Redefining Sex

Examining an Old Concept in A New Way

Originally published via Medium.com on October 13, 2022

Photo credit by Martin Moore, via Unsplash

“Yes, but what is sex?” I pressed, and I watched my friend’s nose scrunch as their mouth gaped for a moment then faultered. This was the second time I’d asked, because their first answer had left me a bit lacking. In fact, I’m always surprised to see how varied people’s interpretations are when I’ve broached the subject with them.

At first glance, it doesn’t seem that hard of an answer. But, go ahead and give it a try: what is sex? Is it when a penis penetrates a vagina? If that’s the case, do lesbians not have sex? Is there a definition that adequately encompasses how sex is expressed and experienced throughout the gender spectrum? Do erotic, oral acts such as fellatio and cunnilingus count? If so, why — and would everybody agree? Is masturbation sex? How about cyber sex? Sexting? Further, is there a definition that takes into account sex that happens without consent?

See, if you’re anything like me, the more you tried to nail it down, the more you realized how nuanced this definition had to be because, as it turns out: sex is (and isn’t) very many things to very many people.

“As it turns out, sex is (and isn’t) very many things to very many people.”

But, being the sexual revolutionary I am, I rose to the challenge to try and conjure up a satisfactory answer. One that would, hopefully, be succinct yet broad enough to capture the breadth of what sex is from many, if not all, perspectives.

But, why does this matter?

I’m a bit of a fan of the Sapir-Whorf hypthothesis, which proposes that “the structure of a language determines a native speaker’s perception and categorization of experience” (Dictionary.com). Or, more simply put, that “our language shapes our reality. . .the language that we use shapes the way we think and how we see the world” (Simplypsychology.org). Being mindful and intentional in the language we use, then, allows for a greater broadening of perspective and awareness in how we treat such matters.

Our relationship with sexuality in the U.S. has been a tenuous one. While we’re widely presented with sexual imagery and ideations through avenues like the media, much of what we know about sex is limited, and strict ideas tying sexuality to morality have had a profound impact on our relationship with our sexual bodies. As such, commonly available information on sex tends to come in two extreme flavors: either explicitly pornographic (which is wonderful, too, but meant for entertainment) or medically sterile. Thankfully, in the recent years, the movement towards sex positivity and education has gained momentum and many sexperts and educators have thrown in their hats in order to fill this need. As one such educator myself, I natrually felt compelled to revisit our definition, and thus our understanding, of sex.

As it stands, the current popular denotation of sex given by the Merriam-Webster dictionary is limited to “heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis: COITUS” or “intercourse (such as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis.” Alternatively, Google’s provided definition by Oxford Languages offers up “[to] arouse or attempt to arouse someone sexually.”

Definition of “sexual intercourse” as given by Mirriam-Webster.com

During my time in college, I worked in a cognitive science lab doing experimental research. Part of that work involved attempting to come up with the “purest, most succinct” definitions for the values that we would be using in our experiment. This required that we did not define one subjective word using another (or, sometimes itself). So, seeing intercourse defined with intercourse and sex with “to sexually arouse” is both grating and wholly useless to me, as I’m sure it is to you. I can feel Dr. Cohen shaking his head disapprovingly now. After all, we shouldn’t need to jump down a dictionary rabbit hole to find a proper meaning. And, while I appreciate Merriam-Webster’s attempt at non hetero-normative inclusion, this definition basically reads as “Sex is sex with penis and a vagina or…sex not with a penis and vagina.” I think we can do better!

So, let’s get to it, shall we?

Redefining Sex: A Process

Photo credit by Kelly Sikkema, via Unsplash

Well, to nobody’s surprise, this mission proved almost immediately to be bigger than what I’d expected. After my initial introspection, I could offer a pretty adequate definition of healthy sex, but I wanted to see if I could find a definition that was even more inclusive and applicable. My mind went to courtroom rulings and the stringent uses of definitions in the past. I needed something that would lend itself to the flexibility of subjective experience as well as grant a solid enough reference point for separating sex versus the sexual. So I got up with my best friend, grabbed a glass of wine, and we got to philosophizing!

In order to tackle the task ahead of us, we first felt that we had to identify what qualified as sexual contact. The easiest answer we found was intention and context, whereas the intention was to elicit arousal in either the self or another via touch.

We agreed that sexual touch stemmed from erotic desire. That is, desire that stimulates the erogenous centers of the body or mind and delivers pleasure responses throughout. Granted, while this touch may seek to cause arousal in others, it doesn’t have to in order to be considered sexual. As long as the intention of eliciting arousal is present in the person(s) delivering the touch, the touch would qualify.

Here’s an example:

Person A touches Person B in the genitals. Person A does this because they are aroused with erotic desire and find Person B attractive. Person A receives a pleasurable feedback in their body from the contact and/or cognitively experiences erotic pleasure from this. Person B does not find this contact pleasurable nor welcome. This touch is sexual — harassment, no less! Person B slaps Person A for trespassing on their boundaries.

Now, here’s where context comes in.

Person A touches Person B in the genitals. Person A is a medical professional performing a routine exam and is not deliberately intending on arousing Person B (intention). Person B’s body responds to the touch with reflexive pleasurable feedback, but Person B understands that this is an exam (context) and there is no intention of arousal. This is not sexual contact.

Finally,

Person A touches Person B in the genitals. Person A does this because they are aroused with erotic desire and find Person B attractive. Person A receives a pleasurable feedback in their body from the contact and/or cognitively experiences erotic pleasure from this. Person B is also aroused and attracted to Person A, so when they are touched, Person B also receives a pleasurable feedback in their body from the contact and/or cognitively experiences erotic pleasure from this. This is sexual contact.

We identified what constituted as sexual contact. So, then, what was sex?

What we could immediately say is that sex had to actively involve more than one person for it to be distinct from other sexual acts. So, under this definition, masturbation wouldn’t be sex, though it would be considered a sexual act (intentional, continuous, erogenous arousal of the self).

After that, arose the question of if there was an element of time to sex. Does a five minute make-out session count? After all, it includes intentional, erogenous arousal involving two or more persons. But, when we usually think of sex, there’s usually a little more to it than that, isn’t there? What about Quickies?

Eventually we settled on adding “continuous” to our model definition. It would imply that there was a certain element of time included in the concept of sex without restricting what that timeframe would look like.

So, from this, we drafted our first version of the definition of sex: “Intentional, continuous, erogenous arousal involving two or more persons.”

Yes, it was still a bit dry, but it was a start! Plus, we appreciated this definition because it was inclusive to the nonmonogamists out there. But there was still something missing; something very important.

We revisited a story about a pair we knew who’d engaged in oral sex with one another. While one of them didn’t consider what they’d done to be sex, the other very much did. This again brought up a pivotal point: not everybody has to agree that sex happened. Again, sex is subjectively perceived and experienced.

So, What the Heck Is It?

Photo credit by No Revisions, via Unsplash

Ultimately, the conclusion we came to was that, at its most basic form, sex could be defined as, “the experience of intentional, continuous, erogenous arousal involving two or more persons.”

The “experience” portion allows for the subjective perception of arousal and pleasure that can vary from person to person and is largely influenced by context and culture.

Sex had to be intentional; the motivation being the, hopefully mutual, stimulation and enjoyment of the arousal state — erogenous arousal, to be specific.

It also involves time. There’s a difference between what we commonly think of as sex and just some playful, sexual flirting. Say a couple steals away for a brief minute or two to a secluded corner and engages in some hot n’ heavy making out and genital touch — not quite sex (though certainly sexual)!

Finally, for something to be sex, it had to involve at least two or more persons.

This definition also allows for things like “cyber sex” or “phone sex,” which don’t necessarily provide physical proximity, but still involve multiple persons’ participation and check off the other boxes (intentional, continuous, erogenous arousal). So, if we’ve instinctively referred to these practices as sex, perhaps this definition can explain why!

Important Notes and Concessions

It’s worth noting that this definition does limit the reported experience of sex to the party speaking on it. You can’t report on anyone else’s experience but your own.

For instance, because sex is an experiential phenomenon, I would not be able to say “we had sex,” but rather “I had sex with such-and-such.” Unless my partner(s) corroborated and shared the same perception of the experience, I wouldn’t be able to speak on their behalf.

“For instance, because sex is an experiential phenomenon, I would not be able to say ‘we had sex,’ but rather, ‘I had sex with such-and-such.’ Unless my partner(s) corroborated and shared the same perception of the experience, I wouldn’t be able to speak on their behalf.”

Harkening back to our previous example: Partner A gives oral sex to Partner B. Partner A does not consider that sexual contact to be sex, but partner B does. Their perception on what necessarily denotes full-on sexual activity varies depending on their individual perspectives. In healthy examples of sex, that experience is shared (ie: “The consensally shared experience of intentional, continuous, erogenous arousal involving two or more persons”).

Unfortunately, when that experience and intention isn’t shared, that’s when we get non-consensual or otherwise problematic situations (ie: “The unequal experience of intentional, continuous, erogenous arousal involving two or more persons, whereas one or more persons are nonconsensually exploited”).

Note that here we’ve been able to give examples of both healthy and unhealthy sex using our base definition as a guideline.

Parting Thoughts

While it would seem that we accomplished our goal in creating a fairly comprehensive, new definition of sex (although Dr. Cohen may still wince at the use of erogenous in there), the more important takeaway here would be to help understand the complexity of attempting to do such a thing.

That being said, I again invite you to examine the definitions for yourself. Puzzle along with a friend and see what you find there. Did our definition change how you think about sex? What would you change or add?

In cases such as this, it can be fair to say that the journey is almost greater than the destination. In deconstructing the definition of sex, we come to realize the many intersecting elements that go into our interpretations of it. We can find our biases and blind spots and open our perspectives into horizons beyond what we previously conceived.