Or that's what drug companies would have me think.

According to this article from MacLeans, (thanks, Jana!) a woman may qualify as dysfunctional if she

- has chronic, or even occasional, trouble becoming aroused
- if she has difficulty achieving orgasm -- or if she's never had one
- if she experiences any sort of pain during intercourse
- if she's the type who'd just rather eat chocolate and do her nails

As for Number 1... Well, sure, I've had moments where I just wasn't into it. These times have been EXTREMELY RARE, and were usually under extreme circumstances, but nonetheless..

As for Number 2.. Geez.. Orgasms are a LOT of work. Sometimes I'm just lazy. It's not that I'm not having a good (even great) time, it's that sometimes, I just don't want to, or I'm distracted, or I feel ugly.

As for Number 3.. I feel if you DON'T experience any sort of pain during intercourse, you ain't doin' it right (at least, sometimes).

And finally.. Most of you know, I'm not in the least "this type of girl", but there have been some times.... Not RECENTLY mind you, but in the past, sure.

So, what does this mean? If you read over Erectile Dysfunction (ED)inventories (which I happen to have in my office), you can tell where they got the FSD (female sexualy dysfunction) from. They assume that if we, as women, aren't cumming and fucking at every waking moment, then we are somehow abnormal.

Now, again, I must prelude this with my own individual biases. I believe I am probably left of center when it comes to sex. I DO like sex whenever, whereever, however. I also realize that most women I know aren't necessarily like me. The peaks and valleys or their libido are must more dramatic and my own, relatively constant, peak.

However, the way I see it is: If you're okay, I'm okay. If you're happy with your libido, and your sex life, however grand or miniscule it may be, then who has the authority to write you a prescription to change that?

Okay, but what if you aren't happy with our sex life? Is there something out there that will help you? A pill? A spray? Kegel exercises? I say, emphatically, NO!

'This is more or less the conclusion that Pfizer, the maker of Viagra, seems to have reached several months ago. The company had been testing its drug on women, but then officially pulled out of the FSD race, conceding that Viagra worked only with men. (In fact, most women felt more improvement with the placebo than the drug. At least it didn't cause headaches and hot flushes.) Female sexual disorders, Pfizer's researchers concluded, are "far more complex than male erectile dysfunction."'

Remember folks: Women are not rats. Just because Dr. SoandSo developed a nasal spray that works on rats, it doesn't mean it will work on Ms. Mary Housewife. I wager that rats don't have mortages, bad hair days, bloating, nagging mothers, and The O.C.

That's not to say that Erectile Dysfunction is a simple problem. Actually, yes it is. Just look at the name. It's not called "Male Sexual Dysfunction" is it? The problem is with the penis, period. Once you get the right hormones and blood flow happening, problem solved (usually).

But, as this is the point of this post, is that "Female Sexual Dysfunction" is a huge misnomer. If this 'dysfunction' is a dysfunction (and only the patient can truly diagnose that), then it is simply way too complicated a thing to be treated through drugs alone.