Most Popular Sex Advice of 2017

2017 was a transformative year for conversations around intimacy and relationships. From mainstream media to scientific research, sex advice evolved significantly, reflecting changing attitudes toward pleasure, communication, and consent. This article explores the most influential and widely discussed sex advice that shaped conversations in 2017, offering practical insights that remain relevant today.

The Rise of Communication-First Intimacy

Perhaps the most pervasive message of 2017 was that communication forms the foundation of satisfying intimate relationships. Unlike previous decades when sex advice often focused on techniques or performance, 2017 emphasized talking openly with partners before, during, and after intimate moments.

This shift reflected broader cultural movements toward consent and mutual respect. Experts highlighted that conversations about desires, boundaries, and expectations don’t diminish spontaneity—they enhance it. Partners who discussed what they wanted reported higher satisfaction and deeper emotional connections. The advice wasn’t about awkward interrogations but natural, ongoing dialogue that deepens over time.

Practical application involved checking in with partners about comfort levels, asking permission before trying new things, and creating safe spaces where both people felt heard. Many relationship counselors noted that couples who mastered this communication skill experienced fewer misunderstandings and greater overall relationship satisfaction.

Pleasure as a Priority, Not an Afterthought

2017 saw a significant cultural moment around prioritizing mutual pleasure in intimate relationships. For decades, mainstream advice had often centered on performance metrics or male satisfaction, but 2017 media and expert discussions increasingly normalized the idea that all partners deserve pleasure and satisfaction.

This included frank conversations about female pleasure, which had historically been underemphasized or treated as secondary. Resources and articles widely discussed that many women didn’t orgasm from penetration alone and that this was completely normal, not a problem to fix. The emphasis shifted to exploring what actually works for each individual body, rather than following a predetermined script.

Sex educators highlighted that pleasure is deeply personal and variable. What works brilliantly for one person might not work for another. The advice centered on curiosity and experimentation within the context of trust and communication, treating intimate exploration as a collaborative journey rather than a performance to achieve.

Consent Beyond Yes or No

While consent had been discussed previously, 2017 refined the conversation significantly. Rather than viewing consent as a single yes-or-no moment, experts emphasized that it’s ongoing, enthusiastic, and can be withdrawn at any time. This represented a maturation of the conversation beyond simplistic frameworks.

The nuanced approach acknowledged that consent can look different in different relationships and situations. For some couples, explicit verbal communication worked best. Others developed non-verbal cues or signals that clearly indicated comfort and desire. The key was that both partners felt confident about what was happening and why.

Importantly, 2017 advice also addressed that sometimes people change their minds mid-way through an interaction, and that’s completely valid. Partners who responded with understanding rather than disappointment or pressure created relationships where people felt safe expressing their true feelings. This shift reflected growing psychological understanding that safety and trust directly enable more satisfying intimate experiences.

Mental Health’s Impact on Intimacy

2017 discussions increasingly connected mental health directly to sexual satisfaction and desire. Stress, anxiety, depression, and past trauma all significantly affect intimacy, yet these connections had historically been underexplored in mainstream sex advice.

Experts emphasized that low desire, difficulty with arousal, or challenges with orgasm often signal something worth exploring—whether that’s relationship dynamics, work stress, body image concerns, or previous negative experiences. The advice moved away from viewing these as purely physical problems requiring pharmaceutical solutions toward understanding the whole-person context.

This included frank discussions about how anxiety can create a self-perpetuating cycle, where worry about performance actually impairs performance. Practical advice involved managing stress through exercise, meditation, therapy, or lifestyle changes. For some people, this meant addressing untreated depression or anxiety with professional support. The overarching message was that taking care of mental health directly improves intimate relationships.

Redefining Sexual Health Beyond Reproduction

2017 saw broader conversations about what sexual health actually means. Historically, medical and cultural frameworks had often conflated sexual health with reproductive capacity or STI prevention—important but incomplete pictures.

The expanded definition included pleasure, desire, satisfaction, intimacy, and emotional connection as legitimate components of sexual health. This meant that sexual health isn’t only relevant to people actively trying to conceive; it’s a lifelong aspect of wellbeing for all people.

Conversations also expanded around different life stages. Sexual health in your twenties looks different from sexual health in your sixties, yet both deserve attention and resources. The advice acknowledged that relationships, bodies, and desires all evolve, and having realistic expectations about these changes reduces unnecessary stress and disappointment.

Technology and Intimacy: Finding Balance

2017 brought increasing discussion about how technology affects intimate relationships. While dating apps and technology had been discussed before, 2017 advice dug deeper into both benefits and drawbacks of various technologies in intimate contexts.

Some of the most interesting advice acknowledged that technology could enhance intimacy—whether through long-distance video communication, apps that help couples explore interests together, or resources for education and connection. Simultaneously, advice addressed how constant connectivity, work stress carried into bedrooms through phones, and comparison culture (often fueled by social media) could undermine intimate connection.

Practical guidance involved creating technology-free spaces and times specifically for partners to connect. This didn’t mean eliminating technology but being intentional about when and how it entered intimate spaces. Couples who established these boundaries reported feeling more present and connected during intimate time.

Pleasure Products as Tools, Not Taboos

2017 represented a cultural inflection point where pleasure products became increasingly normalized and discussed openly. Rather than remaining whispered taboos, these tools were presented as legitimate resources for exploration, either solo or with partners.

The advice emphasized that using these products doesn’t indicate problems in a relationship; for many couples, they enhance connection and pleasure. Additionally, solo exploration with these tools helped many people understand their own bodies better, which then translated into better communication with partners about preferences and desires.

Health professionals noted that this normalization had practical benefits—people felt more comfortable discussing products with partners, less shame about their bodies and desires, and more access to factual information about safety and quality. The conversation had shifted from whether these products were acceptable to how they could be incorporated into healthy intimate lives.

Vulnerability as Strength in Intimate Relationships

A particularly touching theme in 2017 sex advice was reframing vulnerability not as weakness but as essential strength. Intimate relationships inherently involve vulnerability—physical, emotional, and psychological. Rather than minimizing this, the year’s best advice celebrated it.

This included permission to express desires that might feel embarrassing, to acknowledge insecurities, to admit when something doesn’t feel good, or to ask for what you actually want rather than what you think you should want. Partners who could be vulnerable with each other created space for authentic connection rather than performance-based interaction.

The advice acknowledged that vulnerability requires trust and safety, which circles back to communication and consent. When both partners commit to creating non-judgmental space for honesty, intimacy deepens significantly. The research supported this: couples who reported high emotional intimacy also reported higher sexual satisfaction.

Reframing “Normal” and Individual Variation

Perhaps as important as what 2017 sex advice emphasized was what it actively discouraged: the idea that there’s one correct way to have a satisfying intimate life. Bodies, desires, and preferences vary enormously among humans, and 2017 advice increasingly validated this diversity rather than pathologizing variation.

This included diverse body types, different frequencies of desire, varied preferences for types of stimulation, different relationship structures, diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, and the full spectrum of what actually turns people on. The message was that as long as all involved parties enthusiastically consent, there’s nothing wrong with your particular preferences.

This reframing had practical implications. People spent less energy worrying that they were “abnormal” and more energy actually enjoying their intimate relationships. Therapists reported that normalization of diversity reduced shame and anxiety, which directly improved intimate satisfaction. When people could stop performing what they thought they should want and instead explore what they actually wanted, satisfaction increased across the board.

The Pleasure Gap and How to Close It

Beyond the general principle that pleasure matters, 2017 advice tackled the specific reality that many heterosexual relationships involved a significant disparity in pleasure experiences. Research presented throughout 2017 consistently showed that women orgasmed less frequently than men during partnered sex, and this gap widened in casual encounters. Rather than treating this as inevitable, experts framed it as addressable through practical changes.

The key insight was that this gap stems largely from how partners spend time during intimate encounters. If partnered sex primarily centers on penetration, which provides less direct stimulation for most women, the pleasure disparity makes biological sense. The advice involved being intentional about including activities that work for all partners involved, not treating them as preliminaries or afterthoughts but as central components of intimacy.

Practical applications included spending dedicated time on mutual pleasure rather than following a linear progression toward a single endpoint. Some couples found that varying the sequence of activities—sometimes prioritizing different partners’ pleasure first—created more balanced experiences. Others discovered that communication about timing mattered: understanding that partners have different timelines for arousal and orgasm allowed for adjustments that benefited everyone. The research emphasized that closing this gap often required intentional effort rather than assuming things would naturally balance out, but that effort consistently paid dividends in satisfaction for all parties.

2017 discussions also normalized that some women simply don’t orgasm from penetration, and that’s not a dysfunction—it’s how their bodies work. Rather than viewing this as a problem to solve through technique, the advice reframed it as information that should shape how partners structure intimacy. This simple reframe removed a layer of pressure and shame that had previously characterized many women’s experiences.

Desire Differences and Mismatched Libidos

While 2017 advice emphasized that desire varies among individuals, it also provided practical frameworks for couples navigating significant mismatches. Relationships where one partner wants sex significantly more or less frequently than the other had historically been presented as problems requiring one partner to compromise their authentic desires. 2017 advice offered more nuanced approaches.

Experts acknowledged that desire differences don’t necessarily signal relationship problems. Factors like stress, health status, relationship stage, and even biological variation mean that partners’ sexual desires naturally fluctuate. The problematic dynamic wasn’t the difference itself but how couples responded to it. When higher-desire partners felt rejected or when lower-desire partners felt pressured, resentment accumulated quickly.

Practical advice involved separating the person from the behavior. A partner declining sex on a particular evening doesn’t reject the other partner personally; they’re expressing their current state. This reframe reduced emotional reactivity that often escalated conflicts. Some couples found that scheduling intimate time helped, not because spontaneity is bad but because it removed the daily negotiation that can become contentious. Others discovered that lower-desire partners often felt more motivated when they weren’t under pressure, creating a counterintuitive but effective approach where removing expectation actually increased frequency.

The advice also acknowledged that sometimes mismatches reflect deeper issues worth exploring: medical problems affecting desire, relationship disconnection, stress, or depression. In those cases, addressing the underlying issue often resolved the desire mismatch. However, even when desire differences remained genuine and not driven by fixable problems, couples could still find satisfying compromises. Some partners explored solo pleasure or used other outlets while maintaining connection through non-sexual intimacy, others found creative ways to meet in the middle, and still others renegotiated relationship structure entirely.

Aging, Bodies, and Sexual Evolution

2017 brought increased visibility to conversations about sexuality across lifespan, particularly for people in their forties, fifties, sixties, and beyond. Mainstream sex advice had historically centered young adults, creating a cultural blind spot around midlife and later-life sexuality. This invisibility had real consequences: people assumed their changing bodies and desires meant something was wrong, when actually they were navigating normal evolution.

The physical changes of aging affect sexuality in multiple ways. Hormonal shifts, changes in blood flow, modifications to tissues, and altered recovery times are biological realities. Rather than presenting these as problems, 2017 advice reframed them as information that should shape intimate practice. Longer arousal times aren’t failures; they’re part of how bodies work at different life stages. Different stimulation needs reflect actual neurological and physiological changes, not loss of function.

Beyond the physical dimension, 2017 discussions highlighted that people’s desires, preferences, and relationship contexts shift significantly across decades. Someone’s sexuality at twenty looks genuinely different from their sexuality at fifty—and both are normal and valid. Some people reported that later-life sexuality became more satisfying because of increased confidence, reduced performance anxiety, deeper partnerships, or freedom from reproductive concerns. Others navigated new challenges but found that addressing them with the same curiosity and communication that worked earlier in life remained effective.

Practical advice included adjusting expectations rather than avoiding intimacy as bodies changed. Partners who remained engaged with sexuality despite physical changes consistently reported better satisfaction than those who assumed changes meant the end of that aspect of their relationship. The advice also involved seeking medical help when appropriate—hormonal treatments, medications, or devices could address specific challenges—while recognizing that some changes simply require adjustment rather than intervention. Healthcare providers increasingly recognized that sexual satisfaction remains relevant throughout life, and 2017 advice validated this across cultural conversations.

Solo Sex as Part of Comprehensive Sexual Health

While 2017 discussions frequently centered partnered sex, important advice also addressed solo sexual exploration as a legitimate and valuable component of sexual health. This represented a meaningful shift from historical frameworks that often treated masturbation with shame, secrecy, or pathology.

The practical benefits of solo exploration were clearly articulated. People who understood their own bodies—what sensations they enjoyed, what timing worked, what kinds of stimulation were most effective—had significantly better tools for communicating with partners. Instead of expecting partners to intuitively know what works, people who’d explored solo could provide specific, useful guidance. Additionally, solo pleasure provided valuable stress relief and emotional regulation benefits independent of partnered sex.

2017 advice also addressed that solo sexual practice doesn’t replace partnered sex but complements it. Some research presented during the year suggested that people who engaged in both solo and partnered sex reported higher overall satisfaction than those who engaged in only one or the other. The advice normalized that both have distinct value and can coexist healthily in relationships.

For people in relationships, this sometimes required addressing assumptions or insecurities. Some partners initially felt threatened by a partner’s solo practice, fearing it suggested dissatisfaction with partnered sex. The advice involved understanding that these are separate experiences—solo sex involves different timing, context, and often different goals than partnered sex. Couples who worked through this often found that accepting and sometimes supporting each other’s solo practice actually strengthened their partnerships by reducing pressure and increasing overall sexual satisfaction.

Navigating Desire Discrepancies in Sexual Interests and Kinks

Beyond frequency differences, 2017 advice also addressed situations where partners had significantly different interests regarding specific sexual activities or scenarios. One partner might be curious about practices the other partner wasn’t interested in, creating a practical navigation challenge.

The advice centered on several key principles. First, that curiosity about particular activities doesn’t require judgment about either partner’s preferences. If one partner wanted to explore something the other partner didn’t, that’s information—not a sign of incompatibility or that either partner is wrong. Second, that exploration requires genuine enthusiastic consent from both parties. Pressuring someone into activities they don’t want, or expecting someone to suppress legitimate interests indefinitely, both create resentment and disconnection.

Practical frameworks involved distinguishing between activities one partner was willing to try for the sake of their partner’s pleasure versus hard boundaries that shouldn’t be crossed. Many people discovered they were willing to participate in activities they weren’t independently interested in, if the context involved clear communication, safety, and their partner’s genuine joy. Other people found certain activities were absolute boundaries they couldn’t cross even for a valued partner. The advice supported both positions while emphasizing that knowing your own boundaries and expressing them clearly protects both partners.

For couples with significant interest discrepancies, creative solutions emerged in 2017 discussions. Some couples found middle grounds—activities that weren’t anyone’s primary fantasy but that both partners were enthusiastic about. Others negotiated asymmetry where each partner engaged in some activities primarily for the other’s benefit. Still others explored fantasy conversation or media as ways to engage with interests without full physical practice. The key principle was that solutions required honesty and true consent, not coercion or resentment management.

Sexual Health Across Diverse Relationship Structures

2017 brought increased mainstream discussion of non-monogamous, polyamorous, and otherwise non-traditional relationship structures. While alternative relationship structures had existed and been discussed in niche contexts, 2017 represented a cultural moment of greater visibility and less automatic pathologizing.

Importantly, the sexual health advice that applied to monogamous relationships—communication, consent, pleasure prioritization, vulnerability—applied equally to alternative structures, but required more explicit navigation. Polyamorous relationships involved additional communication layers around boundaries, emotional safety, and jealousy management. Open relationships required clear agreements about what was and wasn’t acceptable with outside partners. All of these involved the same foundational principles of communication and consent, just applied more extensively.

2017 advice highlighted that these relationship structures don’t inherently work better or worse than monogamy—they work better or worse depending on whether the partners involved are actually suited to that structure and whether they’re willing to do the communication work. Someone who tried polyamory to solve existing relationship problems usually found that the structure magnified existing issues rather than resolving them. However, people who chose alternative structures because it genuinely aligned with their relationship needs and desires often reported high satisfaction.

Additionally, advice addressed specific challenges unique to alternative structures. Jealousy management in non-monogamous relationships, for instance, required different skills than monogamous relationship challenges. Managing multiple partners’ needs simultaneously involved coordination and fairness concerns that monogamous relationships didn’t typically navigate. The advice acknowledged these structural differences rather than pretending all relationship types faced identical challenges. People choosing alternative structures who understood the specific communication and negotiation demands generally navigated them more successfully than those assuming they could operate like monogamous relationships but just “more open.”

Trauma, Healing, and Reclaiming Pleasure After Harm

2017 discussions increasingly connected sexual trauma to current sexual functioning and offered practical frameworks for healing. This represented a significant evolution from earlier advice that often treated trauma as something that should be “fixed” before engaging with sexuality, rather than acknowledging that healing often happens through supported, consensual intimate experiences.

The advice recognized that trauma responses—difficulty with arousal, pain during sex, difficulty with vulnerability or trust, triggers that arise unexpectedly—made logical sense as protective mechanisms. Brains and bodies that had experienced harm often developed automatic responses designed to prevent future harm. Rather than viewing these responses as obstacles to sexuality, the advice framed understanding them as part of healing.

Practical guidance involved clear communication with partners about trauma history and current responses. Partners didn’t need detailed trauma narratives, but they benefited from understanding specific triggers or responses: “Sometimes I need to pause and reorient,” or “Touch on this part of my body sometimes triggers me, so let’s avoid that.” This transparency allowed partners to support healing rather than inadvertently triggering responses. Additionally, having agreements about pacing and control often helped trauma survivors reclaim pleasure—knowing they could stop at any moment, that they had agency, that their partner would respect their boundaries often enabled nervous systems to gradually relax.

2017 advice also emphasized that healing from trauma often benefits from professional support. Trauma-informed therapists could help process underlying experiences and build skills for managing current responses. Some approaches specifically addressed trauma in sexual contexts. The advice supported combining professional support with supported intimate exploration, recognizing that healing happens in relationship and connection, not just in isolated therapy.

Importantly, the advice validated that recovery isn’t linear. People sometimes experienced progress followed by setbacks. Partners who remained patient and supportive, who didn’t interpret setbacks as personal rejection, who maintained perspective on the longer healing journey generally provided the most supportive environment. The message was that sexuality after trauma is absolutely recoverable and can eventually become deeply satisfying, but the path involves patience and ongoing communication.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did communication-focused advice become so prominent in 2017?
Communication rose to prominence partly due to broader cultural shifts toward consent and respect, amplified by social movements gaining media attention. Additionally, relationship research had increasingly demonstrated the concrete benefits of communication—couples who talked openly reported higher satisfaction, fewer conflicts, and greater emotional intimacy. Mental health professionals also recognized that unexpressed needs and unaddressed concerns create resentment and disconnect. 2017 marked a cultural moment where this research intersected with social values, making communication-first approaches mainstream rather than niche.

How can couples actually implement better communication about intimacy without it feeling awkward?
Starting small often works best. Rather than a formal conversation, couples might ask a casual question during non-intimate time: “What felt really good last time?” or “Is there anything you’ve been curious about?” Making it a ongoing conversation rather than a one-time sit-down reduces pressure. Some couples find it easier to discuss desires when they’re not in the moment—perhaps over coffee or a walk. Written communication through messages can also feel less vulnerable for some people. The key is consistency and safety—when partners demonstrate they’ll listen without judgment, subsequent conversations feel easier. Many couples found that the first conversation was the hardest, and things flowed more naturally once they’d broken the ice.

What does enthusiastic consent actually look like in practice?
Enthusiastic consent isn’t necessarily loud or explicit every time—it’s about genuine desire and clear communication. It might look like a partner saying “yes, I want to” or showing clear physical enthusiasm. Non-verbal cues matter too: if someone is actively reciprocating, maintaining eye contact, and seems engaged, that’s consent. The key is that it’s not coerced, not given because of pressure, and not assumed from previous consent. For many couples, checking in occasionally—even a simple “is this still feeling good?”—maintains clear communication. Importantly, consent can be withdrawn: if someone says stop or becomes visibly uncomfortable, that changes everything. Partners who create space where people can comfortably say “no” or “not right now” build relationships where yes actually means yes.

How does addressing mental health actually improve intimacy?
Mental health directly affects desire, arousal, and satisfaction through both neurological and emotional pathways. Anxiety physically triggers the sympathetic nervous system (fight-or-flight), which directly inhibits arousal responses. Depression reduces dopamine, affecting motivation and pleasure-seeking. Stress keeps cortisol elevated, which suppresses desire. Beyond the physiology, emotional connection requires presence and safety—difficult when someone’s mind is racing with work stress or ruminating about problems. Addressing these through therapy, stress management, exercise, or medical treatment when appropriate removes these obstacles. People often report that treating depression or anxiety suddenly makes intimacy feel possible again, suggesting the barriers were primarily mental-health related rather than relationship-related.

How has technology changed sex advice and should couples be concerned about it?
Technology has provided unprecedented access to information and connection, which has generally improved sex advice quality and accessibility. However, it’s also created new challenges: constant connectivity can interfere with presence, unrealistic portrayals can create expectations mismatch, and comparison culture can undermine satisfaction. The advice isn’t to eliminate technology but to use it intentionally. Couples who set phone-free times, avoid scrolling in bed, and consciously choose which resources they engage with tend to report better intimacy. Technology itself is neutral—it’s the how and when of use that matters. Being deliberate about technology in intimate spaces, rather than allowing it to happen by default, allows couples to experience the benefits without the drawbacks.

Related posts:

The Truth About Sexual Frequency 5 Sex Positions to Enhance Your Emotional Connection Sex Drive Changes During Perimenopause The Secret Ingredients That Make Marriages Last Decades We Tested Bond Touch Bracelets: Do They Really Keep Love Alive? Sex Shouldn’t Just Be for Special Occasions The G-Scale for Orgasms: Measuring the Intensity of Pleasure Daily Sex: Benefits and Concerns