Addiction is the compulsive activity and overwhelming involvement with a specific activity.  It can be a psychological dependence or physical. We all know the physical ones such as alcohol and drugs.  We deal with physical dependence, tolerance, and withdrawal.  We are all familiar with the so called cures, i.e. cold turkey, abstinence, psychological counseling or rehabilitations.  Does sexual addiction fit these parameters or definitions?  Clearly the answer is no, however, the media has now coined the term of "sexual addiction."  Does it really fit the image of a druggie doper, pot head, and chain smoker or strung out pill popper?   I suggest the inpatient disease "SEXUAL ADDICTION" is just not legitimate. It is a made up term for the celebrity obsessed media to either create sympathy for the victim, usually the wife, or as the case may be for Tiger Woods or John Edwards, for the alleged culprit themselves.  The term was created for alleged sexual misconduct of only the very wealthy married celebrities in order to sell news papers or TV time.  Think about it, have you ever heard of a poor, single, common person who has had multiple sex partners going to rehab or being diagnosed a "sex addict?" I guess those people have to take cold showers.
"Sexual addiction" is a make believe term, used to excuse celebrities and permit them to seek out a sham facility and then renter their celebrated status, now cured.  Then they can go back to their wives.    Wives, by the way, not spouses.  Because if the insatiable appetite of sexual promiscuity was in the form of a woman, she would be a nymphomaniac and would not have to go to a rehab but would actually be sought after by men, usually married men who only wished their wives would be so horny. Interestingly enough, a single non married man similarly never has to go to rehab or is smeared with the phony term of sex addict.  Rather they are the Errol Flynn's, the Don Juan's, the envy of all. This term of sexual addict seems to cover only married men who need rehab for their wives. Frankly it is a feminist term of art designed to protect the sanctity of marriage.   Because apparently it's not an addiction if are not married your just a very lucky horny bachelor. The sexual addiction is just a cover-up for religious mores and marriage.

Take for example, masturbation. Every pre teenager masturbates as much as they can get away with, even after they sometimes get married. It's considered normal by the medical and psychological profession, but certainly not to the religious sects.  Do we have masturbation clinics for excessive masturbation of teenagers or very horny adults? Are they masturbation addicts?   Of course not, they are healthy normal adults exercising a sexual release.  Do honeymooners who are up in their rooms all day and night need sex rehab clinics?   No, all they need is a few yrs of humdrum sex and then when they go outside of the marriage for sex they are called adulterers.  Of course, if they're wealthy enough to do a Tiger or Edwards they are "sex addicts."   Deep down and not discussed openly however, is that very likely, they are the envy of every full blooded sexually active male.
The difference of understanding addiction is … self indulgence versus self destructive…indulgence without destruction is not addiction.