Quote:
Originally posted by
Vaccinium
While I'd concur that women not desiring more sex is not "wrong" nor are the women "broken" (in science, there is no right and wrong, good and bad), I vehemently disagree with the contention that if a woman doesn't desire
...
more
While I'd concur that women not desiring more sex is not "wrong" nor are the women "broken" (in science, there is no right and wrong, good and bad), I vehemently disagree with the contention that if a woman doesn't desire more sex then it is her partner who is to blame. That, of course, is a possibility for some couples, but some women just naturally have low sex drives because of fatigue, stress, hormonal imbalances, etc. "Female Viagra" would merely be a way to help those women who don't have much of a libido but who desperately want one. It's just one piece in the puzzle.
less
To Vaccineum:
Thanks for your post. It was quick and to the point. Very nice.
With all due respect, I seems that you misunderstood me. Please allow me to explain.
You mentioned, "...I vehemently disagree with the contention that if a woman doesn't desire more sex then it is her partner who is to blame." That's great. That's makes two of us.
Please review my statement and read it once more and look for the word "blame". This is what I typed, "On the contrary, it is more likely a clue that her partner..." I typed "more LIKELY a CLUE" not the word blame. Then it follows with, "...is NOT IN TUNE with her." This also does NOT translate to blame.
If I did not type it...I did not say it.
On your comment about "libido", please refer to the link and the actual article because the definition of Female Sexual Dysfunction, or FSD, is in the air at the moment. Yet, with that said the entire purpose of the female viagra is to help women that are having problems.
The article does state, "But that doesn’t mean that FSD doesn’t have a physiological component. Side effects of medications (including some antidepressants, blood pressure drugs, and birth-control pills), shifting levels of hormones, stress and anxiety, obesity, and conditions including diabetes and multiple sclerosis can all lower a woman’s desire." This matches with your 2nd to last sentence.
Please understand, I am not majoring in biological sciences at UC Berkeley. I am majoring in Legal Studies. So, not being a science major I allowed the article to carry that part of the discussion; the scientific jargon mumbo jumbo. You did not see it, read it, in my statement because the article was able to do that. Therefore, I am not against women getting proper medical treatment, or anyone else for that matter with a low libido. Meaning, that yes, whatever percent of women that can be assisted by the female viagra is a good thing.
If I did not print it...I did not say.
In no way did I intend to offend anyone; not you, not men, not women, not scientist, and not even my neighbor's cat. That is simply not my style of doing things. I do not go around hurting people's feelings. Madam, please, I'm a lover not a wife-beater.
***Please understand, that my thesis was more on the lines of that the female viagra is going to be marketed even to women that do not have Female Sexual Dysfunction, or FSD, for the sake of greed.***
***Now, I will take FULL RESPONSIBILITY for having written the statement too quickly in a manner that has obviously not been clearly received by the audience. Yes, that is my screw up!***
Well, then...I hope that you do not view my explanation as being a bit too straight forward. In case I offended you a second time, madam, I apologize.
Thank you,
Miguel M.
