RESUMO
Background: Blue balls/vulva has received increasing interest from the public in recent years, sparking debate about genital physiology, controversy around "sexual release" as a treatment for this type of pain, and sexual consent. Aim: This cross-sectional, mixed-methods online study aimed to evaluate the general understanding and frequency of blue balls/vulva and whether individuals have ever been pressured to continue sexual activity because of a partner's fears of experiencing pain without orgasm. Methods: A total of 2621 individuals with a penis (n = 1483) or vagina (n = 1138) were recruited for an online survey on the experience of "blue balls/vulva." Quantitative analyses consisted primarily of descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses. Between-group differences were analyzed (based on whether respondents reported having a penis or vagina), and responses to open-ended questions were examined via thematic analysis. Outcomes: The primary outcomes of interest were reports of the belief in blue balls/vulva, the frequency and pain characteristics of blue balls/vulva, and the incidence of being pressured to continue sexual activity due to a partner's fears of experiencing pain without orgasm. Results: Results indicated that significantly more individuals with a penis than a vagina reported believing that blue balls are real, endorsed experiencing pain when they approached orgasm but did not ejaculate, and reported moderate and severe pain. Significantly more individuals with a vagina than a penis reported being pressured into a sexual act due to a partner's fear of experiencing pain without orgasm. Results from the thematic analysis indicated that participants recognized that those with a vagina are expected to act sexually to prevent their partners' experience of blue balls, despite agreement that this phenomenon should not be used to coerce or manipulate partners into engaging sexually. Clinical Implications: Education on the frequency of this phenomenon and methods to relieve pain alternative to partnered sexual activity should be addressed in patients who present with this condition. Strengths and Limitations: Although the survey was brief, it provided information from a relatively large sample about whether people believe that this phenomenon exists, how many experience it, how painful it is, and how often it has been used as an excuse for a partner to continue sexual activity. Conclusion: Results indicated that severe pain exists in a minority of individuals, that solitary sexual and nonsexual activities can help to alleviate the discomfort, and that this pain is not a valid reason to continue unwanted sexual activity.
RESUMO
Scientists can analyse DNA to reveal our likelihood of developing certain diseases. As technology advances, it raises questions as to how much emphasis should be placed on genetic testing in the workplace. In 2008 the United States implemented the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, prohibiting employers from using a person's genetic information in the workplace. This article discusses how Australia should act to prevent unjustified genetic discrimination in the workplace. In 2003 a report from the Australian Law Reform Commission and the Australian Health Ethics Committee, entitled Essentially Yours, concluded it was important to legislate now to protect employees from unlawful discrimination rather than wait for the technology to advance. This article assesses and adds to the recommendations of this report. It argues that genetic status should be considered an inherent requirement of a job, and therefore genetic discrimination should be lawful where it may protect employees themselves, third parties at risk and in professions where it is necessary that employees be healthy in the future. However, to avoid unjustified discrimination, genetic information should only be lawfully used in the workplace where there is a very high probability that the disease will manifest within a specified number of years.
