WELL, well. It's the talk of the Internet. Let's see how badly men want Viagra now that one of its possible side effects is death during or following sex. Now, how does that tasteless joke go, something about going after coming? Sexist doubletalk on
the miracle of ViagraOK, OK. Sorry about that. Yes, this is a serious subject, but isn't it funny how society accepts and propagates the glaring double standards of sexuality, especially when it comes to making guys more studly, macho and prolific?
You've got to admit, all this hoopla over a prescription drug that apparently cures impotence is a bit much. The craziness has now encircled the globe.
For example, Japanese males with a yen for the stuff are booking expensive special "tours" to Hawaii that include an appointment with a doctor, two bottles of the precious blue pills (that's the maximum, since it's still not legal in Japan) and a flight back home.
Can you imagine if a bunch of women signed up for a junket like this? Guess what they'd be called. Here's a hint: The first letter of the word is "S" and it ends with "LUTS."
Double standard, double standard. Check out Wall Street executive Alan Greenberg, who is donating $1 million to a New York hospital to buy Viagra for impotent men who can't afford the $10-per-tablet cost. "I guess you could say I'm kind of into basics," says Greenberg. "I think it's something that will give a lot of pleasure to a lot of people."
What kind of kooky priorities are these? People are dying from cancer, AIDS, heart disease, strokes, diabetes and at the hands of drunk drivers, yet the chairman of Bear, Stearns Companies is worried about erections?
Sad, sad. Impotence and dementia both afflict the elderly, but isn't someone suffering from Alzheimer's disease more deserving of compassion and medical care than somebody who's otherwise physically fit except for some limpness in the love-making department?
If there was such great need for something like Viagra, why weren't men talking about such a major "problem" and demanding a cure before?
Let us pray that there's just as much media excitement and public interest when drug companies come out with prescription "cures" for women's problems, such as frigidity, fibroids, menstrual overflow and PMS.
Tsk, tsk. Even the Church of England is embroiled in the ballyhoo. It owns shares in Pfizer Inc., the U.S. manufacturer of Viagra, and has made a bundle on its holdings. "The Church has no problem with making money out of a drug that restores a healthy function to people who have lost it," a spokesman said.
Is that right? Does it have a problem, then, with the fact that more Viagra could possibly mean more "mistakes" such as unwanted pregnancies? Do churches still have a "problem" with a woman's right to choose her destiny?
NO, no. You might think these are the militant ramblings of a raging feminist, but they're meant to stimulate discussion on whether the world is really equitable. Doesn't it, in fact, tend to lean toward the so-called dominant gender when it comes to concern about well-being and sexual satisfaction?
Hey, hey! How about a prescription pill that enhances sensitivity and romance on the part of lovers? How about one that stimulates men to willingly do more housework or to take care of the kids without expecting a medal?
Oh, yeah. Oh, YEAH. Now you're talking.
Diane Yukihiro Chang's column runs Monday and Friday.
She can be reached by phone at 525-8607, via e-mail at
DianeChang@aol.com, or by fax at 523-7863.