What's Missing in the Search for Female Viagra

Terry Allen has a short but pointed rant in In These Times on what she calls "restless vagina syndrome" otherwise known as female sexual dysfunction, and it's supposed cure, which thanks to an uncritical media has been constructed as the hunt for a female Viagra.

There's so much to be depressed about the tenor of most public conversations about what constitutes female sexual dysfunction and how women who are genuinely distressed by some aspect of their sex lives can best be helped. There's an equal amount to be depressed about in the quality of much of the research that gets offered up in defense of what sex researcher John Bancroft refers to as

a classic example of starting with some preconceived, and non-evidence based diagnostic categorization for women's sexual dysfunctions, based on the male model

What's missing for me (and it's missing even in Bancroft's insightful quote) is any explicit discussion of what most of these conversations are really about; gender. Biomedical and most quantitative social science sex research continues to bury its head deep in the sand, denying what many other disciplines are now unpacking; that a binary notion of gender is fundamentally flawed and that the male/female dichotomy is rarely if ever a complicated enough lens through which to understand any human experience. Instead, to those searching for a female Viagra there are men, there are women, and the twain shall only meet when we put them in the proper configuration and get them hard and wet enough to merge for precisely 2.36 minutes, 1.5 times a week. Actually now that I write it, it does sound a little hot.

So that's one complaint, and it's a personal one to be sure. But there's something more important missing from the discussion, which is the lived experience of sexual confusion, frustration, and pain that many of us do experience. Of course the story that those searching for drugs tell us is that all they want to do is make our lives better. Too bad they rarely bother to actually ask us what we want. They define a sexual problem not by how much it bothers us, they define it by an number, how many times we have sex, how many times we orgasm, how often we think about sex.

I get people who are experiencing distress because of some aspect of their sex lives who are frustrated by the kind of politicizing I'm engaging in here. They just want help, and if a drug company can offer it, they'll take it. The problem is that the help being offered isn't going to address the complex experience being presented.

It's a lie that Viagra improves your sex life. Viagra doesn't improve your sex life. It doesn't make sex better or make men want to have sex more. It just gives them erections. Anything else that happens is you.

The lie in the promise of a female Viagra, that a pill can make someone want sex, is the same lie for male Viagra, it's just that their marketing campaigns mesh so well with our own fears and ignorance about sex that we'd rather take the lie than deal with the truth.

 

Follow Cory Silverberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/aboutsexuality

Comments

[NilesCrane]

there already is female viagra...i­ts just not in pill form...it is in many forms namely,

expensive shoes,
diamonds,
a clean floor and/or clean kitchen,
an hour to just sit down by themselves,
talking with them about their day and caring,
Listening,
and fresh linens on a bed.....th­ats pretty much it, some cheap, some expensive, the more labor intensive and expensive the better sex you get...

Its really that simple.

[zaneblue]

The moderation at this board is ridiculous.

Female desire and orgasmic function can be improved by taking very high-dose fish oil, along with the RDA of calcium/ma­gnesium/zi­nc and a good multivitamin and avoiding caffeine and other stimulants. Check with your nutritionist about safe upper limits for fish oil by weight. So this is completely a moot point, this approach works as well as Viagra in men and also improves desire, something Viagra does not do.

A similar approach works for men, except unlike Viagra which can lengthen the time it takes a man to orgasm, this nutritional approach will shorten the time to orgasm. Most men don't want that, so the orgasmic diet is primarily for women.

[way2sunny]

Marrena Lindberg's orgasm diet. There is zero evidence that it has anything to do with orgasm beyond the placebo effect. If it works for you, yay, but without evidence it's useless.

[zaneblue]

It's not for lack of trying. I've got a PI at Columbia University, an offer to publish in the Journal of Sexual Medicine and LOTS of anecdotal evidence. My test of ultra-refined fish oil in treating FSD has a properly licensed FSD metric, and is a very rigorous double blind crossover trial. I've lost funding three times.

I would LOVE to prove I'm right.

[Whatevah]

I am a big fan of Viagra. My experience is that it does, indeed, make sex better. It is especially helpful in situations where a man is making love to more than one woman. My gratitude to the pharmaceutical industry knows no bounds.

In terms of the search for a female Viagra, I believe such a thing already exists. Unfortunately, it is difficult to obtain legally. You may remember the scene in the movie "Manhattan" where Diane Keaton smokes marijuana to enhance her pleasure.

In England doctors can prescribe an inhaler that delivers a mist containing the active ingredient from marijuana. English women (and men) say it is very helpful.

I understand that many, many people have serious sexual problems that can't be solved with the help of a pill. You have my sympathy and support. However, I would urge everyone to have a more open-minded attitude about the benefit of drugs. The segment of society that harbors anti-pharma attitudes are making their lives worse, not better, not easier. These drugs do, indeed, provide tremendous help to many, many people.

Close-mindedness is not something that helps sexual dysfunction at all.

[DesmondRavenstone]

I'm no fan of Viagra. More specifically, of how it's been marketed as a "miracle cure". It isn't. In fact, there are plenty of men who have been cheated out of substantive treatment of erectile dysfunction by the slick promise of that little blue pill.

Many cases of male sexual dysfunction can be successfully treated and reversed by counseling, education, changes in lifestyle and improved communication with one's partner. In short, through hard work. Viagra -- originally intended as a better last resort than surgical interventions -- has been pushed as a quick fix alternative, setting back men's sexual health by over a decade.

Should we therefore ban Viagra. No, but we should be urging doctors to educate men about its potential risks, as well as the benefits of other treatment options, before reaching for the prescription pad. And we certainly shouldn't be rushing to find its female equivalent.