Science of Sex

Science of Sex is a monthly feature on Of Sex and Love in which I discuss the science of sexuality in an easy-to-digest format that’s accessible to the casual reader.

I end with some extended reading material for people who want to know more about the subject of each post.

Previous topics include the dual-control model of sexual arousal, pheromones, the women of sexology, and habituation of sexual arousal. Find the entire archive below.

Check back every second Saturday for a new sexy science post.

Science of Sex: BMI And Birth Control Efficacy

March 30th, 2019

bmi and birth control efficacy

This month’s very late Science of Sex post was motivated by the new Hulu show Shrill, which reminded the world that emergency contraception may not be as effective for overweight people. Specifically, the brand Plan B (also known as the morning after pill) EC is rated up to 175 pounds, which is just over the average weight of an American woman.

The results of a large European study show that the popular form of EC, levonorgestrel 1.5 mg, (Plan B pill) loses its potency in women weighing about 165 pounds and does not work at all in women weighing 175 pounds or more.

There are several theories as to why.

  1. Having more fat makes pills break down more quickly. This makes the medication less effective.
  2. Overweight people have more blood, so more birth control is required to reach ideal blood concentration levels.

Researchers haven’t pinpointed which theory, if either, is correct. All we know is that EC might not be reliable for many people. This was something I learned last year thanks to Reddit, but it’s not something that many people have heard from doctors, pharmacists, or other professionals. Even the manufacturer denies this to be the case.

Fortunately, there is another option: Ella. According to the study, Ella is more effective than Plan B for overweight users, and you can take the pill up to five days later. In comparison, Plan B loses effectiveness after 72 hours. However, you may need a prescription for Ella.

Ella bested Plan B by half, with about 50% fewer pregnancies than those taking levonorgestrel.

Additionally, you may be able to double up on doses of Plan B to increase its effectiveness if you are overweight.

This increased risk of pregnancy doesn’t end with EC. Cochrane examined different studies and found mixed results. The effectiveness of birth control didn’t decrease universally as BMI increased, but the patch and some birth control pills were less effective for overweight and obese users. Shots, implants, and hormonal IUDs were not less effective.

Across the board, IUDs are touted as being the most effective birth control or EC regardless of BMI.

But any contraception is better than none. The European Medicines Association advises that using Plan B is better for overweight people than using no EC. You just need to be aware of the risks.

Further Reading

Comment


Science of Sex: Sexual Harassment in the Field of Sexuality Research

February 9th, 2019

Sexual Harassment in the Field of Sexuality Research

After a hiatus last month, I am back with another installment of Science of Sex. As soon as I read a recent entry in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, I knew I had to write about it.

Titled “Sexual Harassment in the Field of Sexuality Research,” this submission is a guest editorial from Drs. Debby Herbenick and Sari M. van Anders along with Lori A. Brotto, Meredith L. Chivers, Sofia Jawed-Wessel, and Jayleen Galarza.

You might recognize some of these names from a previous Science of Sex post in which I discussed the work done by women in the field of sexuality. I’ve also reviewed Brotto’s book, and it inspired another Science of Sex post.

For those who are unfamiliar, these women are doing groundbreaking work around sexuality. Some have ties to the Kinsey Institute. Along with research, many of them are educators, and some are also authors. If you’re interested in sex and academia, you’ll probably run into their names.

I appreciate their work and share it often. So I was intrigued when a paper was released at the beginning of this month and it was co-authored by multiple people who have earned my respect and admiration.

It wasn’t great news, however. These women have worked hard and provided valuable insight into sexuality. But sexual harassment occurs so frequently and egregiously that they felt they had to talk about it.

They get right to the point:

Our field has a problem with sexual harassment, and we need to talk about it. Though sexual harassment is currently at the forefront of discussions taking place within major social movements, professional societies, and disciplines […], the discipline of sexuality research has—to this point—been largely absent from these discussions.

The editorial continues to break down the issues and to offer possible reasons for such sexual harassment including that the very nature of their work might invite unwanted behavior. I touched on this a bit myself when I wrote about being a sex educator in my own way. This editorial emphasizes how rampant the issue really is.

But our professional sexuality spaces are about our work, not our personal sexualities.

As someone who has dealt with this issue myself, I am not surprised that sexual harassment extends far and wide among those whose careers focus on sexuality. As a woman, I know that sexual harassment and the sexism that allows for it permeates every field and every walk of life.

I was surprised, however, that a group of women and perhaps this group of women stepped forward to say something. Some people might argue that it’s about time or, rather, that “Time’s Up.” With the MeToo movement setting a foundation, there may be no better time for these professionals to air their grievances.

Yet, it still feels brave. I worry that these women will face professional repercussions, personal attacks online, or have their lives otherwise invaded by people who are unwilling to hear these truths. I worry that these voices will be minimized like so many voices that came before them.

I thanked the women on Twitter. Their bravery speaks volumes, and their effort is appreciated by me at least. That effort includes multiple, actionable steps to end sexual harassment in their field. Yet again, these women were forced to do the work that should not be on their shoulder.

I write this month’s post to encourage any of my followers who have not read this guest editorial to do so, to encourage thought and discussion about sexual harassment, and to remind my readers that there is still work to do if we want to create a world where there is no need for this type of editorial, and that work falls on all of us.

Comment


Bijoux Indiscrets cosmetics for better sex

Science of Sex: Finger Length and Sexual Orientation (The 2D:4D Ratio)

December 22nd, 2018

More than fifteen years ago, when I was still in high school, I had heard there was something about your hand shape that could be linked to being gay. I’d heard this repeated throughout the years but always in a way that indicated it was an urban legend, simply a myth. Why did I think this way? Because no one discussed the science; they just held up their hands and explained this fact.

This month’s Science of Sex explains the theories about why hand shape and, specifically, finger length correlates with gay orientations. I hope you enjoy learning a little more about physical and sexual development if you, too, had heard about this phenomenon before and had wondered whether it was true or how.

Science of sex finger length orientation 2d:4d ratio

Researcher Jonathon Manning was the first to notice a correlation between finger length and homosexuality in men. He wrote about how men having a ring finger that’s longer than an index finger (rather than the index finger being longer or both fingers being the same length) can be an indicator of sexual orientation. This high ratio (greater than 1), known as the 2D:4D ratio, is typically more common in women than in men.

But there are a few caveats.

First, we’re talking about the right hand specifically. Secondly, measurements should be taken from the crease to best compare overall finger length. Third, to reiterate, the high ratio is already prevalent in women, so this measurement applies less to them (although, you’ll discover that it does highlight some interesting traits).

This doesn’t mean that you should assume you’re gay if your ring finger is longer, but it might be an indication of biology at play if you don’t identify as straight.

Why does this happen? Researchers know that hormones such as testosterone and estrogen affect our development in the womb. A longer ring finger is connected to the influence of testosterone (a type of androgen) in utero. A lower ratio, which is typical of straight men, corresponds to greater testosterone influence in the womb. The interplay between testosterone and estrogen during this stage is also important.

You might remember that testosterone which encourages skeletal growth. This is why men tend to be taller and have defined Adam’s apples; testosterone spurts during puberty cause this. But finger length is visible at birth, unlike changes that don’t occur until puberty.

Finger length is just one thing that can be affected by hormones in utero. Research suggests, that on average, a gay man’s brain is a bit more feminized than a straight man’s, and that a gay woman’s brain tend to be a bit more masculinized. Of course, there is great variety not just between the sexes but in a single sex, so it is not accurate to say that a game man has the brain of a straight woman. You have to consider the spectrum.

However, there are other ways in which gay men and women are more similar to straight women and men, respectively. Gay men and straight women tend to do better when it comes to verbal measures, and gay men are also more similar to women when it comes to being dependent on landmarks, not direction, when navigation or providing directions. Young gay boys even gravitate toward individual sports rather than team sports.

Higher exam scores, increased neuroticism, better visual recall (in women), and improved literacy also correlates with a greater testosterone influence in utero. There are also some risks from increased testosterone exposure, including an increased risk of prostate cancer as well as lower sperm count, increased risk of heart disease and obesity (in men), and increased risk of mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, alcohol dependence, and bulimia.

Many of these differences exist even in children; although, some people wonder whether children who are more ‘sex typical’ who later identify as gay may trace their sexual roots more to childhood events than fetal development.

The potential differences and risks I’ve listed above occur to a high 2D:4D ratio. But it’s not just the high ratio that matters. Bisexual men, for instance, have a lower ratio than gay men. Lesbians also tend to have a lower digit ratio, indicating a decreased preference for a masculinized partner, than straight women. However, a high ratio in women correlates to identifying as femme rather than butch.

Amazingly, scientists have been able to study women who were identical twins where one was gay, and the other was not. The differences persist.

A low digit ratio even corresponds with an interest in polygamy.

This research indicates not just the biological differences between gay, straight and bisexual people, but also the significant impact of hormones during our fetal development. The more I read about this, the more I realize that a ton of research supports these theories.

However, I would love to see more research on bisexual men and women specifically — not just because I am one.

Additional Reading

Comment


Science of Sex: Arousal, Disgust, and Decision Making

November 24th, 2018

Welcome to November’s issue of Science of Sex, wherein I tackle issues about human sexuality. Why do we do that? How do we know? This month, I discuss another issue related to arousal (although I’ve barely scratched the surface, it seems) and what happens when the arousal cycle ends.

I hope you enjoy this article, and if you’re interested in more, check out the Science of Sex archives.

science of sex - arousal disgust decision making

Initially, I was just going to write about the interplay between arousal and disgust, but sexual arousal affects so many of our systems — especially cognitive ability.

If you’ve given a thought to how being aroused affects your thinking process, you’ve probably realized how easy it is to make poor decisions when aroused. Anecdotally, I have risked my sexual health by not using condoms, but foregoing protection and birth control is only one example of this risk. Arousal might lead you to have sex with someone who is a bad choice (an ex, a friend, someone with whom romantic feelings are unbalanced, etc). Disgust plays a role in why most people don’t have sex with family members; although, Science of Sex: Genetic Sexual Attractionsome people do.

Studies have even found that a woman’s attractiveness can influence whether a man chooses to use a condom during sexual activity with her.

Less obvious and perhaps more indirectly related to cognitive ability is how arousal seems to lower disgust, at least, in some individuals. Researchers theorize that disgust evolved as a way to keep us away from potentially dangerous things. So humans developed aversions to things that are dirty and “yucky,” such as fecal matter, bodily fluids (urine, blood, semen etc), and even actual dirty in our environment. It makes sense that arousal would inhibit disgust because sex involves precisely some of those things.

This interplay explains why you might be more open to the idea of a certain sexual activity, say, anal sex, once you’re already aroused than you would be “cold.”

You might even notice disgust returned once the arousal cycle has completed, either through orgasm or simply subsiding over time. This can manifest as disgust or guilt toward yourself or partners after sex. If you’ve ever found yourself completely disinterested in any sexual activity, then you know what I mean. As you’re frantically closing every browser tab once you’ve finished masturbating because you cannot stand to see it, you’re experiencing the return of disgust.

At least one study finds that this isn’t the case with women. This could perhaps be due to arousal non-concordance: a woman’s mental and physical arousal is typically less in sync than a man’s. The canceling out of disgust when aroused that men experienced could simply be an effect of their higher levels of arousal concordance.

Arousal continues to affect our system in other ways, too. Sexual arousal is often accompanied with the promise of sexual gratification through either solo or partnered activity. Dopamine receptors activate when aroused, which is one reason sexual tension can feel so good. The promise of sexual reward can also encourage poor decision making. The drain of dopamine and hormones after your arousal cycle completes can also contribute to negative post-masturbation or post-sex feelings.

This is also related to post-sex blues (described as postcoital dysphoria in research), something that women experience more frequently than men. As hormones decrease in your body after a sexual experience, you might feel down even if the sexual encounter was enjoyable.

I suspect that arousal inhibits or overrides a number of feelings and responses that we either don’t yet know about or understand, and I look forward to telling my readers about them in a later post.

Further Reading

Comment


Make love to your long distance lover online

Science of Sex: Why Do Genitals Look Like That?

October 27th, 2018

In this installment of Science of Sex, we take a look at why genitals look the way they do. Surprise: it’s for reproduction. Keep reading if you want to learn a bit more, however.

Originally I was just going to focus on testicles, which are surprisingly more interesting than I had been lead to believe. However, I couldn’t help myself from going down the rabbit hole and touching on other genitals.

Note: The language in this post is cisnormative because I am focusing on reproduction alone.

science of sex - why genitals look that way

Testicles and ovaries are the two types of gonads or reproductive organs; although, the scrotum is more analogous to the labia. Both split down the middle, and the scrotum even has a “seam.”

Anyone who has seen a certain Seinfeld episode is familiar with shrinkage, which occurs when the body is cold, and the genitals retract closer to the body. It’s the cremasteric muscle that’s responsible for pulling in the testicle.

The muscle doesn’t just pull the testicles up and down. Each testicle has its own orbit, so they’ll hang unevenly. Apparently, the right testicle usually hangs higher than the left. Some suggest that this is also a defense mechanism should one testicle become harmed; the other may remain safe. But anatomist Stany Lobo suggests that testicular orbit maximizes space for each testicle, allowing it to remain cool enough.

The current theory is that testicles and the sperm inside them remain slightly cooler than the man’s body by about 3 degrees Celsius (cooler temperatures at night lead to descended scrotums, which may play into why humans so often have sex after dark), but the heat of a woman’s vagina and uterus reactivates the sperm, which are able to survive at those temperatures for the amount of time it would take to fertilize an egg (approximately 50 minutes to 4 hours). Voila!

As best as we can tell, the comparatively-large human penis is designed mostly for pleasure. A larger penis may attract and keep more mates.

The shape of the penis also aids conception. The large, contoured head acts a bit like a shovel as it thrusts into a vagina. This doesn’t necessarily benefit conception by a man’s sperm, but it does displace sperm for any previous partners a woman may have had. A larger corona and more vigorous thrusting can also increase the sperm-displacing effect.

The refractory period prevents a male from re-entering his partner and displacing his own sperm, aiding the continuation of his lineage.

The vagina and uterus are obviously shaped for penile penetration. However, the position of the organs aids reproduction in another way. Before our ancestors walking upright, the uterus tilted to aid “doggy” style sex. When our ancestors did become bipedal, the uterus tilted. One theory posits that to aid face-to-face sex, female lips became more pronounced and darkened in color (mimicking her labia) to attract a mate. I imagine those same characteristics attracted mates to female partners, especially when swollen and darkened due to arousal.

Interestingly, I have yet to come across a lot of information about the shape of the vulva. Perhaps the penis does most of the work when it comes to reproduction. And researchers have yet to come to a conclusion on whether female orgasm aids or hinders conception.

Like the foreskin protects the glans, clitoral foreskin protects the clitoral shaft (which extends deep below the surface). The labia also provide protection for the vagina, which is further protected by the hymen, stretchy tissue around the vaginal opening that can sometimes cover it.

The vagina itself balloons outward during arousal, a process known as vaginal tenting, that makes intercourse easier. The elongation of the vagina reduces penile impact against the cervix, which many women find uncomfortable or painful. No one wants to reproduce if it hurts, after all.

It’s interesting that despite all these adaptations, sex can still be so uncomfortable, especially for women. But perhaps nature’s focus on reproduction is why issues of pleasure, comfort, and connection are so often overlooked.

Further Reading

Comment


Science of Sex: Vaginismus

September 15th, 2018

Welcome to this month’s edition of Science of Sex. This topic was suggested by one of my readers in my recent blog giveaway (thanks Courtney!). Vaginismus is a condition that you might never have heard of if you haven’t struggled with it (or known someone who has). And it seems like medical professionals don’t always take claims of pain as seriously as they should. It’s a shame because vaginismus is quite treatable as you’ll learn below.

Check out the rest of the Science of Sex posts here.

Vaginismus science of sex

Some people suffer from a condition known as vaginismus, which is characterized by involuntary contractions of the vagina that make sex painful or even impossible. It’s not uncommon for people who have this — or their partners — to describe it like hitting a wall.

There are two types of vaginismus: primary (lifelong) and secondary (developed).

A similar problem is dyspareunia or painful sex; although, vaginismus is a specific condition and patients with this condition have fewer issues with desire and self-lubrication than those whth dyspareunia.

Vaginismus is interested because it’s certainly tied to emotions, especially fear and anxiety. One survey found that people who suffer from vaginismus had a significantly higher phobia of sex while another found that over half of participants with vaginismus qualified as alexithymic (the inability to name their emotions).

While a past trauma such as sexual assault may potentially be one factor in vaginismus, people who have never engaged in any form of sexual activity can also suffer from this. And pain may be present in non-sexual situations like using a tampon or getting a Pap smear.

But there is doubt whether the emotional state causes vaginismus or whether pain leads to anxiety. Vaginismus is definitely a vicious cycle.

Researchers have looked for differences in brain and genital response in people with this condition. Interestingly, there are no differences in how the brain responds. Furthermore, while women with vaginismus report less mental arousal to erotic content, they don’t necessarily have decreased genital arousal. This is known as arousal non-concordance, and is a common theme of female sexual dysfunction.

Because of the emotional/mental aspects of vaginismus, many of the treatment options are psychological. Mindfulness, for example, can be an effective treatment.

Touching exercises are a common treatment for this condition. Patients are instructed to touch themselves progressively closer to their vagina until their can do so with less or no pain. Insertion begins with a single finger, then moves to devices (dilators) that become progressively larger.

Coping with vaginismus can be difficult for couples. Some professionals recommend erection-enabling medications if partners find it difficult to remain erect or to engage in penetration after dealing with vaginismus. Becoming accustomed to touch helps to desensitize people.

Treatment can allow for successful intercourse in as little as two weeks.

Medicine interventions have been explored, and botox may be one option for treating vaginismus. Surgery is also occasionally a solution. A hymenectomy (removal/reduction of the hymen) to make sex possible and pleasurable.

Although most people think of vaginismus in terms of sex, it can also affect childbirth and labor. Specifically, women with vaginismus are more likely to have C-sections and to suffer from perineal laceration (tears of the perineum, the skin between the anus an vagina) during vaginal deliveries. It stands to reason that fear of pain and muscle contractions or tension could make this area more vulnerable.

Further Reading

Comment


Bijoux Indiscrets cosmetics for better sex

Science of Sex: How Science Got Sex Wrong

August 11th, 2018

Although I’ve dedicated most of this series to the awesome research being done about sexuality as well as those who take the time to study it. In some ways, the field is lagging behind other scientific endeavors, so every little bit counts. However, I am going to make a departure in this post and discuss the missteps science has taken when it comes to sex.

Check out previous Science of Sex posts here.

how science got sex wrong

Science is really a process and scientists as a group does not always agree. But sometimes these mistakes have been costly, traumatic even. As I type those words, the specific error that comes to mind is the listing of homosexuality in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. For years, being gay wasn’t an accepted orientation; rather, it was a mental health condition. It wasn’t until DSM III when homosexuality was removed entirely.

The same edition of the DSM was the one to back off the idea that sadomasochism might not be a red flag for mental health issues, either. Although, it wasn’t until the DSM 5 that BDSM was reorganized as a unusual sexual interest and not a disorder. Since then, studies have shown that kinksters are not more mentally unhealthy than everyone else and may even be healthier in some respescts!

Speaking of disorders that were reclassified with the publication of DSM 5, gender identity disorder has only recently been reclassified as “gender dysphoria.”

The inclusion of homosexuality in the DSM was the very metric by which people were allowed to gaslight and stigmatize anyone who wasn’t straight. People whose sexual orientations and interests could land them in an asylum or potential prison. These inclusions affected whether — and how — medical and mental health professionals treated patients, and some people were reluctant to seek medical help because of that.

You simply can’t treat a human humanely when their natural sexual proclivities are listed in the book that doctors use to diagnose people.

Although the people who created and updated the DSM are more recently guilty of this, it’s not a new occurrence. We all learned about Freud, the Oedipus complex and how people can get stuck in certain development stages never to reach their full potential as adults. However, the more you learn about psychology, the more you realize that Freud was wrong about everything least of all sex.

Freud was the one who championed the idea that women who orgasmed from clitoral stimulation were achieving orgasm in a lesser way because they were stuck in one of those latent phases. In fact, most women require clitoral stimulation to orgasm (and many prefer it even during intercourse). We now know there’s nothing wrong if a woman doesn’t orgasm from penetration alone. This ideology has been repeated for years, and even in 2018, women strive to orgasm the “right’ way, as if their body’s abilities and pleasure are lesser when derived from clitoral stimulation. Did I mention how it contributed to the willful ignorance of female sexuality as a legitimate research subject?

It’s hard to break old habits, but there are hurdles even when researchers are using fact and science to explore sexuality. More recently, for instance, a study concluded that over 2/3 of the improvement in female sexual dysfunction could be attributed to placebo and not to the medications that were being tested. You might recall that both Emily Nagoski and Lori Brotto argue that medication may not be the best treatment for female sexual dysfunction (which is poorly defined, to begin with).

Aside from the efficacy of treatments, researchers must contend with self-reporting: many studies simply ask people about their sex lives and must rely on participants to answer honestly and completely. This has led to some interesting discrepancies. Time after time, men report having more sexual partners than women. A new study suggests that the way men count partners (estimating versus women’s’ actual counting) and qualify sexual activities accounts for much of this discrepancy.

But it goes further than that: people are terrible at remembering how much sex they actually have. One study revealed that people ‘remember’ having sex twice as often as they actually did it!

Even if people were perfectly honest and reliable, it’s important to examine just who is responding to these studies. Are these people more sexual or more willing to discuss sex (you can join a sex study, too)? Does this skew the numbers? And are these studies representative of the actual population? Sex, orientation, and skin color of people in surveys may not correspond to real life. Many researchers statistically analyze their results because of this, but not all surveys are created (or analyzed) the same.

I’m already over 700 words and have yet to mention small sample sizes, lack of control groups, and conclusions that ignore real experiences. Nor have I discussed the click-bait headlines and titles painted with broad strokes when journalists simply want clicks and not true understanding of human sexuality.

Perhaps that’s why when people get it right and reveal something about our inner workings, it matters that much more.

Further Reading

6 Comments