sex addiction

Should You Seek Sex-Addiction Intervention if You Have Seven Orgasms a Week? (Hint: No.)

Posted by figleaf | Tags:

Fri, 2011-03-04 17:01

According to Annie Scudder, one of the items in a current Time magazine roundup of "things you didn't know about sex addiction" would be...

An orgasm a day is considered troublesome: The article explains, "seven orgasms a week (either alone or with someone) is still considered by many experts to be a threshold for possible disorder."

Source: Très Sugar

While this is a very big improvement on the Victorian belief that men could develop terminal and/or mental illness with "as many as" ten ejaculations a year, it's still a pretty ridiculous threshhold.

I'm not saying, at all, that all people should have libidios. Roughly 1% of adult men and women are straight-up asexual so no doubt 1% of sex "rehab" counselors are asexual as well. (Same with Time Magazine reporters, editors, and fact checkers, who seemed a little more skeptical of the claim.) Substantial numbers of other men and women have modest libidos, and numerous others either neglect or avoid erotic interest, and the libidos of others may be episodic or circumstantial where said circumstances are not common. So, again, I don't expect all of them to have average to above average libidos.

But do none of them?

Actually, if I may be fair for just a moment, the very fact that people's libidos vary enormously both from each other and even within individuals over time suggests that "seven orgasms a week" might be a sign of "addiction" in an individual who's natural libido cycle would ordinarily be substantially lower. In other words as with other silly-sounding but perfectly legitimate psychiatric disorders, a guideline of once per day can be an indication, but not an automatic diagnosis. If someone's libido interferes with their normal daily functions either directly or through obsession or anxiety about it then treatment might be beneficial. Or, as the American Psychiatric Association's proposal puts it you might have a disorder if "you have an illness if you spend so much time pursuing intercourse or masturbation as to interfere with your job or other important activities."

But so much for being fair. First because once a day doesn't seem like a very reasonable threshold. Second because I'm as suspicious of those who profit from "curing" sex addiction as I would be of, say, vibrator vendors who claimed one should have at least one orgasm a day.

Bottom line: the proposed APA definition based on effectiveness encroachment is waaaay more reasonable than a blunt count.

(via Em & Lo)

Repost or Like this

How About Step One: Admitting They're Powerless Over Their Addiction to Demonizing Sex?

Posted by figleaf | Tags:

Tue, 2010-03-02 21:53

Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, who was writing mainly about the usual moronic assumptions pop evolutionary psychologists are making out of the Tiger Woods imbroglio has a wonderfully pithy (and earthy) takedown of the “sex addiction” meme. (Emphasis mine.)

I don’t like the framework around “sex addiction” not because I think that every man is a natural dog who will fuck every woman he sees if given the chance, and that women are fools to expect otherwise (or have the duty to milk our men 3-5 times a day to stop him—-most men wouldn’t want that, either). I don’t like it because the framework demonizes sex itself, even as those who push it deny that. Do I think people act out with sex? Sure, but it’s usually in service of some other neurotic need. Call Tiger Woods a “sex addict” distracts from the more mundane reality.

She said it here.

I’ll note in passing that as usual it’s usually ardent feminists like Amanda who understand that most men are not, in fact, the uncontrollable sperm hydrants of anti-feminist fantasy. Which begs the question of which side really hates men.

I’ll also note that while “sex addiction” is nearly always represented as a male condition at least one counselor (who specializes in men) says it’s about 20% women but the (not trustworthy enough to link to) sources say it’s mostly because women are way less likely to report it or to seek counseling or attend “sexaholics anonymous” meetings. And something called the Sexual Recovery Institute suggests many women may prefer to call themselves “love addicts” instead, though according to SRI’s checklist it all amounts to the same thing. But which might skew reported ratios anyway.

I’ll also note in passing that by belittling conceits such as sex, fishing, or shopping addictions I’m belittling real, actual, biochemical-substance addictions such as alcohol and narcotic addictions. I’m pretty sure literally nothing could be further from the truth.

Repost or Like this

One third watch but is it really a problem?

Posted by figleaf | Tags:

Thu, 2007-10-18 15:48

Via Pam Spaulding of Pandagon

There is a crisis brewing in the Church: a growing epidemic of sexual addiction among women. A new book from Pure Life Ministries by authors Steve and Kathy Gallagher, Create in Me a Pure Heart, explores the scope of the problem and provides biblical answers for the church and the struggling woman.

For twenty-two years, Kathy Gallagher has been helping women cope with their husbands’ addiction to pornography, strip clubs and prostitutes. Now she is responding to a growing number of women addicted to porn, chat rooms and online sex. “Thirty years ago,” remarks Gallagher, “you never would have thought that the woman sitting next to you in Sunday school might be viewing porn. But with the growth of the Internet, the gap between what men and women do in secret has been drastically reduced.”

According to Nielsen NetRatings, nearly one-third of the visitors to adult websites are female. Today’s Christian Woman reported that 34 percent of their online newsletter readers admitted to intentionally accessing Internet porn. Women are also twice as likely as men to visit online chat rooms, according to Internet Filter Review.

Spaulding links to the original sources here.

While I think there really is a problem with “sex addiction” in the sense that there are attachment-related compulsive disorders, and while it’s even possible that women — traditionally kept distant from nuts-and-bolts sexuality — might not be well prepared to recognize something like that, I’ve always been a little cautious about the difference between “as much as one should have” vs. “as much as one wants.”

It wasn’t that long ago (throughout the 1900s) that American and English men were advised not to have sex with their wives more than 10 times a year for fear of certain insanity, de-vitation, and an early grave (let alone what might happen if they masturbated 10 times a year!) Nor it was it that long ago (the first half of the 20th Century) that “considerate” gynecologists removed or burned away the clitorises of “nymphomaniac” women — very often at their request! — in hopes of curing them of “uncontrollable” sexual urges.

And so while I feel sympathy for men or women who really have compulsive disorders associated with sexual behavior I’d rather hear about it from a more neutral, more credible source than the couple that Spaulding links to but I don’t care to. (It’s not bad that Spaulding does. I just really don’t care to follow suit.)

Somewhat coincidentally the image below the fold includes a nude torso and partial erection (with very nice natural shadows and lighting, if I say so myself.) Server logs and survey data suggest that of those who chose to view the image about two thirds of you are women and a third men. No one should feel obliged to look.

[Doh! Now you can click through. —fl]

Repost or Like this