New Research Suggests G-Spot Doesn't Exist

krou writes to tell us that according to a new study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, a team from King's College London has found no evidence to suggest that the G-Spot actually exists, and they believe it may be a myth encouraged by magazines and sex therapists. The study performed is the largest of its kind, including some 1,800 women, and still was unable to find meaningful proof. Of course, the studies were probably all led by men, who everyone knows can't find the G-Spot anyway.

Comments

Vaginas on /.

[sopssa]

And the crowd goes wild..

On a more serious note, why do you have to make it so technical? Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others. If girls say that specific area pleasures them more, you don't have to make tons of researches about it. You can just believe it. And like with everything else sexual, it can difference between people.

If you are coming (as a man, and as a hint for slashdot's girls), stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful. It's even possible to come just by stimulating that area, without touching your dick (I've done it). That is actually what's called men "g-spot", while technically its deeper in your ass, but you can stimulate it somewhat from under your balls too. If you're not up for gay sex, you can of course ask your girl to put a finger in your ass and try to stimulate it from there.

Also why not just experience? Girls tend to let you know what feels good, in a way or another. Or just ask her if she has spotted it and help you stimulate it. It will be slighty different with every girl, because everyones body and sexuality is slighty different.

If there's one area in your life thats not all technical and about science, let it be sex, and just have fun.

Re:Vaginas on /.

[Anonymous Coward]

    I have to post AC on this one..

    Here's a map for those who don't know. :)

    TFA is a piece of crap story. It's very small on some women, but I've always managed to find it. Any women who haven't had it explored, drop me a line. :)

    It does exist on both men and women. It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside.

    On women from inside, touching towards the abdomen, you will feel a spongy area. Just up (towards her head) from there is it. It's not in exactly the same place on everyone, but it's there. Every woman is a bit different on how manipulating it feels best for them too. Experiment, and learn what your lover is telling you.

    You can manipulate it from outside too. Basically, pressure on the abdomen, just above the pubic bone, curling your fingers down (towards her feet) slightly.

    The combination of those will drive her wild. With enough practice, you can hit it right off every time. After a few demonstrations, even the threat of it can drive her to an orgasm. :) The combination works much better on skinny women. The external stimulus simply doesn't work well through layers of fat. (no offense to large women, just the facts)

    The g-spot can be reached from the rectum also, but there is more stuff in the way. Some women like it that way though.

    As for fingers in my rectum.. Well.. I'd prefer that be left alone. I'm perfectly content having orgasms without anything in my ass.

Re:Vaginas on /.

[Rei]

This study is yet another piece of controversy on the topic. There have been peer-reviewed studies that have gone both ways on the issue.

Probably the main complicating factor is that the G-spot is about stimulating skene's/paraurethral gland(s), aka, the "female prostate". What develops into the prostate in men develops into this in women. Our bodies are homologous; we develop from the same immature organs, just to different degrees, shapes, sizes, etc. The secretions from it match those of seminal fluid quite closely.

Just like the prostate can be stimulated in men, so can the female prostate. The problem is that while it's smaller in women, it varies dramatically in size, and can even have degenerated so much that it's outright missing. So right off the bat, you have a huge selection bias problem that you need to neutralize in your studies. A woman with a missing female prostate may well have less stimulation by focusing on that one area, leading to the opposite effect in your study and canceling out positive results.

Re:K, what? Bad Methodology

[b4dc0d3r]

The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot. If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one.

So this study is about whether identical twins both self-report the same data. It's possibly a badly executed study on genetics, but it certainly does not study what the headline says.

In a different study, the spot was found during physical examination, and reportedly can be increased in size through vigorous stimulation. I know, citation needed, but I remember facts better than URLs.

"This is by far the biggest study ever carried out and shows fairly conclusively that the idea of a G-spot is subjective."

No, the idea of whether you have one is subjective. Whether you actually have one should be as subjective as whether you have a femur.

Dr Petra Boynton, a sexual psychologist at University College London, said: "It's fine to go looking for the G-spot but do not worry if you don't find it. It should not be the only focus. Everyone is different."

Sounds reasonable...

Recently Italian scientists claimed they could locate the G-spot using ultrasound scans. They said they had found an area of thicker tissue among the women reporting orgasms.

Sounds like actual evidence...

But specialists warned there could be other reasons for this difference.

Sounds speculative.

Re:My Wife Thinks it Exists

[EatHam]

She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is

Yes she did.

Re:K, what?

[t0p]

When I was schooled on the G-Spot by a former girlfriend, she said it was an area on the front wall of the vagina. I could certainly feel the slight swelling that she guided me to. I stimulated it by performing doggy-style or by lifting her legs and thrusting upwards. There was certainly something there that she enjoyed having stimulated. Other women also enjoyed it. But some others didn't experience the same sensations. So maybe it isn't real. But who cares? If some women think it's there and enjoy its stimulation, then it's real enough for them. Which is the important thing.

Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks

[Z00L00K]

Anything that makes sex enjoyable... Oh how wrong that could get!

Anyway - stimulation is more than one single spot, it's a full body experience. And every person is different, and it's an adventure to find the right spots.

Re:I'm confused

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was "I put on my robe and wizard hat."

orignal url

[cinnamon colbert]

here http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123232355/abstract
abstract of article

Genetic and Environmental Influences on self-reported G-Spots in Women: A Twin Study
Andrea Virginia Burri, MSc, Lynn Cherkas, PhD, and Timothy D. Spector, MD
Department of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, London, UK
Correspondence to Andrea Burri, MSc, Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 EH7, UK. Tel: 00447943802987; Fax: 004402071886718; E-mail: andrea.burri@kcl.ac.uk, tim.spector@kcl.ac.uk
Copyright © 2009 International Society for Sexual Medicine
KEYWORDS
G-Spot Twin Study Genetics Heritability
ABSTRACT

Introduction. There is an ongoing debate around the existence of the G-spot—an allegedly highly sensitive area on the anterior wall of the human vagina. The existence of the G-spot seems to be widely accepted among women, despite the failure of numerous behavioral, anatomical, and biochemical studies to prove its existence. Heritability has been demonstrated in all other genuine anatomical traits studied so far.

Aim. To investigate whether the self-reported G-spot has an underlying genetic basis.

Methods. 1804 unselected female twins aged 22–83 completed a questionnaire that included questions about female sexuality and asked about the presence or absence of a G-spot. The relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors to variation in the reported existence of a G-spot was assessed using a variance components model fitting approach.

Main Outcome Measures. Genetic variance component analysis of self-reported G-spot.

Results. We found 56% of women reported having a G-spot. The prevalence decreased with age. Variance component analyses revealed that variation in G-spot reported frequency is almost entirely a result of individual experiences and random measurement error (>89%) with no detectable genetic influence. Correlations with associated general sexual behavior, relationship satisfaction, and attitudes toward sexuality suggest that the self-reported G-spot is to be a secondary pseudo-phenomenon.

Conclusions. To our knowledge, this is the largest study investigating the prevalence of the G-spot and the first one to explore an underlying genetic basis. A possible explanation for the lack of heritability may be that women differ in their ability to detect their own (true) G-spots. However, we postulate that the reason for the lack of genetic variation—in contrast to other anatomical and physiological traits studied—is that there is no physiological or physical basis for the G-spot. Burri AV, Cherkas L, and Spector TD. Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported G-spots in women: A twin study. J Sex Med **;**:**–**.

Re:K, what?

[adamchou]

one of several significant stimulus points

There are actually quite a few. For those that don't know them, here's a good list of the 4 I've learned of