Writers’ Newsletter: Updates to Sexography for Writers
By: Joe Duncan
Tags: Policies, Updates, Medium, Publishing, Writing

Writers’ Newsletter: Updates to Sexography for Writers

An Addendum From the Editor

It’s been quite a year so far, and as 2020 draws to a close, it’s safe to say that Medium itself has gone through some massive transformations. We’ve switched over to the new relational model, there have been some updates to the distribution guidelines and rules, and we’ve seen drastic changes to our landing page, Medium.com, all of this serving to reaffirm the 2,500 Heraclitan ideals that all is in flux, that change is the only constant.

It is the times like these that test our resolve, that demand that we get up from our cozy, comfortable spaces and actually grow. Have you ever heard of a success trap? For those who don’t know what a success trap is, a success trap is when we find something that works, the magic sweet spot that brings us the kind of success we find valuable, and it traps us into halting our own progress — our own growth.

This happens a lot in the worlds of business, economics, and politics. Imagine investing heavily in land-line telephones in 2001 or MySpace in 2005 because those were the industries that brought you success in the beginning, and thus they felt safe. Imagine investing heavily in Polaroid cameras in the late nineties. You see where I’m going with this. You’d probably be out of a lot of money because each of those firms — and the investors who chose to invest in them — fell into a success trap. And today, the changes are much more rapid as communication becomes faster and faster and tech speeds up.

In my view, success traps are the enemy of personal development. Complacency is the enemy of feeling like we’re moving toward some particular goal; like we’re accomplishing something that gives us a sense of purpose and value. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t fall into these myself. Sometimes I’ve written two or three great stories that all fit into a certain theme, only to see the forth one bomb because the times were changing, trends were changing, the whole world and its aggregate perspectives were changing around me, and I was still trying to do the same old thing.

And it’s with this in mind that I ask us to challenge ourselves and grow with the times, to not become complacent with the same ideas, the same formats, and the same style that we’ve become used to. If change is a part of Medium, it’s safe to say that change will be a part of Sexography, too.

Science Vs. Pseudoscience

Recently, I’ve rejected quite a few pieces for pseudoscientific claims and overpromising. Here at Sexography, we strive to curb the spread of disinformation, even if that disinformation is accidental, borne through ignorance, or well-intended. It’s often the well-intended misinformation that sounds the most plausible because sometimes reality can be whackier and much more counter-intuitive than we give it credit for.

Going forward, we’d like to reiterate that if you want to submit a scientific piece, something that makes any claims of health, diseases, sexual wellness, and more, we’re going to ask that it be scientifically robust and intellectually honest.

This means that we want such pieces to cite credible sources and contain those links in the work for additional reading. A lot of self-help writers come out and make a lot of bold claims and never back them up with any evidence. We don’t want this.

This also means that the science is high-quality. If you aren’t very scientifically literate, we suggest not attempting such pieces. For instance, if you’re not quite sure the difference between a preliminary study, an epidemiological study, a double-blinded placebo-controlled study, and an observational study, perhaps it’s time to dive deep into this world before attempting to submit these kinds of pieces. In fact, it’s in the Medium rules for distribution…

Pseudoscience or questionable health/medical/diet claims, including anti-vaxx

Conspiracy theories

If you’re trying to argue that the cure for anorgasmia, the inability to climax, is deep breathing, safe to say you’re going to have to provide a lot of evidence to support this claim. If you title your work The One Sure-Fire Way to Make Sure You Climax Every Time!, and you cite one study that’s preliminary and says at the bottom something to the effect of, “This is just a preliminary study to see how we could methodically perform a more robust study. Further research is needed,” it’s safe to say that your piece will be rejected for making claims that can’t be supported by the evidence.

Evidence matters because we presume that our readers will believe what we say, and if by believing what we say, they might engage in an activity that’s either harmful or stops them from getting the effective and proven treatments that they need, well, that’s very bad.

It’s also important that we cite people with proper training. If you come up with an idea that makes objective claims about sexuality, it’s important that you don’t just turn to Google and search for the top articles that support your claim from any random blog. This is far from a complete analysis of the subject and these too will continue to be tossed out.

Any risks and drawbacks to the information we have on a topic should also be included. If a study mentions that it looks promising but they could only secure enough funding to try the study out with 23 participants, say so. If there’s any risk of following the advice, if there is potential for serious harm, it’s safe to say it’s not going to be published.

Pro-tip: I reach for academic journals when doing science pieces, I read and analyze all of the information I can on a subject before typing my first word. The National Institute of Health website is great for checking out studies from all over the world, it can be found at nih.gov.

Hate Speech

We here at Sexography are inclusive of all views, sexes, genders, races, creeds, and basically any conceivable type of human you can think of. At the same time, I’ve had to reject quite a few pieces that broke another two of Medium’s distribution guidelines:

Stories that promote intolerance or prejudice against individuals or groups, including the use of scientific or pseudoscientific claims to pathologize, dehumanize, or disempower others.

Unsubstantiated accusations of illegal or unethical behavior

The rule of thumb to follow here is to ask yourself if your piece is informative, helpful, and empathetic, while at the same time remaining critical; or if it’s hostile & written out of aggression for a certain group of people. This is a very delicate needle to thread.

There are no justifications for hate speech carried out against whole groups of people and these pieces will continue to be rejected. Instead, try to come at another’s viewpoints or life situation from a place of understanding, try to steel-man their positions, try to show the benefits of their perspectives and the reasons they adopt them.

Words like “many” and “some” are vital, here, so we don’t end up labeling entire swaths of people who share some superficial likeness as being “bad” and sowing the seeds of division. Rather than attacking a group based on race, sex, LGBTQ status, marital status, etc., try criticizing larger ideas that certain people of all types share, but be sure to criticize the ideas themselves and not just say that all people who believe X are evil, bad, immoral.

Some Other Important Things to Consider

Here’s what we do want:

Thoughtful, high-quality work.

Science-based sex education and understanding.

Provocative pieces that make people think and that might not have all the answers.

Deep, existential subjects relating to the human condition.

Personal essays and stories that get to the heart of what it means to be a sexual beind (not erotica — we don’t publish erotica).

Journalistic integrity, as opposed to hit-pieces, smear campaigns, and other dirty tactics that the world has too much of.

Articles that get curated. Make sure you’re getting curated a lot. If not, maybe consider changing up your approach.

Here’s what we don’t want:

Not to state the obvious, but, erotica. We don’t want erotica.

Stories riddled with profanity and vulgarity. A sparsely used profane word is one thing, but articles that are trying the shock-and-awe approach to getting reads will be rejected. Try to say what you have to say delicately and with tact.

Politically-motivated articles that cherry-pick science and data to fit a certain conclusion. These make claims that aren’t supported by the evidence they cite unless much of it is ignored.

Stuff that’s too content-market-y. If you give us one or two paragraphs about a subject and then spend six or seven pushing a product, and the overwhelming takeaway was “buy this product”, and the article said little else, it’s safe to say we’ll reject it.

Hit-pieces, smear campaigns, and other dirty tactics that the world has too much of, as opposed to journalistic integrity.

A constant influx of uncuratable pieces.

Let’s See Some Quality Writing

This has been a tough year. Here in the U.S., we’ve had a chaotic presidential election as the entire world watched, all wrapped up in a global pandemic that forced most of us to be homebound. It’s been a crazy ride. But we can push through it. I know as times get tough, the tendency can be to just turn out as many pieces as possible without paying much respect to quality. This isn’t the answer. Trust me, I know from much, much experience that quality will take you a lot farther than quality.

Think of the best writers you know who publish the greatest stuff and realize they don’t have some magical skill that allows them to sit down and spit out articles in just a few minutes or hours; that’s not how it works for anybody. Putting in the time, revising your ideas, revising your drafts, and constantly improving pieces until you feel they’re perfect, rather than rushing them out the door, is the way to become more successful.

I believe the writers we’ve accumulated who contribute to this publication can step up their game and achieve these goals, both to meet publication standards and for the sake of their own excellence. We strive to bring our readers the highest quality work from around the web and we’ll continue toward that goal.