Corrigendum to “Similar mechanisms of traumatic rectal injuries in patients who had anal sex with animals to those who were butt-fisted by human sexual partner”

2018 ◽  
Vol 59 ◽  
pp. 56
Author(s):  
Damian Jacob Sendler
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Anal Sex ◽  
Rectal Injuries

scholarly journals Consensus on Recommendations for Safe Sexual Activity during the COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 2297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Cabello ◽  
Froilán Sánchez ◽  
Josep M. Farré ◽  
Angel L. Montejo
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Sexual Activity ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Anal Sex ◽  
Physical And Mental Health ◽  
Maximum Protection

Sexual activity offers numerous advantages for physical and mental health but maintains inherent risks in a pandemic situation, such as the current one caused by SARS-CoV-2. A group of experts from the Spanish Association of Sexuality and Mental Health (AESexSAME) has reached a consensus on recommendations to maintain lower-risk sexual activity, depending on one’s clinical and partner situations, based on the current knowledge of SARS-CoV-2. Different situations are included in the recommendations: a sexual partner passing quarantine without any symptoms, a sexual partner that has not passed quarantine, a sexual partner with some suspicious symptoms of COVID-19, a positive sexual partner with COVID-19, a pregnant sexual partner, a health professional partner in contact with COVID-19 patients, and people without a sexual partner. The main recommendations include returning to engaging in safe sex after quarantine is over (28 days based on the duration one can carry SARS-CoV-2, or 33 days for those who are >60 years old) and all parties are asymptomatic. In all other cases (for those under quarantine, those with some clinical symptoms, health professionals in contact with COVID-19 patients, and during pregnancy), abstaining from coital/oral/anal sex, substituting it with masturbatory or virtual sexual activity to provide maximum protection from the contagion, and increasing the benefits inherent to sexual activity are recommended. For persons without a partner, not initiating sexual activity with a sporadic partner is strongly recommended.

scholarly journals Characterizing Sexual Agreements With One's Most Recent Sexual Partner Among Young Men Who Have Sex With Men

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 335-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Feinstein ◽  
Trey V. Dellucci ◽  
Patrick S. Sullivan ◽  
Brian Mustanski
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Hiv Prevention ◽  
Sexual Health ◽  
Health Communication ◽  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Anal Sex ◽  
Sexual Agreements ◽  
Young Msm ◽  
Sexual Health Communication ◽  
Sex With Men

Men who have sex with men (MSM) often create sexual agreements with their partners, but little is known about agreements with serious versus causal partners. We used data from 472 young MSM to examine agreements with one's most recent partner, individual differences across types of partnerships and agreements, and predictors of condomless anal sex (CAS). Two-thirds of participants did not have agreements. Monogamous agreements were most common among those who were seriously dating their partner, but also present among those who were casually dating their partner and those who were not dating their partner. Participants who were seriously dating their partner reported the most frequent sexual health communication. Participants without agreements reported the lowest frequency of and comfort with sexual health communication. Participants who were seriously dating their partner and those with monogamous agreements were most likely to report CAS. HIV prevention should address communication with serious and casual partners.

Evidence supporting the standardisation of extragenital gonorrhoea and chlamydia screenings for women

2020 ◽  
pp. sextrans-2020-054577
Author(s):  
Jamieson Trevor Jann ◽  
Nicole J Cunningham ◽  
Ryan D Assaf ◽  
Robert K Bolan
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Health Centre ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Nucleic Acid Amplification ◽  
Anal Sex ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Multivariable Regression ◽  
Behavioural Factors ◽  
Current Guidelines

ObjectiveCurrent guidelines for women do not include extragenital screening for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and do not mention anal sex behaviour. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to determine the number of potentially missed CT and NG cases by relying on urogenital screening and self-reported anal sex behaviour among women.MethodsDemographic and clinical data of 4658 women attending a community health centre in Los Angeles, California, USA from 2015 to 2018 were examined. CT and NG were detected using nucleic acid amplification test (APTIMA Combo 2, Hologic Gen-Probe, San Diego, California). Demographic and behavioural factors were also examined to assess potentially missed NG/CT cases. Multivariable regression analyses were used to determine whether reported anal sex behaviour predicts NG/CT rectal infection.ResultsA total of 193 NG cases and 552 CT cases were identified; however, 53.9% of NG cases and 25.5% of CT cases were identified exclusively through extragenital screening. Of all positive cases of rectal CT, 87.0% did not report anal sex without a condom and 91.3% did not report any anal sex with their last sexual partner. Of all positive cases of rectal NG, 78.9% did not report anal sex without a condom and 76.3% did not report any anal sex with their last sexual partner. Anal sex with last partner was not predictive of NG/CT rectal infection.ConclusionsRelying solely on urogenital screening and reported behaviour misses NG/CT cases. Extragenital NG/CT screening should be conducted in all women regardless of reported anal sex behaviour.

Kisspeptin in the posterodorsal medial amygdala modulates sexual partner preference and anxiety in male mice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Adekunbi ◽  
Xiaofeng LI ◽  
Geffen Lass ◽  
Olufeyi Adegoke ◽  
Shel Yeo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Medial Amygdala ◽  
Partner Preference ◽  
Male Mice

Sexual Health Communication of Black Men Who Have Sex With Men Who Met On or Offline: A Secondary Data Analysis (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob D Gordon ◽  
Andre L Brown ◽  
Darren L Whitfield
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Health ◽  
Health Communication ◽  
Black Men ◽  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Sexual Partners ◽  
Hiv Status ◽  
Sexual Health Communication ◽  
Sex With Men ◽  
Traditional Masculinity

BACKGROUND Black men who have sex with men (BMSM) continue to experience disproportionate rates of HIV/STI infection despite advances in effective prevention tools. Over the last decade the method of finding sexual partners has evolved, with BMSM increasingly using geospatial dating applications to find sexual partners. Sexual health communication between partners has been associated with safer sex practices by previous scholars, but it is unclear how sexual health communication of BMSM differs for sex partners found on or offline. OBJECTIVE The current study explored sexual health communication in relationship to how one found their last sexual partner and factors associated with poorer sexual health communication. METHODS This study used secondary data in the form of a self-administered national survey. BMSM were recruited online and in-person and answered questions about their sexual health behaviors regarding their last sexual partner. RESULTS In total, 403 individuals were included in the analysis. The majority of respondents 55.8% (225/403) were more likely to have found their last sexual partner through geospatial dating applications and online websites than offline venues 44.3% (178/225). There was not a significant difference in scores of sexual health communication between those who found their last sexual partner on or offline (P=.49). Additionally, sexual health communication was also not significantly associated (P = .25) based on the venue of their last sexual partner after controlling for covariates. Significant predictors of lower sexual health communication of BMSM were found: positive HIV status (P = .003), a casual partner type (P < .001), and endorsement of traditional masculinity ideologies (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS Findings from this study confirm high rates of sexual partner seeking via online venues among BMSM. The significant predictors of lower sexual health communication, endorsement of traditional masculinity ideologies and positive HIV status, suggest that stigma is a barrier to effective sexual health communication of BMSM.

Oral versus anal sex at last encounter – behavioral differences among men who have sex with men in the District of Columbia

AIDS Care ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 793-798 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Phillips ◽  
Manya Magnus ◽  
Irene Kuo ◽  
Katharine D. Shelley ◽  
Anthony Rawls ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Anal Sex ◽  
Behavioral Differences ◽  
Sex With Men

An Assessment of the Cues College Students Interpret From a Sexual Partner to Determine They Are Refusing

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052199793
Author(s):  
Tiffany L. Marcantonio ◽  
Danny Valdez ◽  
Kristen N. Jozkowski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
College Students ◽  
Sexual Partner ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sexual Partners ◽  
Sexual Scripts ◽  
Nonverbal Cues ◽  
Sexual Experiences ◽  
Verbal Cues

The purpose of this study was to assess the cues college students use to determine a sexual partner is refusing vaginal-penile sex (i.e., refusal interpretations). As a secondary aim, we explored the influence of item wording ( not willing/non-consent vs refusal) on college students’ self-reported refusal interpretations. A sample of 175 college students from Canada and the United States completed an open-ended online survey where they were randomly assigned to one of two wording conditions ( not willing/non-consent vs refusal); students were then prompted to write about the cues they used to interpret their partner was refusing. An inductive coding procedure was used to analyze open-ended data. Themes included explicit and implicit verbal and nonverbal cues. The refusal condition elicited more explicit and implicit nonverbal cues than the not willing/non-consent condition. Frequency results suggested men reported interpreting more explicit and implicit verbal cues. Women reported interpreting more implicit nonverbal cues from their partner. Our findings reflect prior research and appear in line with traditional gender and sexual scripts. We recommend researchers consider using the word refusal when assessing the cues students interpret from their sexual partners as this wording choice may reflect college students’ sexual experiences more accurately.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document