Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Stigma. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, December 8, 2016

Americans have been lying about the benefits of abstinence only education and the dangers of porn for decades â€” Quartz

7:30 AM Bilal Muazin No comments

Over the past few weeks, as the idea of a Trump presidency has gone from unthinkable joke to horrifying reality, Iâ€™ve heard a new term making the rounds, particularly among my friends in media. â€œWeâ€™re living in a post-truth era,â€ they tell me, citing Trumpâ€™s many lies and contradictions, the rise of fake news sites, and a growing distrust of the mainstream media as evidence that the American people are increasingly distanced from reality.

I think this is a fairly accurate assessment. But as someone whoâ€™s been writing and educating Americans about sex-related topics for over a decade, I can testify to the fact that weâ€™ve been living in a â€œpost-truthâ€ era for years. Quite frankly, Iâ€™ve been dealing with a post-truth world for my entire career.

The easiest entry point for understanding Americaâ€™s fuzzy relationship between sex and fact is the sad state of American sex education. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a mere 13 US states require sex education to be â€œmedically accurate.â€ To put that in context, 39 states require HIV education to either stress or cover abstinence, in spite of the fact that thereâ€™s little proof that a focus on abstinence actually helps delay sex.

Indeed, Americaâ€™s two-decade long love affair with abstinence-only education (which president Barack Obama has attempted to put an end to) feels like the epitome of â€œpost-truth.â€ Study after study shows that abstinence-only education doesnâ€™t reduce the rate of teen pregnancy, delay the age at which young people start having sex, or lower rates of STI transmission. But as long as telling kids not to have sex feels like the solution, these misguided lesson plans will likely persist. (In fact, it might actually get worse; president-elect Donald Trump and vice president-elect Mike Pence are not known for an enlightened outlook on sexuality. Pence once said on national television that condoms are â€œvery, very poor protectionâ€ against STIs).

This aversion to the truth is much more than a failing of political conservatives. In my experience, liberals are just as willing to ignore the facts when itâ€™s convenient to their larger narrative.

Over the years Iâ€™ve rolled my eyes at numerous acts of â€œjournalismâ€ that perpetuated half-truths and outright lies about the sex and porn industriesâ€"often in the supposed service of protecting women. >The Price of Pleasure, for exampleâ€"an anti-porn documentary created by NYU professor Chyng Sunâ€"misled many of its interview subjects and used manipulative editing to craft a vision of a ruthlessly exploitative porn industry that few porn performers recognize. A piece in The Atlantic once positioned double anal, an extreme sex act that even the most practiced porn performers need to warm up to, as a routine occurrence. And letâ€™s not forget the New York Timesâ€™ own Nicholas Kristof, whose factually inaccurate writing has peddled numerous myths about sex work and who has positioned himself as a voice of authority in spite of numerous sex workers whoâ€™ve contested his version of the â€œtruth.â€

The topic of sex is vulnerable to this sort of misinformation for a number of reasons. Itâ€™s an intensely personal experience, and one most of us have some degree of experience with. This creates a personal sense of authorityâ€"even when we lack any facts or expertise beyond our own limited experience. Compounding this false confidence is the persistent taboo against public discussions of sexuality. Stigma around sex prevents us from openly and honestly discussing the topic, adding further fuel to the many â€œtruthyâ€ statements that circulate about human sexual experience.

A slumping news industry has coincided with the rise of social mediaâ€"a phenomenon that has made news consumption more individualized and created information bubbles that help reinforce what feels right over whatâ€™s actually true.While unfortunate, in this context it makes sense that weâ€™re seeing a spread of inaccuracy in our discussions of politics, the environment, and other hot-button topics that have historically been more buffered from falsehoods than sex.

But if my work in sex education offers me a deeper understanding of the factors that encourage and enable a collective divorce from reality, it also gives me hope that post-truth isnâ€™t a permanent state of being. If we stay committed to pursuing and promoting a reality-based vision of the world, itâ€™s possible to overcome seemingly overwhelming odds.

On the same Tuesday that Trump secured the White House, Californiaâ€™s adult industry battled misinformation, ignorance, and a well-funded propaganda machine to defeat the egregious Proposition 60. Opposed by many health organizations and practically all of Californiaâ€™s adult film actors, the proposition would have violated worker privacy and potentially made it possible for regular Californians to sue porn producers if they believed actors werenâ€™t wearing condoms. Around the globe, sex workers have banded together to make their voices and opinions heard, and are slowly chipping away at the post-truth ethos thatâ€™s oppressed their industry for decades (if not centuries).

And even though government-funded sex education is often mediocreâ€"if not outright harmfulâ€"a number of independent sources have harnessed the internet to provide smart, thoughtful, and fact-based sex education to young people around the globe. This is the lesson activists and politicians alike need to internalize in the age of Trump. With enough commitment, dedication, and persistence, the truth can ultimately win out.

Follow Lux on Twitter @luxalptraum. Learn how to write for Quartz Ideas. We welcome your comments at ideas@qz.com.

Thank You So Much for Read this News

Yes, Sex Robots Are a Thing and Here's Everything You Want to Know

1:57 AM Bilal Muazin No comments

Sex robots may be all over science fiction, but our real sexy-AI future is probably closer than you thought.

As 2016 comes to a close, it's worthwhile to ask where we're at, sex robot-wise, as we move into the new yearâ€"and the answer depends on what kind of sex robot you're looking for. First, there are the "escort" services in Japan and South Korea that let people rent out technologically-advanced sex dolls. Though we already knew about American artist Matt McMullen's "RealDolls,", lifelike sex dolls that can be modeled after real people (like the one Ryan Gosling fell in love with in Lars and the Real Girl), he's currently adding artificial intelligence so they can talk to their human companions. And engineer Douglas Hines invented a robot named Roxxxy, which (or is it who?) responds verbally to touch and can talk about the news.

Thankfully, it doesn't look like sexbots are in danger of replacing human partnersâ€"at least for now. According to a survey by Tufts University researchers, most people agree that having sex with a robot is more like using a sex toy than sleeping with a person. But even when sex is taken off the table, our artificial friends could have some other interesting uses in the future.

We asked sexual biotechnology researcher Nicole Prause, PhD, if what's available now really counts as a sex robot and what we can expect in the future.

Would it be fair to say that sex robots already exist?

Nicole Prause: Sure, at the most basic level, sex robots already exist. There are machines to "auto-extract" ejaculate both for fertility and pleasure purposes already. They are not responsive to human preference or feedback, but the mechanics already exist. Responsive characters already exist, tooâ€"they just have to limit your requests of them because they are not very flexible.

What are the most advanced sex robots we have right now?

NP: The most advanced robots in terms of their intelligence do not exist in sex. The most advanced development I have seen for emotional tasks is for automated therapy, such as for PTSD. Studies are being conducted showing that, while people do not ascribe actual human qualities (they do not believe the robot has come to life), they will disclose more emotional content to a robot therapist than to a human therapist. These advances are occurring in collaborations between research psychologists and computer scientists.

What do you think the most advanced sex robots will look like in 10 years, then?

NP: Sex robots in 10 years are likely to be increasingly able to detect sexual movements (e.g., being touched on the nipple and how hard), but so little is known about "typical" sexual interactionsâ€"how many people desire or respond to nipple stimulation and what is optimal pressureâ€"that it will be very difficult to develop accurate "off-the-shelf" robots. The advances are most likely to come with learning algorithms developed for other, non-sexual purposes. The necessity of advanced computing to integrate the information from the periphery (nipple, vulva, et cetera) and the stigma of working in this area suggest sexually-focused robots will not receive attention from the best scientists until sometime far after others have developed related capabilities. I am not optimistic we will see much in 10 years.

Do you see any potential uses for them beyond entertainment?

NP: People can remain aware of the robot as a robot and still have true emotional experiences themselves, and I do not see why sexual experiences would be different in this respect. Much like sex films, which adults overwhelmingly recognize as fantasy, I believe robots will be a useful tool for some people beyond entertainment alone.

What positive effects do you think they could have on our lives?

NP: Robots could be very useful in situations where partner access is not available. For example, therapy to overcome sexual abuse might feel safer to start with a well-controlled, programmed, non-judgemental partner. Those who have difficulty attracting partners, due to mental illness, different physical appearance, or simple disinterest, might choose to enjoy sexual activity with robots. Established romantic relationships could include a robot to increase their sexual breadth. Robots also might serve in a discharge capacityâ€"directing illegal sexual behaviors towards the robot instead of a human.

What negative effects could they have?

NP: The biggest likely negative effect is the technology backlash that always occurs in sexuality: people will be shamed for sexual behaviors with robots. They will be made to feel they are broken, maladjusted, or otherwise lesser. In other words, the most likely negative effects are from the social response to sex robots, not the robots themselves. They also might present a challenge for individuals with social anxiety, who otherwise might be motivated to improve their social interactions out of a desire to attract a sexual partner, have a family, and so on. Of course, any device could carry some basic risk of injury, but I trust those to be minimized, as safety will be in mind with development.

This is likely to mimic what we have seen with sex films: a tiny minority of people who view sex films report having problems with them, while society loses its collective shit with conservative panic about imagined problem. "Loses its collective shit" being a super-professional opinion.

If we want to get an idea of what sex robots could be like one day, do any sci-fi movies actually do a good job depicting them?

NP: No. Movies with sexbots always present them as far more advanced than I can imagine them being in 50 years, much less 10, in terms of emotional simulations. Repetitive sexual movements I expect to become much more realistic more rapidly than the interaction.

Would it be possible for people to one day fall in love with robots?

NP: As with sex films, there will be a tiny minority of people who fail to distinguish reality with robots. I hope we focus on this education rather than demonizing the technology.

Thank You So Much for Read this Article

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )