A few weeks ago I asked you to challenge the Advanced Medical Institute. An organisation who specialised in selling medication for men’s psychosexual problems (erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation) who caused concern over their advertising method and sales techniques which bullied and humiliated vulnerable men.

Following complaints from men, an investigation by Trading Standards in Westminster has led to AMI ceasing trading. The company still practices in Australia where it has it’s main offices.

While it is good news AMI is no longer operating in the UK, there are still issues about the company we need to urgently address and I would encourage you to do this if you’re a journalist, blogger, healthcare practitioner or men’s health activist.

We need to find out answers to the following questions:

What has happened to the men who’ve had ‘treatment’ from AMI?
We know the approach taken by AMI hinged around bullying men and making them feel anxious and inadequate for their sexual problems. There was also pressure not to consult with the medical profession (GPs particularly) or counselling services. This could have caused a lot of harm to men already anxious about psychosexual problems. We need to try and reach men in this category and share information with them about how to get help – particularly talking to their GP and getting referrals to psychosexual therapy if appropriate. We also need to try and identify just how many men were affected and learn lessons from their experiences to ensure this kind of exploitation can be avoided in the future.

Campaigning for refunds for those who’ve paid for treatment
Those who have paid AMI for products they’ve either not received or were ineffective are entitled to a refund, however with the company no longer trading it is unclear how this will be addressed. I would recommend men who are worried about this to contact Westminster Trading Standards directly or you can also get more information about claims from Consumer Direct (thanks again to our friends @SuffolkTS for this recommendation and for their continued advice/support in investigating AMI). Those in a position to campaign more widely on this may want to try and help men affected.

Investigating the doctors who worked for the company
AIM were not just a bunch of salespeople. The patient history and approval of products were taken/given by medics, most of whom I believe were NHS staff working as locums for AMI. This raises questions about ethical and appropriate conduct of medical practitioners who could have been in no doubt of the company they were working for. Given how dreadfully men have been treated by the company I would not think it unreasonable that doctors identified as working for AMI should be reported to the GMC. If you are interested in exploring this further please do email me as I have information that could help in this case.

We should not let this story end here. I cannot stress enough how appallingly men were treated by this company and the long term physical and psychological harms that have been caused as a result. Because this is a psychosexual topic it’s easy to see it as trivial or even joke about it. It truly isn’t. Let’s please give this the attention we’d pay to other health topics and seek help and recompense for men affected – and a full investigation into the medics who were happy to collude with AMI’s unethical practices.

June 14 to 20th is Men’s Health week, with numerous practitioners, charities and healthcare organisations hosting events and conciousness raising activities.

One area that probably won’t be falling under any of the public campaigns for Men’s Health Week – but ought to be a priority for us to tackle – is taking on the organisation known as the Advanced Medical Institute.

You may remember I’ve covered this organisation previously. It is notorious within Australia, the UK and other parts of Europe for aggressively selling products to men for erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation. Over the past year the number of emails I’ve had from men who’ve had distressing experiences with the company has increased every month, many asking if there is anything I can do to help tackle AMI. As more men have bravely decided to start speaking out against the organisation I think it’s time we offered them some support.

Concerns about AMI are numerous. These include:
- The sales techniques used by the organisation
Men who contact the organisation do speak to a medic (more on this shortly) but mostly discuss the products they want to purchase with salespeople from the organisation. They use particularly emotive and distressing techniques to get men to place an order. I have heard taped conversations with staff from AMI and read transcripts of calls. If men hesitate over purchasing their products AMI staff tell them their wives will leave them or have affairs if they do not buy their products. Salespeople tell men their partners are lying if they’ve not complained about the situation or have been supportive of them. Men are also told they are ‘losers’ for having psychosexual problems. Medics working for the company tell men not to talk to their GP and advise their GP’s won’t know about the products AMI offer and don’t fully understand men’s psychosexual problems. They also wrongly advise men there is no help for psychosexual problems on the NHS. Men who have had experiences with the company have complained of inadequate medical history taking or staff not taking account of existing health problems such as epilepsy. Men calling with psychosexual problems linked to their sexuality, body image etc have told me these issues have been ignored by the company who solely focus on a medical solution and advise against seeking further psychosexual counselling.

None of these activities are ethical or acceptable within clinical practice or psychosexual therapy. A man seeking help and advice needs to be giving a thorough medical check as well as a sensitive sexual history. Factors indicating existing health problems need investigation as do any symptoms or behaviours suggesting psychosexual therapy is more appropriate. Certainly no reputable practitioner would pressure someone into any treatment, nor call anyone struggling with problems a ‘loser’ or threaten their spouse would leave them or cheat if the refused treatment. These aggressive sales techniques are applied only when men appear to be deviating from purchasing AMI products – for example questioning the cost of items or asking whether it’s okay to also speak to their doctor.

-Misleading advertising
Aside from adverts in newspapers and on billboards causing offence, there is some suggestion men see the adverts as a form of helpline. So when they call the organisation it may be unclear it is simply designed to sell a product. Talking to a salesperson on the phone may be confused with a counsellor (partly because they are referred to with titles like ‘clinical co-ordinator’), and because men also talk to a medic who takes their sexual history. This is used to establish the men are eligible to purchase products, not that they necessarily have a psychosexual problem. However this is not clarified to the client. Those who have seen AMI staff at their offices report similar confusion and even greater sales pressure techniques used in face to face settings. If you check the company’s website it implies there is no sales pressure and people can opt out, however this does not happen in practice and those approaching the company through hearing about them from newspapers or billboards have no information on consumer rights.

- Purchasing Policies
Aside from the issues of advertising and sales techniques another major concern about the company is how much it charges for the products it sells. In calls I listened in to last year the salespeople (clinical co-ordinators) were telling clients the product costs “£75 a month with a £399 deposit up front, global cost of that with VAT is £1299 or you can do a one off payment of £999 that’ll save you £300 and that pays for everything in advance”. This is a lot of money for men to pay, however the stigma of sexual problems, fear of seeking medical advice or lack of awareness of where support could be given ensures men may well feel this is their only option. Particularly when aggressive sales techniques are additionally employed. However, men who have had experiences with AMI tell me that the contracts are difficult to break, cash continues to be withdrawn from accounts even if men ask for a refund or explain the products haven’t worked for them. In such cases men are either blamed for the failure of the product, or the company becomes unreachable. Most men I hear from about AMI are extremely distressed by the experience of talking to the company, and upset that the guaranteed refunds they were promised are not honoured. They are ashamed of their condition and using AMI and feel unable to get help from outside organisations to obtain a refund.

- The role of medics
Doctors are employed by AMI. Their job is to take medical histories from men seeking AMI products. Those who call or visit AMI are told the doctor’s medical registration number, although men I’ve talked to say they often don’t realise they ought to note this down. The medical histories taken seem acceptable although the psychosexual histories taken seem somewhat basic. Aside from the ethical question of practitioners working for companies that use aggressive sales techniques and inadequate refund systems, there is also the question that many practitioners working for the company appear to breach medical codes of conduct in the advice they give. For example dissuading men from talking to their GP about physical or mental health problems.

- What is sold
AMI’s website implies they offer a range of therapies, whereas they mainly focus on selling products for erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation. While it seems the products sold are genuinely designed for use in these conditions, it is unclear how effective the products for premature ejaculation are – particularly delivered in a nasal spray form. Moreover, there has not been (to my knowledge) any investigation of what products men receive, whether they are genuine or effective. Given that many psychosexual problems are not easily ‘fixed’ with a medical intervention simply providing a product without additional therapy is likely to be ineffective – and may explain why so many men complain the products they get from the company do not work. Alternatively it could be because what they are sold are not effective/genuine products. Further testing would be needed to establish this.

If you’ve been affected by AMI, what can you do?

Contrary to what AMI may have told you, you can get help from your doctor about this. In the UK your GP is able to talk about psychosexual problems and refer you to a therapist on the NHS. Or you can refer yourself to one via BASRT. You should tell your doctor about your experiences with AMI as in many cases the encounter with the company seems to add to men’s distress and psychosexual problems. Certainly you should speak to your GP if you are experiencing erectile problems on a consistent basis as this may indicate other health problems (such as heart disease or diabetes). If you are worried about premature ejaculation therapists can help you learn stress relieving/meditation techniques or encourage using a condom that prolongs sex. More resources about help with premature ejaculation are described in this post.

Trading Standards can offer advice and you can find your nearest office via their website (linked). Suffolk Trading Standards have been particularly helpful and recommended that men also may wish to speak to staff at Consumer Direct for further ideas about making a complaint. You may feel very anxious about discussing such a personal issue but staff are trained to hear about such cases and will be sympathetic and discreet.

If you’re a journalist, blogger, health practitioner or member of the public who wants to take action, what can you do?
Men’s sexual problems are something of a joke, we don’t take them very seriously and the stigma associated with this area is part of the reason men feel unable to frankly talk about their problems or ask for help. While other areas within medicine/healthcare have been tackled by skeptics, medics and activists this particular area and company have not been really addressed. It is time that changed.

You can do several things. If you’re a journalist or blogger you can find out about the company’s sales techniques and investigate medics involved with the company. You can also investigate the company’s policies and practices around refunds as well as what is contained within the products they are providing. You can flag up some of the issues I’ve already highlighted here as more proof of bad practice as well as providing answers to some of the things we don’t fully understand about the company. Let me know if/when you do this and I’ll add links to any activity against AMI on this post.

If you’re a healthcare provider you may also wish to support such investigations, but you may also wish to focus more on making your psychosexual services on offer to men more readily available and accessible. Signposting men to clinics you may run or advice services can be invaluable. As can campaigning for more services on offer for men and their partners.

There are sources of help available to men in the forms of therapists, help groups and General/Family Practice. We need to all do our best to share widely this help is out there.

You can put pressure on newspapers who carry advertisements from AMI to drop these. Again you may wish to speak with Trading Standards about this. Name and shame newspapers who won’t do this.

AMI have been causing distress to men for years in the way they promote and sell their products. We should not let the fact their products are for sex-related problems distract us from the very real harms the company may be causing. Let’s work together and ensure this company is fully investigated and prosecuted as appropriate.

Today’s Times Weekend focuses on an important yet taboo issue – Infertility. ‘Sex, fertility and commitment: what men really think’ includes in depth interviews with several men about the topic. While it’s right to talk about this issue from a male perspective, there are messages within the feature that are worrying in relation to sex, orgasm, fertility and gender. Not least because the issue of sex is not covered in any depth, but what is discussed about sex and orgasm is misleading.

Part of the feature focuses on an interview with Lord Robert Winston, a recognised pioneer in fertility treatments. He states: “Many years ago I did a study that, to my great regret, was never published. It was on women who were not orgasmic. We showed a clear correlation between women who did not enjoy sex and unexplained infertility. The study indicated that women who didn’t achieve orgasm and were having IVF were more likely to experience unexplained infertility”

This is troublesome for several reasons. Firstly it is always difficult when practitioners talk of research they’ve done but never published. It means we have no idea of assessing the work, and it won’t have been subjected to peer review. If we’re hearing about a study it needs to be treated according to standard academic conventions. Which usually include noting other evidence in the area. As in this case there is an established body of research on sexual functioning and fertility that has been steadily growing since the 1970s. This is not discussed.

The idea of orgasm as something to ‘achieve’ has long been a worry within the sex research community, not least because it sets up sex as something that must end in orgasm and prioritises orgasm as the main focus of sex. It overlooks wider areas of pleasure couples may explore. And in relation to fertility these aspects are crucial.

For couples looking to enjoy sex within the confines of infertility treatment the Times represents sex in a narrow way, with orgasm as end goal, something you ‘achieve’. It does not help the readers appreciate a more varied approach to pleasure and affection which may be vital to a couple where sex is increasingly becoming only about conception. It gives no guidance on how that might be explored. Something we might expect when headlines promise a discussion of sex and fertility.

Moreover it does not fully explore the wider and more complex issues relating to sex and infertility that result in sexual problems. Just a few examples include the stress of treatment, anxiety about fertility, fears of being childless, relationship breakdown, preoccupation with having a baby, and the cost of treatment (if one is paying privately). While these are all talked about within the Times interview they are not really presented as a clear explanation of a complicated problem that contribute to psychosexual difficulties. Instead the piece highlights women’s lack of orgasm/sexual pleasure as a major contributor to infertility.

We know women’s fertility problems and psychosexual issues are intertwined (see here and here). However the nature of this relationship is complex. In some cases psychosexual dysfunctions lead contribute to infertility, while in others it may be the anxiety around fertility problems or undergoing infertility treatment that leads to psychosexual difficulties (see for example here and here).

Men’s psychosexual dysfunctions similarly experienced, regardless of whether it is the man or his partner who has the clinical problem (see here and here). Indeed if a couple is struggling to conceive and the man is unable to get an erection or is struggling with premature ejaculation (during intercourse or masturbation) it adds to the strain they are already under. Given the Times’ feature focuses on men, sex and infertility it is somewhat worrying this issue is not fully explored.

For women and men sexual pleasure is possible without orgasm. And while some theories have argued women need to orgasm to conceive, this is not the case. Discussions that focus on sex only in terms of orgasm miss the wider pleasures couples may experience, and also overlooks more important questions about the general quality of couples’ relationships. The Times could have used this opportunity to explore how couples might experience this, but they sadly failed to do so.

From the reporting of Lord Winston’s comments in the Times report readers could be forgiven for thinking women can control their fertility by making more of an effort to enjoy sex or having orgasms. This massively oversimplifies the wider body of research on this area.

Healthcare professionals, therapists and sex educators also need to take greater responsibility in this area. There is plenty of evidence about psychosexual problems and infertility. What we lack is clear advice programmes for couples that focuses specifically on addressing those problems as they arise, and to combat them in the first place with support and information about pleasure and intimacy that is not goal oriented to the ‘achievement’ of orgasm. We need more research on this topic and more training for professionals working with couples to help them maintain a positive relationship under highly stressful and often very distressing conditions. Part of the reason couples do struggle in this area may well be to do with professionals failing to provide this information in a timely fashion.

The issue of infertility is still taboo and highly emotive. Any practitioner talking about the area needs to do so in a way that fits with current evidence based practice and focuses on couples not women or men. We also must ensure advice given does not make people feel they have contributed to their infertility by a lack of female orgasm, which is likely to scare anyone considering trying for a baby – whether they have fertility problems or not.

The Times undoubtedly covers the male experience of infertility with their case studies. But given its focus was on sex and infertility it fails to engage on this level and misses a vitally important opportunity to help readers with a major worry couples struggle with.

What made me start blogging?
Five years ago I sat down on a dark November evening and wrote my very first blog entry. It was a bit ranty. I’d been misquoted by a journalist and was anxious it would get me into hot water (again).

I didn’t have a game plan when I started blogging. My partner (who’s way more tech savvy than I am) thought it might be a good way of sharing ideas I was struggling to convey via the mainstream media (I was writing several advice columns in magazines at the time, as well as hosting a regular radio phone in for BBC Five Live).

I approached the blog as a form of therapy. I wanted to work with the media but was getting a lot of stick for it professionally (I’m an academic as well as a sex educator). Having a place to blog would allow me to correct any errors in reporting and disclose bad journalism. I even hoped it it might even let me bring evidence into sex/relationships reporting – and show it was possible to do so without things becoming worthy or dull.

One thing I felt sure of early on was this blog was something I enjoyed writing, but I wanted to be useful, and most importantly to deliver things about sex, relationships, science and journalism that readers wanted to know about. Which is why the blog has always been shaped by things you’ve asked for.

Readers make this blog (or “why don’t you have comments?”)
Last summer I asked regular readers to give me feedback on this blog and got some very helpful responses. It’s taken me a while to implement some of these, but I have now upgraded the blog to include the things you asked for – photos and images to liven things up, a better blogroll, summaries at the start of most entries so you can decide if you wish to read on. And categories. Something I didn’ think about five years ago and really wish I had. I’m now in the process of going back through all the 800+ posts and adding categories to them, which I hope will make this blog a lot more useful to you.

The one thing this blog doesn’t have is comments. I did start off having them, but encountered several problems. As I was offering advice within columns and websites elsewhere I hadn’t planned to also answer problems on this blog. However, not all readers understood this so I frequently found requests for advice on anything from infidelity to penis size included in discussions about blogs relating to research design or journalism ethics. This sometimes led to some readers mocking those asking for advice, which of course is completely unacceptable for me as an educator.

Moreover, I’ve always blogged openly – never behind a pseudonym. I work within the community on sex/relationships projects and educational activities (in the UK and internationally). This meant I was very accessible, and felt vulnerable when those whose comments were deleted or not posted, made very personal threats.

I found moderating the comments was time consuming and took me away from other educational activities which I felt were more worthwhile. So I decided to remove the comments option. When I’ve asked readers if they want them back the general response is ‘no’. That’s mostly from people who feel the blog’s a safe space to get information which they can use as they wish elsewhere.

Of course I strongly welcome respectful email feedback and am always happy to add information or correct errors within the blog. You’re always welcome to start discussions on other forums or your own blog about issues raised here. For now I’ve no plans to reinstate comments, but since I’m occasionally asked why I don’t have them I thought this was a good a time as any to clarify the issue.

Achievements so far
Having read back to 2004 I’m pretty pleased with this little blog. It’s nice to see it’s grown into a resource that people trust and enjoy reading.

The things I’m most proud to have written are activist blogs that highlight medicalisation, exploitation and abuse. These include the debates around female sexual dysfunction, questioning high street stores stocking ‘herbal’ erectile dysfunction drugs (not approved by the FDA), exposing the Advanced Medical Institute’s aggressive sales technique for men affected by premature ejaculation, or highlighting misleading media coverage of the availability of Viagra on the high street.

I initially planned to use the blog to set right bad sex coverage in the media (or occasions where I’d been misquoted). This has been a theme within the blog although I think it’s become more focused over time (although not necessarily less ranty than my very first post). I can’t say whether it’s made much difference to journalists, and I hope it’s not put people off working with the media. I’ve found it helpful to describe poor practice – not least because the general trend for ‘experts’ working with the media is to act grateful for any exposure, not publicly discuss poor experiences or document bad practice. Gems for me include an expose of GMTV sending a cab to my home at 6am on the off chance I might wake up and come to their studio. Or how a TV show wanted to discuss female sexual confidence without mentioning genitals or masturbation. Or some rather nasty experiences with snotty TV producers just after I’d had a baby. Not to mention the hilarious case of the science journalist who really took a dislike to me (and colleagues). Oh, and let’s not forget the journalist who wanted me to recommend them an ‘unethical psychologist’ .

Of course, the past five years have not been spent simply slagging off journalists. No. Sometimes I’ve also turned my gaze to bad science too. Where it’s been depressing to report on a carnival of studies which seem to set us back sexually. Studies complaining women orgasm too easily, or there’s a ‘clitorocentric conspiracy’ against the vagina, how sex with a partner is 400% better than any other kind of sex you might have, and you can tell whether a woman has vaginal orgasms by her walk.

Let’s not forget my other bugbears. The fake formula and shonky surveys and my goodness this blog’s a treasure chest for those. And if I’m not being irritated by that, then there’s always the problem of psychologists talking about celebrities, or the general ethical issues raised by Big Brother for me to moan about.

Of course, it’s not all been bad news. Anyone would think this blog is only about gripes and grumbles. I’ve always wanted to showcase a variety of sexual experiences within this blog and not just think about sex just for a Western audience. I’ll continue to discuss issues relating to sex and seniors; teenagers; disability; transsexuality; lesbian, gay and bi issues; open relationships; BDSM; sexual health; contraception; prostitution; pornography; reproductive health; pleasure; desire; asexuality; dating; psychosexual problems; showcasing great sex pioneers; talking about safer sex; and as many other topics as I can find for you to read about.

Where to next?
Unlike five years ago, I’m now thinking strategically about this blog – who it’s for, what it does, and seeking to find ways to assess any impact it may have. I’ve noticed over the years it sometimes deviates into areas that interest me, but may not appeal to all readers. So my aim is to ensure the focus of the blog remains around the core things you’re most interested in when you visit – sex, science, and media.

I’m currently involved in overhauling the site so in the new year I hope to have far more open access materials available for you – relationships and sex guides, information about sexual and reproductive health, more advice and links to sources of help, along with practical information for journalists, healthcare professionals, parents, teens and teachers.

I’ve been asked by many readers for more information about how to become an agony aunt/media sex educator, so I’ll be blogging about this – as well as how to write a sex blog – in the not too distant future.

I’ll also be making use of twitter soon, as sometimes I blog about issues people need to hear about fast (particularly developments in science/health), so hopefully that will make messages more accessible. I’ll let you know once I’ve sorted it.

Obviously I’d like to hear what you’d like to see. How would you like this blog to develop over the next year (or five!). Are there any particular things you’d like to see more/less of? Topics you want covered? People you’d like me to interview for the ‘quickies’ section of the blog? Campaigns you want covered? Let me know what your vision is for this blog.

So, happy fifth birthday blog. Big birthday kisses to those of you who’ve been with me from the beginning. For those of you who’ve only recently found this blog I hope you like it enough to stick around for the next half decade. I notice one of my favourite other blogs Mind Hacks has also celebrated it’s fifth birthday too, so congratulations to them.

Time to blow out the candles and make a wish. Of course, I can’t tell you what it is. You’ll have to come back in five years to find out if it’s come true.

Without further ado, let’s find out the answers to the questions I posed as part of the Science Late evening of sex event on Wednesday. How did you score?

1. What are the most common methods sex researchers use to study sex?
a. By looking – watching people have sex in a laboratory or on film
b. By measuring – assessing sexual behaviour via brain scanning, blood tests or heat sensors
c. By listening – recording answers from surveys or interviews
d. By participating – having sex with the people they are studying
e. Not sure

Correct answer = C

The most commonly used methods in contemporary sex research globally are surveys or interviews/focus groups. Brain scans, heat sensors or blood tests can be used, as can observational studies (where people have sex within laboratory settings). However, these latter two methods are used less as they’re often more difficult to recruit representative participants for studies. With the internet the opportunity for people to film their sexual activities and share those with researchers, and methods where participants film or document their own lives may become increasingly popular in the future. One thing we don’t do, but which people often assume happens, is have sex with the people we’re studying and then write about it. This would be considered unprofessional and unethical in research nowadays, and would focus the study on the researcher rather than a wide range of participants.

Want to find out more?
Check out the Kinsey Institute and the Magnus Hirschfeld Archive for Sexology who provide information about sex research being undertaken and provide answers to your frequently asked questions about sexual behaviour.

You might also find these guides helpful too:
Want to be in a sex study? Tells you about how sex research is conducted and how you can get involved

Sex research since Kinsey’s day – explains the different methodological approaches that can be used to study human sexual behaviour.

What’s it like to be a sex researcher? answers the frequently asked questions I’ve received about studying sex.

How to run a sex study outlines the steps you’d undertake to carry out a scientific study.

2. How often does the average UK couple have sex per week?
a. 7-10 times
b. 4-7 times
c. Once a week or less
d. Not sure

Correct answer = C

Robust and reliable research indicates that younger people do have more sexual encounters annually than older people. You can see links to research where frequency has been addressed here. The UK Natsal study found the average for heterosexual sexual activity per month was around 6 times. If you account for sexual behaviour over a wide range of ages the average is once a week or less. However, reputable sex research focuses more on quality rather than quantity. We would usually ask people for a range of sexual behaviours they engage in (masturbation, oral sex, intercourse) and whether they enjoyed them. That way you might find someone doesn’t report much ‘sex’ (as in intercourse) but they enjoy masturbation on a regular basis and are happy with this.

This contrasts with the media’s description of sex where ‘sex’ is usually only considered in terms of intercourse and quantity is taken as a measure of ‘great sex’.

Want to find out more?
Set yourself an experiment. Look at magazine or newspaper coverage of sex/relationships over the next month and see how ‘great sex’ is described. Is it written about in terms of exploration, variety and pleasure, or described in terms of quantity and penetration.

3. The average penis size is 5 inches long
a. True
b. False
c. Not sure

Correct answer = B

Many studies do give the average erect penis length as 5 inches. However, there are numerous problems with studies on penis size as they vary in the methods used to collect data. Some studies relied on self report, others on a researcher either measuring an erect or flaccid penis. Critical reflection on penis size studies suggest there are problems with the inconsistency of measuring penis size (summarized here). Interestingly research in this area suggests men (gay and straight) are more worried about length than girth, although women seem to be more interested in girth. And partners of men (male or female) are usually most bothered about their partner’s technique and the way they treat them. With anecdotal evidence suggesting men with larger penises don’t try so hard to please their lovers.

4. Women and men are equally stimulated by visual images of sex
a. True
b. False
c. Not sure

Correct answer = A

Women and men are just as likely to be turned on by visual images of sex. This may run counter to common knowledge of this issue, particularly since the media often repeats the idea that men are visual creatures and provide various evolutionary and biological explanations for this. What science is now discovering is that women, like men, do get aroused by sexual imagery. There is a diverse range of what turns women on – as with men. There is often the myth that women prefer erotica and men like porn, or women need their sexual imagery served up with a warm slice of romance. Yet studies where women have been asked about or shown sexual imagery suggest they do respond to a variety of arousing stimuli.

Interestingly many of the studies assessing response to visual images of sex (usually done through showing a series of images or sexual film clips and measuring genital response) did not include women. These were conducted on male participants (often undergraduate students) who were tested in response to viewing sexual images to see if exposure to said imagery had led to them feeling more hostile towards women.

More recent studies of women show they report enjoying a range of sexual imagery but do often worry more than men about the content of materials and how they’re made. Debates around the impact of porn, and whether the content is sexist, can often make women feel guilty for looking at/enjoying sexual imagery. Interestingly we’ve focused more on asking women critical questions about how they respond to porn than we have inviting men to reflect on their porn use.

Want to learn more?
Violet Blue’s written a fascinating book called The Ultimate Guide to Adult Videos which discusses how to pick porn to view, and answers some of the common concerns people have about content.

Alternatively there is a vigorous debate about porn/sexual imagery that’s ongoing. Some view porn as innately sexist and degrading to women, others feel it’s a symptom of a sexist culture but not a direct contributor to sexism/abuse. While some believe porn could help improve relationships, or at least has no harmful effects. You can find debates ongoing across different websites (particularly those with a feminist/political focus). Read up on the issues and see where you fit in.

5. Men can fake orgasm
a. True
b. False
c. Not sure

Correct answer = A

Men can, and do, fake orgasm. We don’t know exactly how many do this, but therapists and educators are increasingly hearing from men who are worried about faking orgasm. Reasons for doing so include being tired, sore, wanting to bring sex to an end, and not wanting to let a partner down. Men report feeling the need to fake because of pressure to perform sexually. It is unclear whether this pressure is experienced more or less acutely by straight or gay men. Interestingly, we tend to respond to women faking orgasm as being an inevitable (partly linked to the stereotype of women being less sexual). We tend to respond to the idea of men faking with disbelief or humour. This does little to help either gender if they feel the need to fake.

Want to find out more?
Comedian Richard Herring has written a great book called Talking Cock which although based on humour is a useful survey on male sexual behaviour and includes some discussion about faking orgasm.

If you’re a man and find it consistently difficult to orgasm it might be you have delayed (or retarded) ejaculation. More information about this condition and treatment options available here.

6. Men reach their sexual peak at 17 years old, women at around 40 years old
a. True
b. False
c. Not sure

Correct answer = B

Although this is often quoted in the media it doesn’t make sense in social research terms. The data seems to have come from surveys in the first half of the 20th century on sex where young men could record an interest in sex, but young women couldn’t. Culturally young women weren’t supposed to be sexual (particularly before marriage) and so either were unable to report on sexual behaviour, or were too afraid to disclose what they may have done. Older women who were married and had experienced sex were in a stronger position to report on their experiences. So early surveys measured behaviour and found younger men were able to report sex positively, as were older women. This is not the same as hitting a sexual peak during lifespan.

Although studies do still about that reinforce this myth or suggest particular ‘peak’ times for sex, reliable research suggests that rather than their being specific peak times for sex, there will be times when people enjoy, desire, and have sex more or less. This will be influenced by many factors including health, parenthood, financial security, relationship quality, and lifestyle factors (such as work stress).

Sexual activity may reduce as people age, and certainly we do see young people reporting having more sexual encounters. However, this does not mean the same thing as pleasure or desire or exploration. Older people do also report they may not have as much sex as in their youth, but the sex they have remains important and pleasurable.

Part of the misrepresentation of sexual behaviour across lifespan as having one off peaks is linked to the quantity over quality. A more accurate way of looking at this issue would be to see sex intertwined with other factors (listed above) and to expect points in your life when you’ll have no sex (with a partner), lots of sex, and occasional sex – with quality differing also.

Want to find out more?
Keep a diary for the next year and record when you had sex. Note periods when you enjoyed different sexual activities (masturbation alone, oral sex, intercourse), who you were intimate with, and when you were or were not enjoying sex to identify what else was happening. It might be something negative like being made redundant, or something positive like starting a new job where you put your energy into that activity.

7. Animals (other than humans) can be gay
a. True
b. False
c. Not sure

Correct answer = A

Homosexuality has been observed in numerous species from dolphins to monkeys, dogs to sheep. We have only recently begun to learn more about this topic as science has in the past often misrepresented homosexuality in animals, describing it as ‘immature sexual behaviour’ or reporting it as something that only happens because no other sexual partners are available. Or simply not discussing it at all.

Want to find out more?
The question of sexuality is one that fascinates people – and can be a reason for concern or celebration. If you want to find out more about your own sexuality why not try the Kinsey scale which gives you a score from heterosexual through to entirely homosexual. You can even get a t-shirt to proudly display your rating.

Within the scientific community we’re still debating homosexuality and for two differing takes on this issue you might consider Queer Theory which sees sexuality largely as a social construct or contrast this with Qazi Rahman and Glenn Wilson’s excellent book Born Gay.

There’s also widespread discussion about whether homosexuality can be ‘cured’. Evidence shows it cannot (because it’s not a disease or dysfunction). You might find these papers interesting – they feature interviews with psychiatrists and patients who were part of treatment programmes to ‘cure’ them of homosexuality.

8. Where do most people get their sex information from?
a. Friends and family
b. School/college sex education
c. Self help/sex experts
d. The media (magazines, films, television, internet)
f. Pornography

Correct answer = D

Most people do use the media, and particularly the internet (where available to learn more about sex). Friends can be highly influential, although more for young people than older adults. The self help/sexpert market (which often influences media content) is worrying given that many sex experts are not adequately qualified to discuss sex and relationships issues. Porn is not the first place people look for information, however evidence suggests it is somewhere people will turn to if they can’t find answers elsewhere.

Want to learn more?
If you want to find useful places to get quality sex information (aside from the links above), I’d recommend:
Paul Joannides – author of Guide to Getting it On
Cory Silverberg – who writes Sexuality About
Good Vibrations magazine
Dodson and Ross – sex tips, advice and information
DIY sex education from All About My Vagina
Susie Bright gives great sex advice over at Jezebel

9. What’s the most popular area in sex research currently?
a. Desire and pleasure
b. Sexual problems
c. Sexuality
d. Sex addiction
e. Love, romance and courtship

Correct answer = B

The most funded and most prolific research globally focuses currently on sexual problems. That’s things like sexual dysfunctions and sexually transmitted infections (particularly HIV). While these are issues requiring investigation, there are problems about other issues such as love and romance, desire and pleasure receiving far less attention. In particular concerns have been expressed about the ‘medicalisation of sex’ (for women and men) and the way sex research has been influenced by pharmaceutical funding.

Campaigners working within sex research are working to try and broaden the range of topics studied in this area, but limitations around funding and academic priorities do still influence what gets studied. This is a problem since many members of the public have many unanswered questions about sex which are currently not being addressed.

Interestingly, the area of sex addiction is hyped up a lot in the press but is not being researched to the same degree within academia/therapy. That’s because the concept is not agreed upon by practitioners. You can find out more in this great discussion between Susie Bright and Leonore Tiefer on the topic, or see just how problematic the diagnosis of sex addiction is in my blog ‘Help! I’m a sex addict and I didn’t even know it’.

10. Why do sex researchers study sex?
There are numerous reasons why we study sex. To find out more about human sexual behaviour, to get people answers to questions they have. To reduce problems – STIs, anxieties, fears. To promote sexual pleasure. Or to encourage abstinence (not all sex researchers are sex positive). Some sex researchers are motivated to research sex because they want to offer help, to share pleasure, or to learn more about themselves. Some may have had a personal experience (positive or negative) that’s motivated them to study a particular area of sex.

As part of the Science Museum event I asked guests to share why they thought we studied sex and I’ll blog all their ideas next week – along with some updates from real life sex researchers about their motivations.

So, are you a sexpert? You may have scored well or badly on this test. It doesn’t really matter. Many of the questions were deliberately tricky. Hopefully what the test has revealed to you is that there’s a lot more to sex research than you may have imagined, it’s an area that spans many academic areas (science, medicine, history, anthropology and zoology to name a few). It’s a growing subject area and one with a real application to human life. By continuing to read up on sex (using some of the links above) and ask questions about all the sex stories you read in the press (and anyone who calls themselves a ‘sexpert’) you’ll be well on the way to sexpertise.

If you work in science communication, sex research or sexual health you are welcome to use this quiz (and answers) in your own activities (with acknolwedgement). Please do research all answers before presenting to ensure you fully understand topics, and perhaps you can bring in questions and resources of your own to add to the quiz.