Editorial Standards & Guidelines

Our Editorial Mission

Sexual Positions Free is committed to producing content that is accurate, accessible, inclusive, and grounded in the best available evidence. We hold ourselves to the same standards we would expect from a reputable sexual health publication — because that is what we aspire to be.

Our editorial team operates with full independence from our commercial partners. Advertising revenue does not influence which topics we cover, how we cover them, or what conclusions we reach. No brand has the right to review or approve content before publication.

How Content Is Created

Every piece of content on SPF begins with a clearly defined editorial brief. For position guides, this includes: the position name and common aliases, an outline of the how-to instructions, the physical considerations involved, and any relevant safety or comfort notes. For guide articles, briefs define the target reader, the core question being answered, and the key sources to consult.

Writers assigned to a brief are required to:

• Conduct primary research using peer-reviewed literature, clinical guidelines, and authoritative sexual health resources (e.g., WHO, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, Journal of Sexual Medicine).
• Clearly distinguish between well-established findings, emerging evidence, and experiential or anecdotal information.
• Write in plain language that is accessible to a non-specialist adult reader without oversimplifying the subject matter.
• Disclose any limitations of the evidence, including small sample sizes, self-reported data, or lack of research in certain demographics.

Research Sources & Medical Accuracy

We prioritise the following types of sources, in descending order of weight:

1. Peer-reviewed academic research — published in indexed journals with editorial oversight.
2. Clinical guidelines and position statements — from bodies such as the British Medical Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, or equivalent national bodies.
3. Expert commentary — from named, qualified practitioners (sex therapists, physiotherapists, psychologists, medical doctors) interviewed or consulted directly.
4. Reputable non-profit organisations — with a demonstrable public health mandate and transparent funding.

We do not cite Wikipedia, content farms, or commercial brand websites as primary sources. Where a claim cannot be sourced to a credible authority, it is not published.

All content containing medical or health-adjacent claims is reviewed by at least one qualified reviewer before publication. Reviewers confirm the factual accuracy of specific claims, flag anything that requires qualification, and sign off on the content before it goes live.

Inclusivity & Language Standards

SPF is committed to reflecting the full diversity of people who have sex. Our style guide requires:

• Anatomy-based language (e.g., "person with a penis", "person with a vulva") used where appropriate, alongside inclusive relationship framing (e.g., "partner" rather than "he" or "she" as default).
• Explicit acknowledgement of relevant anatomical variation — including trans and intersex bodies — where the topic warrants it.
• Avoidance of stigmatising, shaming, or pathologising language. We do not describe any consensual sexual practice between adults as "abnormal", "deviant", or "wrong".
• Representation of a range of relationship structures (monogamous, non-monogamous, solo) appropriate to the topic at hand.

Contributor Guidelines

We occasionally publish content from external contributors. All contributors are subject to the same editorial standards as our in-house team. Acceptance of a pitch does not guarantee publication — all submissions go through our standard editorial review process.

Contributors must:

• Be willing to have their work edited for accuracy, clarity, and style.
• Disclose any conflicts of interest at the pitch stage — including commercial relationships with brands, products, or services related to the topic.
• Provide verifiable credentials or demonstrable relevant experience for pieces that make clinical or expert claims.
• Agree that SPF retains the right to update or remove contributed content to maintain accuracy over time.

We do not accept contributed content that is promotional in nature, contains undisclosed affiliate links, or conflicts with our inclusivity and language standards.

Update Policy

Sexual health research is an active field. Information that was accurate two years ago may be superseded by new evidence. We are committed to keeping our content current.

Our update policy works as follows:

• Annual review: All content is scheduled for a full editorial review at least once every twelve months.
• Triggered review: Any significant new research finding, guideline change, or reader-reported correction triggers an immediate review of affected content.
• Corrections: Factual errors are corrected transparently. Where a correction is material, a correction note is added to the article noting the original error and the correction made.
• Last reviewed date: Each article displays the date it was last reviewed for accuracy, which may differ from the original publication date.

Content Corrections

We take accuracy seriously and welcome correction. If you believe any content on SPF contains a factual error, please contact us using the subject line "Content Correction" and include:

• The URL of the page in question
• The specific claim you believe is incorrect
• Your source or evidence for the correction

Our editorial team will acknowledge all correction requests within five business days and will investigate every claim in good faith.