Discussion for article #236856
When are these women going to learn. If we approve the drug - that leads to birth control pills or leads pregnancy which leads to more schools or more abortions. So lets just stop this right now.
geez. the next thing women are going to want is equal pay. go figure.
11 Likes
Limbaugh no doubt: “It will just encourage the sluts.”
7 Likes
Male Viagra does nothing for a man’s libido. It just helps him get an erection by improving blood flow
.It’s a kind of hydraulic assist.
The drug for women evidently DOES improve a woman’s libido, so it seems like a misnomer to call it “female Viagra”.
9 Likes
But there ARE drugs out there for men that DO increase male libido. TRT for an extreme example.
1 Like
As a previous commentator notes, the equivalence between Viagra, which helps with erectile dysfunction, and this drug, which helps with libido, is a false one. That is not to say that the drug should not be approved by the FDA – that question is above my pay grade. But it is worth thinking seriously about the alternatives to which a drug like this is likely to be put by people other than its intended users – date rapists come to mind most immediately, but I’m sure there are others.
1 Like
Because they can get the same results from a vaginal ultrasound probe?
SNARK, just to be clear.
2 Likes
Date rapists? Are you kidding? This is NOT a drug that renders women incapable of conscious thought or incapable of resisting advances or incapable of saying no or incapable of reason.
It increases the potential for arousal.
AROUSAL IS NOT CONSENT.
If a woman is aroused and says no, she still said NO.
Your comment is insulting and misogynist. Women are sexual beings and that does NOT mean that they are thereby “fair game.”
Stop with the backhanded slut-shaming.
Edit: This crap argument is often used to defend rapists in trials… “she was turned on” is used to mean “it was not rape.”
Don’t take that side and eliminate women’s agency and render them as mere objects.
If a man has a hardon and is raped, it was still rape despite his hardon.
(I can’t believe these things need to be pointed out)
8 Likes
For what it is worth…I’m not an expert on this (I’m a biologist, but don’t work in this field), but from what I know the neurotransmitters controlling male and female libido overlap quite a bit. I suspect that there is a chance it might work for males as well.
2 Likes
Thanks for posting this article. I hadn’t heard of it before.
I’m just not buying what Marcotte is selling, namely the idea that a woman’s inability to become aroused by her partner is rooted in social behavior. At one point, she specifically comes out and says, “While there certainly are women who have low libido for physical reasons, the reason that so many experts are skeptical of a pharmaceutical fix is that a pill won’t fix boredom.” While I certainly don’t advocate a heavy reliance on pharmaceuticals, the idea that women are emotionally blocked smacks of sexism. A man can have a real physical problem with his sexual desires but a woman’s problem is largely emotional? I call BS on that.
6 Likes
Really? What woman wouldn’t become aroused by a fat republican shithead lying on her abdomen? She’s just trying to breathe…and get the guy off her.
Besides…It’s still a male dominated society that doesn’t give a shit about women…
2 Likes
Excellent point.
I’m not a doctor (though I wish I played one on TV for the money), but most men with ED don’t need anything as extreme as Viagra or Cialis. Further, keeping it up, even for less than four hours, doesn’t improve the rest of the physiology of the male sexual act anyway. If you’re over 50, it’s probably a one and done evening regardless of a long-lasting woody. But I digress.
1 Like
There is a difference between being bored with your husband and being emotionally blocked.There is also a difference between being exhausted from holding down a job while doing most of the childcare and housework and being emotionally blocked.
But there is another issue. The drug didn’t pass muster for effectiveness. OK, not much in the way of side effects were reported, but that doesn’t mean they may not happen when more people take them, as has happened with every other drug.
I wish this drug worked, but the evidence isn’t there. It would be highly irresponsible of the FDA to approve an ineffective drug because people wish it worked.
3 Likes
I wondered if that might be the case. Or, what about any of the ones already on the market (for men) that work pretty much like this one – wouldn’t they, likewise, possibly work in the ladies?
A few years ago I watched a documentary by Liz Canner called “Orgasm, Inc.” Might be some difference in what she was looking into versus this Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder, but I’m skeptical after watching that documentary.
You misunderstand my points. First, as I said, I am not opposed to this drug’s approval. I do not have pharmacological or medical training so I have no opinion one way or the other. Second, and more importantly, I am not arguing that someone who takes this drug (or someone who has a hard-on) has thereby consented to sex. Obviously they have not. I am saying that someone who wants someone else to be sexually aroused might be tempted to give them this drug. Obviously no still means no. But does yes still mean yes if you have had your libido medically enhanced without your knowledge or consent? I would think not. Do you disagree?
Pre/Post -coital Intelligent conversation is all a lot of women need to increase their libido…
TRT is testosterone replacement for men low on the hormone that gives men and women their sex drive.
They have something similar for women, too. That does increase libido.
I suppose TRT is a “drug” in some generic sense, but not in the sense that viagra is a drug – some chemicals that increase blood flow.