What Is Lovesickness?

— And How Do You Actually Cure It

The prescription calls for watching “The Notebook.” On repeat.

BY

Picture this: It’s 3 a.m., and instead of blissfully snoozing beneath your sleep mask (…or adding a bunch of viral TikTok finds to your cart), you’re deep in the trenches of your feelings, wrestling with the kind of heartache no amount of beauty sleep or online shopping can heal. Welcome to the not-so-exclusive club of the lovesick, bb, where the main activities include over-analyzing text messages, obsessing about ~the one that got away~, and wondering if your soulmate is really out there. Bleak, right? That’s because, hi, lovesickness is a real thing, and unfortunately for all of us, it hurts like hell.

“Lovesickness describes the intense emotional and physical experiences associated with romantic love,” says Sarah Hill, PhD, a research psychologist and consultant for Cougar Life, specializing in women’s health and sexual psychology. “The symptoms resemble those of a physical illness because of the profound links between the mind and body.” You can’t eat, you can’t sleep, you feel depressed, and the thought of doing anything other than crying in bed and watching Love is Blind seems impossible. Sound familiar?

Even though the term isn’t a recognized medical diagnosis, Hill stresses that it’s a very real, very painful mental ailment. To put it bluntly, being lovesick makes it feel like your heart got hit by a semi-truck. Whether you’re trying to get over a breakup, grappling with unrequited love, or coming to terms with a going-nowhere situationship, lovesickness isn’t just for the dramatically inclined—it’s a legit rollercoaster of physical and emotional symptoms that can leave even the strongest among us reeling.

The silver lining? While lovesickness is your body and mind grappling with loss, remember, you’re not spiraling alone—you’ve got us! And with the help of relationship pros, we’re breaking down every damn thing you need to know about lovesickness, from what it is to how to heal. Stick with us, y’all, because happier days are on the horizon, no matter how lovesick you feel rn.

What Actually *Is* Lovesickness?

As the name suggests, lovesickness is the feeling of being “sick” due to the loss or lack of romantic love. Again, it’s not an official medical or clinical condition, but holistic relationship coach Alexandra Roxo stresses just how uncomfortable the experience can be.< “It’s the point where emotional pain turns to physical pain after going through a breakup, heartbreak, or a separation,” she says. While heartbreak—an existential experience—makes you feel sad, Roxo says the difference is that lovesickness is usually described as the physiological response to that heartbreak. Feeling lovesick means you might find it hard to eat, sleep, work, or even have fun. Food might lose its taste, music might sound flat, and you might even experience real symptoms of clinical depression and anxiety. So, no! You’re not being dramatic! Your body *literally* feels sick from lost love, dammit!

The term is sometimes mistaken for limerence—an obsessive form of love—but lovesickness primarily stems from the absence of love, triggering a feeling similar to that experienced from addictive substances. “Being lovesick can feel akin to the withdrawal symptoms from opioid drugs,” Hill explains, “As both scenarios involve a lack of stimulus that usually activates the brain’s reward centers, leading to a dopamine withdrawal.”

While this all sounds, frankly, miserable, it’s important to note that feeling lovesick is actually totally normal. “Both lovesickness and heartbreak can be intense and distressing emotional experiences, but they are also natural responses to the complexities of relationships,” Hill says. Knowing how to heal is key, and curing your lovesickness is possible. Promise.

What Are the Signs and Symptoms of Lovesickness?

Feeling lovesick isn’t just about wallowing in your feelings post-breakup (but, like, that’s totally valid too). According to Hill and Roxo, the symptoms of lovesickness can—and likely will—vary from person to person, ranging from mood swings to sleeplessness to yearning for your former partner. Sometimes, you might feel fine, and other times, you feel like you’re on autopilot or have a hard time functioning in daily life.

So, if you find yourself wanting to call out of work because your heart literally hurts, there’s a chance you’re feeling lovesick. While the signs of lovesickness aren’t always obvious, here’s what the pros say to look out for:

  • Difficulty sleeping: Your love interest’s absence can disrupt your sleep cycle, making it hard to fall or stay asleep.
  • Restlessness and anxiety: A constant state of unease, especially after the breakup or when exposed to triggers? Check.
  • Inability to concentrate: Your thoughts might be consumed by your partner or your breakup, distracting you from any and all tasks at hand.
  • Increased tearfulness: You might find yourself crying over songs, random memories, or simply out of nowhere. Inconvenient, sure, but normal.
  • Pain or tension in the chest: This can be a physical manifestation of your emotional pain (but if it persists, feels uncomfortable, or intensifies, reach out to your doctor ASAP).
  • Mood and appetite changes: Swings in mood and changes in appetite are A Real Response, often leading to eating too little or too much.
  • Obsessive thoughts and idealization: You may find yourself putting the relationship on a pedestal or obsessing over what went wrong.

Understanding these symptoms is the first step toward healing, and can empower you to take steps toward recovery and eventually find balance and happiness again. Because, yes! You will be happy again!

How Do You Heal from Lovesickness?

Dealing with lovesickness can feel like you’re wading through emotional quicksand, but there *are* effective ways to pull yourself out and move forward. Let’s break down some expert-backed strategies to heal from lovesickness and find your footing again.

Be Kind to Yourself.

First and foremost, be gentle with yourself. Lovesickness can take a toll not just emotionally, but physically too. Roxo suggests giving yourself plenty of extra TLC. Eat soothing foods, take bubble baths, get a massage, or cuddle with your pet for some quality physical touch. Don’t be afraid to feel your feelings—so cue up that sad playlist or watch some breakup movies—but Roxo says to schedule something uplifting afterward (like coffee with a pal) to help balance your emotions.

Set Boundaries…and Stick To Them.

As hard as it might be to delete a number or block an account, Hill emphasizes the importance of the whole out-of-sight, out-of-mind thing. Delete the pics, toss the mementos, and try to keep contact to an absolute minimum. Setting healthy boundaries for yourself—whatever that looks like to you—during this time is key, and once you’ve decided that you’re not going to talk to your ex and that you’re going to avoid stalking their socials, stick to it!

Sweat It Out.

I realize working out whilst sad sounds like agony, but physical activity can actually be a crucial component of healing. “Exercise, especially cardio, can significantly improve your brain chemistry, helping to alleviate the fog of lovesickness,” Roxo says. She recommends incorporating upbeat music into your workouts to elevate your mood further.

Have Fun. Seriously.

Since lovesickness is often a dopamine withdrawal, rediscovering joy and pleasure outside of your romantic relationships is crucial to overcoming the ailment. Whether it’s picking up a new hobby, going on a trip, or reading everything trending on BookTok, find fun new activities to look forward to. And if the idea of a rebound relationship sounds alluring (which is okay!), Hill suggests taking things slow and dating people different from your former partner. “Opening yourself up to new experiences can encourage healing,” says Hill.

Ask For Help.

Remember, it’s more than okay to ask for help during this challenging time. Whether it’s a friend or a professional, having someone to act as a sounding board and uplift you when you feel low is paramount. In fact, Roxo encourages reaching out to a therapist or coach who can support you through this transition. “This period of pain could very well be a pivotal moment leading to a breakthrough in your love life,” she says. What’s important is taking proactive steps towards recovery, allowing yourself to grieve, and gradually opening your heart to the possibility of love again.

How Long Does Lovesickness Last?

The truth is, there’s no universal clock for recovering from lovesickness. Some of us might shake it off in a few weeks, while others might be in the trenches for far longer. As Roxo puts it, “The acute symptoms usually start to chill out after a week or two, but really, lovesickness fades in time, depending on how you deal with it.”

While you might wish for a magic potion to speed up the process (don’t we all?), everyone mends at their own pace. It’s a journey, but trust the process. Your heart didn’t come with a fast-forward button, but it’s equipped with resilience and the capacity to heal. You got this.

Complete Article HERE!

Misinformation Is on the Rise.

— Here’s What You Need to Know About Birth Control.

Three Black reproductive experts discuss how to access birth control, navigate the misinformation online, and understand what’s unfolding politically.

By Margo Snipe

It’s been a tricky landscape since Roe v. Wade was overturned almost two years ago, as reproductive health care has become increasingly complicated to navigate — and misinformation is on the rise.

Not only are the attacks on abortion care merging with limits on the availability of infertility treatment, but the same court that reversed the constitutional protection for abortion will hear arguments this week on restricting access to mifepristone, one of two medications commonly used to induce an abortion. And on the state level, new bills are aiming to cut back contraception options.

In Oklahoma, one bill in the state legislature has sparked questions about whether it might ban emergency contraception — like the day-after Plan B pill — and intrauterine devices, or IUDs. Part of it targets contraception that prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg. At the same time, some birth control options are expanding. This month, Opill, the first over-the-counter birth control pill, began sales. And, under a new policy, New York pharmacists can dispense certain hormonal contraceptives without a prescription.

Capital B asked three Black reproductive health care experts some of the big questions about how to access birth control, navigate the misinformation online, and understand what’s unfolding politically. Here’s what you need to know.

What is the difference between abortion care and birth control?

Amid the uptick in misinformation, experts want patients to understand there is a distinct difference between abortion care and birth control. Birth control, like the pill and IUDs, is not abortion inducing, doctors say.

While both are considered a part of reproductive health care, birth control, also called contraception, is intended to prevent pregnancy before it occurs and is often discussed and prescribed by gynecologists, which are doctors who specialize in women’s reproductive health systems. 

“Birth control is acting to fundamentally prevent pregnancy,” said Dr. Alexandra Wells, an OB-GYN in Washington state. It works by stopping sperm from meeting the egg, she said.

Abortion care is separate. It terminates an already existing pregnancy, either out of patient choice up to a certain time period or medical necessity. It takes place after folks know they are pregnant and is typically managed by obstetricians, or doctors that focus on the pregnancy of patients. Many practitioners have their training in both gynecology and obstetrics.

Over the past year, how has the landscape over available birth control changed?

With so many different bills being introduced in states across the country, aiming to both limit and expand access to reproductive health care, the amount of misinformation spreading across social media platforms is surging.

While birth control and abortion care are different, the landscape in terms of access to both is shifting nationwide.

Soon after the 2022 Dobbs decision reversing federal abortion protections, when states began moving to restrict abortion, many physicians were concerned about the implications on birth control, said Dr. Yolanda Lawson, a Texas-based OB-GYN. It was not the first time. Several years prior, in the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that corporations run by religious families cannot be required to pay for insurance coverage for contraception care.

More recently, changes in abortion care have also trickled into changes in birth control access and infertility treatment for families. When reproductive health care clinics offering abortions close, other  services are impacted, said Wells, who’s also a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health. The good news is technology is making online access to birth control options more accessible. Many options can be mailed and are often covered by insurance, she said.

Opill is now available, adding to the many other options, including condoms, spermicide, the ring, IUDs, implants, patches and cycle tracking.

How do I know what’s happening with access to birth control in my state?

There is no comprehensive, central location for all of this information, said Jennifer Driver, senior director of reproductive rights at SiX, an organization that works with elected officials after they win office. The federal Title X family planning websites have a lot of information and resources for patients, said Driver. The best way to find out what is happening with legislation is directly through the state legislator. On each website, you can see what bills are being introduced and which representatives may have brought it forth.

Local news coverage from trusted outlets may also break down what bills are impacting your reproductive health care. Experts caution against relying on social media for health information, given the sheer amount of misinformation and myths.

Do IUDs induce abortions?

No. The devices work by thickening the mucus along the uterine wall, making it difficult for sperm to migrate and meet with the egg, preventing fertilization.

“It’s a simple mechanism, but it really works,” said Lawson, who’s also the president of the National Medical Association. It prevents conception. They are 99.9% effective at preventing pregnancy.

What birth control is now available?

Condoms, spermicide, contraceptive sponges, apps to track your menstrual cycle, emergency contraception like Plan B, and most recently Opill, are all birth control options that do not require a prescription from a doctor.

Some hormonal contraceptives require either a prescription or insertion by a medical provider. Those include the ring, IUDs, implants, contraceptive injections, and birth control pills. Sterilization is also an option regardless of the gender of the patient.

“It’s really amazing that women have so many contraception options,” said Lawson. There is some slight variation in how well each works, she said. “There are options that our grandmothers and even mothers did not have. I hope women are empowered by that.”

It’s also important to make sure you feel comfortable with your provider, said Wells. You should feel free to ask questions about how each contraceptive option works and might impact your body.

A lot of birth control options are covered by insurance, and many clinics and health centers may offer free condoms. Some birth control pill companies offer discounts on their websites.

If you’re uninsured, many freestanding health clinics offer sliding scale payment options based on your household income and ability to pay, which could bring the price down.

How do I know what my best birth control option is?

It’s important to understand your medical history, said Wells. In person or online, your provider may ask about your history with high blood pressure, blood clots, and conditions like lupus. Those conditions may preclude the use of certain forms of contraception.

People should also consider their lifestyle and goals, she said. For example, the IUD requires a one-time insertion every handful of years depending on the types, whereas the pill requires patients to take them at the same time each day. Each option offers a different level of independence. The pill can be stopped at any time. The IUD and implant require an appointment with a provider to remove.

Complete Article HERE!

Lack of sex education in GOP states puts students at risk

An assortment of contraceptives such as Plan B and condoms provided by Planned Parenthood Generation Action at the Sex and Relationships photoshoot. Sex-ed is an important part of K-12 education, and the risk of losing the curriculum in schools can lead to an increase in unwanted teen pregnancies and STIs.

By Sunjae Lee

Although it may be a cliche, there is some truth to the trope ‘it takes a village to raise a child’ — whether it be through teachers, pediatricians, athletic coaches or politicians who create laws directly affecting youth. But in some states across the U.S., the adults in charge of youth policies are not doing their part in ensuring quality education for all.

According to an Associated Press article, GOP-led states are at risk of losing sex education curricula in their schools. This idea was amplified after the emergence of the “parents’ rights” movement, whose main concern is dismantling inclusive LGBTQ+ sex education. Republican leaders and parents are trying to ensure that it is the parents’ choice to allow their children to take part in any sex education.

So what can we expect in the absence of sex education at K-12 institutions if these policies are implemented?

Lack of sex education for all youth may lead to an increase in unwanted teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Since GOP state leaders tend to oppose abortion rights, minimizing unwanted pregnancy is crucial in these states to protect teens from potential physical, emotional and financial harms. In fact, teen birth rates are much higher in states that ban abortion and have minimal sex education curricula.

Moreover, the number of contracted sexually transmitted disease (STD) cases has risen again since the COVID-19 pandemic — reaching more than 2.5 million cases of syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia according to the CDC’s 2022 statistics.

GOP-led states are especially at higher risk; out of the top 10 states with the highest rate of STDs, eight are Republican-controlled states.

Many of the Republican voters who oppose mandatory sex education argue that it is the parents’ responsibility to determine what constitutes appropriate sex education for their children. But this begs the question: is sex education really taught at home?

According to OnePoll, one in five parents are not willing to have conversations about sexual matters with their kids at all. Even the parents who discuss sex education with their kids tend to avoid more complex topics, such as birth control and consent.

While sex education in schools is taught by qualified instructors, parents may not have the same level of professional expertise. Not only do they tend to avoid harder topics, but their own lack of education can lead to misinformation. For instance, older generations who are more socially conservative may be more likely to still believe in myths regarding sexual assault, such as victim-blaming for dressing or acting in a “sexually provoking way,” or believing that victims could have prevented it if they wanted to. A study from the International Society for the Study of Individual Differences’ journal proves that individuals with sexually conservative views are more likely to accept these myths.

Furthermore, teenagers are more likely to seek sexual information from peers and teachers than parents. We must keep these resources open, allowing for spaces where minors feel comfortable participating in honest outreach discussions.

The controversy surrounding sex education in public schools has been a longstanding issue, but it significantly escalated recently in GOP-led states due to opposition from parents and politicians who are reluctant to incorporate LGBTQ+ topics. The “Don’t Say Gay Bill” in Florida exemplifies the strong aversion for such discussions in politically conservative states. Given that the inclusion of LGBTQ+ sexual health in the curricula is the biggest concern among Republican-controlled states, should schools offer LGBTQ+ exclusive sex education to satisfy everyone?

The main reason why LGBTQ-inclusive sex education is important is that gender and sexually-marginalized youth are at a higher risk for sexual health issues such as STIs, sexual activity under the influence and dating violence.

LGBTQ+ youth are also far less likely to have open sex discussions with their parents. Even if they do, unless their parents are part of the community themselves, it is often difficult for kids to receive useful and accurate information specifically concerning their sexual health. It is important that schools protect LGBTQ+ youth by providing adequate education to prevent against poor health outcomes and lack of support within their homes.

Sex education is a shared responsibility between schools and parents. While schools need to provide children with quality health education, they also need a welcoming environment at home to seek answers. Instead, youth are struggling to find proper information in a world where open discussions about sex and sexual diversity are considered taboo. In each of our villages, adults and educators are responsible for ensuring safe environments and comprehensive education for all youth, including the LGBTQ+ community.

Since not everyone is privileged enough to receive quality sex education at home, K-12 schools provide necessary education for everyone regardless of socioeconomic status, family background and sexual orientation. When giving equal educational opportunities is the main function of primary and secondary schools, how is it acceptable to exclude one of the most important subjects?

Sex education is directly related to a person’s physical, emotional and social well-being. The World Health Organization defines sexual health as “a state of physical, emotional, mental and social well-being in relation to sexuality.” Teaching adolescents about sexual health ensures a better quality of life overall.

According to a study from the Journal of Adolescent Health conducted with adolescent women, better sexual health is associated with better social integration, higher self-esteem, less substance use and lower self-reported depression. Another study from the Frontiers in Reproductive Health Journal suggests that among male adolescents, mental and reproductive health are intertwined; poor sexual health leads to poor mental health and vice versa.

Hence, comprehensive sex education can prevent many health issues and encourage healthy habits in various aspects of life. Minimizing sex education curricula means young people who are not fortunate enough to have sexually accepting and knowledgeable parents will have to learn on their own while risking their sexual health.

Conservatives’ irrational fear of healthy relationships being formed between members of same sex and non-binary gender identities, along with their false beliefs of comprehensive sex education encouraging reckless sex, are putting children at risk — including their own. What may hurt their kids is delaying essential education, as well as restricting exposure to healthy homosexual love or confident transgender people. The exclusion of proper sex education may leave people with irreversible consequences, such as unwanted pregnancy, HIV or sexual trauma.

Children should be set up for success, not put in a position where they have to rely on misinformation or the internet to be taught healthy sexual habits.

Complete Article HERE!

What is ‘sex’? What is ‘gender’?

— How these terms changed and why states now want to define them


Transgender rights advocates rally at the Kansas capitol, Wednesday, Jan. 31, 2024. In 2023, the state enacted a measure that says there are two sexes, male and female, based on a person’s “biological reproductive system” at birth.

By Grace Abels

  • This year, 17 state legislatures sought to narrowly define “sex” or “gender” in state law as based solely on biological characteristics. In Utah, one became law.
  • Although they’re sometimes used synonymously, “sex” and “gender” have different meanings to medical professionals. Sex traditionally refers to one’s biological characteristics, whereas gender is how a person identifies.
  • Laws redefining sex in state law could require driver’s licenses and identifying documents to display a person’s sex assigned at birth, a policy that transgender advocates say would lead to discrimination.

After decades of creating laws that assumed “sex” and “gender” were synonymous, lawmakers across the country are taking another look at how states define those terms.

Scientific and legal interpretations of these words have evolved considerably in the past century. Today, medical experts understand biological sex assigned at birth as more complex and consider it distinct from gender identity.

In 2020, the Supreme Court also broadened its understanding of sex discrimination in employment to include discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Grappling with this cultural, scientific, and legal shift in the meaning of “sex” and “gender,” lawmakers in some states have tried defining the terms narrowly in state law as biological and binary. In 2023, four states passed such laws and, this year, 17 states introduced bills defining “sex.” Some bills in Florida and West Virginia were defeated, but 15 bills are still advancing in states across the country.

This focus on terminology may seem rhetorical, but these legislative changes can restrict access to driver’s licenses and documents that match a person’s gender identity. Transgender rights advocates say that requiring IDs to match the sex a person was assigned at birth can expose transgender Americans to discrimination.

So, how do we understand these terms, and what could these definitions mean for everyday life once codified?

How have the terms ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ evolved?

Until the mid-20th century, Americans’ understanding of “sex” was largely biological and binary.

“For a substantial time period, law in the United States defined identity categories, such as race and sex, in biological terms,” said Darren Hutchinson, an law professor at Emory University law professor.

In the 1950s and ’60s, psychological research emerged that differentiated biological sex from “gender.” Researchers coined terms such as “gender roles” as they studied people born with reproductive or sexual anatomy that didn’t fit the typical definitions of male or female and observed how children sometimes developed identity distinct from their biological sex.

By the early 1960s, the term “gender identity” began appearing in academic literature. By 1980, “gender identity disorder of childhood” was included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders’ third edition. This inclusion signaled that the concept of gender identity “was part of the accepted nomenclature being used,” said Dr. Jack Drescher, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Columbia University.

Before the 1970s, the word “gender” was rarely used in American English, according to research by Stefan Th. Gries, a linguistics professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He said evidence suggests it was used mostly when discussing grammar to describe the “gender” of a noun in Spanish, for example.

Edward Schiappa, a professor of communication and rhetoric at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, observed in his book “The Transgender Exigency” that the rising use of “gender” in English coincided with the term’s introduction into psychological literature and its adoption by the feminist movement. Feminists saw the term as useful for describing the cultural aspects of being a “woman” as different from the biological aspects, he said.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who argued sex discrimination cases before the court in the 1970s, said that she intentionally used the term “gender discrimination” because it lacked the salacious overtones “sex” has.

After the 1980s, gender’s term usage rose rapidly, moving beyond academic and activist circles. In common American English, “sex” and “gender” began to be used more interchangeably, including in state law — sometimes even in the same section of the law.

In Florida’s chapter on driver’s licenses, for example, the section on new license applications uses “gender,” but the section on replacement licenses uses “sex.”

Modern legal and scientific views of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’

Today, medical experts and most major medical organizations agree that sex and gender are different.

Sex is a biological category determined by physical features such as genes, hormones and genitalia. People are male, female or sometimes have reproductive or sexual anatomy that doesn’t fit the typical definitions of male or female, often called intersex.

Gender is different, experts say. Gender identity refers to someone’s internal sense of being a man, woman, or a nonbinary gender. For cisgender people, their sex and gender are the same, while transgender people may experience a mismatch between the two — their gender may not correspond to the sex they were assigned at birth.

Our legal understanding of “sex discrimination” has also evolved.

In 2020, the Supreme Court decided Bostock v. Clayton County, a series of cases in which employers were accused of firing employees for being gay or transgender. The court held that this was a form of “sex discrimination” prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Whether the court will extend this interpretation to other areas of federal law is unclear, legal experts told us.

How have lawmakers responded to this shift?

Recently, lawmakers have tried to codify their understandings of “sex” and “gender” into law.

In some cases, these laws aim to recognize and protect transgender Americans. The Democratic-backed Equality Act, which passed the House, but not the Senate, in 2019 and 2021, would have federally protected against discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation and gender identity. Some states have passed similar equality legislation, creating a patchwork of anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people.

But lawmakers in many Republican-led states have proposed narrow definitions of sex and gender that would apply to large sections of state law. “Women and men are not identical; they possess unique biological differences,” Iowa’s Republican governor, Kim Reynolds said in a press release detailing her support for the state’s version of such a bill. She added, “This bill protects women’s spaces and rights afforded to us by Iowa law and the Constitution.”

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds speaks July 28, 2023, at the Republican Party of Iowa’s 2023 Lincoln Dinner in Des Moines, Iowa.

Opponents reject the idea that the bills relate to women’s rights and claim the bills are an attempt to “erase” legal recognition of transgender people.

In 2023, four states passed laws defining sex, and two other states did so via executive order.

The Kansas Legislature, for example, passed the “Women’s Bill of Rights” overriding Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto. The law says that “pursuant to any state law or rules and regulations … An individual’s ‘sex’ means such individual’s biological sex, either male or female, at birth.”

The law defines male and female as based on whether a person’s reproductive system “is developed to produce ova,” or “is developed to fertilize the ova of a female.”

Because of the bill, transgender Kansans may no longer amend the sex listed on their birth certificates or update their driver’s licenses to be different from their sex assigned at birth, although courts are reviewing this policy.

The Kansas law also states that “distinctions between the sexes with respect to athletics, prisons or other detention facilities, domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, locker rooms, restrooms and other areas where biology, safety or privacy are implicated” are related to “important governmental objectives” a condition required under the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

Rose Saxe, lawyer and deputy project director of the LGBTQ and HIV project at the American Civil Liberties Union, said the Kansas law does not explicitly require those spaces to be segregated by “sex” as the bill defines, but tries to justify policies that would do so.

Current bills defining ‘sex’

This year, 17 more states considered bills that would narrowly define “sex” and/or “gender” in state law according to the ACLU’s anti-LGBTQ legislation tracker. One, Utah, signed a definition into law, and 10 other states are advancing 15 bills combined. In the remaining six states, the bills were carried over to next year or defeated.

The Utah State Capitol is viewed March 1, 2024, in Salt Lake City.

Some bills, such as Arizona’s S.B. 1628 change the terms for the entire statute: “This state shall replace the stand-alone term ‘gender’ with ‘sex’ in all laws, rules, publications, orders, actions, programs, policies, and signage,” it reads. The state Senate passed the bill 16-13 on Feb. 22, along party lines with Republicans in favor.

Other bills, such as Idaho’s H.B. 421, don’t replace the word “gender” but declare it synonymous to “sex.” Gender, when used in state law, “shall be considered a synonym for ‘sex’ and shall not be considered a synonym for gender identity, an internal sense of gender, experienced gender, gender expression, or gender role,” reads the text of the bill, which passed the Idaho House 54-14 on Feb. 7.

Saxe said the bills could have a cascading effect on other laws.

Two bills in Florida, neither of which passed, would have explicitly required driver’s licenses to reflect sex assigned at birth. Advocates, including Saxe, worry that other sex-defining bills would have a similar consequence.

Transgender rights advocates say access to identification that matches an individual’s identity and presentation is important. “If you can’t update the gender marker on your ID, you are essentially outed as transgender at every turn,” said Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality to PolitiFact for a previous story on drivers licenses in Florida. This can happen during interactions with potential landlords, employers, cashiers, bartenders and restaurant servers.

“Even in the states that have passed these bills,” said Paisley Currah, a political science professor at the City University of New York, “there’s still going to be these contradictions,” because a person’s driver’s license might not match the gender on their passport, for example.

“Unless you’re a prisoner or immigrant or you are in the Army, the government actually doesn’t get to look at your body,” said Currah, who wrote a book on how government agencies address “sex” categories. “It’s always some doctor that signs a letter … and so there’s always a document between your body and the state.”

How these sex-defining laws would affect state agencies remains to be seen. And the laws may face court challenges, likely on the grounds that they violate the Equal Protection Clause or right to privacy, Saxe said.

Complete Article HERE!

What doctors wish patients knew about getting a vasectomy

By Sara Berg, MS

When discussing reproductive health choices, one procedure has been gaining attention—especially since the fall of Roe v. Wade—for its effectiveness: the vasectomy. As individuals and couples explore long-term contraception options, vasectomies have emerged as a popular choice for those seeking a permanent solution—rates have increased by 26% in the past decade. With its relatively low risks and high success rates, this procedure is reshaping conversations about family planning.

The AMA’s What Doctors Wish Patients Knew™ series provides physicians with a platform to share what they want patients to understand about today’s health care headlines.

In this installment, three physicians took time to discuss what patients need to know about getting a vasectomy. These AMA members are:

  • Jason Jameson, MD, a urologist and chief of urology at the Phoenix Veterans Affairs Medical Center, who serves as a delegate for the American Urological Association in the AMA House of Delegates.
  • Amarnath Rambhatla, MD, a urologist at Henry Ford Health and director of men’s health at the Vattikuti Urology Institute in Detroit.
  • Moshe Wald, MD, a urologist at the University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics and an associate professor in the department of urology at Carver College of Medicine in Iowa City.

Henry Ford Health and University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics are members of the AMA Health System Program, which provides enterprise solutions to equip leadership, physicians and care teams with resources to help drive the future of medicine.

There are seasonal spikes in vasectomies

“We sometimes see seasonal spikes in vasectomies. We see it in March and then also in November and December before the end of the year,” Dr. Rambhatla said. “We think it spikes at the end of the year because everyone has met their deductible for the year.

“In March, it’s been loosely associated with March Madness, he added, noting “the running joke is that men get their vasectomy around the NCAA basketball tournament and ask their wives for permission to lay on the couch for four straight days so they can watch the basketball tournament.”

“The other interesting thing we’ve seen is with the Roe v. Wade reversal. There are studies showing an increase in Google trends, searches and consultations for vasectomies after that,” Dr. Rambhatla said. “So, it seems like some men are more inclined to be in control of their fertility status after that ruling.”

It’s a minor surgical procedure

“A vasectomy is a minor surgical procedure, which is aimed at eventually achieving permanent birth control,” said Dr. Wald, noting “the procedure is typically performed in a clinic setting under local anesthesia, which means injection of numbing medication into the area.

“However, in some cases, based on anatomy and on the patient’s preference it could also potentially be done in the operating room under sedation or general anesthesia,” he added. “But the vast majority are being performed  in the clinic under local anesthesia.”

“The procedure involves the surgical interruption of a tube called the vas deferens. The vas deferens is the tube that drains sperm from the testicle outwards and a man typically has two of them, one on each side,” Dr. Wald said. “So, the idea is to interrupt these tubes, and then allow enough time for  the sperm that at the time of the vasectomy was already beyond the vasectomy site to wash out.”

The procedure “usually takes about 20–30 minutes. One or two small cuts are made in the scrotum with a scalpel or no-scalpel instrument,” Dr. Jameson said, noting “the vas deferens are cut and tied or sealed with heat. The skin may or may not be closed with sutures.”

But “if the vas deferens are not easy to feel due to body characteristics—obesity, previous scarring—the procedure may be more challenging to perform,” Dr. Jameson noted.

It’s OK to drive yourself home

“Most of the time patients are OK to drive themselves home after the procedure. Occasionally I’ll have some patients who are a little nervous or anxious about getting a vasectomy,” said Dr. Rambhatla. “So, we can prescribe them medication to help calm down their anxiety for the procedure.

“In those situations, they need to have a driver with them because that medicine can alter their ability to drive,” he added. “Otherwise yes, you could drive yourself home.”

Don’t be nervous, it’s straightforward

Patients “should definitely relax. It’s a straightforward, easy procedure,” said Dr. Rambhatla. “The most common feedback I get from men after the procedure is: Oh, I thought it was going to be a lot worse than that.”

“Sometimes their friends will mess with them before the procedure and say it’s going to be a terrible experience and it is just good old fun,” he said. “But most of the time, people say it wasn’t so bad and they had nothing to worry about.”

Follow up requires a semen test

A vasectomy is “not immediately effective. If you can imagine a tube through which sperm is passing, the vasectomy is basically occluding that tube so sperm isn’t passing through anymore, but there’s still sperm on the other side of that tube we’ve occluded,” said Dr. Rambhatla. “And so, all that old sperm needs to be cleared out for men to become sterile.”

“We check a post-vasectomy semen analysis about three months after the procedure to make sure all that old sperm has been cleared out,” he said. “And sometimes some men may take longer, so it can take up to six months or so to clear out all the old sperm.”

Vasectomy is very effective

It is important to note that a “vasectomy would never provide a 100% guarantee. The only way to reach a 100% guarantee of no pregnancy is simply to avoid sexual intercourse altogether,” said Dr. Wald. “Even after a man gets a vasectomy and later gets a semen test that will show no sperm cells in the semen, there is still a very small risk for an unwanted pregnancy in the future.

“That risk is estimated in many studies at one in 2,000, which is, for example, much better than condoms. But it’s not zero and never will be,” he added. “That risk of roughly one in 2,000 by most series is after a man has a post-vasectomy semen test that showed no sperm. If somebody had unprotected sexual intercourse after a vasectomy before having such semen test at all, his chances for pregnancy could be close to 100%.”

This is meant to be permanent

“The best candidates for a vasectomy are couples who are done having kids or men who may be single and know that for sure they do not want any kids in the future,” said Dr. Rambhatla. That is “because we do consider it a permanent form of sterilization. It can be reversed, but really we want people going into it with the idea of permanent sterilization.”

Dr. Wald agreed, emphasizing that “If there’s any question about that, then I would advise against the vasectomy at that particular time.”

Vasectomies don’t always work

“There is a risk of failure. Even if done by an experienced physician, vasectomies could fail. Not necessarily due to surgical error—which is a possibility,” Dr. Wald said, noting “there have been multiple studies that showed the potential reconnection that can happen.”

“Sometimes there could be microscopic channels that can sprout from one end of the interrupted tube and at least in a transient manner allow for some sperm to sneak into the other side,” he said. “The risk varies a lot depending on if the patient had or did not have a semen test following the vasectomy that was negative for sperm. If he did that, his risk for such failure is very small.”

It may be covered by insurance

“Most private insurers cover some or all of the cost of vasectomies,” Dr. Jameson said. “For men without coverage, various self-pay options may be available in certain local facilities.”

“It’s a lot cheaper for insurance to pay for men to have a vasectomy than pay for them to have another child,” noted Dr. Rambhatla, emphasizing “most insurance companies are happy to cover a vasectomy.”

Vasectomy reversals are complicated

“Vasectomies are theoretically surgically reversible. The problem is that vasectomy reversals are a very different thing,” Dr. Wald said, noting that “vasectomy reversals are true surgery performed in the operating room. It is very expensive if not covered by insurance and it does not always work, even if done by an expert.”

The success of a vasectomy reversal “depends on various factors such as how long it’s been since the vasectomy, what your fertility status was prior to the vasectomy and what your partner’s fertility status is,” said Dr. Rambhatla. “Because sometimes we see men with new partners who may have different fertility potential than their previous partner or now their same partner is older, and her fertility potential has changed.”

“And the closer you are to the vasectomy period, the better success rates with the reversal,” he said. “Generally, if this is done within 10 years, there’s a good chance that we can get sperm back in the ejaculate. But sperm in the ejaculate doesn’t necessarily translate to a pregnancy.”

There is a risk of bleeding

“From the surgical standpoint, this is a fairly small procedure, so the risks are not to the magnitude of anything life threatening, but there are certainly risks that are worth mentioning,” Dr. Wald said. “There are the most obvious risks of bleeding and infection. Bleeding, if it happens, is not even close to being anything life threatening.

“Such bleeding happens not externally, but rather internally into the scrotal sac and it could cause bruising, swelling and patient discomfort, and it can take a few weeks to gradually absorb,” he added. “It typically involves the surgical wound or the skin, but sometimes can be deeper and even involve the testicle. These are almost always managed by antibiotics, but it’s a risk.”

“The risk of bleeding with vasectomy increases with blood pressure,” Dr. Jameson said. That’s why it is important to have blood pressure controlled before getting a vasectomy.

Watch out for abnormal pain

“What is not that obvious is the risk of chronic testicular pain. I’m not referring to the obvious post-procedural pain, but a chronic condition that can last months, years or even be there for life,” Dr. Wald said.

According to the American Urological Association, about 1% to 2% of men may experience ongoing pain or discomfort, explained Dr. Jameson. The pain is often treated with anti-inflammatory medications such as ibuprofen.

“This chronic type of pain is a treatable condition, but in some men such treatment could involve surgery that could be bigger in its magnitude than the original vasectomy,” Dr. Wald said.

Men can develop antibodies to sperm

“Not all, but most men who undergo a vasectomy do develop antibodies to sperm. This is because sperm is typically separated from the immune system,” Dr. Wald said. “However, a vasectomy is one of the most common causes where sperm is exposed to blood  and the immune system, and that could lead to the formation of anti-sperm antibodies.”

“This is not something that is posing a general health concern and patients will not feel it,” he said. “But the problem is that if somebody does seek fertility later in life and undergoes a vasectomy reversal, even if the vasectomy reversal works, these antibodies do not go away and can coat sperm, slow sperm down and impair its function.”

It should not affect sex

“A vasectomy does not change sexual function. It does not protect against sexually transmitted infections,” said Dr. Rambhatla. “It’s simply a way to prevent sperm from coming out in the ejaculate.”

Additionally, Dr. Jameson noted, according to the Urological Care Foundation, that a vasectomy should also not cause any erection problems—ejaculations and orgasms should feel the same. And while there is no sperm, the amount of semen does not decrease more than 5%.

Avoid extensive activity

“Typically, if the procedure is done towards the end of the week, then the patient can simply take a long weekend and then plan to go back to work Monday,” Dr. Wald said. “It’s not something that requires you to be in bed, but definitely avoid extensive physical activity.”

That means “no heavy lifting, running. Any gym type activities should be refrained from,” said Dr. Rambhatla, noting that “walking is OK. Just no strenuous activity.”

Additionally, “men with more activity and heavy lifting at work may need more time off as you should avoid heavy lifting for a week,” Dr. Jameson said.

Address pain control

“In terms of pain control, usually most people do well with alternating between Tylenol and ibuprofen as needed,” said Dr. Rambhatla, adding that icing for the first couple days also helps.

Patients can “resume sexual activity once the pain and swelling have resolved,” he explained.

Wear snug underwear and ice area

After a vasectomy, it is common to have swelling and minor pain in the scrotum for a few days, Dr. Jameson said, noting that “wearing snug underwear or a jockstrap can help ease discomfort and support the area.”

Additionally, “patients are typically asked to wear a jock strap with a pretty bulky dressing for 48 hours, and also to ice the area intermittently for 48 hours,” Dr. Wald said.

There are other forms of contraception

“Other birth control methods include condoms or birth control pills for females,” Dr. Jameson said, noting “both of these methods are effective but must be consistently used, and the one-time cost of a vasectomy may be cheaper over time than the cost of other birth control methods.”

Additionally, “tubal ligation in females is another surgical option for birth control and is performed by gynecologists,” he said.

Complete Article HERE!

When Makeup Sex Isn’t a Good Idea

By Myisha Battle

A client who is new to dating, sex, and relationships recently asked me “Is makeup sex healthy?” The person, in their late 20’s, has been dating someone seriously for the first time. Things were progressing slowly sexually with his girlfriend, so their question about makeup sex struck me as a great one to ask before ever having the experience firsthand.

We discussed the pros and cons of having an argument that ended with sex, and I explained what I’ve seen as a sex coach. On one hand, it can feel really good to reconnect with a partner after a challenging discussion or verbal disagreement. Sex can be the ultimate display that the fight is over, allowing both partners to move on without any lingering ill will towards each other. On the other hand, makeup sex could be masking deeper issues in the relationship if it’s an ongoing strategy used to resolve conflict in the relationship.

Makeup sex feels like somewhat of a cultural phenomenon. We know it happens, and maybe it’s even happened in our own relationships. But, is it a good thing or something that should be avoided at all costs?

A quick scroll on TikTok reveals a wide range of opinions on the subject. Some people strongly advise against it as it could reinforce bad behavior from your partner. Many posts lean more towards the commonly held belief that makeup sex is a great way to bond after an argument. Other posts suggest that there is something qualitatively different about makeup sex, that includes a heightened state of emotions that you just can’t get to without a fight beforehand. And it’s true that people who see makeup sex as more intense feel a carryover effect from their fight in the sexual experience that follows. This is called “excitation transfer,” which is when you are physiologically aroused by one thing and it transfers over to other areas of your life.

But there’s more to makeup sex than this. A 2020 study of 107 newlywed couples shed some light on what the benefits of makeup sex really are and how sexual quality is impacted by conflict. The study showed that when sex occurred after a flight, it had a greater impact on how people felt about the relationship by reducing the negative effects of conflict. This seems to coincide with the view that makeup sex is a way to feel closer to their partner. What’s surprising is that the study also showed that participants reported that the quality of sex after a fight was actually worse than the sex that occurred without a fight. So even though the sex itself wasn’t perceived as great, there were longer term emotional benefits for the relationship. This helps debunk the assumption that makeup sex is somehow just better than other sex. It also shows the real benefits of sexual connection after healthy conflict.

Where makeup sex gets tricky, though, is when it is used as the sole means for conflict resolution. Given that sex is one of the many ways we bond, it can be seen as an easier way to shift from negative emotions that are stirred up in a flight. But those negative emotions may still be there even after you have sex if you don’t take the time to process them yourself and with your partner. I’ve worked with couples where this dynamic is present and it can become very toxic over time. Feelings pile up that only get relieved through sex, which isn’t necessarily all that satisfying or pleasurable for one or both parties. There can be an aversion to sex for this reason and then feelings have nowhere else to go. This can cause ongoing tension at the least or periodic blow up fights at worst. As a result, people usually have to work with a couple’s therapist to develop healthy conflict resolution skills and be better communicators in general.

There is also a risk of having the perception that the relationship is on solid ground when it isn’t. I’ve heard from people that they have sex regularly, but feel stuck when it comes to day-to-day, non-sexual intimacy with their partner. When sex is the de-facto way to express emotions—joy, sadness, anger, or grief—there can be a lack of emotional closeness in the relationship. Makeup sex could be one way to avoid connecting with each other more deeply, resulting in what looks on the surface like a healthy relationship but is actually one without true intimacy.

Intimacy isn’t just the sex you have with your partner. It’s the ability to recognize the need for healthy conflict and repair. If you are in a healthy relationship where conflicts come up and are worked through, makeup sex can make you feel closer to each other. It’s a way to deepen the intimate connection that’s already there because you made it through something hard together. But it can’t— and shouldn’t—be the only way we connect with our partners. It’s just the cherry on top.

Complete Article HERE!

I’m not surprised women prioritise sleep over orgasms

— A survey has found that more than 85 per cent of women would choose a good night’s sleep over having an orgasm. I understand why

By

My friends and I have a game that we like to call “Eight Hours’ Sleep Or…” It’s not a particularly imaginative name and certainly won’t keep the creators of Pictionary or Scrabble up at night, but it’s as good a way as any to while away the spare two and a half minutes we tend to catch between work and parenting.

The idea of the game is to find something you would rather have than eight hours’ sleep a night. It goes something like this:

“Eight hours’ sleep or being best friends with Taylor Swift?”

“Eight hours’ sleep.”

“Eight hours’ sleep or being pursued by Brad Pitt?”

“Eight hours’ sleep.”

“Eight hours’ sleep or an end to mansplaining?’

“Eight hours’ sleep.”

“Eight hours’ sleep or being able to eat all the cheese without any negative impact on your health?”

“Eight hours’ sleep.”

“Eight hours’ sleep or an unlimited supply of confidence and money?”

“Eight hours’ sleep.”

And so on and so forth until you realise that nothing on God’s Earth will ever trump the idea of eight uninterrupted hours of sleep, of waking up feeling rested, recovered and raring to go into the day ahead.

It has been a relief, then, to discover that my group of friends and I are not alone. A major survey of bedroom habits by Good Housekeeping magazine has found that more than 85 per cent of women would choose a good night’s sleep over having an orgasm. Only 52 per cent of men feel the same way, perhaps because of the “gender sleep gap” –  yes, there is such a thing! – with 61 per cent of women saying their sleep quality varied, compared with 53 per cent of men.

Anyway, I think what we can all take from this is that sleep is very, very hard to come by these days. Stress, hormones, the lure of sitting up late at night scrolling through a little screen that sits in the palm of your hand and contains all of the horrors of the world… and then there’s the fact that sleeplessness has become a sort of status symbol, a way of telling people to back the hell off and go easy on you without actually having to tell people to back the hell off and go easy on you.

Saying “I’m tired” over and over and again is the most wonderfully passive-aggressive way of signifying you are busy and pressurised and do not have time for the trifling trivialities everyone seems to be bringing to your doorstep. We say we want eight hours’ sleep, but do we really? If we had eight hours’ sleep a night, then what would our excuse be?

Personally, I’m done with being sleepless in south London. It’s so boring talking about how tired I am all the time, such a waste of energy in itself. And in the past year, I have realised how counter-productive my obsession with sleeplessness is. The more I worry about sleep, the less I actually sleep.

I realised this last spring, when I spent a couple of hundred quid on an Oura ring, which is a sleep tracker that wellbeing experts swear by. Every night, I went to bed in it, and got annoyed by the flashing red and green lights that seemed to emanate from it in the dark. Every morning, I woke up and looked with horror upon the graphs that told me how exhausted I was, and what this might mean for my long-term health (nothing good). Eventually I realised that the presence of the tracker was in itself having a detrimental effect on my sleep. It was fuelling my insomnia, so I took it off, and decided to take radical steps to actually prioritise sleep, as opposed to just talking about the lack of it in my life.

Now, I devote the evening to sleep. I have sacrificed what remained of a social life for it. I don’t go out. I refuse all dinner invitations, choosing instead to eat early with my 10-year-old. I am in bed before her, my phone switched off and on charge, a good book in my hands as I get comfortable in my 200-thread-count Egyptian cotton linen. My friends know that if they text me after 8pm, they are unlikely to get an answer until the next morning. I spend at least 90 minutes reading, and have usually drifted off by 11pm.

I have rules: no more than one coffee a day, and never later than 11am; if I wake in the middle of the night, reading for 15 minutes is a much more effective tool than simply closing my eyes and trying to get back to sleep; my own duvet is essential, as I like to turn it round again and again to find the cool side; and if my husband starts snoring he is immediately out and into the spare room. 

This may seem draconian, but I don’t care. Because nothing – and I mean nothing – is more important than a decent night’s sleep.

Indeed, now I am in my 40s and in menopause, I can see that it is the most important thing of all when it comes to emotional well-being. You can go on anti-depressants, you can sign up for therapy, you can do as much exercise as you want: but if you are not prioritising rest, the chances are you will not start to feel better. It doesn’t have to be eight hours. But in my experience, anything below six and you are going to struggle. You are going to be cranky, short-tempered and extra sensitive. Any resilience you have will be gone by mid-morning. There will likely be tears. This is nothing to be ashamed of: it’s just simple, human biology.

Of course, I suspect many women would sleep much easier if they knew they lived in a world where they were entitled to both eight hours’ kip a night and an orgasm. But that’s another column entirely, and until that moment comes (pardon the pun), you’ll find me of an evening tucked up in bed in my nightie, sipping on a nice mug of Ovaltine.

Complete Article HERE!

The 3 most important steps to achieving orgasm, according to an expert

— Tried and tested

By Adriana Diaz

If there’s one thing the internet is not lacking, it’s unsolicited advice about how to improve your sex life. Not sure how to cut through the noise? Here are three simple tips according to an expert.

Orgasms aren’t just a way to finish getting freaky in the sheets – they have physical and mental benefits too. Yet the mystery of the Big O has eluded men and women for centuries.

Many surveys suggest that about half of women are not satisfied with how often they reach climax – and 10% to 15% of women have never had an orgasm in their lives, as reported by the National Library of Medicine.

Men have less trouble – only about 5% to 10%, according to a study published by Sexual Medicine – but that still leaves millions of Americans who can’t reach climax, or feel insecure when their partner can’t get off.

Everybody is different, but research and experts agree these three factors are key to reaching the finish line.

#1. Stimulation

It may seem intuitive, but what does “stimulation” really mean?

“The whole thing about the type of stimulation that you need is a combination of pressure and rhythm,” Dr Laurie Mintz, LELO Sexpert and author of Becoming Cliterate, told The Post.

Applying the right amount of pressure to erotic zones, such as the clitoris, the penis or the ears, helps build sexual arousal and eventually activates the muscles to contract, a necessary physical step.

Pressure also needs to be applied with a good rhythm – which some suggest is the key to orgasm claiming.

Experts, including Dr Mintz, agree that a great way to find the sweet spot for the G-spot is to bring a vibrator into the bedroom.

Getting into the flow of a good rhythm can focus attention so intensely that it overtakes any other thoughts and self-awareness nearly putting the person in a trance and allowing for a sufficient intensity of experience to trigger the mechanisms of climax, according to a study published in Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology.

#2. Mindfulness

To reach a sexual trance, you have to hone in on the sensations of the sexual experience and achieve mindfulness.

“Mindfulness is putting your mind and body in the same place at the time,” Dr Mintz, a LELO ambassador, explained. “And most of us don’t do that in our life, let alone our sex life.”

“When we’re having sex we’re in our head, ‘What do I look like? What am I doing? Am I doing okay?’ And you can’t orgasm when you’re not in your body. You have to learn how to be in your body.”

She advises everyone to try meditation or yoga to practice mindfulness in their daily lives or play music during sex.

“A myth about mindfulness is that it takes a lot of practice and that you have to meditate every day. No. You can practice being mindful in your daily life,” Dr. Mintz insisted.

An easy way to begin practising mindfulness is when brushing your teeth, Dr Mintz shared.

“The next time you brush your teeth, really focus on the sensations. When your mind wanders, bring it back to the sensations. You can learn mindfulness in daily activities and then apply it to the bedroom,” she suggested.

#3. Communication

Once you’ve used mindfulness to discover what pressure and rhythm are getting you to the finish line, you have to communicate that to your partner.

“Couples – no matter if it’s a hook-up or a relationship – who, communicate about sex and talk about what they need during sex are much, much more likely to orgasm,” Dr Mintz said.

“A common myth is that your partner should know what you want without asking. Nobody reads minds. That’s where communication comes in.”

While moaning and groaning can help guide your partner, verbally directing them how to help you cum is the best way to get over the finish line.

Complete Article HERE!

How to have a good fight with your partner

— Trust us, it’s possible

By Shona Hendley

Before you panic, fighting in a relationship isn’t necessarily a bad thing – but there’s a right way to go about it, plus four things that actually do spell the end.

While arguing and fighting with someone, particularly a partner, is often viewed as a sign that things may not be going well, many experts argue the opposite.

In fact, according to US clinical psychologist Deborah Grody married couples who don’t have any conflict are often the ones who end in divorce.

“Relationships that can’t be saved are relationships where the flame has completely gone out, or it wasn’t there in the first place,” she told Time magazine –because the indifference behind this lack of motivation can be a sign they don’t care enough about their partner, or their relationship to fight.

The sometimes beneficial nature of arguing was also backed up by a 2012 paper published by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. 

This research showed that constructively having conflicts with your partner may bring you closer together because while they cause short-term discomfort, they also incite honest conversations that can benefit the relationship in the long run.

In saying this, clinical psychologist and author of Difficult People, Dr Rebecca Ray says that not all arguing is beneficial and the determining factor behind what is and isn’t, can have a lot to do with how you fight, or your fighting style and whether, as the researchers specified, it is constructive.

“A good fight is one where both partners face the problem from the same side, not necessarily the same perspective. That is, you are both committed to a resolution of the problem itself, rather than making each other the problem (which is a bad fight),” she tells Body+Soul.“A good fight is also one where both partners make room for each other’s perspectives and how difficult it can be to express vulnerability,” she adds.

Your fighting style is so important, believe psychologists and relationship experts, John and Julie Gottman, that it can be one of the best predictors of divorce.

After years of extensive research, the pair identified four primary predictors of divorce, coining them, the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.” 

These predictors are criticism, contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling, and when they are used when arguing with a partner, they can be a telltale sign of a bad fight says Dr Ray.

“A bad fight is full of accusations and contempt, ineffective listening, and the pressure on each other to be perfect or be met with punishment.” 

So, how do you work out your fighting style and if it is ‘bad’ or ‘good’?

“In my book, Difficult People, I discuss psychoanalyst Karen Horney’s three styles of interpersonal coping which, when used often enough, can become automatic and habitual in times of conflict,” says Dr Ray.

These include moving towards people (compliance); moving against people (aggression); and moving away from people (detachment).

“There are both healthy and unhealthy versions of each of these coping strategies,” she explains. “Unhealthy moving towards looks like habitual people-pleasing, which means one partner will have difficulty speaking up for their own needs and often end up resentful.

Unhealthy moving against looks like blaming, accusing, and generally aggressive communication, which can stop the other partner from feeling psychologically safe.

And unhealthy moving away looks like avoidance of addressing the problem altogether, or being indifferent to a workable outcome. While each of us will lean towards one of these tendencies, with awareness and willingness, conflict doesn’t have to be coloured by unhealthy versions of these coping strategies.”

How to have a ‘good’ fight

One simple change that can help move your argument from negative territory to somewhere more positive, is altering the language you use.

More Coverage

“A good fight sounds like ‘I’ statements rather than ‘you’ statements,” says Dr Ray. “It also sounds like respectful language and tone,” she says, which means no yelling or swearing because this can be disrespectful in this context.

And while giving each other space and taking a break from the situation if things become tense can be helpful, there should be a willingness to return to solve the issue.

“A problem won’t be solved unless it’s brought into the light. Don’t sweep things under the carpet. Address them before they become too big to carry,” she says.

Complete Article HERE!

Open Marriage Is Not A Fad

— In defense of non-monogamy.

By Jenny Block

Monogamy Is Good, And It’s Here To Stay. I was leery about this 2008 piece the minute I saw the title. But as soon as I read it and saw the word “fad” used to describe the kind of relationship that I have been deliriously happy in for years (and the kind hundreds of other people I have met have been in for decades) I knew I was dealing with a classic case of fear and misunderstanding — a dangerous mix. I thought I might simply reply in the comments section, but I quickly realized that I had way too much ground to cover. So, below I have gone section by section in response to Ms. Cline’s piece.

“Why aren’t you in an open relationship yet? Carla Bruni Sarkozy, wife of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, famously “prefers polygamy and polyandry.” Reveal magazine quoted Will Smith as saying that he and his wife Jada Pinkett-Smith allow each other extra-marital dalliances. Oprah did a segment on open marriages. Both YourTango contributor Jenny Block and Village Voice columnist Tristan Taormino have books out on open relationships. All of this talk of free love is enough to make chicks who prefer old-fashioned monogamy feel a bit, well, old-fashioned. But if history can teach us anything, the open relationship bandwagon will come and go, which is a good thing because most women still benefit from and prefer monogamy.”

Cline’s opening question immediately gave me pause. This is the tone of someone who feels either uncomfortable or threatened. Surely no one is asking Cline, or anyone else, why they’re not in an open relationship, which me wonder if perhaps Cline is questioning herself. I have never suggested, and would never suggest, that anyone in a monogamous relationship is old-fashioned, and I have repeatedly assured my readers that I have no problem with honest, intentional monogamy. I have been told that to those on the outside, people in the open relationship community can come across as a smug group who think they’re more highly evolved than the monogamous. I am saddened to hear that, but it’s all the more reason that reading and writing on this topic is so important.

The truth is, it’s the lying that is a racket. And, if history can teach us anything, which surely it can, it’s that open relationships aren’t going anywhere. They’ve been around since the dawn of time. If it seems like they come and go, that’s only because the press coverage wavers, not the relationships themselves. The fact that Tristan and I both had books come out on the subject this past June certainly brought it into the public eye, hence the appearance of a suddenly new popularity.

I am not sure what Cline is referring to when she says “most women” as “most” of the women I have spoken to and researched neither prefer nor feel particularly benefited by monogamy. Quite the opposite is true. Many women feel caged in a relationship where their body is “owned” by their partner. Monogamy doesn’t necessarily result in that dynamic but it certainly does at times. That’s where open relationships can be very rewarding for women: controlling one is no longer the cornerstone of the relationship. Instead, love trust and intimacy are.

“Why? Women still generally do more work in relationships than men do and openness requires even more diligence than a regular relationship;”

That certainly is the stereotype. Whether or not it is the reality is unclear, but the fact that it is misogynistic is unarguable. I have trouble seeing how openness requires more diligence than a “regular” relationship. First, it begs the question of what “regular” is. Cheating is so common that, in some ways, I’d consider it more normal than true monogamy. Keeping one’s partner from straying — even though their biology is driving them to seek multiple partners — requires all the assiduousness one can muster. I no longer have to be conscientious in that way, but I am as tireless when it comes to making sure the people I’m involved with know how much I love them — and you don’t get a pass on that just because you’re in a monogamous relationship.  Being with another person requires attention. Providing that attention should be a part of the joy of that relationship, not part of the burden.

“Women are taught to care more about relationships and risk more for them than men, so non-monogamy raises the stakes more for us.”

I’m unclear here about what it is that women “risk more” than men. The stakes aren’t any higher in open relationships than they are in closed ones; they’re the same. We risk our hearts—whenever we love someone. What’s the point if we don’t take that risk? And if the risk is being alone, well, I think the divorce rate proves that “committing” to a monogamous relationship does not guarantee you anything.

“And, despite today’s female open relationship proponents, it’s men who typically initiate and prefer non-monogamy.”

This is simply untrue, although I would be interested to review any historically and scientifically significant proof that shows otherwise.

“The recent rash of high-profile cheaters (Elliot Spitzer, John Edwards, David Patterson, Larry Craig) has shown monogamy in an ugly light. People yearn for… variety, and now that we live longer than ever, it’s unrealistic to imagine a couple staying together for fifty years without a single affair. And in fact, statistics show twenty percent of men and thirteen percent of women cheat on their spouse.”

Exactly. So why not be honest with your partner about your needs instead of subscribing to a societal convention that is very young and that has proven to be highly unworkable? Cline is right when she says that these cases reveal monogamy in an unflattering light. So why not take advantage of that view and use it as an opportunity to take stock of the reality, as opposed to the fantasy, of what monogamy is and when it does and doesn’t work?

“But open relationships are not the solution, says Ayala Pines, psychologist and author of Romantic Jealousy, because jealousy and envy are just as hardwired as infidelity. Only a third of monogamous marriages survive cheating because of jealousy and a lingering sense of betrayal, says Pines. And the success rate for open relationships is not any better for similar reasons. “In my experience with open relationships,” she says, “the couple goes back to monogamy or else to illicit affairs. Or, it ends in divorce.”

Jealousy and envy have not been scientifically proven to be hard-wired. It is more likely that they are learned, based upon the study of non-Western cultures who live decidedly non-monogamous lifestyles. And as for the statistic of one-third, well, show me an argument and I’ll give you a statistic. As to Pines’ experience with open relationships, people who go to see a psychologist are likely going because they have a problem. Pines doesn’t see the people who are in happy open relationships. My question for Pines would be, what percentage of the closed couples that she treats end up happily back together?

“Another reason why open relationships don’t work in practice for a lot of women is because they’re simply too time-consuming. The block is upfront about the work involved in juggling a husband and a girlfriend.”

Again, I can’t see not pursuing a fulfilling relationship because it requires some of your time. All relationships take time. Everything worth doing takes time. How about hobbies? People are willing to put in the work to train for a marathon. How about careers? People are willing to spend four whole years to get a degree. That’s like saying, “I’d love to follow my dreams, but it’s just too much trouble.”

“An excerpt of her book on Huffington Post, Life In An Open Marriage: The Four (Not-So-Easy) Steps prompted one HuffPo commenter to say, “I’m exhausted just reading about all the ‘work’ and never-ending ‘communication’ about feelings, situations, jealousy, worry, etc. It all sounds like much more effort than it’s worth (IMO).” Likewise, Taormino’s Opening Up: A Guide to Creating and Sustaining Open Relationships is an intimidating 300 pages, in which the kind of person who is successful at non-monogamy is described as someone committed to knowing themselves “on a deep level,” a process she says might include “psychotherapy and counseling, reading, writing, journaling, blogging, attending workshops and peer support groups, meditation, and various spiritual practices.” While the idea of openness may be appealing to some women, it’s hard to imagine many of us finding the time to juggle a second relationship. Especially those of us with careers and children.”

I have a career and children. All of the people I know in open relationships have careers and/or children. And shouldn’t we all want to know ourselves on a deeper level? Good strong relationships require that. Otherwise, what’s the point? What do you get out of a relationship if you only have a surface understanding of yourself and your partner? Relationships between any number of people — good ones anyway — require attention and care. Not wanting to deal with “all that trouble” is a sad commentary about the value one places on enjoying truly satisfying, happy, healthy relationships.

“Open relationships are being billed as the wave of the future, but they’ve gone in and out of style every few decades, never becoming more than a fringe movement.”

Fringe is a tough word. At one time hippies were fringe but nowadays, not so much. The same goes for punks and guys who invented personal computers in their garages. Being part of a vanguard group doesn’t make what you’re doing wrong. Open relationships are far from being at their beginning stages, just as they are far from being unrecognized by the larger population. In the last six months alone, either myself, the topic, my book, or some combination thereof have been in or on The New York Times, the UK Observer, the Tyra Banks Show, Fox television, the London Observer, Huffingtonpost, the San Francisco Chronicle. I can’t imagine how something with that sort of media coverage is fringe. Isn’t that how the saying goes, once the media has it, whatever “it” is is no longer “cool”? I have never been more excited to no longer be cool.

“According to Susan Squire, author of I Don’t: A Contrarian History of Marriage, “there have been experiments of mate-swapping in the 19th century and again in the 70s and a few Utopian societies, but it never seems to stick. It doesn’t work or only works for a short period. Then, history cycles, marriage cycles, and everything repeats itself.”

As I mentioned earlier, I would argue that the cycle is the popularity of talking about open marriage rather than the popularity of actually having them. Otherwise, where did all of these people in open marriages go? I know a wealth of couples who have been in open marriages for more than thirty years. They might not have been talking about it because of prejudices like those presented in Cline’s essay, but they were still living their happy, open lives.

“The last time open marriages (often known as polyandry, free love, friends with benefits, et al)”

Forgive me for breaking in mid-sentence, but “polyandry, free love, friends with benefits, et al” are not the same things. At all. Polyandry refers to when a man has multiple wives. Free love wasn’t (isn’t) necessarily about intimacy within committed relationships. The same goes for friends with benefits. Open marriage refers to, well, open marriage: two people are married and have the freedom to pursue additional physical and/or emotional relationships (the latter of which would then imply a polyamorous relationship).

“were in vogue during the revolution of the late sixties and seventies. In 1972, the landmark book Open Marriage documented Nena and George O’Neill’s attempts to redefine marriage and open up their relationship to other partners.”

The book Open Marriage offers only one chapter about intimacy and the authors only peripherally mention spouses pursuing other partners. O’Neill’s definition of open marriage was more about opening oneself up to the world and not focusing on being a couple and nothing more. Interestingly, that is still the best marriage advice around. Have your friends, your hobby, your career. Be a partner to your spouse. But don’t become defined by his or her existence and your relationship with him or her.

“It was a runaway bestseller and, like today, promoted the impression that open marriages were the way of the future. By 1977, Nena O’Neill had published The Marriage Premise, which argued that fidelity was not such a bad thing after all. Squire herself got caught up in what she calls “the five minutes of open relationships” in the seventies. In her first marriage, she says, “We did this thing where we had to tell each other but we could [be with] whoever we wanted. Did it work? No. I remember him calling me to tell me he was drinking with some woman, and saying ‘I’m going to go sleep with some woman, do you mind?’ Of course, I minded. When faced with that, I wasn’t into it. And the reverse was true as well.”

A personal antidote is interesting. But it certainly doesn’t prove anything except that an open relationship with that partner wasn’t for Squire. Pines brings up another X factor of open relationships. Despite all the progress of feminism, she says “women are still socialized to care more about relationships and desire commitment more than men.” Just consider the multi-billion dollar wedding industry and the success of happily-ever-after rom-coms and shows like Sex and the City. Women want weddings, not necessarily marriages. It does make one ponder the old question of whether life imitates art or art imitates life.

“We are also more likely to devote our lives to children, family, and spouse.”

Only because society drills into our heads that we’re supposed to. What would women be like if no one told them incessantly how they were supposed to be? There’s no way to know. No way to know.

“In short, the stakes are higher if there’s to be an emotional fallout from an open relationship.”

Why? We have our own money and our careers. We shouldn’t be defining ourselves by our spouses. The problem is not with open relationships, but with continuing to tell women that they need a man, that they have to be mothers to be fulfilled, that there is one right way to do things, and that everything else is just a “fad.” If we keep telling this tale, it will most certainly continue to prevail. But what if we drop the whole ownership thing, the whole who cares if science says we’re not monogamous, let’s demand it anyway because one group of people (read: the church) says we should and live like thinking human beings who choose lifestyles because they work for us and our partners and the community at large. Keep in mind that marriage has a 50% failure rate and infidelity is rampant. If we went by those statistics, one might conclude that it’s heterosexual monogamous marriage that’s a fad. 

“In Woody Allen’s ménage a trois flick Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Javier Bardem’s character is flagrantly trying to bed three women. The women agree, but Vicky falls in love with him and is tormented. Christina agrees to merely be the extra “salt” in the relationship between Bardem and jealous ex-wife Maria Elena. Bardem is unflappable. Everyone in the theater laughs knowingly—for Bardem, it’s about [intimacy]. But the women always seem to have a little too much invested, a little too much to lose.”

This is a movie written by a man. Not real life. A movie. Truth be told, I wasn’t at all convinced at the end of the film that Christina wouldn’t pursue open relationships in the future. This one simply was no longer working for her. It makes me sad to think that viewers would perceive as novel a woman making a choice based on her own needs.

“And this isn’t just the stuff of a Woody Allen fantasy. Men are typically the ones who initiate open relationships. According to a poll on Oprah.com, seven percent of women and fourteen percent of men say they are in an open relationship. The gender gap is due partially to the habits of gay men, who are more likely than women or straight men to be in non-monogamous arrangements. But, it’s also that “men tend to prefer open relationships more than women do,” says Pines, who has decades of clinical and research experience on the subject, “because their preference for casual [intimacy] far exceeds women’s.”

That is, if women are telling the truth on those surveys, which researchers have said time and again they are not because of the stigma of admitting to being in or wanting an open relationship. Open relationship boards, events, and organizations are filled with women. I can’t see why that would be difficult to accept. It doesn’t affect those women — or men for that matter — who want to remain in closed relationships. Just as the legality of gay marriage doesn’t affect the state of heterosexual marriage. There is no need to invalidate another person’s life to validate your own.

“It’s intriguing that Block and Taormino, two of today’s loudest advocates for open relationships, are women.”

Why isn’t our existence — and popularity — proof enough that there are women in the lead? I don’t follow the logic. First, the argument is that there are very few women who want open relationships so they must be a fad or fringe. But then she says two women are leading the charge. What should one conclude from that?

“Historically, it’s been men who’ve advocated for polyandry and men who’ve benefited. “In the ancient world, men were never expected to be faithful,” says Squire. Women were severely punished for extra-marital affairs primarily because it threatened patrilineal culture, where the paternity of a child would be in question if the woman strayed. In the last three or four centuries, the Lutheran marriage model of fidelity has become the standard, which has given women a more equal stake in romantic partnerships.”

But what about all of the matriarchal societies? Surely it isn’t only Western cultures that count in this discussion?

“Sure, some women can tinker with this arrangement and come out on top, but for many of us there’s a sense that this is part of the battle of the sexes we’re not winning.”

Exactly. Open relationships work for some people, monogamy works for others. This isn’t a competition. Not for me anyway. They both can — and do — work. The decision is about individuality consciousness and desire. How do you want this world to work? If there’s only one way to have a relationship, how long before we’re back to only one “right” religion or one way for the genders to behave or one way to look?

“So if you’re feeling like a fuddy-duddy for not wanting two lovers, remember this open relationship thing is a fad, and, as history has shown us, this too shall pass. While it may seem like non-monogamy is feminism’s natural next step, the fact is that women largely prefer one partner, and we enjoy putting time and emotion into our primary relationship. There’s not enough reason for us to change our ideas about what makes a satisfying love life, just to get on board with a time-consuming relationship model.”

Everyone is allowed their own opinion. This is Cline’s and that’s fine. But it is imperative that it not be taken as fact, because fact it is not. The truth is that the model of a romantic, monogamous, “you complete me” marriage is little more than a hundred years old. And how old is civilization? Maybe heterosexual, monogamous marriage will end up being the fad in the long run. We don’t and can’t know. But, regardless, the only thing I advocate for is honesty and respect. Be honest with your partner. Respect the ways others choose to live even if that way might be different from yours. And if you’re feeling like a “fuddy-duddy,” perhaps it’s time to reevaluate your own life, not the lives of others. As my dad always says, “No one ever cares about what we’re doing nearly as much as we think we do.”

Complete Article HERE!

How the anti-gender movement is bringing us closer to authoritarianism

An all-gender restroom in San Francisco.

By Judith Butler

In the United States, gender has been considered a relatively ordinary term. We are asked to check a box on a form, and most of us do so without giving it too much thought. But some of us don’t like checking the box and think there should be either many more boxes or perhaps none at all. The myriad, continuing debates about gender show that no one approach to defining or understanding it reigns. It’s no longer a mundane box to be checked on official forms.

The anti-gender ideology movement, however, treats the range of sometimes conflicting ideas about gender as a monolith, frightening in its power and reach.

The fear of “gender” allows existing powers — states, churches, political movements — to frighten people to come back into their ranks, to accept censorship and to externalize their fear and hatred onto vulnerable communities. Those powers not only appeal to existing fears that many working people have about the future of their work or the sanctity of their family life but also incite those fears, insisting, as it were, that people conveniently identify gender as the true cause of their feelings of anxiety and trepidation about the world.

The project of restoring the world to a phantasmatic time before gender promises a return to a patriarchal dream order that only a strong state can restore. The shoring up of state powers, including the courts, implicates the anti-gender movement in a broader authoritarian, even fascist project. We see the rolling back of progressive legislation and the targeting of sexual and gender minorities as dangers to society, as exemplifying the most destructive force in the world, in order to strip them of their fundamental rights, protections and freedoms.

Consider the allegation that “gender” — whatever it is — puts children at risk through programs such as reading books with queer characters cast as examples of indoctrination or seduction. The fear of children being harmed, the fear that the family, or one’s own family, will be destroyed, that “man” will be dismantled, including the men and man that some of us are, that a new totalitarianism is descending upon us, are all fears that are felt quite deeply by those who have committed themselves to the eradication of “gender” — the word, the concept, the academic field and the various social movements it has come to signify.

The resulting authoritarian restrictions on freedom abound, whether through establishing LGBTQ+-free zones in Poland or strangling progressive educational curricula in Florida that address gender freedom and sexuality in sex education. But no matter how intently authoritarian forces attempt to restrict freedoms, the fact that the categories of women and men shift historically and contextually is undeniable. New gender formations are part of history and reality. Gender is, in reality, minimally the rubric under which we consider changes in the way that men, women and other such categories have been understood.

As an educator, I am inclined to say to these people, “Let’s read some key texts in gender studies together and see what gender does and does not mean and whether the caricature holds up.” Reading is a precondition of democratic life, keeping debate and disagreement grounded and productive.

Sadly, such a strategy rarely works.

A woman in Switzerland once came up to me after a talk I gave and said, “I pray for you.” I asked why. She explained that the Scripture says that God created man and woman and that I, through my books, had denied the Scripture. She added that male and female are natural and that nature was God’s creation. I pointed out that nature admits of complexity and that the Bible itself is open to some differing interpretations, and she scoffed. I then asked if she had read my work, and she replied, “No! I would never read such a book!” I realized that reading a book on gender would be, for her, trafficking with the devil. Her view resonates with the demand to take books on gender out of the classroom and the fear that those who read such books are contaminated by them or subject to an ideological inculcation, even though those who seek to restrict these books have typically never read them.

To refuse gender is, sadly, to refuse to encounter the complexity that one finds in contemporary life across the world. The anti-gender movement opposes thought itself as a danger to society — fertile soil for the horrid collaboration of fascist passions with authoritarian regimes.

We need to take a stand against the anti-gender movement in the name of breathing and living free from the fear of violence.

Transnational coalitions should gather and mobilize everyone the anti-gender ideology movement has targeted. The internecine fights within the field must become dynamic and productive conversations and confrontations, however difficult, within an expansive movement dedicated to equality and justice. Coalitions are never easy, but where conflicts cannot be resolved, movements can still move ahead together with an eye focused on the common sources of oppression.

Whether or not people are assigned a gender at birth or assume one in time, they can really love being the gender that they are and reject any effort to disturb that pleasure. They seek to strut and celebrate, express themselves and communicate the reality of who they are. No one should take away that joy, as long as those people do not insist that their joy is the only possible one. Importantly, however, many endure suffering, ambivalence and disorientation within existing categories, especially the one to which they were assigned at birth. They can be genderqueer or trans, or something else, and they are seeking to live life as the body that makes sense to them and lets life be livable, if not joyous. Whatever else gender means, it surely names for some a felt sense of the body, in its surfaces and depths, a lived sense of being a body in the world in this way.

As much as someone might want to clutch a single idea of what it is to be a woman or a man, the historical reality defeats that project and makes matters worse by insisting on genders that have all along exceeded the binary alternatives. How we live that complexity, and how we let others live, thus becomes of paramount importance.

There is still much to be understood about gender as a structural problem in society, as an identity, as a field of study, as an enigmatic and highly invested term that circulates in ways that inspire some and terrify others. We have to keep thinking about what we mean by it and what others mean when they find themselves up in arms about the term.

Complete Article HERE!

LGBTQ+ in Africa

— How the US far-right whips up homophobia

Sexual minorities say they have faced a wave of abuse since Uganda’s harsh anti-LGBTQ+ law was enacted last year

Tough laws targeting homosexual acts or abortion in African nations are often preceded by lobbying from American hard-liners. Often well-financed, these networks campaign against equality and diversity.

By Martina Schwikowski

Fundamentalist Christian churches from the United States are increasingly gaining power and influence in societies and political spheres across Africa. Many of them have been whipping up negative sentiments against LGBTQ+ people and abortion rights.

Haley McEwen, a sociologist at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, has examined some of their influential networks.

“US Christian right-wing groups have been very active in the US foreign policy since the early 2000s,” McEwen told DW.

“There are several organizations that have been around since the 1970s — and in the early 2000s they started to increase their influence internationally.”

A protester joins supporters of the LGBTQ+ community as they stage a protest against a planned lecture by Kenyan academic Patrik Lumumba at the University of Cape Town
Conservative activists often portray LGBTQ+ people as alien imports who threaten African societies

The groups have expanded into African countries like Uganda, Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana and South Africa.

According to McEwen, the networks also focused on UN organizations “in response to the advances being made by the international feminist movement to gain recognition of sexual and reproductive health and rights within the UN frameworks.”

‘Hatred from outside our history’

These conservative activists — who describe themselves as “pro family” — seem only interested in safeguarding one special type of family: heterosexual, monogamous nuclear families ordained by marriage.

“We continue to advocate that this is hatred that is deliberately being stirred, that it is not organic and not within our history and it is actually producing the conditions for violence and assault of LGBTQ+ persons in Kenya,”Irungu Houghton, Kenya director at Amnesty International, told DW.

Homosexuality has always been being practiced discreetly in what is now Kenya, according to Houghton. British colonialists enacted the first laws that criminalized gay sex in the 1930s.

Influence comes with money

These days, it’s African leaders who introduce the new laws — which is why they’ve been targeted by far-right networks from the US.

According to McEwen, these groups want to win over African leaders in order to implement what is being described as “family friendly agendas” — both in their home countries and internationally at the United Nations.

McEwen said this influence was also being exerted by funding African organizations which domestically propagate “nuclear family” policies and oppose LGBTQ+ rights and comprehensive sexuality education.

There is a homegrown network of such groups in Africa, but according to McEwen, they heavily rely on funding from outside Africa.

Who’s funding the anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment?

UK-based media platform openDemocracy published a 2020 report that examined more than 20 American Christian groups.

The paper revealed that the groups — which are known for their campaigns against LGBTQ+ rights, access to safe abortion, contraceptives and comprehensive sex education — have spent at least $54 million (€49.5 million) in Africa since 2007.

One of these groups is Christian conservative organization Family Watch International (FWI) which, according to openDemocracy “has has been coaching high-ranking African politicians … to oppose comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) across the continent.”

Uganda signs anti-LGBTQ bill into law

In May 2023, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed one of the world’s toughest anti-LGBTQ+ laws — including the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality” — drawing Western condemnation and risking sanctions from aid donors.

According to activist Frank Mugisha, director of Sexual Minorities Uganda, FWI was highly influential in the genesis of Uganda’s legislation.

However, FWI said in a statement on its website that it is “opposed to the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act 2023” and it “opposes legislation that penalizes a person for having same-sex sexual attractions or for their gender identity.”

“Family Watch opposes the death penalty or harsh penalties in the context of Uganda’s pending law and other similar bills,” according to the statement.

Africa’s tough anti-LGBTQ+ laws ‘stirring up hatred and acrimony’

Shortly afterward, Uganda passed the law, and a Kenyan lawmaker proposed a bill that has often been described as “copy paste” of the Ugandan law. The Kenyan bill is still undergoing parliamentary procedures.

In Ghana, a similar bill was recently passed by parliament. But it’s still unclear when and whether president Nana Akufo-Addo will sign it into law.

“There is a direct link between the emergence of hate bills in Uganda and Ghana and now Kenya with these interests,” said Amnesty’s Houghton.

“We have been very concerned that this is not only focusing on stirring up hatred and acrimony between societies but is also focusing on reversing many gains with regards to comprehensive sex education and sexual productive health rights.”

Complete Article HERE!

Is it ethical to watch AI pornography?

By

If you’re in your 20s and 30s, you probably watch pornography. Millennials and gen Z are watching more pornography than any other age group and are also more likely than any other demographic to experiment with AI pornography.

As technology advances, AI-generated tools and techniques are becoming increasingly sophisticated and accessible. This can lead to unethical content, including deepfakes – videos in which a person’s face is replaced with someone else’s likeness, without their consent. Social media platform X (formerly Twitter) recently faced a scandal when it became awash with deepfakes of Taylor Swift.

But what about other kinds of AI pornographic content? How can consuming it affect you, and how can you make sure that you’re consuming it ethically? I’m a sex and relationship therapist, so I’m interested in helping clients with various sexual issues, including porn consumption problems. I am also curious about the ways AI could be used positively to create pornography that is not only ethical, but educational and sexy at the same time.

The impact of watching AI porn

While it’s perfectly normal to be curious about sex, watching a lot of pornography can affect your sexual satisfaction – and AI porn is no different. You might, for example, start comparing your partner to the hyper-realistic, but impossibly perfect, digitally generated actors of AI porn.

Already, research suggests that men who frequently watch online porn may experience erectile dysfunction. This could be due to the idealised unrealistic portrayals in pornography compared to real-life sexual encounters. AI pornography would likely only exacerbate this, with AI porn avatars able to participate in sex acts that wouldn’t be possible, or as accessible, for real people.

Among women who watch porn, opinions vary. Some women have noted positive changes, including a reduction in the shame associated with sexual pleasure. But others have expressed reservations about the beauty standards in pornography, finding them unattainable.

This stance is very much shared by anti-porn campaigners, who claim that porn degrades and objectifies women. They believe it feeds into ideas of male supremacy, potentially leading to violence against women.

Regulating AI pornography

The roles women are given within mainstream pornography often portray a different power imbalance than, for example, gay male porn. For this article, I spoke to porn actor John Thomas. He argued that gay male porn was somewhat more ethical than mainstream straight porn which is [made for men to consume]. “Both roles in a gay scene might be appreciated by the viewer, rather than the pure objectification of the woman in a straight scene.”

One of the many concerns with unregulated AI-generated pornography is that it can distort a viewer’s sense of reality, leading to misinformation, unrealistic expectations around sex and potential harm. However, since the moral landscape surrounding ethical AI porn is a grey area, we are pushed into uncharted territory. As new technology emerges, new challenges arise.

To ensure responsible innovation within the adult entertainment industry, it’s essential to be aware of AI’s ongoing integration into our daily lives. For example, risks could be mitigated by training AI systems to recognise deepfakes, violence or child pornography.

For actors in the adult entertainment industry working pre-AI, consent has always been key. I asked John Thomas about best practice in the industry:

When working for a porn studio [as a freelance worker], I sign a contract which typically includes clauses relating to rights to my image – usually I am signing to give the studio the right to use, and alter, my image [from the photos or video created] and distribute it. AI is not specified in any contract I’ve signed.

But since AI porn is expected to become more mainstream, the topic of consent becomes more ambiguous. As John Thomas adds: “I think one could interpret the contract to include AI … the contracts are written in such an expansive way that, having signed away the rights to your image, and consent to your image being altered, it could [hypothetically be used in AI].”

How to be an ethical porn consumer

Just as there are fair trade brands known for their ethical practices in producing coffee and clothing, there should be a safe space for consumers to explore their sexuality and fantasies.

As a porn viewer, you can be more ethical in your consumption by becoming porn literate, improving your understanding of realistic sexual expectations, gender identities, sexual orientations, relationship styles, kinks and ethical BDSM practices.

And if you decide you want to watch AI porn and want to minimise the risk of consuming unethical content, here are some tips to help enhance your porn literacy skills:

• consider joining online communities where discussions about “feminist porn” and sexualised content are open and encouraged

• if you are a fan of a particular porn actor, consider following them on social media. This will provide you with some insights into their performance activities and their preferred ways for you to access their content

• when coming across porn sites, take a moment to assess if they are recognised for ethical production practices. Some established sites are known for their commitment to ethical pornography. Typically, the ethical emphasis will revolve around aspects such as production standards, consent, representation of diverse body types, genders and races, portrayal of safe sexual practices and prioritising the enjoyment of all involved

• keep in mind the difference between fantasies and real sexual encounters when watching porn. Remember that what you see online may not translate to real life

• keep a close eye on your porn consumption. If you sense it’s becoming overwhelming, or impacting your daily life or sexual experiences, don’t be ashamed. Seek support from a professional, such as a sex therapist.

Complete Article HERE!

How My Sex Life Changed After My Breast Cancer Diagnosis

By Molly Longman

On Dec. 2, 2015, Erin Burnett was two days out from her wedding and existing in the buzzy state of bliss that’s reserved for people who are very much in love. That morning, as she was happily daydreaming in the shower, she noticed something was different about her left nipple. She took a closer look — it seemed to be inverted. She felt an immediate chill; the sudsy water suddenly felt like ice.

She called her doctor, who said Burnett could come in during her lunch break to get her breast checked out, just as a precaution.

After some testing, the doctor told Burnett to come back after her wedding day. She tried to put the experience out of her mind until after the ceremony. Just 12 days after tying the knot, at 28 years old, Burnett got the call. She had stage II, triple-positive, invasive ductal carcinoma. Her honeymoon would be cut short.

The diagnosis impacted Burnett’s life in myriad ways — but a major factor was the impact on her sex life. “I had a brand-new marriage, with no honeymoon phase,” she remembers. “I used to joke around with my friends and say: ‘You guys are having these crazy sex lives where someone pulls your hair, while my husband’s picking my hair up off the ground.'”

Burnett underwent a double mastectomy and a hysterectomy, which induced what’s known as medical menopause. “I didn’t know until it happened that I was gonna have vaginal atrophy, vaginal dryness, pain with intercourse, lack of lubrication, and lack of libido [following the hysterectomy],” she says. She also faced emotional hurdles, especially as she coped with losing her breasts and went through painful attempts at reconstruction.

Throughout the treatment process, Burnett and her medical team were so focused on saving her life that her quality of life often took a backseat. In particular, the quality of her sex life was not top of mind for her or her providers.

This is a common refrain from cancer survivors, who say that the medical establishment tends to leave out or breeze through conversations about the ways cancer can impact your sexual health, especially because they’re rightfully so laser-focused on keeping you alive. But this can have serious ramifications for people’s sexual health, mental health, and relationships, says Ericka Hart, MEd, a sex educator and breast cancer survivor. “They’re usually not concerned about the ways that you are gonna experience pleasure in the future, they just want to fix you — and in their mind, cancer is the issue they’re fixing,” they say.

This often puts the onus on patients to bring up questions about how their diagnosis and treatment will affect their sexual health.

Anna Crollman, a 37-year-old breast cancer survivor from North Carolina, remembers feeling incredibly nervous about asking her provider about the sexual side effects, such as painful intercourse, she was experiencing during and after her treatment. “I like to call it the ‘doorknob question’ that you squeeze in right when they’re about to leave and their hand’s almost on the door,” she says. “You say: ‘Hey, just one more thing.'”

But if sexual health is brought up earlier and more often by providers, it’s not only easier for patients to discuss their issues when they’re ready to do so, but also for them to find more satisfaction with sex in the long run — and to feel less alone, says Don S. Dizon, MD, a professor of medicine at Brown University and director of the Sexual Health First Responders Clinic at Lifespan Cancer Institute.

It’s common, especially for women and nonbinary people, to blame themselves for sexual health issues and feel they have to suffer alone. “Most of the people I see feel like they’re the only ones going through this,” he says. “When I tell a person, ‘This is really common,’ there’s a weight lifted off their shoulders because [until then,] they think they’ve done something wrong.”

But patients shouldn’t be deterred from seeking information about improving their sexual health, despite cancer, and they shouldn’t have to work up extra courage to get answers. As Dr. Dizon puts it: “everyone deserves a sex life.”

The Physical Impacts Cancer Can Have on Sex

Breast cancer treatments can dampen physical desire in several ways. Breasts are an erogenous organ, Dr. Dizon says, and oftentimes a mastectomy is required as part of treatment. “The loss of breast-specific sensuality is something everyone will go through to some degree,” he says. “The process of naming that is really important, because people don’t consciously think of the breast as a sexual organ, and it is.”

Meanwhile, for those with hormone-positive breast cancer, doctors often prescribe drugs called aromatase inhibitors that lower estrogen levels, causing medically induced menopause. “These notoriously have a negative effect on sexuality, whether it’s vaginal dryness, painful activities, or loss of desire,” Dr. Dizon says. “Chemotherapy can also harm body image, because people gain a lot of weight, and it can cause neuropathy and physical side effects like nausea and diarrhea.”

As patients know, these physical impacts can take a real toll.

Shonté Drakeford, a nurse practitioner and patient advocate in Maryland, was diagnosed with stage four metastatic breast cancer in 2015, after being dismissed by providers for six years when she presented with symptoms. Drakeford says that before her diagnosis, her sex life with her high school sweetheart was “amazing.” For the first two years of treatment, she had no major sexual side effects, though she had to be careful about what positions she took part in, as the cancer had spread to her lungs, lymph nodes, ribs, spine, and left hip. “I asked my doctor what I could do that wouldn’t harm me, physically, because I was fragile,” she remembers. “He got all red and was embarrassed to answer.”

About three years into treatment, Drakeford noticed that her libido had lessened, and she was experiencing vaginal dryness. “Even though, mentally, I wanted to [have sex], my mind and vagina didn’t connect,” she says. “It was like a slow transition into a menopausal state.” This was due to her treatments, which she couldn’t stop. “I’ll be on treatment forever; this is lifelong for me,” she says. “I wish they had Viagra for women.”

Drakeford’s doctors told her that vaginal estrogen therapy — which some menopausal people use to help with some sexual side effects — wasn’t an option for her; her cancer was hormone-positive, so it essentially fed on hormones like estrogen. “It’s all about safety,” Drakeford says. “Am I willing to risk my health for sexual satisfaction?”

Cancer Can Cause Mental Health Barriers to Satisfying Sex, Too

Beyond these physical questions, mental hurdles are also prevalent amid cancer treatments. Many of us have ideas about what sex “should” look like, and those are challenged by a life-changing diagnosis like cancer, says Emily Nagoski, PhD, a sex educator and author of “Come as You Are” and “Come Together.”

Hart says that they felt “disconnected from their body” after their cancer diagnosis, something that they believe to be common for other survivors, but that looks different for everyone. As they were being treated for breast cancer in 2014, they struggled with how their body was constantly being touched, especially by white medical staff. Hart, who is Black, found that this challenged their understanding of bodily autonomy and lead to them distancing themself from their romantic partner, who was white. “I didn’t want a white person to touch me sexually,” they remember.

Hart says that something else shifted following their mastectomy: they felt like people could no longer see them as a whole person — they only saw Hart’s illness. At one point in their healing process, Hart went topless in public, baring their double mastectomy scars to end “the lack of Black, brown, LGBTQIA+ representations and visibility in breast cancer awareness.” As important as this messaging was, Hart felt “de-sexualized” by some of the responses their display elicited. “People would see my topless pictures and respond: ‘Oh my God, you’re so inspiring,'” they say. “But if anybody with nipples went topless on the internet, that would not be the response.”

This is a commonly felt sentiment among breast cancer patients — they feel society begins to see them only as patients, rather than sexual beings. Hart points out that you rarely see sex scenes with cancer patients in the media. FWIW, the only one I could think of was in “Desperate Housewives,” which involved a somewhat superficial plot about Tom feeling uncomfortable having sex with Lynette when she wasn’t wearing her wig, and Lynette fearing it meant he was no longer attracted to her. (This is a real fear among patients, though Dr. Nagoski notes: “In a great relationship, we’re attracted to the human being we chose to be with, not to the body parts of that human. It’s normal to have feelings about changes to our bodies and our partners’ bodies, of course, but a strong relationship adapts to those changes with love and trust.”)

Meanwhile, Crollman, who was diagnosed with cancer at 27, adds that the mental barriers to sex after cancer were “the hardest part.” “The pain, of course, is physically uncomfortable, but even though my partner and I tried so hard to stay in open communication, the reality was, we went through a very, very dry spell,” she says. “I was feeling really lost, mentally. I went through a deep depression, and I was seeing a therapist to cope because I really didn’t feel comfortable in my body.” After having a double mastectomy, Crollman felt “vulnerable” being in front of someone else while she was still “struggling to come to terms with the body that I had.”

Plus, not being intimate for a period due to these understandable challenges led to “more physical triggers and trauma around that experience — around the fear of it, around the pain that was related to it because of the side effects,” Crollman remembers. “So it was kind of this multileveled, emotional, psychological challenge.”

Finding Pleasure Again Post-Diagnosis

The physical and emotional stressors surrounding sex are very real, but reframing can help cancer patients to work through them. “The stakes around treatment certainly may be high, but the stakes around sex are not” — or at least, they don’t have to be, Dr. Nagoski says.

Although our culture tells us we can somehow “fail” sexually, especially “if we don’t perform according to some external, bullshit standard, the reality is there is nothing to lose, there is no way to fail,” Dr. Nagoski says. “We only imagine we’re doing it ‘wrong’ when we compare our experiences to some bogus cultural script of what sex ‘should’ be like — a script that was always irrelevant to our lives, but after a cancer diagnosis is just an absurd, pointless, and even cruel standard against which to assess our sexual connections. There is nothing at stake with sex; you have nothing to lose, only pleasure and connection to gain.”< Pleasure can look different to different people, and sex is just one piece of it. In order to maximize satisfaction for all parties involved, Dr. Nagoski says you first need to get on the same page as your partner — and that means getting curious. "If your partner wants sex, ask each other these important questions: What is it that you want, when you want sex with each other? And what is it that you don't want? When don't you want sex with each other? And, perhaps most importantly, what kind of sex is worth having — as in, what makes sex worth not spending that time watching 'Parks & Recreation'?"

Also, “You could decide to take all sex entirely off the table,” Dr. Nagoski says. “That’s a legitimate choice.” Hart adds that some couples may decide to open up their relationship amid cancer.

However, many people with cancer do want to try to explore sex and pleasure again, whatever that looks like for them. But because there are so few good resources out there and so much stigma around the topic, they may do so with varying levels of success.< Hart, for example, discovered that kink and BDSM was a sexual space of healing for them. "After being poked and prodded and having surgeries and chemotherapy literally once a week with a giant needle, I wanted to go into spaces where I could reclaim that pain," they say. "So doing things like impact play — being consensually spanked and hit — I could reclaim the pain after years of feeling like I didn't have a choice of opting into it." Hart also recommends working with a sex therapist to find pleasure again, which may include finding ways to incorporate chest play after a mastectomy, whether you still have nipples or not. Dr. Nagoski recommends the book “Better Sex Through Mindfulness” by Lori Brotto, who specializes in sexual health interventions for those with cancer and for survivors of sexual trauma.

Dr. Dizon adds that some healthcare providers might be more comfortable pointing their patients to resources rather than giving them actual advice about their sex lives, so asking your doctor if they have recommendations for something to read or a support network you could join might be a smart tactic for finding the support you seek.

Drakeford says she hasn’t been shy about asking for resources but still hasn’t felt satisfied with the level of pleasure she’s experienced since her diagnosis. She’s tried vaginal moisturizers, lube, and sex toys and hasn’t seen much success. “I even tried that slippery elm herb — it did nothing. Not a thing!” Drakeford says. “I’ve been going on nine years without things improving. I hope researchers can get on this and find something that actually works for people like me . . . even if it’s not during my lifetime.”

Burnett, for her part, has tried to be intentional about pleasure from the very beginning — though it hasn’t been easy.

While she was undergoing chemo, Burnett says, she and her partner scheduled sex around treatments. “The first couple of days after chemo, your body’s pretty toxic, so you aren’t going to be intimate,” she says. “Then seven to 10 days after is when you’re at your sickest. So for us, it was usually around that two-week mark that we’d schedule time to be intimate, before the next round.”

Since going into medical menopause, Burnett’s tried multiple tactics to make sex post-breast-cancer more pleasurable with her partner, including lubes, moisturizers, and laser therapy. (Dr. Dizon notes it’s important for those with breast cancer to find options that have specifically been studied in people with breast cancer, not the general population.) She also had to mentally get used to the changes in her breasts — though getting a mastectomy scar tattoo helped her regain some confidence, both in general and in the bedroom.

Although Burnett didn’t get the honeymoon phase she’d always dreamed about, she did learn quickly that she’d found a partner who’d keep every word of his vows. “There is something really intimate about someone who can be there for you and hold your hair back as you’re throwing up, and pick it up as it’s falling out,” she adds, nodding to her old joke about her friends having their hair pulled.

The couple’s 10-year anniversary is coming up next year, and they’re planning to finally take that honeymoon they never got. “It’ll be a different kind of honeymoon, because my body is just different from most other 36-year-olds’ out there. But it will also be a celebration of surviving 10 years.”

Complete Article HERE!

The ugly return of homophobia

— Bigotry is coming from the progressive establishment

By

As a child of the Eighties and Nineties, I remember well that homosexuals were fair game in the mainstream media. One columnist in The Star railed against “Wooftahs, pooftahs, nancy boys, queers, lezzies — the perverts whose moral sin is to so abuse the delightful word ‘gay’ as to render it unfit for human consumption”. After the death of Freddie Mercury, sympathy in The Mail on Sunday was limited. “If you treat as a hero a man who died because of his own sordid sexual perversions,” one writer cautioned, “aren’t you infinitely more likely to persuade some of the gullible young to follow in his example?”

It was sadly inevitable that the AIDS crisis would exacerbate this ancient prejudice. A headline in The Sun declared that “perverts are to blame for the killer plague”. And while a writer for the Express held “those who choose unnatural methods of self-gratification” responsible for the disease, letters published in its pages followed suit. One reader called for the incarceration of homosexuals. “Burning is too good for them,” wrote another. “Bury them in a pit and pour on quicklime.” Someone had been reading his Dante.

I happened to come out in a much less hostile climate. In the early 2000s, we were enjoying a kind of Goldilocks moment, neither too hot nor too cold. We weren’t generally on the receiving end of homophobic slurs, but nor were we patronised by well-meaning progressives. My memory of this time was that no one particularly cared, and I was more than happy with that. Being gay for me has never been an identity, it’s simply a fact, as unremarkable as being blue-eyed or right-handed.

And so it has been troubling to see a resurgence in the last few years of the kind of anti-gay rhetoric that was commonplace in my childhood. Of course, it could be argued that the rise of social media has simply exposed sentiments that were previously only expressed in private. As Ricky Gervais has pointed out, before the digital era “we couldn’t read every toilet wall in the world. And now we can.”

Yet the most virulent homophobia appears to be coming from a new source. Whereas we have always been accustomed to this kind of thing from the far-Right — one recalls Nick Griffin’s remark on Question Time about how he finds the sight of two men kissing “really creepy” — but now the most objectionable anti-gay comments arise in online spheres occupied by gender ideologues, from those who claim to be progressive, Left-wing and “on the right side of history”. The significant difference is that the word “cis” has been added to the homophobe’s lexicon. Some examples:

“Cis gay men are a disease.”

“Cis gay men are truly some of the most grotesque creatures to burden this earth.”

“I hate cis gay people with a burning passion.”

“If you’re a cis gay man and your sexuality revolves around you not liking female genitalia I hope you die and I will spit on your grave.”

“Cis gays don’t deserve rights.”

“There’s so many reasons to hate gay people, most specifically white gays, but there’s never a reason to be a transphobe.”

“It’s time to normalise homophobia.”

Of course, any bile can be found on the internet, but these kinds of phrases are remarkably commonplace among certain online communities. Even a cursory search will reveal innumerable examples of gender ideologues casually branding gay men “fags” or “faggots”, praising the murder of gays and lesbians, and claiming that the AIDS epidemic was a positive thing. Many thousands of examples had been collated on Google Photos under the title “Woke homophobia: anti-gay hatred & boxer ceiling abuse from trans activists & gender-identity ideologues”. The site was taken down last year, presumably because it violated Google’s policy on hate speech — or perhaps because it revealed the toxicity of the ideology the company has spent so long promoting.

If such ideas were restricted to the demented world of internet activism, we might be justified in simply ignoring it. But we now know that the overwhelming majority of adolescents referred to the Tavistock paediatric gender clinic were same-sex attracted. Whistleblowers have spoken out about the endemic homophobia, not simply among clinicians but also parents who were keen to “fix” their gay offspring. And of course there was the running joke among staff that soon “there would be no gay people left”.

And now a series of leaked internal messages and videos from WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), has revealed that clinicians in the leading global organisation for transgender healthcare have openly admitted in private that some teenagers mistake being same-sex attracted for gender dysphoria. The result of the “gender-affirming” approach has amounted to what one former Tavistock clinician recently described as “conversion therapy for gay kids”. Homosexuality was removed from the World Health Organisation’s list of psychiatric disorders in 1993, and yet here we are medicalising it all over again.

So how did we reach the point where gay conversion therapy is being practised in plain sight by the NHS? Much of the responsibility has to lie with Stonewall, a group that once promoted equal rights for gay people but now actively works against their interests. It has even gone so far as to redefine “homosexual” on its website and resource materials as “same-gender attracted”. It should go without saying that gay men are not attracted to women who identify as men, any more than lesbians should be denounced for excluding those with penises from their dating pools. What trans activists call discrimination, most of us call homosexuality.

“What trans activists call discrimination, most of us call homosexuality.”

Indeed, activists often claim that “genital preferences are transphobic”, or that sexual orientation based on biological sex is a form of “trauma”. The idea that homosexuality is a sickness was one of the first homophobic tropes I encountered as a child. Now it is being rebranded as progressive.

As for Stonewall, its former CEO Nancy Kelley went so far as to argue that women who exclude trans people as potential partners are analogous to “sexual racists”. She claimed that “if you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it’s worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions”. It is worth remembering that Stonewall is deeply embedded in many governmental departments and quangos, as well as corporate and civic institutions. Anti-gay propaganda is being reintroduced into society from the very top.

Meanwhile, the Crown Prosecution Service has been meeting with trans lobby groups such as Mermaids and Stonewall to discuss changes to prosecutorial policy in cases of sex by deception. Since these meetings — only revealed after sustained pressure from a feminist campaigner who submitted Freedom of Information requests — the CPS has recommended what Dennis Kavanagh of the Gay Men’s Network has described as “a radical trans activist approach to sex by deception prosecutions that would see them all but vanish”. In trans activist parlance, the barriers to having sex with lesbians and gay men are known as the “cotton ceiling” and “boxer ceiling”. Now it seems the establishment is attempting to support the coercion of gay people into heterosexual activity.

Consider a recent post on X by Stephen Whittle, OBE, a professor of equalities law at Manchester Metropolitan University. In a reply to LGB Alliance’s Bev Jackson, Whittle took issue with the notion that “love is all about genitals” (an argument that Jackson has never made). Having dismissed this straw man as “a very hetero/homo-normative perspective”, Whittle then claimed that “a lot of gay men can’t resist a young furry ftm [female-to-male] cub”.

While it is true that there are some bisexuals who identify as gay, it is simply not the case that homosexual men “can’t resist” certain kinds of women. As Jackson rightly noted in her response, this is rank homophobia, “disturbed and disturbing on every level”. Yet it has been expressed by an individual who has been described as a “hero for LGBTQ+ equality”. With heroes like these, who needs villains?

Another example is Davey Wavey, a popular online influencer, who has encouraged gay men to perform heterosexual acts in a video called “How to Eat Pussy — For Gay Men”. It may as well have been called “Gay Conversion Therapy 2.0”. We are firmly back in the Eighties, where gays are being told that they “just haven’t found the right girl yet” and lesbians are assured that they just “need a good dick”. And yet now these demeaning ideas are being propagated by those who claim to be defending the rights of sexual minorities.

The Government’s recent guidance on how schools are to accommodate trans-identified pupils — in which biological sex will take precedence over identity — has been met with horror from gender ideologues. One of the common refrains one hears from activists is that it represents “this generation’s Section 28”. But this is to get it precisely backwards. Gay rights were secured on the recognition that a minority of the population are same-sex attracted. In dismantling the very notion of sex and substituting it for this nebulous concept of “gender identity”, activists and their disciples in parliament are undoing all of the achievements of previous gay rights movements.

The widespread homophobia of the Eighties, epitomised by Section 28, was based on the notion that homosexuality was unnatural, dangerous and ought to be corrected. Present-day gender identity ideology perceives homosexuality as evidence of misalignment between soul and body. In other words, it seeks to “fix” gay people so that they fit into a heterosexual framework. It is no coincidence that so many detransitioners are gay people who were simply struggling with their sexuality. Gender identity ideology is the true successor to Section 28.

The proponents of this revamped gay conversion therapy dismiss our concerns as “transphobia” and “bigotry”, or as part of a manufactured “culture war”. Worse still, the new homophobia is being cheered on by those it will hurt most. While prominent gay figures continue to feed the beast that wishes to devour them, we are unlikely to see this dire situation improve any time soon. It was bad enough in the Eighties, when gay people were demonised and harassed by the establishment. Who thought we would have to fight these battles all over again?

Complete Article HERE!