How Common Is Rough Sex? Research Shows Normalization Has Outpaced Consent
Tuesday, December 16, 2025.
Rough sex did not drift into the mainstream quietly. It arrived loudly, confidently, and with the cultural authority of repetition.
Behaviors once treated as niche or transgressive—choking, spanking, slapping, hair pulling—now appear routinely in television plots, music lyrics, dating-app bios, and social media confessions.
The message is subtle but persistent: this is what sex looks like now.
A large, nationally representative U.S. study suggests that impression is largely correct—particularly for younger adults. It also reveals something more troubling.
Rough sex may be common, but consent has not kept pace with its normalization.
Drawing on data from more than 9,000 adults, the findings show three things clearly:
Rough sex behaviors are widespread, sharply divided by age, and frequently experienced without permission. Visibility, it turns out, is not the same as agreement.
Why We’ve Been Guessing About Rough Sex Until Now
Public conversation about rough sex has long outpaced reliable data.
Earlier studies often relied on college samples, outdated surveys, or online opt-in panels that skew young and sexually adventurous by design.
Public health surveys, meanwhile, focused on pregnancy and disease prevention, rarely asking about behaviors like choking or slapping at all.
Debby Herbenick, a professor at Indiana University’s School of Public Health, set out to correct that gap. Rather than asking participants whether they had engaged in “rough sex”—a term that invites interpretation—her team asked about ten specific behaviors, one by one.
No euphemisms. No ambiguity.
Participants reported whether they had:
performed each behavior on a partner,
experienced it with consent, or
experienced it without consent.
That distinction matters. As the data makes clear, it matters a great deal.
The Data: Broad, Current, and Methodologically Serious
The study analyzed data from the 2022 National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior, using Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel—an address-based sampling method designed to reflect the U.S. non-institutionalized adult population.
The final sample included 9,029 adults ages 18 to 94.
The behaviors assessed were concrete AF: hair pulling, biting, face slapping, genital slapping, light spanking, hard spanking, choking, punching, name-calling, and smothering. Participants did not have to decide what “rough” meant. They only had to answer yes or no.
Rough Sex Is Common—Especially If You’re Under 40
Nearly half of women and more than 60% of men reported having performed at least one of the listed behaviors on a partner. More than half of women and nearly half of men reported receiving at least one of these behaviors with consent.
Age, however, was the clearest dividing line.
Adults under 40 were dramatically more likely to report both performing and receiving rough sex behaviors.
Acts like choking were rare among men over 50 and commonplace among men in their 20s and 30s. This was not a gradual shift across the lifespan. It was a sharp generational break.
Biting and light spanking were the most commonly reported behaviors across all age groups. More extreme acts—such as punching or smothering—were reported far less often.
The Familiar Return of Gender Scripts
Despite being framed culturally as edgy or transgressive, rough sex participation largely followed traditional sexual roles.
Men were more likely to report performing behaviors such as spanking or choking. Women were more likely to report receiving them. Even within practices marketed as adventurous or liberating, the underlying script remained familiar: active male, receptive female.
Transgender and gender-nonbinary participants reported the highest overall rates of engagement, with roughly 70% reporting both performing and receiving at least one behavior consensually.
They also reported the highest rates of non-consensual experiences.
Where the Data Turns Uncomfortable: Consent Is Not Universal
Up to this point, the findings could be read as cultural change. Then the consent data appears.
Approximately 20% of women reported experiencing at least one of the listed behaviors without their permission. Among men, the figure was about 16%. For transgender and gender-nonbinary participants, it rose to roughly 35%.
These are not edge cases.
They indicate that a substantial minority of adults have had physically aggressive sexual behaviors done to them without consent—often in encounters that may otherwise have been framed as normal or mutually desired.
Normalization, it seems, does not automatically produce negotiation.
International and College Data Tell the Same Story
The U.S. findings mirror results from other Western countries.
A 2024 German study led by Döring found similar age gradients and gendered participation patterns, with younger adults far more likely to engage in rough sex and men more likely to take active roles.
Research among U.S. college students goes further still.
A 2021 probability study found that nearly 80% of sexually active undergraduates reported engaging in rough sex, most commonly choking, hair pulling, and spanking.
If older adults find these numbers surprising, that may be the point. The shift appears generational, not incremental.
Novelty, Pornography, and the Limits of Playful Explanations
Evolutionary psychology has often framed consensual rough sex as novelty-seeking rather than aggression.
Research by Burch and Salmon suggests links between pornography consumption, sexual boredom, jealousy, and the initiation of rough sex—particularly among men.
In those studies, rough sex was typically described as recreational and low-risk.
The current data complicates that narrative.
Novelty does not explain why non-consensual experiences are so common, why women and gender-diverse folks report disproportionate harm, or why choking—specifically—appears repeatedly in non-consensual contexts.
When one in five women reports having a partner cross physical boundaries without permission, the line between play and coercion deserves far more scrutiny than novelty theories allow.
What the Study Couldn’t Measure—and Why That Matters
The authors note several limitations. The list of ten behaviors may not capture everything folks consider to be rough sex.
The survey did not assess whether consensual acts were actually wanted or enjoyed. Bisexual and pansexual participants were grouped together, potentially obscuring distinct experiences.
As with all self-report data, memory and interpretation may influence lifetime estimates.
Future research, the authors argue, should focus less on prevalence and more on process: how consent is communicated, how assumptions replace conversations, and how non-consensual acts emerge within otherwise consensual encounters.
That shift may be overdue.
Frequently Asked Questions About Rough Sex, Consent, and Prevalence
Is rough sex normal?
“Normal” depends on what you mean. From a prevalence standpoint, the answer is yes—rough sex behaviors are now common, particularly among adults under 40.
Large, nationally representative data show that a substantial proportion of U.S. adults have engaged in behaviors such as spanking, hair pulling, or choking at least once.
From a relational or ethical standpoint, normality is more complicated. A behavior can be common without being well negotiated, mutually desired, or emotionally safe. The data suggests that rough sex has become normalized culturally faster than norms around explicit consent have evolved.
In other words, it is widespread—but not always well handled.
How common is choking during sex?
Choking is one of the most frequently reported rough sex behaviors among younger adults, particularly men in their 20s and 30s. It is far less common among older cohorts, indicating a sharp generational divide rather than a gradual cultural shift.
Importantly, choking also appears disproportionately in reports of non-consensual experiences. While many adults report engaging in choking consensually, it is also one of the behaviors most often cited when participants describe acts done to them without permission.
This dual pattern—high prevalence and elevated consent risk—is what makes choking a particular concern for public health researchers and clinicians.
Is rough sex usually consensual?
Often, but not reliably.
The majority of adults who report rough sex experiences describe them as consensual.
However, a substantial minority do not.
About one in five women and roughly one in six men report that a partner performed at least one rough sex behavior on them without consent. Rates are even higher among transgender and gender-nonbinary folks.
Consent, in this context, is not rare—but it is inconsistent. The data suggests that assumptions frequently replace conversations, especially in younger age groups.
Why is rough sex so much more common among younger adults?
Several factors likely contribute.
Younger adults have grown up in a media environment where rough sex behaviors are frequently depicted as standard, desirable, or expected. Pornography, social media, and entertainment media often portray acts like choking or spanking without showing negotiation, boundaries, or aftercare.
There is also evidence that novelty-seeking plays a role. Emerging adults tend to report higher interest in sexual experimentation overall. What the data cannot tell us is whether younger adults are more comfortable with rough sex—or simply more accustomed to encountering it.
Does rough sex challenge traditional gender roles?
Not as much as it claims to.
Despite being framed as edgy or progressive, rough sex participation often mirrors conventional gender scripts. Men are more likely to report performing behaviors such as choking or spanking, while women are more likely to report receiving them.
Rather than subverting traditional sexual roles, rough sex may intensify them under a new aesthetic—one that feels modern while preserving familiar power dynamics.
Is rough sex linked to pornography use?
Research suggests an association, but not a simple cause-and-effect relationship.
Studies indicate that people who consume pornography more frequently are more likely to report interest in or engagement with rough sex behaviors. Pornography may shape expectations about what sex “normally” includes, particularly when explicit negotiation is rarely depicted.
However, pornography alone does not explain why non-consensual experiences occur or why certain groups report disproportionate harm. Media influence may normalize behaviors without providing scripts for consent.
Is rough sex dangerous?
It can be.
Some behaviors—particularly choking—carry physical risks even when consensual, including loss of consciousness and vascular injury. Psychological risks are harder to quantify but equally important, especially when consent is ambiguous or absent.
The data does not suggest that rough sex is inherently harmful. It does suggest that harm becomes more likely when behaviors are assumed rather than discussed, or when intensity is prioritized over attunement.
What’s the difference between consensual rough sex and sexual assault?
Consent is the difference—but consent is not always a single moment.
Consensual rough sex involves clear communication, ongoing permission, and the ability to stop at any time without consequence. Sexual assault involves acts performed without permission, beyond agreed boundaries, or after consent has been withdrawn.
The study highlights a gray zone that deserves attention: situations where an encounter is broadly consensual, but specific acts within it are not. This is where misunderstanding, assumption, and harm most often occur.
Why do transgender and gender-nonbinary people report higher rates of non-consensual experiences?
The data does not explain why—only that the disparity exists.
Possible contributing factors include higher exposure to sexual exploration, power imbalances in dating contexts, and reduced social scripts for negotiating consent in gender-diverse relationships. What is clear is that these groups experience disproportionate risk and deserve focused attention in both research and clinical settings.
What does this research mean for couples?
For couples, the takeaway is not prohibition—it is precision.
Rough sex requires more communication, not less. Explicit conversations about specific behaviors, boundaries, and meanings are protective, not unromantic. What feels “obvious” to one partner may feel intrusive or frightening to another.
When behaviors become common before they become negotiated, misunderstandings multiply. Couples who slow down enough to talk tend to fare better.
What questions should future research focus on?
Prevalence is no longer the central question. Process is.
Future studies need to examine how consent is communicated, how assumptions replace discussion, and how non-consensual acts arise within otherwise consensual encounters. Understanding how boundaries are crossed matters more now than simply counting how often.
Final Thoughts
Rough sex is no a longer marginal notion. It is visible, statistically common, and—among younger adults—often assumed rather than discussed.
That assumption is the problem.
What the data makes clear is not that people are experimenting, but that experimentation has outpaced the skills required to do it well.
Familiarity has replaced negotiation. Repetition has been mistaken for agreement. And when intensity becomes normative without shared language, consent becomes something inferred instead of confirmed.
This study does not argue against rough sex.
It argues against cultural laziness. Against the belief that popularity equals safety, or that desire excuses ambiguity. It shows a population navigating physically intense intimacy without reliable scripts for boundaries, meaning, or repair.
The danger is not novelty.
The danger is normalization without conversation.
When behaviors become common before they become negotiated, harm is no longer surprising. It is structural.
Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Herbenick, D., Fu, T.-C., Chen, X., Ali, S., Simić Stanojević, I., Hensel, D. J., Wright, P. J., Peterson, Z. D., Harezlak, J., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2024). Prevalence and demographic correlates of “rough sex” behaviors: Findings from a U.S. nationally representative survey of adults ages 18–94 years. Archives of Sexual Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-024-02841-9