The Myth of Sex Addiction: Why It’s Time to Rethink the Narrative

"Sex addiction" is a term that gets used a lot in modern culture, often as a catch-all explanation for behaviors that fall outside societal norms. But here’s the reality: sex addiction is not recognized as a clinical diagnosis. It’s notably absent from the DSM-5, the manual mental health professionals use to diagnose psychological disorders. This exclusion isn’t an oversight—it reflects a lack of scientific evidence to support "sex addiction" as a legitimate medical condition.

What’s often referred to as sex addiction might better be understood as compulsive sexual behavior or unresolved emotional and psychological issues manifesting through sexual expression. And recent research challenges the entire framework of labeling such behavior as an addiction.

Take the groundbreaking UCLA study, for example. Researchers set out to explore whether the brain responds to sexual imagery in the same way it does to substances like drugs or alcohol in cases of addiction. Participants who self-identified as "sex addicts" were shown sexually explicit content while their brain activity was measured. What the study found was surprising: their neural responses didn’t align with patterns typically seen in addiction. Instead, their reactions were more consistent with heightened sexual interest, not a compulsive, addictive response. The bottom line was that the sexual desires were based on peoples libidos, and not addiction. And people libidos (like mine) are different.

This distinction is critical. Unlike substance addiction—where the brain's reward pathways are hijacked and rewired—sexual behavior does not exhibit the same neurobiological markers. The "addiction" label, in this context, oversimplifies a complex interplay of psychological, emotional, and cultural factors.

So, why does this matter? Framing sexual behavior as an addiction often reinforces shame and stigmatization, especially for those who are already struggling with guilt, anxiety, or trauma related to their sexuality. This misdiagnosis can prevent people from receiving appropriate support, steering them toward programs designed for addiction rather than therapy that addresses the root causes of their behaviors.

It’s important to recognize that compulsive behaviors around sex may stem from unresolved trauma, unmet emotional needs, or cultural programming that shames healthy sexual expression. Pathologizing these behaviors as an addiction risks deepening the very wounds that need healing.

This isn’t to dismiss harmful behaviors or the impact they can have. If sexual behavior is causing distress or harm, it needs to be addressed—but the solution lies in exploring the underlying causes, not attaching an inaccurate label.

As professionals and as a society, it’s time to move beyond reductive labels and engage in nuanced conversations about sexuality and mental health. It’s time to focus on healing, education, and reframing our understanding of what it means to be human, free from shame and misdiagnosis.

The UCLA study was a wake-up call—challenging us to think critically about how we understand and approach sexuality. Let’s honor that challenge by addressing the complexities of human behavior with the depth they deserve.