As a member of numerous sexuality organizations, I’m often involved in a variety of conversations, both online and in-person, with colleagues in my field. The truth is, even amongst professionals, the field of sexology is still dominated by regional biases, rather than dispassionate science. For example, a sex therapist in New York City, where I practice, is probably going to hold a more tolerant view of a broad spectrum of sexual practices than a sex therapist in more conservative regions. I suppose this is something that would be obvious to most readers, but unfortunately, this lack of uniformity is a black mark on the field of sexology. Case in point, a cardiologist in New York is likely to have the same level of knowledge and theoretical background as a cardiologist in Biloxi, Mississippi. An opthalmologist in Seattle will probably agree on mostly everything with an opthalmologist in Tulsa, Oklahoma. That’s because these are medical practices ruled by scientific study. And sexology is a scientific discipline as well. But it is poorly funded, so there’s still a lot we don’t know about sexual practices from a scientific standpoint. As a result, sexology (and sex therapy) is still dominated by local mores, community standards, and personal prejudice.
As a case in point, I will briefly discuss an online conversation in one of the organizations I belong to. I don’t want to reveal anything too personal about anyone involved in the conversation, so I will just touch upon the main themes that I think are extremely important because they touch upon a major issue– the current state of the field of sexology […]