Over the past few weeks parents, practitioners, young people and journalists have been concerned about the Channel 4 series ‘The Joy of Teen Sex’. This has led to a number of us deciding to complain to the Channel and recommend a way forward to ensure future programming is improved.

Below is a copy of our letter, sent to the Chief Executive (David Abraham) and Commissioning Editors yesterday. Myself and others will be reproducing this letter on our blogs and you are welcome to share it on forums, your own blog or for teaching/discussion purposes. If you have been worried by the series and believe Channel 4 should address the current poor standards in sex and relationships broadcasting you may also want to contact the Channel yourself.

Dear David Abraham

Cc: Sue Murphy, Andrew Jackson, Katy Boyd, Liam Humphreys, Kate Teckman, Dominique Walker

We are a group of professionals who are pro-sex education and accessible sexual and reproductive healthcare. We believe in accurate and open discussions about relationships and sex, and feel television can be an effective and powerful medium for sex education programmes that are entertaining as well as informative.

For the past decade Channel 4 has been making programmes addressing sex and relationships issues for teens and adults including: The Sex Inspectors (2004), Orgasmatron/Body Shock (2005), The Dark Side of Modern Love (2005), Am I A Sex Addict (2007), The Sex Education Show (2008-present), and most recently The Joy of Teen Sex. This clearly demonstrates a commitment on behalf of the Channel which we feel is important given how little coverage these topics receive.

While these programmes may have attracted high viewing figures, they have been criticised by therapists, healthcare providers, and educators for portraying inaccurate or outdated and misleading representations of sex education, healthcare, clinical treatments and therapies.

Many of us have been approached to participate on these programmes, or publicise them to our colleagues/clients. We have repeatedly shared our worries about the direction programmes appear to be taking, although have had little success in having those concerns heard.

The recent series The Joy of Teen Sex has been even more problematic than previous similar shows, raising complaint and concern from sexual and reproductive healthcare staff, sex educators, youth workers, sex researchers, parents and young people. In particular they have been worried by:

- the range of topics covered, which may not be representative of the needs/questions teens may have

- some of the skills and qualifications of the professionals used in the programme

- the advice given to programme participants which left little room for exploration, choice, and the right to refuse sexual activity that doesn’t appeal to them

- misleading and/or factually incorrect information, and frequently used unreliable statistics to back up points made. For example the inaccurate claim made at the start of each programme that the average teen has had three sexual partners by the time they reach 16. In fact reputable research finds most teens have not had intercourse before they are 16.(1).

- little attention paid to communication, confidence, respect, romance, affection, closeness

- an overemphasis on sexual techniques and products

- offering options that may not be realistic for viewers, particularly younger teens or those on a low income

- valuing the ‘televisual’ over more relevant issues to young people – e.g. exploring vajazzling

- consistent muddling of key terms (e.g. vagina used when vulva is meant), or using outdated terms such as ‘hymen’

- inaccurate representation of what sex education is like, what sexual health services deliver, and how sex education and healthcare professionals should act. For example a medic making a client cry by showing her graphic images of STIs; telling young women to expect bleeding as part of losing virginity; or not making clear the difference between normal vaginal discharge and an STI

- mixed messages from programme makers in their casting calls to young people/parents, and what professionals being consulted for the series were told it would offer (see Appendices 1 and 2)

- an overall tone that encouraged teen blaming, slut shaming and homophobia, while perpetuating messages of hegemonic masculinities and narrow sexual norms

- not listening to numerous professional concerns during the development stage

- no awareness of, or respect for, cultural diversity

- producers of the show using twitter to promote the programme while simultaneously dismissing professional and parent complaints of the series, referring to anyone who questioned the series as ‘haters’ (see also Appendix 3)

We are concerned the Commissioners and Channel Four have not shown due diligence over this series. It seems to be fitting a pattern of programme development where viewing figures are prioritised over empowerment but where programmes are still marketed as ‘educational’. It does not appear to fit with the Channel’s Public Service Remit or Corporate Responsibility.

We are worried misinformation about sexual and reproductive healthcare and education has been grossly misrepresented, leading to parents feeling anxious, young people’s right to accurate information not being delivered, and professional advice being ignored at all stages of programme development.

The right of young people to comprehensive sex and relationships education is still contested in this country. Many individuals and organizations oppose sex education on the grounds it will sexualise their children, claim it will not give accurate information, or will encourage sexual activity rather than encouraging thoughtful decision-making about relationships. For this reason it is vital that any programme claiming to provide education about sex and sexuality does not provide fuel for these arguments. Sadly we have seen reactions to The Joy of Teen Sex in public discussions and on places like twitter that indicate the programme is already being used as evidence of the ‘failings’ of sex education.

As a result we fear this style of programme making could lead to young people and adults not getting the sexual and relationships advice they need; making the job of healthcare providers, therapists, educators, parents and youth workers more difficult; and causing distress to young people and parents. We have been overwhelmed with emails from anxious teens and parents who support sex education, but are concerned about the messages of teenagers, sex, relationships and sexuality portrayed in this series.

Channel 4 clearly intends to continue making programmes about sex and relationships. We are hoping as Channel Directors you will wish these future broadcasts to be accurate, entertaining and empowering. To ensure this happens we are calling on Channel 4 to establish an advisory group made up of sexual and reproductive health practitioners, sex educators, youth workers, parents and young people to oversee the development of future programming and ensure that it is entertaining, accurate and empowering. This idea is endorsed by Brook, the young people’s sexual health service. All of the signatories below are happy to help you with this endeavor, and are now expecting you to listen to our concerns, and promise quality sex and relationships broadcasting in the future. We look forward to hearing your response soon.

Signed
Petra Boynton PhD, Social Psychologist and Sex Researcher, University College London
Dr Stuart Flanagan, Genito Urinary Physician
Justin Hancock, Bish Training, trainer and consultant
Lisa Hallgarten, Director, Education For Choice
Wendy Savage MBBCh FRCOG MSc (Public Health) Hon DSc
Marge Berer, Editor, Reproductive Health Matters
Romance Academy – a nation-wide, holistic, relationships and sex education initiative
Dr. Meg Barker, Sex therapist and social psychologist, The Open University
Chris Ashford, Principal Lecturer in Law, University of Sunderland
Alice Hoyle, Sex and Relationship Education Advisory Teacher
Alison Terry, Second year student, Applied Community and Youth Work Studies, University of Manchester
K. Barratt, Second year student, Applied Community and Youth Work Studies, University of Manchester
Becca Thompson, BSc MA COT
Steven Norris, Student Teacher
Clare Bale, RGN, BA (Hons),MPH, PhD Candidate, University of Sheffield
Dr. Lesley Hoggart, Principal Research Fellow, School of Health and Social Care University of Greenwich
Matthew Greenall, advisor on international HIV & sexual health programmes
David McQueen, International Speaker and Youth Advocate
Janet Horrocks, Healthy Schools Project Officer
Joelle Brady, MSc, Researcher
Kendelle Bond, MD of Zest Consultantancy, Public Health Consultant
Dr Jayne Kavanagh, Medical Ethics and Law Unit Lead, UCL Medical School and Associate Specialist in Sexual and Reproductive Health, Camden Provider Services
David Evans, Researcher and Chief Executive SRE Project
Peter Bone, Chair of the Advisory Council, PSHE Association

(1) Wellings, K, Nanchahal, K, Macdowall, W, McManus, S, Erens, B, Mercer, CH, Johnson, AM, Copas, AJ, Korovessis, C, Fenton, KA, Field, J Sexual behaviour in Britain: early heterosexual experience. Lancet, 2001: 358; 1843-1850

APPENDIX ONE
Example email correspondence from researchers on The Joy of Teen Sex, to professionals:
“We are in the early stages of shaping our series and are keen to talk to industry professionals, so we can get it right. I understand your concerns and I can reassure you that our aim is to make a thought-provoking and positive series that will look at relationships, emotions and identity as well as “the act of sex”.”The Joy of Teen Sex will not be gratuitous, voyeuristic or salacious. Our aim, working alongside dedicated professionals, is to provide a platform for teenagers and parents to discuss the emotional, physical and psychological pressures young people face when they are seeking to forge loving relationships.”

APPENDIX TWO

Example of casting call information to recruit participants to the programme (reproduced and discussed in this previous blog post about The Joy of Teen Sex).

APPENDIX THREE
Metro Newspaper’s account of Twitter remarks from one of the producers on The Joy of Teen Sex, made during and after episodes were aired. (These have since been removed from twitter by said producer).

Update
Our letter has been reported in The Guardian and Channel 4 have since sent the newspaper this response (reprinted below). For the record the Channel have not as yet been in touch with any of the signatories of the letter and have not even acknowledged receipt of our letter. We await their promised correspondence.

Channel 4 has been committed to programming that addresses the lack and inadequacy of sex education in schools for many years through programmes such as the Sex Education Show and The Joy of Teen Sex. We are proud of our programming in this field as well and their ability to bring large audiences to the often difficult issues they have addressed. We have a hugely successful Sexperience website which has consistently been a leader in the field and has seen millions log on for further advice or information after watching the programmes. Anecdotally we also know from healthcare professionals that viewers have sought medical advice and treatment as a result of watching the programme.

While the programme makers of The Joy of Teen Sex consulted with a number of sexual healthcare professionals to ensure the information provided was accurate and appropriate, we realise that this type of programming will not always appeal to everyone. However, Channel 4 is always willing to listen to the concerns of viewers and interested parties following its broadcasts and we will correspond with the authors of the letter directly about their concerns.

A few thoughts on this response (from me, rather than on behalf of everyone who signed our letter). Given the major problems with The Joy of Teen Sex, it seems more than disingenuous for them to claim the series has been addressing the lack of and inadequacy of sex education. The point of our letter is to highlight how the misinformation in Channel 4′s programming is misleading regarding sex education, and may in fact be causing more work for parents and practitioners while giving ammunition to the anti sex education lobby. There are plenty of ways to support sex education but causing concern to young people, educators and parents is not the way to do it. Nor is creating programmes which feature mainly 18′s and over (not representative of ‘teens’). Or making programmes for teens that are screened after 10pm, and are blocked to under 18s when they’re archived on 4oD. The Channel can’t even claim they’ve not been told about the problems around delivering SRE and how media can inform this – they’ve asked me to speak at their education events twice to specifically tackle this issue (see here and here).

Anecdotes are fine, but how many healthcare professionals have said people have sought advice? Presumably if this is being reported to the Channel they’ll have some record of it? Why are these professionals listened to, but those of us who are raising concerns (based on what we’re seeing in practice) are not?

The Channel mention they consulted with ‘a number of sexual healthcare professionals to ensure the information was accurate and appropriate’. How many professionals and who were they? Six people/organisations signing our letter were directly approached to appear on the Joy of Teen Sex when it was in development. We all shared our concerns about the programme idea at the time but were unable to participate because the producers would not alter their focus. So that’s several professionals we directly know about who gave extensive feedback who were ignored. It would be useful to know who the healthcare professionals who were ultimately used by the Channel, because if they were responsible for signing off the inaccurate statistics and misleading examples of practice screened week on week there are, sadly, questions to ask about their competence.

It is not enough to say our complaint about this series and other programming is just a matter of taste. It is a matter of accuracy and broadcasting ethics. Our reason for writing to the Channel is not to have a grumble about a few things we just don’t like the tone of. It’s a serious catalogue of consistent problematic practice.

The Channel states how it ‘is always willing to listen’. Presumably that includes all the parents and practitioners who have also contacted the Channel separately from our group letter? People who are still waiting for any reply? Channel 4 has not, so far, indicated they are listening. They need to respond to us directly for us to know this is happening. And to continue a dialogue that shows they are taking on board feedback. Not fobbing people off with vague PR speak.

I will keep you posted on any further correspondence from the Channel who I hope decide to revisit our letter and realise we are offering them an opportunity to ensure they provide accurate, entertaining and empowering sex programmes in the future. It would be supremely arrogant of them to continue to decide they know better than young people, parents, practitioners – in other words, their audience.

1. Get educated – then share the knowledge
There are many ways to learn about sexual health and wellbeing. You can bring yourself up to speed with information about HIV/AIDS here (contains links to quizzes, resources, forums and advice sheets). Or you can test your knowledge with Avert’s Quizzes (on sex, pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, contraception). Teen site Scarleteen includes loads of frank and helpful information, as does Go Ask Alice!, Kinsey Confidential and Cory Silverberg at About.com’s Sexuality section.
You can also make use of Planned Parenthood’s toolkits and resources, while All About My Vagina explains how anyone can become a sex educator (with links to resource materials).

2. Bust those myths!
Despite education and advice, many people are still confused about HIV and AIDS. You might want to check out some mythbusting courtesy of About.com; questions, answers and papers about areas of confusion about AIDS from The Body while New Scientist lists the top 5 myths about HIV.

3. Don’t just focus on sex
HIV can be transmitted through sexual contact, but it is also passed on from mother to baby through breast milk, through blood transfusion (if infected blood is transfused – this is less common nowadays), by sharing needles, needlestick injury, or unsterilized/unhygienic needles or other sharps used routinely in healthcare. Further information on transmission can be found here. The problem with messaging around sex is we tend to focus on confusing or mixed messages, or advice that’s difficult to put into practice (for example asking people to be faithful in countries with massive gender inequalities). Instructing people they must abstain without discussing the contexts for why abstinence may happen, considering delay messages or thinking about when abstinence is not possible or wanted does not empower communities. It certainly does not protect those who are subject to sexual abuse and rape. Equally dangerous is instructing against condom use. Or telling people not to have sex, to be faithful or always use a condom without giving them any life skills to put these choices into action. Simplistic approaches that assume all people need is instructions to have HIV tests or simply ‘use a condom’ without addressing their wider social, economic, healthcare or personal needs is unhelpful and frequently counterproductive. Discussing sex only in the context of intercourse (vaginal or anal) leaves out wider contexts around relationships, desire, and coercion. We need to focus on clear messaging around sexual transmission of HIV (with actionable solutions and life skills offered), but not forget there are other means of getting the virus. This is of particular concern given a recent study from Swaziland that suggests 1:5 babies are infected with HIV through dirty needles or other clinical equipment.

4. Challenge and tackle inequalities
HIV is more prevalent in countries or communities where there are high levels of gender inequality, restricted access to healthcare, poverty, discrimination over sexuality (including transsexuality), and high levels of illiteracy. Challenging transphobia, homophobia, gender inequality, and discrimination against male, female and trans sex workers can help – for example in the views you hear from other people (particularly those working in health and social care or law enforcement), biased media coverage, or discriminatory practices expressed by organisations. You can also support campaigns that address poverty and literacy along with wider access to healthcare. You might even decide to become an activist – here’s an example toolkit for just this purpose.

5. Volunteer and/or fundraise
There are many ways of getting involved in tackling HIV, inequalities and poverty. You might want to volunteer on a sexual health helpline, or help out at an HIV/reproductive health clinic – on reception, as a health advisor/advocate, or interpreter (either using signing or different languages). Or you could always donate toys or magazines to clinics.

Unwanted clothing, shoes, blankets, toys can be donated to charities supporting those affected by HIV (particularly orphanages worldwide and clinics supporting the homeless, refugees or those fleeing domestic abuse).

You could give of your time locally – for example seeing if your local health or educational authority needs any support (which may include administrative duties that free up healthcare providers to see patients). You might want to prepare nutritious meals for people living with HIV, or if you’re currently breastfeeding you may want to donate some of your milk to feed babies whose mothers are HIV positive. Not all mothers have the option of donated milk or formula, more information for them can be found here.

Spare cash? Well, the recession’s still on, but as the saying goes ‘every little helps’. Financial donations can be made nationally and internationally. If you do wish to donate I’m always happy to recommend trustworthy charities and healthcare providers working to treat and prevent HIV (and other health issues). The Terrence Higgins Trust are always worth supporting, or you might want to help the Jabulani Foundation whose innovative approach to healthcare was recently reported in The Lancet (sadly not open access).

You can save your pennies in a jar, or raise money through car boot or jumble sales, or even sell stuff on ebay and put your profits to a good cause.

Donating materials can also help – old computers, digital cameras, access to educational materials are always welcome in resource poor communities. Offering to help with fundraising (including creating advertising, designing and maintaining websites) is also welcome. Here’s an example of what one charity needs. Search on the web to find more you could contribute to.

Maybe you’re not able to contribute cash but have other skills you might share? Gardening, cooking, sewing/needlework, knitting or craft can be applied to help those affected by HIV/AIDS, raise funds, teach new skills, or generally raise awareness. Knitted items (hats, booties and baby clothing) are always welcomed by orphanages – although don’t forget clothing for toddlers and older kids (particularly shoes, kids do get through a lot of shoes!). You can donate your children’s unwanted items, with the added opportunity of raising their awareness about HIV.

Maybe you’re a drama buff, artist, musician or film maker – in which case those talents can be used to help people find new ways to share messages around HIV/AIDS, safer sex, communication skills, and desire.

If you’re good with words or numbers then why not volunteer to help people who might be struggling with HIV alongside other disadvantages related to literacy/numeracy. Help may well be appreciated with filling in forms, applying for benefits, balancing budgets, or following medical advice.

6. Target problematic practices
There are well meaning campaigns that promote abstinence only as a response to HIV. While it is appropriate to recommend delaying sex until someone is ready (and has sorted contraception/condom use), many abstinence campaigns focus on simply telling people not to have sex – with no additional information about relationships, pleasure, confidence, or negotiating skills. In particular suggesting adults abstain from sex until marriage without any additional sex education, and recommending this approach in countries/communities with major gender inequalities, does little to reduce the spread of HIV. For a balanced view about abstinence based educational approaches see Avert’s review, plus this systematic review from the Cochrane Collaboration indicating abstinence only approaches are not effective. Speak out against those who promote HIV programmes that are only focused on abstinence because it doesn’t reduce the prevalence of HIV.

Linked to some abstinence campaigns is anti-condom propaganda, promoted by some faith based organisations, governments and NGOs. This includes misinformation such as ‘condoms don’t work’, which is untrue. Of course no barrier method is 100% effective, if used correctly then condoms are 80-97% effective in preventing HIV transmission. Other claims include condoms usually break – again untrue if used correctly (in such cases condoms are 98% effective). Or that there are minute holes in condoms that the HIV virus is small enough to pass through. This is false. Condoms are a barrier method and the HIV virus cannot pass through latex or polyurethane condoms. More information about condoms and how to use them can be found courtesy of Planned Parenthood.

Here’s how to use the male condom


And the female condom

Use this awareness of what condoms do and how they are an effective method of preventing HIV transmission, and support educational campaigns that not only distribute condoms but also give people the life skills to know how to use them correctly and negotiate using them with a partner.

Remember, though, that just repeating ‘always use a condom’ mantra, handing out condoms or expecting people just to use condoms without addressing their individual needs is unlikely to be effective. Indeed where people are facing stigma, inequalities and violence handing them condoms and expecting them to use them is deeply disempowering. If you are working as an activist, educator, healthcare provider or are a client using sexual health services speak out against simplistic approaches that promote condom use or HIV testing in an uncritical way.

Unfortunately sexual health – particularly around HIV/AIDS – is often based on good ideas from well intentioned people, but not necessarily practices based on the latest evidence. To find out what’s going on you can use PubMed and Google Scholar to search for research papers, or organisations like MedFash or BASSH. The amazing Magnus Hirschfeld Archive (a multi language resouce) has lots of free tools to help improve your sexual health knowledge – including an online course about understanding STIs. Toolkits to help are also available via the WHO. If you work in education or healthcare ensure your staff are supported to learn about effective ways of promoting clear messages around HIV prevention or how to manage if you are HIV positive. Ask for additional training if you are a staff member or volunteer in this field and ensure you’re obtaining (and attending) continued professional development (and not just for the per diems or certificates – you need to show clear outcomes in your practice and benefits for your clients).

Added to this is the problem of staff who are working in the field of HIV/AIDS but may lack basic training, be unsupported or require more intensive supervision – particularly around reflecting on current evidence and how that might underpin their practice. Without this we see staff giving advice that goes outside their area, not referring to medical specialists when they should, or being highly negative/judgemental. You can do your bit, wherever you are in the world, by campaigning for open access to journals and free or low cost training and support for healthcare practitioners on how to find, appraise, synthesise and apply evidence. All of us who work in health research, activists, clients and academics can and should be pushing for high quality research that does not reinvent the wheel, drain or divert resources from healthcare provision, and can demonstrate practical results that build capacity and sustain communities. Which I appreciate is often difficult to do – that very fact should shame us into trying far harder to achieve it.

In many cultures there’s a mix of a lack of sex education, often a negative cultural attitude to sex, alongside sexual messages within the mainstream media – often with different messages for women and men (so men are expected to be hypersexual, women less so). So often people are not sure about HIV, what it is, how to prevent transmission, or what to do if you’re positive. Creating educational and awareness campaigns that aim at diverse audiences (teens, parents, LGBT, sex workers) and allow people to discuss any areas of confusion can really help. If you want to assess the effectiveness of an HIV intervention, this free toolkit by eminent researcher Doug Kirby is invaluable.

It’s no surprise that HIV is rising in countries where governments have not taken enough appropriate action against HIV or poverty, or to promote balanced sex education. Where politicians are opposed to/negative about pre-marital sex, homosexuality, drug users, or sex workers and do not invest in healthcare and education, then it’s not surprising their electorate suffer. Lobbying, protesting and drawing attention to how government’s do not tackle HIV effectively is one way forward – as is making the treatment and prevention of HIV an election issue. Make politicians accountable – and expose those who are not willing to tackle HIV. Remember HIV is an issue globally, it is easy to assume it happens to people who’re not like us in terms of where they live, their sexuality, gender and so on. In fact focusing on HIV as something that happens somewhere else, or to other people can mean we avoid tackling real inequalities on our doorstep, patronise those in other communities, or assume we’re not likely to become HIV positive or contract other STIs.

We can all find out our HIV status and practice safer sex.

Many people struggle with accessing services that provide education, prevention advice or treatment for HIV due to access to or availability of services. This may be simply because they cannot afford medications, or the cost of travel to get to clinics. Or it may be that services are available but clinic opening times and directions are unclear – or are not available at the time when you need to go (for example early afternoon or weekend for teenagers, evenings for adults). Alert clinics that aren’t making their availability clear. Offer to distribute leaflets or display adverts showing opening times. And campaign for low cost or free access to healthcare, drugs, education, baby milk (for infants who can’t have breast milk) and condoms. Practical campaigning on affordable healthcare, transport and road links, and joined up healthcare that addresses concurrent conditions is also vital (but again, frequently politically difficult, another alarm bell that we really can and should be doing more).

We’re all fighting to prevent HIV/AIDS but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t question fundraisers that claim to make a difference. There are those who exploit this area, and even where there are well meaning campaigns they may be more about fashion than fundraising/awareness/empowerment. If you want to make a difference then the Buy Less campaign may be more appropriate

7. Healthcare practitioners and teachers – speak out!
As well as promoting more evidence based practices (see above), tackling colleagues who are judgemental about HIV/AIDS (or related areas – for example prejudiced towards homosexuals, transsexuals, sex workers or drug users), then work towards better training and support for them – and if this fails then complain to management and ensure they are not harming others with their views.

Challenge NGOs and funding bodies promoting that only promote abstinence only/anti condom messaging (see above), or who will only fund HIV programmes that don’t mention safer sex or other sex positive/educational messages. Or who simply push for condom use and testing with no other resources given. Where possible ensure your services do not take this approach and link with colleagues to ensure you offer a balanced service based on the latest evidence. If you are working in a resource poor country you may find making links with established academics/practitioners in other countries can help you access materials you need for your work (please email me if you’d like me to put you in touch with some).

If you are struggling to access drugs, medical supplies, sterile clinical products and syringes, or basic supplies like bedding or clothing, then again you may find making links with colleagues in other countries can help. Western medical students, for example, are often keen to fundraise, volunteer and access/share sterile items.

We’ve already heard about the political barriers to sorting HIV, but if you are experiencing this as a healthcare provider, educator, parent or volunteer then expose it – to local papers, through a blog (which can be anonymous if necessary), or through the HIV research/practitioner community. That might be discussing a school or health authority promoting negative or mixed messages, or denying access to condoms. Or national blocks on sex education, or politicians openly supporting AIDS denialism, being trans/homophobic, or harassing those with HIV.

If you don’t feel able to speak out yourself, then alert people like me and we can try and help you find ways to share your story anonymously.

8. Empower people to protect themselves
As well as becoming a sex educator (see point 1 above), encouraging peer to peer education initiatives can make a real difference to young people, although adult to adult peer support schemes work well too (for example to raise awareness among m/f/t sex workers, or gay men). The 15 and Counting Campaign provides a wide range of resources for setting up sex education activities – and to help people campaign within their communities for better access to HIV/sex education.

Alternatively, you may want to support existing HIV initiatives aimed at teaching skills and raising money for people who are affected by HIV. For example the Positive Beadwork Project.

You could encourage clubs and pubs to provide condoms, or work with HIV charities or health authorities to hand out condoms in social spaces. (Remember it’s not just about dishing out the condoms, it’s also about giving people the chance to ask about safer sex and relationships, pleasure and communication).

Supporting open access organisations like the (wonderful) Hesperian Foundation helps people learn more about their health and HIV – including how to prevent, treat, and live with the virus. Their books are free to those in resource poor communities (the rest of us quite rightly pay). Titles worth sharing are listed below (and many come in languages including Bengali, Chinese, Indonesian, Urdu, French and Spanish).

HIV, Health and Your Community
Helping Health Workers Learn
Where there is no doctor: a village care handbook
Where women have no doctor
Where there is no dentist

9. Question bad science
Sadly there’s a lot of misinformation in the name of HIV/AIDS, and often this comes from science – or people pretending to be scientists. The worst offenders are the AIDS denialists, who not only promote their views across the internet, they’re also active within the media (see this recent report on the inclusion of an AIDS denialist movie at a cultural festival).

It is important to tackle AIDS denialists, and there’s a particularly useful list of resources here about spotting pseudoscience relating to this issue.

Added to this are those who (usually well meaningly) offer alternative treatments to those affected by HIV. There is no evidence that homeopathic remedies ‘cure’ or ‘prevent’ HIV, and those who promote such treatments – particularly when encouraging standard medical treatments for HIV (antiretrovirals) are discontinued – are extremely dangerous. Unfortunately there are some who are not averse to maliciously exploiting this virus and will offer a variety of cures, spells, amulets, or other products with the promise of curing or preventing HIV – but in fact simply a means of parting people with their money. We need to do more to stamp out quackery in this area and educate people to use established treatments and methods of prevention.

One of the major criticisms raised at the HIV/AIDS research community is about ensuring studies are focused, relate to/develop existing findings (rather than replicate them), and have measurable benefits to communities. Critics have argued that research in HIV may build academics careers but do little to enable people in ‘real life’ settings, or the focus on HIV detracts from other equally important issues within healthcare. While some of these accusations are often unfounded, there are questions to be asked about the quality of some studies on HIV/AIDS, and the ethical conduct of researchers. We should question any research on HIV/AIDS that doesn’t appear to have ethical approval, or does have approval but still seems to be putting participants at risk. Two examples of this come from sex workers in Cambodia and a Canadian study taking part on prostitutes in Nairobi. If you have concerns about ethical and governance issues in research then you should speak to the ethics committee overseeing the work. Established scientists can help if you need support with this (I can refer you to some if this is an issue for you).

We also need to be wary of research that doesn’t fit with the wider body of evidence (or contradicts it). Particularly in the case of studies that seem to be detracting from general HIV messages, or appear to promote anti-condom messages.

Studies and interventions that do not involve communities, sustain development or empower people are also a major problem. Particularly when they involve resource poor communities, or where literacy is an issue, or where access to wider healthcare and education is limited. More information on how this can have a devastating impact on communities (and how researchers, practitioners, activists and communities can resist this) can be found here.

Those of us working within research in sexual health/HIV need to do more to explain our methods, make evidence more accessible and directly applicable, and link carefully with communities where we’ll be working. It is important to work ethically and transparently, but also nurture community relationships as it is unfortunate that some studies are scuppered not because researchers were unprofessional, but the negative reputation of science resulted in opposition to research. PLRI are a good example of practitioners trying to achieve this.

10. Don’t forget, there are 365 World AIDS Days a year
It’s easy to think about HIV/AIDS on World AIDS Day, but not always so easy to remember it all year round. Hopefully the list of ideas above may give you some pointers for things you can do throughout the year that will make a difference. Setting aside time to regularly engage in an activity (like fundraising, volunteering or community education) means you don’t forget about HIV and you help those affected by it.

If you’ve found these tips helpful then please feel free to circulate widely.

I’ll leave you with a link to the official World AIDS Day site, and this short film from 2010 that reminds us why we cannot stop fighting HIV and supporting those affected

Posters for World AIDS Day 2011 can be downloaded here.

One story you can’t have missed in the past week or so was the sacking of Professor David Nutt in a situation where the government (yet again) disregarded evidence. Sadly it’s something we’ve got used to with this current administration. There’s been an interesting discussion about this over on Bad Science forums, although my favourite story on the issue comes courtesy of the Daily Mail whose attempts to smear scientists is pure comedy gold. I’d strongly recommend using this piece in teaching around journalism/science communication. I particularly like the Mail’s understanding of science as lab-based, unimaginative, not working in the real world, arrogant, and resistant to being questioned/challenged. Unfortunately many people also hold those views about science – although they probably don’t go as far as the Mail and equate scientists to Hitler :-0

While we’re on the topic of science communication and evidence based practice, here are two very useful dates for your diary. On November 16 2009 Westminster Skeptics in the Pub are hosting an event ‘Evidence based policy making’ with Dr Evan Harris MP and Professor David Nutt. On November 24 (again hosted by Westminster Skeptics) there’s an event ‘What next for Science Activism and New Media’ where a group of science bloggers and activists will be discussing issues around science communication and the impact of science blogging. If you’re a science journalist it would be particularly great to see you there to get some additional input from you about your views on science blogging/activism.

Stonewall hosted their annual awards ceremony this week (which seemed a lot less controversial than last year). They named journalist Jan Moir as their ‘bigot of the year’ following her attack on the late Stephen Gately. It’s always good to see those supporting LGBT issues rewarded, although while the folk at Stonewall are celebrating it might be worth looking to other countries where thinks are not so good for lesbians and gays. Like Uganda, who are seeking the death penalty for LGBT people (and requiring friends/family to turn in their loved ones suspected of being LGBT). It’s truly terrifying stuff, but worth reminding ourselves about the situation many LGBT people are faced with across the world.

I’ll leave you with a spoof documentary from The Onion about sexual arson (which actually does exist, although not perhaps in the way described in this clip

Crime Reporter Finds Way Of Linking Warehouse Fire To Depraved Sex Act

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.

Last night the Science Museum in London hosted one of its fabulous ‘Lates’ events. The theme of the evening was ‘sex and science’ and there was a great range of things to do. From learning more about yourself in the ‘who am I?’ tour, through to speed dating, finding out about the history of sex toys, salsa dancing, an experiment in ‘dance, hormones and sexual selection’ and some sexy punk science. Condoms were available to all guests, just in case things got extra fruity, and judging by the amount of drink and giggling going on I think people had a good time

I hosted a talk called ‘So you think you’re a sexpert?’ where we took 10 commonly asked questions about sex or commonly quoted sex ‘facts’ and put them to the test with some interactive voting to find out how smart our audience were about sex.

I’d like to give a great big thank you to everyone who came to Science Lates last night. I thought it was a novel way to share science, and the range of talks/events going on ensured we could create a balance between the fun and frisky and the serious and scientific.

For those of you who weren’t able to make it, I’ve reproduced the ‘So you think you’re a sexpert?’ quiz below, and I’ll give you the answers tomorrow, along with incorporating questions from the audience last night.

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

10. Why do sex researchers study sex?
This was an open-ended question we gave to the audience last night. I’ve got all their answers to sort through and I’ll be posting those in a blog next week, along with some answers from real-life sex researchers and educators.

Come back tomorrow and you can find out whether you’re a sexpert, and learn more about each question.

Please circulate the message below to all your networks

Many of you will have read about the horrific attack on Ian Baynham in Trafalgar Square and how this is now treated as a murder following the decision to turn off life support. Any attack is horrific but this took place in Trafalgar Square which one would imagine to be one of the safest places in London.

In response to this recent attack, the rise in the number of homophobic attacks in London, and previous hate attacks, a vigil has been organised in Trafalgar Square for this Friday 30th October 2009, 8pm.

The event is being organised by 17-24-30. Their aim for the vigil is to show the world that this anti-sociable behaviour is unacceptable.

For further details about the event, join the group on Facebook by clicking this link.

17-24-30 have said, “It’s important that you join in, because this wasn’t just a homophobic attack. It was an attack on everyone’s right to walk through their city without fear of attack. This is about everyone, str8 and gay.”

An additional vigil will be held in Liverpool on Sunday 1 November for James Parks, a trainee police officer aged 22, currently in hospital in a serious condition following a homophobic attack at the weekend.

Here’s a roundup of some of the sex/science stories that I’ve been following this past week.

I’m sure pretty much everyone tuned in to see Question Time last Thursday, and to find out what British National Party leader Nick Griffin had to say. I found the programme a bit disappointing, although Griffin did manage to give us a few gems. Including his dislike of school based sex education (he doesn’t agree it ought to be taught to primary school children). And homosexuals, or rather the ‘militant homosexuals’ (seemingly mild mannered ones are fine in Griffin’s book). Men kissing. He doesn’t like that. He finds it ‘creepy’. So if you want to bring down the BNP a well organised gay male snogathon might be a good place to start.

During Question Time Griffin is he tried to discredit Islam by discussing its approach to women. While Islam may be problematic in its treatment of women in places, the BNP hardly does well in this area. Witness their Family Law White Paper (which incidentally also returns to Griffin’s bete noir – the homosexual – as the BNP propose dissolving gay partnerships). Or you might want to see what policy resolution they proposed for teenage mothers at their recent conference:

‘Teenage mothers – the problem and the solution

If an 18-20 year old pregnant woman is married [marriage should not be an option available to 16/17 year olds, even with parental consent] and her husband has a job, then she will be exempt from going in to one of the homes.’

[A reader got in touch asking whether I agreed with the BNP policy for teenagers. The answer is no. They also wanted clarification about why the suggestions above are problematic. Firstly, the BNP state sex education won't make a difference to teen pregnancy rates, yet evidence clearly indicates it does. Secondly they outline a pattern of activity (different babies by different dads to upgrade accommodation) that doesn't happen in reality as much as the tabloid's would have us believe. Many teen mothers live with their families or the baby's father, or if they are in social housing often are placed in bedsits or flats. The most vulnerable mothers are often placed in the most inappropriate housing. I do agree that some young mothers can end up not being mature enough to parent effectively and this plus poverty can cause problems to mother and child(ren). However maturity isn't age related and while some teen mums can struggle, not all do. Mothers who are older may also lack the maturity or social support to parent effectively.

Thirdly, the BNP's report describe teen mums as feckless queue jumpers who get housing above those who've been waiting longer. Although there's no evidence for this happening on any large scale - again often teen mums are housed in bed and breakfast or shared accommodation rather than a home of their own. Withholding to young mothers (single mothers under 21) means they will have no independence or the opportunity to enjoy life. Enforcing a dress code is impractical and patronising (also if you're a young mum then a below the knee skirt and top where no cleavage is on show is not a great outfit when you're busy with a baby and might be breastfeeding). These suggestions imply young mothers will be being punished for having a baby. Parenting classes and support are ideas that are good, but these are already on offer and in most areas considerable effort has been put into providing these for young parents. Certainly the idea that those who do not confirm will be imprisoned and have their baby put into care is draconian and unworkable.

My main concern with the policy is it's not considered evidence, it has not researched what actually happens to young people, and has only focused on teenage girls - ignoring the roles and responsibilities of young men.

This is also discussed over at Lancaster Unity and Sim-O's Good Old Fashioned Values. The issue of what to do about teenage pregnancy is an important and emotive one. I'll be writing a future blog about what contributes to teen pregnancy/motherhood and what we can do about it]

Back to Question Time which also featured Sayeeda Warsi who has opposed gay marriage and school based sex education. In 2007 she said “I will campaign strongly for an end to sex education at seven years and the promotion of homosexuality that undermines family life”. So while Warsi was placed on the programme to challenge Griffin, there was little opportunity for the audience or other panelists to identify that sadly it’s not just the BNP who are promoting homophobic or sex negative policies.

Staying with the topic of bigotry, Jan Moir has tried to explain her recent column about the death of Stephen Gately. Moir’s most recent response does not fully apologise for her column, nor does it put right the inaccuracies about sudden death or sexuality she described. Perhaps it might have been better for Moir to issue a genuine and short apology, or say nothing at all.

Still on negative stories, Ben Goldacre over at Bad Science alerts us to The Spectator’s plans to screen the AIDS denialist movie House of Numbers as a means of encouraging ‘debate’ about AIDS. Goldacre’s blog highlights the problem with the movie (and links to numerous blogs who’ve been challenging the film and how it’s been accepted/promoted by people who ought to know better). Although gossip now suggests the event may be off.

On a more positive note, Halloween is just around the corner (although I promise not to mention the (over 18s) Pumpkin Dildo again this year). So in the run up to the event why not think about something suitably supernatural and consider dating a (real life) vampire? Actually I’ve done little else but fantasise about Edward Cullen of late, so this guide is useful in case he tires of Bella and comes for me. Join me, and check out the Twilight series, or tuck into Susie Bright’s Bitten – a great new gothic erotic anthology.

And if you want some super sex education this week the Kinsey Institute’s running a Sex Research Live event on 28th October where you can find out about your sexual personality and find out more about how we research sex. Or pop to London’s Science Museum (also on 28th) from 6.45pm where you can find out more about sex – including a chance to test your own sexual knowledge. And I’ll be telling you exactly why scientists study sex.