Here are the sex positions people are most curious about — and it’s not missionary

New York Post - Apr 3rd, 2025

A recent study by FetishFinder reveals a significant increase in Google searches for new sex positions in the United States, with the Bear Hug position leading the charge. This standing position saw a 623% spike in interest, as Americans seemingly look to spice up their sex lives. The study identifies other positions gaining popularity, such as the Filthy Sanchez, Anvil, Bridge, and Full Nelson, all showing significant increases in search volumes. The data suggests a nationwide curiosity and desire to explore new dimensions of intimacy.

The context of this surge in interest ties back to a perception that Americans might not be engaging in sexual activities as frequently as desired, with averages suggesting only once per week. FetishFinder's spokesperson notes that these search patterns indicate a renewed exploration of sexual desires across the country. This trend could reflect broader societal shifts towards openness and experimentation in personal relationships, as well as a reaction to the perceived monotony in traditional sexual routines. The study highlights a cultural moment where individuals are actively seeking to enhance their intimate experiences.

Fetish Finder Google Searches Sex Positions Bear Hug American Sex Life Sexual Exploration

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

4.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides an engaging and readable exploration of current trends in sexual curiosity, focusing on unconventional sex positions. However, its reliance on a single, unverified source and lack of transparency regarding the methodology used to gather data significantly undermine its accuracy and credibility. The sensational tone captures attention but detracts from the depth and seriousness of the discussion, limiting its potential impact and engagement. While the topic is timely and of public interest, the article could benefit from a more balanced and comprehensive exploration of the subject, including multiple perspectives and expert opinions. Overall, the article's strengths lie in its readability and engagement potential, but its weaknesses in accuracy, source quality, and transparency limit its overall quality and reliability.

Accuracy

The story claims that there has been a significant increase in Google searches for certain sex positions, with specific percentages given for each position. However, the story lacks concrete data or references to support these claims, such as the methodology used by FetishFinder or the time frame of the study. For instance, the claim that the Bear Hug position saw a 623% increase in searches is a precise figure but lacks verifiable data or context to confirm its accuracy. Additionally, the story mentions the average American has sex only once per week, a statistic that requires validation from a reliable source. Without access to the original study or data, these claims remain speculative and unverified.

Balance

The article primarily focuses on the curiosity and interest in new sex positions among Americans, without exploring broader perspectives or potential cultural implications. It does not provide alternative viewpoints or discuss the potential reasons behind the increased interest in these positions. The article could have included perspectives from sociologists, psychologists, or sexologists to provide a more balanced view of why these trends might be occurring. The lack of diverse viewpoints makes the article somewhat one-sided, focusing solely on the sensational aspect of the data presented.

Clarity

The article is written in a straightforward and engaging manner, making it easy to read and understand. The language is clear, and the structure follows a logical flow, with each sex position discussed in turn. However, the article's tone is somewhat sensational, focusing more on the novelty and shock value of the sex positions rather than providing a nuanced exploration of the topic. While the clarity of the writing is commendable, the emphasis on sensationalism detracts from the article's overall quality.

Source quality

The story relies heavily on data from FetishFinder, a source that is not widely recognized or verified in the public domain. There is no information about the credibility or expertise of FetishFinder in conducting such studies, nor are there any additional sources or experts cited to corroborate the findings. This reliance on a single, potentially non-authoritative source limits the reliability of the information presented. The lack of multiple sources or expert opinions significantly affects the article's credibility.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency regarding the methodology used to gather and analyze the Google search data. There is no explanation of how the data was collected, the sample size, or the demographic details of the searchers. Additionally, the article does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or biases that might have influenced the findings. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for readers to assess the validity of the claims and understand the context in which the data was collected.