MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2334340081 · doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12426

Cacchioni, T.Big Pharma, Women, and the Labour of Love. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 2015. 184pp. $50 ISBN‐10 1442611375 (hbk) $21.95 ISBN 13: 978‐1442611375 (pbk) $21.95 ISBN 978–1‐4426–1137–5 (ebk)

2016· article· en· W2334340081 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elham Amini

Notice bibliographique

RevueSociology of Health & Illness · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
ThématiquePharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHuman sexualityGender studiesSociologyPillSexual dysfunctionNarrativePsychologyMedicinePsychiatryNursing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In the summer of 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finally approved female Viagra (the pink pill) as a ‘fix’ for female ‘sexual dysfunction’. This decision was made after rejecting the drug twice due to its limited effectiveness as a sex ‘corrector’ drug. Should we consider this drug as a sexual enhancer for women and a solution to women's ‘sexual problems’? Does the drug offer women a sense of choice and equality and what does this mean for how we understand women's sexual experiences? Although Big Pharma, Women and the Labour of Love was published before the FDA's final approval, it is a key reference for responding to the above questions. Cacchioni's important book sits at the intersection of medical sociology and the sociology of sexualities. It explores diagnostic procedures of female sexual dysfunction, the medicalisation of women's sexual problems, and the influence of pharmaceutical companies in this process. Using empirical data, Cacchioni examines the impact of pharmaceutical companies on women's sexual expectations and norms, exploring how women's sexual problems are constructed in the sexual pharmaceutical era when a woman's voice has rarely been heard. The vivid narratives illustrate women's understanding of their sexual problems and the strategies they use to address them in their everyday lives. Moreover, by conducting in-depth interviews with the practitioners who treat these women, and attending sex-related community events for women experiencing sexual pain, Cacchioni explores the ways that medical and sexual experts maintain a heteronormative definition of sexual desire. By connecting feminist and sociological arguments on sex and medicalisation with an analysis of heteronormativity, Cacchioni challenges the pervasiveness of the medicalisation of heterosexuality which constructs norms that remain relatively unachievable without the use of drugs. The book is organised into six chapters and an epilogue. Chapter 1 chronicles the making of a sexual enhancement drug which involves oversimplifying our understanding of human sexuality. Drug companies first ‘make the illness’ and then manufacture and commercialise their products to fix the problem. Chapter 2 develops this discussion by concentrating on the treatment of women who experience sexual pain as an example of validating penetrative sex, even if the women themselves are not willing in this act. In this chapter, Cacchioni unfolds a nuanced and critical evaluation of medical experts’ strategies (medicalisation, demedicalisation, and do it yourself) for sexual pain treatment. In Chapter 3, Cacchioni challenges the definition of normal and successful heterosexuality and elaborates on how it can restrict women's experience of sexual pleasure. Chapters 4 and 5 make wider claims on the commodification, liberalisation, and medicalisation of sexual relationships which, by creating gold standards for sexual pleasure and desire, make pleasurable sex complicated for women. These two chapters develop the literature on ‘sex work,’ tailoring women's sexual response to fit sexual norms, and Cacchioni identifies three types of sex work in this respect: ‘discipline work,’ performance work and ‘avoidance work.’ Discipline work intends to change a woman's mental and physical sexual response by strategies such as sex therapy and taking medicine. Women, also, may engage in performance work by faking orgasm and avoidance work by practicing sexual avoidance strategies. Chapter 4 analyses the accounts of participants who actively tried to achieve the gold standard of heteronormativity and Chapter 5 explores the ways in which some participants challenged these standards. In her final chapter, Cacchioni makes a case for critically considering the relationship and connections between medicalisation and heteronormativity. Throughout this book, Cacchioni challenges the dominant theory that sees ‘hypoactive sexual desire disorder’ as a derivative of biomedicine. Instead, she tries to relate female sex and sexual responses to broader sociocultural conditions and changes in the pharmaceutical-related sex era. She scrutinises the ways that drug companies try to gain support - such as funding certain research projects, using social media, and creating their own clinics - in order to create a market of women who identify themselves as having hypoactive sexual desire disorder. Cacchioni's analyses are carefully nuanced, tending to emphasise the complexity of sexuality while connecting with frequently opposed domains. Cacchioni was among the activists who campaigned against the approval of the drug. Therefore, her knowledge of the field and impressive documentation contributes to the development of a sophisticated understanding of the growth of pharma-sex and its critiques. As a feminist sociologist, she argues that cultural expectations of sexual desire, pleasurable sex, and heterosexuality have a critical impact on women's experience of sex. Cacchioni insightfully characterises this as the paradox of the post-feminist age and highlights the importance of exploring women's lived experience in order to understand sexual pleasure from their point of view. In sum, Cacchioni's book is an interesting and engaging read for sociologists, medical practitioners, sexologists and women who identify themselves with sexual problems.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,221
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,439

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,004
Communication savante0,0060,007
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0670,022

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,136
Tête enseignante GPT0,439
Écart entre enseignants0,303 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSociology of Health & IllnessMême sujetPharmaceutical industry and healthcareTravaux en français237 207