That pill is not a female version of Viagra. I wish people would stop making that comparison. This is a drug designed to enhance a woman's libido, for treating sexual desire disorder. Viagra does nothing for a man's libido. It simply allows him to physically act on his existing libido. The equivalent of Viagra for a woman would be those drugs that enhance her natural internal lubrication when she becomes aroused.
This drug is a real version of the mythical "Spanish fly". There is no equivalent for a man, of Flibanserin.
Ann Althouse said... "That pill is not a female version of Viagra. I wish people would stop making that comparison...."
Check out the video. It doesn't.
9/22/15, 1:29 PM
Really? Did you actually listen to it? The first news person calls it "female Viagra" at the 0:35 mark and it comes up (haha) again at 0:45 (might be more but I stopped watching at that point). Even the very caption on the video you hosted says "Female Viagra Is Coming".
Do you think hot old men with their blue pill induced petrified wood want to boink their drugged up sober old wives? Heh heh heh Nahhhh they want a hot young hoor.
If any of my girlfriends start taking this stuff I'm a gonner' Not enough Canadian Viagra in the world to keep up with that demand. Think I'll go into hiding.
Taken everyday, with danger of stroke or death. As opposed to a couple of glasses of wine or smoking marijuana. Sounds like a really fantastic product. BTW, turned down twice by FDA.
This company was smart to market itself as a feminist thing- comparing itself to Viagra.
Yes, it was a brilliant move, because the FDA found the effect to be so subtle it's probably not even there. This way the manufacturer can sell a drug that doesn't work by getting gullible feminists to bully the FDA.
I guess I don't care very much if women want to pay a bunch of money for a placebo, but the fact that the FDA was willing to roll over is a bit unsettling.
Assuming that 0.5 is a blowjob equivalent, I'd say a lot of guys would welcome an additional random blowjob each month. They might even return the favor.
The baseline is 2 to 3 events a month - statistically the effective increase is .5 to 2 additional events a month. Not really that big a deal.
When thought of in those terms it does not sound like much. However, for the woman's partner who's not getting it as often as they would like, the more relevant way to think about it is how long do I have to go from when I want sex until when I can get sex. So this drug reduces the time between encounters from a range of 10-15 days to a range of 7.5-10 days. If the partner's desire is more like once every 3.5 days, then this reduces the couple's desire misalignment from a range of 6.5-11.5 down to 4-6.5. That works out to ~7.5-15 fewer days of sexual frustration per month for the woman's partner.
When viewed in those terms it is damn significant.
Ok, according to IgnoranceisBliss, the statistic was for an increase in "enjoyed sexual encounters" (emphasis mine). Doesn't sound like the man's necessarily getting sex more often, just that the woman is enjoying it more often.
And we all know how a real man tells if a woman had an orgasm, right?
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
३० टिप्पण्या:
That pill is not a female version of Viagra. I wish people would stop making that comparison. This is a drug designed to enhance a woman's libido, for treating sexual desire disorder. Viagra does nothing for a man's libido. It simply allows him to physically act on his existing libido. The equivalent of Viagra for a woman would be those drugs that enhance her natural internal lubrication when she becomes aroused.
This drug is a real version of the mythical "Spanish fly". There is no equivalent for a man, of Flibanserin.
@Todd
Gell-Mann Amnesia effect needed.
"That pill is not a female version of Viagra. I wish people would stop making that comparison...."
Check out the video. It doesn't.
Well, maybe it will lead to unhappy, sex filled marriage, only the sex isn't with her husband.
Ann Althouse said...
"That pill is not a female version of Viagra. I wish people would stop making that comparison...."
Check out the video. It doesn't.
9/22/15, 1:29 PM
Really? Did you actually listen to it? The first news person calls it "female Viagra" at the 0:35 mark and it comes up (haha) again at 0:45 (might be more but I stopped watching at that point). Even the very caption on the video you hosted says "Female Viagra Is Coming".
Where did they find the women who weren't horny?
Do you think hot old men with their blue pill induced petrified wood want to boink their drugged up sober old wives? Heh heh heh Nahhhh they want a hot young hoor.
The video says "Female Viagra" a million times. It's even on the still used in the blog post.
This company was smart to market itself as a feminist thing- comparing itself to Viagra.
In a parallel universe, feminists complain about this medication making women "Stepford Wives".
MayBee said...
In a parallel universe, feminists complain about this medication making women "Stepford Wives".
They say that like it's a bad thing.
How many 91 year old men that use Viagra hook up with pre-menopausal women?
If any of my girlfriends start taking this stuff I'm a gonner' Not enough Canadian Viagra in the world to keep up with that demand. Think I'll go into hiding.
Never understand the attraction to watching Colbert. Or is it Colbere?
I agree, I don't get the attraction to colbert's humor. I also don't care for his knarled ear either. Yeah I know the story.
"understood" (In case any grammar police are staying up past their, there, they're bedtime)
Fliberanserin and Viagra collide, couple, cohabit, court, cuddle, copulate conspicuously.
Colbert is mocking the drug, which barely does anything , in contrast ti Viagra, which does too much.
Taken everyday, with danger of stroke or death. As opposed to a couple of glasses of wine or smoking marijuana. Sounds like a really fantastic product. BTW, turned down twice by FDA.
Ann Althouse,
Flibanserin can indeed do something--but it's not an aphrodisiac, if that's what women are hoping for.
Flibanserin is a glorified antidepressant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norepinephrine%E2%80%93dopamine_disinhibitor
And yes, the more depressed you are, the less likely you are to enjoy sex--or anything else.
So the drug company is targeting mildly depressed women, who will find that as their mild depression improves, their libido will recover.
alan markus asks: "How many 91 year old men that use Viagra hook up with pre-menopausal women?"
Donald Trump, if he lives that long.
This company was smart to market itself as a feminist thing- comparing itself to Viagra.
Yes, it was a brilliant move, because the FDA found the effect to be so subtle it's probably not even there. This way the manufacturer can sell a drug that doesn't work by getting gullible feminists to bully the FDA.
I guess I don't care very much if women want to pay a bunch of money for a placebo, but the fact that the FDA was willing to roll over is a bit unsettling.
Canadiens mock everything American....in American....after becoming American.
Why not just give them what Suzy Favor Hamilton took?
That was funny. I think that was the first time I laughed at a Colbert bit.
Colbert is mocking the drug, which barely does anything...
Between a 50% and 100% increase in enjoyed sexual encounters per month is barely anything?
The baseline is 2 to 3 events a month - statistically the effective increase is .5 to 2 additional events a month. Not really that big a deal .
Assuming that 0.5 is a blowjob equivalent, I'd say a lot of guys would welcome an additional random blowjob each month. They might even return the favor.
alan markus said...
The baseline is 2 to 3 events a month - statistically the effective increase is .5 to 2 additional events a month. Not really that big a deal.
When thought of in those terms it does not sound like much. However, for the woman's partner who's not getting it as often as they would like, the more relevant way to think about it is how long do I have to go from when I want sex until when I can get sex. So this drug reduces the time between encounters from a range of 10-15 days to a range of 7.5-10 days. If the partner's desire is more like once every 3.5 days, then this reduces the couple's desire misalignment from a range of 6.5-11.5 down to 4-6.5. That works out to ~7.5-15 fewer days of sexual frustration per month for the woman's partner.
When viewed in those terms it is damn significant.
Ok, according to IgnoranceisBliss, the statistic was for an increase in "enjoyed sexual encounters" (emphasis mine). Doesn't sound like the man's necessarily getting sex more often, just that the woman is enjoying it more often.
And we all know how a real man tells if a woman had an orgasm, right?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा