The myth of sexual compulsivity

The Myth of Sexual Compulsivity
Martin P. Levine & Richard R. Troiden
The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 347-363
Sarah E. Roe
SOC 323
Grace College
May 6, 2013

The Myth of Sexual Compulsivity
The definitions of what constitutes sexual addiction and compulsion are ambiguous at present, mental health practitioners commonly use the terms to describe a “lack of control over erotic impulses”. So defined, sex addicts or sexual compulsives are people who feel driven to engage frequently in nonnormative sex, often with destructive consequences for their intimate relationships and occupational roles.
Mental health professionals differ, however, in how they conceptualize a lack of control over erotic impulses. Some classify it as an addiction, likening it to chemical or food dependencies. In this view, loneliness, low self-esteem, and anxiety cause individuals to lose control over their sexual behavior, which poses grave threats to ongoing relationships and careers. Despite the risks, sex addicts engage in these practices because they offer temporary relief from psychic distress. This relief I described as a sexual “fix” or “high” similar to the ones obtained from illegal drugs, alcohol, or food.
Sexual addiction appears differently among men and women; male sex addicts outnumber female addicts. Among men, the addiction is thought to cause uncontrollable promiscuity, autoeroticism, transvestism, homosexuality, exhibitionism, voyeurism, fetishism, incest, child molestation, and rape. Sexual addiction in women manifests itself in “frequent dangerous sexual encounters with strangers”.
Other mental health practitioners classify a lack of sexual control as a compulsion, comparing it to other disorders of impulse control. In this view, sexual compulsion is a self or triggered by anxiety. Feelings of “anxiety, loneliness, and low self-esteem” are mislabeled as “hormones,” and trigger the search for a sexual encounter. Sexual activity temporarily reduces these anxious feelings; however, a temporary boost to self-esteem is soon replaced by guilt and remorse over the sexual activity, which rekindles the feelings of anxiety and the cycle of compulsion.
Thus at the present time, some mental health professionals diagnose people as either sexual addicts or sexual compulsives when clients are unable to control their sexuality; that is, to stop masturbating, to stop having extramarital affairs or anonymous sex, or to stop purchasing and using pornography. Individuals use similar standards for diagnosing themselves as sexual addicts or sexual compulsives.
Taking an interactionist approach to mental illness, they suggested that sexual compulsion and sexual addiction are therapeutic constructions (i.e., stigmatizing labels attached to behaviors that diverge from prevailing erotic standards). There is nothing intrinsically pathological in the conduct that is presently labeled as sexual compulsive or addictive; these behaviors have assumed pathological status only because powerful groups are beginning to define them as such. Rather than referring to actual clinical entities, the terms “sexual compulsion” or “sexual addiction” refer to learned patterns of behavior that are stigmatized, thereby suggesting that the concepts of sexual compulsion and sexual addiction are value judgments parading as therapeutic diagnoses (i.e., pseudoscientific euphemisms used to describe people who engage in non-normative sex).
The twin concepts of sexual addiction and sexual compulsion emerged in response to shifts in the wider sociosexual landscape. The health threats associated with genital herpes, hepatitis B, and AIDS, national concern about drug use, addiction, and teenage pregnancy, a renewed interest in committed relationships, and the rise of politically powerful right-wing religious groups altered the societal values surrounding non-relational sex. In response, some mental health professionals and members of sexual "self-help" groups came to regard people who engage in frequent sex, non-relational sex, or sex in "inappropriate" settings as sex addicts or sexual compulsives.
On the other hand, we do not deny the existence of people who find it difficult to manage their sexuality within the normative boundaries mandated by the wider culture. We also acknowledge that some people learn to depend on sex as a means of coping with problematic issues. Finally, we do not deny the existence of ego-dystonic sexuality, the idea that people may be highly dissatisfied with the fashion in which they manage their sexuality. However, despite these acknowledgements, we maintain that "sexual addicts" and "sexual compulsives" do not possess clinical conditions that set them apart from non-addicts and non-compulsives. They differ in external behavior rather than in internal make-up.
Sexual conduct is a learned behavior; it expresses a person's overall lifestyle. Thus the so-called sexual compulsives and addicts express and manage their sexuality in ways that violate prevailing societal expectations. Because these learned patterns of sexual conduct are an integral part of many people's lives, abandoning them and substituting new patterns is difficult. Yet all people experience problems of daily living: loneliness, guilt, shame, anxiety, and low self-esteem, various times and places. In their discomfort they seek means of reducing these unpleasant feelings. They may learn to alleviate them through work, prayer, parenting, intimate friendships, or sex, behaviors that are valued to different degrees by the wider culture. People who have learned to depend on sexual release as a means of dealing with anxiety or loneliness might be described more accurately as "sex dependents."
The invention of sexual addiction and sexual compulsion as "diseases" threatens the civil liberties of sexually variant peoples. As seen before, the definitions of sexual addiction and compulsion are highly subjective and value laden. Not surprisingly, such concepts can be (and have been) used to pathologize unconventional erotic activities. Consequently, mental health professionals must remain cautious about endorsing concepts which may serve as "billy clubs" for driving the erotically unconventional into the traditional sexual fold.