G-Spot “Doesn’t Exist”

momo_velia_deviluke-nana_asta_deviluke-to-love-ru-by-ishikei.jpg

Sex researchers have concluded that the so-called G-Spot, a vaginal area of exceedingly heightened sexual sensitivity, does not in fact exist.

The Gräfenberg Spot, named for the gynecologist who postulated its existence, is said to be an especially erogenous area of the vagina which can produce powerful orgasms when stimulated during sex.

For decades, sexual literature detailing how to stimulate it has flourished in the pages of women’s magazines, but its existence has never been scientifically demonstrated.

Seeking to put the matter to rest, University of London researchers undertook the largest sexological study of the G-Spot to date, encompassing 1,800 women.

The study participants, all twins, were asked whether they considered themselves to have a G-Spot or not, on the basis that if the G-Spot did exist as a biological and genetic phenomenon, it would be more likely to occur in identical twins (who share the same genes) than in non-identical twins (who share only half their genes).

The results demonstrated identical twins were no more likely than non-identical twins to report having such a spot, suggesting the G-Spot is in fact a purely subjective phenomenon at best.

One of the authors holds forth on the subject:

“Women may argue that having a G-spot is due to diet or exercise, but in fact it is virtually impossible to find real traits.

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

Via the BBC.


    Post Comment »
    224 Comments
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Avatar of JoeLuvAnime
    Comment by JoeLuvAnime
    08:37 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    and people wonder why we are in a recession because were spending to much money on useless theorys

    Avatar of MasterYuke
    Comment by MasterYuke
    08:59 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    apparently its not a theory anymore. bummer...
    of course it could just be because they can't stimulate a woman enough.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:17 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    well, they are british....

    Comment by Schrobby
    11:57 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Now there's no more need to search... ^_^

    Avatar of Yoshii-kun
    Comment by Yoshii-kun
    12:27 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This means we no longer need cunnilingus and fingering techniques!
    Just go for the main course!
    YAY!

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:34 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Ask the French first...

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:38 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    just goes to show that scientists should be in a lab not a woman. it does exist. they are just too fucking dense to find the mother fucker, lol. it was a group of virgin scientists and they came up with this conclusion to provoke an encore of the study. thus playin' with more pussies. that is my theory.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:46 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yes, you clearly are an expert on the subject, so we should all believe your theory.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:07 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Wasn't the point that there is no physical phenomenon that makes a G-spot...it just means that it is all in her head and does not actually exist. They had to find it for the experiment...that is why they needed twins.

    Avatar of acce245
    Comment by acce245
    13:17 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Well, I would posit that if this 'g spot' were real, a photo or biopsy or autopsy should be able to find it, in much the same way a clitoris (or any other anatomical area) can be readily defined. Definitely sounds like the study had a proper double-blind and everything. Once again, this is something that is merely in the head of a woman...

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:33 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    this study is bullshit, if you can't find the G-spot in your women that just means you're not trying hard enough

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:40 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    How the hell is a poll=scientific research? This is ridiculous.

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:05 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @13:40

    Well the alternative method is a bit complicated... and sexy.

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:08 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    all I have to say is that women respond if you touch that spot, weather it's in their head or not it seems to heighten their experience.

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:08 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This is foolish. I postulate that the G-spot exists for a simple reason. The prostate exists in men, and at one time, we were all women in the womb. At some point, something that was already there had to grow into the prostate, as such, something there existed and still exists with the purpose of a pleasure zone inside the sex organs. Granted it's more complex than that, but seriously, do these people actually think...? It is a collection of nerves for god's sake, it's just different in various women. And they've got it backwards. The head plays with what level of pleasure you allow yourself to feel, not what pleasure is actually disseminated from a source. It's the same with pain and emotion.

    This whole thing sounds like complete bollocks to me.

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:06 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'l like to do a study of my own. But 1800 twins might be a bit much. How about 10 twins and 5 triplets?

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:59 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Using twins does not prove anything other than that G-spot is not genetic.

    Rwanda? women if I recall correctly from a New Scientist article all achieves female ejaculation due to traditional herbal practices which stimulates vagina when they were 13 years old that encourage some form of physical change in the vagina.

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:30 07/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    1800 twins huh... given that, we have 900 sets of twins. Half that sample will have been identical twins too.

    450 sets of identical twins.

    <3

    Avatar of Pandemonia
    Comment by Pandemonia
    04:31 07/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Whether the G spot exists or not:

    1800 twins... given that, we have 900 sets of twins. Half that sample will have been identical twins too.

    450 sets of identical twins.

    <3

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:16 07/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    nothing but a bunch of incompetent otaku must frequent these pages. anytime someone says that it is there for sure, the virgin swarms mark it negatively. they don't know cause they are too busy playing love plus or whatever the something plus game is. well i'll throw you a bone. here. check out the video on the stimulation techniques of the gspot. it did wonders for me. google it.

    "Tristan Taormino's Expert Guide To The G Spot" - Blu-ray

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:35 08/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think it's unfair to say that something doesn't exist simply because it takes shape within the confines of the human mind and subjective experience. If one's willing to say that, then you may as well say that fiction doesn't exist, or that fiat money doesn't exist. After all, these things are little more than collective hallucinations of society at large.

    Avatar of Sandalphon
    Comment by Sandalphon
    07:22 22/03/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    'unfair' to whom? to the people that believe it exists? I don't think that's the word you were looking for. Scientist have long adopted the axiom of "If it can not be measured, it does not physically exist".

    Of course, when someone is able to measure something that was previously unmeasurable, then its existence is acknowledged, but until then...

    Imagine this, someone accidentally discovers that, indubitably, "chi" does not and can not exist. Would all "chi-believers" just stop believing?

    Another example, same scenario, someone discovers that, irrefutably, the Devil and any similar entity, including God, does not and can not exist. Would all religions claiming the existence of such entities just disband?...

    Hardly.

    Comment by H-Ero
    09:34 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Sounds to me like the only thing this test told us was that the researchers have a twin fetish.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:52 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    My vag says otherwise to all this. *reaches for vibrator*

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:10 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yes all they did was ask them if they had it and not actually did tests on them. >>

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:12 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    fap fap fap

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:46 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This would probably be accurate. There have been numerous peer reviewed articles that have indicated that the G-Spot does exist and others that indicate that it does not exist. This is just one more on the controversy pile. There is some suggestion that the G-Spot is actually due to the Skene's Gland, which is known to vary greatly from woman to woman with some possessing a large one and on the extreme end, it can be missing entirely. This could explain why it is so difficult to obtain consistent results. A study should be done to isolate the effect of this gland in the perception of the G-Spot.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:33 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @10:46

    Most link it to the Skene's gland, but because the upper vaginal wall is rarely directly stimulated with direct pressure (Such as someone trying to find the G-spot) that a more intense orgasm could be achieved.

    It also supports the claim that doggy style causes more intense orgasms for the woman.

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:37 10/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @09:52

    uh, even if you believe in G-spots you should not be using a vibrator where G-spots are.

    Avatar of Sandalphon
    Comment by Sandalphon
    07:33 22/03/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    @09:52 The researchers actually concluded that if it exists, it's purely a subjective phenomenon.

    You can claim you have one, but ultimately, such spot exists on your mind and not in your vagoo.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:15 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    What about all those Japanese porn where the guy fingers the woman at a certain spot and she starts screaming and cums in a matter of minutes?

    Avatar of pkisme
    Comment by pkisme
    10:35 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    its entertainment friend..

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:20 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    ha ha, thinking porn is real. oh my. hilarious!

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:42 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    LOL at taking porn seriously...some naive ppl..

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:18 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    You mean she really isn't a plumber? :O

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:09 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    It didn't look like acting though! They came and were gasping rapidly and also have convulsion

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:33 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Watch it again with real girls. They can and will point out everything that is faked (aka nearly everything).
    Us guys can't detect it the same way certain animals cant see other animals in camouflage even if it is obvious to humans.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:03 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    now a whole bunch of authors will go bankrupt

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:13 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This was for a better futur for all man from all culture!!!

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:43 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    hey this beats what my psychology "scientist " professor was researching :

    her research was based on learning of young children , her data was how hard children were sucking pacifier while having particular book read to them

    p.s.
    rescission got nothing to do with stupid research noobz-tard.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:53 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    University of London diesnt have shit to do wth the United States

    Avatar of finalllyanime
    Comment by finalllyanime
    04:58 08/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    THAT'S A DAMN GOOD POINT. What are we gonna do with some information like that...? Be a gynocologist..? NO!

    Avatar of red candle
    Comment by red candle
    08:38 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'd still look for it \V/(^_^)

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:43 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    HENTAI LIED TO ME!?

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:46 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    In soviet Russia, G-spot finds you

    Avatar of JJ
    Comment by JJ
    08:39 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    If women would enjoy sex as much as men did, the bars and clubs wouldn't be full of desperate guys after 3am.

    Avatar of smorki
    Comment by smorki
    08:59 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Protip: desperate guys on bars after 3 AM aren't in the least bit attractive.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:28 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Protip: Anything a guy says to a girl translates to: "Would you like some dick with that?"

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:16 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    That's what the alcohol is for -- to artificially, temporarily, render members of one's preferred sex more attractive.

    (i.e., "Beer Goggles")

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:55 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    never have sexual relations with a girl that is drunk worst sex ever

    Comment by Tenno Seremel
    08:40 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Could we really trust UK scientists? There is a Britain scientists meme (or whatever it is called in English) for a reason.

    As for myself I don't really care whether it exists or not.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:14 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yep, they're only responsible for having pioneered a ridiculous amount of technology and engineering over the past few and recent centuries.

    Avatar of Kortaku
    Comment by Kortaku
    09:15 06/01/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The English already 'made up' global warming.







    Post Comment »

Popular

Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments