Dry Academia but Slightly Wetter Hotel Antics

at "Sexology" Conference

If we want to drive we take driving lessons [the practice]

Why isn't the same true of sex?

I just got home from the annual meeting and 50th-anniversary celebration of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (SSSS, a/k/a "Quad S," at sexscience.org).

You'd think that attending a conference of sex researchers, therapists, and academics would be pretty freakin' fun, especially with titillating symposium titles like "I'll Take 'Nipples' for $1,000, Alex" and "Student Judgments Concerning the Sexually Explicit DVD American Bukkake 14."

But in most of the sessions I went to, complex statistics, dry presentations, and boring analyses were more common than provocative topics and engaging presenters.

I'm all for super-duper sex brainiacs (sex nerds make me hot), but the event felt like any standard academic gathering—the presentations just happened to be on masturbation, barebacking, and sex work.

Some of the research was undeniably interesting, like studies on gender and sexual coercion, sex and emerging technologies, and female erotic response.

But there was a wide gap between what the academics were inquiring into and theorizing about. Too much sexual dysfunction, not enough function.

We Need Sex Laboratories

for Experiments [The Academy of Sex]

We're surrounded by sexperts telling us what to do in the bedroom. But how would they know?

Sex still sells. But sex and anxiety sells even more - hence the never-ending features and programs detailing the mistakes you might be making, gaps in your knowledge and new things you simply must try.

Women's magazines are the most promiscuous in this area but the internet, TV, radio and newspapers can hardly claim total abstinence either.

And what if the "could do better" areas of your sex life have been identified (or, arguably, invented)?

The publication or program tackling the issue must have a solution - but they need a hefty dose of authority to convince you that some desk-bound journalist knows more about your sex life than you do.

They need statistics! And examples! And quotes! They need, in short, a sexpert.

Sexperts are not a new invention - the word, apparently, has its origins in the 1920s - but their proliferation in recent years is noticeable, thanks to a combination of ever-increasing coverage of sex, stylistic trends in journalism that demand collaboration from experts to lend a piece authenticity and authority and a more general cult of the guru.

We look to "experts" for guidance on everything so it is no surprise that the sex we are having - or not - hasn't escaped scrutiny.

There is no clear path to becoming a sexpert and no particular qualifications required.

"I wrote a book about sex, was invited on TV and then suddenly I was being introduced as a 'sexpert'," says Tracey Cox, one of the most celebrated experts in the field of sex and relationships.

"And that's how you become a sexpert! I do find the term difficult, because anyone can call themselves a sexpert and it's not necessarily true."

Cox has a degree in psychology and more than two decades' experience of learning and writing about sex, as a journalist and former editor (at Australian Cosmopolitan).

"But I have always been totally honest about the fact that I am just a journalist who is interested in sex. It is my area of expertise but you have to be clear about what you are qualified to do.

"I have been called a 'sex therapist' a couple of times and I always correct that straight away."

Dr Petra Boynton is not only an expert on sex - she did her PhD on the effects of sexually explicit images and now works as a psychologist at University College, London - but an expert on being an expert.

Unfortunately, she says, not all specialists are necessarily the most well-qualified people.

"If your livelihood depends on being in the media then some people are going to say anything in order to appear," she says.

Academics and therapists with other sources of income - and professional reputations to uphold - are not necessarily so compliant.

"There are still always mavericks who'll say anything to see their name in print," she says. "And that's not to say that if you're not an academic you have nothing to offer.

"It's just frustrating because we're sitting on top of a mountain of genuine research and information and it's hard to get it out there."

It is not only academics who are frustrated at the quality of information. "You see the same tips and advice over and over again and I think, 'That just doesn't work,"' Cox says.

"If I'm offering a practical tip I make sure it's been tried out by several people first - some of the things you read about are just impossible to do."

And once someone has gained a sexpert tag, they may be treated as an oracle, often with little justification.

But the blame for this cannot be placed entirely on shady sexperts who don't deserve the title: journalists and editors also contribute to the problem.

Someone with a book to promote is likely to be more readily available and more pliable than a cranky academic who will get stroppy if he doesn't feel you're taking his research seriously or a genuine expert who wants to tell it like it is.

"But there's only so much the writer can do," Boynton says. "The people you really have to convince are the editors."

No matter how much a publication might want to appear as best mate, big sister and agony aunt all rolled into one, the advice comes second to commercial viability.

Sex features are often planned from the (sales-generating) coverline backwards, leaving little room for genuine investigation or research.

The writer's task is to find a quote that fits the brief. Cox recalls when a journalist called and "asked what the best angle [to the mathematical degree!] was for sex".

She adds: "You can see how people get pushed into saying anything for the sake of giving a quote."

Sex is often not treated very seriously, Boynton says. "The articles on the subject are very gendered, very feminised, they're given to non-expert writers to do and have to fit with a racy picture and an attention-grabbing headline.

"If it was cancer or abuse or fraud you would need a proper qualified expert and you would treat them quite deferentially. But with sex, everyone has an opinion." And anyone, by extension, can become an expert.

And the future? The squeeze on variety, discourse and realism in the mainstream media means that the best information can now be found on the internet, she says.

A brave editor could make a killing by offering less limited sex advice but, according to Boynton, "I don't think that's going to happen any time soon."

tags: sex  advice  expert  practice  theory  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit