This is paraphrased from "Androgen Production and therapy in Postmenopausal Women," from the copyrighted online resource UptoDate, a very convenient reference for the medically inclined and one that the residents at Beth Isreal, for one, are addicted.
Androgens in women:
1) the biggest is androstenedione (production split between ovaries and adrenal glands)
2) testosterone (T). 99% protein bound (which reduces its activity). 1/4 from ovaries, the rest is made from androstenedione in other tissues or secreted by the adrenals.
3) lesser androgens: dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA 1/2 adrenal, 1/4 each ovaries and other) and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA-S, mainly adrenal).
Roles in women:
androgens are required for / made into estrogens, and they also are tought to affect the function of brain (mood and thinking, one study showed estrogen or estrogens/ testosterone improved mood and hinted the combination was better than just estrogen) and bone (lower values in women with vertebral fractures have been noted but women with complete androgen resistance don't have unusual bone loss), as well as libido: "a balance of estrogen and androgen also may be necessary for normal sexual desire and responsiveness" and certain women who stop making androgens complain of loss of desire that estrogens alone doesn't fully correct. "Studies on the role of androgens in sexuality in normal premenopausal women are inconclusive."
After menopause, testosterone falls primarily because tissues like fat make less of it from other hormones, because the ovarian production doesn't slow down.
Studies on the role of androgens in sexuality are conflicting. Some showed more sexual desire in women with androgen plus estrogen vs just estrogen. Other studies have NOT replicated these results with one noticing just more pleasure from masturbation rather than overall desire. Others have shown that testosterone can increase desire but doing so requires "replacing" it until levels were double the norm in premenopausal women. Also a recent study of 201 women concluded that "most aspects of female sexual function were not affected by age, menopausal functioning, or serum sex hormone concentrations."
And while androgen may help bone, "there is no strong evidence that the addition of androgen to estrogen in postmenopausal women is more beneficial than estrogen alone."
DHEA supplements did not improve symptoms in one study.
One concern over replaement is causing heart disease (since men get more of it). Evidence is "limited" at this point but some undesirable changes in cholesterol are noted. Side effects include deep voice, hairyness, acne and clitorimegaly (the latter rare).
Overall: "the data that androgen significantly improves sexual functioning, cognitive function and affect are not compelling."
The chapter concludes, "for highly selected postmenopausal women, especially those who have undergone bilateral oophorectomy, estrogen replacement alone may not be adequate therapy [and it makes sense] to offer such women androgen therapy in conjunction with estrogen therapy. [woman and doctor must realize risks and benefits are yet to be fully defined.]"
[Side Note: I have read accounts from patients one who said testosterone was distracting because every time she moved her blouse on her nipples aroused her, and multiple accounts of women feeling more sexual and free at the time of menopause without hormone replacement of any kind.
It is certainly true that the commonest female sexual complaint is lack of libido, but its important to explain how we define these terms. What it seems like to me is that normal women may have less libido than men and often it is the man and not the woman in a heterosexual relationship that perceives a problem. (If the problem is discordance, is the answer medicine? Then why not a testosterone blocker for the man as often as augmentation for the woman?)
If women have a libido on average that is less than men's, we have to be careful concluding that represents a problem. The way women are is, afterall, the way they are, that is in turn, the norm, and by definition the norm is normal, not pathologic. Their height is less than men's too, but no one is stating the obvious parallel that the commonest female body complaint is lack of height, and that's because society is telling women that being horny is more important than being tall.
While I agree, the decision has nothing to do with biology or disease states and everything to do with cultural values. If we decide as a culture women need to be enhanced we better be damned sure who's doing the deciding (ought to make sure women are seeking said "enhancements" in an uncoerced fashion which is damned hard itself) else we end up with a council of men deciding how much sex women should want much like we've got a council of mostly men deciding what their access to abortion should be. IMNSHO.
The risk of medicalizing having less libido than MTV or a partner suggests is optimal is that normal women end up with a disease label (ever read that 85% of women have a "premenstrual mood disorder?" According to whom?). Then women with normal libidos, or reduced libidos from work stress, or because her partner is a heel or unattractive/ a sexual clutz, end up facing perjorative labels like "frigid" (about as nice as calling Bob Dole a "limpie") and getting treated for "conditions" they don't have.
Here endeth the rant, which, I should add, stems from a personal interest in the subject and a background in some bioethics, not from the post that inspired the topic.]
[This message has been edited by Ian (edited May 14, 2002).]
Testosterone
Moderator: Available
Testosterone
Interesting post, Ian.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
In my non-scientfic opinion, I think the best way to boost a woman's sex drive is to help her to feel better about herself and to spend quality time with her partner. There are so many older ladies (60+ years) who complain how much they hate their bodies and they need to loose weight. How can you feel sexy if you hate your body? How can you want to be intimate with your partner if you're stressed out from work, bills, kids, fighting, retirement, etc.
While not downplaying the importance of hormones, there is a lot to be said about dealing with a woman's mindset to increase libido.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I find this a rather intriguing statement, considering that there are some cultures that view women as having a higher libido than men and therefore need to be circumsized, guarded, or locked up. Assuming that your statement comes from studies in the western world (I'm guessing), it would be interesting to see how other cultures view female libido and how it compares.It is certainly true that the commonest female sexual complaint is lack of libido
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I agree. Look at the (no longer in use) custom of Chinese foot binding. It was the mothers who wrapped up their daughters' feet, even though it was the men who found it a turn-on. Maybe in the origins of the custom it was coerced (don't know), but it became accepted through generations as a norm.If we decide as a culture women need to be enhanced we better be damned sure who's doing the deciding (ought to make sure women are seeking said "enhancements" in an uncoerced fashion which is damned hard itself)
In my non-scientfic opinion, I think the best way to boost a woman's sex drive is to help her to feel better about herself and to spend quality time with her partner. There are so many older ladies (60+ years) who complain how much they hate their bodies and they need to loose weight. How can you feel sexy if you hate your body? How can you want to be intimate with your partner if you're stressed out from work, bills, kids, fighting, retirement, etc.
While not downplaying the importance of hormones, there is a lot to be said about dealing with a woman's mindset to increase libido.
-
Dana Sheets
- Posts: 2715
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am
Testosterone
And it goes back to mixed messages:
Graham crackers, corn flakes were developed as "plain food" that would suppress unwanted sexual urges.
Tis a pity that any culture came up with the silly idea that sex, sexuality, masturbation, copulation, and orgasm were a bad idea.
We know better.
It seems that Ian and Van are pulling from two differing sources. In this day and age, we are able to find studies on either side of most any issue that come across as valid.
Libido, the perceptions on it, who has more if it, who should have it, who is entitled to it- is really the core issue (IMHO) of the "gender wars". Sexual potence is a root and base conditioning in all animals.
Now there are some twists in the "natural order" such as bixsexual and homosexual activity -- things that don't seem to lead directly to procreation -- and as such were condemned by many a culture (and celebrated by a few as well).
But what are we really talking about here? Does "testosterone" in males or females really affect how we train? Or is it more learned social perception?
Or, as it seems to come up time and time again -- is the training for men and the training for women so different that we really don't even belong in the same schools?
Uechi is, after all, a style meant for men to use to fight other men. Why should women want to study such a style? Women don't fight each other that way and women and men don't fight together the same way men fight.
So perhaps some new "styles" are in order. The "I'm a woman defending myself against a man" ryu and "I'm a woman defending myself against a woman" ryu and "I'm a man defending myself against a man" ryu.
Are these 3 distinct styles/arts?
Graham crackers, corn flakes were developed as "plain food" that would suppress unwanted sexual urges.
Tis a pity that any culture came up with the silly idea that sex, sexuality, masturbation, copulation, and orgasm were a bad idea.
We know better.
It seems that Ian and Van are pulling from two differing sources. In this day and age, we are able to find studies on either side of most any issue that come across as valid.
Libido, the perceptions on it, who has more if it, who should have it, who is entitled to it- is really the core issue (IMHO) of the "gender wars". Sexual potence is a root and base conditioning in all animals.
Now there are some twists in the "natural order" such as bixsexual and homosexual activity -- things that don't seem to lead directly to procreation -- and as such were condemned by many a culture (and celebrated by a few as well).
But what are we really talking about here? Does "testosterone" in males or females really affect how we train? Or is it more learned social perception?
Or, as it seems to come up time and time again -- is the training for men and the training for women so different that we really don't even belong in the same schools?
Uechi is, after all, a style meant for men to use to fight other men. Why should women want to study such a style? Women don't fight each other that way and women and men don't fight together the same way men fight.
So perhaps some new "styles" are in order. The "I'm a woman defending myself against a man" ryu and "I'm a woman defending myself against a woman" ryu and "I'm a man defending myself against a man" ryu.
Are these 3 distinct styles/arts?
Testosterone
"There are some cultures that view women as having a higher libido than men and therefore need to be circumsized, guarded, or locked up."
I'm not sure that they think the women have a higher sex drive. Actually, I think it comes from plain bias against women and their sexuality. In north america, that's in the sense that women who have a lot of partners are sluts and men who have a lot of partners are studs, and the images of women we celebrate are often but not always chaste, pure, virgins etc. Just go to a high school somewhere and see how the kids treat male and female sexuality different.
In countries that have women circumsized, I think they're worried not that women have larger sex drives, but that women have any independence of their own. Enjoying sex makes sex the property of women too, and the men in these cultures don't women sharing in that. The women there are supposed to be their property, and enjoying sex makes them harder to control. Circumcision is part of a disgusting culture that enslaves women.
How's that for "cultural relativism" for someone who regularly has a PC lael pop up next to his name?
"Assuming that your statement comes from studies in the western world (I'm guessing)"
It comes from the prevalence of the disorders in the USA, and by disorders, I mean what medicine / psychiatry and the culture that underlies them have chosen to define as disorders. You picked up on my point that because of the way this is done, it's almost impossible to really know what normal and abnormal are. One can study what makes women (or men) happiest but you always happen to remember the unspoken qualifier "in this culture." You may well end up "treating" symptoms of a culture rather than a biologic malfunction because its MUCH harder to separate sexual norms from culture than it is, say, blood pressure norms from culture.
"There are so many older ladies (60+ years) who complain how much they hate their bodies and they need to loose weight. How can you feel sexy if you hate your body?"
Good example of a cultural symptom. We have really unhealthy diets and exercise habits. As a result we have a lot of unhealthy bodies here. We also have as another symptom of our wealth a lot of expendable income and a lot of people trying to market products and defining the way people ought to look and act. Our culture produces fat bodies on the couch and sexy little bodies on the TV, and lots of people on the former can't live up to the latter. Some get depressed, some flipflop and mistake skinny for fit and end up with eating disorders.
The answer in my book is healthier and more normal bodies on both couch and TV. Every now and then you spot a real person (say, with zits or a big butt) in the media but by and large capitalism isn't interested in pushing zucchini (fritos have a higher profit margin) or zitty teens (else who needs to by all the facial products?).
There's a great cartoon from Bloom County which shows a little old lady with a cup of tea watching a TV which says, "And, as we at Oil of Olay have always said, a woman isn't worth a plugged nickel unless she looks, oh, 18 or 19 years old."
I'm not sure that they think the women have a higher sex drive. Actually, I think it comes from plain bias against women and their sexuality. In north america, that's in the sense that women who have a lot of partners are sluts and men who have a lot of partners are studs, and the images of women we celebrate are often but not always chaste, pure, virgins etc. Just go to a high school somewhere and see how the kids treat male and female sexuality different.
In countries that have women circumsized, I think they're worried not that women have larger sex drives, but that women have any independence of their own. Enjoying sex makes sex the property of women too, and the men in these cultures don't women sharing in that. The women there are supposed to be their property, and enjoying sex makes them harder to control. Circumcision is part of a disgusting culture that enslaves women.
How's that for "cultural relativism" for someone who regularly has a PC lael pop up next to his name?
"Assuming that your statement comes from studies in the western world (I'm guessing)"
It comes from the prevalence of the disorders in the USA, and by disorders, I mean what medicine / psychiatry and the culture that underlies them have chosen to define as disorders. You picked up on my point that because of the way this is done, it's almost impossible to really know what normal and abnormal are. One can study what makes women (or men) happiest but you always happen to remember the unspoken qualifier "in this culture." You may well end up "treating" symptoms of a culture rather than a biologic malfunction because its MUCH harder to separate sexual norms from culture than it is, say, blood pressure norms from culture.
"There are so many older ladies (60+ years) who complain how much they hate their bodies and they need to loose weight. How can you feel sexy if you hate your body?"
Good example of a cultural symptom. We have really unhealthy diets and exercise habits. As a result we have a lot of unhealthy bodies here. We also have as another symptom of our wealth a lot of expendable income and a lot of people trying to market products and defining the way people ought to look and act. Our culture produces fat bodies on the couch and sexy little bodies on the TV, and lots of people on the former can't live up to the latter. Some get depressed, some flipflop and mistake skinny for fit and end up with eating disorders.
The answer in my book is healthier and more normal bodies on both couch and TV. Every now and then you spot a real person (say, with zits or a big butt) in the media but by and large capitalism isn't interested in pushing zucchini (fritos have a higher profit margin) or zitty teens (else who needs to by all the facial products?).
There's a great cartoon from Bloom County which shows a little old lady with a cup of tea watching a TV which says, "And, as we at Oil of Olay have always said, a woman isn't worth a plugged nickel unless she looks, oh, 18 or 19 years old."
Testosterone
"It seems that Ian and Van are pulling from two differing sources."
Van is relating the personal experiences of a doctor, and I'm relaying the opinions of another in a literature summary. That one doctor may see a certain population that colors his/her opinions, or maybe sees problems differently (where I might see an unhealthy diet, he/she might see the effectiveness of testosterone where diet is hard to change). The first doctor wasn't citing any studies, however.
"Now there are some twists in the "natural order" such as bisexual and homosexual activity -- things that don't seem to lead directly to procreation."
Lots of people who claim to have a problem with nonheterosexuals because they don't lead directly to procreation have no problem with other things and activities that don't lead directly to procreation. A partial list: masturbation, toothbrushes, football, airconditioning, the priesthood, pancakes and uechi-ryu karate. What's all the fuss about? I think: nonstandard sexual identities undermine traditional gender roles and therefore, confront sexism. (nothing to do with procreation).
"Does "testosterone" in males or females really affect how we train? Or is it more learned social perception?"
Yes. ;o)
"Or, as it seems to come up time and time again -- is the training for men and the training for women so different that we really don't even belong in the same schools?"
Um, no, but there's an obvious need for separate women's self-defense classes.
"Why should women want to study such a style?"
Because women, like men, have feet and hands and knees and elbows, and when they whack guys with them, it hurts them just as it does when men whack other men.
"Women don't fight each other that way and women and men don't fight together the same way men fight."
True, but who really squares off in karate stances anywhere in the real world? We do the seisan jump, does anyone still think that's about "fighting" in the real world?
"Are these 3 distinct styles/arts?"
You're forgetting man defending himself against a woman! Actually, these styles are taught. There are purpose-made self defense classes for women, and most martial arts originated in men fighting men. There are some with certain (I would say male to male) combative slants like Krav Maga (see thread on Bill's forum) the art of combat taught in the Israeli military.
I think there's less of a market for woman on woman self defense, although the programs set up to deal with domestic violence among lesbians, combined with general self defense for women, fall into that category.
There's been a lot of talk on the forums about men needing to defend themselves from women, but I think those in favor would say that its a mental issue primarily and that they don't need a separate kata. What the hey would be in it?
Van is relating the personal experiences of a doctor, and I'm relaying the opinions of another in a literature summary. That one doctor may see a certain population that colors his/her opinions, or maybe sees problems differently (where I might see an unhealthy diet, he/she might see the effectiveness of testosterone where diet is hard to change). The first doctor wasn't citing any studies, however.
"Now there are some twists in the "natural order" such as bisexual and homosexual activity -- things that don't seem to lead directly to procreation."
Lots of people who claim to have a problem with nonheterosexuals because they don't lead directly to procreation have no problem with other things and activities that don't lead directly to procreation. A partial list: masturbation, toothbrushes, football, airconditioning, the priesthood, pancakes and uechi-ryu karate. What's all the fuss about? I think: nonstandard sexual identities undermine traditional gender roles and therefore, confront sexism. (nothing to do with procreation).
"Does "testosterone" in males or females really affect how we train? Or is it more learned social perception?"
Yes. ;o)
"Or, as it seems to come up time and time again -- is the training for men and the training for women so different that we really don't even belong in the same schools?"
Um, no, but there's an obvious need for separate women's self-defense classes.
"Why should women want to study such a style?"
Because women, like men, have feet and hands and knees and elbows, and when they whack guys with them, it hurts them just as it does when men whack other men.
"Women don't fight each other that way and women and men don't fight together the same way men fight."
True, but who really squares off in karate stances anywhere in the real world? We do the seisan jump, does anyone still think that's about "fighting" in the real world?
"Are these 3 distinct styles/arts?"
You're forgetting man defending himself against a woman! Actually, these styles are taught. There are purpose-made self defense classes for women, and most martial arts originated in men fighting men. There are some with certain (I would say male to male) combative slants like Krav Maga (see thread on Bill's forum) the art of combat taught in the Israeli military.
I think there's less of a market for woman on woman self defense, although the programs set up to deal with domestic violence among lesbians, combined with general self defense for women, fall into that category.
There's been a lot of talk on the forums about men needing to defend themselves from women, but I think those in favor would say that its a mental issue primarily and that they don't need a separate kata. What the hey would be in it?
Testosterone
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
"Islam recognizes both men and women as having sexual drives and rights to sexual fulfillment and affirms heterosexual relations within marriage and lawful concubinage. All other sexual behavior is illicit. Whether the 7th century message of the Qur'an undermined or improved the position of women is much debated. There is more agreement that in subsequent centuries Muslim male elites, adopting the cultural practices of conquered Byzantine and Sasanian lands, construed that message to promote the segregation and seclusion of women and to reserve public and political life for men. Social segregation was legitimized in part by constructing "male" and "female" as opposites: men as rational and capable of self-control; women as emotional and lacking self-control, particularly of sexual drives. Female sexuality, if unsatisfied or uncontrolled, could result in social chaos (fitna) and social order thus required male control of women's bodies.7"
(taken from: http://www.merip.org/mer/mer206/bruce.htm )
The former was just to give you a reference as why I made my statement claiming some cultures thinking women had a higher libido.
What it all boils down to? Power struggle and control issues.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
[This message has been edited by Colleen (edited May 15, 2002).]
I don't doubt that claiming women have a higher sex drive and need to be controlled is from a bias. It's a convient excuse to have power over someone.I'm not sure that they think the women have a higher sex drive. Actually, I think it comes from plain bias against women and their sexuality.
"Islam recognizes both men and women as having sexual drives and rights to sexual fulfillment and affirms heterosexual relations within marriage and lawful concubinage. All other sexual behavior is illicit. Whether the 7th century message of the Qur'an undermined or improved the position of women is much debated. There is more agreement that in subsequent centuries Muslim male elites, adopting the cultural practices of conquered Byzantine and Sasanian lands, construed that message to promote the segregation and seclusion of women and to reserve public and political life for men. Social segregation was legitimized in part by constructing "male" and "female" as opposites: men as rational and capable of self-control; women as emotional and lacking self-control, particularly of sexual drives. Female sexuality, if unsatisfied or uncontrolled, could result in social chaos (fitna) and social order thus required male control of women's bodies.7"
(taken from: http://www.merip.org/mer/mer206/bruce.htm )
The former was just to give you a reference as why I made my statement claiming some cultures thinking women had a higher libido.
What it all boils down to? Power struggle and control issues.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Agreed!Circumcision is part of a disgusting culture that enslaves women.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
One of the reasons I won't buy beauty magazines!trying to market products and defining the way people ought to look and act.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
just to point out...homosexuality does occur in the natural order. Primates and dolphins have been observed performing homosexual acts. (although it wouldn't be homo because dolphins aren't human...) How can it be unnatural if it occurs in the natural world?some twists in the "natural order"
[This message has been edited by Colleen (edited May 15, 2002).]
-
Dana Sheets
- Posts: 2715
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am
Testosterone
A woman, properly aroused, will have no problem producing the natural lubrication needed to make intercourse enjoyable.
A woman, improperly aroused, will have lots of problems.
There are lots of reasons why a woman might not be as aroused as she thinks she is. The body does not lie.
And women need a little time. Sometimes both partners are in a hurry -- but sometimes it is better to take the time and enjoy the journey as much as the goal.
Dana
How DID we get on this topic anyway.
Oh, and another thought.
I still think that toe to toe fighting while standing is not where most women need to spend 90% of their time training. We're lighter - so it's more likely that we're going to get knocked to the ground more quickly. We need to be able to "slam elbows" from the ground. BUT we also need to be able to get to that position if we've been attacked from behind or the side. Uechi is a very toe to toe system - so a woman could feel sort of "incomplete" in her personal defense arsenal if she only trained stand up Uechi or any other "stand up" martial art.
That's what I mean by differing systems.
A woman, improperly aroused, will have lots of problems.
There are lots of reasons why a woman might not be as aroused as she thinks she is. The body does not lie.
And women need a little time. Sometimes both partners are in a hurry -- but sometimes it is better to take the time and enjoy the journey as much as the goal.
Dana
How DID we get on this topic anyway.
Oh, and another thought.
I still think that toe to toe fighting while standing is not where most women need to spend 90% of their time training. We're lighter - so it's more likely that we're going to get knocked to the ground more quickly. We need to be able to "slam elbows" from the ground. BUT we also need to be able to get to that position if we've been attacked from behind or the side. Uechi is a very toe to toe system - so a woman could feel sort of "incomplete" in her personal defense arsenal if she only trained stand up Uechi or any other "stand up" martial art.
That's what I mean by differing systems.
