Difference or dysfunction?: Deconstructing desire in the DSM-5 diagnosis of Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder

Abstract

This article answers ongoing calls within critical sexuality scholarship to explore how constructions of women’s bodies influence and are influenced by broader sociocultural contexts. Specifically, this article offers a conceptual analysis of female sexual desire, highlighting the deeply political nature of its pathologization. We briefly explore dominant definitions and models of sexual desire to highlight the erasure of embodied desire as an important part of healthy female sexuality. The DSM-5 diagnosis of Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder is critically analyzed to highlight how desire differences are framed as gendered, individual problems which sidelines relational, contextual, and sociopolitical factors contributing to individual distress. When the language of desire is displaced by the language of interest (particularly when framed as receptivity), the capacity to theorize wanting and entitlement is undermined. We argue that the pathologization of diverse desires obscures possibilities for embodied wanting and neglects the consideration that all types of desire (absent, frequent, physical, emotional) may represent normal sexual variations.

Psychological Perceptions of Women with Sexual Arousal Disorder: A Qualitative Study in Iranian Culture

“…Community health centers are healthcare sectors in Iran's healthcare system that provide primary care and public health services. These centers provide services in the area of physical, mental, and sexual care for women by midwives through the electronic health system and refer patients with sexual disorders by screening questions to the psychologist, who interview them based on DSM-5 criteria ( 5 ) for sexual interest/ arousal disorder. Inclusion criteria in this study were women aged 25 to 42 years old, Women who were enrolled in the Integrated Health System (SIB) according to the Women's Health Screening Checklist and referred to a psychologist for further examination, women who were early psychologically interviewed (by a psychologist) for having high Mindfulness and Self-Awareness.…”

“…Many women find it difficult to differentiate between the two states. Sexual arousal is a mental experience as well as a physiological condition ( 5 ). According to a systematic review conducted in Iran, 48 % of the general population suffers from sexual dysfunction ( 6 ).…”

From ignorance to knowledge: Sexual consent and queer stories

“…Within this discussion of sexual consent (willingness to have sex), it is important to unpack the boundaries and limits between being willing to have sex and wanting to have sex. Wanting is typically associated with desire; however, desire (like willingness) is multidimensional (Thomas & Gurevich, 2021). People can consent to sex they do not want.…”

“…Recent law and policy changes have focused on shifting the definition of sexual consent toward an affirmative model that requires partners to express willingness to participate in sexual activity (Duncan, 2014). Willingness is a concept distinct from wanting or desiring sex (Thomas & Gurevich, 2021). Although consent (willingness) and desire (more closely associated with wanting) are often conflated, willingness can happen in the absence of feelings of desire or wanting.…”

Book Review: Diagnosing desire: Biopolitics and femininity into the twenty-first century by Alyson K. Spurgas

“…Thomas and Gurevich (2021) critique the diagnostic criteria in the DSM-5 around female sexual interest/arousal disorder—their conclusory statement affirming Spurgas’s argument: desire is framed to be gendered and individualized within such criteria (i.e., DSM) and, as such, it ignores the contributing relational and sociopolitical factors, rendering an individual to be pathologized (Thomas & Gurevich, 2021). Thomas and Gurevich (2021) further illuminate the development of desire through “complex decision-making processes,” which Spurgas would describe as (re)negotiations of power and an array of socialization processes.…”