Yes it’s terrible for both but women are able to move on with their lives (get married, have kids, etc) whereas men more often can’t, so it wouldn’t be surprising if a smaller proportion of women with PAS end up represented in survey than men. If no one accounts for the greater life obstacle it presents to men then they might misinterpret the greater male response as lower incidence of PAS in females. In other words, I can see high potential for this being mistaken for a primarily male problem when in actuality it isn’t.
1 Like
I can see your point @vkg1 but I wonder how helpful it is to say it. If I was a woman suffering terrible sexual symptoms that are largely unrecognised by doctors and the world of medicine, would I be more or less inclined to join a community that is predominantly male when I see members of that community saying “it’s not so bad for women”?
I might have tuned out after reading this line.
3 Likes
I agree with Greek and Dubya. It is an unfortunate post at best, vkg1.
Sex is not only about kids. It is also about passion, intimacy and fun. All this can go missing under this condition. Many men here can get „artificial“ boners with meds and could technically impregnate a woman. In fact, that is probably true for most of us, but here we are. I doubt many women can just overlook all that has gone missing, just because technically they can still have kids. You see a lot of women involved in the PSSD community.
The bigger problem with PAS patients is that they appear to be less organized than the PFS and PSSD communities.
While I understand your general point and understand that you don’t mean to belittle the suffering of women, your post could easily be understood in this way, especially looking at the first sentence. A lot of men here can still have sex, technically, but haven’t moved on.
We want to encourage more women to participate here, so let’s be More welcoming and let’s try to avoid misunderstandings.
6 Likes
Do we have similar data for post dutasteride patients that will be published?
I specifically said it’s “terrible for both men and women” so why write all this stuff about how terrible it is? It is more of a show stopper for men, because men require arousal for sex more than women do. I do hope you are able to appreciate this physical fact. As I said, the point was that we should not interpret lower female response to survey as lower incidence in females.
I was arguing that we should recognise these syndromes as just as much of a problem among women as men even if survey response from women is lower. I bet you money survey response is lower among women. It is, isn’t it? If you read my post, the whole point was that we should recognise and avoid the temptation to minimise the impact on women. I was arguing for recognition of victimisation of women.
I don’t appreciation having what I’ve written to encourage increased recognition of the impact on women being called “unfortunate”.
Results are not visible!
1 Like