Sex Addiction Part 1

This post is part one in a two-part post regarding sex addiction. This part will focus on the phenomenon of sex addiction, its presentation in men and women and how it influences/is influenced by societal norms. Part two will discuss terminology: whether or not the word “addiction” should be used to describe this phenomenon and discusses other terms that have been put forth by mental health professionals.

Ok so, what is sex addiction? According to Martin P. Levine and Richard R. Troiden, it is the phenomenon in which individuals “feel driven to engage frequently in nonnormative sex, often with destructive consequences for their intimate relationships (e.g. marriages) and occupational roles” (349). Diagnosed sex addicts report a sense of being unable to control their sexual behavior and fantasies and feel distress as a result. In my opinion, the phenomenon of sex addiction is another form of medicalization (See previous blog for an in-depth explanation of medicalization). Medicalization is the process in which various phenomena are perceived in the realm of the individual and as an appropriate area for medical and pharmaceutical intervention. In short, medicalization believes that any problem and solution is solely found within the individual person. I’m not a fan of medicalization because it tends give short-term (individual) solutions to long-term (societal) problems. Medicalization tends to believe that giving an individual a pill will solve all their problems without giving any consideration to the environment (societal and otherwise) the person lives in. According to Janice M. Irvine, in her article, “Reinventing Perversion: Sex Addiction and Cultural Anxieties,” many individuals label themselves as  “sex addicts” because “it has the alleged moral neutrality of disease; they feel relieved…to attribute their sexual problems to the disease of addiction” (433).  They believe the use of medical terms and medical intervention erases stigma and social judgment. However, medicine is not immune to cultural and social influences. For example, the first edition of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, published in 1952, “defined masturbation, fellatio, cunnilingus, homosexuality and sexual promiscuity as forms of mental illness” (Levine et al, 353). However, now, masturbation, oral sex and homosexuality are no longer seen as disorders. The boundaries of what is considered normal and abnormal changes within time and space. Levine agrees saying, “In any given society, sexual scripts provide the standards determining erotic control and normalcy. What one society regards as being sexually “out of control” or deviant, may or may not be viewed as such in another” (351). Medicine is just as susceptible to the changing whims of a given society as anything else. It is not immune and it is not objective, although it would love to be.

The socially constructed phenomenon of sex addiction is influenced by and strengthens sexual scripts and gender stereotypes as well as reinforces cultural anxieties about sex. Men who are diagnosed with sex addiction are said to “exhibit repetitive and extreme forms of behavior. Often they are prone to violence, or engage in fetishistic behavior” (Irvine, 446). These behaviors include “uncontrollable promiscuity, autoeroticism, transvestism, homosexuality, exhibitionism, voyeurism, fetishism, incest, child molestation and rape” (Levine et al, 349). In contrast, women who are diagnosed with sex addiction are said to engage in “frequent dangerous sexual encounters with strangers” (Levine et al, 350) in which they are either “risking victimization or using sex to feel vicariously powerful” (Irving, 446). Men are described as violent, yet powerful in a frenzied animalistic way as a result of uncontrollable lust. However, women are either helpless victims or as desperately trying to seize the power that only men have (Can anyone say Freud?). Irving declares “the concept of sex addiction is also antithetical to feminism in that it shapes ideas about ‘appropriate’ women’s sexuality into static imperatives” (449).  For something that is supposed to erase stigma, it affirms old ones: of men as animals and women as weak.

The concept of sex addiction also attacks sex as a behavior and as an identity/orientation. Many sex addiction self-help groups condemn “pornography, sex without love, and multiple partners” (Irving, 446). An individual is considered cured from their sex addiction when they are engaging in sexual behavior that is normative and condoned by mainstream society, i.e. heterosexual sex within the confines of heterosexual marriage or a committed relationship. Also individuals who participant in sexual behavior that is not considered normative (people who are polyamorous, not straight, and/or enjoy casual sex) are, by definition, labeled as disordered. It does make me wonder if the guilt and distress diagnosed sex addicts feel is, at least in part, linked to societal condemnation of their sexual behavior. Maybe if society were more accepting of non-normative sexual behaviors and fantasies, there be would be less guilt and distress?

Sex addiction is more than a term and much more than a “disease”. It is a powerful construction used to label people, to sway minds and to control the public. It individualizes societal issues and problems instead of solving them and reinforces gender stereotypes. That all being said, if someone feels that they are experiencing sexual urges that are causing them distress and impairs their daily functioning, then they should go see an open-minded, sex-positive therapist. Whether it results from negative societal views of sex or an individual issue or both can hopefully be determined with therapy.