The Ethics of Libido Manipulation
Just because we can suppress sexual desire, should we?
Posted December 3, 2016 | Reviewed by Gary Drevitch
Recent research published by star sex researcher Nicole Prause, PhD . evokes a technological future where we will be able to upregulate or down-regulate libido, using non-invasive electrical stimulation. With electrical paddles that use the technology of Trans-Cranial Magnetic Stimulation , the researchers demonstrated that they can exert external control over someone’s desire for sex. This research is preliminary, though it follows other research demonstrating that this technology may be useful for a variety of issues, including treatment of depression . But just because we can do this, should we? And what are the ethical guidelines by which we can manage our use of this technology?
Technological advances, from the invention of fire to the creation of the atomic bomb, have all prompted similar ethical quandaries. Perhaps it seems grandiose to compare this technology to issues such as these. But, consider our own history with these matters:
The female equivalent of Viagra is yet to be found. But low female libido is a huge issue, affecting countless couples around the world, where wives want to want more sex, but struggle with steadily decreasing arousal as they and their relationships age. Millions were invested in Flibanserin , a medication which only increased female desire for sex by about one time a month, and came along with serious risk of side effects.
The sex addiction treatment industry treats countless men across our country who struggle with moral, social and relational conflicts over their sexual desires and behaviors. Sex addiction treatment teaches men to approach cravings for sex as though they are cravings for drugs or alcohol , and to suppress and control these desires in similar manner. Residential treatment for sex addiction is a uniquely American issue, where programs charge as much as $1,500 a day for treatment that purports to increase their self-control in their sexual choices.
Given what new technology may offer us, will a husband now ask his wife if she wants to “put on her bonnet tonight,” where electrical technology provides a means for the couple to have mutually satisfying eroticism?
Or will conservative, religious parents buy special pillows for their children, where they are able to remotely suppress their children’s desire for sex or masturbation until the child is an adult?
Many people with bipolar disorder experience serious life consequences from symptoms of hypersexuality that occur during manic phases. Should they be offered this technology as a prophylactic means to engage in harm reduction ?
What about the many elderly men and women in nursing homes? Where masturbation and sexual behaviors are often forbidden? Hypersexuality is sometimes a side effect of treatment for Parkinson’s disorder, and disorganized sexual behavior a symptom of Alzheimer’s Disorder and many other mental health conditions.
There is tremendous potential from this technology, both positive and negative. The only thing I can guarantee is that this technology will be used, if it is able to achieve even a tenth of its potential effect.
Similar ethical concerns exist about genetic engineering and selection or manipulation of characteristics in one’s children. But these ethical concerns have not stopped research in these areas, occurring around the world.
So, what should we do? How can we guarantee that this technology is used ethically? The key element must be that use and applications be guided by professionals informed and educated about sexual diversity and the wide range of human sexual interests and libidos. An understanding of sexual health must guide this research and development. Intrusions of sexual shame and social stigma against sexual expression must be guarded against, lest this technology be used to suppress sexuality at the convenience or interest of society, as opposed to the individual.
Informed consent must be central to any applications to externally manipulate libido and sexual desires. Use with individuals who cannot give informed consent must be regarded with as much suspicion and concern as we currently view lobotomies or forced sterilization.
Human beings hold a right to their sexuality, and to sexual pleasure. The World Health Organization defends this in their statement on sexual health . But sexual self-determination remains a central challenge in many of today’s most vociferous social debates, from abortion to bans on gay conversion therapy of LGBT teens. The ability to electrically alter sexual libido injects new potential into already existing socio-ethical quandaries. It is only through careful, thoughtful, sexually informed and transparent application that we can prevent and minimize ethical misuse of this technology, and protect sexuality as human right.
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
David J. Ley, Ph.D. , is a clinical psychologist and the author of Insatiable Wives, Women Who Stray and The Men Who Love Them .
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.