Archive for July, 2010

Response from a patient on the “medicalization” of female sexuality debate

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010 by Ilene Rosenthal, Marketing

We received an unsolicited response to Dr. Marcus’ position piece on the “medicalization” of female sexuality from a patient.  Her words speak for themselves.

“The last time I was in the office I told Dr.Marcus that she will be remembered for her contribution to Female Sexuality the way that Margaret Sanger was with birth control.

I read the article (in the latest e-newsletter from the Medical Center for Female Sexuality) and I could not agree more. It took a great deal of courage for me to pick up the phone and make that first appointment. I had spoken with a psychotherapist at length about the problem itching. discomfort and pain in my vagina; loss of desire that had nothing to do with my attraction to and love for my partner and finally my inability to achieve orgasms after being someone who previously had no sexual problems and certainly no problems achieving an orgasm. As I was in a new relationship my therapist said it was just a matter of getting comfortable with a new person. I know my body and I knew she was wrong. I tried the ‘herbal cures”, specifically Thandia from Native Remedies. Three months and I felt no difference.

I have been on Dr. Marcus’ s treatment regime for less than a month. The vaginal dryness and discomfort ended the first week. My level of sexual desire has returned almost to the level it was before I noticed a change and this weekend I had an orgasm that was as good as some of the ones I had at 30. So, I am a firm believer that there is no “magic pill” but a complex mixture of supports that Dr. Marcus has developed for each patient. You saved my sexuality and thus my relationship which is a huge part of my ongoing happiness.”

“M”, July 2010

Debate: the “Medicalization” of Female Sexuality

Friday, July 23rd, 2010 by Bat Sheva Marcus LMSW MPH PhD
I hope you’ll forgive the lengthy perspective below, but this is an issue I am extremely passionate about. 
 
If I hear one more time that women’s sexual dysfunction is a myth created by the media, and that the search for medical solutions is merely a thinly veiled way for the pharmaceutical companies to fleece innocent and gullible women, I may shoot someone. 

The Numbers

Ask around:  women have long been complaining to each other and their physicians about various sexual problems that present issues in their relationships and with their own quality of life:   ”I have pain.”  “I don’t get turned on.” “I can’t have an orgasm.” Even if you do believe that the pharmaceutical companies are looking for ways to keep their shareholders happy, it is difficult to find fault given these statistics.

Current studies indicate that 43% of women express dissatisfaction with their sex lives at some point in time. Hmmmm. Let’s say the “real” number is being inflated by 100% — that would still leave us with one quarter of all women suffering from these conditions and their unhappy consequences.

How real is this?  For the skeptics,  let’s say that number is still inflated and the real, discounted number is only 10% of all women who are experiencing female sexual dysfunction.  Even that would 30 million women in US alone!  Do the math:  21% would be 60 million women.  And 43% would be 120 million. 

Are we painting a clear picture here?   Whether it’s 30, 60 or 120 million women suffering from female sexual dysfunction, it’s only reasonable to accept that it’s a problem worth addressing.

Big Bad Pharma

Now let’s talk about the big bad pharmaceutical companies accountable to their shareholders. Profit and share-price are the motives for making a product which works and will sell to a large patient population driven. No question.

When they look at the statistics they must be salivating!  What a huge group of prospective users!  An effective drug that solves low desire, for example, would be a boon!

So what’s wrong with that? 

What if the motivation for studying a solution for millions of women is profit?  Personally, I don’t really care what their motives are as long as they are working on the problem. If Big Pharma is trying to produce a drug that may help low desire or arousal, good for them!  This may also be good for some my patients, which is the point, isn’t it?

Medical treatment and psychotherapy

Strikingly, you most often hear complaints about the “medicalization” of female sexual dysfunction from psychotherapists.  Many seem horrified at the possibility that physiology may be at the root of female sexual dysfunction, and claim that practitioners will push suffering women into spending their hard earned dollars on questionable medical treatment. 

In our practice, we have the opportunity each week to refer some of our patients – including some who have found medical treatment for their fsd – to local psychotherapists for longer term counseling connected with their experiences with sexual dysfunction. We recognize that the priority is getting patients the help they need in whatever way best suits their temperament, medical condition and wallet.  Even though we believe that our approach of integrating the psycho-sexual with the physiological is powerful, we accept that some women will decide on traditional talk therapy to address their needs. Just because there may be a physiological reason for a particular sexual condition, does not mean that there cannot be related psychological – or even psychiatric – dysfunction that needs to be addressed by a specialist.  But let’s be fair – the reverse is also true.

And finally, as part of the health care debate it’s hard to disagree with effective medical treatment that carries an annual cost of less than $2000,  particularly when compared to upwards of $7000 per year for psychological counseling alone.  So, factoring in the cost of different treatment options must be part of the equation for every patient.

“Quick Fix” vs. the “Long Haul”

To women who experience ongoing sexual difficulties, the choice between a quick fix and an interminable journey is unhelpful.  Calling medical treatment for female sexual dysfunction a “quick fix” undermines the hard work patients do to face their condition head on.  Patients will often overcome great embarrassment and insecurity to seek treatment.  They may try unfamiliar or even uncomfortable procedures to address their problems.  They may need to involve a disappointed or resistant partner in order to make progress.  None of this describes a “quick fix” and the psychotherapeutic community’s knee-jerk assignment of that term demonstrates disrespect for women who are sincerely struggling with an untenable situation.

Two key questions remain at the fore when a patient considers treatment options:  will it work and is it safe?  After that, the next question is often: how long will it take (the adult version of, “Are we there yet?”)?  Of course, the fact that medical treatment of FSD often resolves problems within a few months may alienate therapists who believe in a longer-term process.  That, we believe, needs to be left up to the patient.

At the root of this argument is another assumption:  that intimacy and sex are the same. The sooner we recognize that this is not true in every case, the more open the psychotherapy community will be to considering other channels to help patients find complementary paths to solving the distress of FSD.

A “quick fix” for the media

As we watch the media respond to the news regarding Flibanserin,  Boehringer Ingelheim’s drug to improve sexual desire in women currently in clinical trials,  we see how desperate they are to find a  pithy, newsworthy way to present an issue.  That’s where “Flibanserin, Viagra for women” comes from.

Such a synopsis ignores the different way the medications work (vascular for Viagra, hormonal/neurotransmission for Flibanserin) and disregards the complexity of sexual dysfunction for women.  The lack of depth in describing the problem and its possible resolution is astounding and only reflects poorly on responsible media coverage.

“The consumer is not an idiot. She is your wife”

This quote is only one of many tenets of advertising and marketing proffered by David Ogilvy, considered the father of modern advertising.

To suggest that women will be sheep and buy whatever cream or pill is recommended, and keep using it even if it’s not working, is ludicrous and infantilizing. Women are smart consumers. When they have a problem they try a solution and they stop if it doesn’t work. I can list a slew of herbal “remedies”  that have been on the market for sexual dysfunction. Some had significant marketing and PR dollars behind them, and nearly all of them are no longer being sold.

I have the utmost confidence in women who are seeking solutions to obstacles that stand in the way of their goals.

An intelligent, responsible person will evaluate treatment options with her own needs at the fore, and with an eye towards efficacy and safety and effort.  She will not be convinced by phony claims, snake oil or an unsatisfying experience.

So, as you can see, this is not snake oil or fantasy, but a set of sound alternatives based on medical practice and fact.  Virtually all conditions can be addressed in far less than one year with follow up assessment as needed.    If you’ve ever met a young married woman who has been unable to consummate her marriage, a vibrant mom of teenagers who simply cannot find her libido, a post menopausal 55 year old who can no longer achieve orgasm, a young single woman who wrestles with her relationship because she cannot feel aroused, then you know how important it is to be prepared with all possible solutions.  It is our job the help her have the sexual life she wants, regardless of what the critics say.

Kids at Camp = more time for sex!

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010 by Bat Sheva Marcus LMSW MPH PhD

We had to repost this advice since, well, it’s summer!!

Okay so your kids are at camp, you’re alone in the house — have sex! The summer might be an unusually great time for you to reconnect with your partner. Even if you’re not lucky enough to have the house to yourself, for many people the summer is a slower time — and may be a great time to work on the relationship.

One of the things I hear over and over again from couples is how universally the intimacy in the marriage affects the whole relationship. As one patient told me yesterday, “You know, now that we’re having sex, and I’m ‘into it,’ we just seem to be having so much more fun together. He’s happier, I’m happier, he’s being more helpful. Our life is just so much better.”

So this week, maybe instead of reorganizing your closet, and plowing your way through your “to do” list, you’ll think about climbing back under the covers (or back into the shower, or onto the living room sofa) and put some sizzle back into your marriage.

Size….again

Thursday, July 15th, 2010 by Bat Sheva Marcus LMSW MPH PhD

 Am I starting to sound like a broken record? Again and again, we get women saying “I wish my partner was a little smaller. I guess I’m an anomaly, but I just don’t like having intercourse with a large penis. It hurts.” You’re not an anomaly. It is so rare that anyone complains of a penis being too small, but larger penises can present their own challenges and not every women’s vaginal canals can handle the larger penis. So guys… one more time – (should we say it in unison?) BIGGER IS NOT NECESSARILY BETTER!

Goin’ Down

Monday, July 12th, 2010 by Shannon Bertha, ACS, PhD

At times we may feel that our partners are not adequately stimulating us during sex.  This can be true for men and women.  It isn’t that our partners are bad lovers or do not know how to perform, but rather that they may not know what really turns us on.  There can be many ways to guess what turns on your partner, for example, how they move during sexual activity or what sounds they make;  but the clearest, most direct is verbal communication. 

This subject comes up a lot when women talk to us about oral sex.  Let’s face it: oral sex for women is complex and asks couples to face many aspects of lovemaking that are sometimes difficult to address:  physiology, physics, the senses (sight, smell, taste), patience, power within a relationship, and more.

Here’s a scenario we hear a lot:  A woman really enjoys oral sex but doesn’t want to ask for it too much because she believes her partner doesn’t like to do it.  So she goes though a number of sexual encounters with intercourse,   enjoys it, but does not climax during any of these events.  Finally, she decides she is going to take matters into her own hands and tells her husband, before intercourse, that she wants an orgasm and would like him to perform oral sex on her.  To both of their surprises, he smiles , gets very excited and takes action.  As it turns out, he really enjoys giving oral sex to his wife, and he’s pretty good at it!  But she hesitated to express interest in it because of her own assumptions about her husband.  This little event sparked many more conversations about what they can do for (and to) each other to make each sexual experience fulfilling. 

If you find your partner needs some help in this area, or would like different technique suggestions, there are a number of books that are available for performing oral sex on women, such as: 

She Comes First: The Thinking Man’s Guide to Pleasuring a Woman by Ian Kerner

Guide to Eating Out – The Lick-by-Lick Guide to Mouthwatering and Orgasmic Oral Sex by Palmer Strong

And books that discuss both:

The Going Down Guide: Tongue Tips and Oral Sex Techniques for Men and Women by Emily Dubberley and Al Needham

Our sexual culture and The New York Times

Friday, July 9th, 2010 by Stephen Snyder, MD

The latest public figure to make journalistic hay from the flibanserin controversy is Camille Paglia, whose editorial in The New York Times, ”No Sex Please, We’re Middle Class, “ seems to be getting some play on my twitter feed.   It’s a fun read, but she throws a lot of things together that I’m not sure really stick.

According to Paglia,  over-education is an important source of diminished sexual desire among the ” anxious, overachieving, white upper middle class, ”  as she calls it.  This is an old myth about sex, going back as far as D. H. Lawrence and probably farther — that too much education separates a person from the raw physical sources of his or her sexuality.

There’s not much to support this myth about sexuality and education, and every reason to be suspicious of it.   We don’t really know what goes on in most people’s bedrooms.  A quality US study on sexuality that asked, the National Health and Social Life Survey,  found that frequency of sex didn’t change much with  educational level.  The study did find that highly educated people were having more oral sex, though.    Seems like higher education might give one a taste for more sexual variety — hardly a bad thing.

Paglia also contends that if you were unlucky enough to be born after the industrial revolution, then you’ve really missed the boat on  great sex.   As she writes, “The real culprit, originating in the 19th century, is bourgeois propriety. As respectability became the central middle-class value, censorship and repression became the norm. Victorian prudery ended the humorous sexual candor of both men and women during the agrarian era, a ribaldry chronicled from Shakespeare’s plays to the 18th-century novel.”

OK, I get that it would have been a blast making dirty jokes with my fellow groundlings at the Globe Theater.   But I’m not convinced that the late 16th century had much of an edge on us when it came to sexual enjoyment.    No indoor plumbing, not much bathing, no antibiotics to treat venereal disease — I’ll take the modern era, no matter how many hours I’m stuck answering email.

I agree with Paglia that a serious amount of organic sexual grit has been scrubbed off by the media and by the culture at large.    But I question whether there’s much of a connection between the kind of sex talk we hear, and the kind of actual sex we’re having.  Fact is, we don’t really know what kind of sex even our closest friends are having, much less people in other cultures and from other centuries.

I’m not convinced that we’re having worse sex, or less of it, than people in other times and cultures.    It may just be that our sexual problems  get more attention.   I suspect previous generations would envy us our greater sexual freedoms.  Our freedom to educate ourselves about sex if we choose to.  Greater freedom from sexual ignorance and shame.  And that most precious freedom of all — the freedom to kvetch about sex in print.

© Stephen Snyder, MD 2010    

Twitter.com/SexualityToday

PsychologyToday.com/blog/SexualityToday/

www.SexualityResource.com

How much is enough….sex?

Thursday, July 1st, 2010 by Bat Sheva Marcus LMSW MPH PhD

The question always comes up:  what’s the “right” amount of sex?

At nearly every lecture I give, at some point, I get the question: “so how often is normal?” It’s the kind of questions we sex educators hate. Really. The honest truth is that couples vary so widely in their sexual desires and habits that defining the “norm” seems ludicrous.

I have had couples who have sex once a month and when that is good and satisfying that works just fine for both of them. I’ve had couples who really and truly like to have sex a few times a day.

 However,  people invariably push me to answer and I hate to be one of those namby-pamby “everything is okay and good” type of practitioners. I don’t always find that to be the most helpful approach.

The truth is there really do appear to be some norms. The reality is that, given the hundreds of couples I’ve seen, what seems to be the average amount of sexual activity (in a long term relationship where the sex is going well) seems to be somewhere between 1-3 times a week. So, there it is.

In a book by Laura Berman I saw  a paragraph where she suggests (after the disclaimer we all make—see above) that in her experience most couples should have some type of sexual activity at least once every two weeks or things often seem to go awry.

 So there you have it. Hopefully you now feel “normal.” The more important question is,  are you happy? Does your current level of sexual activity satisfy you and your partner?  If not, that is something you should look into because that is something you can do something about!