Comments on: More Tales of Wild Women

By: Kill Pill at I Blame The Patriarchy

Kill Pill at I Blame The Patriarchy — Tue, 03 Jan 2006 12:05:09 +0000

[…] A while back, among a few facetious yet poetical lines written on the perils of chick-Viagra, I noted that women who are disinclined to submit to dudely impalement every 2 hours hardly suffer from a disease that warrants pharmaceutical intervention, and that any pill devised to make girls horny is obviously just a designer roofie and a sick ploy of the patriarchy to keep the sex class in thrall. […]

By: Twisty

Twisty — Mon, 02 Jan 2006 10:30:24 +0000

Frumious, is it possible that you intended to allude to this post? I have had an email from its author, Ms. Riba, who chastises me for my insensitivity re: FSD.

I think it’s pretty clear that (a) I’m joking and (b) I’m not denying the existence of an actual pathology of sexual dysfunction. I merely suggest that a lack of interest in fucking should not automatically be considered a disease, when a perfectly natural disgust is an equally plausible explanation.

By: Frumious B.

Frumious B. — Mon, 02 Jan 2006 03:06:26 +0000

Carnival of Feminists, #4, carries this story http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2005/12/23/more-tales-of-wild-women/ on Female Sexual Dysfunction.

As to the men who can’t get enough, I could introduce you to an ex of mine who wanted sex every day, twice in a row, despite certain biological changes which occur in males when they are no longer teenagers. You’d be disappointed, though.

By: WookieMonster

WookieMonster — Tue, 27 Dec 2005 17:28:37 +0000

Ug. Of course pharmacists won’t refuse to fill this, after all it would be a dude getting it, right? He’s the one who wants the sex so he has to “fix” her, right?

Of course dudes can’t actually get their hands dirty with nonsense like getting their partner excited, even if it just means buying a pill, silly me.

By: BritGirlSF

BritGirlSF — Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:45:52 +0000

I wonder if there’s any way to send the dude who robbed Mr. Girls Gone Wild a Christmas present?
As an addendum to Twisty’s comment : Guys, the fact that a woman doesn’t want to fuck you doesn’t mean that she has a sexual dysfunction. It probably just means that you’re ugly, or that she’s already fucked you often enough to realise that you’re bad in bed, and unfortunately there isn’t a pill for either of those problems.

By: sunny in texas

sunny in texas — Mon, 26 Dec 2005 01:31:32 +0000

you rock! i just had to say that.

By: belledame222

belledame222 — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 16:37:03 +0000

Anti-deps are probably a good parallel. Yes, they’re over-prescribed. Yes, there are environmental/social aspects to depression as well as lack of desire that don’t get addressed by pills alone. I’m still damn glad they exist. Even if one of the common side effects of at least one is like hitting the “mute” button on the naughty bits. It’s an unfortunate trade-off; yeah, it sucks, but how much sex are you going to be having when you’re so depressed it feels like you’re moving at 33 rpm? As of now, the only effective counter I know of is altering dosage and adding Wellbutrin. (Yes, exercise, general happiness, better diet, tantric breathing, loving partner, good toys, and so on, all help too; they still don’t fix it ime, anymore than good talk therapy and loving friends cured the depression all by themselves).

It’d be nice if things like assertiveness training (”No, I don’t have a headache; I just don’t want to fuck you”) were as common as pills in this society. Otoh: *if* the new pills work, hey, all they do is increase desire. It doesn’t say what they increase desire *for.* Wouldn’t it be ironic if it led some women to realize that, y’know, actually those vague happy feelings they get around their best friend or the mail carrier were in fact Big Lusty Feelings, and the reason their marriage can’t be saved is because they were barking up the wrong tree all along?

By: Jodie

Jodie — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 09:08:49 +0000

You are correct that sexual dysfunction in women does exist. YOU feel that you do not have enough desire — THAT is sexual dysfunction.

However, lack of desire is often labeled as dysfunction even though it may not be dysfunctional at all.

If, say, you were content with your level of sexual desire, but your partner wasn’t, that is NOT sexual dysfunction.

Or, say, your libido was decreased because you were too tired after working and then doing the lion’s share of the housework too — that is not sexual dysfunction either.

I’m sure others can come up with more instances of this, but throwing medication at things like this is like giving prozac for normal grief the day after a loved one dies; it’s ineffective and unnecessary.

By: belledame222

belledame222 — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 22:34:59 +0000

(happy holidays to all, and to all a good…what you will)

By: belledame222

belledame222 — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 22:15:24 +0000

Um. As annoying as aspects of the viagra-ization of society has been (not least of which the way health insurance oftens covers it without covering birth control), women can have sexual dysfunction that isn’t about “they need a better lover/vibrator/empowerment,” y’know. Can’t we have bread and orgasms, too? Why does wanting to punch up your libido make one a “sexbot,” and for that matter is that necessarily a bad thing?

signed, doesn’t sleep with men, has still felt that low ebb, usually for physiological reasons, and would have loved something to punch up the libido, as it is the cream in her coffee.