We've seen the commercials, we've read the articles, and hey, some of us have even seen the results of Viagra - the drug created to help male erectile problems. Since Viagra hit shelves, and perhaps even before, pharmaceutical companies have been after the proverbial holy grail of money makers - a drug to help cure female sexual dysfunction (FSD). The drug would ideally be a medical treatment that helps arousal, desire, and orgasm. Currently products aim to boost blood flow and increase physical sensation in the genitals, thus creating increased desire for women and help orgasm as well.
The pink pill - as it's referred to - could help the estimated 43 percent of women who are diagnosed with some sort of sexual problems. Of course, one of the biggest challenges with the pink pill over Viagra is that it's still unclear what constitutes a female sexual dysfunction in the first place. What is the equivalent of not having an erection? Lowered libido? The inability to orgasm? And if these are the issues to be tackled, what is the norm or standard to meet?
For years we've been trying to diagnose what is a healthy and normal sex life - but it's not so easy to do when you're talking about the medicalization of sex and sexuality. And given that there are often times emotional and psychological factors tied to sexual dysfunction, is it appropriate to provide a drug that merely address the mechanics of sexual disorders?
I'm sure many would say yes it is. And I think it's important for women to have the option of a drug that can benefit their physical pleasure - if only for the reason that men have been able to have this choice for a few years now. But it's also important to explore the other factors - stress, depression, lack of openness around female sexuality, lack of sex education, and overall sexual well being.
In order for all women to truly overcome sexual disorders or issues, we have to have more than one solution and it has to go deeper than just increased blood to the genitals.