Over the last decade, as companies chased after an effective chemical, there was fretting within the drug industry: what if, in trials, a medicine proved too effective? More than one adviser to the industry told me that companies worried about the prospect that their study results would be too strong, that the F.D.A. would reject an application out of concern that a chemical would lead to female excesses, crazed binges of infidelity, societal splintering.
“You want your effects to be good but not too good,” Andrew Goldstein, who is conducting the study in Washington, told me. “There was a lot of discussion about it by the experts in the room,” he said, recalling his involvement with the development of Flibanserin, “the need to show that you’re not turning women into nymphomaniacs.” He was still a bit stunned by the entrenched mores that lay within what he’d heard. “There’s a bias against — a fear of creating the sexually aggressive woman.”
“Unexcited? There May Be a Pill for That.”—NYT
Gee, you ever think that might be part of the problem? That there’s a societally acceptable level of lady-boning?
(via ladonnapietra)
“good but not too good”
Yeah, go fuck yourself, dude.
(via whynotshesaid)
This article gave me fits for many reasons.
(via wut4)
i am so fucking angry at this
(via piddlebucket)
let me tell you how fucking angry this makes me as a woman who has been struggling with therapy for issues regarding my ability to enjoy sex. there could be something out there that would work for me, but maybe I can’t get it because some repressed, asshole fucking dudes decided that women enjoying and taking control of their libido’s and sexual needs would hurt society???
FUCK. YOU.
(via lagertha-lodbrok)
(via rapeculturerealities)