![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Please, User:Flyer22 Reborn, can you explain what was so POV in my edits that none could be saved? I'm honestly upset, I don't want this fight to drag on forever, and I wish to stop being persecuted. I'm also calling intervention immediately. Rafe87 ( talk) 14:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I've started this discussion to address the following paragraph:
"Repetitive penetrative anal sex may result in the anal sphincters becoming weakened, which may cause rectal prolapse or affect the ability to hold in feces (a condition known as fecal incontinence). [1] [2] Rectal prolapse is relatively uncommon, however, especially in men, and its causes are not well understood. [3] [4] Kegel exercises have been used to strengthen the anal sphincters and overall pelvic floor, and may help prevent or remedy fecal incontinence. [1] [5] A 1993 study indicated that fourteen out of a sample of forty men receiving anal intercourse experienced episodes of frequent fecal incontinence. [6] However, a 1997 study found no difference in levels of fecal incontinence between gay men who engaged in anal sex and heterosexual men who did not, and criticized the earlier study for its inclusion of flatulence in its definition of fecal incontinence. [7]"
As seen with this edit, I reverted Steeletrap on the removal of two quality sources; he stated "removing controversial assertion that is contradicted by one of the studies--which says 14/40 men who regularly receive anal sex have rectal prolapse--in the same paaragraph)." When reverting him, I noted that "it's a primary source study, which was apparently criticized, as noted in the section." I've since removed the two pieces for discussion. I haven't looked at these two studies; they were in the article before I started working on it, but it appears that the first study is flawed. It also doesn't appear that there have been many studies on rectal prolapse from anal sex (regarding gay men/MSM or heterosexuals); I'm not sure that we should retain this information if other studies have not repeated the same finding. The two sources that Steeletrap removed (and I restored) are not about anal sex, but I added them because I think it's important to note that rectal prolapse is very rare.
Jytdog and Doc James, any opinions on the rectal prolapse material? Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 05:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC) _____
References
The entry already indicates that some researchers speculate that there is a relationship between anal sex between gay men and romantic feelings: "The notion that it might resonate with gay men with the same emotional significance that vaginal sex resonates with heterosexuals has also been considered", it says.
However, the entry just leaves it at that, without discussing the subject further, even though there is already research, some of which with very large sample sizes, analyzing the link (if any) between feelings and form of sex practiced between gay men.
If the editors agree, I wish to insert the following lines just after the sentence quoted above, based on the research I found:
Some evidence extracted from both probability and convenience sampling gives support to that thesis; studies from the United States, [1] Brazil, [2] and Australia [3] (though not the Netherlands [4]) shows that the practice of anal sex between men is more common among regular or committed partners than casual partners. According to multi-national evidence, anal sex without a condom is particularly common between committed partners. [5] [3] [4] [2] Besides, young gay and bisexual men with more of a romantic focus seem to desire practicing anal sex more; [6] a study of about 25,000 gay and bisexual men also points that they more often practice anal sex on last sexual encounter with a male partner if the latter is someone they were in love with at the time of the sexual episode. [1]
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author2=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
If any of the editors wishes to have access to any of the papers above, I can provide it if this is not against the Wikipedia's rules. Rafe87 ( talk) 03:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I have moved the two sections below from the article, to here. Both are shot through with WP:OR, picking this primary source or that one and stringing together a narrative that is entirely the creation of editors, and not found in any secondary sources.
It is also full of statements like "As of 2011, this survey provides the most up to date data about anal sex at the population level" which are some editor's opinion.
These need to be entirely rewritten summarizing secondary and tertiary sources. That is what we do here.
In 1992, a study conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that 26% of men 18 to 59 and 20% of women 18 to 59 had engaged in heterosexual anal sex; a similar 2005 survey (also conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) found a rising incidence of anal sex relations in the American heterosexual population. The survey showed that 40% of men and 35% of women between 25 and 44 had engaged in heterosexual anal sex. [1] In terms of overall numbers of survey respondents, seven times as many women as gay men said that they engaged in anal intercourse, with this figure reflecting the larger heterosexual population size. [2]
In a 2007 report regarding the prevalence and correlates of heterosexual anal and oral sex among adolescents and adults in the United States, a National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) found that 34% men and 30% women reported ever participating in heterosexual anal sex. The percentage of participants reporting heterosexual anal sex was significantly higher among 20- to 24-year-olds and peaked among 30- to 34-year-olds. [3] A 2008 survey focused on a younger demographic of teenagers and young adults, aged 15–21. It found that 16% of 1350 surveyed had had this type of sex in the previous 3 months, with condoms being used 29% of the time. [4] However, given the subject matter, the survey hypothesized the prevalence was probably underestimated.
In Kimberly R. McBride's 2010 clinical review on heterosexual anal intercourse and other forms of anal sexual activity, it is suggested that changing norms may affect the frequency of heterosexual anal sex. McBride and her colleagues investigated the prevalence of non-intercourse anal sex behaviors among a sample of men (n=1,299) and women (n=1,919) compared to anal intercourse experience and found that 51% of men and 43% of women had participated in at least one act of oral–anal sex, manual–anal sex, or anal sex toy use. [5] The report states the majority of men (n=631) and women (n=856) who reported heterosexual anal intercourse in the past 12 months were in exclusive, monogamous relationships: 69% and 73%, respectively. [5] The review added that "most research on anal intercourse addresses men who have sex with men (MSM), with relatively little attention given to anal intercourse and other anal sexual behaviors between heterosexual partners" and "[r]esearch is quite rare that specifically differentiates the anus as a sexual organ or addresses anal sexual function or dysfunction as legitimate topics. As a result, we do not know the extent to which anal intercourse differs qualitatively from coitus." [5]
According to a 2010 study from the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior (NSSHB) that was authored by Debby Herbenick and other researchers, although anal intercourse is reported by fewer women than other partnered sex behaviors, partnered women in the age groups between 18–49 are significantly more likely to report having anal sex in the past 90 days. [6] As of 2011, this survey provides the most up to date data about anal sex at the population level.
Figures for prevalence can vary among different demographics, regions and nationalities. A 1999 South Korean survey of 586 women documented that 3.5% of the respondents reported having had anal sex. [7] By contrast, a 2001 French survey of five hundred female respondents concluded that a total of 29% had engaged in this practice, with one third of these confirming to have enjoyed the experience. [8]
Figures for the prevalence of sexual behavior can also fluctuate over time. Edward O. Laumann's 1992 survey, reported in The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, found that about 20% of heterosexuals had engaged in male-to-female anal sex. Sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, working in the 1940s, had found that number to be closer to 40% at the time. A researcher from the University of British Columbia in 2005 put the number of heterosexuals who have engaged in this practice at between 30% and 50%. [9] According to Columbia University's health website Go Ask Alice!: "Studies indicate that about 25 percent of heterosexual couples have had anal sex at least once, and 10 percent regularly have anal penetration." [10] The increase of anal sexual activity among heterosexuals has also been linked to the increase in anal pornography, especially if a person views it more regularly than a person who does not. [11] [12] [13] [14]
Reports with regard to the prevalence of anal sex among gay men in the west have varied over time. Magnus Hirschfeld, in his 1914 work The Homosexuality of Men and Women, reported the rate of anal sex among gay men surveyed to be 8%, the least favored of all the practices documented. [15] By the 1950s in the United Kingdom, it was thought that about 15% of gay males had anal sex. [16]
Similar to the Hirschfeld study, scholars state that oral sex and mutual masturbation are more common than anal stimulation among gay men in long-term relationships. [10] [17] They say that anal intercourse is generally more popular among gay male couples than among heterosexual couples, but that "it ranks behind oral sex and mutual masturbation" among both sexual orientations in prevalence. [18] Wellings et al. reported that "the equation of 'homosexual' with 'anal' sex among men is common among lay and health professionals alike" and that "yet an Internet survey of 18,000 MSM across Europe (EMIS, 2011) showed that oral sex was most commonly practised, followed by mutual masturbation, with anal intercourse in third place". [19] A 2011 survey by The Journal of Sexual Medicine found similar results for U.S. gay and bisexual men. [20]
Various older studies on male-to-male anal sex differ significantly. The 1994 Laumann study suggests that 80% of gay men practice anal sex and 20% never engage in it at all. [21] A survey in The Advocate in 1994 indicated that 46% of gay men preferred to penetrate their partners, while 43% preferred to be the receptive partner. [22] A survey conducted from 1994 to 1997 in San Francisco by the Stop AIDS Project indicated that over the course of the study, among men who have sex with men instead of solely gay men, the proportion engaging in anal sex increased from 57.6% to 61.2%. [23] The National Institutes of Health (NIH), with their report published in the BMJ in 1999, stated that two thirds of gay men have anal sex. [24] Other sources suggest that roughly three-fourths of gay men have had anal sex at one time or another in their lives, with an equal percentage participating as tops and bottoms. [22] The latest nationally representative sex survey in the U.S., the 2012 edition of the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior, suggests high lifetime participation in anal sex among gay men — 83.3% report ever taking part in anal sex in the insertive position and 90% in the receptive position, even if only between a third and a quarter self-report very recent engagement in the practice, defined as 30 days or less. [25]
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
{{
citation}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
Pdf.
Preview.
{{
cite journal}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author2=
(
help)
-- Jytdog ( talk) 20:52, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
____________
Jytdog, a lot of the material was there before I started working on the article, but I did source and add some of the material. For example, I added some of the "Heterosexual anal sexuality and anal sex behaviors: a review" information. That content is not WP:OR and is a review of the literature. That source is particularly important because it makes it clear that "most research on anal intercourse addresses men who have sex with men (MSM), with relatively little attention given to anal intercourse and other anal sexual behaviors between heterosexual partners" and "[r]esearch is quite rare that specifically differentiates the anus as a sexual organ or addresses anal sexual function or dysfunction as legitimate topics. As a result, we do not know the extent to which anal intercourse differs qualitatively from coitus."
I also added information such as "oral sex and mutual masturbation are more common than anal stimulation among gay men in long-term relationships." This is supported by the sources. I added "They say that anal intercourse is generally more popular among gay male couples than among heterosexual couples, but that 'it ranks behind oral sex and mutual masturbation' among both sexual orientations in prevalence." This is supported by this source.
There is not a lot of information out there about the prevalence of anal sex and there is not a lot of up-to-date information about the prevalence. This is why I left in the older research. WP:MEDDATE is clear about cases such as these, where not much research progress is being made. What content do you find to be OR and what content do you suggest we add back? Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 22:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Proposed sections
|
---|
References
|
Doc James, can I get your opinion on this too? My above proposed sections? The data on the prevalence of anal sex, especially for heterosexuals, is limited, and I worked with what exists on the topic. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 03:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
There are some studies on the link between anal sex and relationship status/romantic expectations of gay men. I had inserted it before, but Flyer22 Reborn helpfully deleted it, as she's wont to do. It sort of bothers me how all mentions to anal sex in the gay male sector sound so much negative than for everyone else. It's almost like only gay men don't have a right to it. In the gay section, there is no mention to the positive aspects of the practice - to pleasure, orgasm, feelings of intimacy, etc. - even though all data pertaining to that are already available in the scientific literature, and indeed, I tried to add it before. I also added a phrase, which was properly sourced, about bi men's attitudes towards anal play with men and women, which is also gone. Is any of it salvageable in the view of you all? Rafe87 ( talk) 00:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Per above, I have re-added pornography material to the heterosexual Prevalence section. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 01:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Fix here. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 03:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Fix again here. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 18:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
In the section on pegging NIH is listed as a source for information. The information was published in the British Medical Journal and not from the NIH. Pub Med Central is a repository of many many medical journals and is not solely for in NIH information. I would fix this, but the article is locked. If you look at the citation you will see that all funding for the paper came from British sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:6824:d8d0:7115:6cb4:5e77:77df ( talk • contribs)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Anal sex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:53, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Why the graphic pictures. It's practically porno. Not sure that's what wikipedia is for. The text is pretty clear on its own. Kids use wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.38.87.213 ( talk) 23:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, it seems kinda extreme to use what you can effectively find on a porn site, perhaps a more biological diagram would be more appropriate, or something oriental historically depicting the act. AvatarofPride ( talk) 15:50, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
here: http://healthise.com/general/is-anal-sex-safe-how-to-perform-anal-sex/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.114.3.54 ( talk) 09:22, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Anal sex has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please can this page be categorised as "Sex education" or "Pornography" or "Other Adult" as we have had children accidentally coming across this page in schools. Jon.howarth ( talk) 11:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Avril1975, regarding this, why did you remove what was there and why do you think that the WP:Primary sourced material you added should remain? We are trying to stay away from primary sourced material for this topic unless it is necessary to include it. This is for good reason. See Talk:Anal sex/Archive 9#Prevalence sections for why. Furthermore, your addition made it seem as though it is common for women to experience an orgasm from anal sex, when this is not the case. This is addressed in the Anatomy and stimulation section. Your addition was WP:Undue weight, especially where you placed it, and you used Bustle.com to source the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior material. If anything, a scholarly source should be used to report on that matter if we are to include it at all. For example, the 2010 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior study (authored by Debby Herbenick et al.) that we include in the article is supported by this Cengage Learning source. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 00:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Moved and cut. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 19:04, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Is there some particular reason only hetrosexual oriented images are shown, or is this article actually intended to be rather homophobic in nature, considering the fact that anal sex is more popular among the homosexual as opposed to the hetrosexual community? I therefore conclude that this article needs major revisions in order to NOT be homophobic. 108.201.29.108 ( talk) 05:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Health risks, it is required to add immunological infertility
Autoimmune infertility due to Antisperm_antibodies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Путеец ( talk • contribs)
Flyer22 Reborn Jytdog Now you have studied immunology, and now you can add autoimmune infertility referring to the article antisperm antibodies. Here and in all articles related to the practice of anal sex and the health of LGBT people and MSM. Путеец ( talk) 07:00, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Anal sex has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"A 2000 study found that 22.9% of college students who self-identified as virgins had anal sex. They used condoms during anal sex 20.9% of the time as compared with 42.9% of the time with vaginal intercourse"
This isnt what the source says, source says 22% of nonvirgins
Some women have penises and I think it should be mentioned in the "female-to-female" section that penis-in-anal-sex is a viable form of lesbian sex! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily.mayfield ( talk • contribs)
If trans women can be lumped into "men" in this article, due to the "mechanics of sex," while considering the subjects of the sources (cis men and cis women), and this concept of "mechanics" is based on genitals, then why does it not work in the reverse where trans women who use their penis for anal sex, like myself, are implicated by those same sources for the "female to female" section? Lily.mayfield ( talk) 06:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
It's been raised in a discussion on Talk:Missionary position that this article is another that uses "generally" in its introductory sentence.
MOS:FIRST says: "If [the article] subject is definable, then the first sentence should give a concise definition: where possible, one that puts the article in context for the nonspecialist."
I don't think the current first sentence is a definition, and I don't really think that any statement entirely covered by "generally" can be. A definition says what something is, not what it usually or generally is.
(To work out if something is a satisfactory definition, try swapping it in to the article later on - e.g. "With regard to lesbian sexual practices, generally the insertion and thrusting of the erect penis into a person's anus, or anus and rectum, for sexual pleasure includes fingering, use of a dildo or other sex toys, or anilingus". That is clearly nonsense.)
I think the MOS is clear that the first sentence needs to give a definition, i.e. say what anal sex is: e.g. "Anal sex is sexual activity involving the anus, or anus and rectum." A second sentence can then say (assuming we can source the assertion) that the most common form of this is what the first sentence says; but what is currently in the first sentence is not the definition of the term.
I think the two terms also need separating - e.g. analingus is referred to by the article as anal sex, but isn't anal intercourse; so I don't think we can define the two together.
Thoughts? TSP ( talk) 11:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Please, User:Flyer22 Reborn, can you explain what was so POV in my edits that none could be saved? I'm honestly upset, I don't want this fight to drag on forever, and I wish to stop being persecuted. I'm also calling intervention immediately. Rafe87 ( talk) 14:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I've started this discussion to address the following paragraph:
"Repetitive penetrative anal sex may result in the anal sphincters becoming weakened, which may cause rectal prolapse or affect the ability to hold in feces (a condition known as fecal incontinence). [1] [2] Rectal prolapse is relatively uncommon, however, especially in men, and its causes are not well understood. [3] [4] Kegel exercises have been used to strengthen the anal sphincters and overall pelvic floor, and may help prevent or remedy fecal incontinence. [1] [5] A 1993 study indicated that fourteen out of a sample of forty men receiving anal intercourse experienced episodes of frequent fecal incontinence. [6] However, a 1997 study found no difference in levels of fecal incontinence between gay men who engaged in anal sex and heterosexual men who did not, and criticized the earlier study for its inclusion of flatulence in its definition of fecal incontinence. [7]"
As seen with this edit, I reverted Steeletrap on the removal of two quality sources; he stated "removing controversial assertion that is contradicted by one of the studies--which says 14/40 men who regularly receive anal sex have rectal prolapse--in the same paaragraph)." When reverting him, I noted that "it's a primary source study, which was apparently criticized, as noted in the section." I've since removed the two pieces for discussion. I haven't looked at these two studies; they were in the article before I started working on it, but it appears that the first study is flawed. It also doesn't appear that there have been many studies on rectal prolapse from anal sex (regarding gay men/MSM or heterosexuals); I'm not sure that we should retain this information if other studies have not repeated the same finding. The two sources that Steeletrap removed (and I restored) are not about anal sex, but I added them because I think it's important to note that rectal prolapse is very rare.
Jytdog and Doc James, any opinions on the rectal prolapse material? Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 05:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC) _____
References
The entry already indicates that some researchers speculate that there is a relationship between anal sex between gay men and romantic feelings: "The notion that it might resonate with gay men with the same emotional significance that vaginal sex resonates with heterosexuals has also been considered", it says.
However, the entry just leaves it at that, without discussing the subject further, even though there is already research, some of which with very large sample sizes, analyzing the link (if any) between feelings and form of sex practiced between gay men.
If the editors agree, I wish to insert the following lines just after the sentence quoted above, based on the research I found:
Some evidence extracted from both probability and convenience sampling gives support to that thesis; studies from the United States, [1] Brazil, [2] and Australia [3] (though not the Netherlands [4]) shows that the practice of anal sex between men is more common among regular or committed partners than casual partners. According to multi-national evidence, anal sex without a condom is particularly common between committed partners. [5] [3] [4] [2] Besides, young gay and bisexual men with more of a romantic focus seem to desire practicing anal sex more; [6] a study of about 25,000 gay and bisexual men also points that they more often practice anal sex on last sexual encounter with a male partner if the latter is someone they were in love with at the time of the sexual episode. [1]
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author2=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)
If any of the editors wishes to have access to any of the papers above, I can provide it if this is not against the Wikipedia's rules. Rafe87 ( talk) 03:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I have moved the two sections below from the article, to here. Both are shot through with WP:OR, picking this primary source or that one and stringing together a narrative that is entirely the creation of editors, and not found in any secondary sources.
It is also full of statements like "As of 2011, this survey provides the most up to date data about anal sex at the population level" which are some editor's opinion.
These need to be entirely rewritten summarizing secondary and tertiary sources. That is what we do here.
In 1992, a study conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that 26% of men 18 to 59 and 20% of women 18 to 59 had engaged in heterosexual anal sex; a similar 2005 survey (also conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) found a rising incidence of anal sex relations in the American heterosexual population. The survey showed that 40% of men and 35% of women between 25 and 44 had engaged in heterosexual anal sex. [1] In terms of overall numbers of survey respondents, seven times as many women as gay men said that they engaged in anal intercourse, with this figure reflecting the larger heterosexual population size. [2]
In a 2007 report regarding the prevalence and correlates of heterosexual anal and oral sex among adolescents and adults in the United States, a National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) found that 34% men and 30% women reported ever participating in heterosexual anal sex. The percentage of participants reporting heterosexual anal sex was significantly higher among 20- to 24-year-olds and peaked among 30- to 34-year-olds. [3] A 2008 survey focused on a younger demographic of teenagers and young adults, aged 15–21. It found that 16% of 1350 surveyed had had this type of sex in the previous 3 months, with condoms being used 29% of the time. [4] However, given the subject matter, the survey hypothesized the prevalence was probably underestimated.
In Kimberly R. McBride's 2010 clinical review on heterosexual anal intercourse and other forms of anal sexual activity, it is suggested that changing norms may affect the frequency of heterosexual anal sex. McBride and her colleagues investigated the prevalence of non-intercourse anal sex behaviors among a sample of men (n=1,299) and women (n=1,919) compared to anal intercourse experience and found that 51% of men and 43% of women had participated in at least one act of oral–anal sex, manual–anal sex, or anal sex toy use. [5] The report states the majority of men (n=631) and women (n=856) who reported heterosexual anal intercourse in the past 12 months were in exclusive, monogamous relationships: 69% and 73%, respectively. [5] The review added that "most research on anal intercourse addresses men who have sex with men (MSM), with relatively little attention given to anal intercourse and other anal sexual behaviors between heterosexual partners" and "[r]esearch is quite rare that specifically differentiates the anus as a sexual organ or addresses anal sexual function or dysfunction as legitimate topics. As a result, we do not know the extent to which anal intercourse differs qualitatively from coitus." [5]
According to a 2010 study from the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior (NSSHB) that was authored by Debby Herbenick and other researchers, although anal intercourse is reported by fewer women than other partnered sex behaviors, partnered women in the age groups between 18–49 are significantly more likely to report having anal sex in the past 90 days. [6] As of 2011, this survey provides the most up to date data about anal sex at the population level.
Figures for prevalence can vary among different demographics, regions and nationalities. A 1999 South Korean survey of 586 women documented that 3.5% of the respondents reported having had anal sex. [7] By contrast, a 2001 French survey of five hundred female respondents concluded that a total of 29% had engaged in this practice, with one third of these confirming to have enjoyed the experience. [8]
Figures for the prevalence of sexual behavior can also fluctuate over time. Edward O. Laumann's 1992 survey, reported in The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, found that about 20% of heterosexuals had engaged in male-to-female anal sex. Sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, working in the 1940s, had found that number to be closer to 40% at the time. A researcher from the University of British Columbia in 2005 put the number of heterosexuals who have engaged in this practice at between 30% and 50%. [9] According to Columbia University's health website Go Ask Alice!: "Studies indicate that about 25 percent of heterosexual couples have had anal sex at least once, and 10 percent regularly have anal penetration." [10] The increase of anal sexual activity among heterosexuals has also been linked to the increase in anal pornography, especially if a person views it more regularly than a person who does not. [11] [12] [13] [14]
Reports with regard to the prevalence of anal sex among gay men in the west have varied over time. Magnus Hirschfeld, in his 1914 work The Homosexuality of Men and Women, reported the rate of anal sex among gay men surveyed to be 8%, the least favored of all the practices documented. [15] By the 1950s in the United Kingdom, it was thought that about 15% of gay males had anal sex. [16]
Similar to the Hirschfeld study, scholars state that oral sex and mutual masturbation are more common than anal stimulation among gay men in long-term relationships. [10] [17] They say that anal intercourse is generally more popular among gay male couples than among heterosexual couples, but that "it ranks behind oral sex and mutual masturbation" among both sexual orientations in prevalence. [18] Wellings et al. reported that "the equation of 'homosexual' with 'anal' sex among men is common among lay and health professionals alike" and that "yet an Internet survey of 18,000 MSM across Europe (EMIS, 2011) showed that oral sex was most commonly practised, followed by mutual masturbation, with anal intercourse in third place". [19] A 2011 survey by The Journal of Sexual Medicine found similar results for U.S. gay and bisexual men. [20]
Various older studies on male-to-male anal sex differ significantly. The 1994 Laumann study suggests that 80% of gay men practice anal sex and 20% never engage in it at all. [21] A survey in The Advocate in 1994 indicated that 46% of gay men preferred to penetrate their partners, while 43% preferred to be the receptive partner. [22] A survey conducted from 1994 to 1997 in San Francisco by the Stop AIDS Project indicated that over the course of the study, among men who have sex with men instead of solely gay men, the proportion engaging in anal sex increased from 57.6% to 61.2%. [23] The National Institutes of Health (NIH), with their report published in the BMJ in 1999, stated that two thirds of gay men have anal sex. [24] Other sources suggest that roughly three-fourths of gay men have had anal sex at one time or another in their lives, with an equal percentage participating as tops and bottoms. [22] The latest nationally representative sex survey in the U.S., the 2012 edition of the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior, suggests high lifetime participation in anal sex among gay men — 83.3% report ever taking part in anal sex in the insertive position and 90% in the receptive position, even if only between a third and a quarter self-report very recent engagement in the practice, defined as 30 days or less. [25]
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
{{
citation}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
Pdf.
Preview.
{{
cite journal}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author2=
(
help)
-- Jytdog ( talk) 20:52, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
____________
Jytdog, a lot of the material was there before I started working on the article, but I did source and add some of the material. For example, I added some of the "Heterosexual anal sexuality and anal sex behaviors: a review" information. That content is not WP:OR and is a review of the literature. That source is particularly important because it makes it clear that "most research on anal intercourse addresses men who have sex with men (MSM), with relatively little attention given to anal intercourse and other anal sexual behaviors between heterosexual partners" and "[r]esearch is quite rare that specifically differentiates the anus as a sexual organ or addresses anal sexual function or dysfunction as legitimate topics. As a result, we do not know the extent to which anal intercourse differs qualitatively from coitus."
I also added information such as "oral sex and mutual masturbation are more common than anal stimulation among gay men in long-term relationships." This is supported by the sources. I added "They say that anal intercourse is generally more popular among gay male couples than among heterosexual couples, but that 'it ranks behind oral sex and mutual masturbation' among both sexual orientations in prevalence." This is supported by this source.
There is not a lot of information out there about the prevalence of anal sex and there is not a lot of up-to-date information about the prevalence. This is why I left in the older research. WP:MEDDATE is clear about cases such as these, where not much research progress is being made. What content do you find to be OR and what content do you suggest we add back? Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 22:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Proposed sections
|
---|
References
|
Doc James, can I get your opinion on this too? My above proposed sections? The data on the prevalence of anal sex, especially for heterosexuals, is limited, and I worked with what exists on the topic. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 03:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
There are some studies on the link between anal sex and relationship status/romantic expectations of gay men. I had inserted it before, but Flyer22 Reborn helpfully deleted it, as she's wont to do. It sort of bothers me how all mentions to anal sex in the gay male sector sound so much negative than for everyone else. It's almost like only gay men don't have a right to it. In the gay section, there is no mention to the positive aspects of the practice - to pleasure, orgasm, feelings of intimacy, etc. - even though all data pertaining to that are already available in the scientific literature, and indeed, I tried to add it before. I also added a phrase, which was properly sourced, about bi men's attitudes towards anal play with men and women, which is also gone. Is any of it salvageable in the view of you all? Rafe87 ( talk) 00:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Per above, I have re-added pornography material to the heterosexual Prevalence section. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 01:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Fix here. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 03:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Fix again here. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 18:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
In the section on pegging NIH is listed as a source for information. The information was published in the British Medical Journal and not from the NIH. Pub Med Central is a repository of many many medical journals and is not solely for in NIH information. I would fix this, but the article is locked. If you look at the citation you will see that all funding for the paper came from British sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:6824:d8d0:7115:6cb4:5e77:77df ( talk • contribs)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Anal sex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:53, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Why the graphic pictures. It's practically porno. Not sure that's what wikipedia is for. The text is pretty clear on its own. Kids use wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.38.87.213 ( talk) 23:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, it seems kinda extreme to use what you can effectively find on a porn site, perhaps a more biological diagram would be more appropriate, or something oriental historically depicting the act. AvatarofPride ( talk) 15:50, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
here: http://healthise.com/general/is-anal-sex-safe-how-to-perform-anal-sex/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.114.3.54 ( talk) 09:22, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Anal sex has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please can this page be categorised as "Sex education" or "Pornography" or "Other Adult" as we have had children accidentally coming across this page in schools. Jon.howarth ( talk) 11:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Avril1975, regarding this, why did you remove what was there and why do you think that the WP:Primary sourced material you added should remain? We are trying to stay away from primary sourced material for this topic unless it is necessary to include it. This is for good reason. See Talk:Anal sex/Archive 9#Prevalence sections for why. Furthermore, your addition made it seem as though it is common for women to experience an orgasm from anal sex, when this is not the case. This is addressed in the Anatomy and stimulation section. Your addition was WP:Undue weight, especially where you placed it, and you used Bustle.com to source the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior material. If anything, a scholarly source should be used to report on that matter if we are to include it at all. For example, the 2010 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior study (authored by Debby Herbenick et al.) that we include in the article is supported by this Cengage Learning source. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 00:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Moved and cut. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 19:04, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Is there some particular reason only hetrosexual oriented images are shown, or is this article actually intended to be rather homophobic in nature, considering the fact that anal sex is more popular among the homosexual as opposed to the hetrosexual community? I therefore conclude that this article needs major revisions in order to NOT be homophobic. 108.201.29.108 ( talk) 05:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Health risks, it is required to add immunological infertility
Autoimmune infertility due to Antisperm_antibodies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Путеец ( talk • contribs)
Flyer22 Reborn Jytdog Now you have studied immunology, and now you can add autoimmune infertility referring to the article antisperm antibodies. Here and in all articles related to the practice of anal sex and the health of LGBT people and MSM. Путеец ( talk) 07:00, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Anal sex has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"A 2000 study found that 22.9% of college students who self-identified as virgins had anal sex. They used condoms during anal sex 20.9% of the time as compared with 42.9% of the time with vaginal intercourse"
This isnt what the source says, source says 22% of nonvirgins
Some women have penises and I think it should be mentioned in the "female-to-female" section that penis-in-anal-sex is a viable form of lesbian sex! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily.mayfield ( talk • contribs)
If trans women can be lumped into "men" in this article, due to the "mechanics of sex," while considering the subjects of the sources (cis men and cis women), and this concept of "mechanics" is based on genitals, then why does it not work in the reverse where trans women who use their penis for anal sex, like myself, are implicated by those same sources for the "female to female" section? Lily.mayfield ( talk) 06:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
It's been raised in a discussion on Talk:Missionary position that this article is another that uses "generally" in its introductory sentence.
MOS:FIRST says: "If [the article] subject is definable, then the first sentence should give a concise definition: where possible, one that puts the article in context for the nonspecialist."
I don't think the current first sentence is a definition, and I don't really think that any statement entirely covered by "generally" can be. A definition says what something is, not what it usually or generally is.
(To work out if something is a satisfactory definition, try swapping it in to the article later on - e.g. "With regard to lesbian sexual practices, generally the insertion and thrusting of the erect penis into a person's anus, or anus and rectum, for sexual pleasure includes fingering, use of a dildo or other sex toys, or anilingus". That is clearly nonsense.)
I think the MOS is clear that the first sentence needs to give a definition, i.e. say what anal sex is: e.g. "Anal sex is sexual activity involving the anus, or anus and rectum." A second sentence can then say (assuming we can source the assertion) that the most common form of this is what the first sentence says; but what is currently in the first sentence is not the definition of the term.
I think the two terms also need separating - e.g. analingus is referred to by the article as anal sex, but isn't anal intercourse; so I don't think we can define the two together.
Thoughts? TSP ( talk) 11:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)