Hubbry Logo
Sex, ExplainedSex, ExplainedMain
Open search
Sex, Explained
Community hub
Sex, Explained
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Sex, Explained
Sex, Explained
Sex, Explained
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Sex, Explained
GenreDocuseries
Narrated byJanelle Monáe
Theme music composerJackson Greenberg[1]
Opening theme"Explained Theme Song"
Country of originUnited States
Original languageEnglish
No. of seasons1
No. of episodes5
Production
Running time17–26 minutes
Production companyVox Media
Original release
NetworkNetflix
ReleaseJanuary 2, 2020 (2020-01-02)
Related

Sex, Explained is an American documentary limited series produced by Vox. The series, along with The Mind, Explained, is a spin-off of the television series Explained.[2] Episodes of the show explore various topics around the subject of sex, seeking to explain nuances and trends.[3] The series is narrated by Janelle Monáe and debuted on Netflix on January 2, 2020.[4]

Episodes

[edit]
No.TitleOriginal release date [5]
1"Sexual Fantasies"January 2, 2020 (2020-01-02)
Despite how taboo people often think their own sexual fantasies are, research shows that most sexual fantasies fall into the same three basic categories: group sex, novelty and control. This is due to common biological, psychological, and societal influences on sexual fantasy themes, in different parts of the world and at different times in history. These commonalities and themes can be seen in popular media portrayal of sexual fantasies, both mainstream and in pornographic media.
2"Attraction"January 2, 2020 (2020-01-02)
The nature of human attraction is discussed – in heterosexual, homosexual, and gender fluid relationships – covering how the evolutionary imperative of progeny interplays with human experience of sex that is exterior from procreation, all mixing together to affect who and what we are attracted to.
3"Birth Control"January 2, 2020 (2020-01-02)
The history of birth control is discussed, both hormonal and non-hormonal. Incidence of dangerous side effects, non-consensual experimentation and enforced or coerced sterilization are highlighted. Current progress in birth control options across the globe are also covered. Some representative males are interviewed, discussing their willingness to take male-focused birth control options like a pill or an injection to the testicles.
4"Fertility"January 2, 2020 (2020-01-02)
Male and female infertility is a growing medical advancement, though far more effort is made to understand infertility issues in women – despite research showing that most males living today have a lower sperm count than their ancestors. There are also risks of birth defects from conception with older sperm, which are presently under-researched. Challenges for same-sex couples and single parents who wish to have biological children are also leading to redefinitions of infertility. Footage from the birth of the first child conceived via IVF shown and fertility expert Dr. Sherman Silber discusses advances in treatments like ovary tissue freezing and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).
5"Childbirth"January 2, 2020 (2020-01-02)
800 women die in child birth each day, globally, and a global survey showed that up to 30% of women rate their childbirth as a traumatic experience. Anthropologist Holly Dunsworth explains that labor for non-human primates is much easier than for humans. As obstetrics became a recognized medical field, and induction via pitocin was developed, pregnancy further became a somewhat less uncertain process. The "cascade of interventions" at play in a medical child birth have led to an excess of c-sections and higher rates of post-traumatic distress (PTSD) and postpartum depression (PPD). There have also been positive and negative results from the push back toward "natural childbirth", including women who choose epidurals or who require c-sections feeling shamed for their choices or circumstances.

Reception

[edit]

Reviews for Sex, Explained have been generally positive. Review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes reported an approval rating of 100% based on 5 reviews.[6] The Daily Beast's Jordan Julian said, "Though by no means a substitute for comprehensive sex ed, the Janelle Monáe-narrated series provides adults with a valuable supplement to whatever knowledge they may (or may not) have gleaned from school and experience."[4] Ashlie D. Stevens of Salon described the series as an "entertaining and informative start to some more adult-oriented sex education." Stevens also noted how the series reflected the strength of the Explained series, saying, "But Sex, Explained excels in finding a voice that is smarter than it is steamy, which isn't a surprise if you've watched the Explained Netflix series that preceded it."[2]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Sex, Explained

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
is a five-episode documentary miniseries produced by and released on on January 2, 2020, as a spin-off of the broader Explained franchise, focusing on scientific, historical, and physiological dimensions of human sexual behavior and reproduction. The series, narrated by , features episodes dedicated to specific topics: arousal and attraction, the evolution and efficacy of methods, factors influencing , the biological processes and challenges of , and common patterns in sexual fantasies drawn from empirical surveys. Each installment runs approximately 20 minutes, employing animations, expert interviews, and data visualizations to convey information accessibly while grounding discussions in biological realities such as hormonal influences on desire and reproductive outcomes. Produced amid Vox's explanatory journalism style, the series has been noted for filling gaps in public understanding of sex-related biology, particularly where formal education may be limited, though its sourcing from Vox—a outlet with documented ideological leanings—invites scrutiny of narrative framing in sensitive areas like reproductive technologies. Reception has been largely favorable, with critics highlighting its utility in demystifying topics like male versus female contraceptive options and the prevalence of certain fantasy archetypes, evidenced by studies showing over 90% of people harbor recurrent sexual imaginings tied to dominance, submission, or novelty. No major controversies emerged at release, distinguishing it from more polarized media on sexuality, though its emphasis on empirical data over prescriptive norms aligns with efforts to prioritize causal mechanisms in human mating behaviors.

Overview

Series Premise and Structure

is a limited docuseries produced by for , released on January 2, 2020, that dissects key elements of through expert commentary, scientific data, and animated explanations. The series, narrated by , adopts the concise format of Vox's broader Explained franchise, with each installment lasting around 20 minutes to deliver accessible insights into biological mechanisms, historical contexts, and behavioral patterns related to sex. The premise centers on elucidating misunderstood aspects of sex without prescriptive moralizing, drawing from , , and to address topics often obscured by cultural taboos or misinformation. It features interviews with researchers, clinicians, and individuals sharing personal experiences, supplemented by Vox's signature visualizations of data such as hormone levels or contraceptive efficacy rates. While aiming for enlightenment, the series reflects Vox's editorial lens, which emphasizes progressive narratives on issues like body diversity and . Structurally, the five episodes each target a discrete subtopic: "Attraction" examines pheromones, responses, and mate selection; "Birth Control" reviews methods from ancient barriers to modern hormonal options, including failure rates like 9% for typical pill use; "Drive" analyzes variations influenced by testosterone and stress; "Bodies" covers genital anatomy and conditions; and "" explores and differences in satisfaction. This modular approach allows standalone viewing while building a cohesive overview of as a multifaceted biological and social phenomenon.

Production and Key Personnel

was produced by Studios for as a spin-off from the broader Explained franchise, which originated from Vox's YouTube explainer videos. The five-episode limited series premiered globally on on January 2, 2020, with each installment running approximately 16-19 minutes and focusing on distinct aspects of through , expert interviews, and archival footage. Executive producers for the series included , who also served as for the Explained series, Joe Posner, and , a co-founder of known for his role in developing the original explainer format. Additional executive producers credited across episodes were Chad Mumm and Emily Wiedemann from Vox Media Studios. Supervising producer Rebecca Davis oversaw production coordination, while producers such as Sanya Dosani, Shant Alexander (associate producer), and Liam Brooks (archival producer) handled episode-specific elements including research and sourcing. Directorial credits varied by episode, with filmmakers like those specializing in short-form documentaries helming individual segments, though no single overarching director is listed for the . The production drew on Vox's editorial team, including managing producer Valerie Lapinski and Mona Lalwani for Vox Editorial in select episodes, emphasizing a data-driven, journalistic approach aligned with Vox's mission to explain complex topics.

Episodes

Attraction

The "Attraction" episode of Sex, Explained, released on on January 2, 2020, investigates the drivers of , questioning whether individuals possess a fixed "type" and emphasizing multifaceted influences on desire. Running 17 minutes, it contrasts attraction with that in other , arguing that unlike many animals where serves primarily reproductive ends, preferences incorporate novelty, , and non-procreative elements. The narrative reviews historical theories—such as pheromones or simplistic compatibility rules—before asserting that environmental and cultural contexts profoundly shape attractions, with providing a foundational but not deterministic layer. To illustrate complexity, the episode references experiments like showing subjects bonobo mating footage to gauge responses, suggesting attractions defy rigid instinctual patterns and vary widely due to personal and societal norms. It posits that human uniqueness lies in attractions decoupled from pure , potentially enabling fluidity in preferences. However, this framing overlooks counterexamples, such as bonobos engaging in sex for social bonding and pleasure independent of fertility cycles, undermining claims of human exceptionalism. Empirical evidence from indicates stronger innate components than the episode highlights. surveys, including a 1989 study by analyzing 10,047 participants across 37 societies, reveal consistent sex-differentiated preferences: men valuing cues to like and physical (correlating with via r=0.4-0.6 in meta-analyses), while women prioritize status and resources signaling paternal . These patterns persist despite cultural variance, supporting models where attraction evolved to maximize reproductive fitness. Twin studies estimate of traits at 20-50%, with genetic factors influencing preferences beyond environment alone. Produced by , the episode's de-emphasis on fixed biological drivers aligns with media tendencies to favor environmental explanations, potentially reflecting broader institutional preferences for narratives of malleability over innateness, even as peer-reviewed data affirm the latter's primacy in causal chains of attraction. Overlooking factors like (MHC) dissimilarity—linked to subconscious scent-based preferences enhancing offspring immunity—further limits its scope, as shown in studies where MHC variance predicts partner choice with effect sizes up to d=0.5.

Birth Control

The "Birth Control" episode, the third in the series, premiered on on January 2, 2020, and runs approximately 20 minutes. Narrated by , it surveys the long history of contraceptive practices, beginning with ancient methods such as silphium-based pessaries documented in Greek and Roman texts around the 1st century BCE, and crocodile dung suppositories referenced in Egyptian papyri dating to circa 1850 BCE. The program contrasts these rudimentary approaches with 20th-century innovations, emphasizing how early hormonal research in the , led by figures like Gregory Pincus and John Rock, culminated in the FDA approval of the first , Enovid, in 1960. It portrays the pill's development as marred by ethical lapses, including large-scale trials on Puerto Rican women in the without adequate , where up to 25% of participants reportedly experienced severe side effects like blood clots and strokes. The episode explains modern hormonal contraceptives' mechanisms, noting that combined estrogen-progestin pills inhibit by elevating hormone levels to simulate , achieving typical-use effectiveness rates of about 91% but with risks including (3-9 cases per 10,000 users annually for low-dose formulations). Progestin-only options and like IUDs (e.g., Mirena, inserted for up to 8 years with 99.8% efficacy) are discussed as alternatives that localize effects to the , potentially reducing systemic side effects like mood alterations or changes reported by some users. Non-hormonal methods, such as IUDs (which impair via inflammatory response, effective for 10-12 years at 99.4% efficacy) and barrier devices like condoms (82% typical efficacy), receive coverage for avoiding endocrine disruption but are critiqued for user-dependence and lower reliability in practice. Featured contributors include economist Shareen Joshi on access disparities, activist on , and archival insights from journalist Barbara Seaman, whose 1969 book The Doctor's Case Against the Pill exposed pharmaceutical downplaying of risks like liver tumors and cardiovascular events. A core thesis posits that contraceptive progress has stalled, attributing this to pharmaceutical incentives favoring incremental tweaks over non-hormonal or male-targeted options, despite demand for shared responsibility. The spotlights the of male methods beyond condoms and (near-100% efficacy post-procedure but requiring surgery), referencing the 2016 halt of a dimethandrolone undecanoate trial after 20 of 320 men withdrew citing , mood swings, and loss—side effects deemed tolerable in female equivalents but intolerable here, framing it as gendered double standards rooted in societal expectations that women absorb risks. Cultural variances are noted, such as higher reliance on withdrawal (78% failure rate typical use) in regions with limited access, and promotion in conservative contexts, though empirical data indicate no method eliminates all failures without dual use. While highlighting user dissatisfaction—surveys show 30-50% of pill users discontinue within a year due to irregularities or —the program underscores that unintended pregnancies affect 45% of U.S. conceptions annually, often tied to inconsistent use rather than inherent flaws. Vox's production, informed by its style, prioritizes historical inequities and patient narratives over quantitative risk-benefit analyses from clinical trials, potentially amplifying anecdotal harms while understating aggregate safety profiles established in decades of post-marketing surveillance.

Drive

The sex drive, also known as , refers to the biological and psychological motivation to engage in sexual activity, rooted in evolutionary pressures for . It is primarily driven by the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis, where hormones such as testosterone play a central role in initiating and maintaining desire across sexes, though levels and responsiveness differ. Empirical studies indicate that testosterone correlates positively with sexual thoughts, fantasies, and behaviors, with exogenous administration increasing drive in hypogonadal individuals of both sexes. Disruptions in this axis, such as from endocrine disorders or medications, can suppress drive, underscoring its physiological foundation over purely social constructs. Sex differences in drive are well-documented, with meta-analytic evidence showing men exhibit a stronger overall sex drive than women, evidenced by higher rates of spontaneous sexual thoughts (men average 19 times per day versus women's 10), masturbation frequency, and willingness to engage in casual sex. This gap persists across cultures and measures, with effect sizes ranging from medium to large (Hedges' g = 0.69), refuting claims of equivalence as artifacts of reporting bias. Evolutionary theories posit this divergence arises from asymmetric reproductive costs—higher parental investment in females selects for choosiness, while male drive maximizes mating opportunities—supported by animal models and human cross-cultural data. Hormonal fluctuations explain temporal variations: in women, drive peaks mid-cycle near ovulation due to estrogen and testosterone surges, aligning with fertility windows, whereas men's remains more stable. Factors modulating drive include age, , and environment. Drive typically declines with age in both sexes, more sharply in women post-menopause due to estrogen drop, though men maintain functionality longer absent comorbidities. Psychological elements like stress or depression inversely correlate, often via serotonin elevation suppressing reward pathways central to desire. Lifestyle interventions, such as exercise boosting testosterone or addressing relational dynamics, can enhance drive more reliably than pharmacological fixes alone, which carry risks like dependency or cardiovascular effects. Claims minimizing biological drivers in favor of cultural narratives lack empirical backing, as twin studies attribute 30-50% of variance to , with shared environment playing minimal roles.
FactorEffect on Sex DriveEvidence
Testosterone LevelsPositive ; supplementation increases desire in deficient statesMeta-analyses of clinical trials
Sex DifferencesMen > Women in frequency and intensity surveys, g=0.69
AgeDeclines progressively, steeper in women post-50Longitudinal cohort studies
Stress/DepressionSuppresses via serotonin-dopamine imbalance and self-report data

Bodies

The "Bodies" episode of Sex, Explained examines physiological changes in human sexual and function across life stages, from through aging, highlighting how these transformations influence , , and intercourse. It frames the as adapting primarily for , with secondary effects on , while noting variations due to , , and environment. The narrative underscores that —distinct male and female morphologies shaped by production ( in males, ova in females)—underpins these changes, though rare affect less than 0.02% of births and do not alter the binary reproductive classification of the . Puberty marks the onset of sexual maturation, typically between ages 8-13 in females and 9-14 in males, driven by reactivation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. This surge in gonadotropins stimulates gonadal production: and progesterone in females promote , wider hips, and (first , averaging age 12.4 in the U.S.), while testosterone in males fosters muscle mass increase, voice deepening, and starting around age 12. Accompanying rises in sex hormones correlate with heightened sexual curiosity and rates, with longitudinal data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health showing peak gonadal activity aligning with evolutionary pressures for mate selection and reproduction. The episode notes potential disruptions from endocrine disruptors like , which studies link to earlier onset in girls, though causation remains correlative rather than definitive. In reproductive adulthood (roughly ages 20-40), bodies optimize for , with female cycles enabling conception and male parameters peaking (e.g., concentration averaging 15-200 million per milliliter). The episode covers pregnancy's profound adaptations in females, including a 50% increase in , uterine expansion to 500 times pre-pregnancy size, and relaxin hormone effects loosening pelvic ligaments, which can temporarily alter sexual positioning and sensation. Postpartum, elevated from suppresses and often reduces , with recovery varying; a of 59 studies found 42% of women experiencing postpartum sexual concerns persisting up to 12 months, attributable to from perineal trauma or hormonal shifts rather than psychological factors alone. Male bodies show relative stability, though chronic conditions like impair erectile function in 35-75% of cases via vascular damage. Aging introduces declines in reproductive capacity, with the episode detailing in females—ovarian cessation around age 51, involving 12 months without menstruation due to follicle depletion, leading to drops of 90% and symptoms like vaginal thinning (affecting 45-65% of women) that reduce and elasticity, potentially causing during penetration. Empirical evidence from the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN) cohort of over 3,000 women confirms these changes but also reveals 61% maintain post-menopause, often mitigated by non-hormonal aids or topical , countering narratives of inevitable sexual cessation. In males, testosterone declines 1-2% annually after age 40, contributing to prevalence of 52% by age 70 per the Male Aging Study, linked to rather than issues alone; however, 70% of affected men respond to , preserving function. The episode asserts sexual activity's benefits, such as cardiovascular protection and mood enhancement, corroborated by a 2016 review of 20 studies showing regular intercourse reducing mortality risk by 50% in older adults. Throughout, the episode draws on physiological data to affirm that while wanes, erotic potential endures via neural plasticity and relational factors, with brain imaging studies indicating activation of reward centers (e.g., ) independent of peak hormonal states. Produced by Vox—a outlet with documented left-leaning institutional biases that occasionally prioritize sociocultural interpretations over strict —this installment adheres closely to peer-reviewed , avoiding unsubstantiated claims of sex as a "spectrum" beyond DSD anomalies, though it minimally addresses evolutionary trade-offs like menopause's "" for kin investment over extended reproduction.

Pleasure

The Pleasure episode delves into the neurobiology and variability of sexual and satisfaction, drawing on to differentiate between experiences. It underscores that sexual pleasure primarily arises from genital stimulation activating neural pathways in the brain's , releasing neurotransmitters like and oxytocin, akin to mechanisms observed in studies. For women, the episode highlights the clitoris's central role, with its approximately 8,000–10,000 nerve endings enabling intense localized sensation, supported by anatomical mapping via MRI studies showing extensive internal structure extending beyond the visible . Data from large-scale surveys, such as those by the , indicate that 70–80% of women do not achieve from penile-vaginal intercourse alone, necessitating direct clitoral involvement for most, challenging cultural assumptions of equivalence in intercourse-based pleasure. 30824-4/fulltext) Interviews with sex researchers, including those referencing longitudinal studies like the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior, reveal sex-based differences: men report higher rates of during partnered sex (around 95%), often from penile friction, while women's satisfaction correlates more with emotional context and manual/oral , with only 25% consistently orgasming from penetration. The episode critiques oversimplified narratives in media and literature that downplay these disparities, attributing them to evolutionary adaptations rather than alone—males' and penile sensitivity facilitate quicker, more reliable responses, whereas female pleasure pathways prioritize multi-site for reproductive compatibility. is presented as a key exploratory tool, with self-reported data showing 92% of men and 76% of women engaging in it lifetime, aiding in understanding personal pleasure thresholds without performance pressure. Sources like peer-reviewed meta-analyses affirm these patterns hold across cultures, countering claims of purely constructed differences, though the episode notes individual variation due to hormones, age, and health factors such as reducing estrogen-linked sensitivity.

Scientific Evaluation

Alignment with Empirical Evidence

The "Sex, Explained" series incorporates empirical findings from and reproductive , particularly in outlining hormonal influences on attraction and documented failure rates for contraceptive methods, though its framing occasionally dilutes causal biological realities in favor of sociocultural emphases. For instance, the attraction episode highlights how preferences become "hard-wired" through biological and environmental interactions, aligning with evidence that genetic factors and early developmental cues contribute to mate selection patterns, such as preferences for and indicators observable across cultures. However, the episode's stress on environmental malleability understates heritable components, as twin studies indicate that and partner preferences have moderate to high genetic (30-50%), independent of postnatal environment. In the birth control episode, the series accurately conveys historical developments and technological limitations, such as the absence of widely available contraceptives, which reflects empirical data on hormonal side effects deterring adoption, with trials showing 20-30% dropout rates due to reduction and mood alterations. It aligns with consensus on , where perfect-use failure rates for oral contraceptives are under 1%, but typical-use rates reach 7% due to inconsistent adherence, a gap substantiated by longitudinal U.S. surveys tracking unintended pregnancies. The presentation correctly notes global access barriers but omits fuller discussion of causal factors like , which accounts for over 90% of typical failures across methods. The drive episode, encompassing and desire dynamics, partially aligns by referencing testosterone's role, consistent with meta-analyses showing men exhibit stronger overall sexual drive ( g=0.69), driven by higher baseline levels and spontaneous frequency. Empirical from daily studies confirm men's desire fluctuates less and remains higher in long-term relationships, contrasting women's context-dependent tied to relational and ovulatory factors. Yet, the series' narrative risks conflating individual variation with equivalence, as cross-cultural evidence from 53 nations underscores persistent male-female disparities in rates and partner-seeking behaviors, rooted in evolutionary selection pressures rather than solely cultural conditioning. Regarding bodies, the series' exploration of and variations touches on biological realities like traumatic birth experiences (reported by one-third of women globally), corroborated by WHO data linking pelvic anatomy and labor mechanics to complications in 10-20% of cases. It aligns with dimorphic evidence, where is defined by production (sperm or ova), with conditions—affecting 0.018% for viable third gametes—representing developmental anomalies, not a spectrum undermining . Claims implying fluidity in bodily sex markers overlook that 99.98% of humans exhibit clear or female gonadal function, as verified by genomic and endocrine assays. The pleasure episode, framed around fantasies, accords with empirical patterns of predictable themes (e.g., dominance/submission in 30-60% of reports), biologically linked to reward circuits and cross-sex conserved cues like novelty and . differences emerge in biological substrates, with men showing greater visual responsiveness and erectile periods limiting multiples, while women exhibit higher orgasmic potential via clitoral innervation (8,000+ nerve endings vs. penile ' 4,000), supported by fMRI studies of cortical . The series' emphasis on subjectivity aligns superficially but underplays causal differences in , where men's pleasure-seeking correlates more with frequency (average 2-3x weekly vs. women's 1x), per self-report aggregates. Overall, while drawing valid empirical threads, the production's selective sourcing—favoring progressive outlets over comprehensive meta-analyses—introduces interpretive skews that prioritize inclusivity over unvarnished .

Critiques of Interpretations

Critics have argued that the series' interpretations of and orientation underemphasize innate biological and evolutionary mechanisms in favor of malleable social and psychological factors, potentially reflecting selective presentation of data aligned with cultural narratives over comprehensive empirical synthesis. In the Attraction episode, biological cues such as pheromones and hormones are noted alongside environmental influences, yet the portrayal risks overstating variability in preferences without sufficient weight to universals documented in large-scale studies. For instance, David Buss's analysis of mate preferences among 10,470 individuals across 37 cultures revealed consistent sex-differentiated priorities—men valuing physical cues to more than women, who prioritized resource provision—patterns replicated in subsequent meta-analyses supporting evolutionary theories of and , rather than purely learned behaviors. The inclusion of researcher Lisa Diamond, whose longitudinal work on women's sexual identities is featured, has drawn scrutiny for framing changes in self-labels as evidence of widespread "fluidity," whereas detailed examination of her data indicates relative stability in the direction and intensity of attractions, with shifts often attributable to relational or definitional factors rather than core desire reconfiguration. Diamond's 10-year study of 79 women found that while 67% changed identity labels at least once, the underlying pattern of same- versus other-sex attraction remained consistent for the majority, challenging interpretations that generalize fluidity as normative rather than exceptional, particularly given lower rates in men and population-level stability evidenced by twin estimates of 30-50% for . In discussions of and , the series highlights trends like declining counts—attributed to environmental factors such as endocrine disruptors—but critiques note an omission of evolutionary , where modern mismatches between ancestral adaptations and contemporary lifestyles (e.g., delayed ) exacerbate such declines without negating the primacy of gametic dimorphism in defining sex binaries. Peer-reviewed estimates place true conditions (disorders where reproductive anatomy is ambiguous and neither male nor female gametes are produced) at 0.018% of births, far below inflated figures sometimes invoked to blur binary categories, underscoring that developmental anomalies do not undermine the causal reality of as the defining criterion for sex. These interpretive choices align with patterns in outlets like Vox, where empirical data on heritable sex differences is sometimes subordinated to nurture-dominant explanations, despite countervailing evidence from and ; for example, genome-wide association studies confirm polygenic influences on traits like , explaining up to 25% of variance, which popular syntheses risk diluting to emphasize plasticity. Such critiques emphasize the need for causal realism, prioritizing mechanisms like over post-hoc social attributions, to avoid misguiding public understanding of as a biologically anchored rather than a predominantly constructed one.

Reception and Impact

Critical and Audience Responses

Critics largely praised Sex, Explained for its accessible format and educational value, with aggregating a 100% approval rating based on five reviews. Reviewers highlighted the series' engaging 20-minute episodes, colorful animations, and interviews with experts on topics like attraction and , describing it as an entertaining entry point to suitable for adults and curious teens. Publications such as Salon commended its balance of intelligence and appeal, noting the narration by enhanced enjoyment without prioritizing sensationalism. Decider recommended streaming it for its informativeness, though acknowledging it offers surface-level insights rather than comprehensive expertise. Audience responses were more varied, reflected in an user rating of 6.9 out of 10 from over 3,600 votes. On , user reviews showed mixed sentiment, with positives emphasizing eye-opening coverage of under-discussed issues like and fantasies, often calling it engaging and well-narrated. Negatives criticized episodes as dull, superficial, or politically slanted, with some viewers faulting a perceived emphasis on over and questioning expert selections. Broader critiques of Netflix's "Explained" style, including this series, pointed to oversimplification in addressing complex topics, limiting depth despite visual appeal. The limited critic sample—primarily from mainstream outlets—may skew toward favorable views aligned with Vox's progressive framing, contrasting with audience perceptions of occasional ideological overreach.

Cultural and Educational Influence

"Sex, Explained," produced by and released on on January 2, 2020, has served as an informal educational supplement, addressing topics like and in short, animated episodes narrated by . Viewing guides for episodes such as "Attraction" have been created for classroom use, enabling educators to facilitate discussions on biological and psychological aspects of sexuality. The series highlights systemic shortcomings in U.S. public school , where only 29 states mandate comprehensive instruction and fewer than 10 address LGBTQ+ identities explicitly, positioning streaming content as a surrogate for deficient curricula. In academic settings, it has appeared in biology and assignments, prompting analysis of empirical data on topics like exposure—93% of boys and 62% of girls view it before age 18, per a 2016 study— to counter unrealistic expectations. However, its brevity limits depth, often prioritizing over exhaustive coverage, which some educators note as suitable for introductory rather than advanced instruction. Vox's production style, reflective of the outlet's progressive editorial leanings, emphasizes inclusivity, including perspectives from narrator Monáe, potentially influencing how sexual diversity is framed in environments. Culturally, the series has modestly advanced destigmatization of sexual topics by featuring relatable interviews and animations, fostering viewer engagement on platforms like , where promotional episodes generated over 76,000 interactions in 2020. It underscores societal taboos, such as reluctance to discuss fetishes or at home, contributing to broader on reproductive amid declining formal on these issues. Yet, critiques from progressive outlets argue it falls short on intersectional analyses, like racial disparities in , revealing limitations in its cultural reach despite aiming for universality. Overall, its impact remains niche, with audience demand below average for TV series in select markets, suggesting supplemental rather than transformative influence on public attitudes.

Controversies

Representation and Diversity Concerns

Critics have argued that "Sex, Explained" underrepresents racial minorities, particularly individuals, in its expert interviews and visual depictions, resulting in a predominantly white-centric narrative on . In a January 15, 2020, review for The Root, contributor Brandi Collins-Calhoun described the series as delivering " and mansplaining," highlighting the absence of as s or subjects beyond trauma-focused anecdotes. For instance, the episode on sexual fantasies featured no interviewees and relied on stock imagery excluding them, while portraying men in alignment with historical racist , such as hypersexualized figures or animalistic tropes. Similar issues were noted in episodes addressing attraction, birth control, and childbirth. Collins-Calhoun pointed out that only four Black women appeared across these segments, often limited to brief mentions of disparities like elevated maternal mortality rates for Black women in the U.S.—which stood at 55.3 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2018 according to CDC data—or historical eugenics targeting minorities, before pivoting to white women's experiences and advocacy. Black experts like reproductive justice advocate Loretta Ross and filmmaker Monica Simpson were included but confined to discussing victimization rather than broader expertise, contrasting with prominent roles for white figures such as midwife Ina May Gaskin, whose past associations with racially insensitive views were not addressed. These representation concerns reflect broader debates on inclusivity in educational media, where demographic diversity is weighed against sourcing from established scientific authorities. While the series, narrated by , incorporated some discussion of LGBTQ+ attractions and historical abuses like forced sterilizations disproportionately affecting people of color, critics contended it failed to integrate non-white perspectives meaningfully, potentially reinforcing erasure for marginalized audiences. No widespread empirical studies have quantified the series' demographic imbalances, and counterviews, such as user praises for its expert diversity on platforms like , suggest perceptions vary.

Ideological Biases and Omissions

"," produced by , reflects the outlet's left-leaning editorial perspective, as rated by media bias evaluators, which favors progressive interpretations of social issues including sexuality. This manifests in the series' emphasis on inclusivity across sexual orientations and gender identities, such as the inclusion of gender fluid relationships in discussions of attraction, without substantively engaging counterarguments from biological essentialism or empirical studies highlighting average sex differences in patterns and partner preferences. The series omits deeper exploration of evolutionary psychology's role in shaping sexual behaviors, despite superficial nods to reproductive imperatives; for example, the attraction episode portrays human mating as largely decoupled from strict reproductive drives, diverging from evidence that pressures continue to influence traits like symmetry and fertility cues across cultures. Such framing aligns with academic trends critiqued for underrepresenting innate biological factors in favor of malleable social constructs, potentially sourced from institutions with documented ideological skews toward . Critiques highlight further omissions, including inadequate representation of non-white experiences in sexual narratives, leading to perceptions of cultural erasure in topics like fantasies and trauma. Additionally, the birth control episode has been observed to amplify risks of hormonal methods, such as blood clots, which some interpret as skewing toward caution over access, though this contrasts with broader progressive advocacy for contraception. Overall, the absence of traditional or religiously informed views on sex—such as procreation's primacy or abstinence's efficacy—reinforces a secular, pleasure-centric lens, sidelining causal evidence from longitudinal studies on relationship stability and outcomes tied to monogamous norms.

References

  1. https://www.vox.com/2020/1/2/21046744/sex-explained-netflix
  2. https://www.netflix.com/title/81160763
  3. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11390530/
  4. https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/movies-tv/sex-explained-could-be-the-most-necessary-show-on-netflix
  5. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/sex_explained/s01
  6. https://decider.com/2020/01/02/sex-explained-netflix-stream-it-or-skip-it/
  7. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11390530/episodes/?season=1
  8. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11390530/fullcredits/
  9. https://www.themoviedb.org/tv/96815-sex-explained/cast?language=en-US
  10. https://dion.studio/Explained
  11. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11535978/fullcredits
  12. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11535972/
  13. https://medium.com/jeffs-film-tv-reviews/sex-explained-on-netflix-1ee9bc60d68d
  14. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/bda183fd-0359-4318-a063-b5bab63f0230/external_content.pdf
  15. https://labs.la.utexas.edu/buss/files/2015/10/buss-1989-sex-differences-in-human-mate-preferences.pdf
  16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4439540/
  17. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13558358.2020.1818541
  18. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11535978/
  19. https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/contraceptive-effectiveness-united-states
  20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36227317/
  21. https://www.psychiatrist.com/jcp/circuits-sexual-desire-hypoactive-sexual-desire-disorder/
  22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361175924_Sex_drive_Theoretical_conceptualization_and_meta-analytic_review_of_gender_differences
  23. https://bsd.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13293-025-00698-4
  24. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02400-w
  25. https://www.health.harvard.edu/mens-health/understanding-sex-drive
  26. https://www.mazewomenshealth.com/blog/2020/05/28/sex-in-the-media-sex-explained-on-netflix/
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3638209/
  28. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010782411000497
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10125944/
  30. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dating-and-mating/202003/how-high-sex-drives-differ-in-women-and-men
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10265381/
  32. https://acpeds.org/sex-is-a-biological-trait-of-medical-significance/
  33. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19317611.2021.1965689
  34. https://assets.csom.umn.edu/assets/71520.pdf
  35. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/
  36. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/sex_explained
  37. https://www.salon.com/2020/01/02/sex-explained-netflix-vox-steamy-smart/
  38. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/sex_explained/s01/reviews?type=user
  39. https://hyperallergic.com/570010/netflix-documentaries-explained-history-101/
  40. https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Sex-Explained-Attraction-Viewing-Guide-5171976
  41. https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/01/05/janelle-monae-sex-explained-new-netflix-series-education-schools-lgbt-inclusive-relationships-lessons/
  42. https://www.thereviewgeek.com/sexexplained-s1review/
  43. https://www.listenfirstmedia.com/blog-6-winning-social-strategies-you-can-steal-from-netflix/
  44. https://web.phenixxgaming.com/2020/01/22/sex-explained-is-an-important-netflix-series/
  45. https://forwardtogether.org/sex-explained-was-a-lot-of-white-noise-and-mansplaining/
  46. https://tv.parrotanalytics.com/MX/sex-explained-netflix?pubDate=20250401
  47. https://www.theroot.com/sex-explained-was-a-lot-of-white-noise-and-mansplaining
  48. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11390530/reviews/
  49. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/
  50. https://www.allsides.com/news-source/vox-media-bias
  51. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10480807/
  52. https://www.reddit.com/r/birthcontrol/comments/ejmt09/sex_explained_birth_control_episode_seems/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.