Exploring the Role of Sexuality Attitudes and Reassessment (SAR) in the Sexological Profession
Introduction
In the sexological profession, the concept of Sexuality Attitudes and Reassessment (SAR) plays a crucial role in shaping practitioners’ perspectives and skills. This blog article will delve into the origins, processes, benefits, and limitations of SAR training.
The origins and process of a SAR
SAR emerged from the National Sex Forum in the United States during the early 1960s, spearheaded by Methodist Ministers Reverend Ted McIlvenna and Reverend Laird Sutton. They recognized the need for a novel approach to sex education that addressed the sexual needs of youth (Britton & Dunlap, 2017). Over time, their program evolved into the attitudinal restructuring process known as SAR, where attendees self-assess their sexuality and observe diverse human sexual experiences (Britton & Dunlap, 2017).
Today, SAR training is integral to sexology programs worldwide, forming part of the credentialing requirements for professional associations and universities (Britton & Dunlap, 2017; Gradellini et al., 2022; Lin & Lin, 2018; Zal, 2022; Ramanathan & Redelman, 2020; Sitron & Dyson, 2009). The training typically involves presentations, the use of sexually explicit media (SEM), experiential activities, and small group discussions. SAR training comprises two phases: desensitisation and resensitisation (Britton & Dunlap, 2017; Lin & Lin, 2018). Desensitisation occurs through SEM, while resensitisation involves exploring participants’ feelings and emotions related to the content (Lin & Lin, 2018).
The benefits of the SAR
SAR offers numerous benefits for sexology practitioners. It helps address anxieties and attitudes around sexuality, demythologises sexual behavior, and integrates desensitisation to emotional reactions, taboos, and biases (Stayton, 1998). This foundational work enables practitioners to navigate difficult conversations in clinical settings confidently (Kristina & Lindroth, 2022).
The small group discussions in SAR create a safe space for participants to explore their feelings without the pressure of a larger group. This process fosters transformative learning, allowing participants to reflect on their and others’ viewpoints (Mezirow, 2009, cited in Lin & Lin, 2018). By encountering diverse sexual material, participants become more comfortable and confident in their professional roles (Kristina & Lindroth, 2022).
SAR training is designed to challenge participants emotionally, spiritually, and intellectually, ultimately helping them embrace and accept the diversity of human sexuality (Britton & Dunlap, 2017; Stayton, 1998). Exposure to SEM is crucial for sexological practitioners, who often use it in therapeutic and educational settings (Brewster & Wylie, 2008).
One significant benefit of SAR is its role in distinguishing sexological professionals from pseudo-experts. It is a defining feature of professional credentials and is considered a rite of passage into the profession (Barratt, 2008).
The limitations of SAR
Despite its benefits, SAR has limitations. Historically, there has been a lack of data supporting its effectiveness (Kristina & Lindroth, 2022). While some studies have provided insights, there have been no randomised control trials (RCTs), which are considered the gold standard in research (Fernainy et al., 2024). This gap in evidence is problematic, particularly when there is a push for evidence-based teaching and assessment (Thomas et al., 2019).
Measuring attitudes and values through SAR has also proven challenging. Tools like the Sex Knowledge and Attitudes (SKAT) and the Sex Knowledge and Attitude Test for Adolescents (SKAT-A) have shown limitations in their validity (Sitron & Dyson, 2009; Kristina & Lindroth, 2022). Additionally, the impact of SAR training can be influenced by participant euphoria and ephemeral states, which may affect the perceived effectiveness of attitudinal and interrelationship changes (Barratt, 2008).
Another limitation is that SAR may not be suitable for all participants. Those who are mentally unstable or have experienced trauma may find the SEM content psychologically challenging or triggering (Britton & Dunlap, 2017; Brewster & Wylie, 2008). Screening processes for SAR candidates are essential but not always well-documented.
Major draw back – sexual attitudes and values are embodied
One major drawback of SAR is that it fails to address, and break down barriers around the embodiment of our sexual attitudes and values. Essentially, we are all bodies living in a sexually and culturally faceted world. A somatic approach is to introduce a group of participants to nakedness, viewing each other as a body and each other’s bodies and genitals. “Nakedness can symbolise the truth of the matter and the truth of self – psychological authenticity. The metaphor of stripping away implies an authentic self-clothed in cultural baggage or social roles” (Barcan, 2004). Imagine the sensations, emotions in a non-judgemental, safe environment – you could experience your body with this incredibly powerful tool. This has actually been achieved in the sexological bodywork program outside mainstream sexology profession.
Haines (2019) reminds us, “We are taught to distance ourselves from sensations and the body, rather than living inside them. The distancing from lived experience, from feeling aliveness, also prepares us to be quick to objectify others and other types of life.” Addressing the embodied attitudes and values towards the human body, genitals, and their objectification in modern culture can assist in breaking down internal shame and stigma, thus highlighting the effectiveness of a somatic approach in the professional practice of sexology.
Finally
SAR is a valuable tool in the sexology profession, offering numerous benefits in addressing attitudes and biases around human sexuality. Despite its limitations, including a lack of comprehensive data and challenges in measuring effectiveness, the modern SAR feels outdated, SAR remains integral to sexological training. By fostering self-awareness and understanding, SAR helps practitioners navigate the complexities of sexual concerns and sexual wellness, ultimately enhancing their professional capabilities.
However the major drawback of traditional SAR training is the lack of awareness around the embodiment of sexual attitudes and values, and addressing these in an effective manner, where other programs such as sexological bodywork have. Adding the somatic aspect to traditional SAR training would bring it into the 21st century. While further research and development are needed, SAR continues to play a crucial role in shaping well-rounded and competent sexological professionals.
References
Barcan, R., & Eicher, J. B. (Ed.). (2010). Nudity: A cultural anatomy. Bloomsbury 3PL.
Barratt, B. B. (2008). Evaluating brief group interventions in sexuality education and enhancement: Do workshops really work?. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 3(4), 323-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546120802371992
Britton, P., & Dunlap, R. (2017). Designing and leading a successful SAR: A guide for sex therapists, sexuality educators, and sexologists. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315301112
Brewster, M., & Wyli, K. R. (2008). The use of sexually explicit material in clinical, educational and research settings in the United Kingdom and its relation to the development of psychosexual therapy and sex education. Sex Education, 8(4), 381-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681810 2433903
Dixon, S., & Chiang, C. M. (2019). Promoting reflexivity and reflectivity in counselling, education, and research. Canadian Counselling Psychology Conference, 15-31. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/111408
Fernainy, P., Cohen, A. A., Murray, E., Losina, E., Lamontagne, F., & Sourial, N. (2024). Rethinking the pros and cons of randomised controlled trials and observational studies in the era of big data and advanced methods: a panel discussion. BMC Proceedings,18(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12919-023-00285-8
Gradellini, C., Kaleci, S., Sim-Sim, M., Dias, H., Mecugni, D., Aaberg, V., & Gómez-Cantarino, S. (2022). Adaptation and Validation of the Sexuality Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for the Italian Context. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114162
Haines, S. (2019). The politics of trauma: Somatics, healing, and social justice. Random House US.
Irwin, R. (2023). Sparing the doctor’s blushes: the use of sexually explicit films for the purpose of Sexual Attitude Reassessment (SAR) in the training of medical practitioners in Britain during the 1970s. Medical Humanities, 49(2), 172-181. https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2021-012341.
Kristina, A. J., & Lindroth, M. (2022). Exploring the role of sexual attitude reassessment and restructuring (SAR) in current sexology education: for whom, how and why?. Sex Education, 22(6), 723-740. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2021.2011188
Kezelman, C. A., & Stavropoulos, P. (2020). Organisational Guidelines for Trauma- Informed Service Delivery. Blue Knot Foundation. https://blueknot.org.au/product/organisational-guidelines-for-trauma-informed-service-delivery-digital-download/
Lin, Y. L., & Lin, Y. C. (2018). Effectiveness of the sexual attitude restructuring curriculum amongst Taiwanese graduate students. Sex Education, 18(2), 140-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2017.1410698
Pillai-Friedman, S., Pollitt, J. L., & Castaldo, A. (2015). Becoming kink-aware – a necessity for sexuality professionals. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 30(2), 196-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2014.975681
Ramanathan, V., & Redelman, M. (2020). Sexual dysfunctions and sex therapy: The role of a general practitioner. Australian Journal of General Practice, 49(7), 412-415. https://doi.org/10.31128/AJGP-02-20-5230
Rosser, B. S., Dwyer, S. M., Coleman, E., Miner, M., Metz, M., Robinson, B. E., & Bockting, W. O. (1995). Using sexually explicit material in adult sex education: An eighteen-year comparative analysis. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 21(2), 117-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/01614576.1995.11074142
Sarri, G., Patorno, E., Yuan, H., Guo, J. J., Bennett, D., Wen, X., Zullo A.R., Largent. L., Panaccio, M., Gokhale, M., Moga, A.C., Ali, M.S., & Debray T.P. (2022). Framework for the synthesis of non-randomised studies and randomised controlled trials: a guidance on conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis for healthcare decision making. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 27(2), 109-119. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111493
Sakaluk, J. K., & Fisher, A. N. (2019). Measurement memo I: Updated practices in psychological measurement for sexual scientists. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 28(2), 84-92. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2019-0018
Sitron, J. A., & Dyson, D. A. (2009). Sexuality Attitudes Reassessment (SAR): Historical and New Considerations for Measuring its Effectiveness. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 4(2), 158–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546120 03001407
Sitron, J. A., & Dyson, D. A. (2012). Validation of sexological worldview: A construct for use in the training of sexologists in sexual diversity. Sage Open, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012439072
Aliki, T., Gruppen, L.D., Vleuten, C.V., Chilingaryan. G., Amari, F., & Steinert. Y. (2019). Use of evidence in health professions education: Attitudes, practices, barriers and supports. Medical Teacher 41(9), 1012-1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1605161
William R. Stayton (1998). A Curriculum for Training Professionals in Human Sexuality Using the Sexual Attitude Restructuring (SAR) Model. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 23(1), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/01614576.1998.11074203
Wollert, R. W. (1978). A survey of sexual attitude reassessment and restructuring seminars. Journal of Sex Research, 14(4), 250-259. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3812528
Wright, S. (2010). Depathologising consensual sexual sadism, sexual masochism, transvestic fetishism, and fetishism. Archives of sexual behaviour, 39(6), 1229-1230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9651-y
Zal, F. (2022). Inspiring Sexual Attitude Reassessment (SAR). The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 19(8), S30-S31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2022.05.111
