Last summer myself and several other sex educators, therapists and reproductive healthcare staff were approached by researchers from Betty TV working on a new programme commissioned by Channel 4 called ‘The Joy of Teen Sex’. The show was described as a cross between the established (and popular) Embarrassing Teenage Bodies and The Sex Education Show. The Joy of Teen Sex would be set in a mock clinic where young people who had sex and relationships questions could get advice. The TV company was looking for people to appear as experts on the series (who’d play the role of ‘clinic staff’), and/or to refer them young people for possible inclusion.

After friends and family the media is often one of our main sources of sex information (acting as a ‘super peer’ – who doesn’t always have the right answers). Young people particularly appreciate sex and relationships advice from broadcast and online media. Providing sex information via the mainstream media is not new and has been well received by young people, parents, educators and healthcare staff (a classic example can be found here, see also here).

I am very much in favour of using the media to share information on sex and relationships (and other health topics). But I had reservations from the outset about this particular series. All of which I shared with the researchers at the time, and I’ll repeat now.

The series was billed as being a ‘youth’ programme. Although that doesn’t necessarily mean young people were actively involved in its creation. The title ‘The Joy of Teen Sex’ sounded like something by an adult trying to impress the kids rather than generated by a youth audience.

As I heard more about the planned content of the series it seemed profoundly out of touch with the title. The title implied an attempt at celebrating sex, while the calls for participants suggested it was mostly negative and problematising sex (more on this later). The proposed content did not match the kind of things I’ve noted young people are worried about (through my research and work over the past decade as an agony aunt; and from listening to parents, sex educators and healthcare staff).

Given both Embarrassing Teenage Bodies and The Sex Education Show had received some criticism for their approach to sex-related topics , I was concerned that merging them for a new format without learning from the feedback for existing programmes was not good practice. When I shared these worries with the researcher from Betty TV they did not appear interested.

Setting up a ‘pretend clinic’ was also perhaps unhelpful as it may give an inaccurate impression to young people of what sexual health services are like. If the mock clinic appears off-putting to an audience it may also discourage them from attending a sexual or reproductive health clinic in real life (for more ideas on what a ‘real’ GU clinic is like click here).

The ‘clinic’ setting also framed sex and relationships issues within a health or medical format. Which may be appropriate for tackling the treatment of STIs or contraception, but given this programme was also being presented as providing advice about relationships was a medical tone the best to use? After all, do you head to your GP when you want tips to spice things up sexually? Given the wider concerns about medicalisation and sex, presenting young people with the idea sex and relationships are a primarily medical issue (as opposed to social or cultural) is unhelpful.

Those worries, however, were insignificant compared to my anxiety when I received the advert the company wanted me to pass on to young people, which read:

SO YOU THINK YOU KNOW IT ALL WHEN IT COMES TO SEX?

(The above advert was also posted here with other casting calls can be found here and here)

Let’s unpack this advert.

First of all the programme starts with a challenge – asking if young people know it all. None of us ‘know it all’ when it comes to sex. Such an approach runs counter to working with young people on sensitive issues, where the aim is usually to create a safe space where people can ask questions or debate issues with confidence, rather than feeling judged, silenced or challenged.

‘Sex’ is not transparently defined. Discussions with the TV researchers making the programme indicated they understood ‘sex’ as penis in vagina intercourse (or anal sex in the case of young gay men). This is an extremely limited view of ‘sex’, the meaning of which has been explored in depth here.

Yet ‘sex’ and relationships are constructed in a particular way by this advert. For young people the advert focuses on ‘sex’ as whether or not they know much about infections, problematising porn, ‘losing’ virginity, and young women’s orgasmic difficulties. That leaves out a whole range of other issues young people may wish to talk about while reinforcing many gender and sexual behaviour stereotypes.

When it gets to the parent section of the advert it becomes even more judgemental. Here we see ‘sex’ categorised with more mentions of porn, a brief nod to sexuality, value judgements about ‘sleeping around’, and the setting up of girls as victims, boys as predators. There is nothing positive for parents. Only a list of potentially scary issues a parent might get in touch with. Indeed sex is stated as ‘the biggest worry for parents’.

Is that true? Are parents not also worried about their child’s future? Their academic progress? Their friendship groups? Risk of violent crime? Their health and wellbeing? Financial worries? Some parents may well be anxious about their child’s sexual development, but I’m confident most parents will have additional, and equally pressing, concerns. Realistically if sex really is your prime concern as a parent is television the best place to get support? Particularly if your worries are linked to the motional or physical safety of your child. This is not to say parents should not want advice, just that framing conversations with young people about relationships in purely negative ways is unhelpful.

The advert does indicate what the aim of the series might be. Rather than an opportunity to empower parents or listen to young people, it seems to be designed for the viewer to judge the wayward teen or hapless parent. Previous programmes and wider media coverage about young people’s sexual behaviour have been criticised for creating a format which slut shames young women, makes young men appear to be perverts, presents a heteronormative tone (while pretending to be right on about sexuality), and generally suggests sex is a scary issue – for both young people and their parents. It harks back to an old fashioned view (explored in depth here) that if we had to deliver sex education we might as well make it as offputting as possible to dissuade young people from considering trying it. Aside from this being limited, it is also disempowering. And it shifts topics that young people may not necessarily be seeing as a negative, into a problem. Although in this case dressing it up as a ‘sex positive’ series.

The phrase that put me off supporting the programme most was ‘Sex is the most important thing in a teenager’s life’. It may surprise you, but I profoundly disagree. ‘Sex’ may be important to some teens some of the time, but not to all teens all the time. For many young people the most important thing in their lives may be their friends, their schooling, hobbies or sports, their pets, their faith, music or a whole slew of other stuff I’m probably to old and boring to know about.

Indeed when you talk to young people, often what they are interested in is being in a relationship, being close to someone (either in the short or long term). They may certainly have questions about ‘sex’, and have a range of feelings attached to it – curiosity, anxiety, and excitement. But they will also have other questions that go beyond the mechanics of intercourse.

The majority of young people (2/3 of the UK population) do not have ‘sex’ (at least defined as penis in vagina intercourse) until they are 16 or over (the UK’s age of consent). Many young people aged under 18 have not have sex or a relationship. Those having sex at a very young age tend to be more vulnerable due to numerous reasons (covered here) and are of particular concern to educators, healthcare staff and youth workers.

When you talk to people who deliver sex and relationships education via schools or youth groups, those who are working ethically and appropriately are not trying to convince young people sex is the most important thing in their lives. Indeed, they are usually stressing to young people the importance of having many interests, and encouraging them to delay sex. Alongside tackling wider problems or opportunities facing young people (like schooling, home issues etc). Critics of sex education often argue that talking about sex encourages early experimentation, which is not accurate. However, you can see why critics get worried when young people are being encouraged to view sex as the cornerstone of their entire lives, when for many it isn’t (at least not all the time).

From the calls for respondents the programme ‘teen’ has been defined as young people aged 16+ (or in some cases 18-20). Meaning the focus of the series is better described as being aimed at ‘young adults’.

Setting up a post watershed series (screened at 10pm) aimed at ‘teens’ but really meaning over 16s raises issues over what topics will be covered. Working with young people on sex and relationships issues reveals lots of diversity. You may find a nine year old asks a question that seems very ‘adult’ while a fourteen year old wants to know something that you’d expect a much younger child to be aware of. Part of the skill in working with young people (as it is with adults) is pitching what is discussed at their level, within their comfort zone. Not talking about issues they are not yet confident to understand, or that may be beyond their comprehension or are age inappropriate.

There is always a dilemma in education and advice giving about to provide information that does not patronise young people nor decide for them what they ‘ought’ to know. Young people have a right to sex and relationships education, but when television programmes muddled entertainment and advice (ignoring the latter for the sake of the former) this can mean young people either get information that is not useful, or are presented with concepts that may not be appropriate to their needs.

My worry with this programme is the topics selected for the series were chosen to attract an older audience, rather than truly deliver sex information to teens based on issues young people really want answers to.

It is important to stress I only had involvement at the early stages of development, when practitioners were being approached to be part of the series or find potential participants. I don’t know whether the focus of the programme has altered since, but reading pre-reviews of the series suggests concerns myself and others had with the series have not been resolved.

According to press coverage, in the first show we will meet a woman called Michelle whose 17-year-old daughter Rachel got pregnant last year, is sexually active, but ‘refuses’ to go on the pill. Already we can see the cards being stacked against the mother and the daughter. The danger of such programming is it becomes an opportunity for audiences to judge others who are not fitting particular expected roles. Worryingly there is often a class and race based subtext to this kind of media coverage where audiences are invited to judge chavvy youth or those from ethnic minorities or different faiths.

Other press discussions of what we can expect from the programme, from sex tips to ideas about techniques suggests the focus is a primarily adult one – but one that is also problematic. Adult sex advice (from the media and self help market) is preoccupied with positions and performance. Where ‘perfect’ sex is something to continually aspire to, is measured by how much you do it (not what you do), and where orgasms are something you ‘achieve’ not ‘experience’. It is a space where relationships are usually defined as monogamous (usually heterosexual but sometimes lesbian or gay sexuality is acknowledged). It is not a place where diverse sexualities are talked about in depth – or if any kink or alternative sexualities are focused on it is usually in a fairly sanitised or problematised way.

Sex for grownups (in the mainstream media and popular culture) excludes those who can’t fit into size 10 sexy lingerie, afford the latest sex toy, or whose bodies can’t mould themselves into 101 different positions. It is not a place for people with disabilities to have a voice, nor for those who are Trans, queer or asexual to speak out. If you are single you are allowed to be sexual so long as you can talk (albeit not very explicitly) about friends with benefits, or better still indicate you are trying your hardest to get into a relationship.

Many researchers, therapists and sex educators feel the stifling mainstream depictions of sex and lack of adventure and exploration – and absence of focus on communication – is a problem for adults who want to experience enjoyable sexual encounters or relationships. As a result, the aim of teaching young people to view sex and relationships in more diverse ways is to overcome many of the bad advice aimed at adults, or at least develop the critical thinking and life skills to see through the commercialised, pressurised and frequently unrealistic versions of sex currently on offer in mainstream popular culture.

It is therefore worrying the ‘The Joy of Teen Sex’, rather than tackling what ‘sex’ might be and how young people may look forward to experiencing it, may just serve up a predictable platter of Cosmo-esque sex tips. This is not what youth-focused sex and relationships education should be.

The media frequently distorts the teaching of sex and relationships. This can frighten parents and disempower teachers. Yet with programmes that provide unrealistic ideas about advice giving for young people this could easily give parents the wrong impression, suggesting as the norm activities that are not considered appropriate within school based or healthcare settings. It would be damaging if a programme that misrepresented both sex education and sexual health care contributed to a backlash against supporting parents, schools and healthcare providers from giving relationships information to young people.

Parents already worry about tackling sex and relationships issues with young people although they play a fundamental role in educating children. Media coverage that exaggerates the concerns of young people, presents an overly sexualised focus, or does not tackle the more mundane (and less ‘sexy’) questions young people may have can do two things. Firstly it can suggest to parents they need to be fearful for their child (and their potential sexual interests), and secondly imply the issues their child wants to know about are completely outside a parent’s ability to tackle. Neither are empowering for parents or young people. It is perhaps for this reason parents have already started speaking out about the programme.

What is not clear is why young people and parents wanted to participate in The Joy of Teen Sex. Were they seeking attention or fame? Or did they need advice? If it’s the latter it would be useful to know what led them to get this through a television programme rather than existing services – particularly if people had encountered barriers with existing education or healthcare on sex and relationships issues. Were people unaware of, or unable to access existing sources of free help and information? What about the participants in the programme? How representative are they of young people generally – and how many would-be participants for the show were not included? Why was that? It would be interesting to see journalists follow up on these questions, rather than just inviting us to gawp at and judge the participants in this series.

I have not seen the programme, so I my concerns could be completely misplaced. I will watch it and see if it manages to provide accurate and empowering information. I sincerely hope it does, but I am not confident this will happen. As a supporter of mediated sex advice it infuriates me programmes continue to be made where experts are ignored, where unethical practice is permitted, where young people are not involved, and where the end result does not educate but may well disempower parents, teachers and young people. It represents an endless stream of programming that wastes time, money and opportunities to share accurate advice people so desperately want.

I am always happy to support programmes that cover sex and relationships in an affirmative and diverse way, that move beyond ‘sex’ as intercourse, positions, techniques or infections to answer the questions young people really have in a sensitive way.

I did not feel The Joy of Teen Sex was offering this (although as already mentioned I am happy to be proved wrong). When I was asked to participate as a presenter and to refer young people to the researchers I refused. I felt the TV researchers were not listening to the feedback I shared on how they might make this programme more accurate and empowering, or my concerns about the wellbeing of young people and parents.

Equally worryingly the researchers warned me and other educators not to criticise or question them in public (i.e. on Twitter) or share our concerns about the series.

When a TV company commissioned to make a youth focused programme tells practitioners concerned about young people to keep silent, you really have to wonder who they are trying to benefit.

The Joy of Teen Sex is on Channel 4 tonight at 10pm (GMT)

It’s nearly Christmas and you may have already got gifts for friends and family. But if you’re still wondering what last minute goodies to buy, or can stretch to one more present, then here’s a few suggestions for charities and organisations who could do with your support.

These are all programmes I feel are often not given much publicity and may not fit in the usual ‘good gift’ type Christmas promotions, but nevertheless do amazing work all year round and deserve our support.

I’ve picked 6 charities/groups who represent various different activities around sex, relationships and health. Some are faith based, some secular. Some are specifically focused to one region or country, others are international. You may want to support the one you feel most impressed by – or perhaps give a small amount to several of these very good causes.

As well as financial support there are also other ways to help these organisations so do read up on any that interest you and see if you can help them as a volunteer in the new year.

Hesperian Foundation
Hesperian is a non-profit publisher of books and newsletters for community-based health care. It produces free resources in various different languages on topics such as Where There Is No Doctor, Disabled Village Children and Helping Health Workers Learn.

Here are ways you can get involved, which don’t just involve financial donations – you can also volunteer, translate and review books, and let other people know about the work Hesperian are doing.

Jabulani Rural Health Foundation
Jabulani is a non-profit organisation that supports Zithulele Hospital and its surrounding community. Zithulele Village is situated in a remote part of the Wild Coast (Eastern Cape Province, SA). Founded in 2007 by four Christian doctors, our focus is on healthcare, education, poverty relief, environmental issues and care for those affected by HIV/AIDS.

Practitioners at Zithulele have introduced a number of innovative programmes for rural health which have been reported in The Lancet and SAMJ and include nutrition, maternal health, occupational therapy and education projects.

A short film about the hospital can be found here:

Donation information can be found here
Become a friend of Zithulele here

Scarleteen
Scarleteen is an independent, grassroots sexuality education and support organization and website. Founded in 1998, Scarleteen.com is visited by around three-quarters of a million diverse people each month worldwide, most between the ages of 15 and 25. It is the highest-ranked website for sex education and sexuality advice online and has held that rank through most of its tenure.

More info here

Donate here

Outsiders
Outsiders is a community for people with physical and social disabilities that enables people to meet, make friends, overcome isolation and form relationships. It coordinates local meet ups, provides advice and hosts numerous events to raise funds for greater advocacy for people with disabilities. It also operates a peer support network, lobbies for greater rights for disabled people, and informs health and social care practice around sex, relationships and disability.

As well as providing financial assistance there are other ways you can help Outsiders including lobbying on issues around disability rights, and assisting the organisation with research, advocacy and resources. More information on how to give here

Education for Choice
Education For Choice is the only UK-based educational charity dedicated to enabling young people to make informed choices about pregnancy and abortion.

When young people have opportunities to explore the decisions that can lead to and result from pregnancy they are better able to:
Protect themselves from sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy
Make informed choices
Access appropriate services to support their choices.
Education For Choice’s work is focused on the word choice. Whilst we concentrate on the issue of abortion, as it is the issue that receives least attention, we believe that work with young people should value all pregnancy choices equally.
Our ethos is that the best outcomes of unintended pregnancy occur when the woman involved has been able to make her own informed choice.

Donate here

The New View Campaign
The New View Campaign was formed in 2000 as a grassroots network to challenge the distorted and oversimplified messages about sexuality that the pharmaceutical industry relies on to sell its new drugs.
The pharmaceutical industry wants people to think that sexual problems are simple medical matters, and it offers drugs as expensive magic fixes. But sexual problems are complicated, sexuality is diverse, and no drug is without side effects.

The goal of the New View Campaign is to expose biased research and promotional methods that serve corporate profit rather than people’s pleasure and satisfaction. The Campaign challenges all views that reduce sexual experience to genital biology and thereby ignore the many dimensions of real life.

The New View Campaign is devoted to education, activism, and empowerment. We invite you to benefit from the information on this website, and we invite your support and participation.

More information on donating and volunteering for the New View, as well as implementing its ideas into policy and practice can be found here

I hope you are able to support one or more of these charities/organisations financially or in some other way.

Thanks for your continued support for this blog. Your feedback, suggestions and ideas for content (and how to improve the blog) is always very welcome.

Wishing you a very Merry Christmas and all the best for a happy and healthy New Year.

To get people in the Christmas spirit – and the mood for giving, I’ll be sharing carols, seasonal songs and a few sketches on twitter between 1-4pm on 22nd December (GMT) on the hashtag #PsXmasCharityConcert.

If you missed it, here’s the concert in full – please consider giving to one or more of the charities/organisations listed above while you tune in!

We opened with Mariah Carey’s All I Want For Christmas Is You

Followed by Meryn Cadell’s The Cat Carol which you can listen to here. [Not really suitable for young children, anyone who feels a bit hormonal, or people who like cats]

Then it was time for a bit of reading, with the fabulous Joyce Grenfell’s Nursery School Nativity Play And George, Wise Men never do that…

I bet you’ve never heard a better (or madder) version of The Little Drummer Boy than this one by The Klezmonauts.

It’s a Christmas tradition in our house that my dad reads King John’s Christmas as part of our family concert (he does it beautifully). So it felt apt to include it in my virtual Christmas Concert.

Next it was time for some Christmas kitsch – and it doesn’t get much kitscher than Eddie Dunstedter and his organ. I feel like I need a pair of heels, a cocktail and a Christmas pinny to really get into this one…

And if that wasn’t camp enough, it was time for some innuendo with Larry Grayson asking ‘Who’s stuffing your turkey this Christmas?’ (Go on, you can tell me!)

Do you believe in reindeer and the magic of Christmas? Of course you do! It’s only those pesky physicists who try and spoil things with all their logical explanations. Bah humbug!

Another song due after that, and it was over to Si Cranstoun and a very jolly Miss Santa Claus (he’s part of the Dualers – who are fab!)

What could be more seasonal than a song about an Angel Gabriel by LAMB?
I can fly
But I want his wings
I can shine even in the darkness
But I crave the light that he brings

Hoping you have someone in your life who make you feel this way.

On a lighter note I asked if people were familiar with the term Camp As Christmas? You will be after watching Bearforce 1 and ‘Christmas is here’ (which frankly ought to be the Christmas number one IMHO)

Next it was time for an activity for all the family – and kids of all ages. The Santa Application form (which I use in teaching questionnaire design – only at Christmas obviously). Still time to get your application written!

Obviously it wouldn’t be Christmas without a bit of Judy Garland, and the tearjerker anthem Have yourself a merry little Christmas

Last up in the virtual concert was my favourite carol In The Bleak Mid Winter which has the most beautiful words written by Christina Rossetti. I have a bad habit of ruining carol services by blubbing my way through the final verse of this.

Thanks for joining in my charity concert – either here or on twitter, and remember this was all for the good causes listed above, so please give them your money or your time if you are able.

Merry Christmas!

Tonight I’ll be hosting The Science of Pulling event, part of the British Science Festival a week long celebration of science, this year hosted in Birmingham.

Have you ever wondered…
- how much of your adult life are you likely to be single?
- can one night stands ever lead to love?
- do dating manuals ever work?
- what’s the best way to meet someone?
- can science really teach us how to pull?

I’ll be answering those questions and talking about what science can tell us about dating and relationships. We’ll find out how scientists study dating, how much we don’t know about this area of our intimate lives, and we’ll bust some of the truly bad science around dating advice.

The aim of the event is to introduce people to science in a fun way, but show how social science in particular can be usefully applied to our daily lives. I’m hoping people will leave feeling more confident and happy about their relationship status, and possibly even with a date or two lined up as after my talk there’s a chance to join in the science festival’s first speed dating event where you can put the science of pulling to the test.

It’s a real pleasure for me to return to the West Midlands for this event, having had my first lectureship post at Aston University (Birmingham) in the psychology department, and where I studied for my PhD in Applied Human Psychology. I also completed my postdoc research in the West Midlands on a community study of women involved in street prostitution an experience that changed my approach to understanding and doing research and shifted my practice into critical social psychology and healthcare.

The Science of Pulling event is open to anyone whether you’re in a relationship or single, have an interest in sex research or science more generally, and whether you’re straight, gay, lesbian, bi or trans. Please join us if you’re able, or check out the #britscifest hashtag where hopefully we’ll be able to share what we’re learning about pulling power.

I’ll leave you with a guide I wrote a while ago for anyone who’s single but considering dating – useful, even without the science bit!

In a recent piece in Scarleteen Heather Corinna picks up on approaches to advice giving that will be familiar to many of us. Things like adding negative qualifiers, talking down to young people, moralising, or being ambiguous. They are all key no-nos in sex education, yet as you read through Heather’s account it’s obvious how very often we inadvertantly (and perhaps sometimes quite deliberately) couch our sex education messages in such a way that we undermine our practice.

You can read the whole piece here – it’s great for anyone working in sex education or sexual health, or if you are a parent or carer. You may find sharing this piece and discussing with colleagues may help challenge some of the bad habits that may be sneaking into our sex education practice.

After reflecting on Heather’s piece, agreeing with it, and worrying how many of the problems she highlights I’ve been guilty of, I thought of some additional bugbears. These are issues I’ve most commonly seen in media advice giving, but also observed in school-based sex education and sexual health care.

In no particular order my bugbears of prescriptive sex advice giving are….

“You should abstain, and if you can’t abstain be faithful and if you can’t be faithful then use a condom”
The ‘ABC’ approach to sex is one that was very popular for a long while in sexual health campaigns, particularly in developing countries. Some charities, NGOs, teachers and healthcare professionals still view it as cutting edge advice and promote it actively. My problem with it is partly the order it goes in which puts not having sex as better than having sex, and grudgingly goes from a ‘well you shouldn’t be doing it’ through to a ‘if you must then I suppose you should use a condom’. A message you’d think is aimed at children but is often applied to adults as well. On a practical level this advice also only works if you’re with a partner who respects your decision to abstain or be faithful – who doesn’t coerce you into sex or has sex with other people. As with Heather’s piece (linked above) there’s the additional problem of how long you should abstain for. Use a condom is fine so long as you both agree to do this, can access free or low cost condoms and know how to use them. Bizarrely the ABC message requires high levels of communication, respect, equality and trust. And yet it’s often promoted to people who are relatively powerless – women in gender unequal societies or young people.

Here’s what to do, not how to do it
Commonly found in problem pages this often also underpins a lot of sex advice given to young people by adults. You’ll list what someone should do – ‘talk to your partner’, ‘share a fantasy’, ‘spice up your sex life’, ‘use condoms’ – but give no information about how to do this. The ‘what to do’ approach lists activities but doesn’t explain why they may be helpful/important and gives no life skills about how you might put them into action. Sometimes this is explained as a function of media advice giving where you may be limited by time or word count, but often it is bad practice linked to a lack of skills on the part of the advice giver, or the general discomfort of the advice giver to go into detail. After all anyone can say ‘use a condom’ but it’s much more complex to talk in depth about how to talk about condoms, putting one on, where you get them from, and how to use them to enhance sex.

Expecting teenagers to put into action things we know adults struggle to achieve
While I agree getting people to think about how ready they are for sex is important, as is developing confidence and a sense of empowerment in relation to sex, I do feel the advice we give – even in our discussions of ‘sex readiness’ – expects a lot. Knowing where to get contraception, feeling able to ask for condoms to be used, enjoying masturbation, being able to say yes to what you want and no to what you don’t – all of these are great ideas. We encourage young people to see these and other instructions as things they need to be able to do before embarking on sex. Yet we frequently forget many of these activities are things that we, as adults, find difficult or perhaps don’t view as particularly important. Encouraging young people to think of the things they need to do to help them enjoy sex now or in the future as a discussion is undoubtedly more effective than a list of ‘shoulds’, and rather than just getting young people to think about whether they’re ready we might also encourage adults to do the same. Particularly adults that teach sex education or deliver sexual health services to adults or young people.

Here’s what I like, you’ll like this too (Aka ‘our sexual experiences are all the same’)
How often have you picked up a magazine that’s got a sex tip in it by someone who tells you what sex position, sex toy or erotic dvd is ‘best’ for giving you ‘mindblowing orgasms’ or similar. Pretty often such advice, although well meaning, is from someone who is telling you what they like – although it’s reported as what’s right/normal for all of us. This is partly due to some sex advisors only having their own sexual experiences to draw upon, and partly due to journalists (and some ‘sexperts’) simply not being aware of the wider research on sex that tells us about the diverse experiences of thousands of people worldwide. The unfortunate result is a lot of samey, heteronormative and often completely inactionable advice that makes you feel bad if it doesn’t work for you.

One size fits all
The evil twin of ‘here’s what I like’, the ‘one size fits all’ approach to sex education takes no account of diversity. Messages are delivered to us as though we’re all white, straight, middle class, educated, able bodied, young, affluent, confident and motivated to enjoy safe and positive relationships. If you look at a lot of sex/health advice giving in media and education you’ll notice there is nowhere near enough information that truly addresses inequalities relating to gender, health, education, income, sexuality or culture. Often such topics are interpreted by sex educators as ‘difficult’ or ‘radical’ so are avoided. If such topics are touched upon they’ll be either a small addition to an otherwise mainstream approach, or be constructed as problematic and depressing.

Evidence is boring
As mentioned, some sex educators work from a perspective of what works for them. That might be in terms of what gives them pleasure, or what messages they feel are appropriate to share based on their religious or political views. While there’s no problem in knowing what you like and embedding pleasure in your educational messages, nor basing your research/teaching around your own experiences or beliefs, there is a problem is this is all you do. If you’re not aware or not able to look at the evidence behind what you’re teaching you may well miss what’s new in the area, ideas that reflect difference and diversity (see above), or a wider world view than your current focus. Consulting evidence not only broadens what we teach, it helps us reflect on what we talk about and ensure we’re not just speaking from the ‘university of life’.

Learn to like it/make yourself do it
Recently I read a well known sexpert telling a female reader that they needed to make themselves have sex with a partner because, having entered into a marriage with them, the deal was to provide sex. Even if you didn’t feel like doing it. That’s a fairly extreme example but there’s still often a trend in self help sex books and sex features in the media that implies if you’re not keen on something you must make yourself learn to like it. Whether it’s swallowing semen, deep throating a partner, have a threesome, or have sex when you just don’t feel like it the overall theme is that you should at least try. The underlying message is ‘if you don’t do this your partner may leave you’. Alternatively the advice implies that if you’re not trying something then you’re a prude or obstructive or that if you don’t ‘use it you’ll lose it’. Of course it’s difficult to know whether someone isn’t keen for good reason and might actually like something if they gave it a go with a partner they trusted, or whether it’s someone who’s already feeling coerced that you as an educator continue to pressure. Before we tell people they should make themselves do something it may be better to focus on what it is they’re contemplating, why they object to it (or feel compelled to do it), and what is the most comfortable decision for them to make.

Sex = health and health = sex
If you listen to many sexperts and some sex educators you’d think that we can only talk about sex in medical terms. Instead of frank talks about desire and sexual activity we hide our coyness in the language of hormones, biology and blood flow. And in the case of hormones in particular often overplay their importance without truly understanding how they work. Anything too difficult for us to explain within the media or our sex ed classes we refer on to family medicine/general practice (even though we know such services are not best placed to deal with general sex issues), or we pass on to counselling (which might be good but may often not be appropriate). We don’t focus nearly enough on finding ways people can empower themselves or find answers to their questions or solutions to their problems. We spread all sorts of misinformation about how particular foods like pumpkin seeds or goji berries can transform our sex lifes, or suggest sex is a way to reduce wrinkles or burn calories. Undoubtedly your diet can impact on your health (as can many other factors like poverty, education and genetics) and health can impact on your sex life. But making sex into purely a health related topic often means we focus on it in limited and negative ways/ Perhaps unsurprisingly many sex educators (particularly teachers in schools) opt to frame sex in the language of health and biology as a means of avoiding topics they find difficult like desire, sexual activity, confidence and negotiation.

Boundaries, what boundaries?
Talking about sex is undoubtedly important, and clearly something people want to know about. But it worries me that some sex educators (in the media and particularly in school based settings) take little or no account of boundaries. This can be related to the ‘one size fits all’ approach mentioned above, or could be as simple as not changing lesson plans to different age groups, or realising that one person’s desires, values and experiences will be very different to another person – regardless of age or experience. The key here is to identify what people want to know, not assume what they should know, and be respectful of their boundaries. Something that offers a challenge to those of us who want to promote pleasure yet requires reflection to ensure we don’t give advice that offends or excludes.

Sex is something you achieve, not experience
You’ve seen the headlines on the glossy magazines about ‘best ever orgasms’ or ‘ultimate orgasms’ or ‘great sex tonight’ or ‘blow his/her mind’. Much of our current media sex coverage presents sex as something you achieve, practice and perform. And there’s a whole industry of sex products (toys, lingerie, erotica and ‘sexpertise’) to accompany this. While there’s nothing wrong with wanting to experience pleasure, the aspirational approach to sex doesn’t advocate adventure, exploration or experimentation. Instead it makes sex into something that must be worked upon in a set format with ‘proper’ sex involving intercourse and only finishing with the guy’s orgasm (in the case of heterosexual sex – presented as the norm in most media/self help guides). Perhaps unsurprisingly this approach filters into wider sex education with teachers anxious to know how to address it, panicked over what they see as our ‘sexualised’ culture, and often presenting sex as intercourse ending in orgasm. Our challenge is to check how often we present sex in such a formulaic manner and find other ways to talk about it.

Back to Heather Corinna who concludes in her piece
“Of course, my favorite approach is avoiding generalized statements like this at all and instead having conversations where I can simply first ASK (or be told) if someone does or does not want to have sex right now, then give more information, and ask more questions, then tailoring what I am saying to what they state their needs and wants to be: if we start there, and work from their answer, it’s pretty easy to sidestep all of the problems with these kinds of phrasings. I think it also makes it easier for us to focus as much on what we should be doing as we’re focusing on what teens should.”

I agree and add to this the same applies when working with adults.

For all of us who work in sexual health and education it is often easy to slip into bad habits, particularly when people are asking you to tell them what to do about sex/relationships. Although reflecting on the messages we share is time consuming and can often feel threatening and annoying, such activities are essential to making the advice we share useful, applicable and accessible to all.

The Swedish Association for Sexuality Education has produced a fantastic new resource all about the hymen, which calls for the hymen to be renamed as the ‘vaginal corona’. This is in response to a fair amount of ignorance about the hymen and virginity – which has caused problems for women and intimate relationships (particularly in countries where virginity is put at a premium).

The booklet is available in several languages including English, Arabic, and Sorani. The guides are designed to describe what female genitals look like, what the vaginal corona (hymen) is, and to challenge myths around virginity and female sexuality.

Best of all, they’re sex positive, clear, and free. So if you’re working in sex education, activism or outreach then you’ll definitely want to use these resources in your work. I’d recommend them to you even if you think you know a lot about female sexuality, virginity and female anatomy. Many of my colleagues who’ve been researching and educating on sex and relationships have been amazed how much they’ve learned from this booklet.

While you’re enjoying the resource linked above you might want to also check out other parts of the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education’s website which is a treasure trove of sex positive (and free) resources. My favourites include Dicktionary (about the male body and desire) and Pussypedia (about the female genitals and pleasure) and a guide to clitoral sex. There’s also a whole slew of resources, teaching guides and articles, an amazing sex FAQ section. And this wonderful film ‘Talking about sex’ which describes how sex education programmes can help change boys and men’s inaccurate views about sex, improve relationships, and tackle gender inequalities.

Feel free to share this information and support the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education – showing the rest of the world sex positive education at its best.

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.

We’re all familiar with the term ‘designer vagina’, but did you know there’s actually no clinical evidence to suggest non-essential female genital surgery is effective or safe? A systematic review of the literature on labial surgery for women (just out in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology) has found “medically nonessential surgery to the labia minora is being promoted as an effective treatment for women’s complaints, but no data on clinical effectiveness exist”. The paper isn’t open access but is well worth a read if you can find it. It outlines the issues around genital surgery including why this trend is increasingly popular. Sadly women’s media is not massively critical on this topic, so here’s hoping this research might encourage a bit more critical reflection among editors (although I’m not holding my breath).

Predictably plastic surgeons haven’t responded massively well to this review – I wonder why? You might be shocked or amused to see one practitioner’s reaction courtesy of the BBC:
“Essentially this is just about removing a bit of loose flesh, leaving behind an elegant-looking labia with minimum scarring”.
As ever, The Daily Mash wade in with their satirical take on what makes a whole ‘perfect vagina’.

Are orgasms bad for your health? Well, yes, according to Marnia Robinson (lawyer turned sex expert) who suggests that orgasms ‘play havoc with your neurochemistry’ and recommends people should practice sexual intimacy without orgasm. This is an interesting theory, but it’s only a theory, and the data included in Robinson’s thesis seems to be selective rather than systematic. While Robinson rightly does talk about conventional messages about sex being around achievement and unrealistic goal setting, her message ultimately becomes less about personal choice and slips into the familiar rhetoric of their being a ‘right’ way to have sex. This story’s picked up on here.

Movie star Jane Fonda’s got the media in a fluster by announcing sex is still great aged 71. It’s led to the predictable discussions about whether it’s okay or not for seniors to be sexy – and a whole flurry of spin off features and radio programmes all arguing that older people ought to be getting it on, and are sexier than ever before. Which doesn’t quite fit the evidence. Some older people do report positive relationships and enjoying intimacy – although that may not necessarily involve lots of intercourse (or even any intercourse at all). Caution is required so we don’t reinforce the stereotype that anyone over 60 should be sexless, or pressurise older people to think sex is a mandatory activity and there’s something medically wrong if they’re not still doing it. [You might be interested in some blogs about senior sex I've written previously - all linked within this blog].

In anticipation of tomorrow’s Disability: sex, relationships and pleasure conference at the Royal Society of Medicine, The Times asks ‘Is sex for the disabled the last taboo?’. The piece covers some of the issues facing disabled people about relationships (it’s a bit limited by some inaccurate reporting in places – the comments after the piece I think are more interesting). I’ll be blogging a report on the conference early next week where I’ll be particularly focusing on some of the key questions of evidence based policy and practice relating to sex positive support for disabled people.

Want to know how to talk dirty? Here’s a quick guide I contributed to for Playboy about some common errors people make around naughty chat (over 18s only). [I was glad to see this feature didn't go down the usual uncritical approach to spicing up your sex life and encourages readers to reflect on why they want to talk dirty and ensure it's something their partner is equally interested in].

There are two key errors people make with sexy talk:
- The first is to assume their partner is fine with talking dirty without checking, and launching into some rude chat that embarrasses, upsets or unnerves them.
- The second is thinking talking dirty is something they ought to be doing, but not feeling sure what to say – or when to say it.

Talking dirty can be a real turn on, but isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. Saying something unexpectedly could really spice things up, but it also could be a disaster if you offend, upset or just make your partner fall about laughing. If you want to get better at communicating your desires I’d recommend Carol Queen’s Exhibitionism for the Shy.

Sex writer Brian Alexander contacted me recently with a problem he was answering from a reader of his Sexploration column. The woman in question had a partner who was getting off on her being sexually provocative with other men. It was hard to tell if this was a case of a couple with communication problems, or a guy being controlling and forgetting the key rules of acting out sexual fantasies – that it must always be safe, sane and consensual. You can read the problem and answer here.

Finally, the fantastic international sex education campaign 15 and counting have launched a competition where rappers, singers and musicians have been composing songs relating to the campaign. All the entries can be found here. With some of the most popular here. My favourite is Hemanifezt – Be a Protector for Yourself.

So if you’re a musician, song writer or performer why not contribute your song to the competition? Educators working within schools or healthcare may want to encourage young people to get involved in the competition. And feel free to share this information – both about 15 and counting and this music comp.

And if you want a bit of inspiration, let’s go back to the 90s with a groundbreaking safer sex song that still sounds great today.

Let’s talk about sex!

After several years debating and consulting on this issue, the government have finally conceded to make sex education statutory.

This follows years of campaigning from educators, parents groups and healthcare staff. And most importantly after years of young people saying they wanted more than just basic biological information – they needed to know about how to enjoy healthy relationships.

The new plans for SRE (sex and relationships education) will focus on age-appropriate messages and will focus on feelings, emotions and respect – as well as information about physical development, pregnancy and contraception, and protecting yourself from STIs.

Parents will still be allowed to opt out – but only until the child is 15. So they should still get one year of SRE (assuming they don’t leave school before 16). The number of parents who do opt out of SRE is generally low, although the age 15 limit does raise issues about those kids who may need sex ed earlier and may not be getting this information from either home or school.

Generally I think practitioners, educators and hopefully parents will be happy with these proposals. We are living in an increasingly sexualised and commercial culture and our sex education needs to be statutory and match up to the needs of young people to ensure they can enjoy happy and healthy relationships as adults. And avoid teenage pregnancy and STIs.

Schools are still going to be allowed to deliver sex ed along with their particular ‘ethos’ (so faith schools may still be able to limit aspects of what’s taught relating to sexuality and contraception).

Predictably press coverage has taken the negative line – and you can expect most coverage to probably follow this ‘parents lose their rights’ format (not an accurate representation of what’s going to happen, but hey its our media’s standard line on sex ed

If you want to read the whole summary, reports, parent survey and what’s going to be covered on the curriculum it’s all here.

I’ll be blogging about this in more detail next week, including more information about the changes to SRE and what that will involve for teachers, parents and young people. If you’ve any questions you want me to address in this blog about this issue, do feel free to get in touch.

A couple of weekends ago the New View Campaign (who work to challenge the medicalisation of sex) hosted an event called Vulvagraphics.

The aim of the event was to celebrate genital diversity. The site above contains links to the various exhibitions that featured in the event. All of which represent a diversity of vulvas depicted in art, film, drama, literature and craft.

In an era where we’re used to seeing surgically enhanced or airbrushed images of vulvas, and at a time when we tend to focus on vulvas in negative ways (as dirty, hairy or smelly), Vulvagraphics invited women and men to rethink how they view the vulva.

Photos of the event (including a variety of vulvas) can be seen here. Viva la Vulva posters and ‘love your vulva’ badges are available here.

This might be an event you respond to by wondering what those kooky feminists are up to now? However, it does have an important message about body awareness and confidence. It is worth reading about the event and seeing how you might apply the messages from it. That might be individually in terms of your own body confidence, or as a means of celebrating your vulva with a partner. Or if you’re a parent it might enable you to think how you can encourage your children to feel proud and positive about their genitals. Teachers, sex educators and healthcare staff could also reflect on how they currently deliver messages about genitals – and whether those could be improved and made sex positive.

So go ahead. Love your vulva. Or if you don’t happen to have one, love someone else’s

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.