHumSOm mH

.omusoououcH Hmsxom mcHHso
.hHHchHuOEO .zamzm omHuHmo= mcHuumo

 

Hm. on. usonm mcHnusumHo mcHnumEOm mH whose OH N
mcHomoq MoumsHO new EouH .02 .Oz
uouomm coozuom coHumHoquU EouH HmumsHO

 

HomscHucoov m OHQMB

39

TABLE 3

RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THE CLUSTERS FROM THE CLUSTER ANALYSIS. COR-
RELATIONS BETWEEN THE FOUR CLUSTERS DERIVED FROM THE ITEM
ANALYSIS OF THE SEX ROLE PREFERENCE INVENTORY.

ALPHA RELIABILITIES IN PARENTHESES.

 

l 2 3 4
Adherence to conventional sex roles ------ l (.70) .25 -.22 -.11
Relationship between sex and affection---2 (.69) -.08 .04
Liberality in sexual expression ---------- 3 (.65) -.15

Sexual submissiveness -------------------- 4 (.82)

 

RESULTS

Results of Analyses Over All 16 Variables

 

There were no significant differences between the
responses of the homosexual and heterosexual gs on the
hypothesized variables sex role preference, neuroticism,
self—acceptance, or self-actualization. However, the homo-
sexual §s scored higher on the femininity (Fe) variable than
did a comparable group of heterosexual Sg. This finding sup-
;ports the research hypothesis and indicates that homosexual
.§§ were more like females in stereotypic interests and
attitudes. The means and standard deviation Of the test
performances for the homosexual and heterosexual samples are
presented in Table 4. A summary of the multivariate analyses

of variance is presented in Table 5.

Hypothesis A

 

A univariate analysis of variance indicated that the
homosexual and heterosexual §s did respond differently on
the overt measure of feminine interests. The significantly
higher scores obtained by the homosexuals suggest that these
males have interests similar to the female in contrast to
the heterosexual males. However, the finding lends no em-

pirical support to those theories (Bieber, et al., 1962;

40

41
Freud, 1962) which assert that male homosexuals have
identified with the female and/or have failed to develop a
masculine identity. Perhaps, the homosexual male has
acquired the ability to accept the masculine as well as
the feminine aspects in his personality. Gough (1957) found
among his standardization data that the mean scores for
females on the Fe scale was 22.8 and 16.3 for males in a
college sample. The mean Fe score for homosexual males was
20.9 in the present study (Table 4). This finding tends to
support Stoller's (1968) conclusion that there are mixtures
of masculinity and femininity in every human. The mean Fe
score for heterosexual males in the present study was 17.7
‘which, again, suggest a mixture of both qualities with a
preponderance of masculinity. It is clear that the homo-
sexual males exhibited more feminine interests in the present
study, than the heterosexual males; however, the results do not
suggest that they are stereotypically feminine as common
stereotypes would indicate. The results of the univariate

analysis are presented in Table 5.

Hypothesis B

 

No support for the research hypothesis which predicted
differences between homosexual and heterosexual males on
overt measures of sex role preference was found. An in-
spection of Table 5 indicates that homosexual males scored
no differently than heterosexual males or were no more

likely to prefer a stereotypically feminine or "passive"

 

 

4 2 L

sexual pattern than heterosexual males. The responses of
the homosexual males would suggest that they neither express
a preference for the stereotypically female sex role during
sexual experiences nor the stereotypically male sex role.
Strikingly, this finding was not found to be peculiar to

the homosexuals but was evident in the heterosexual sample
as well. Possibly the adverse reactions to conventional

sex roles has affected the attitudes of males of both sexual

orientations as well as females.

Hypothesis C

This analysis did not indicate any statistically
significant differences between the homosexual and hetero-
sexual samples on the neuroticism scale. The prevailing
attitude which suggests that homosexual males are inherently
pathologic and are more neurotic than heterosexual males
was not supported by the present data. Both the homosexual
and heterosexual males scored within the normal range as
indicated by Eysenck and Eysenck (1963). Interestingly,
both these groups scored below the mean score of 10.9 found
in a sample of 1,003 college students tested by Eysenck and
Eysenck (see Table 4). Homosexual males in the present
study might be described as being no more neurotic than
heterosexual males and, perhaps, less neurotic than many
"normal" college students given the Eysenck and Eysenck

mean.score. The analysis can be found in Table 5.

43

Hypothesis D

 

From an inspection of the data (Table 5), it was
discovered that the homosexually oriented §s scored no
differently than heterosexually oriented S5. The reaction
to societal attitudes surrounding homosexual behavior among
males might be expected to decrease self worth or lower
self-acceptance. However, the homosexuals in the present
study appear to have been little affected and responded to
test items in a similar manner reported by heterosexual
males. It is conceivable that the adverse reactions in our
society to homosexual behavior had increased the homosexual's
self-awareness and self-perceptions and enhanced a sensi-
tivity to his own needs rather than decreasing his self-
acceptance in contrast to heterosexual males. The present
data support the Chang and Block (1960) data which found no
difference between the self-acceptance scores of homosexual
and heterosexual males. The results of the univariate
analysis for the self-acceptance scores are presented in

Table 5.

Hypothesis E

 

NO significant differences between the experimental
and control groups were indicated on the nine measures of
self-actualization used in this study. Homosexual males
were no less likely to be self-actualized than heterosexual
males. However, the results indicate that the homosexual

males scored higher on existentiality (Ex) and time

 

 

44 L.
competence (Tc). These results were not significant but
they approached significance at the .10 and .05 levels,
respectively (See Table 5). These findings indicate that
homosexual males are more likely to be flexible in the
application of values and principles and lives more fully
in the present without the burdens of guilt, regrets, and
resentments from the past than heterosexual males, at least
in this sample.

In this investigation homosexually oriented males were
discovered to live by their own values, with an internal
locus Of control, value the same things in life that fully
functioning or self-actualizing people do, and accept their
own natural aggressive feelings. They were found to pos-
sess sensitivity of responsiveness to their own needs and
feelings and possessed the capacity for developing meaningful
relationships with other people, unencumbered by exaggerated
expectations and obligations.

The results of this study indicated that psychological
functioning is unrelated to an individual's choice Of sexual
outlet. Femininity of interests was more characteristic of
the experimental group, but this finding cannot be interpreted
as feminine identification or psychosexuality in the homo-
sexual sample. The homosexual sample scored no differently
than heterosexual males. These findings are in direct con-

tradiction to what is often assumed.

45

Relationships Between the 16 Variables

The intercorrelation matrix of the 16 dependent
variables in this investigation is presented in Table 6.
There was a significant positive correlation between neu-
roticism and femininity. This suggests that males, whether
homosexual or heterosexual, who score high on Fe are very
likely to show signs of neurotic disorder or emotional
instability under excessive pressures. Interestingly, a
similar relationship was evident between neuroticism and
adherence to conventional sex roles for both groups. There
was a significant negative correlation between neuroticism
and self-acceptance and the variables used to measure self-
actualization. This would indicate that there was an inverse
relationship between these variables and neuroticism. Self-
actualization and self-acceptance were also negatively cor—
related to the variable, adherence to conventional sex roles.

It was discovered that there was not a significant
relatiOnship between femininity and the other variables in
this investigation, excluding neuroticism, time competence,
and self regard. The latter two variables were related to
femininity in the negative direction. The results would
seem to suggest that femininity in homosexual males is
unrelated to psychological functioning. (Femininity here
refers to feminine interests).

Sex role preference was independent of the other
variables in this study. This would indicate that sexuality

is unrelated to psychological functioning, at least in this

 

46

study. Sexuality here refers to mode of sexual expression
during intercourse. As might be expected, self-acceptance
'was significantly correlated with self-actualization. Males
‘who like themselves and have high self worth are more likely
to become self-actualized as indicated by these data. There
were significantly high positive correlations between all
self-actualization variables which support Shostrom's (1963)
standardization data. The generally high correlations

among these variables would suggest that homosexually
oriented males, at least in this study, possess many of the

attributes of self-actualizing people.

Race of the Subject as a Relevant Factor

 

The race of the homosexual and heterosexual §s was
shown to be a non-significant factor in this study. A
multivariate analysis for race over all variables was run
and indicated that whether a subject is black or white has
no statistical significance on his test performance. This
study made no specific research hypotheses concerning race
as a factor. The analyses for race of the SS on the vari-
ables can be found in Tables 7,8,9 and 10 in the Appendix.

Although race was not a salient factor in the present
study, the results indicate that black and white §s scored
no different on the research variables. It appears that
homosexual males, regardless of race, have significantly
higher feminine interests than heterosexual males. At the

same time, it is clear that black and white homosexuals

 

47 L

scored no different than their heterosexual counterparts on
all other variables. The differences or lack of differences
which exist between the homosexual and heterosexual SS in

this study cannot be attributed to the Ss' race.

48

TABLE 4

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIAIONS FOR HOMOSEXUAL AND HETEROSEXUAL
MALES ON ALL 16 VARIABLES.

——-_— _v.

Variable Homosexual Males Heterosexual Males

Mean (S.D.) Mean (S.D.)

 

Adherence to Conven- 2.86 ( .90) 2.63 (1.00)
tional Sex Roles

Relationship Between 1.00 ( .37) .93 ( .25)
Sex and Affection

Liberality in Sexual 2.06 ( .69) 2.27 ( .45)
Expression

Sexual Submissiveness .07 ( .36) .03 ( .18)
Neuroticism 9.93 (5.60) 9.80 (4.35)
Self-Acceptance 23.83 (4.17) 24.30 (3.53)
Self—Actualizing Value 20.13 (3.31) 20.80 (2.26)
Inner-Directedness 87.53 CLLSZ) 89.60 (9.80)
Capacity for Intimate 19.47 (4.30) 19.60 (3.91)
Contact

Self-Regard 12.77 (2.58) 13.13 (1.76)
Existentiality 22.37 (3.76) 21.73 (4.13)
Spontaneity 12.70 (2.93) 13.13 (2.11)
Feeling Reactivity 16.17 (3.25) 17.00 (2.61)
Acceptance of Aggression 16.23 (3.90) 16.30 (3.32)
{Time Competence 17.37 (3.38) 16.63 (2.86)
Fenuninity 20.93 (3.12) 17.70 (3.50)

 

 

49

HH. mo.m em. mm. oo.mH No.8 HuHHmHucwumem

 

me. we. mm. He. mm.e mo.~ cummmmumHmm

uomucoo mumsHucH

mm. mm. om. mo. sm.mH pm. you muHomdmo

om. mo. ow. om. mm.eHH no.qo mmocoouoouHouuoccH

osHm>

om. em. mm. mm. vo.m 56.8 mcHuHHmsuom-mHmm

on. mo. so. mm. vm.vH sm.m monogamooaanmm

gm. «0. mm. Ho. mH.mm hm. EmHOHuousmz

mmoco>HmmHE

00. mm. ow. om. mo. «0. Insm Hmsxom

COHmmmmem Hmsxmm

mm. mm. mH. on.H vm. om. OH muHHmuonHH

sOHuoomm¢ new row

we. NS. NS. we. oH. so. cmmzumm dHnmcoHumHmm

mOHom Mom HmcoHuco>

em. om. em. om. om. mm. 1:00 on ooconozoe

cozy mmoH m m can“ mmOH m m mumsom coo: ouanm coo: OthHum>
c3oo moum OOMHum>HcD Houum mHmwnuommm

 

.mflHm¢Hm<> Bzmazmmma 0H WEB ZO moz¢Hm¢> m0 mmmwfl<2¢ MBde¢>HBHDS mmfi mom MHMHB NMflZZDm

m mHméB

 

50

.mm u Hounm How cocooum mo moonmoo “H I mHmonuommm Mom Eooooum mo moouooo«

 

 

*Hooo. Hv.mm «vooo. om.qH hm.OH mm.mmH muHchHEom
so. ~m.m mm. mm. ms.m so.m mocmumdfioo osHe
conmoummm
mm. No. vm. Ho. OH.mH no. mo oocmummood
om. mo.H mm. om.H mo.m Nv.OH >HH>Huomom ocHHmom
Ho. Ho. Hm. me. Hm.o mm.m muHmcmucomm
soap mme m m away mme m m mumOOm coo: wusmHm coo: OHanum>
C309 moum ousHHm>HcD Houum mHmwnuomwm

AomscHucoov m mHnme

51

H00.

man an He.“

1H8>6H Ho. man an mm.“ 1H6>oH mo. men an mm.“

“on

.omuuHsO coon O>m£ mHMSHooo .HO>OH
umsfi chHHMHouHOO HOMOHMHcmHm on 09

 

hm
0v
om
hv
mm
mm
mo
mv
mNI
mo
mH
ON
hHI
vH

mm
on
mm

mm
HHI
mH
mm!
won
OH
mo
mmn
MH

0v

vm we
me he
5v mg
MM! mHI
mm mm
owl mmt
vH CHI
00 00
No mH
0H! emu
NH HH

mo
Nm
vMI
vm
moi
Ho
00
mo
mMI
OH

we
MHI MOI
om om ¢HI

mm! mml mo vol

No mH QOI mo MOI
mH mH m0! NH VNI
MH HH 50! OH hHI
mm! mml m0! NNI mm
m m h m m

mo

mHI mNI

NH mHI 00
v m N

H

. . . . . . . .cOHmmOumm¢ Ho oosmumooom
. . . . . . . . . . .%UH>HUOMOM mcHHmOh
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . >9Hocmucomm
. . . . . . . . . . . . .wuHHMHucoumem
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . UHMUQMIMHOm
. . . . . uomuqoo mumsHucH you SuHommmo
. . . . . . . . . . . . OOGOHOQEOU OEHB
. . . . . . . . . . .mmmcoouoouHOIHOGGH
. . . . . . . . .05HM> @GHNflHM5uofllewm
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .kUHGfiCHfiwh
. . . . . . . . . . . . oucmummoomlmHmm
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . EmHOHuouooz
. . . . . . . . . mmoco>HmmHsnsm Hmsxom
. . . . OOHmmoumxm Hmsxwm OH HUHHOHOQHH
.OOHuommmd now now comsuom mHnchHHMHmm

. . mOHOMm ”Om HMCOHHGO>GOU OU OUGOHOSE

 

mmHanum> cmosumm mCOHumHOHHOU

«Hnmfium>.

 

mmHdem¢> Bzmazmmmn OH mmB mom xHMBflz ZOHB¢HMMMOUMHBZH

m mHm¢B

DISCUSSION

No statistically significant support was found for
four of the research hypotheses. Those hypothesized vari-
ables which failed to yield differences between the homo-
sexual and heterosexual groups were: 1) sex role prefer-
ence, 2) neuroticism, 3) self-acceptance, and 4) self-
actualization. The most obvious conclusion, at least in
this study, is that homosexual males do not differ from
heterosexual males on any of these variables. However, the
homosexual males do differ from heterosexual males on the
overt measure of femininity (Fe). The results of the
present study indicate that the homosexual males scored
higher on feminine interests than the heterosexual male.
Despite differences on the Fe variable, the assumption that
homosexual males are more like the female psychologically
and sexually (Bieber, et al., 1962) cannot be supported by
the present data. It seems that gender identity surpasses
mere interests and/or attitudes and is determined by far
more variables. Aside from higher feminine interests, the
present group of homosexual gs could be described as no more
neurotic, no less self-accepting, no less self-actualized,

or categorized in terms of a predominant role in sexual

52

53

patterns than a comparable group of heterosexual males.
Perhaps the homosexual males' emotional and sexual
expressions are not limited by conventional sex roles as
theory has it. There are innumerable psychiatrists and
psychologists who have asserted that homosexual males re-
spond much like the female in sexual pattern, the impli-
cation being that these individuals show a preference for
the stereotyped passive female sex role. No support was
found in the present study to substantiate such a premise.
Homosexual and heterosexual males did not differ on the
measure of sex role preference. Indeed, it might be more
accurate to state that the conventional sex role stereotypes
are fast disappearing among the individuals in this study.
But the homosexual and heterosexual samples could be de-
scribed as desiring sexual relations where choice of a pre-
dominant "dominant" or "passive" sex role is unimportant.
The finding that homosexuals do not express a preference for
the stereotypically female-passive or male-dominant sex role
was found by Curran and Parr (1957). They concluded, from
their study of homosexuals being seen in private psycho-
therapy, that homosexuals will engage in a variety of sexual
acts despite any preferences they might have. Hooker (1965)
commented that for the majority of the homosexuals in her
sample "there is no correspondence between a conscious sense
of_gender identity and a preferred or predominant role in

sexual activity" (p. 50). Other investigations have described

54

similar findings (Hoffman, 1968; West, 1968; Westwood, 1960).
These results should not be interpreted to suggest that
there are not homosexuals who express sex role preferences.
However, the homosexuals in the present research cannot be
characterized as preferring any specific sex role in their
sexual patterns. They seem to transcend conventional sex
roles.

As mentioned earlier, the homosexual and heterosexual
.groups did differ on the overt measure of femininity. That
is, the homosexual males scored significantly higher on Fe
than heterosexual males. This suggests that homosexual
males resemble females in their interests and/or attitudes
much more so than do heterosexual males. However, the fact
that homosexuals are more like females than heterosexual
males does not bear gender implications. Gough (1957) used
such adjectives as gentle, sincere, helpful, patient, and
being respectful and accepting of others to define femininity
of interests, while, on the other hand, masculinity of
interests was characterized by adjectives such as hard-headed,
ambitious, restless, manipulative and Opportunistic in
dealing with others, and indecision. If it is these charac-
teristics that define femininity of interests, it seems
clear that psychological femininity or female psychosexuality
has little relationship to feminine interests. Perhaps
since the present sample of homosexuals scored in the inter—

mediate range on the Fe scale, between females and

55

heterosexual males, it would be more appropriate to conclude
that they are clearly not psychologically feminine but,
rather, are more capable of expressing such attributes as
warmth, sincerity, gentleness, and sensitivity which charac-
terizes femininity (Gough, 1957) than heterosexual males.
Homosexually oriented males appear to deviate further from
the "masculine ideal" than their heterosexual brothers but
are not, on the whole, feminine in demeanor and sexual
pattern as is commonly advanced.

Recent psychological and sociological research have
indicated that homosexuality is compatible with positive
psychological adjustment (Weinberg, 1972; Weinberg and
Williams, 1974). The present study is congruent with these
findings. These studies suggest that most homosexuals, who
are generally not visible to us as such, are pragmatic in
outlook, are coping effectively with life situations and
are effective in their mastery of the environment (Freedman,
1975; Warren, 1974). Many homosexually oriented males are
found to possess self-actualizing values similar to their
heterosexual counterparts as suggested in the present in-
vestigation. Such results would tend to indicate that
psychological adjustment and/or positive mental health is
not defined in terms of sexual pattern, whether of a homo-
sexual or heterosexual nature, but rather in terms of the
ability to effectively deal with the world.

Individuals who are most efficient in their

56

psychological adjustment appear to be those who are capable
of fulfilling both psychological and basic replenishment
needs. Homosexually oriented males are no less capable of
fulfilling these needs than are heterosexually oriented
males. In some cases, perhaps, it is clear that some homo-
sexuals may function or adjust better than heterosexuals.

As shown in Table 5, homosexuals in the present study scored
higher than heterosexual males on measures of time competence,
living in the present, rather than being obsessed with the
past or the future, as well as on measures of existentiality,
ability to situationally or existentially react without
rigid adherence to values and principles.

Weinberg and Williams (1974) investigated the psycho-
logical and social psychological aspects of societal
reaction to homosexuality and the consequences of these
reactions on the homosexually oriented individual. Their
findings indicated that a greater sense of personal worth
and self-acceptance was characteristic of those homosexual
males who: 1) disregard as significant the negative re-
actions of society toward homosexuality, 2) are more ac-
culturated to fgay" practices and homosexuality as viewed
in that community, 3) view homosexuality as normal and not
as an illness, and 4) have a strong commitment to homo-
sexuality and show an unwillingness to give up his homo-
sexuality. Homosexuals in the present study were no less

self-accepting than the homosexuals described above or

57

heterosexual males. They could be described as comfortable
in their choice of sexual outlet and possessing a high level
of self-perception. They do not view their homosexuality

as inferior to heterosexuality.

Discussion of the Levels of Sexual Preference

 

It is important to make a distinction between male
homosexuals studied in the present research and other males
whose sexual orientation contrast the heterosexual preference.
It seems to be generally accepted that all males with sexual
preferences which deviate from the heterosexual patterns
can be categorized as homosexuals. This attitude ignores
the possibility, and, indeed, the existence of the trans-
sexual male, the transvestite, and the bisexual. The liter-
ature is replete with conclusions attributed to homosexual
males which are clearly based on data which included bi-
sexuals, trans-sexuals, and the like (Freud, 1962; Marmor,
1965). The sexual object choice as well as the extent to
‘which one sexual object choice is consistent is dependent
on the sexual preferences of a given orientation. For
example, a male or female sex partner is consistent with a
bisexual preference, while the male homosexual is only
emotionally and sexually attracted to other males. The
need to clarify such differences in sexual preference is
paramount in understanding homosexual behavior among males
and, also, lessens the confusion which exists in current

literature.

58

The bisexual male is emotionally and erotically
attracted to both men and women without a clear preference
for either. Unlike the homosexual male, he enjoys both
male and female contacts equally. Some bisexual males
accept and equally enjoy both types of emotional and sexual
contacts and have no strong preferences for one or the other
sex even though they may have had greater experiences of
one sort (Churchill, 1967). It might have been only a matter
of circumstance that brings some bisexual males into more
frequent contact with one sex over the other. Such a situ-
ation is not unusual among single males with a bisexual
orientation, since male contacts are often more available
to them than female contacts.

There is the transvestite whose orientation has both -
a sexual and_gender implication. The male transvestite is
one who cross-dresses. He wears the attire or clothing
usually associated with the opposite sex. He may wear one
item of clothing of the opposite sex in a fetishistic
manner or may enjoy wearing a complete outfit. The male
transvestite can be divided into homosexual transvestites
and heterosexual transvestites. Basically, the homosexual
transvestite (drag queen) dresses for vanity or to be
sexually attractive to other men and represents a good part
of that minority of noticeable gay men upon which the homo-
sexual stereotype is Often based. The heterosexual trans-

vestite is frequently compulsive in his cross-dressing, and

59

in the earlier phases his cross-dressing may serve erotic
needs. While, there are a few heterosexual and homosexual
transvestites who may feel the need to be feminine strongly
enough to request hormones or may eventually find them-
selves to be trans-sexual, most are appalled at the thought
of participating in major body changes (Feinbloom, 1976).
In these cases both the homosexual and heterosexual male
transvestite regard themselves as male, and would be most
uncomfortable at the thought of sex-reassignment surgery
requested by trans-sexual males. Feinbloom (1976) acknowe
ledges that "deviant cross-dressing involves a time and
setting known to be inappropriate... [and] when speaking of
cross-dressing, one must always remember the assumption of
setting -- a time, a place, and an audience. In various
settings the same act can have multiple and different meanings"
(p. 18).

The final group is the trans-sexual males who are
quite different from the transvestite or the homosexual male.
The trans-sexual male perceives his gender identity as
incongruous with the anatomical or biological reality and
actively seeks to resolve the conflict through sex-reas-
signment surgery. The term trans-sexual can refer to both
pre and postoperative men, though once surgery is completed
the male trans-sexual is defined with the female biological
sex which is compatible with his gender identity. In

Opposition to the transvestite and homosexual male, the male

tans-sexual fe
:ale's body" .
selves heterose
fish to be homc
a: 'wish to ma.
1976, p. 31) .
according to t
IEeinbloom, 19
It Shou
Mtween the DC
sexual males.
the Planner in
sexual identi1
cerned about 1
ThiOlOgiCal it
accepts his 13.
relationships
the biseanl ;

...xual patter

nah

 

60 L

trans-sexual feels himself to be a female "trapped in a
male's body". In general, male trans-sexuals consider them-
selves heterosexual but some male-to—female trans-sexuals
wish to be homosexual females or lesbians postoperatively
or ”wish to maintain options for bisexuality" (Feinbloom,
1976, p. 31). Essentially the latter two groups are small
according to the sparse research which currently exist
(Feinbloom, 1976; Green and Money, 1969; Stoller, 1968).

It should be clear that there are critical differences
between the homosexual, bisexual, transvestite, and trans-
sexual males. The differences are essentially related to
the manner in which each one perceives his gender and/or
sexual identity. The homosexual male is basically not con-
cerned about being a man either in_gender role or in sexual
(biological identity) identity. He knows that he is a man,
accepts his body, but chooses to express himself in sexual
relationships with other men. The homosexual male, like
the bisexual male, differs from the heterosexual male in
sexual pattern; however, unlike the transvestite (homosexual
and heterosexual) and the trans-sexual male, he feels com-
fortable being simply male both psychologically and be-

haviorally.

Discussion of the Cluster Analysis

 

The cluster analysis in Table 2 contains 15 of the
original 20 items and four of the variables in the study and

shows that the data has a relatively high degree of reliability

1:133) With re
..-.--‘Mship bet1

:3: the subscal'
Batain, 1975) a
.rfscale tends t
;:e:'erence and i
axed in this st
:Ltiple groups
:Hmter and Cc
333? 1 ‘- adhe:
relationship be‘
itsexual eXpre

The item

fairly high wi t

61
(Table 3) with respect to the content of the items. The
relationship between clusters is minimal which indicates
that the subscales of the Sex Role Preference Inventory
(Batain, 1975) are fairly independent (Table 3). Each
subscale tends to measure a distinct aspect of sex role
preference and indicates that sex role preference, as mea:
sured in this study, is not a unitary concept. The blind
multiple groups solution in the computer program PACKAGE
by Hunter and Cohen (1969) yielded four groups representing:
.group 1 -- adherence to conventional sex roles; group 2 --
relationship between sex and affection; group 3 -- liberality
in sexual expression; and group 4 -- sexual submissiveness.

The items in each group or cluster were correlated
fairly high with the cluster to be included within that
cluster. The original scale contained 20 items but item-to-
cluster correlations below .30 were not included since such
items decreased the alpha reliability of the cluster. In
terms of the factor analysis, which has been deleted here
since the four factors were identical to the clusters, items
'were not included if the communality for that item was below
.10. .

An inSpection of Table 2 and Table 3 indicates that
some ambiguity in the phrasing of the five items which were
not included and, perhaps, items 2 and 19, may have affected
the way the SS in the study responded to those items. Per-

haps these items can be rephrased or rewritten and administered

33 other _S_S in

2::irical Clus‘

 

This st:
335:; cf literaf
:et'deen homo 88>
gattern (Hooker
L971; Weinberg.
iiiea that there
Izcsexuals and
Size psychiatri

:foLmded . Hom<

serially oriente
:other importa
tamer-mind edn e s
Hike the heter
lepresent stud'

62

to other SS in the future and the alpha reliabilities of the

empirical clusters would conceivably be increased.

Summary and Conclusions

 

This study seems to be an addition to the growing
body of literature indicating non-significant differences
between homosexuals and heterosexuals, except in sexual
pattern (Hooker, 1957; West, 1968; Hoffman, 1968; Freedman,
1971; Weinberg, 1972; Weinberg and Williams, 1974). The
idea that there should be personality differences between
homosexuals and heterosexuals is speculatively appealing to
some psychiatrists and psychologists but is empirically
unfounded. Homosexually oriented males are unlike hetero-
sexually oriented males, in that they resemble the female
in other important ways. They are much more capable of
tender-mindedness, gentleness, and sensitivity but are not
unlike the heterosexual male in other ways, at least in
the present study. Obviously further research is needed
before psychologists can be satisfied either that there are
no significant personality differences or that the important
differences have been identified.

The results of this study suggest that the stereo-
type Of homosexuals commonly held by many heterosexual and
some homosexuals exists in a small minority of homosexually
oriented individuals but was not the case in the homosexual
subjects in the present investigation. These subjects were

characterized by good psychological adjustment, and many

are found to 1
3d possessed <
:mterpart S -
further from t1
is heterosexua
Phenomer
imnstrate the
:3“: as invariat
:ther parts of
;:station advan
ices function e
sen in face of
serial expressi
ihcgtile and c.

63

were found to be self-actualizing, had high self-worth,
and possessed qualities uncommon in their heterosexual
counterparts. The fact that the homosexual males are
further from the stereotype of the masculine ideal than
the heterosexual males was demonstrated in this study.

Phenomenologically, the results of this study
demonstrate that an individual's choice of sexual outlet is
not as invariably salient, nor as much in conflict with
other parts of his life, as is often supposed. The inter-
pretation advanced in this study was that the homosexual
does function effectively in society and continues to do so
even in face of negative societal reaction to his mode of
sexual expression. The homosexual's healthy adaptation in
a hostile and contemptible world lends credence to his

ability to be psychologically well-adjusted.

The res
is: further 6
:3: be fruit-fl“
existing mate:
is suggeSted t
_::.ssures helI
sanity ‘30 C
Lens in some I
gation of the
afruitful enC'
identity in r E
semal has sic.
semals alike.
are to reach a
particularly A

emosexual ity

'fieviant"

THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

The results of this research would tend to indicate
that further exploration of femininity and passivity would
not be fruitful for further research on homosexuality using
existing materials. Perhaps further areas of study would
be suggested through the investigation of how societal
pressures help create self-hatred, promiscuity and the
inability to develop lasting relationships, and other prob-
lems in some homosexually oriented individuals. An investi-
'gation of the politics of homosexual stereotyping would be
a fruitful endeavor. In a broader sense, the politics of
identity in relation to cultural conceptions of the homo-
sexual has significant effects on heterosexuals and homo-
sexuals alike, and deserves further study, especially if we
are to reach an understanding of the homosexual. Societies,
particularly American society, must come to conceptualize
homosexuality in a more positive framework, and as not being
“deviant" or "perverted", thereby reducing the differentiation
of human beings on the basis of sexual orientation. In
addition we must come to realize the diverse nature of homo—
sexuality. Homosexuals, like heterosexuals, are individuals

set apart from all other homosexuals and generalizations

64

 

:agarding the r
vidualism. Fur
3e concomitant
seraality, love

agart from the

65
regarding the nature of homosexuality disregard this indi-
vidualism. Further research is needed in understanding
the concomitants of homosexual identity such as emotional
sexuality, love and romance, and friendships that are

apart from the purely physical sex act.

Sarahal, H. Co

Psychia

aatain, R. The
1975).

Benjamin: H . 2
Press,

fisher, 1. A
New YOI

5mm, D. Inve

W

0- Trar
and A.

Behavic
W

3mm ,

:lingl J. ' anc

omOSe:

31: 20'
tIlurChill ' W.

Hawtho:

Ch H
*PPEn, A.

1
fl

D. The .
19%

iry.

curl-an I D Q

LISTS OF REFERENCES

Barahal, H. Constitutional factors in male homosexuals.
Psychiatric Quarterly, 1939, 13, 391-400.

 

Batain, R. The Sex Role Preference Inventory. (Unpublished:
1975):

 

Benjamin, H. The transsexual phenomenon. New York: Julian
Press, 1966.

 

Bieber, I. A_psychoanalytic study of male homosexuals.
New York: Basic Books, 1962.

 

Brown, D. Inversion and homosexuality. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 1958, 28, 424-429.

 

Brown, D. Transsexualism and sex-role inversion. In A. Ellis,
and A. Barbanel (Eds.) The Encyclopedia of Sexual
Behavior, Vol. II. New York: Hawthorne Books, Inc.,
1961.

 

 

Chang, J., and Block, J. A study of identification in male
homosexuals. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1960,
24, 207-310.

Churchill, W. Homosexual behavior among males. New York:
Hawthorne Books, Inc., 1967.

 

Coppen, A. Body-build of male homosexuals. British Medical
Journal, 1959, 3, 1443-1445.

Cory, D. The homosexual in America. New York: Greenberg,

1957.

 

Curran, D., and Parr, D. Homosexuality: An analysis of 100
male cases seen in private practice. British Medical
Journal, 1957, April 6, 797-801.

 

 

Dean, R., and Richardson, H. Analysis of MMPI profiles of 40
college-educated overt male homosexuals. Journal of
Consulting Psychology, 1964, 28, 483-486.

 

66

 

   

Jeluca, J. The s
Pro‘ectiv
1966p 351!

Sicko}, B. Attib
adequacy

Psycholog

Midge, W. , and
among A11

Psycholo

Eysenck, 3., ar.
Inventor
Testing

Feinbloom, D I

Delacor

Fenichel, 0. 1
York: ‘

Be lmo n.

Ere“Jinan. M .
than s

Freud, S . In

of
‘&

reaSs
m

67

Deluca, J. The structure of homosexuality. Journal of
ProjectiveTeohniques and Personality Assessment,
1966, 3Q, 187-191.

 

Dickey, B. Attitudes toward sex roles and feelings of
adequacy in homosexual males. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 1961, 25, 116-122.

 

 

Doidge, W., and Holtzman, W. Implications of homosexuality
among Air Force trainees. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 1960, 34, 9-13.

 

 

Eysenck, H., and Eysenck, S. The Eysenck Personality
Inventory. San Diego: The Educational and Industrial
Testing Service, 1963.

 

 

Feinbloom, D. Transvestites and transsexuals. New York:
Delacorte PreSSZSeymour Lawrence, 1976.

Fenichel, O. The psychoanalytic‘theory of neurosis. New
York: W. W. Norton, 1945.

Freedman, M. Homosexuality and pgychological functioning.
Belmont: Brooks/Cole, 1971.

Freedman, M. Far from illness: Homosexuals may be healthier
than straights, Newsweek, 1975, 8, 28-32.

 

Freud, S. In J. Strachey (Trans.), Three essays on the theory
of sexualipy (1905). New York: Basic Books, 1962.

 

 

Green, R., and Money, J. (Eds.) Transsexualism and sex
reassignment. Baltimore: The Johns H0pkins Press,
1969.

 

 

Gough, H. Manual for the California Psychological Inventor .
San Diego: Consulting Psychologist Press, 195 .

Henry, G. Sex variants. New York: Harper, 1941.

 

Hoffman, M. The gay world. New York: Basic Books, 1968.

 

Hooker, E. The adjustment of the male overt homosexual.
Journal of Projective Techniques, 1957, 2;, 18-31.

 

Hooker, E. Male homosexuality in the Rorschach. Journal of
Projective Techniques, 1958, 22, 33-54.

 

 

Hooker, E. An empirical study of some relations between
sexual patterns and gender identity in male homosexuals.
In J. Money (Ed.) Sex research: New developments.
» New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1965.

 

Booker, B. Male
(Ed.) §_€

Enter, J., am
program
Compute

Karpman, B. (E
New Yo:

Kinsey, A., P<
Sexual
Saunde

Liddicoat , R ,
1957,

Lindner ' R . P

Emory J . (I
Basic

Killer, P. '
homos
catio
@e

him

68

Hooker, E. Male homosexuals and their "worlds". In J. Marmor
(Ed.) Sexual inversion. New York: Basic Books, 1965.

 

Hunter, J., and Cohen, S. PACKAGE, A computer library tape
program available at the Michigan State University
Computer Center, 1969.

Karpman, B. (Ed.) The sexual offender and his offenses.
New York: Julian Press, 1954.

 

Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W., Martin, C., and Gebbhard, P.
Sexual behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia:
Saunders, 1948.

Liddicoat, R. Untitled article in British Medical Journal,
1957, 1110-1111.

 

Lindner, R. Must_you conform? New York: Rinehart, 1956.

 

Marmor, J. (Ed.) Introduction. Sexual inversion. New York:
Basic Books, 1965.

 

Miller, P., Bradley, J., Cross, R., and WOod, G. Review of
homosexuality research (1960-1966) and some impli-
cations for treatment. Psychotherapy: Theory,
ResearchL and Practice, 1968, 5, 3-6.

 

 

Pauly, I. Male psychosexual inversion: Transsexualism.
Archives of General Psychiatry, 1965, 13, 172-179.

 

Rabinovitch, R. (1951). Overt homosexuality. In B. Karpman
(Ed.) The sexual offender and his offenses. New York:
Julian Press, 1954.

Rado, S. A critical examination of the theory of bisexuality.
Psychosomatic Medicine, 1940, 2, 459-467.

 

Saghir, M. Homosexuality: III. Psychiatric disorders and
disability in the male homosexual. American Journal
Of Psychiatry, 1970a, 126, 1079-1086.

 

 

Schofield, M. Sociological aspects of homosexuality. New York:
Little, Brown, 1966.

 

Sheldon, W. Varieties of delinquent youths. New York:
Harper, 1949.

 

Shostrom, E. The Personal Orientation Inventory. San Diego:
The Educational and Industrial Testing Service, 1963.

 

Simon, W., and Gagnon, J. Homosexuality: The formulation of
a sociological perspective. Journal of Health and
Social Behavior, 1967, 8, 177-185.

 

 

 

Stoller, R. E

Starr, A. (15
sexual
Books,

”Jan den Haag,
cultuz
l 963 .

Warren , C . Id
York:

Heinberg, c,
St. Ma

Weinberg , M .
Oxford

Nest, D. Homo
K
Westwood, G

WOlfenden , J
Offens‘
m

69

Stoller, R. Sex and gender. New York: Science House, 1968.

 

Storr, A. (1964). Sexual deviation. In W. Churchill Homo-
sexual behavior among males. New York: Hawthorne
Books, Inc., 1967.

 

Van den Haag, E. (1963). Notes on homosexuality and its
cultural setting. In H. Ruitenbeek (Ed.) The problem
of homosexuality in modern society. New York: Dutton,
1963.

 

Warren, C. Identity and community in the gay world. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1974.

Weinberg, G. Society and the healthyghomosexual. New York:
St. Martin s Press, 1972.

 

Weinberg, M. and Williams, C. Male homosexuals. New York:
Oxford University Press, Inc., 1974.

West, D. Homosexuality. Harmondsworth: Pelican Books, 1968.

 

westwood, G. A minority. New York: Longmans, Green, 1960.

 

WOlfenden, J. Sir. Report of the committee on homosexual
Offenses and prostitution. London: Her Majesty‘s
Stationery Office, 1957.

 

 

Brown, D . The
sexual
613-6]

Pittenger , N .
homose

Ruitenbeek , E
moderr

Ruitenbeek , 15
London

Stoller, R. E
In J.
Basic

Tripp. c. The
Book‘E

GENERAL REFERENCES

Brown, D. The develoPment of sex-role inversion and homo-
sexuality. Journal of Pediatrics, 1957, g9,

613-619.

Pittenger, N. Time for consent: A christians' approach to
homosexuality. London: SCM Press, Ltd., 1970.

Ruitenbeek, H. (Ed.) The problems of homosexuality in
modern society. New York: Dutton, 1963.

’Ruitenbeek, H. (Ed.) Homosexuality: A changingpicture.
London: Souvenir Press, Ltd., 1973.

Stoller, R. Passing and the continuum of gender identity.
In J. Marmor (Ed.) Sexual inversion. New York:

Basic Books, 1965.

Tripp, C. The homosexual matrix. New York: McGraw—Hill

Book Company, 1973:

70

APPENDIX
Description of research variables
Sex Role Preference Inventory
Personal Data Form
Instructions

Tables 7-10

 

Self-Accepta

 

The p
such as sens

capacity f or

The ;
llfiity or ffi
‘s’ariable inc

Sew

This
reactivity.
teriZeS ind:
Show difficn

The j

of .

APPENDIX

DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH VARIABLES

Self-Acceptance

 

The purpose of this variable is to assess factors
such as sense of personal worth, self-acceptance, and

capacity for independent thinking and action.

Femininity

 

The purpose of this variable is to assess the mascu-
linity or femininity of interests. High scores on this
variable indicate more feminine interests, while low scores

indicate more masculine interests.

Neuroticism

 

This variable assesses emotional ability and over-
reactivity. Neuroticism or emotional instability charac-
terizes individuals who are emotionally overresponsive and
show difficulty in returning to a normal state after critical

emotional experiences.

Self-Actualizing Value

 

The purpose of this variable is to measure affirmation

of a primary value of self-actualizing pe0ple.

71

ritis'centialit‘
:_________________4

This Vi
judgment and '

grinciples .

Faeling react
This v

tivity of res.

Scontane it
This 1
in Spontanem

SPODtaneou S l‘

a

J

W
Self

B

The 1

SlVeness , (1

Can.

72

Existentiality

 

This variable assesses the ability to use good
judgment and be flexible in the application of values and

principles.

Feeling reactivity

 

This variable reflects the ability to show sensi-

tivity of responsiveness to one's own needs and feelings.

Spontaneity

 

This variable measures the ability to express feelings
in spontaneous action. It measures the freedom to react

spontaneously and to be oneself.

Self-Regard

 

Self regard measures affirmation of self because of

self worth or strength.

.Acceptance of Aggression
The purpose of this variable is to assess the ability
to accept one's natural aggressiveness as opposed to defen-

siveness, denial, and repression of aggression.

Capacity for Intimate Contact

The purpose of this variable is to measure ability
to develop contactful intimate and interpersonal relationships
‘with other human beings which are not encumbered by excessive

expectations and obligations.

 

This v
is basically

actions or re

The Competen

 

This v
individua l i s

{fist or futur

The pu
to WhiCh an i
by SOClety as

roles .

Rel

This v4

sexuality and

73

Inner-Directedness

 

This variable measures whether reactivity orientation
is basically internal or external. It measures whether

actions or reactions are toward others or toward self.

Time Competence

 

This variable measures the degree to which an
individual is oriented to the present as opposed to being

past or future oriented.

Adherence to Conventional Sex Roles*

 

The purpose of this variable is to measure the degree
to which an individual adheres to the sex roles as defined
by society as Opposed to the ability to go beyond these sex

roles.

Relationship Between Sex and Affection*
This variable measures the ability to integrate

sexuality and affectivity into a meaningful whole.

Liberality in Sexual Expression*
This variable measures the ability to express sexu-

ality in a variety of ways. It is related to Adherence to

 

Conventional Sex Roles, in that it assesses the ability to

 

transcend traditional sex roles and to experience sexuality

in its fullest aspects.

_sgual Suani

This
sexual inter
passive part

preferences

*These var ia

ence Inven to

74

Sexual Submissiveness*

 

This variable measures the capacity for submissive
sexual interaction. It assesses one‘s ability to be a
passive partner during sexual experiences outside any

preferences which might exist.

*These variables are the subscales of the Sex Role Prefer-

ence Inventory.

This
cginions or 1

sexuality .

l- The domi
The more
Sexual a
I enjoy
dominat£
It is a;
Whether
Prefere
Each pa
tations
I do r“:

COnCErr

~J
.

I have

interc<

1.

aWay “ ’

 

SEX ROLE PREFERENCE INVENTORY

This inventory is designed to assess people's
opinions or reactions with regard to a certain aspect of

sexuality.

Adherence to Conventional Sex Roles

l. The dominant partner should initiate sexual activity.

2. The more dominant partner should take charge of the
sexual aspect of a relationship.

3. I enjoy sexual activity where neither me nor my partner
dominate.

4. It is disgusting to me to see an effeminate man,
whether his femininity is indicative of his sexual
preference is unimportant.

5. Each partner in a sexual experience should have expec-
tations of the other, and they should each abide by them.

6. I do not feel that conscious role-playing is a primary
concern for me during sexual experiences.

7. I have had fantasies of being a woman during sexual

intercourse.

Relationship Between Sex and Affection
1. There is something disturbing about getting "carried

away", emotionally, during sexual intercourse.

75

2. Someti

activi

Lflfirality

1. I am a

2. It is
a sexu
3. It is
very t
4. My par

Sexual Sut
\

1- I alwa
ences.
2' I have

ence.

2.

76

Sometimes my partner is more active during sexual

activity than I am.

Liberality in Sexual Expression

1.

2.

4.

I am always the dominant partner during sexual encounter.
It is sometimes fun to take a more passive role during

a sexual experience.

It is easy for me to be gentle, warm, and to express
very tender feelings during sexual experiences.

My partner has decided what we would do sexually.

Sexual Submissiveness

 

1.

2.

I always prefer passive, unreciprocated sexual experi-
ences.
I have never assumed a passive role in a sexual experi-

ence .

IDENTIFICP

AGE:

SEX:

ETHNIC GRC

MARITAL ST

YEARS OF E
0%

YRS. 1 2 3

OCCUPATION

APPROXIMAT]

HaVe You e1

Offerlse?

PERSONAL DATA SHEET

IDENTIFICATION CODE:

 

AGE:

 

SEX:

 

ETHNIC GROUP:

 

MARITAL STATUS: SINGLE MARRIED
YEARS OF EDUCATION COMPLETED (MARK HIGHEST GRADE COMPLETED)

GRAMMAR SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL COLLEGE MA Ph D

 

 

YRS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 l 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

OCCUPATION (IF STUDENT, PLACE "STUDENT" IN BLANK):

 

APPROXIMATE PERSONAL ANNUAL INCOME:

 

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for any felonious

offense? YES NO

Have you ever been arrested or convicted for any sexual
offense? ___YES___NO
Have you ever been referred for counseling or psychiatric
treatment? ___YES___NO

Have you ever sought or are you presently receiving counseling

or psychiatric treatment? YES NO

If you have experienced any prolonged disturbing emotional
or sexual problems, but did not seek professional advice,

briefly describe the experience(s).

 

 

77

The
be used t<
to a varie
is include
regard to

In
strongly ‘
Strongly 1
In Such ca
be Charac.
that you 1
Statement

Yo-
tained he.

in resp0r1|
d

‘° “04 92
dec' .
% 1
Remember

1t, and t

INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECTS

The following inventories and questionnaires will
be used to study the attitudes and values of various groups
to a variety of statements. In addition, an assessment form
is included to assess pe0ple's opinions or reactions with
regard to a certain aspect of sexuality.

In some instances you may discover that you agree
strongly with some of the statements, disagree just as
strongly with others, and perhaps uncertain about others.
In such cases select the one you more strongly believe to
be characteristic of your personal feelings. we would ask
that you be as candid as possible in responding to each
statement.

You will discover that each of the instruments con-
tained here will have individual instructions to help you
in responding to the statements therein. However, please

do not omit any item even though it is difficult for you to

 

 

 

decide, just select the more characteristic reSponse.

 

Remember to read each statement, decide how you feel about

it, and then mark your answer on the answer sheet.

78

‘Sariable

Adherence 1
tional Sex

Relationsh.
and Affect.

Liberality
EXPressive'

Semal Sub-
Neuroticis
Self-fiecep
5elf‘actlla
Inner-dire

Capacity f
Contact

Self-regar
Existentia
Spontane it
Peeling Re

Acceptance
AggressiOr

Time Comps

\

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR BLACK AND WHITE

79

TABLE 7

HOMOSEXUAL MALES ON ALL 16 VARIABLES.

 

 

Black §s White gs
Variable Mean (S.D.) Mean (S.D.)
Adherence to Conven-
tional Sex Roles 2.75 (1.06) 3.00 ( .68)
Relationship Between Sex
and Affection .94 ( .44) 1.07 ( .27)
Liberality in Sexual
Expressiveness 2.00 ( .82) 2.14 ( .53)
Sexual Submissiveness .13 ( .50) .00 ( .00)
Neuroticism 8.88 (4.70) 11.14 (6.44)
Self-acceptance 23.50 (4.16) 24.21 (4.30)
Self—actualizing Value 19.25 (3.57) 21.14 (2.77)
Inner-directedness 86.94 (12.65) 88.21) (10.51)
Capacity for Intimate
Contact 19.25 (4.84) 19.71 (3.75)
Self-regard 12.94 (2.49) 12.57 (2.77)
Existentiality 21.63 (4.18) 23.21 (3.17)
Spontaneity 12.81 (3.25) 12.57 (2.62)
Feeling Reactivity 15.81 (3.43) 16.57 (3.11)
Acceptance of
Aggression 15.56 (4.40) 17.00 (3.21)
Time Competence 17.75 (3.61) 16.93 (3.17)
Femininity 21.19 (2.93) 20.64 (3.41)

 

 

Variable

Adherence
tional Se

Relations
and Affec

Liberalit
Expressiv

Sexual su'
Neurotici:
Self-accel
Self—actué
Inner-dire

Calpacity 1
Intimate C

Self‘regar
Existent i a
Spontaneit
Feeling Re

AcceptanCe
Aggression

Femininity

\

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR BLACK AND WHITE

80

TABLE 8

HETEROSEXUAL MALES ON ALL 16 VARIABLES.

 

 

Black gs White §s
Variable Mean (S.D.) Mean (S.D.)
Adherence to Conven—
tional Sex Roles 2.62 (1.04) 2.65 (1.00)
Relationship Between Sex
and Affection .92 ( .28) .94 ( .24)
Liberality in Sexual
Expressiveness 2.23 ( .44) 2.29 ( .47)
Sexual Submissiveness .08 ( .28) .00 ( .00)
Neuroticism 10.31 (3.82) 9.41 (4.80)
Self-acceptance 24.85 (2.64) 23.88 (4.12)
Self-actualizing Value 20.85 (2.64) 20.76 (2.02)
Inner-directedness 89.38 (10.26) 89.76 (9.74)
Capacity for
Intimate Contact 20.23 (4.02 19.12 (3.87)
Self-regard 13.15 (2.12) 13.12 (1.50)
Existentiality 21.77 (4.62) 21.71 (3.85)
Spontaneity 12.92 (2.10) 13.29 (2.17)
Feeling Reactivity 17.08 (2.43) 16.94 (2.82)
Acceptance of
Aggression 16.77 (3.68) 15.94 (3.09)
Time Competence 16.23 (2.55) 16.94 (3.11)
Femininity 17.85 (4.54) 17.59 (2.58)

 

 

 

 

 

Source

 

Race Ef
Black
White

Sexual c
Effect
Homose
Hetero

Race X SE
orientatj

Error

*Dependem
Adhe:
RGIat
Liber
SEXUa
NGurO
Self”
Femin.
Self~1

Signj

**

81

TABLE 9

SUMMARY TABLE FOR MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
OF EIGHT DEPENDENT VARIABLES.* MULTIVARIATE
TEST FOR RACE AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION.

 

Multivariate
Source of Variation df F-ratio P Less Than
Race Effect 1 1.1501 .3481
Black gs
White §s

Sexual Orientation

Effect 1 2.5188 .0223**
Homosexual gs
Heterosexual §s

Race X Sexual
Orientation 1 .8737 .5450

Error 56

 

*Dependent variables used in Multivariate test:
Adherence to conventional sex roles
Relationship between sex and affection
Liberality in sexual expression
Sexual submissiveness
Neuroticism
Self-Acceptance
Femininity
Self-Actualizing Value

**Test significant at alpha level .05.

SUM

_.

 

Source c

 

Race Ef'
Black
White

SEXual
Homo:

Hete

Race x

Error

*Depe

TABLE 10

SUMMARY TABLE FOR MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF

EIGHT DEPENDENT VARIABLES.*

MULTIVARIATE TEST

FOR RACE AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION

 

Multivariate
Source of Variation df F-ratio P Less Than
Race Effect 1 .3203 .9546
Black §s
White.§s
Sexual Orientation Effect 1 .9786 .4638
Homosexual §s
Heterosexual §s
Race X Sexual Orientation 1 .5287 .8292
Error 56

 

*Dependent variables used in multivarate test:

Inner-directedness
Time competence

Capacity for intimate contact

Self-regard
Existentiality
Spontaneity
Feeling reactivity

Acceptance of aggression

 

 

HIGQN STATE UN V.

"lllll 21" H” Ill [IIIIVILMINIEMHIES