It’s true. Or so says the completely unscientific but -- according to the New York Times -- expert opinion of SexHelp.com. I’m outing myself by displaying my test results on this very page. It’s small so you might not see that I’m a “10” on the sex addict scale. I was pleased to see that I beat out fellow sex addict Dr. Petra Boynton (she’s only a 9, but she’s British).

As you’ve probably read of late Petra and I are in good company. Yesterday actor David Duchovny left his sex addiction rehab program, presumably bolstered after an intense few weeks of being told to masturbate less, stop fantasizing about sex, only have sex when he feels an emotional connection with his partner, and for goodness sake, don’t use sex to make yourself feel good or express something about your identity (also no sex toys, sex outdoors, BDSM, etc… etc…).

So why am I sharing such a personal fact with so many people I barely know? Well it’s not an elaborate ploy to get more dates and feed my addiction. It’s more of a response to the sex addiction literature I’ve been reading and the absolutely shameful news coverage of the two most recent sex addiction media events (first Duchovny, then the anal-bead-heralded movie premiere of Choke).

Blogs aren’t always conducive to elaborate arguments, so if you’re interested in a reading why everything you know about sex addiction is wrong, there’s lots to sink your teeth into. Here let’s just take two examples.

First up this quote from a CNN.com story published following Duchovny’s disclosure that he was seeking counseling for his “sex addiction”:

'We're seeing it with epidemic proportions now, particularly with regards to cybersex,' said Mark Schwartz, psychologist and former director of the Masters and Johnson Institute in St. Louis, Missouri. 'There isn't a week that goes by where I don't get two calls' about sex addiction.

A St. Louis psychologist who was affiliated with a sex therapy institute receiving two calls a week is hardly an epidemic (and even according to some of the sex addiction people the numbers haven’t changed from what they claim are the 6-10% of Americans who are sex addicts). And any clinician who makes broad social statements based not even on their clinical experience but the anecdotal evidence of their phone records really needs to brush up on their ethical obligations as a mental health professional.

Next up is this gem from a peer reviewed journal article written for nurses about women and sex addiction:

Addiction in women is a growing problem in the United States and is recognized as a very serious disease. Today researchers are able to document the neurochemistry of addiction in the brain. It has been found that sexual activity can create a “high” equal to that of crack cocaine.

Sounds pretty scary. The problem is that it is an inaccurate description of the actual research and it takes that mistake and further confuses it with a leap in logic. It’s true that some studies show that brain activity (although not neurochemistry as suggested in the quote) is present in similar areas during cocaine craving and orgasm. But this in no way means that the experiences are equal.

So what have most of the major news organizations done when called to report on a concept that still hasn't been accepted into either of the bibles of world mental health professionals? Well they go right to the people who invented the term; the sex addiction and recovery industry. Turning to “sex addiction counselors” as experts on human sexuality is like turning to the Ministry of Truth for an expert opinion on where we came from. Without agreement from mental health professionals, without a solid basis of evidence-based research, and in many cases without a grasp of sexological research the sex addiction industry has established itself as a necessary body to treat an illness that only they agree exists.

This is not to say that there aren’t people who struggle with out of control sexual behaviors. People lose relationships, families, jobs, and more because they feel like they can’t control a particular behavior. The problem is not that the sex addiction industry is making up the pain, the problem is that by mixing morality and ambiguity into their theory they actually reduce their chances of helping people in pain deal with their problematic behaviors. Quick fixes are great for selling books and winning elections. But they leave most of us regular folks high and dry in the end.

And so I’ve decided to come out as a sex addict. I seem to be coping fine. I work three jobs, I volunteer my time with several organizations, and if I weren’t Jewish I’m sure I’d go to church with some regularity. I even occasionally see my family (never as much as they like, but I blame that on the addiction). Sure I need help, and I never hesitate to avail myself of mental health services when in need. But I hope I can set an example that it is possible to be labeled a sex addict by a website and still be doing okay. Maybe I should make t-shirts.

**I hesitated before giving this post the title I gave it. I think there’s a tendency among those who don’t agree with the sex addiction model to make fun of the people who get labeled or label themselves as sex addicts. These people may be in genuine crisis and instead of getting the support they need they're being led up the garden path (either by people who know better or should know better). I didn’t want to increase their pain by seeming to make fun of them. But in the end, after reviewing the “research” the terminology is so ludicrous that I felt I had no choice. Plus I bet there isn’t a group that Petra Boynton belongs to that I wouldn’t be proud to join.