Sex Clearly Undefined for Today’s Youth
By Alanna Mitchell
With permission, The Globe and Mail
Sat, Feb 28, 2004
When is sex not really sex?
When it’s oral, manual, online or conducted over the phone and sometimes even when it involves intercourse without orgasm.
At least, that’s the finding of a study of 164 heterosexual university students being published today in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, and it’s raising troubling questions about whether the message of safe sex is being hampered by different definitions between the generations.
Hilary Randall, a PhD candidate in psychology at the University of New Brunswick and one of the paper’s co-authors, said the findings point to a gaping hole in programs designed to deal with preventing sexually transmitted infections such as HIV/AIDS.
Young people, bombarded with the safe-sex message, are applying it only to what they consider to be formally having sex. Older adults, who are designing the safe-sex programs, are using it to refer to a wide range of sexual activity, including oral sex and certainly anal and vaginal sex, with or without orgasm.
“This old, antiquated language is not getting the information across,” said Ms. Randall. To be effective, sexual-health programs will need to be far more specific in describing sexual activities rather than relying on omnibus terms such as “having sex,” her paper says.
When safe-sex educators talk about limiting the number of sex partners to avoid infection, that message, too, may be understood differently by younger Canadians, who may be counting only those with whom they have had vaginal intercourse with orgasm, said co-author Sandra Byers, a psychology professor at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton.
“They are saying: ‘I didn’t have sex. I had sexual activity.'” she said. For example, just over three-quarters (77 percent) of the males interviewed said that anal intercourse without orgasm qualified as having sex, meaning that the same act wasn’t sex at all to 23 percent. If