Jump to content

Pushback on "Pink Viagra"


Pong Messiah
 Share

Recommended Posts

The real problem with 'pink Viagra'

 

I'm glad people are pushing back on this.

 

I mean, aside from the health concerns, the idea that there is something "wrong" with women who don't regularly/often/ever get randomly and spontaneously horny for no reason is kind of insulting... especially since there is nothing wrong or unusual about it, and odds are good these people didn't feel it was a problem until they were told it was a prob.

 

It also reinforces the notion that spontaneous arousal, which is more associated with men, is the "right" way to be, while more responsive arousal, which is more associated with women, is the "wrong" way to be. That's kinda rude. I mean, wouldn't dudes be all like wtf if somebody created a pill designed to make men talk about their feelings?

 

:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This type of med has been in the making for something like ten years or longer; it didn't work then and it doesn't work now. It's trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist, like the article points out. With a 10% success rate of "minimal", it sounds like its a loooooong way away from FDA approval.

 

If it ever gets approved, though, invest. I can totally see the drug taking off with wealthy women over 65. All those bored, wealthy couples and panther-like widows living in those uppity assisted living communities with nothing but time on their hands and having the same sex/no sex for decades?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist,

Generally speaking, yeah. A lot of variation between people and their sexual appetites, response, etc. Sure, people have physical and psychological problems that can affect them sexually, but just because you don't act and respond exactly the way your partner or society or the media tells you you should when it comes to sex doesn't mean you have a "problem."

 

This kind of thing really pisses me off.

  • Pathologize something perfectly normal that many people are insecure about
  • Offer up a "cure" (never mind that it might not even work or that it could have other harmful side effects)
  • Profit!

Furthermore, I have seen no indication that women across the globe are clamoring for a pill that makes them "spontaneously horny" or whatever more often. If there is a movement for such a pill -- well, great, I stand corrected. But really, who're these pills for?

 

:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But aren't there middle aged women who want a higher sex drive?

There are people of all ages and genders who want all sorts of things, and I couldn't care less what they want so long as they don't hurt anybody else. My issue is with pushing the idea that there is something wrong that needs to be fixed in a woman if she doesn't feel spontaneously aroused as often as her partner/society/media tells her she should. There's already enough of that crap out there. But ya of course if it's something she decides she wants for herself, great (assuming a pill with a higher success rate ever comes out)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know this is really for men so they can continue not putting forth the effort of turning women on.

That thought definitely crossed my mind. Imagining the inventors, was thinking of a mix between that guy who made the passive-aggressive spreadsheet of all the times in the last few months she refused to have sex with him, and "that guy" who buys his wife super hot lingerie on her birthday ("Oh thanks, honey, a gift for... you. How nice.").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

I think there is pressure for women to want a higher sex drive because men demand it to fulfill their needs. Although, I'm not middle-aged yet, so I'll let you know when I get there.

That is certainly a factor, but the reverse is true about viagra for men. Viagra is as much about the vanity of men needing to perform, as the women who want their guy to perform. And now, its a $ billion industry, every year.

 

But in the case of pink viagra, I think there is also another factor (possibly the biggest factor): big pharma wanting to double its profits and market to women the same way they do to men, and manufacturing a need to fill it. I don't think its so much a conspiracy of men wanting women to take pink viagra, as it is big pharma wanting to create and market a solution looking for a problem, and for doctors to be legalized drug pushers for big pharma.

 

 

Just yet another example in a long line of "Got a problem with X? Then, here, see your doctor for a magic pill." And time will tell, but I have a feeling like all sorts of other drugs, pink viagra will likely end up having a host of health risks and side effects for women. It's pretty arrogant of humans to think that after millions of years of evolution, we now can "fix" female sexuality with a pill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But aren't there middle aged women who want a higher sex drive?

There are people of all ages and genders who want all sorts of things, and I couldn't care less what they want so long as they don't hurt anybody else. My issue is with pushing the idea that there is something wrong that needs to be fixed in a woman if she doesn't feel spontaneously aroused as often as her partner/society/media tells her she should. There's already enough of that crap out there. But ya of course if it's something she decides she wants for herself, great (assuming a pill with a higher success rate ever comes out)!

 

Why just women? Why don't you see something 'wrong' with middle aged men who want a higher sex drive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

But aren't there middle aged women who want a higher sex drive?

There are people of all ages and genders who want all sorts of things, and I couldn't care less what they want so long as they don't hurt anybody else. My issue is with pushing the idea that there is something wrong that needs to be fixed in a woman if she doesn't feel spontaneously aroused as often as her partner/society/media tells her she should. There's already enough of that crap out there. But ya of course if it's something she decides she wants for herself, great (assuming a pill with a higher success rate ever comes out)!

 

Why just women? Why don't you see something 'wrong' with middle aged men who want a higher sex drive?

 

There's a distinction: viagra does nothing to increase sex drive. It treats a legitimate, physical ailment. It's abused (and frequently leaves young men impotent who do abuse it) but it's not designed to have anything to do with sex drive, but rather the motor is revving but the emergency brake is stuck.

 

This medication seems more designed to get the motor started.

 

Now I really don't care either way, but there's a difference between the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why just women? Why don't you see something 'wrong' with middle aged men who want a higher sex drive?

Because this is a topic about a pill that is being marketed toward women. What else would we be talking about? If I start a topic about the incarceration rate among young, low income black males, are you going to hector me about why I'm not talking about high-achieving young Asian females not being accepted into universities? Sheesh.

:eek:

 

Also, I think I was pretty clear that I don't care what anybody desires so long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. So of course that would include middle aged men who want a higher sex drive -- though as Brando points out, that's not what Viagra actually does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got men's libido covered already anyways (of course we would!). Androgel testosterone topical patches. For hormone therapy which of course has the pleasant effect of restoring waning libido.

 

I knew a guy on that once. He was in his early fifties. He also went tanning, had hair replacement treatments done, and had a sports car. Mid-life crisis a little? What a toolbag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issue is with pushing the idea that there is something wrong that needs to be fixed in a woman if she doesn't feel spontaneously aroused as often as her partner/society/media tells her she should.

This idea, as you describe it, may well be precisely what's causing the very problem it's ostensibly trying to fix. Pressure to conform to social expectations are the ultimate wet blanket. Nobody ever got their groove back by thinking something is wrong with them that needs fixing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But aren't there middle aged women who want a higher sex drive?

This is the other side of it.I agree with concerns about pathologizing the having of a 'responsive' as opposed to a 'sponteineous' sex drive and pushing some expensive pill with potential side effects to treat this "pathology."

 

On the other hand, I likewise disagree with telling women who want a more sponteineous drive (and the men who wish their women had that) that they're WRONG, although this pill is most likely not the best way to go about acheiving this (Cerina's post alludes to what is). I don't think ten-a-penny hipster bloggers (I say this in a general sense, NOT in reference to anyone here) who would be inclined to view the prioretization of sexual satisfaction (especially male satisfaction) as blasphemy and high treason are ultimately any more justified in telling women what's RIGHT for themselves in their relationships than "big pharma" is. I think they should realize that a 'responsive' drive is perfectly natural and normal, but should not be stigmatized for wanting a more sponteineous drive, though I agree with misgivings about this particular pill. Again, not that I think anyone here necessarily is. Just sayin'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two relevant questions are:

Is there a problem?

 

and

Does this fix it?

 

If the answer to either of those is no, then this is wrong. If the answer to both is yes, then the follow up is: what are the side effects?

 

If the side effects are negligible, there is a problem, and this fixes it, then anyone who's standing up against it is doing so purely for political reasons.

 

Even the women she discusses, she doesn't go into detail: did the women previously have strong sex drives and now have difficulty becoming aroused? Is there a physical/mental issue that needs to be addressed? Or are these women having normal sexual responses?
That's a big question.

 

In the end, it comes down to the question about what's normal and what needs treated, and what's the best treatment. I think it probably isn't a major issue for most women, but there are lots of things that aren't a major issue for most people that we still treat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that's dated after the approval, that you linked to.

 

Also, interesting point: the drug has nothing to do with menopause and is for pre-menopausal women. So another monkeygirl argument that has absolutely no legs, but she thinks everyone else is stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.