The key question we should be asking about sex: was it good for you?

Working as a health professional gives you a distorted view of the world. By its nature your work is dominated by people who have problems and it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that the majority are well. This phenomenon also plays out at a national level with public health bodies seemingly preoccupied with risk rather than the pleasure people experience using drugs or engaging in sex or, God forbid, both.

So it’s refreshing to see a new call to reorientate public health away from adverse outcomes of sexual activity to one recognising the benefits and pleasure of sex. While this may not seem radical to many, trust me, it is. This mini revolution is not only logical, but has the potential to bring many benefits. By starting from a point where sex is viewed as pleasurable rather than problematic, there is an opportunity to advance sexual justice, not just recognise how sex enhances most people’s lives.

Sexual justice is sorely needed as recent debates about the rights of the transgender community, for example, have shown. Whether you’re heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual or of any other orientation, having the state recognise that your sexual activity is pleasure-based and not deviant or at least unhealthy must be a basic right.

History highlights how various states have branded, and some continue to brand, forms of sexual activity as deviant and those who engage in that activity are not only marginalised but risk punishment. Complicit in this is the conflation of sexual health with sexual wellbeing by various national public health bodies. These state-sponsored organisations in effect use issues like HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases as de facto proof that a particular sexual practice is harmful and, in some cases, unnatural. This singles out groups of people and their sexual preference, creating or amplifying stigmatising attitudes towards them.

To their credit, the World Health Organisation has recognised the idea of sexual pleasure and its importance in public health by including pleasure in their definition of sexual health. This forward-looking view helps reduce stigma by framing positive sexual experiences as the goal of public health outcomes. Moving away from the perverse scenario where success is measured as the absence of or reducing sexually transmitted diseases like gonorrhoea or chlamydia.

There are parallels here with drug use. For decades, research has ignored the pleasure and benefits of using drugs like cannabis, cocaine or ecstasy. This is not merely an abstract moral failing but has proved to be costly to public health itself. We have wasted both time and opportunity to harness the potential of drugs like cannabis and LSD to treat physical and psychological problems.

Likewise, the resources ploughed into sexual health problems have been at the expense of gleaning intelligence about sexual pleasure which could actually improve and possibly prevent sexual health problems developing in the first place. Most sexual health problems are preventable, be this through education or engaging in simple harm reduction activities such as providing condoms.

Politicians, policy makers and public health bodies are influential in signalling what constitutes “normal sexuality”. This influence can be used for good by recognising the rich variety of ways that individuals choose to express their sexual identity. If these influencers start from a perspective that views these people as having the right to sexual pleasure rather than engaging in activity that is a threat to public health that subtly, but critically, changes the world view. Those responsible for these decisions may be wary of acting ahead of public opinion, but that’s a risk they must take.