While sex in general has been misrepresented in popular media and porn, LGBTQ sex, in particular, tends to be exaggerated.
Less than 6% of teens reported that they received sex education with any mention of LGBTQ-related topics, making it easy to believe some of the most popular myths.
Here are 7 things you may have gotten wrong about queer sex.

While almost teens in the US get some form of sex education, fewer than 6% had sex education classes included LGBTQ-related topics as of 2015, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

This lack of formal education paired with the overall misrepresentation of LGBTQ sex in mainstream media and porn makes it easy for myths about queer sex to circulate.

Here are 8 things you may have gotten wrong about LGBTQ sex, from scissoring to STIs.

Myth: “Scissoring” is real.

“Scissoring” is not a thing. At least, not in the way that most porn portrays it.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, “scissoring” is when two people with vaginas touch clitorises in order to stimulate each other. It is one of the most common ways queer people with vaginas — typically cisgender lesbians — are shown having sex.

While a realistic version of scissoring called “tribbing” is actually used, the way porn portrays it is typically wrong, with a lot of forceful slamming of genitals and awkward positions that can’t be comfortable for anyone.

Myth: Penetration happens with no preparation.

Porn portraying queer men often fails to show the preparation involved in anal sex, such as cleaning the area, using lube, and foreplay.

According to Dr. Joseph Terlizzi, a colon and rectal surgeon, people who are bottoming — or being penetrated during anal sex — oftentimes need to prepare their bodies before sex to make sure they don’t get hurt.

“If your anus is too tightly contracted when you are first penetrated, you’ll run the risk of tearing skin or damaging your sphincter,” Terlizzi told Lighthouse: LGBTQ+ affirming care. “That’s why it’s important to relax your anus before penetration using various foreplay techniques and to keep your anus relaxed and well-lubricated while bottoming.”

In real life, not preparing adequately can lead to an uncomfortable and painful experience for those bottoming.

Myth: Bisexual people are just going through a phase.

The idea that bisexual people are just going through a phrase is one of the most common misconceptions around bisexuality, according to the Human Rights Campaign.

This kind of statement implies that you don’t believe their sexuality exists. Experts acknowledge that sexuality is a spectrum, just like gender, and people can be attracted to people of all genders, one gender, or no gender at all.

Myth: Women having sex with women must use a strap-on.

Porn, television, and movies that show queer women having sex often focus heavily on penetration, specifically with a strap-on — or a sex toy that attaches a dildo to a harness so that people can engage in hands-free penetration.

But the idea that strap-ons are a part of sex every single time is inaccurate, and frames queer sex in a heteronormative way.

In reality, sex can look lots of different ways for queer people with vaginas, and not all of them revolve around penetration. Oral sex, clitoral stimulation, dry humping, nipple play, and tribbing are just a few of the ways that queer people can get it on without penetration.

Myth: People with vaginas can’t give each other STIs.

While the use of dental dams — or latex sheets designed to be put on the vagina during oral sex — is sometimes seen as a joke among queer people, the idea that two people with vaginas can’t transmit STIs to each other is far from true.

Queer people with vaginas are at risk for the same types of STIs as cisgender or straight people and sex should still be approached with caution. STIs can be transmitted from skin to skin contact, oral-genital stimulation, and contaminated toys, so safe sex practices are important.

Myth: You can guess who’s a top and who’s a bottom.

A consistent theme in media featuring queer people is the masc-femme, top-bottom dichotomy. Think Shane Mccutcheon on the original “The L Word” being the ultimate top heartbreaker while sporting her iconic androgynous rocker aesthetic.

Essentially, feminine-presenting people are framed as being the “bottom,” or the person the sex is done to, and masculine-presenting people are framed as being the “top,” or the person being assertive during sex.

In reality, people can be tops, bottoms, or switches — or people who are versatile in their sexual preferences — regardless of gender presentation.

Myth: Having preferences that exclude people based on whether they are cisgender or a certain racial group isn’t problematic.

Queer men often list “preferences” on dating apps like “no blacks, no femmes, no fatties.” Sometimes, these preferences really just act as thinly veiled guises for racism, transphobia, and fatphobia.

Research released earlier this year on sexual racism illustrated the negative impacts this kind of dating exclusion can have on queer men of color.

In addition to racial preferences, a significant number of dating app users exclude transgender people from their dating pool.

These kinds of identity-based preferences lead to feelings of low self-esteem and marginalization among those excluded, and can contribute to disproportionately high rates of poor mental health and even suicide among these groups.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

December 10, 2019December 10, 2019

10 Misconceptions About BDSM

By Griffin Wynne

If Hollywood made a blockbuster film about all the common misconceptions about BDSM, it would be called 50 Shades of Grey Area. From outdated ideas to complete misrepresentations, there is no shortage of faulty information out there about BDSM. And while experimenting with kink may not be everyone’s cup of tea, listening to experts spill the tea about BDSM can help everyone stay informed.

“BDSM is something that the general population doesn’t know much about,” Kayna Cassard, sex therapist and founder of Intuitive Sensuality, tells Elite Daily. “So, they make up stories about what it means for people who engage in it.” According to Cassard, the lack of accurate information about BDSM often leads people to stigmatize the practice. “Our stories are often informed by [outdated or limited] belief systems,” Cassard says. “When you have those systems filling in the blanks on something like BDSM, there is a lot of negative judgment about it.” Whether you’re just starting to dip your toe in the kink world or you’re a BDSM babe that’s tired of correcting all the misinformed stereotypes, knowing the real tea about the kink community can be super helpful.

Here are 10 common misunderstandings about BDSM, cleared up by experts.

1. Myth: BDSM isn’t consensual.

Like any sexual encounter, engaging in BDSM requires talking about consent and intentions before getting down to business. “BDSM is 100% consensual and the result of explicit, thorough communication,” Brianne McGuire, host of the Sex Communication podcast, tells Elite Daily. “Activities may include physical contact that appears violent, but really, it’s the manifestation of an agreed-upon dynamic.” As McGuire shares, BDSM is a completely consensual practice that demands transparency from all partners. “BDSM emphasizes consensual play and teaches us tools to communicate our erotic and sexual needs more effectively,” Cassard says.

2. Myth: BDSM isn’t feminist.

For sex educator and “24/7 Sub” Lina Dune, a huge BDSM misconception is that the practice is not feminist. “As a submissive, I have been told all manner of things about why my role in BDSM is not feminist,” Dune says. “But BDSM is the coming together of equals to participate in consensual power exchange. Any way you slice it, that’s feminist to me.”

As Dune shares, BDSM can create space a particularly special space for women, femmes, and assigned female at birth (AFAB) people to reclaim their sexuality and sexual power. “And if there are some spanking, name-calling or ball gags thrown in there? All the better,” Dune says.

3. Myth: BDSM only involves penetrative sex.

Though penetrative sex can be a large part of BDSM, McGuire and Cassard both share that BDSM isn’t only about sex. “BDSM activities often involve no penetration,” McGuire says. “The nature of sharing energy and power in a highly communicated, consensual way goes far beyond sexual release.” Cassard agrees that BDSM can be a “tool in your relationship and sexual arsenal,” helping you and your partner communicate more effectively.

“BDSM is a practice that can offer so many opportunities for growth, fun, and deeper intimacy — and it doesn’t even have to do with sex,” Cassard says. “It provides experiences that address so many things that are important to a relationship and personal well-being such as mental stimulation, sensation play, control and power dynamics, and fantasy exploration.”

4. Myth: BDSM is expensive.

“There’s a misunderstanding that BDSM isn’t accessible because there is a big commitment involved in buying proper equipment,” Gigi Engle, sex coach, sexologist, and author of All The F*cking Mistakes: A Guide to Sex, Love, and Life, tells Elite Daily. “You can use anything around the house. A wooden spoon can be a paddle; a scarf can be handcuffs or a blindfold.” As Engle shares, while some may want to build a dungeon or shell out for a special whip, BDSM can just about communicating and exchanging with your partner(s). You can get creative together and have fun along the way.

5. Myth: BDSM is all leather and bondage.

While pop culture may depict BDSM as all leather and bondage, Dr. Christopher Ryan Jones, relationship and sex therapist, shares that the practice is actually incredibly versatile and multifaceted. “The biggest misconception is that BDSM is one particular thing,” Dr. Jones tells Elite Daily. “BDSM can be entirely different from one scenario to another.”

According to Dr. Jones, while some people are into more extreme BDSM activities, like suspension bondage or masochism, others may be more into moderate or light BDSM, like wearing blindfolds or roleplaying. Whatever the case, BDSM means something different to everyone who engaged with it. “A major misconception is that there is ‘one way’ to do something or that BDSM has to be this strict, regimented thing,” sex educator and mental health professional Lola Jean tells Elite Daily. “There isn’t one ‘right’ style or method or right or wrong. It’s about finding and tailoring what is right for you regardless of the role that you’re in.”

6. Myth: BDSM is only for dominatrices.

The truth is, there no one “type” of person that is into BDSM. While some people are more public about their kinks and interests, others may be into BDSM on the down-low. Whatever the case, Dr. Jones emphasizes that anyone can practice BDSM.

“There are people from all walks of life, various racial, cultural, educational, and socioeconomic backgrounds, who take part in BDSM sexual practices,” Dr. Jones says.

7. Myth: You’re either a Dom or a Sub.

Binaries are over, baby. While some people who partake in BDSM may be a full Dominant or a total submissive (or a full-on sadist or masochist), BDSM is not an “either-or” situation.

“Some couples switch positions,” Dr. Jones says. “Others are interested in BDSM, not because they are masochist, but because they enjoy giving pleasure, or depending on what the BDSM includes, they enjoy their partner’s uncontrollable passion.”

Jean agrees that stereotypes about what certain roles look like can prevent people from really understanding how BDSM functions. “These stereotypes are so limiting, and they prevent us from getting to know the other person as well as ourselves,” Jeans says. “BDSM can look completely different from person to person or pairing to pairing.”

8. Myth: BDSM is all about power.

Jean shares that while some people may engage in power-play or enjoy being dominant or submissive, BDSM isn’t always about the exchange of power. “There is a misconception of power and where that comes from, which leads to individuals wielding that power irresponsibly,” Jean says. “BDSM is not about power exchange for everyone. Fetishes and lighter play can fit within here too.”

While some couples may prefer to keep their experiences more intense, Jean says that others may enjoy being silly and having fun together. “BDSM is entirely individual and intricate and nuanced,” Jeans says.

9. Myth: BDSM should be kept private.

If you grew up in a more conservative area or you carry a lot of internalized shame around sex, Cassard shares that it can be easy to feel like BDSM is “wrong” or “dirty.” While you never need to do anything you’re not into, Cassard attests that being into BDSM doesn’t make you a “bad” or “shameful” person — it’s just another thing that you’re into. “[Practicing BDSM] is normal, and there have been studies showing that there are pretty high levels of mental wellness in the BDSM communities,” Cassard says. There’s no reason to keep BDSM a secret if you don’t want to, as there is nothing shameful about partaking in it.

10. Myth: BDSM is all about pain.

“You can have BDSM without any pain at all, and you can have it where you walk away with bruises all over your body. Each experience is carefully crafted and curated by those participating in the play,” Engle says. While some people are into BDSM with more physical contact, Engle shares that BDSM isn’t innately violent or about pain.

Additionally, Dune emphasizes the importance of aftercare and cuddling, as well as checking in afterward. “A crucial component of any BDSM practice is aftercare so that the partners can reset their nervous system and emotionally get on the same page,” Dune says. “BDSM is a structured way of playing with more intense sexual themes and sensation play, but the ritual of it is meant to safeguard against bad outcomes like trauma, abuse, or triggers.”

From ropes and paddles to feathers and ice cubes, BDSM can look different to everyone. Of course, no matter what you’re into, active consent is the most important part of any BDSM practice. And whether you’re suspended in the sky or laid out on the floor, consensual kinky sex means leaving no room for grey areas.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

December 5, 2019December 5, 2019

Is Same-Sex Behavior Hardwired in Animals from the Beginning?

Same-sex sexual behavior might have started out on an equal footing with different-sex sex.

Evolutionary scientists have been thinking about same-sex sexual behavior all wrong.

That’s the implication of a new study on same-sex behavior in animals. Instead of asking why animals engage in same-sex behavior (SSB), researchers should be asking, “Why not?” the authors said.

If they’re right, same-sex sex may not have evolved independently in different animals for adpative reasons. Instead, same-sex sex may have emerged very early in time and could persist simply because engaging in it doesn’t cost animals much, evolutionarily speaking.

“Usually, when evolutionary biologists see a trait that’s really widespread across evolutionary lineages, we at least consider the idea that the trait is ancestral and was preserved in all those lineages,” said Julia Monk, a doctoral candidate at Yale University, who co-authored the new research. “So why hadn’t people considered that hypothesis for SSB?”

In evolutionary science, same-sex sexual behavior has long been viewed as a conundrum: Why would animals spend time and energy doing something sexual that won’t pass along their genes to the next generation? And yet, same-sex sexual behavior has been observed in at least 1,500 species, ranging from lowly squash bugs to humans.

(To avoid anthropomorphizing, the researchers don’t use the terms “homosexual,” “heterosexual,” “gay” or “straight” to refer to animal behavior.)

“We can’t assign sexuality to animals — we’re trying our best to learn about them by observing their behaviors,” Monk told Live Science. “And those behaviors shouldn’t be mapped onto human cultural and societal contexts.”

The assumption that there must be an evolutionary reason for all this same-sex sex has led researchers to search for possible benefits to same-sex behavior. For example, in humans, researchers have found that having a gay son or brother seems to be associated with a woman having more offspring in total. Other studies have posited that same-sex sexual behavior is a side effect of other genes that have reproductive benefits.

In evolutionary biology, the ability of an animal to reproduce given its environment is called fitness. It’s entirely possible that in some species, same-sex sex could have fitness benefits, Monk and her colleagues wrote in their paper, published Nov. 18 in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. But these evolutionary benefits may not be required for same-sex sexual behavior to exist.

Imagine, instead, that the earliest sexually reproducing animals simply tried to mate with any and all members of their species — regardless of sex. This might have been a logical pathway for evolution, because all the bells and whistles that distinguish males from females are energetically costly to evolve. So any effort expended on mating with the same sex would be compensated for by not spending energy evolving and maintaining distinctive secondary sex characteristics, like differing colors, scents and behaviors. Those sex-distinguishing traits may have all come later in the evolutionary chain, the authors argued.

In this formulation, same-sex and different-sex sexual behavior would have started out on an equal footing, early in animal evolution. This could explain why same-sex sex is so common throughout the animal kingdom: It didn’t evolve multiple times independently, but was instead part of the fabric of animal evolution from the start.

Same-sex penguin couples keep adopting eggs, and the Berlin Zoo is celebrating

The new hypothesis undercuts old assumptions about same-sex behaviors, said Caitlin McDonough, a doctoral candidate at Syracuse University and a study co-author. Much of the research done on these sexual behaviors assumes that same-sex sex is costly for animals and that different-sex sex is not costly, she said.

“You really need to go through those assumptions and test the costs and benefits of both behaviors in a system,” McDonough said.

If same-sex behaviors go back to the roots of animal evolution, the fact that these behaviors are so common today makes sense, Monk said.

“If you assume a trait like SSB is a new development and has high costs, it’s going to be really hard to understand how it could become more and more common from those low initial frequencies,” she said. “It would have to have really large fitness benefits, or be otherwise impervious to natural selection, for that outcome to be probable.

“On the other hand, if you assume a trait is ancestral and was originally common, and it has low costs, it’s much more likely that it would remain widespread to this day, even if it doesn’t seem to contribute much to fitness.”

One piece of evidence supporting this hypothesis is that some echinoderms, including sea stars and sea urchins, engage in same-sex sexual behavior. Echinoderms evolved early in the history of life, likely in the Precambrian period more than 541 million years ago.

But other evidence is slim, largely because scientists haven’t systematically studied same-sex sexual behavior in animals. Most observations have been accidental, and biologists have often viewed sex between two animals of the same sex as irrelevant or improper to note, Monk said. Sometimes, researchers automatically assume that same-sex behavior isn’t really about sex but instead is about dominance or bonding. And often, if two animals are observed having sex, they’re assumed to be male and female without any confirmatory evidence, McDonough said.

“The science that we do is really informed and influenced by cultural biases,” she said.

Thinking of same-sex sexual behavior as a standard part of the animal repertoire would change how researchers approach the study of the evolution of these behaviors. The next step, Monk said, would be to gather more data on the prevalence of same-sex behavior in animals. Then, researchers could compare species from across the tree of life to determine if all linages show same-sex behavior. If so, it would strengthen the argument that same-sex sexuality was part of life for the ancestors of all of today’s sexually reproducing animals.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

October 2, 2019October 2, 2019

Young People with Learning Disabilities Denied Sex Education Due to Societal Stigma

by Ellen Hoggard

Young people with learning disabilities are being denied sex-positive relationships and sex education due to societal stigma, with 36% of professionals saying that sex education is not prioritised in their school

This Sexual Health Week, young people’s sexual health and wellbeing charity, Brook, is working with the learning disability charity, Mencap, to shout louder about the needs of young people with disabilities and support professionals delivering relationships and sex education (RSE).

The charity surveyed the professionals delivering RSE to young people with disabilities. Of those surveyed, 80% said they struggled to find accessible resources that meet the needs of young people with learning disabilities. A further 80% said it is difficult to find images that reflect the sexual experiences of young people with learning disabilities.

Despite RSE becoming mandatory in 2020, inclusivity remains a taboo subject. 54% of those delivering RSE said they cannot access training to help with sex education, while 36% say that sex education is not a priority in their school.

Richard Lawrence, Project Support Assistant and Co-Chair of the Sexuality and Relationship Steering Group at Mencap, said: “Some people are quick to judge people with a learning disability, like me, when it comes to sex and relationships. People with a learning disability have a right to choose if they would like to be in a relationship, have sex or get married.

“People have judged me for wanting to be in a relationship and have told me that because I have a learning disability, I don’t understand what a healthy relationship, consent or safe sex is.”

Helen Marshall, Chief Executive at Brook, said: “The reality is that lots of sexual health messages received by young people who have a learning disability are negative and focus primarily on risks and inappropriate behaviours.

“These are important aspects, but there needs to be a balance. If RSE is accessible, positive and inclusive, it can empower young people to become more independent, explore and develop healthy relationships and help to protect against abuse.”

Brook is using Sexual Health Week 2019 as an opportunity to start important conversations about sex and disability, challenging misconceptions and providing support to professionals delivering RSE.

The charity have created a hub of free, downloadable resources on a range of topics including; masturbation, same-sex relationships and pornography. Each topic is supported with further resources for young people to take away and continue reinforcing their learning.

Sex, relationships and disability

People with learning disabilities face multiple barriers when developing intimate or sexual relationships – including a lack of adequate RSE. Without this education, young people are being denied the skills and knowledge they need to not only have healthy, fulfilling relationships, but to understand and explore their own sexuality.

Teachers and those delivering RSE also face barriers when supporting young people with disabilities. As revealed in a previous survey by the Sex Education Forum, only 29% said they had received training in sex education, and a staggering 99% wanted practical advice on meeting the needs of pupils with special educational needs and disability (SEND).

“Back when I was in school, I only got taught the basics, like here is a man and here is a woman. I didn’t learn anything about consent, safe sex or LGBT,” said Lawrence. “It’s a lot harder for people with a learning disability to find out about sex and relationships because accessible information is hidden away.

“That’s why Mencap is proud to be collaborating with Brook to make a positive difference to the next generation of people with a learning disability.”

If you have a learning disability, or know someone who does, Mencap offers information and support about sexuality and relationships. Enhance The UK is a charity run by disabled people, working to change the way people view disability and for disabled people to be active and equal members of society.

Alongside their #UndressingDisability campaign, they have produced a number of resources and Q&As to ensure disabled people have access to the same support as their peers.

Brook and Mencap want to use this Sexual Health Week and beyond to normalise the conversations around sex and disability, and support RSE professionals to better equip the young people they work with.

Sex and disability needs to be talked about more. For support, information and resources, visit Brook, Mencap and Enhance the UK.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

September 19, 2019September 18, 2019

What Can Brain Scans Tell Us About Sex?

By Kim Tingley

Men have a far greater appetite for sex and are more attracted to pornography than women are. This is the timeworn stereotype that science has long reinforced. Alfred Kinsey, America’s first prominent sexologist, published in the late 1940s and early 1950s his survey results confirming that men are aroused more easily and often by sexual imagery than women. It made sense, evolutionary psychologists theorized, that women’s erotic pleasure might be tempered by the potential burdens of pregnancy, birth and child rearing — that they would require a deeper emotional connection with a partner to feel turned on than men, whose primal urge is simply procreation. Modern statistics showing that men are still the dominant consumers of online porn seem to support this thinking, as does the fact that men are more prone to hypersexuality, whereas a lack of desire and anorgasmia are more prevalent in women. So it was somewhat surprising when a paper in the prestigious journal P.N.A.S. reported in July that what happens in the brains of female study subjects when they look at sexual imagery is pretty much the same as what happens in the brains of their male counterparts.

The researchers, led by Hamid Noori at the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics in Germany, weren’t initially interested in exploring sexual behavior. They were trying to find ways to standardize experiments that use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fM.R.I.) to observe how the brain responds to visual stimuli. In order to do that, they needed to compare past studies that used similar methods but returned diverse results. They happened to choose studies in which male and female volunteers looked at sexual imagery, both because doing so tends to generate strong signals in the brain, which would make findings easier to analyze, and because this sort of research has long produced “inconsistent and even contradictory” results, as they note in their paper. Identifying the reasons for such discrepancies might help researchers design better experiments.

A search turned up 61 studies that met Noori’s criteria for inclusion: Healthy adult men and women of different sexual orientations (including bisexual and transgender subjects) who had rated erotic images in terms of how arousing they were. Those participants had then been put in an fM.R.I. scanner — which detects changes in blood flow associated with neuronal activity — and been shown the most arousing images as well as neutral, nonsexualized ones. What Noori’s team found was that image type — whether it was a picture or a video — was the strongest predictor of differences in which parts of the brain became engaged. Unexpectedly, the weakest predictor was the subjects’ biological sex. In other words, when men and women viewed pornographic imagery, the way their brains responded, in the aggregate, was largely the same.

This latter, more provocative finding yielded the paper’s title, “Neural Substrates of Sexual Arousal Are Not Sex Dependent.” Headlines followed, along with controversy in the cognitive neurosciences. Researchers whose work has shown differences between men’s and women’s brains viewing sexual stimuli objected to such generalization. But the purpose of statistically analyzing many studies together, a process called meta-analysis, is precisely to be more conclusive: The goal is to reveal global patterns that smaller studies can’t.

The science of sex is inherently paradoxical. For centuries, social stigma, prejudice and misogyny have condemned as aberrant sexual pleasures we now know are healthy. Yet despite the growing realization of how much outside views shape even our most private behavior, we can still experience the mechanics of our own desire — never mind that of others — as a fundamental mystery. Noori’s team is trying to shed light on a big part of that lingering mystery: If men’s and women’s brains respond similarly to sexual stimuli, what accounts for the apparent differences in how they approach sexual practices?

Answering that question means connecting the dots from what triggers the firing of specific neurons to how those firings give rise to the myriad thoughts and feelings we have about sex to the actions we take in response to them. Knowing what all this should look like neurologically could give clinicians more ways to treat the 43 percent of women and 31 percent of men who, according to the Cleveland Clinic, report problems in their experience of sex. “Issues of sexual behavior and sexuality are highly associated with mental health, with life satisfaction, even with physiological health,” says Justin Garcia, director of the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University. That makes it crucial to find out what “the constituent parts” of sex are.

In fact, it is still extremely difficult to interpret what activity in a given region of the brain really means. When viewing erotica, women often (and far more often than men) experience a disconnect between their physiological arousal — measured by genital temperature, wetness and swelling — and what they describe feeling. This could mean that they do not realize or do not want to divulge that an image is turning them on, or that they believe an image is or should be arousing when it isn’t, physiologically. That dissonance raises a host of complications. To what extent do cultural attitudes toward pornography — historically, women have been shamed for consuming it — influence both our subconscious and conscious responses to sexual images? Because neuroimaging has been available for only the past 30 years — Noori analyzed studies from 2001 and later — there’s no way to compare similar scans from the ’50s, say, and see how shifting norms might have changed the results.

Complicating things further is the multifunctionality of brain networks. In 2017, Janniko Georgiadis and Gerben Ruesink, at the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands, published a review that showed seemingly distinct patterns of brain activity for wanting sex, liking (or having) sex and the opposite, inhibiting sex. The broadness of these categories shows how opaque those concepts are. Melissa Farmer, a research assistant professor in the department of physiology at Northwestern University, points out that “desire might be anything from when you see someone up until you act on that and approach them. That’s a lot of steps.” Neuroimaging has the potential to delineate those steps more precisely and objectively than self-reporting possibly could.

But even “objective” brain activation can be ambiguous. In a previous study, Georgiadis found that in women, the same areas that tend to become active when viewing sexual imagery that neuroscientists have deemed pleasing also became active in response to photos of vomiting or feces. What scientists tend to regard as “arousal” on brain scans could also be its opposite, or perhaps some combination of each. Likewise, it’s conceivable that the “sameness” Noori found in male and female brain activity indicates that characteristics we’ve defined as opposites actually overlap. In 2015, researchers led by Daphna Joel at Tel Aviv University published an article that analyzed more than 1,400 M.R.I.s of male and female brains and concluded that in most brains, certain regions might be more “male” while others are more “female,” creating a unique gender “mosaic” that defies either-or classification.

Sexual behavior, in turn, is inextricable from other behaviors. Indeed, as Georgiadis and Ruesink point out, the same “sometimes quite generic” brain activity associated with erotic stimuli is also part of how we process “reward, memory, cognition, self-referential thinking and social behavior.” We use the same neural processes to determine if a sexual experience is valuable and worth repeating as we do for food and drugs. A more complete mapping of how men and women respond neurologically to pornography, and how that affects their behavior, might thus offer a model for explaining happiness or addiction.

“In the brain, sex is everywhere,” Georgiadis says, and recognizing its interactions with other mental processes might also argue for a different, less binary definition of it, both as a behavior and as a biological classification. As neuroimaging enables a more granular view of brain networks, we may find that new labels are needed. That could even argue for dispensing with categories like “desire” and “arousal” or “male” and “female” in favor of descriptors that better capture how those concepts intermingle and connect with others.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

September 16, 2019September 15, 2019

Sexual Bereavement

A small special gift for those who grieve

Sex After Grief: Navigating Your Sexuality After Losing Your Beloved -By Joan Price

By Rae Padilla Francoeur

The mind and body aren’t always in agreement. Someone grieving the death of a beloved partner can be gobsmacked by sexual arousal. Such unexpected, often unwanted feelings in the peak of grief trigger shock and shame, further traumatizing the grief-stricken.

Humans are complicated creatures, as author and expert on senior sexuality Joan Price so aptly demonstrates in her newest book, “Sex After Grief.”

“It’s time to talk out loud about sex and grieving,” she writes. “There are many books about grief after loss of a beloved, but they almost never talk about sex.”

Price consults experts in the field of grief as well as those grieving the loss of partners for materials for this book. She also draws from her research as well as her Grief Journal and her Memory Journal that she kept after losing her husband, the love of her life found later in life. She delivers a small, special gift to those attempting to reconcile warring emotional and physical responses during bereavement. What may seem like chaos is natural and normal, she reassures those in the throes of great emotional tumult.

Price, 75, lost her husband Robert Rice in 2008 and spent several years not just grieving but learning about loss and grief. She had four grief counselors throughout her journey from someone rocked by devastating loss to a generous and compassionate sage.

A knowledge of grief along with her expertise in the field of senior sexuality — she has written four other books on senior sexuality and is a sought-after speaker internationally — prompted Price to more deeply investigate the topic of sexuality and grief. Loss of an intimate partner can happen at any age. Grief isn’t the exclusive realm of the elders, sadly, and “Sex After Grief” will resonate with many seeking guidance and support after loss such as divorce, rejection or other circumstances.

The many voices in this book are smart, well-spoken and insightful. Grief seems to open an exquisite, poignant dimension where the bereaved exist in a state of extremes. Emotions, thoughts and experiences are charged and precious. Those transitioning from this stage are changed, says Price. And while they are vulnerable, apprehensive and unsure, they are also wiser and courageous.

Price’s “grief journey” lasted 10 years but during that time, she allowed herself many helpful experiences including forays into the realm of friends with benefits, erotic massage and online dating. She made sure, at every juncture, that she paid attention and honored her inclinations. Her decision to keep two journals, one she filled with good memories of her husband and one about her grief, gave her some of the material she needed to structure and write this book.

White-knuckle grief, “skin hunger,” guilt, disloyalty, loneliness and isolation, and even loving memories clog the path forward. Price writes of “halting steps” toward a place where grief exists but doesn’t always sear. Every loss is unique, every person is unique and, therefore, every journey is unique. Price’s chapters about myths, grief counselors, dating and “pilot light lovers” (those who ignite dormant passions) are all especially meaningful in that they explore experiences, sexual orientation and concerns.

Price speaks candidly about sexuality and the ways sexuality changes with age. The primary audience for this book, people over 50 (perhaps), will not be surprised by what they read. Older people know sexuality doesn’t necessarily diminish with the advent of age and age-related impairments. Older people happily accommodate. Senior sexuality still seems like something of a secret that Price is trying to bring out in the open. Wouldn’t it be nice for Millennials to know, for example, that their sexuality isn’t subject to obsolescence? People of all ages keep at it, often until a final severe illness brings a close to that part of normal and natural functioning. One of the key attributes of this book is an absence of hedging and judgment. Price has a way with candor. Sexuality is. And it’s there, even in dying and death.

Price, too, has found delight and pleasure in her sexuality once again. They exist in concert with a grief that has moderated with time and hard work.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

September 13, 2019September 13, 2019

Sexist attitudes towards sex are cheating women of orgasms – and worse

The myth that women just ‘go along’ with sex denies their right to pleasure and makes it harder to convict men who rape

By Rebecca Hitchen

We may like to think we’re quite sexually free and equal these days, but an End Violence Against Women Coalition/YouGov survey of nearly 4,000 adults finds that two-fifths of people think men want sex more than women do. And between a third of and half of us think it is more likely that in heterosexual couples men will initiate and orgasm during sex, and decide when sex is finished, than women. In contrast, women are believed to be much more likely to refuse sex and to “go along with sex to keep their partner happy”.

This shows the persistence of the idea that sex is more “for” men than it is for women. The female climax is talked about in terms of being elusive, and yet the fact that this “orgasm gap” exists solely in heterosexual sex speaks to a lack of understanding, effort and mutuality, because lesbians are not having this problem. It’s a product of setting up the male orgasm, usually achieved through penile penetration, as the centrepiece of sex.

It is a sad state of affairs that there is a lower expectation that women will experience pleasure or climax during sex, and that this is accepted as to be expected, or “normal”. It’s self-perpetuating, because if women believe that “going along” with sex is a common female experience, they may be less likely to articulate and explore their needs and wants in early sexual relationships or when older. They may also feel pressure not to express discomfort or pain. And when sex is only one part of a long-term relationship, alongside persistent inequality around work, chores, caring and other people’s gendered expectations, plain talking and yet another plea for fairness might be just one battle too many.

Sexual inequality matters enormously, in and of itself, because women should be able to expect and enjoy sexual relationships that are based on mutual pleasure and equality. This shouldn’t need contesting or sound radical any more but apparently it does.

But there’s even more than this at stake. The sexist ideas about sex that we identified can also be a basis for some men developing a sense of greater entitlement to sex, as well as the excusing or minimising of men pestering or pushing women for sex. If you combine these ideas that men want and need sex more, and that women are just less motivated and more likely to refuse, you end up with a toxic status for women as the “gatekeepers” of sex, where it is a woman’s role to manage sexual interactions and access to her body.

If women are “gatekeepers” of whether sex takes place, then it is women who carry all the responsibility for every single sexual interaction they have. And this means that women are also seen as responsible if their boundaries are broken and they experience sexual violence. And it will be principally her who is investigated to ascertain whether a rape took place if she alleges it. The man’s behaviour apparently does not need close examination. It is assumed he will have been up for and will have pushed for sex – only 1% of people think men ever refuse sex, and 2% think men “go along with” sex. This can then lead to the rhetoric of sexual violence being set up as an unfortunate failure to properly gatekeep, a regret, just a big misunderstanding. These are powerful myths that have malign consequences. However, if we thought about sex differently, based on equality, these would be less likely.

This entrenched sexism about sex matters when we consider what is going wrong in a society that is utterly failing to deter, reduce and prevent rape. These ideas are part of why reported rape prosecutions fail, as police and prosecutors decide they can’t build a case if they think a jury will see a woman who “failed to gatekeep” before they see a man who knew he was crossing the line.

This is why we are calling for more, accelerated and frank conversations about actual sexual practice. We need men to recognise their responsibility and accept accountability both for sexism and for good sex. We need to put an end to the notion that sex is something done “to” women, and to reach a place where enthusiastic, mutual consent, equality and pleasure in sexual relationships is the norm.

Sex will be so much better when it’s more equal.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

September 12, 2019

Sex Drug for Women Stirs Up Controversy in Medical Community

Just don’t call the new medication for women’s low desire for sex ‘female Viagra.’

Vyleesi acts on neurochemicals in a woman’s brain to help her feel desire.

By Beth Levine

There is some good news out about how women’s sexuality, long overlooked in the medical community, is treated now. Amid much hype and interest, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Vyleesi (bremelanotide), an injection designed to improve female sexual interest arousal disorder (FSIAD) — also known as hypoactive sexual desire disorder — in premenopausal women, in June 2019.

Is Sexual Interest Arousal Disorder the Same as Sexual Desire Disorder?

Formerly called hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), the term for a lack of desire for sexual activity was recently updated in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5). The disorder is when women are distressed by the fact that they have little to no desire for sexual acts and the lack isn’t due to medication, disease, relationship problems, or psychological issues. The low desire is chronic (six months or longer), present at all times (not just during certain situations), and is associated with personal distress. (The distress must be the woman’s, and not the partner’s. There is nothing wrong with a woman with low desire who isn’t upset with the status. There is a difference between dysfunction and disinterest.)

New Drug Helps Validate Women’s Sexual Experiences

“The whole concept of minimizing women’s sexual health issues is important. In the past, if women had sexual problems, they were just told they were hysterical. Now their issues are coming to the forefront, and at least the release of Vyleesi may indicate that women’s sexual health is becoming more of a priority. It’s empowerment for women that they now have choices and options,” says Michael Krychman, MD, executive director of the Southern California Center for Sexual Health in Newport Beach.

Leah Millheiser, MD, director of the female sexual medicine program at Stanford Health Care in California, adds, “It is a coup for women that the FDA is recognizing chronically low libido as an important health issue.”

New Libido Drug Is Not a Cure for All Sexual Problems

There has been some controversy, however, over the release of Vyleesi, in that it may promise more than it can deliver. First, to be clear, the injections are not a silver bullet. Women’s sexuality is a complex interplay of medical, psychological, situational, and relationship status.

“Female sexual health and wellness are multifactorial. Vyleesi provides one facet to help but it’s important to appropriately assess the woman first. If the woman has complaints, she needs to be offered an intervention: Not just medical, but sometimes also psychological input and counseling are also very appropriate. In my clinical experience, women can benefit from medical intervention and some sort of counseling as well,” says Dr. Krychman.

You May Still Need Sex Counseling to Get Back on Track

Reality check: You will still have to work on your relationship. Women and their partners have to remember that if they have had long-term concerns with desire, they may need help via sex therapy on getting back to intimacy. “It’s challenging to go from 0 to 10. You have to relearn sexual trust and intimacy. Simply giving yourself a shot is not necessarily going to be a panacea. Vyleesi improves desire, but don’t expect to feel like you’re in your sexual prime again. It’s a subtle improvement, but that might be enough to improve intimacy and sexual self-esteem,” says Dr. Millheiser.

Vyleesi Is Not Appropriate for Women With Low Libido Who Do Not Have Arousal Disorder

Vyleesi is only for premenopausal women with female sexual interest arousal disorder. For women who have low sexual desire — and would like to have more — their first stop should be to a clinician who can assess where the issue is. If sexual dysfunction is ruled out, making behavioral changes is more effective than medication. “As you age, spontaneous sex is harder to come by. Making time, relationship and sex counseling, finding private time, getting into a new environment, sex toys, and working on body image can all help. Women may not start out with spontaneous desire, but can develop responsive desire in the act,” says Millheiser, who also recommends “pregaming.” Self-stimulate, or read or watch something arousing, so you can develop responsive desire prior to engaging with your partner.

Not Female Viagra: Vyleesi Does Not Work the Way Viagra Does

There is also a prevalent misconception that Vyleesi, the second medication of its kind to come to market following the release of Addyi (flibanserin), is a female Viagra (sildenafil), referring to the male medication for erectile dysfunction. Vyleesi works on desire, while Viagra works on arousal. “Clinicians really want to move away from comparing women’s drugs with men’s. Viagra increases blood flow to the penis but men have to have desire in order for it to work. Vyleesi alters neurochemicals in the brain so women can feel desire,” says Millheiser.

Has the Public Been Provided Enough Information About the Drug?

The National Women’s Health Network, a consumer activist group, says that the FDA rushed Vyleesi to market too soon. In a statement about the approval, Cynthia Pearson, executive director, said, “The National Women’s Health Network is disappointed in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) decision to approve the drug bremelanotide (brand name: Vyleesi) and urges women to avoid using the drug until more is known about its safety and effectiveness. Women simply do not have enough information to make an informed decision about whether the drug is safe and effective. The FDA did not call on their advisers to review the drug publicly, and the sponsor has not yet published full clinical trial results. The limited data that has been published leaves many important questions unanswered. For example, it appears that hundreds of women enrolled in the pivotal trials were not included in the company’s presentation of the results. What happened to those women?”

The organization also points out the potential side effects: severe nausea, and skin and gum darkening, which did not go away after stopping treatment in about one-half of cases.

There Are Concerns About Side Effects, Safety, and Effectiveness

“We respect the ability of women to make good decisions if they have good information. We are not saying side effects are a reason why women shouldn’t use it; the issue is how much do we know? Can you get enough information to make an informed decision? A very determined person could get more info by reading the detailed label on the FDA website, but it still feels like the FDA didn’t do women good service here by the rush,” says Pearson, adding, “I’ll be surprised if it takes a very big place in the arsenal. It is not very effective and makes a lot of women very uncomfortable. My prediction is it is going to be something of a flop.”

Krychman disagrees with this assessment: “The product has been extensively studied. I think it’s appropriate for the FDA to make its own judgment. They evaluated and assessed the clinical program, which was very robust, and they have a competent group of advisors.”

Millheiser concurs, “The drug company behind Vyleesi has provided sufficient data on safety and efficacy. If there hadn’t been, the FDA would not have approved it.”

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

August 29, 2019August 29, 2019

Not tonight!

Why men are not always in the mood for sex

By Marjorie Brennan

A leading researcher challenges the belief that all men have higher sex drives than women. Many feel under pressure to initiate intimacy and would prefer greater equality in bed.

It is one of the most famous phrases in the English language but it is doubtful that Napoleon ever uttered the words “Not tonight, Josephine”.

However, it remains a humorous standby precisely because of its ‘nudge-nudge, wink-wink’ unlikelihood. What man ever turned down sex when offered up to him on a plate?

However, it could be that this isn’t as unlikely a scenario as we think, according to Canadian relationship therapist Sarah Hunter Murray, who has carried out extensive research on the subject of male sexual desire. She has delved beneath the stereotype of the man who is always ready for sex, finding that many men don’t always feel ‘up for it’ and are uncertain and fearful about how to raise the issue with their partners. As a result, relationships and intimacy are at risk.

In her book Not Always in the Mood, Hunter Murray aims to debunk the myths that surround men’s sexual desire. She says that we have been culturally conditioned, through songs, films, television and advertising, to view men as having an insatiable sexual appetite.

“As a sex researcher, I started studying women’s sexual desires, which were complex and nuanced, with so many factors impacting whether women were in the mood or not. I started to notice there was a counterpoint. In the research, there was this implication that men’s desire was always high or they were always in the mood, and would never turn down sex,” she says.

Over the course of 10 years, Hunter Murray interviewed 237 men of all ages and backgrounds in an attempt to discover whether this was really the case.

“I started by interviewing men without knowing what I’d find… it wasn’t long before they showed they wanted to discuss a more complex narrative than the one we had heard.”

While in initial interviews, the subjects would suggest they had higher sex drives than their partners, when Hunter Murray probed deeper, a different story began to emerge.

“With the in-depth interviews, we would talk for an hour, and they started opening up. I’d ask ‘is there ever a time you’d say no?’ and they’d say ‘if I was sick, or tired’, and I felt the more space men had to express their experiences the more I’d hear stories like ‘my wife and I aren’t really on the same page, we’re emotionally disconnected, I’m not always so turned on, sometimes my wife will suggest having sex before we’ve had a chance to talk and I feel pressured to say yes’.

It struck me that those interviews would begin with men following stereotypical descriptions of their desire — and how we rely on those first minutes and those stereotypes.

Hunter Murray’s book is an attempt to change the conversation around sexual desire, from a male and female perspective.

“What I mostly see is that women either presume men’s desire should be high, so that if their partner has lower desire than them — which is quite common — they take it personally, that he’s not attracted to her or there’s an issue with the relationship. They can also feel frustrated if their male partner does have a high level of sexual desire but they feel ‘he’s just a horndog’ and it has nothing to do with attraction, that he just wants to experience the physical pleasure.

“But I also hear from men in my research that sex is a really intimate way for them to connect and when they initiate sex they can feel quite vulnerable. In addition to physical pleasure, they want some emotional connection.”

Sexual politics has become a hot-button topic, with the advent of the #MeToo movement, and an increasing awareness of sexual harassment and violence towards women. The rise of social media has also seen an exponential rise in the availability of often violent porn, as well as the disturbing advent of the ‘incel’ — men who see themselves as ‘involuntarily celibate’, who express their desire in online chatrooms to punish women for their rejection. How does Hunter Murray see such issues as affecting the portrayal of male sexual desire?

“Women have experienced a lot of harm from men, whether through power or sexuality. But I am hearing a lot of men saying ‘that’s not my experience, that’s not how I want to be’. The men I interviewed were all in [heterosexual] relationships, while the incel is all about not having a girlfriend, so that’s a different subset of men.

“With a lot of the men I spoke to, they were aware of the idea of what men should be, this more traditionally masculine approach to sexuality — being in control, providing pleasure, not being the one who’s desirable or receiving sexual advances, being in the dominant position but what I’m hearing from men is that they question how many people that really fits.

“I’ve spoken to men who say ‘how can I refuse sex, isn’t that going to upset my partner?’ or ‘am I a real man if I don’t do this?’. It’s important to put it out there that the idea of what masculinity means can change over time and we can question what fits, what’s healthy and what no longer fits.

“A lot of the men I spoke to said they enjoyed their female partners initiating sex, when she expressed her desire and her attraction to him, when she flirted, when she touched him sexually or romantically. They said they enjoyed this egalitarian approach to sex rather than the pressure being on them to be the initiator.”

Hunter Murray’s research also found that while on a case-by-case basis, there may be men with higher sex drive than women, men are not statistically likelier to be the partner with a higher sex drive. She stresses the importance of men and women challenging sexual stereotypes and norms.

“Women have been brought up in a culture training them to be demure, or gatekeepers, but a lot of women have higher sex drives which they quash because their male partners haven’t as much of an interest — they feel they shouldn’t step into a dominant sexual role.”

While stereotypical attitudes may not reflect the real picture when it comes to sexual desire, Hunter Murray says that lifestyle factors can also affect men’s sex drive in a way that is not acknowledged.

“We’re aware of how motherhood, child-rearing and running a household can take a toll on a woman’s sexual desire. But we also need to take into account the changing role of the father in society,” says Hunter Murray. “In the past, the dad went to work and wasn’t as involved with his children as much, whereas now we see a lot more involvement for the most part and there are more stay-at-home dads. These are normal stresses and distractions but they can have an impact on men the same as women. Men also talk about wanting to support their family, and that’s also a pressure.”

Hunter Murray believes the link between men’s greater role in family life and their decreasing interest in sex is not reflected in research because much of it is based on university [student] samples.

Much of her research, she says, is reflected in her clinical practice as a relationship therapist, where she sees many men who, as they get older, panic that they are suffering dysfunction when in reality, what they are experiencing is normal.

“Men come in, in their midlife, concerned their sex drives are not as high. They have financial responsibilities, they’re taking care of kids, they’re not getting enough sleep, they have ageing parents. It’s about normalising such experiences — it makes sense that sex drive wouldn’t be as strong. But a man may jump to erectile dysfunction just because he’s not in the mood quite as often. That’s what made me want to write the book — it resonated not just in a research context but because quite a lot of men and women are struggling with these issues in their relationships.”

Ultimately, it is about connection and communication with our partners, says Hunter Murray.

“It takes our strongest version of ourselves to say ‘I want us to connect, I want to be close to you, I want sex to feel good’ — that’s a very vulnerable thing to do — ‘I care about you and am putting myself out there, do you care about me too?’.”

Men want to be desired

Hunter Murray found that in relation to levels of desire, about one-third of the time men have higher sex drives, one-third of the time women have higher sex drives, and the rest of the time it’s about even.

She also found that many men wanted to feel desired by their partners, to receive compliments, to be told they were sexy. “The more that happened the more validated they felt, and it wasn’t just sexual, they felt love and affection.”

Men in their late 30s and early 40s were the ones who identified being most aware of (and sometimes the most distressed about) their desire not being what it used to be.

Desire naturally changes and decreases over the course of a relationship. Companionate love, where our partner feels more like a companion and not our sexual partner, is normal and healthy.

One New Zealand study researching the female partners of men who took Viagra, found the women actually preferred the fact that their partners had softer erections as they aged, as they found Viagra-induced ‘rock-hard’ erections painful.

Murray Hunter’s research found that being sick was the main reason for men saying no to sex, with being tired in second place.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

August 28, 2019August 28, 2019

The Vagina Bible

This feminist gynecologist wants you to know your body and fight the patriarchy

By Julia Belluz

With her new book, Jen Gunter aims to fight the myths that plague women.

Before the advent of C-sections, every human passed through one. But not everybody knows where it is.

The vagina.

Surveys have repeatedly shown that there’s a startling level of ignorance about female anatomy. Dr. Jen Gunter, an OB-GYN in the San Francisco Bay Area, is on a quest to change that.

On August 27, she’ll publish The Vagina Bible, an encyclopedic guide to vagina-related topics born of what Gunter is calling a “vagenda” to empower people with facts about their own bodies

The book builds on her eponymous blog, which became a viral sensation when she took on jade eggs for the vagina sold on Gwyneth Paltrow’s lifestyle website, Goop. The eggs were being marketed as devices “queens and concubines used … to stay in shape for emperors.” In an open letter to Paltrow, Gunter debunked the website’s claims and noted how sexist they were: “Nothing,” she wrote, “says female empowerment more than the only reason to do this is for your man.

Now officially Paltrow’s nemesis — the actress has subtweeted Gunter with Goop’s response to the doctor’s criticisms — Gunter says, “The basic tenet that I go by is that you can’t be an empowered patient with inaccurate information. It’s just not possible.”

Over the years, in Gunter’s blog posts and, more recently, columns in the New York Times, she’s set the record straight on myriad vagina-adjacent topics: vaginal steaming, abortion at or after 24 weeks, misinformation about the HPV vaccine, and best practices for pubic hair care.

There is so much misinformation, so if what you have been told has been riddled with half-truths and sometimes even lies, it is hard to know the facts. Western medicine has been linked with the patriarchy since the beginning. If you can’t dissect female cadavers, how can you know the anatomy?

Also, we speak with euphemisms to appease societal and religious mores. If you don’t use the words for female anatomy and normal function, then that imparts shame and can also lead to confusion.

Now we also have the “natural” fallacy gaining traction. Multiple influencers and even celebrities and some doctors advance the false notion that “your body knows” and “nature is best.” And if women look up vaginal garlic [yes, this is a thing] on a naturopath’s website and see it in Our Bodies, Ourselves, of course they will think it is a valid therapy when it is not.

Julia Belluz

Do you think the “sex recession” is real?

Jen Gunter

Gardasil 9, which is the one that protects against nine strains of HPV — seven high-risk and the two that cause genital warts — is now approved from ages 9 to 45. If you’re going to vaccinate people, you want to catch the people that you’re more likely to help. The younger you are, the less likely you are to have had HPV. The younger you can get people, the more likely you can protect them from all nine strains. As we age and have sexual partners, we’re more likely to be exposed to different strains of HPV. But the chance that you’re going to be exposed to all of them is low.

So I figured that since I’m dating again, and I personally have never had a positive HPV test, and I have no history of having had an abnormal Pap smear or HPV, I thought, well, I’m in a pretty good category then. The chance that I’ve had all nine strains of HPV is probably low. So I just thought, why not get the shot to protect myself from any of the additional strains?

Julia Belluz

Are there other things that you wish more women did to keep their vaginas happy and healthy — and their vulvas and vestibules too?

Jen Gunter

Well, I wish HPV shots for all my friends. I wish that nobody smoked. That’s a very bad thing. People think about lung cancer and smoking. People don’t think about cardiovascular disease from smoking. It’s also very deleterious for the good bacteria in your vagina. And people who smoke have a higher risk of having HPV-related diseases like cervical cancer, so it’s a co-factor in HPV becoming more aggressive. Not smoking, that would be a wonderful thing.

Condoms. You know, there is a little bit of a drop in condom use, and that is probably due to the increasing use of the IUD. That doesn’t mean that people are having risky sex — they’re actually not. But if you’re switching from a method of barrier protection to a method of non-barrier protection, then you’ll have an increased risk of exposure.

Julia Belluz

Great advice.

Jen Gunter

I wish everybody could talk about the genital tract in the same way we talk about the elbow or the foot. It’s just a body part.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

August 12, 2019August 12, 2019

When Starting To Talk To Your Kids About Sex, Younger Is Better

By Kelly Gonsalves

There’s a common misconception that talking to kids about sex at a younger age will encourage them to start having sex earlier in life. But new research finds there’s little truth behind this worry and suggests that when it comes to teaching your kids about sex, the younger, the better.

In a new study published in the JAMA Pediatrics journal, researchers sought to understand how parental involvement in kids’ sex ed affected actual sexual health outcomes. In other words, does having parents who talk to them about sex lead to kids making better decisions about their sex lives?

To answer this question, the researchers examined 31 past studies on sex education programs that substantially involve parents in teaching kids about sex—not a perfect barometer for measuring how much parents teach their kids about sex at home in general but at least a good way to gauge its effects. In total, the meta-analysis involved data on over 12,000 kids between ages 9 and 18 whose parents participated in their sex education.

Learning about sex doesn’t make kids start having sex earlier.

First of all, the results showed parents should be actively engaged in teaching their kids about sex: Kids with more parental involvement were more likely to use condoms during sex, were more open with their parents about their sexual experiences, and had higher sexual self-efficacy, which is essentially the ability to advocate for your needs in bed. And the more hours their parents spent participating in their kids’ sex education, the stronger these effects were.

But the most interesting findings dealt with age: The study found parents helping to educate their kids about sex had no effect on how old their kids were when they started having sex.

“[These initiatives] were not associated with earlier initiation of sexual activity,” the researchers explain. “This should be reassuring for parents who are concerned that talking about sex with their children may somehow result in their children initiating sex. This meta-analysis shows that across the dozens of interventions for parents, youth were no more or less likely to initiate sex at the conclusion of the interventions.”

Talking to kids about sex earlier is good for their health—and their confidence.

The results also showed the positive effects of these parental interventions were even stronger when they happened at a younger age. When parents talked to their kids about sex earlier on (specifically between ages 9 and 14), those kids were even more likely to practice safe sex later on, more willing to communicate with their parents about their experiences, and had an even higher increase in sexual self-efficacy than kids whose parents waited until they were older to start their sex education.

Rather than encouraging kids to start having sex earlier, these conversations actually just create an environment where kids have more knowledge to make more informed decisions about sex later in life. Instead of stumbling into sexual situations in their teens still without having had any formal conversations about sexual health or communication, kids have that basic information with them for whenever their sexual lives begin.

“Thirty years of public health research has shown that young people are not more likely to have sex earlier because they learn about sex,” says Lucinda Holt, M.S., a sex educator and director of communications and development at Answer, a national sex-ed organization based at Rutgers University, in an interview with mindbodygreen. “When you are talking with your child about these topics, you are providing the information they need and helping them prepare to make healthy decisions as they get older.”

She adds that another key benefit of starting these sex talks early is taking away the shame around sexuality so that young people feel comfortable asking their parents and guardians questions instead of feeling like they’ll get in trouble for bringing it up.

“It’s better that they have you as a resource than hearsay from their friends or from sexually explicit content online,” she says.

The myth of “sexualizing our children.”

Some people worry that just knowing about the existence of sex will “corrupt” their child’s innocence and make them become interested in sex at an earlier, inappropriate age—despite the fact that this and many other studies prove that this theory isn’t true.

“People hear the word ‘sex’ in the same sentence with ‘kids,’ and they think talking to their child about sex is about having a sexually explicit conversation. That is not what we’re talking about,” Holt explains. “We are talking about parents and guardians using the correct names of body parts, helping kids understand privacy, empowering them around bodily autonomy, teaching them to respect others’ boundaries, and providing age-appropriate answers to their questions about their bodies and where babies come from.”

Holt points to projects like AMAZE, an online resource that offers kid-friendly educational, animated videos about sexuality, gender, reproductive health, and other body stuff. Created by Answer and other reputable national sex education organizations, AMAZE offers content for kids as young as 4 years old.

Starting these conversations from this young age helps kids grow up in an environment where they’re not afraid or ashamed of their bodies—meaning they’ll be better equipped to ask their parents questions when they need help and know how and when to protect themselves from possible harm.

“When you use appropriate names like ‘penis’ and ‘vulva,’ you’re sending the message that these body parts are like ‘knee’ or ‘arm,’ and we don’t have to be ashamed of our bodies. This sets younger kids up to feel comfortable speaking with a parent about their bodies and to ask questions if they have them,” Holt explains. “Giving kids some basic language and concepts means they will be better prepared to have conversations with a parent as they get older about healthy relationships, consent, and safer sex.”

The younger they are when they start learning about sex, the more prepared and safe they’ll be in the long run whenever they do decide to start their sexual lives—which, according to the research, will be no earlier than if no one had ever started teaching them about sex.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

July 30, 2019July 30, 2019

Is there such a thing as ‘normal’ libido for women?

Drug companies say they can “fix” low sex drive in women.

By Caroline Zielinski

Ever wished you could reciprocate your partner’s hopeful gaze in the evening instead of losing your desire under layers of anxiety and to-do lists? Or to enthusiastically agree with your friends when they talk about how great it is to have sex six times a week?

Perhaps you just need to find that “switch” that will turn your desire on – big pharma has been trying for years to medicalise women’s sex drive, and to “solve” low libido.

One US company has just released a self-administered injection that promises to stimulate desire 45 minutes after use.

In late June, the US Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) approved Vyleesi (known scientifically as bremelanotide), the second drug of its kind targeting hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), a medical condition characterised by ongoing low sexual desire.

Vyleesi will soon be available on the market, and women will now have two drugs to choose from, the other being flibanserin (sold under the name Addyi), which comes in pill form.

Many experts are sceptical of medication being marketed as treatment for HSDD and the constructs underpinning research into the condition.

Yet many experts are highly sceptical of medication being marketed as treatment for HSDD, and also of the scientific constructs underpinning the research into the condition.

What is female hypo-active sexual desire disorder?

Hypo-active sexual desire disorder (or HSDD) was listed in the DSM-4, and relates to persistently deficient (or absent) sexual fantasies and desire for sexual activity, which causes marked distress and relationship problems.

“The problem is, it is very hard to describe what this medical condition actually is, because its construction is too entangled with the marketing of the drugs to treat it,” says Bond University academic Dr Ray Moynihan, a former investigate journalist, now researcher.

His 2003 paper, and book, The making of a disease: female sexual dysfunction, evaluates the methods used by pharmaceutical companies in the US to pathologise sexuality in women, focussing on the marketing campaign of Sprout Pharmaceuticals’ drug flibanserin, an antidepressant eventually approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a treatment for women experiencing sexual difficulties.

“This campaign, called Even the Score, was happening in real time as I was working as an investigative journalist and author.

“I got to see and document the way in which the very science underpinning this construct called FSD – or a disorder of low desire – was being constructed with money from the companies which would directly benefit from those constructs.”

The campaign was heavily criticised, mainly for co-opting language of rights, choice and sex equality to pressure the FDA to approve a controversial female “Viagra” drug.

During his research, Dr Moynihan says he found “blatant connections between the researchers who were constructing the science, and the companies who would benefit from this science”.

“The basic structures of the science surrounding this condition were being funded by industry,” he says.

What does the science say?

The biological causes of the condition have been widely researched. A quick search comes up with more than 13,000 results for HSDD, and a whooping 700,000 for what the condition used to be called (female sexual dysfunction).

Some of these studies show that women with the condition experience changes in brain activity that are independent of lifestyle factors, and other research has found that oestrogen-only therapies can increase sexual desire in postmenopausal women.

Others look into the effectiveness of a testosterone patch increasing sexual activity and desire in surgically menopausal women. Most say there is little substantive research in the field, and even less conclusive evidence.

“Oh, there are … studies galore, but mostly they are done by the industry or industry supporters – that’s one problem,” says Leonore Tiefer, US author, researcher and educator who has written widely about the medicalisation of men’s and women’s sexuality.

“There is no such thing as ‘normal’ sexual function in women,” says Jayne Lucke, Professor at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society at La Trobe University.

“Sexual function and desire changes across the lifespan, and is influenced by factors such as different partners, life experiences, having children, going through menopause.”

Using the word ‘normal’ is very powerful, because it puts pressure on women about our idea of what is a ‘normal’ woman’.
Professor Jayne Lucke

Professor Lucke has studied women’s health and public health policy for years, and believes our need to understand female sexuality and its triggers has created a rush to medicalise a condition which may not even exist.

“Using the word ‘normal’ is very powerful, because it puts pressure on women about our idea of what is a ‘normal’ woman’,” she says.

The studies submitted by AMAG (Vyleesi) and flibanserin (Sprout Pharmaceuticals) for approval from FSD have been criticised for their connection to industry, as well as the small differences between the drugs effects and those of the placebo.

For example, Vyleesi was found to increase desire marginally (scoring 1.2 on a range out of 6) in only a quarter of women, compared to 17 per cent of those taking a placebo. A review of flibanserin studies, including five published and three unpublished randomised clinical trials involving 5,914 women concluded the overall quality of the evidence for both efficacy and safety outcomes was very low.

Side effects were also an issue with both medications.

Flibanserin never sold well, partly due to problems with its manufacturer and partly due to its use terms: that women would have to take it daily and avoid alcohol to experience a marginal increase in their sexual experiences.

“I’m just unsure of the mechanism of action with these drugs – they seem to be using the model of male sexual desire as a baseline,” Professor Lucke says.

“In the heterosexual male model of sexuality, the man has the erection, then there is penetration, hopefully an orgasm for both: that’s the model this is targeting”.

That said, it doesn’t mean that women don’t suffer from authentic sexual difficulties – the preferred term by many physicians, including the head of Sexual Medicine and Therapy Clinic at Monash Health and a sex counsellor at The Royal Women’s Hospital, Dr Anita Elias.

“I don’t use terms like ‘dysfunction’, or worry about the DSM’s classification system,” she says.

“Clinically, I wouldn’t waste too much time reading the DSM: we’re dealing with a person, not a classification.”

She says she prefers to talk about “sexual difficulties” rather than sexual “dysfunction” because often a sexual problem or difficulty is not a dysfunction, but just a symptom of what is going on in a woman’s life (involving her physical and emotional health, relationship or circumstances, or in her beliefs or expectations around sex).

She prefers ‘sexual difficulties’ rather than ‘dysfunction’ because often … (it) is a symptom of what is going on in a woman’s life.

“It’s the reason you don’t feel like having sex that needs to be addressed rather than just taking medication,” she says.

Dr Elias believes silence and shame that surrounds the topic of female sexuality is impacting how these conditions are being dealt with at a medical and societal level.

“Sexual pain and issues just don’t get talked about: if you had back pain, you’d be telling everyone –but anything to do with sex and women is still taboo”.

Dr Amy Moten, a GP based in South Australia who specialises in sexual health, says sexual difficulties are not covered well enough during medical training.

“While training will include a component of women’s sexual health, this tends to refer to gynaecological conditions (such as STIs) rather than sexual function and wellbeing.”

She says many GPs won’t think to ask a woman about sexual issues unless it’s part of a cervical screen or conversation about contraception, and that many women are reluctant to have such an intimate conversation unless they trust their GP.

“We need to think more about how to have these conversations in the future, as we’re living at a time of general increased anxiety, a lot of which can relate to sexual health.”

As for medication? It may be available in the US, but the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has confirmed no drug under that name has been approved for registration in Australia – yet.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

July 27, 2019July 27, 2019

The Modern Monogamous Marriage Is Built on Lies, Not Sex Research

By Carrie Weisman

With some exceptions, gender constructs have served men well in the modern world. It’s landed them in more high-powered positions. It’s gotten them higher wages. And, yeah, it’s given them license to pursue sex in ways that would lead women to be ostracized or shamed. In her new book Untrue: Why Nearly Everything We Believe About Women Lust and Adultery Is Wrong and How the New Science Can Set Us Free, author Wednesday Martin digs into the damage incurred through this “boys will be boys” mentality. And she blows a whistle on the many biases that have boxed their female counterparts into such sexually constrained identities.

Fatherly spoke to Martin about what authentic sexuality looks like in women and how men can help them find their own special shade.

A lot of Untrue is about adultery. Why was it important for you to look into how women function in relationship to non-monogamy?

Infidelity is really a great test case for how we actually feel about gender parity. We have people who believe women should make the same amount men do. We have people who believe that women should hold political office. But how do they feel when women seize a privilege that has historically belonged to men, the privilege of not being monogamous? We don’t have any autonomy if we don’t have the autonomy to do what we want with our bodies.

This book really looks at how science and social science has conspired to put out a narrative that keeps women from attaining sexual autonomy. We think it’s physical violence, coercion, and slut-shaming that keep women in their place within this culture, but it’s also bad science and bad social science. So much of it has been abused to coerce women into monogamy and to discourage us from being sexually autonomous.

How does that message relate to the current cultural climate? How does it relate to the ways in which women are now asserting their sexual autonomy?

In terms of the #MeToo movement, well, I feel like bad science brought us to this moment. There’s been inaccurate science that posits that men are naturally sexually aggressive and that the male sexual coercion of females is natural. There’s a lot of more recent science that tells us that’s not true. I think a lot of that bad, biased science helped bring our culture to a point of crisis.

What are some other misconceptions surrounding female sexual identity and desire?

There is some research to suggest that the institutionalization of a relationship, whether it’s marriage or moving in together, dampens female sexual desire even more than male desire. There are studies that document women talking marriage and long-term partnership as anaphrodisiacs, as something that dampens sexual desire. They talk about familiarity and security killing their libidos. Men need to understand this about the women that they’re with. These women need sexual adventure just as much as men do.

Okay. That’s probably going to unnerve or surprise some guys out there. And maybe that’s indicative of the issue. Why do you think so many women have a hard time coming out about their genuine attitude towards polyamory and other nonconforming sexual behaviors?

You pay a high price for being honest about your sexual desires in this culture. Everything from slut-shaming to lethal violence to someone just thinking that you’re weird. Women who do step out face a lot of danger. In this country, so many mass shootings involve men trying to control women who have left them. And a lot of the triggers don’t even involve infidelity, but the suspicion of infidelity. It’s still really dangerous for women to exercise that really basic form of autonomy within the U.S.

How can men help women feel safe speaking about their desires?

I think men need to educate themselves. They need to understand the female erectile network, the extensiveness of the clitoris, the possibility of multiple orgasms, the fact that we have no refractory period. This all seems to suggest, to me, that women really evolved for sexual pleasure and serial sexual pleasure.

What about guys in monogamous relationships with wives who are not likely to be experiencing serial sexual pleasure any time soon? How can they help their partners enjoy a more diverse sex life?

I wrote the book to be a conversation starter between women and their partners. Men should know that some women really struggle with monogamy. Now, that doesn’t mean they’re going to go invite a “third” into the bedroom as a way to attain novelty. But it should encourage men to step up their game. Buy her a sex toy. Talk about sexual fantasies. Watch porn together. Go on adventures that have nothing to do with sex. Go on a zip line. Learn to tango. Take a trip. Remember, adrenaline can deliver a similar feeling to what sexual novelty gives us. These are all options if you don’t want to seek out adventure by way of consensual non-monogamy.

What about men with daughters? How can they impart healthier sexual attitudes?

It would be extremely helpful to start educating kids about female sexual pleasure at home. It’s important we teach them that women are more than an extension of male desire. Girls are more than precious little things who have to protect themselves from the boys. They are thinking, feeling people who have an amazingly evolved sexual anatomy with an extremely high capacity for pleasure. This is really basic information that kids aren’t getting in school.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

July 21, 2019July 21, 2019

Sex bans are manipulative and destructive to your relationship

By Rebecca Reid

There’s a Greek myth called Lysistrata.

It’s a story about how the wives of the Greeks, sick of their husbands pissing off to war and coming back with a limb missing or not coming back at all, took matters into their own hands.

To create peace between various Greek factions, they went on a sex strike. No nookie for anyone until the war was over. And basically, it worked.

Lysistrata was first performed in 411BC. 2,430 years ago. And yet women are still doing the exact same thing – going on sex strike to get what they want.

Earlier this year Alyssa Milano suggested that we women go on strike from sex until the Georgia six-week abortion limit is overruled.

If you Google ‘sex strike’ you find hundreds of stories from women who got ‘their own way’ by going on strike. One woman got a new kitchen. Another convinced her husband to have another baby. Other women simply use it as a disciplinary measure to correct their husband’s behaviour.

Doesn’t anyone else find this unutterably depressing?

It’s 2019 and apparently the axis of our power as humans is still whether or not we will open our legs for our partners.

Sex shouldn’t be a reward. It should be an expression of lust, or love, or anything else that you want it to be. It should be fun, gratifying, enjoyable.

Sex shouldn’t be the adult equivalent of giving a child a chocolate button for hanging their coat up after school.

By taking sex away from your partner as a punishment you send the message that it’s an activity that you partake in for them in the first place – it suggests that sex is a favour you’ve been doing them and will no longer be doing until they toe the party line.

In every single example I could find online, the person doing the banning is the woman and the person on the receiving end is a man, which further perpetuates an untrue stereotype that men like sex and women put up with it.

Another problematic aspect of the sex ban is that often it’s women putting one in place because she wants to make a financial choice – like a new car or a holiday – that her partner isn’t comfortable with.

Instead of compromising – the money belongs to both of you – or just paying it for themselves, these women perpetuate the idea that their husbands are Chancellors of the Exchequer in their marriage.

They might as well be applying for more housekeeping money.

If your sex life is so lukewarm that the idea of giving it up to punish your partner is appealing, then you’ve got a wider problem which needs addressing.

If however you enjoy sex and withdraw it at your own deprivation then you’re cutting off your nose to spite your face. Even if it works, do you really want to have won an argument with your other half by taking away sex, just like you would get a child to do their homework by offering screen time?

Back in 411BC Greece, women really didn’t have much power. Sex was one of the few things you had the ability to grant. But the world has moved on, and we are equal partners within our relationships and therefore we do not need to withdraw sexual favours to claw back power.

We’re intelligent, mature, sensible women with critical reasoning skills. Why would we resort to such reduced tactics to alleviate conflict?

Of course there is an element of sexual politics in any relationship – when you feel happier and closer to your partner you’ll probably have more sex. When you’re fighting or struggling through issues it might well be less. That’s normal.

No one is suggesting for a second that you should have sex with your partner if you don’t want to or you’re not in the mood. You should only ever have sex when you want to have sex. The issue is when you use ‘I’m not in the mood’ as a bargaining chip, which is patronising and controlling.

If your partner doesn’t take you seriously when you say you’re annoyed about the division of labour within the household, or that you think you need to redecorate your kitchen, then they’re not a good partner.

If you ignore their responses to your marital problems and decide to ‘punish’ your partner rather than compromising, then you’re not a good partner.

Relationships that work don’t involve point scoring. They’re not based around depriving someone else of privileges to train their behaviour. That’s how you treat a naughty child, not a spouse whom you respect.

You might get what you originally wanted – your partner might do more housework or ‘let’ you buy a new car, but what cost is this ‘victory’ to the long term health of your relationship?

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

July 16, 2019July 16, 2019

5 Questions Adults Still Ask About Sex

By Gigi Engle

As an educator who writes and teaches about sexuality, sometimes I still get questions from readers and clients that surprise me.

The most shocking thing isn’t the slew of downright strange questions (of which there are many) but the fact that most of the questions that find their way into my inbox and practice are very common sex questions that I assume most adults know by now. Will a vibrator damage my clitoris? How do I make my partner stop watching porn? Does penis size matter? Is an uncircumcised penis normal? There is no end.

For an educator, it can be frustrating. I put so much information out there only to have the same questions asked again and again.

While it can be maddening, it highlights how deeply sexual shame is ingrained in our minds and culture. People have the information at their fingertips, right there on the internet, but it still doesn’t land.

The fact that these questions are still being asked isn’t the fault of the people asking them. In fact, I’m sure you’ll read some of the examples below and realize you yourself don’t know the answer to at least one. This lack of knowledge into the most basic of sex questions says much less about the people asking them and much more about the state of sex ed. We’re doing ourselves a great disservice as a country by making comprehensive sex ed impossible to access. It’s not your fault you’re confused; it’s our culture’s fault.

With that being said, here are five of the most surprising questions adults still ask me about sex:

1. How do I know what I like in bed? I don’t think I’ve ever had an orgasm.

The short answer: Masturbate. So many of us have this intense fear of self-pleasure, as if touching ourselves could make us dirty, slutty, or unworthy of love. (Note: There is nothing wrong with being a slut, FYI.)

These deep-seated puritanical views of sexuality are extremely pervasive and among the main reasons people don’t enjoy sex. While it spans across genders, this is true for female-bodied people, especially. The clitoris is so key to experiencing pleasure and orgasm. If you’ve never touched your own body, you’re going to have a lot of problems communicating your desires to a partner.

Explore your body. See what feels good for you. You can do this in bed, in the bathtub with a showerhead, using a hand or a vibrator—whatever works for you. Finding out how to bring yourself pleasure is the key to unlocking your sexuality.

2. Why don’t I get wet enough during sex?

This is a question that I get regularly. In these instances, “sex” refers to intercourse. People with vaginas want to know why they need to use lube (or spit, yikes), why intercourse doesn’t feel good or is painful, and why they aren’t having orgasms during sex.

The answer? Because intercourse just doesn’t produce orgasms for most vulva-owning people.

The vaginal canal has very few touch-sensitive nerve endings. The key to female orgasm is the clitoris. While the internal clitoris expands deep into the body, the clitoral glans (the bud at the top of the vulva) is where most of the nerve endings are clustered.

Most of us require clitoral stimulation with adequate foreplay in order to become aroused enough to have intercourse. When the clitoral network is engaged, the clitoris and vulva swell while the vagina lubricates itself. Without this foreplay, sexual intercourse can be uncomfortable or even painful.

“Foreplay” itself is a misnomer, as it places all of the importance on intercourse, when intercourse isn’t even a prerequisite for sexual satisfaction.

Additionally, it doesn’t matter how wet you get. You should really always be using lube. Lube helps with friction, comfort, and even aids you to have more orgasms. (Here’s mbg’s guide to picking the right lube.)

3. Why can I orgasm with my vibrator but not during sex?

This question often goes hand-in-hand with queries such as: Is it normal to prefer masturbation to intercourse? And: Can I get addicted to my vibrator?

Vibrators were designed to bring clit-owning people to orgasm. They offer intense sensation that can give you pleasure like nothing you may have experienced before. With that being said, there is absolutely no scientific evidence that you can become addicted to vibration.

We have to stop thinking of orgasms as a finite resource. We need to open ourselves to experiencing and embracing our full potential for pleasure. You may “need” a vibrator to experience an orgasm, and you know what? That’s totally OK. Some clit-owning people need more intense stimulation to have orgasms.

As I’ve mentioned, intercourse very rarely stimulates the clitoris, the key player in female orgasm. It’s not surprising that you’d prefer a vibrator or oral sex. You’re not weird or broken. You’re a normal sexual being. I promise.

4. If I want to try butt play; will it make me gay?

The “will putting something up my butt make me gay” question is extremely popular among cis men. It seems like no matter how many times I write about the joys of prostate play, this question appears in my email a few times a year.

Here is the truth: No, putting something in your butt will not make you gay. If you put something in your butt and then decide that you are into men now, well, it wasn’t because you put anything in your butt.

If you’re gay, you’re born gay. No amount of butt play is going to “make you” anything.

That being said, butt play is accessible for any and all people, regardless of gender. The first few inches of the anus are packed with nerve-rich tissue. Male-bodied people have a prostate, a walnut-size gland located a few inches inside of the butt. When stimulated, it can offer intense and pleasurable sensation.

If you’re interested in butt play, there is no reason you shouldn’t explore it!

5. What do I do about mismatched libidos?

This question, while very common, has no easy answer. The most important thing we can do about mismatched libidos is to communicate with one another. This is a difficult feat for most couples. Talking about sexual issues or concerns is not something we’re taught how to do.

With strict gender roles set in place by society, it is easy for people to become defensive when their partner raises concerns about sex drive. If you’re a man who doesn’t want sex as much as your partner, it’s considered “unmanly.” If you’re a woman who wants more sex than her male partner, you must be some kind of harlot or crazed sex demon.

Yet, these stereotypes are not at all true. Women, men, queer folks, and beyond all have differing libidos that have nothing to do with gender or sex. To get around differences in libido, we need to talk about it with our partners to find workable solutions. The person with the higher libido often caters to the person who has the lower libido, stifling themselves because they’re sick of being “turned down” for sex. This is not good. Both people are responsible for the sex in a partnership. Everyone deserves to feel satisfied and sexually fulfilled.

Sex is part of relationships. You are in a partnership, and both people need to be willing to compromise to keep the relationship healthy. If we knew how to talk about sex, we’d be able to have these conversations much more freely and without fear of judgment.

If you’re dealing with mismatched libidos, working on more effectively communicating about it is step one.

We need to talk more about sex.

If we want people to stop floundering on the topic of sex, we need to talk about sex. If we had pleasure-based sexual education in schools, young people would go into the world much more equipped to deal with relationships and communication around sex.

If you’re interested in getting more sex ed in your life, check out Planned Parenthood’s website for starters. They have super-informative up-to-date information on sexual health and wellness. They even have super-digestible short sex-ed videos. Inform yourself. We all have to.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!