Sextinction: The Decline of Sex and the Future of Intimacy

by Debra Soh

Dr. Debra Soh, neuroscientist, noted sex researcher, and author of the “exceptional” ( The Times , London) The End of Gender , reports on the hidden crisis of a sudden decline of sexual activity.

There’s a strange paradox in today’s developed society has never been more sexualized, but people across all age groups and demographics are having less sex than ever before. And nobody seems to know why or what to do about it.

The “fearless” (Eric R Weinstein, PhD, host of The Portal) Dr. Debra Soh leaves no stone unturned as she searches for science-backed answers. She takes us on a roller-coaster journey through ideological debates, new technological frontiers, and modern dating to understand the whys and hows of this issue.

With an expert and impartial eye, Soh examines these evolving and controversial developments and colors her findings with anecdotes from her personal research. Compulsively bingeable and groundbreaking, Sextinction upends the conventional wisdom surrounding sex, skewering pieties held by the right and left alike, and looks to the future of sexuality.

Genres: Nonfiction, Feminism, Science, Sexuality, Psychology

336 pages, Hardcover

First published February 10, 2026

Reviews

[Alex Riley]

Will someone think of those poor oppressed men: the book.
Women need to be more preoccupied with how not to be "threatening" to men, so men wouldn't feel "emasculated", than their own well-being. Apparently women aren't already performing enough emotional labor. Are you a successful career woman? Men will resent you, cheat on you, and prefer to marry a young, naive, unthreatening tradwife.

Gotta love seeing a woman who's an author, public speaker and "scientist" preaching for a world where women should best remember to stay 2 steps behind a man. Cutting a branch you sit on, or simply pulling up the ladder behind you?

Includes shaming of: autism, asexuality, polyamory, masturbation and contraceptives, among others.

[Kristen Barfoot]

I would say that this book is a challenge for me to rate.

On one hand, I liked some of the studies and data that the author highlighted. While I've followed the conversation around the decline of sex for awhile, some of this data was new to me and quite interesting. Other data that was brought up were studies I've seen before and still find interesting (especially around the decline of fertility in both genders).

What I did have an issue with was that this author seems to paint everybody and everything with a very broad brush. It also is presented in a way where it feels very 'lecture-y' to women. I disagreed with a lot of the author's statements and stances, and felt like every interpretation of the data presented was extremely biased.

When she states 'All women prefer a mate who makes more money than them' and doesn't leave any wiggle room, it feels a bit strange. She'll then note that anybody who says differently (like women who are focusing on their career and financially independent) is not telling the truth. She then attacks DEI efforts and changes that have encouraged women to pursue higher education and careers (like birth control or scholarships), noting that 'we need to help men get back on their feet!'
Statements around married couples saying that women find men that help with chores/housework in a more 'equal' manner is a 'turn off' seems ridiculous to me. Also multiple times blaming an entire side of politics gets a bit old.... I don't think we can blame the entire left or the entire right for all of these changes....

It feels as though the author does not believe any human may think differently than when we were living in caves... I just wish she left some room for people who may think/feel differently as it felt like she was just saying that anybody who disagreed was wrong.

Not a fan.

[Daniel Gullotta]

This book is basically the literary equivalent of someone looking around and saying, “Y’all need Jesus.” It’s bleak… really bleak. Debra Soh surveys just about every corner of the modern sexual landscape: the near-ubiquity of porn (and how extreme some of it has become), young women being cheered on for starting OnlyFans or becoming sugar babies, the rise of AI partners and sex robots, even the possible role of environmental factors like microplastics in declining libido. Nothing is off limits. I’ve been following the conversation for a while about people (single and married) having less sex, so I wasn’t new to the topic. Still, Soh introduced me to studies and data I hadn’t seen before. The research is thorough and wide-ranging, and she clearly knows the literature. That said, this is not light reading. It felt overwhelming at times. But honestly, I think parents of teens (especially boys), teachers, pastors, and anyone working with young adults should probably read it just to understand what’s going on. The ending is short but offers a bit of hope. For me, the book didn’t just leave me discouraged but it actually strengthened my resolve to step up as a husband and father and not just drift along with the culture. Bleak? Yes. But also clarifying.

[Amanda]

The title is pretty self-explanatory as to what the author is discussing.

I read the book and kept side-eying things. For example, the author complaining about left-leaning spaces dominating discussions of sex and sexuality. Or how women have gone too far while fighting for equality. My suspicions were confirmed when I came across this passage:

"The field of sex research had been overrun by woke zealots, and I wasn't willing to stay quiet about it. As you can imagine, writing and speaking publicly about sex is a taboo endeavor, even when your focus is the science. People are quick to jump to conclusions about you and the quality of your work, often without reading it" (pg. 200). And then on the next page, she mentions being friends with Joe Rogan. Yes, that Joe Rogan.

Considering I've read this entire book, I am judging Debra Soh based on her own words and the company she keeps. She kept insisting she was just presenting the science, but science is also marred in bias depending on how the research is presented. And there are times when she'll say something definitive without a citation and it makes it clear that this is just her opinion, rather than something that's actually backed by her science.

There was judgment and prejudice against people who practice celibacy, identify as asexuals, people engaging in polyamory, and snide remarks about left-leaning women. To the point where she downplayed and outright left out any conversations of misogyny when it comes to dating when it's highly relevant. And then, in turn, blaming women for men's loneliness. Citing things like the #MeToo movement for making men too nervous to approach women, or claims of the number of female graduates from post-secondary education and diversity and inclusion programs pushing men out of academia. I think there should be a space to talk about issues facing men. Blaming it on women is not the way to do it. And I know discussions of women's issues include blaming men, but the real-world impacts of misogyny and misandry are not the same.

The author will also make very odd statements regarding men and women. For example:

"Since married and partnered men make up around 50 to 66 percent of prostitution clients, sugar babying can hardly be considered "pro-woman." Sugar babies are helping their male customers cheat on their wives and hide their lies. If a sugar daddy (pg. 147) is a father, his infidelity will distort his daughter's future expectations of men and his son's future treatment of women... Advocates of prostitution, for all of their talk about female empowerment, don't seem to care about this" (pg. 148).

How is cheating and the negative impacts on the father's children the woman's fault and not the man with a partner and kid(s)????

Or "Liberal feminism is full of bizarre contradictions, such as that it is a patriarchal for a man to pay for your dinner but not when he pays for your nudes" (pg. 135).

This may sound like a gotcha moment, but these are two vastly different situations. One conjures up the scenario of a man paying for a meal and then expecting sex in return, and the other conjures up the scenario of a man approaching a woman who is selling her nude pictures because he wants them. If you want a lap dance, are you going to approach a random woman, or are you going to go to a strip club? Context matters.

And sex work is a complicated matter. Prostitution and sugar babying are things that I would not encourage people to engage in. And I did appreciate the author's discussions of how these influencers will try to make it seem like an enviable lifestyle when it's not. It's rife for possible abuse. There's going to be various things that feminists and left-leaning women say in regards to the matter. The feminist movement is not uniform and the topic of sex work caused a pretty big schism during the second-wave feminist movement. So it's not as easy as saying, "Sex work is bad and should be abolished." Because I don't think that's the solution either. There's a lot of nuance discussion that needs to be had.

One of the worst examples of a false equivalence was here: "I do think we [women] sometimes fail to appreciate how easy access to sex is. Just as men will never fully understand what it's like to live in fear of sexual harassment, rape, and abuse, we can't fully comprehend what it feels like to have zero sexual options" (pg. 223).

Those two scenarios cannot be compared! I, a woman, have been lonely and single and rejected. It feels awful. I would never compare that to the fear of sexual harassment and rape, though.

And then there's the epilogue where she gives men and women advice. The men's advice included self-improvement activities like eating healthy, learning to cook, developing hobbies, and socializing more to gain confidence. Pretty solid advice to becoming a happier, more well-rounded person. Advice for women included instructions to smile more and:

"Don't try to compete with men at being men. It's okay to be feminine, nurturing, make him feel wanted, compliment him, be generous with physical affection, and wear sexy outfits every once in a while. If you want children, ... Once the biological window of opportunity has passed, you can't get it back" (pg. 275).

Essentially, advice for men is do the best you can do for yourself. Advice for women is do the best you can do for him. And why is there mentions of a biological clock for women, but not men, in the epilogue when the author previously mentioned that older sperm leads to health problems in children?

For all of her complaints that women have over-corrected too much to deal with past wrongs, blaming women and coddling men isn't the answer either. In fact, that's never gone away.

I did appreciate the various topics the author covered, including AI partners, sex dolls, and beauty standards and the rise of cosmetic procedures for both men and women. These topics brought up really interesting discussions that made me confront things I knew, things I assumed, things that were upsetting (e.g. I would have been happier without the knowledge that their are child sex dolls), and nuanced discussions, which is what I wanted ultimately wanted when I picked up this book.

For example, there were talks about a catch-22 when designing a custom sex doll in the likeness of a woman: "If consent isn't required before engaging sexually with a robot, [the doll companies] will be criticized for making sexual access too easy. But if a robot is programmed to require sexual consent and has the capacity to turn down its owner's advances, the manufacturer will be criticized for enabling rape fantasies" (pg. 214).

But then, of course, even these discussions had to be ruined with some offhanded remark like, "On the third [AI boyfriend] platform, as I was selecting my AI, I noticed that all the male profiles proudly displayed "he/him" pronouns. I promptly deleted my account, deciding I'd rather be celibate for life" (pg. 120).

Should I be surprised she has a disdain for pronouns?

[Chris M.]

I've seen a lot of people in younger millennial and Gen Z group say they're struggling to find a relationship, so it's hard to dispute the facts and data presented here. In short, Soh does a great job identifying and addressing the decline in sex and relationships, but doesn't fully explore how or why it became as problematic as it currently is today.

With the exception of the chapter about the growth of sex robots, much of what was discussed isn't new or groundbreaking, but it is important to consider the second order effects from the growth in such products and services and how they will impact relationships in the future.

Although it's my opinion, I believe that the contributing factors to this problem stem from a generalized sense of uncertainty, which is a larger issue than politics, gender or identity. Soh made a point about millenials and Gen Z being more coddled than previous generations. I would grant that it's true to an extent, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Millennials, those born between 1981 and 1996 have dealt with more uncertainty and unpredictability compared to previous generations.

To name a few examples:
1) 9/11, which ended a sense of relative stability and safety in the world.
2) 2007-2008 Recession. This was a period where millenials should have been coming into their own both personally and professionally, but were impacted by the recession which negatively affected their job prospects and earning power which delayed adult milestones like getting married or starting a family.
*What's interesting is that there was a mini baby boom from 2005 to 2008 where birth rates significantly increased, but once the recession hit, birth rates fell from 2009 to today, even when economic conditions improved in the 2010s. I would imagine lack of job security played a role in future planning.
3) Covid-19 Pandemic and 2020 in General. The pandemic affected everyone, but those starting to get settled saw an abrupt change to their day-to-day life. Many were isolated or laid off from their jobs. The growth in time spent on social media further eroded a sense of community.

Although Gen Z gets a lot of flak, they've also experienced uncertainty in other ways, such as:
1) Being digital natives. This generation doesn't know a world without internet or social media. This generation is inundated with all the world's problems all at once through social media, and they have 24/7 access to doom scrolling if they want to. They're also exposed to the culture of comparison.
2) Covid-19 Pandemic and 2020. Many found themselves isolated during formative years for developing social skills and emotional intelligence. It further exacerbated young people's dependence on devices and distractions.
3) Growth of AI. Many graduating high school have to consider if their career path might get replaced by AI. The true second order effects of AI into the market are still unknown which only fuels more uncertainty about making future plans.
4) Rising inflation. No secret that the cost of good and services have risen to all-time highs since 2020. This makes the effort of wanting to date that much harder. If young people are struggling financially, they will be less focused on long-term planning. The cost of wages have not kept up with inflation.

Regardless of one's stance on politics or society, people who don't feel a sense of security or well-being about the future are less likely to want to invest in it. This has caused people to become more self-focused and only concern themselves with self-preservation, but survival skills aren't growth skills.

The brain itself evolved to take short cuts. When we take mental shortcuts, it is our brain's way of conserving energy. The short cuts are only focused on immediate gratification, and when people are already burned out, they will take the path of least resistance mentally (Social media companies have capitalized on this research). So, when there is an abundance of distractions that satisfy people's needs that predictable, they are going to seem more appealing than dealing with risk and uncertainty, but that doesn't mean that this type of coping is healthy or sustainable in the long-term.

[David Steele]

Good work this, but let down by a stupid cover. It's an interesting and possibly even important book, but the cover is the sort of thing you'd want to smuggle home in a brown paper bag. Hardly the sort of title you'd want to be caught reading on the tube. A pity, because what's between the covers (as they say) is worth getting into.
Soh takes a long look at the cultural and sociological reasons why we (all of us, apparently) are having less sex and fewer babies. She comes at it from a distinctly conservative angle, which is interesting mostly because she spends a good chunk of the book apologising to leftists who might be offended by her take, while urging them to engage with her arguments rather than her politics. I can't remember the last time I read a left-wing author apologising to conservatives for any outrage they might feel. Funny, that.
Anyway, what you get is a writer who desperately wants people to take this subject seriously, while being acutely aware that she's setting off trip flares and touching third rails with every step she takes.
Her sharpest frustration is reserved for the unintended consequences of feminism. She rails against the idea, pushed by a certain breed of empowering girl-power influencer, that sex work is just another lifestyle choice for women to lean into. It's a luxury opinion, she argues, benefiting a tiny handful of men while being marketed as emancipation to everyone else. In its politics and its instincts, this book sits on the same shelf as Louise Perry's The Case Against the Sexual Revolution: A New Guide to Sex in the 21st Century, and readers of one will almost certainly want to engage with the other.
But there's a lot more here than feminism's dodgy receipts. Soh shines a light on what's going wrong with social media, the cultural imbalances that are resulting in fewer women being able to select a suitable love match, and the growing inequality in relationships. She also looks into the steady stream of men quietly checking out of the dating game altogether, and the rise of sex robots and AI companions.
Soh treats this whole subject of AI and robot sex dolls with a kind of Louis Theroux bemusement that rather made me wonder what rock she's been hiding under. The gist (no spoilers) is that once we've all got to the technological level where there's an AI butler in the house, the odds are it'll be serving up rather more than a dry martini after hours.
My biggest frustration (with the book at least) is that sex is a funny subject. There's a rich vein of humour throbbing all the way through it, and Soh never once lets slip so much as a fnaar or a titter. It's all delivered deadpan, and the book is poorer for it. A bit more levity would have lightened the load considerably. While we're on the subject of AI companions and sex robots, if this kind of thing is your bag (I'm not judging, I'm just saying), have a look at Billy No-Mates: How I Realised Men Have a Friendship Problem by Max Dickens, who has quite possibly the best name ever for writing a book on this topic.
I found "Sextinction" via the ever-reliable Modern Wisdom podcast, episode 1072. If you're wondering whether this book is for you, start there. If Soh's conversation with Chris Williamson doesn't hook you, the book probably won't either. But if it does? Brace yourself. But get an extra paper bag when you buy it.

[Carson Sprock]

I had high hopes for this book, but I was ultimately disappointed. I was expecting something more measured and informative, however this book was much more polemical than I was expecting and while the author certainly knows the subject matter well, she does a lot of extrapolation and editorializing beyond what the evidence she cites seems to support and also gives brief mention to fields of inquiry that deserved a closer treatment but only received a passing mention.

While she does a good job in some chapters of basing her claims on evidence, others seem to be based on vibes. One example from the book is her claim that women are requiring men to have the “triple six” (six figures, six foot tall and six inches of manhood) to be considered eligible. This trope is something that I have encountered on the internet before and I would think that one of the dating apps would have published something on this, but her assertion about the “triple six” came without a citation. Another example was her calling out of “Toxic Podcasts” as spreading harmful messages about the opposite sex to both men and women, contributing to negative views of one by the other, but doesn’t quote any actual influencers. I would think this would be relatively easy to do – find an example of negative messages being propagated by a popular social media influencer and then look at their audience numbers to roughly gauge how widely the message is being disseminated.

Topics that she mentions in passing but deserved closer treatment were divorce, child custody issues, family courts, #MeToo, and social norms around speaking to strangers in public. Some discussion of declining social trust and human capital — à la Putnam's Bowling Alone — would have fit nicely with her overall thesis, as would surveys on male reluctance to approach women post-#MeToo. Further elaboration on each of these would have made the book stronger, since they're all important factors in her central argument.

The book is also poorly written and reads more like a long blog post than a serious non-fiction book or work of popular science. The only reason I’m giving this book 2 stars and not 1 is because the author clearly knows the subject well (nearly a quarter of the book is taken up by the bibliography) and was willing to do some serious investigative journalism, particularly in the chapters on cosmetic surgery, AI pornography, and sex robots – the details of which I found to be shocking and would never known about had she not done the dirty work of signing up for websites, interviewing experts and trawling web forums.

Overall, I think one could save time by skipping the book and just listening to one of her podcast appearances as she is a better speaker than writer.

[Nina Robinson]

This book was filled with dangerously bad takes and misused sociology concepts. Every other paragraph contained a citation about “other biased researchers” before pivoting to the author’s unhinged and unsupported theories that seem to align a bit too well with those of particular far-right “manosphere” podcasters and influencers, including that educated women are the issue—oh, the irony!— (with bonus disgusting overuse of the phrase “high-value men”), the rise in acceptance for kinks and other non-conforming sexual behavior being problematic to the existence of “normal sex”, and plenty of other similarly ridiculous takes weaved in with just enough legitimate discourse to make this book extremely problematic in the wrong hands of someone powerful with similarly low critical thinking skills.

I would guess that the bulk of her research came from scouring weird forums on the internet—it really comes across like she’s never actually talked to Millennials/Gen Z about this topic, and she even states that she has political issues preventing her from discussing with peers in the field. If she had, some obvious answers would have come up and informed her bad takes, including that more young people live at home or with roommates than ever (and cars aren’t as comfy as they used to be), rising surveillance makes it hard to find places to hook up without risk of being caught on video, “third places” for youth are nonexistent in many areas so people don’t have opportunities to meet others in person and thus have to rely on tech, and many people are terrified of the consequences of sex (pregnancy) because current culture makes it harder than ever to afford to raise kids and have the necessary support networks and resources all around, even within steady relationships. Also, as a neuroscientist, this woman should realize the impact that stress and uncertainty have on biological processes—people of all ages aren’t horny because our society is under an immense amount of stress due to widespread implementation of harmful policies and cultural regression it can be inferred that she likely supports.

This field definitely needs more visible research, but THIS BOOK IS NOT IT. It is certainly not peer-reviewed in any capacity, and has potential to misinform in dangerous ways that will only stand to make the issue worse. This conservative discourse on sexuality (parading falsely as “non-biased”) is toxic and based on a very limited world view. Please do not consider this book to be a factual source on this subject, as it is mostly one woman’s opinions.

[Roxanne Wiedemann]

(DNF) More of a note to self so I can remember why I didn't finish it - I actually really enjoy Debra Soh and hearing her share on podcasts, so I was really excited when I saw this book at my local library! But after reading the first couple chapters I just found it a bit depressing and cynical. I'm just not in a place where I wanted to keep reading something that felt so heavy and hopeless, but like I said, I only read the first bit, so I'm not sure if that tone changes as the book progresses.

[Cadence Johns]

Listened to this book because the author was on culture apothecary. SO GOOD. learned a lot and it was bleak content but the author had a hopeful stance. Though some chapters were hard to listen to it helped me know what to pray and look out for. Truly a book full of information

[Dana]

uh oh

[Jacqueline Holland]

Mildly terrifying, but urgent. Literally everyone should read this to understand what’s coming and what’s already quietly happening (and also to be on the same page for my third novel!😆)

[Evan Micheals]

I read this after hearing Dr Debra Soh on the Modern Wisdom podcast and had been aware of her work for many years. This was the first of her books I have read. She opens with a killer opening line: “Society has never been more sexualized, yet we are having less sex than ever before. What are we to make of this paradox?” (p. 5). This beautifully establishes the research question that drives the entire book. The telos of our biology is to have sex and further the species. Every person alive today exists because their parents had sex. When increasing numbers of people are not having sex or children, it becomes more than a lifestyle choice—it becomes an existential question for our civilisation. I agree with Elon Musk that depopulation is ultimately a greater threat than overpopulation.

Dr Soh argues that sexlessness is only the symptom of a much broader cultural problem. “In the following chapters, you will read about how we are undergoing not just a crisis of sexlessness, but one of lost intimacy, social cohesion, and common cause” (p. 9). I think she is right. Our declining sex lives are the canary in the coal mine, signalling a society that is becoming increasingly disconnected from itself. Less sex is not the disease; it is evidence that something deeper has gone wrong.

One of Soh's strongest observations is that we now live in a culture that values marriage remarkably little. The cultural narrative increasingly suggests there are few advantages to marriage over remaining single. “In the words of Gloria Steinem, women are becoming the men they wanted to marry. I would go one step further and add that this is why so many young women are turning away from marriage. Once dependent on men for physical protection and resources, contemporary women are financially self-sufficient. Men have become the equivalent of a fish’s bicycle for women who can take care of themselves” (p. 14).

She goes on to explore the cultural and legal barriers preventing young people from forming relationships and having sex. We have built a society that celebrates successful individuals far more than successful couples and families. There is very little cultural prestige attached to someone who quietly forms and sustains a healthy forty-year marriage. I have noticed myself changing in this regard. When I meet someone for the first time and discover they have maintained a long-term relationship, my esteem for their character rises. It suggests they possess qualities of responsibility, sacrifice, patience, and loyalty that are increasingly uncommon.

Soh also reviews the physical and psychological benefits of sex, particularly for women. “Women reap benefits from penetrative sex, especially without a condom, because semen contains chemicals like prostaglandins, endorphins, oxytocin, and hormones that stimulate ovulation... Sex can also help to ease the discomfort of menstrual cramps, shorten the length of a woman’s period, and delay the onset of menopause” (p. 43). Modern discussions of sexuality often focus almost exclusively on risks and consent. We rarely hear a positive account of what healthy sexuality contributes to individual wellbeing and flourishing.

Pornography occupies a substantial portion of the book, and here Soh is particularly persuasive. “Internet pornography’s rapid rise in popularity has been a catalyst for the sex recession. Watching sex on a screen has gone from being titillating entertainment to replacing the act itself” (p. 60). She asks, “What’s odd is that the oldest members of Gen Z turned eighteen in 2013 and would have been college bound, but despite having less parental supervision and greater independence, a large proportion of these young men weren’t sexually active. This raises the question, if they weren’t excelling in school or chasing girls, what were these young men doing instead?” (p. 60).

To borrow from Jung, if young men are directing this libidinal energy into pornography, it is no longer being invested in improving themselves or society. Soh later concludes, “The problem with technological alternatives like pornography, artificial-intelligence-driven companions, and purchased nudes is that they remove men’s desire to better themselves so that they can attract a real-life partner... Porn dissuades men from doing difficult things...” (p. 61). Men need women to inspire them away from mediocrity towards things bigger than themselves. If pornography becomes the substitute for striving, both men and society lose.

She notes that “More recent, post-COVID data show that 71 percent of teenagers aged thirteen to seventeen... intentionally watched porn...” (p. 60). This suggests pornography has become normal rather than exceptional, making its cultural effects impossible to ignore.

One of the most insightful sections concerns masturbation replacing relational intimacy. Increasingly people advise their partners to masturbate or watch pornography instead of seeking intimacy together. They are free to make that choice, but I think something important is lost. Sex in a committed relationship is not merely physical release; it is emotional connection, vulnerability, affection, and mutual care. Soh captures this well: “When a man ejaculates from watching porn, he is only obligated to close the browser afterward... Sex becomes masturbation with another person—her body becomes a sex toy, a sexualized piece of meat” (p. 75). If there is no longer mutual sexual receptivity within a relationship, one should at least ask whether the relationship has quietly become friendship rather than lovers.

Soh is equally critical of the normalisation of choking, violent pornography, and rape fantasies. I shared many of her concerns that behaviours once regarded as extreme have become increasingly mainstream. However, I was reminded of Seth Stephens-Davidowitz's Everybody Lies, where analysis of PornHub search data complicates the picture. He observes: “Among the top PornHub searches by women is a genre of pornography that, I warn you, will disturb many readers: sex featuring violence against women. Fully 25 percent of female searches for straight porn emphasize the pain and/or humiliation of the woman—‘painful anal crying,’ ‘public disgrace,’ and ‘extreme brutal gangbang,’ for example. Five percent look for nonconsensual sex—‘rape’ or ‘forced’ sex—even though these videos are banned on PornHub. And search rates for all these terms are at least twice as common among women as among men. If there is a genre of porn in which violence is perpetrated against a woman, my analysis of the data shows that it almost always appeals disproportionately to women” (p. 84).

This raises a difficult question. If these fantasies are disproportionately sought by women themselves, what should we make of them? Are they simply unhealthy cultural products that ought to be discouraged, or do they reveal something more complicated about human sexuality that challenges contemporary assumptions? Soh is rightly concerned about the effects of pornography on relationships and intimacy, but Stephens-Davidowitz reminds us that desire itself is often stranger and less politically convenient than we might wish. Understanding why people are drawn to these fantasies may be more important than simply condemning them.


Her discussion of prostitution and sugar relationships also gave me pause. I was struck by her observation that the typical client was an ordinary middle-income man rather than someone wealthy. When twenty-five percent of his disposable income is being directed towards sex workers or sugar babies, that is money unavailable to his own family and children. The consequences are broader than the transaction itself.

Her chapter on sex robots is fascinating. “Sneaky AI sex robots may one day succeed at taking over, not by force, but by making alternatives to sex so enticing that humans select themselves into extinction... The real threat is that no partner, no matter how perfect, can compete with the beautiful illusions in your mind” (p. 99). She later adds, “The line between human and machine can be blurred for only so long before it is finally erased...” (p. 182). This reminded me of Yuval Noah Harari's suffering test. A machine cannot suffer. Without suffering there is no soul in the human sense, and therefore no basis for rights. If we begin confusing sophisticated simulation with genuine consciousness, we risk anthropomorphising machines while simultaneously dehumanising ourselves.

Interestingly, I thought Soh's arguments regarding sex dolls were less convincing. She suggests men purchasing them have largely abandoned hope of relationships with women, yet later argues child-like dolls will increase the likelihood of offending against children. These arguments appear to pull in opposite directions. If one fantasy substitutes for behaviour, why should another encourage it? I was left unconvinced she had fully reconciled these positions.

Her willingness to oppose attempts to legitimise paedophilia deserves credit. “I accept that I will probably alienate a number of my former colleagues for holding these views. The fact that so many academics are content with legitimizing pedophilia as a sexual identity is indefensible” (p. 180). I found myself agreeing with Soh. Some ideas are so detached from ordinary moral intuition that they seem only capable of flourishing within the echo chambers of modern academia. The attempt to legitimise paedophilia as a sexual identity strikes me as one of them.

Soh also explores plastic surgery and body image. “In a functioning world, humans would want their avatars to resemble what they look like. Yet in today’s world, we are redesigning our real-life appearances to imitate those created artificially” (p. 135). She later observes that cosmetic procedures “can interfere with sexual pleasure and functioning...” (p. 136). This reminded me of Marty Klein's Sexual Intelligence. Klein argues that we should stop treating sex as a performance and instead maximise pleasure and intimacy. Plastic surgery often seems directed towards appearance rather than experience.

She also raises an intriguing possibility regarding hormonal contraception. “If women on the Pill prefer feminine men... is this responsible for the demonization of masculinity as ‘toxic’ and the shepherding of men toward feminization?” (p. 198). I do not know whether this hypothesis is correct, but it is certainly interesting enough to warrant further research.

Soh also notes that women appear to have a stronger desire for parenthood than men. We see women intentionally becoming single mothers through sperm donation. We rarely see men attempting the equivalent through surrogacy and donor eggs simply to become sole fathers. Such cases undoubtedly exist, but they appear comparatively rare.

In concluding, Soh writes: “It will take at least a decade for the current dating imbalance to turn around. The sooner young men get back on track, the better off both sexes will be. Men and women must help each other if they want to succeed. At the end of the day, most of us yearn for the same thing, to be understood and appreciated” (p. 209). I think she is fundamentally right. Men and women need each other more than contemporary culture is willing to admit.

When I look out the window of my own life, I do not see many people living at the extremes Soh describes. I suspect she deliberately studies the sharp end of the wedge. Nevertheless, the broader trends concern me. We should encourage our children not merely to maximise superficial attractiveness, but to become people of character—responsible, competent, kind, and capable of sustaining long-term monogamous relationships.

Perhaps this is where my generation has failed. We have not adequately taught our children how to form enduring intimate relationships in which both partners flourish. Pornography, prostitution, plastic surgery, artificial intimacy, and sex robots are all symptoms of that deeper failure. I wonder whether we have already passed a cultural tipping point. Are we entering an era of population decline where people retreat into virtual realities, fall in love with artificial partners, and slowly lose the ability to relate to one another? Soh has convinced me that this is not merely a book about sex. It is a book about intimacy, civilisation, and whether we are quietly forgetting what it means to be human.

[Tonya's Turning Pages]

DNF.
Wow. I could not finish this one. It was a little hard to get past the "poor men" and how women shouldn't work so hard at a career because it threatens men and how being left-leaning and equality have gone too far. She actually compares men being rejected and lonely to women being raped and sexually harrassed. Those two things are not comparable. And let us not forget that she is good friends with and praises Joe Rogan. Yeah...no.

[Maher Razouk]

يعتقد البشر، بغرور، أنهم قادرون على التغلب على أي عقبة تعترض طريقهم. لقد وفرت لنا التكنولوجيا الحديثة وسائل راحة لا حصر لها، لكنها لا تستطيع تغيير طبيعة الإنسان. إن استخدام التكنولوجيا لقمع غرائزنا البيولوجية يضعنا في معركة خاسرة ضد أنفسنا. إنه يدفعنا إلى الانحراف بشكل كارثي عن المسار الصحيح، تاركًا وراءه ردة فعل عنيفة.

خذوا، على سبيل المثال، قطعة الألومنيوم الصغيرة التي أحدثت ثورة كاملة في طريقة تواصلنا. دخل هاتف آيفون السوق لأول مرة عام 2007، وفي غضون خمس سنوات، امتلكه ما يقرب من نصف البالغين في الولايات المتحدة. اليوم، يمتلك 98% من الأمريكيين هواتف ذكية، ومع إمكانية الوصول الدائم إلى الإنترنت، أصبح من النادر ألا يكون المرء متواجدًا على مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي.

يمكننا الآن التواصل مع أي شخص في العالم في لحظة وبأقل جهد. لقد كانت الإمكانيات التي أتاحها لنا هذا الشيء مذهلة حقًا. لكن هذه التقنية الحديثة وضعتنا أيضًا على طريق مظلم ومشوّه، لم نواجهه بشكل كامل بعد.
لم تُحدث تطبيقات المواعدة ثورة في طقوس الخطوبة فحسب، بل أحدثت ثورة أيضًا في كيفية تواصل الرجال والنساء (أو فشلهم في التواصل) مع بعضهم البعض. أدى التصفح المستمر لخيارات رومانسية متعددة إلى شعورنا في آنٍ واحد بتواصل أكبر وفراغ أكثر من أي وقت مضى.
هذا التناقض بين تاريخنا القديم وبيئتنا المشبعة بالتكنولوجيا يطغى على حساسيتنا الفطرية، مما ينتج عنه توقعات غير واقعية حول من نستحق وماذا نستحق. لقد أغرى تمجيد المعايير العالية المستحيلة الرجال بالاعتقاد بأن المؤثرات على مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي اللواتي يملكن ملايين المتابعين قد يُبدين اهتمامًا بهم يومًا ما. لقد أقنعت هذه الظاهرة النساء بأن يمنحن وقتهن فقط للرجال الذين يزيد طولهم عن ستة أقدام ويتمتعون بثروة طائلة.

ما زلنا نواجه تحديات جمة، منها تأثير المواد الإباحية - التي غالبًا ما يصادفها أطفال لا تتجاوز أعمارهم أربع سنوات - في تثبيط عزيمة الرجال عن السعي وراء العلاقات وتوفيرها، وتشويه توقعات الشباب بشأن الجنس، وإثارة موجة من أعمال العنف كالخنق (المعروف أيضًا بالخنق الجنسي) في غرف النوم.

هناك أيضًا التمجيد الحالي للغرور والنرجسية الذي ازدهر مع انتشار برامج تعديل الصور، وحقن التجميل، وهوسنا بالجمال. هذا التركيز على الوجوه المثالية المُعدّلة والأجسام غير الواقعية يُدمّر ثقة الشابات والشباب بأنفسهم، بطرقٍ فريدةٍ من نوعها، وإن كانت متشابهةً بشكلٍ مُريب. إنه يُلحق الضرر بنظرتهم إلى أجسادهم، وأولوياتهم، وما يعتبرونه جذابًا في الواقع.

إن معاقبة نجاح الرجال باسم المساواة بين الجنسين له عواقب وخيمة على كلا الجنسين. وقد أفاد هذا الأمر، دون قصد، الرجال الناجحين للغاية. فوسائل منع الحمل والزواج من طبقة اجتماعية أعلى (ممارسة "الزواج من طبقة أعلى")، بالإضافة إلى تراجع مستوى الشباب في التعليم والفرص المهنية، كلها عوامل تزيد الطلب على تقنيات الإنجاب مثل تجميد البويضات، واستخدام الحيوانات المنوية المتبرع بها، والتخصيب في المختبر. وأصبح اختيار الأم العزباء وبقاء رب الأسرة في المنزل أمراً شائعاً. ونظراً لاختلال التوازن المتزايد بين الجنسين في سوق المواعدة، فمن غير المرجح أن تتغير هذه الاتجاهات قريباً. كما أن المواد المسببة لاضطرابات الغدد الصماء، التي تؤثر على هرمون التستوستيرون لدى الرجال، وتتسبب في انخفاض غير مسبوق في الرغبة الجنسية والخصوبة، فضلاً عن زيادة في حالات ضعف الانتصاب، تؤثر أيضاً على نفسية المرأة في اختيار الشريك. كما أن التعرض البيئي للسموم الكيميائية والملوثات يعيق قدرتنا على جذب الشركاء المحتملين والتحقق منهم بشكل صحيح.

يخشى الكثيرون أن الحضارة على وشك الانهيار السكاني، وأن يحل محل البشر قريباً شكل من أشكال الحياة الاصطناعية. نحن قادرون بالفعل على تصميم شريكات حياة مثاليات من الذكاء الاصطناعي. بعد حركة #MeToo، ومع خوف الرجل العادي من التقرب من النساء، هل ستجعل الشريكات القابلة للبرمجة، العلاقات الجنسية والإنجاب أمراً من الماضي؟
.
Debra Soh
Sextinction
Translated By #Maher_Razouk

[Light Bringer]

If extinction matters, fuck more, fuck easier, fuck earlier. Book says the opposite. Either extinction doesn't matter or the book is not serious. Pick.

[Alseit Kizatbay]

There are many obvious reasons why people nowadays might be having less sex: phones and social media bringing us digitally closer but physically further apart, technological distractions, stressful and busy lives, economic pressure, the rise of porn, mental health problems, etc. But in *Sextinction*, Soh digs deeper into what else might be going on.

Interestingly, her first chapter starts with hypergamy and patterns of mate selection. Soh uses the idea that people tend to seek partners of equal or higher status as a starting point for discussing how changes in education, dating and expectations may be making it harder for some people to find suitable partners. Whether or not hypergamy explains as much as she suggests, it lays the groundwork for many of the ideas developed later in the book.

The book coming out in 2026 really shows. Soh talks about so many trends, internet subcultures and terms that I have heard a lot over the last five years: the "666 rule," mewing, mogging, looksmaxxing, incels, OnlyFans, situationships, catfishing, AI companions and many more. A lot of these things can seem like niche internet jokes or trends, but at the same time they are global, with millions of people knowing about them and being affected by them. What connects many of them is the way dating is moving online, changing how people see themselves, what they expect from potential partners, and ultimately how they form relationships, or don't. With so many choices and comparisons available, expectations can become unrealistically high, while dating itself can sometimes start to feel more transactional.

One of the recurring themes is how much both young men and women care about looks nowadays. With access to the whole world through social media and dating apps, there is always someone better looking to compare yourself or your potential partner with. Everything starts to feel relative and even quantitative, with people trying to measure their own attractiveness and what kind of partner they "deserve" . Soh connects this with hypergamy and argues that these comparisons and expectations can make people less satisfied with the options around them, making dating and forming relationships more difficult.

The book also looks at the sadder side of modern loneliness. In Japan, there is even a term, *hikikomori*, describing a phenomenon of people who withdraw from society and live in extreme social isolation, although unsuccessful dating is of course only one of factors behind it. Soh also discusses how some lonely people increasingly turn to alternatives such as porn, OnlyFans, AI companions that now have voice and video capabilities, and realistic dolls. Some of the extremes discussed in the book were quite shocking and disturbing.

Overall, I think Soh did a good job of connecting many things that you can already see happening around you but might struggle to put into words. At the same time, Soh is quite opinionated throughout the book, so I wouldn't take every connection she makes as an objective explanation of what is happening. I think the book is good for readers who are aware of that difference.

[John Burns]

Depressing and not that insightful. I think if you are the type of person who listens to podcasts and reads books on these sorts of topics, you will have already heard all of these points and nothing will surprise you. I think Debra does a good job of framing human beings as biological organisms, hormone and instinct driven animals, rather than totally rational actors.

We need to understand sex and dating more as things that people will just do naturally when their bodies are not interfered with by all sorts of drugs, when they are not placed in weird novel situations, like only interacting with people through screens. The answer to this issue does seem to be just getting young people to hang out with each other more and to try and wean them off the various medications they're taking that are affecting their normal processing.

Like I said though, it's a depressing read. The trend lines are all going in the same direction and even if we can guess fairly accurately why this is happening, no one seems to be optimistic about our chances of solving these problems. Expect homosexuality to be illegal in the UK by the end of the 21st century.

[Courtney Kelly]

I enjoyed this book. It’s a fascinating yet bleak. Sometimes the book repeated itself but overall I enjoyed the scientific writing style which usually got straight to the point. There is a political bias to the writer but she does explain in the book that she used to hold leftist beliefs but changed as she progressed in her career. At many times the author states she’s pro choice and all for women being educationally and career driven. She stated the facts as they were with the research she found and some of those facts are definitely challenging to hear but I think it’s an important read and an important topic.

[Cody Lasko]

Bleak and full of burdensome generalizations that all too often feel a bit too much like heavy handed sermonizing. But I’ll be damned if this isn’t full of thorough research and necessary insights into a horribly sexually confused and backward direction I don’t think any of us want our society heading.

Oh, and that whole chapter on child sex dolls? Fuck that. Something is seriously wrong with our society if that’s actually a thing people are profiting off of, people are protecting under philosophical arguments, and (especially) people are fucking using. Wow.

Anyways. Good book. Disappointing in a few key aspects. But highly redeemable thanks to the level of research and necessity of the material presented.

After all, if we stop having sex, can we even survive as a species?

[Karim]

A book about why sex is less practiced nowadays. It is multifactorial per the book, and the causes are social media/filters (leading to unrealistic expectations), higher education/career in women, porn, AI/chatbots, sex dolls, and environmental factors leading to impotence.

It has interesting ideas, but each chapter lasts way longer than it should, and that is my main issue with this book. The other issue is that the points it presents are kinda obvious and you already expect them as the culprits, before even starting the book.

I think you can take it or leave it, entertaining and enlightening, but only to a certain extent

[Jack Quinn]

Definitely an interesting book about a very complex subject. Dr. Soh did an excellent job narrating the audiobook, so my hat is off to her. There was some very solid information inside of the book. The chapters on contraception and the prevalence of plastic surgery were excellent. I do have a gripe with the tangents went on occasionally, especially regarding pedophilia. Obviously I'm no fan of pedophiles, but it did not require an entire chapter on the on subject. Overall I did like the book and would recommend for those wondering why younger generations aren't dating.

3.5/5

[Adam Weiss]

Heard the author on a podcast and was pretty intrigued to hear more about the “science” of dating in 2026, so I overlooked the clickbait-y title and tried to give this a go. It was fine — the author makes some interesting points about how AI has the potential to create an even bigger mess in the dating world (surprise!) — but I somehow left this feeling like there were a lot of over generalizations and weird opinions interspersed with the real data. IDK.

[Tokyo D]

I really appreciated this book, especially because it seems like no one else is talking about these issues. I do think that the book could have potentially had more counter arguments (more nuanced) but I think it is well written and worth reading. It will not be a happy read for many people! (me included).

[Kelsey George Hewitt]

3.5 ⭐️ As someone who works with individuals and couples and regularly explores vulnerable topics like sex, intimacy, and the challenges of modern dating, I found Sextinction to be important and I enjoyed reviewing the research. The book was admittedly depressing at times but calls to action about important issues often are.

[Joel Adamson]

Dr. Soh's transformation from scientist to journalist is complete, if by journalist you mean someone who thoroughly describes a problem but never gets to the bottom of it or purposes any solutions. After a while I began questioning the relevance of topics to her thesis. Then I realized I couldn't remember what her thesis was.

[Julie Simons]

Equal parts, fascinating, and disturbing. For a Gen X like me some of what is discussed will blow your mind. 🤯 that said, the author does not hide her biases, which detracted from the material. And the shift in tone from informant to “guide,” in the conclusion did not transition well.

[Charles Reimler]

🟦NEUTRAL 3-Star Due Controversy Within, But Interesting Read! 🟢🧐CHARACTER Is Vital: Be 👍CAREFUL With Whom You ASSOCIATE 🧐Maybe 🟢 LIFESAVING 🧐

[Jodi Brown]

Listened to this one. Could take or leave some of the opinions but such is expected. The research and nuance was very interesting from a clinical perspective. Really
Enjoyed this overall!

[Jonathan Marsh]

Interesting but politically heavy handed. Leans on evolutionary psychology and played to the political rights. Seemed built more for talk show circuit success than science but I could be biased.