Last fall, when the FDA denied Sprout Pharmaceuticals’ application to market flibanserin, a drug for low female desire, one of the most prominent women’s groups, the National Organization of Women, met with the agency to voice concern about the decision. Four U.S. congresswomen blamed institutionalized sexism, writing the government in support of a drug for female sexual dysfunction. According to a 2007 Johns Hopkins study, published in the American Journal of Medicine, 18 million men have erectile dysfunction—not significantly larger, from a medical standpoint, than the 16 million women who may suffer from a lack of desire and feel distress.
The advocacy group Even The Score argues that the FDA has systematically discounted female sexual dysfunction. Viagra, the first male sexual-dysfunction drug, was approved in the U.S. in 1998, and according to Susan Scanlan, chair of Even The Score, men now have 26 drug options for sexual dysfunction—while women have none. “Women shouldn’t be shamed for having this condition. They should be listened to and helped,” said Scanlan, who believes the recent FDA meetings represent the first step towards “a meaningful solution.”
In addition to nonprofit groups such as Black Women’s Health Imperative and the Center for Health and Gender Equality, Even The Score also lists Sprout Pharmaceuticals—with other drug companies—as supporters on its website.
“Even The Score is a marketing tactic that masquerades as some kind of feminist patient group, but it’s a gimmick,” said Tiefer, who has been vocal at FDA hearings about her opposition to flibanserin and doubts there is a pressing medical need for a female sexual-dysfunction drug. Many couples have difficulties when it comes to a range of lifestyle concerns, from in-laws and children to personal finances and work balance, she explained. But that doesn’t mean one of them has a “biological inadequacy” in any of those areas. So when a couple has an asymmetrical level of desire, why does one of them necessarily suffer from a medical problem? Perhaps, she posits, it’s the “world of cell phones, deadlines, and multitasking” that places stress on couples’ sex lives, not a chemical deficiency. “Having been a sex therapist and a psychologist, I’ve heard from hundreds upon hundreds of people,” said Tiefer, who blames modern life and the societal pressures women face to look a certain way, in part, for creating desire asymmetry among couples.
Illustrating the tension between marketing and medical science, a recent article in Marie Claire recounts a Baltimore woman’s experience with flibanserin. Writer Virginia Sole-Smith reports that “Cara” is in her late 30s and a development director for a non-profit, with two young children. Her “sex drive dropped dramatically and never rebounded” after the birth of her first baby. A few weeks into the study, however, she claims a drastic change, planning a mid-workday rendezvous with her husband, leaving a trail of clues for him:
In the first envelope, Ryan found instructions to pick up oysters during his lunch break. Envelope two asked him to swing by a wine store. Number three only said "12 p.m.," along with the name of a local hotel. "I met him at the door wearing only heels," says Cara now. "Building that anticipation all morning was incredibly sexy. Things hadn't been that hot between us in years."
Later, Sole-Smith discloses that she met Cara through a publicist for the drug’s manufacturer and that Cara “posted unusually good results for [her] drug trial.” To readers, Cara’s experience with flibanserin might imply that a woman who doesn’t meet her husband on her lunch break, naked, suffers from low desire. And when it comes to sexuality, there’s already a good deal of insecurity about what is normal, explained Jennifer Fishman, assistant professor in biomedical ethics at McGill University. For both men and women, she said, drug companies often promote an unattainably high ideal of arousal.