The paper, in the (wonderful, open access Public Library of Science), even includes a little cartoon video. Bat porn. In essence, scientists in China have found that a female fruit bat will go down on her partner while he’s taking her from behind. Apparently, the extra stimulation helps him keep it up longer (not a universal observation among females of our species, I venture to guess). The researchers come up with a number of reasons why a lady bat might go to this trouble, among them that it might give his sperm more oomph, might make him less likely to roam, might clean up nasty infections before he passes them to her. But I particularly like their closing shot:

“The behaviour presumably favours the donor, although it may also benefit both partners especially if fertilization success is increased. It is conceivable that the female manipulates the male by increasing sexual stimulation, so that she ultimately benefits.”

I think that’s known as the Pleasure Principle.

Thanks to Klaus for stimulating me to post on this.

The study, published in the (expensive, subscription only) AIDS journal and helpfully summarised by Aidsmap suggests that men who give lots of blow jobs to their HIV-positive partners develop antibodies specific to that partner’s virus, protecting themselves against infection. The more virus their partner has kicking around in their semen, the higher the concentration of specific antibodies, and the protection seems to last for quite a while too. None of the men became infected over the course of the study, even though their partners were not all on treatment.

I’ve never been one for warning people off oral sex — while it is not 100 percent risk free it’s almost always safer than any of the alternatives that provide as much fun. But I’d hate to lose my agonised public health type credentials entirely, so I’ll point out a caveat in this study. The couples who were recruited, an infected man with an uninfected partner, had to have been together for at least 6 months — beyond the most dangerous period for infection in most cases. Any guys who did get HIV through oral sex in that risky early part of their relationship wouldn’t be in the study, because they would no longer be in a “discordant” relationship.

Read. Enjoy. Remember never to e-mail your colleagues when you’ve had a few. Even if they have done the inexcusable and removed the indefinite article from the last line of your restaurant review. A taste:

2) I will now explain why your error is even more shit than it looks. You see, i was making a joke. I do that sometimes. I have set up the street as “sexually-charged”. I have described the shenanigans across the road at G.A.Y.. I have used the word ‘gaily’ as a gentle nudge. And “looking for a nosh” has a secondary meaning of looking for a blowjob. Not specifically gay, for this is soho, and there are plenty of girls there who take money for noshing boys. “looking for nosh” does not have that ambiguity. the joke is gone. I only wrote that sodding paragraph to make that joke. And you’ve fucking stripped it out like a pissed Irish plasterer restoring a renaissance fresco and thinking jesus looks shit with a bear so plastering over it. You might as well have removed the whole paragraph. I mean, fucking christ, don’t you read the copy?

Thanks to rival newspaper The Guardian for washing The Times’s dirty subbing in public. And to Sophie Campbell for the tip.