Talk:Hypoactive sexual desire disorder

Sexual Aversion Disorder
Redirects here but no where in the article does it mention sexual aversion. I think something is fishy here(Drn8 (talk) 15:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC))

The article does discuss sexual aversion disorder. It is discussed in the last paragraph of the section on "history." The reason that Sexual Aversion Disorder redirects to this article is because the main article, until a massive revision in summer 2008 was called Inhibited Sexual Desire (a name that has been out-of-date since 1988). This was the name of a diagnosis in DSM-III (1980). In DSM-III-R (1988), it was subdivided and renamed so that there was now "Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder" and "Sexual Aversion Disorder." Sexual Aversion Disorder is a controversial diagnosis that isn't frequently used, and isn't frequently studied. This is probably why no one has bothered to write an article on the subject. It may be appropriate to make a separate page for that diagnosis and to make it a stub.

In the major edit (largely done by myself) in summer 2008, I strove to make the article as factually accurate (and well cited, unlike the previous version which did not have even a single citation) and neutral as possible. Could you please give justification for the dispute of neutrality and of factual accuracy? The only justification you have given so far is a factually false claim that the article doesn't mention sexual aversion.Freunlaven47 (talk) 04:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

My mistake (Drn8 (talk) 19:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC))

Reverted a series of edits
A series of edits was made to the article, presumably to clean up the language and shorten the introduction. However, this was done at the expense of neutrality. This diagnosis is a controversial one for a number of reasons (see criticisms section), and the new version presents the diagnosis as though it is simply FACT. Edits have been reverted to maintain the article's previously more neutral state. Freunlaven47 (talk) 01:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Needs Serious Changes
To begin with, the article had no citations. It got most of its information from a single webpage which I doubt is very reliable. For example, the title of the article is "Inhibited Sexual Desire." This is the name that was given to to the diagnosis in the DSM-III (1980), but was changed to "Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder" in the DSM-III-R which was published in 1987 (so the name of the diagnosis is out of date by over 20 years. One wonders about the rest of its information.)  I have basically deleted the entire article because it was based on unreliable information and lacked citations. So far I have re-written the introduction and written a section on the history of the diagnosis and provided citations for both sections. It still needs sections on causes, treatment, and criticisms of the currdent nomenclature in the DSM (but of course, these need to be based on reliable sources and have adequate citations.) Freunlaven47  —Preceding comment was added at 22:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Merging or Linking
"There are several good reasons to merge a page:

There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject. There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability. If a page is very short and cannot or should not be expanded terribly much, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it.” []

I don’t see that arousal and desire are the same thing at all, more especially in men anyway (excuse me, I dont understand women, let alone their sexuality). Desire arises in the mind, while arousal is a physiological response. This distinction should be made clearer in the articles. And links used between the topics instead of merging. Desire disorders are psychological while arousal disorders are physical (e.g. erectile dysfunction disorder). The treatment for desire disorders is often psychotherapy or couples therapy. One would treat arousal disorders with medical treatments.


 * I haven't read anything more confusing in a while. You suggest several reasons why the two should be merged, and then go on to explain how you think that arousal and desire are not the same thing? Are there different people talking here? What's happening? Sign your comments with FOUR TILDES.Yeago 19:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The above seems to be flames. I'll explain it for you from my male perspective. Desire is when I feel like I would like to engage in sexual activity or be romantically involved with a partner. Arousal is when my physiological state changes in preperation for sex i.e. erection, increased heart rate etc. I don't get an erection every time I desire someone, I'm not physically aroused. (Drn8 (talk) 14:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC))

**
Parts of this page appear to more or less plagarize http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001952.htm

While this text is in the public domain, so this is legal, I think it may be fair to give credit in some way, shape, or form (other than the link at the bottom as further reference), assuming this is where the text came from.

Good call. It looks like entire sections of this article were taken from the NIH website. Although it is good information, it is somewhat unacceptable to simply copy and paste from other websites into the encyclopedia simply because the information is there; just because it is in the public domain doesn't mean we can just take it. I don't know much about copyright law, but as I understand it the purpose of the GFDL is to make the encyclopedia copyleft, so it is simply unacceptable to take copyrighted information and just insert it here as though it were free information. "'Content must not violate any copyright and must be based on verifiable sources. By editing here, you agree to license your contributions under the GFDL.'" Unless someone seriously edits this article soon, I suggest that perhaps it be removed entirely and written from scratch out of respect for the NIH article. Actions like this illigitimize the rest of the original work posted on the wikipedia, and are also disrespectful to the authors of the work being plagiarized. The NIH piece is an excellent article though, and could certainly be used as a template and/or primary citation.Shaggorama 05:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Although I admire the effort you put into this argument, there is no violation of any Wikipedia policy or copyright law. Public domain, by definition, has no recognizable "author" since it equally belongs to everyone. This is also the reason why it cannot be plagiarism. Please refer to Public domain resources on Wikipedia's policy of pulling in content from public domain sources. Thanks for your care in making Wikipedia a more reliable information resource. Davodd 06:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Someone should re-write this page including some other sources, because it is an important topic. Also, it seems to exclude the possibility that someone might have sexual desire yet feel aversion to actually engaging in sex, due to many factors:  a distaste for sex on a moral level, anxiety over one's body, anxiety about physical contact, moral dilemmas, abuse, as well as other causes that are mentioned. The text only seems to mention people without any desire, but ignores those who have desire but consiously or unconsiously (or both) repress their desires. Akseli 12:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

The article also mostly covers individuals in relationships. -Acjelen 07:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

the article implies that ISD occurs only among people who are part of a romantic couple. should the diagnosis not also apply to individuals who are single and have no desire to be part of a romantic (and sexually intimate) couple?

There isn't a single citation in this article
It's quite long, but for all we know completely made up. --Pipedreambomb 01:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We ought to delete it and stalk and kill everyone who added to it, the bastards.Yeago 13:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Most everyting marked 'citation needed' is simply copied, word for word, from the NIH site. Until this article is expanded, though, referencing those lines seems futile. Tofof 22:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Is lack of sexual interest really a disorder?
That's what I ask, I was told asexuality was just as normal and healthy, if not healthier, than any other type of sexuality. Becuase sexuals yearn for a mate and crave sexual activity whilst asexuals are more likely to find a mate that lasts them their life.
 * It's a disorder if it's causing problems in the person's life. There's nothing wrong with having no interest in sex if, for instance, you are a Catholic priest or nun, or if you are in a relationship with someone who is also asexual.  On the other hand, it would be a problem if you wanted to enjoy sex but just couldn't bring yourself to do it.
 * And what's this about people with sexual interest "yearning" and "craving?" Do you have anything even resembling data to show that sexual desire is unhealthy, or that asexuals have better or longer-lasting romantic relationships, as you claim?  --Psychojosh13 (talk) 16:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * more than 2500 years ago it was proposed that sensual craving (Taṇhā) was a cause of suffering.--Bodigami (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

There is disagreement over the subject of whether not being interested in sex should be considered a disorder. At present, it is only considered a disorder if the person (or their partner?) is distressed about it, but there are plenty of people who disagree with considering not being interested in sex a disorder. Freunlaven47 (talk) 17:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

"Situational" HSDD is a joke, right?
No longer being sexually interested in one's current partner is NOT A DISORDER. It's just some bored guy trying to con his wife into letting him cheat. EAE (Holla!) 10:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Whatever you might personally think, if the situation is causing a problem in the relationship between two people then it is a problem that should be looked at, not ignored. That is why the article says that it is a disorder. And by the way, being told, as a man, that wanting more sex than your partner is greedy or unnatural is just as demeaning and upsetting as a woman being told that she is not sexually active enough. It is a problem that both partners should face together. In the instance you describe you are referring to a change towards less frequent desire in the female rather than a change toward increase in the male (else it'd be called hyperactive sexual disorder and refer to the male). The fact that you think that a sexually unsatisfied guy is simply 'bored' is insulting. Note also that the article frequently refers to men with HSDD. PsychicTeeth (talk) 09:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Occurrence?
How often does HDSS occur? And does it occur in both men and women, or in women only ("no darling, I've got headache")? Steinbach (talk) 10:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

HSDD solutions without drugs
The Physician's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual proposed edition covers the subjects of HSDD, as well as, Female Sexual Arousal Disorder (FSAD) and Erectile Dysfunction (ED). Prescriptions and various substance remedies will alter the homeostatic balance of the body and may cause serious side effects. This does not have to be the case for people who wish to address these conditions safely and enjoy the normal human function of orgasm. Milan Polovich MD discusses treatments that are potentially dangerous and alternatively suggests a safe, economical modality as a solution. PLEASE WIKI-LINK to the non-explicit, informational website, ORGASMAXX.COM. This simple HTML/CSS website is authored by, Milan Polovich MD. The site has no RSS/plug-ins or social networking. It has no Rich media files, re-direction, or copywright infringement. 24.234.238.5 (talk) 23:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

where is the 2013 info re DSM
now that epigenetic tagging is linked to homosexuality, there should be more serious info. 68.188.203.251 (talk) 17:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you provide a reliable source, I'll see what I can do!  Lova Falk     talk   09:37, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Can someone rewrite/organize this a bit?
I understand that this is a technical article but it is really unreadable. This would be improved if the text wasn't composed of HUGE blocks of text upon text and if paragraphs were broken down to a more reasonable size (say 4-6 sentences).

This is not a matter of "dumbing" anything down, it's making the article look less like an intimidating psychology or medical textbook and make it reader-friendly. This can be done simply by incorporating more white space and making cutting back on unnecessary jargony sections. Like all Wikipedia articles, this should be a comprehensive article that is easily understood by a nonspecialist. It should be written with a clarity so that someone without a psychology background can understand it.

Any takers? 69.125.134.86 (talk) 17:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Redirect
Can we have a redirect, Sexual desire disorder? -- Anton Talk  06:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hypoactive sexual desire disorder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081002184826/http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/publications/PDF/PrauseGraham.pdf to http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/publications/PDF/PrauseGraham.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:14, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

low libido
Flyer22 Reborn: You reverted my edit linking to hypoactive sexual desire disorder from the article Trans woman, stating that it does not necessarily equate to "low libido". That is fine. I didn't actually read the article for hypoactive sexual desire disorder, but I linked to that because "low libido", which I was originally going to link to, redirects to hypoactive sexual desire disorder, so I assumed that the two were synonymous. If they are not synonymous then perhaps that redirect should be changed? Does anyone know how "low libido" came to redirect to this article in the first place? Perhaps there is another article that "low libido" would more appropriately redirect to? Vontheri (talk) 14:28, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll redirect it to the Libido article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:47, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

"Lack or loss of sexual desire" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lack or loss of sexual desire. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)