Information

Does a woman's G-spot actually exist?


Does a woman's G-spot actually exist? Are there any research studies?

Links:

  • G-spot (Gräfenberg spot) at Wikipedia
  • U.S. gynaecologist says he has found the G-spot

The existence of the G-spot remains highly debated among researchers. Two recent publications (Hines 2001, Kilchevsky et al. 2012) review studies of the so-called G-spot and conclude the evidence is too inconsistent to claim its definite existence. Foldes and Buisson (2009) argue that the G-spot is actually just a clitoris that is richly innervated. This would be consistent with the reported variability of G-spot presence or absence due to natural variation in innervation among women. (This last statement is my hypothesis offered without citation).

As noted by @Armatus in the comments, a few minutes following some of the Wikipedia links to the scientific journals (not the BBC, CNN, pop news sites, etc.) would give you lots of information about the G-spot. Still, I thought you question was worth typing up a brief answer for the sake of completeness.

Literature Cited

Foldès, P. and O. Buisson. 2009. The clitoral complex: a dynamic sonographic study. The Journal of Sexual Medicine 6: 1223-31.

Hines T. 2001. The G-Spot: A modern gynecologic myth. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 185: 359-62.

Kilchevsky, A, et al. 2012. Is the Female G-Spot Truly a Distinct Anatomic Entity? Journal of Sexual Medicine. 719-726.


Does the female G-spot really exist?

The subject of G-spot - considered as female paradise by many- has come under close scrutiny yet again as US gynaecologists now claim to have found the so-called ‘sex button’ during the postmortem of an 83-year-old woman.

However, TV presenter and sex expert Tracey Cox is unconvinced.

“We still don’t know if the G-spot exists. This was an area found on a dead body that was bluish and grape-like – but how do we know that it felt pleasurable when stimulated? ” the Mirror quoted her as saying.

“There is no doubt that the area on the front vaginal wall, about one to two inches inside a woman, is ultra sensitive to stimulation, but we don’t know if there’s a particular spot. It’s also rather difficult to access – certainly by anything that men were born with!

“But there are sex toys that make it easier to reach the area, which when stimulated gives you a wanting-to-pee sensation that’s soon replaced by strong erotic feelings. But in the end, it’s something women either like, or don’t.”

Apparently, even if the G-spot does exist, the chances of your partner finding it during rumpy-pumpy are quite unlikely, which implies that there’s a lot of ladies out there faking it.

Theories are rampant as to the actual anatomy of G-spot, which is claimed to have been found 60 years ago.

Some think that it’s just an extension of the clitoris, which makes them sound rather like present-day members of the Flat Earth Society, while the Italians claim to have found physiological evidence using ultrasound scans.

They reported that women who have orgasms during intercourse have an area of thicker tissue in their nether regions.

“Women who have front wall orgasms say they feel completely different and that they are more intense,” said Tracey.

“But whether it results in a simply mind-blowing orgasm or just nice feelings for you, it’s definitely worth exploring.”

While it’s irrefutable that men have a prostate, scientists have for many years have been unsuccessful in finding a G-spot and the new claims remain disputed.

According to some experts, G-spot exists only in some women, while some believe that the front wall of the vagina is very sensitive and others believe that the whole idea is nonsense.


The Female “G-Spot” Really Does Exist

Introduction. The anatomic existence of the G-spot has not been documented yet.

Aim. To identify the anatomic structure of the G-spot.

Methods. A stratum-by-stratum vaginal wall dissection on a fresh cadaver.

Main Outcome Measures. Primary outcome is the identification of the G-spot and the secondary outcome is its measurements and anatomic description of the G-spot.

Results. The G-spot has a distinguishable anatomic structure that is located on the dorsal perineal membrane, 16.5 mm from the upper part of the urethral meatus, and creates a 35° angle with the lateral border of the urethra. The lower pole (tail) and the upper pole (head) were located 3 and 15 mm next to the lateral border of the urethra, respectively. Grossly, the G-spot appeared as a well-delineated sac with walls that resembled fibroconnective tissues and resembled erectile tissues. The superior surface of the sac had bluish irregularities visible through the coat. Upon opening the sac’s upper coat, blue grape-like anatomic compositions of the G-spot emerged with dimensions of length (L) of 8.1 mm × width (W) of 3.6–1.5 mm × height (H) of 0.4 mm. The G-spot structure had three distinct areas: the proximal part (the head) L 3.4 mm × W 3.6 mm, the middle part L 3.1 mm × W 3.3 mm, and the distal part (tail) L 3.3 mm × W 3.0 mm. From the distal tail, a rope-like structure emerged, which was seen for approximately 1.6 mm and then disappeared into the surrounding tissue.

Conclusion. The anatomic existence of the G-spot was documented with potential impact on the practice and clinical research in the field of female sexual function.

Source: “ G-Spot Anatomy: A New Discovery ” from The Journal of Sexual Medicine, Volume 9, Issue 5, pages 1355–1359, May 2012

Join over 151,000 readers. Get a free weekly update via email here.


G-Spot Does Not Exist, 'Without A Doubt,' Say Researchers

Many women swear they have one, but a new review of 60 years of sex research shows science still can't definitively find the G-spot.

Researchers have used surveys, imaging scans and biopsies of women, all trying to locate and define the presumably orgasmic area on the vaginal wall known as the G-spot. Based on a review of 96 published studies, an Israeli and American research team came to one conclusion.

"Without a doubt, a discreet anatomic entity called the G-spot does not exist," said Dr. Amichai Kilchevsky, a urology resident at Yale-New Haven Hospital in Connecticut, and lead author of the review, published Jan. 12 in the Journal of Sexual Medicine.

Kilchevsky conceded the work is not "1,000 percent conclusive," allowing that other scientists could one day find something his team missed. But they would need new technology to do it, he said.

A half-century quest

The G-spot was named in honor of the late Dr. Ernst Gräfenberg, who in 1950 described a particularly sensitive 1- to 2-centimeter wide area on the vaginal wall. Gräfenberg's description put Western medicine on a quest to define and learn more about the spot, purported to be a few centimeters in from the vaginal opening, on the vaginal wall toward the front of a woman's body.

But Gräfenberg wasn't the first to write about such an erogenous zone. The Kamasastra and Jayamangala scripts dating back to 11th century India describe a similar sensitive area, according to the new study.

Modern surveys of women on the subject only confounded the search. From a review of 29 surveys and observational studies, Kilchevsky concluded that a majority of women believe a G-spot actually exists, although some of those women also say they can't locate it.

Other researchers have looked for physical evidence. Biopsies of tissue taken from the vaginal wall often find more nerve endings in the area of the purported G-spot than in other regions of the vaginal wall. But Kilchevsky and his colleagues also found biopsy studies with inconclusive results, and the authors point out that sensitivity in the human body isn't determined by the number of nerve endings alone.

One 2008 study used ultrasound imaging to explore the vaginal wall of women, and found evidence of thicker tissue in the area of the G-spot among women who reported having vaginal orgasms. Women who said they had never had vaginal orgasms had thinner tissue in that area. However, other imaging studies included in Kilchevsky's review couldn't find a conclusive G-spot.

Ultimately, Kilchevsky said he hopes his conclusions support women who worry they can't find the G-spot at home.

"Women who can't achieve orgasm through vaginal penetration don't have anything wrong with them," he said.

Kilchevsky doesn't think women who claim to have a G-spot are crazy either. "What they're likely experiencing is a continuation of the clitoris," he said. G-spot skeptics often point out that the tissue of the clitoris extends into the body, behind it where the G-spot would be located.

One study may yield clues

One study in the review kept "the possibility of a discrete G-spot viable," according to Kilchevsky.

A Rutgers University research team recently asked several women to stimulate themselves in a functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) machine. Brain scans showed stimulating the clitoris, vagina and cervix lit up distinct areas of the women's sensory cortex. This means the brain registered distinct feelings between stimulating the clitoris, the cervix and the vaginal wall – where the G-spot is famed to be.

Barry Komisaruk, the lead author of the fMRI study and professor of psychology at Rutgers University, advocates calling it the G-area, or G-region, instead.

"I think that the bulk of the evidence shows that the G-spot is not a particular thing. It's not like saying, 'What is the thyroid gland?'" Komisaruk said. "The G-spot is more of a thing like New York City is a thing. It's a region, it's a convergence of many different structures."

Komisaruk said that pressing on the area proclaimed to be the G-spot also presses the urethra and a structure called Skene's gland, which is analogous to the male prostate.

"Each of those areas have different nerve sites," said Komisaruk. "I think there's good enough data that a lot of women feel that that is a particularly sensitive region."

Debby Herbenick, a research scientist at Indiana University and author of "Great in Bed" (DK Publishing, 2011), pointed out that ambiguity is nothing new in sexual research.

"I'm not sure why some people get caught up in this desire to find this anatomic thing that is the end all be all," Herbenick said.

Findings from the well-known Australian researcher Dr. Helen O'Connell show the vagina, clitoris and urethra may act as "clitoral complex," during sex, Herbenick said. Any time one of these parts is moved or stimulated, it moves and stimulates the others.

"We don't even have orgasm all figured out yet, I don't why we would expect to have the G-spot figured out," Herbenick said.

Pass it on: A new review of 60 years of evidence suggests that the G-spot doesn't exist.

Follow MyHealthNewsDaily on Twitter @MyHealth_MHND. Find us on Facebook.


Harry 'to return to the UK in the next 24 hours' for Diana memorial

Follow The Sun

Services

©News Group Newspapers Limited in England No. 679215 Registered office: 1 London Bridge Street, London, SE1 9GF. "The Sun", "Sun", "Sun Online" are registered trademarks or trade names of News Group Newspapers Limited. This service is provided on News Group Newspapers' Limited's Standard Terms and Conditions in accordance with our Privacy & Cookie Policy. To inquire about a licence to reproduce material, visit our Syndication site. View our online Press Pack. For other inquiries, Contact Us. To see all content on The Sun, please use the Site Map. The Sun website is regulated by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO)


Why The "Biological Clock" To Have Kids Is A Myth

I spend a lot of my time discussing the fact that my womb will never be anything but a waiting room for period blood, and because of this, I've had a number of people — of all ages and genders — ask me how I deal with my biological clock's ticking in relation to my desire to not have kids. There is an implicit assumption there: that every woman feels a hormonally-driven urge to propagate the species, and that if she has decided intellectually to not have kids, she must, on some level, still be fighting this wild, cavewoman urge to procreate. There's the implication that I must be suppressing this desire — out of either heroic self-sacrifice, or because I am a witch who has no time for kids of my own because they would interfere with my attempts to lure strangers into my gingerbread house.

But as much as I'd like to have people believe that I would heroically forgo my own desires for the greater good or that I own property (hey, candy real estate is still real estate!), the truth is that I have never felt my biological clock "ticking." Though I have intellectually weighed the pros and cons of having children, I have never felt the drive to conceive that many of my friends who are mothers have described. That's part of the reason I have opted to not become a mom — if I can't get as worked up about the prospect of creating a human life as I can about the prospect of a very good cheese Danish, then I should probably not have kids.

But the assumption that the "biological clock" is a timer set up in every woman's body that goes off at a certain point in her life and forces her to obsess about having kids, regardless of her specific desires, interests, or life experiences, is a myth. In fact, the entire concept of a "biological clock" is fairly recent, and says more about the way society views women and motherhood than how women and their fertility actually function.

1. The Phrase "Biological Clock" Was Invented In 1978 By A Journalist

Far from being a timeless historical construct, the concept of the "biological clock" as it pertains to reproduction was first used in an article in the Washington Post in 1978 — a year when surely some of you now reading this were already born. It also wasn't a term coined by a scientist, or a woman describing her own experience of having an obsession with having children "kick in." Rather, it was created by writer Richard Cohen, who, in a piece about how women were managing jobs and family, noted that “The clock is ticking for the career woman" — so, yeah, not quite hard science.

And even then, the term was used to describe the timeframe in which women could biologically conceive children — not quite the sudden, helpless onset of biologically-induced baby lust that we often associate with the phrase now. According to Jenna Healey at Yale University's Institution for Social and Political Studies, as the phrase was introduced to the general public at the same time as in vitro fertilization (IVF) was becoming publicly available, the two concepts were "inextricably linked in the public mind" — which may have influenced people to associate the phrase "biological clock" with the idea of a woman who is extremely eager to conceive, rather than the reality of simply outlining the timeframe in which pregnancy can occur. But that's all this relatively recent phrase was ever meant to mean — and it is still often used to mean only that.

2. Your Actual Biological Clock Regulates Your Sleep Cycles — Not Your Womb Cycles

We do have a clock in our body that governs some of our behaviors in a way that we're relatively helpless to fight — but those behaviors are falling asleep and waking up, not filling up our ute with Extra Premium Baby (Unleaded). In scientific writing, "biological clock" refers to our circadian clocks, the internal clocks that tell us to wake up when it's morning, fall asleep when it's dark out, etc.

So while these clocks do regulate some of our desires (and we do fight them — say, when we feel the pull to go to sleep, but instead decide to watch three Die Hard movies in order, just in case they get taken off of Netflix soon), they don't regulate our desires about when or whether to have children, and they don't seem to play a role in our emotional lives in the same way that we imagine the mythical female "biological clock" does.

3. There Is Actually No Scientific Evidence That Women Experience A Biologically-Based Urge To Have Children

It's time to bust out the big guns: there has not been a single study that has confirmed the existence of a scientific, hormonal urge that causes women to helplessly desire children. In fact, a decade-long study conducted by Gay and Sandra Brase of Kansas State University and published in 2011 in the academic journal Emotion found that "baby fever" is quite real, for many men and women — but not because of some vague hormonal reason.

The Brases had originally assumed that they'd find a biological trigger tied to our reproductive functions that set off "baby fever" — but they didn't:

Rather, the Brases found that people's "baby fever" was triggered by being exposed to a baby on a sensory level (i.e. holding, seeing, and smelling a baby), as well as logical decisions about wanting to experience parenthood.

And the Brases aren't out of step with the mainstream of scientific thought on the issue a 2010 Swedish study found that women were most likely to become pregnant soon after their coworkers had babies, providing further grist for the theory that we want to have babies not because our hormones demand it, but because we meet some babies, and start to think that having one of our own is a good idea. As Danielle Friedman reported in The Daily Beast, "Many scientists believe the seemingly biological drive some women feel isn’t triggered by biology, so much as culture," and that according to evolutionary biologists, "Evolution has bestowed upon women a desire for sex and the equipment to have a baby from here, free will steps in." I know — I feel played, too.

The Bottom Line

I say all of this not to shame women or anyone else who experiences "baby fever" — quite the opposite, in fact. I think our society demands that the desire to have a child be a "biological urge" because we don't respect mothers and motherhood enough to say that deciding to be a mother is a valid choice, one that you could become obsessed with not because of your hormones, but just because it seems like a really great idea. We want women to be "swept up in the urge" to become a mother, rather than making a conscious decision to have a child, because it allows us to keep treating mothers as second-class citizens. A culture that treats motherhood as a kooky whim that overwhelms our dumb lady-brains can keep refusing to give mothers paid parental leave, or force them to work job schedules that keep them from being able to take care of their children (or chase them out of the work force entirely) — because, hey, if you didn't want to be treated like this, you shouldn't have upended your life over a whim, you sillybilly!

The "biological clock" theory can keep women from discussing the real reasons they decided to become mothers — or the fact that becoming a mother was a decision at all — serving to both keep women who don't have kids stigmatized ("what are you, a freak of nature?") and keep women who do have kids seeming frivolous ("what are you, some idiot controlled by her hormones?"). It's a baby, not the decision to eat a whole container of peanut brittle because you were PMS-ing, OK? Let's have a little respect.


Is the Female G-Spot Truly a Distinct Anatomic Entity?

Amichai Kilchevsky, MD, Department of Urology, Yale Physicians Building, 800 Howard Ave., 3rd Floor, New Haven, CT 06519, USA. Tel: 203-785-2815 Fax: 203-785-4043 E-mail: [email protected] Search for more papers by this author

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

Department of Urology, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT, USA

Amichai Kilchevsky, MD, Department of Urology, Yale Physicians Building, 800 Howard Ave., 3rd Floor, New Haven, CT 06519, USA. Tel: 203-785-2815 Fax: 203-785-4043 E-mail: [email protected] Search for more papers by this author

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

Neurourolgy Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The existence of an anatomically distinct female G-spot is controversial. Reports in the public media would lead one to believe the G-spot is a well-characterized entity capable of providing extreme sexual stimulation, yet this is far from the truth.

Aim. The aim of this article was to provide an overview of the evidence both supporting and refuting the existence of an anatomically distinct female G-spot.

Methods. PubMed search for articles published between 1950 and 2011 using key words “G-spot,”“Grafenberg spot,”“vaginal innervation,”“female orgasm,”“female erogenous zone,” and “female ejaculation.” Clinical trials, meeting abstracts, case reports, and review articles that were written in English and published in a peer-reviewed journal were selected for analysis.

Main Outcome Measure. The main outcome measure of this article was to assess any valid objective data in the literature that scientifically evaluates the existence of an anatomically distinct G-spot.

Results. The literature cites dozens of trials that have attempted to confirm the existence of a G-spot using surveys, pathologic specimens, various imaging modalities, and biochemical markers. The surveys found that a majority of women believe a G-spot actually exists, although not all of the women who believed in it were able to locate it. Attempts to characterize vaginal innervation have shown some differences in nerve distribution across the vagina, although the findings have not proven to be universally reproducible. Furthermore, radiographic studies have been unable to demonstrate a unique entity, other than the clitoris, whose direct stimulation leads to vaginal orgasm.

Conclusions. Objective measures have failed to provide strong and consistent evidence for the existence of an anatomical site that could be related to the famed G-spot. However, reliable reports and anecdotal testimonials of the existence of a highly sensitive area in the distal anterior vaginal wall raise the question of whether enough investigative modalities have been implemented in the search of the G-spot. Kilchevsky A, Vardi Y, Lowenstein L, and Gruenwald I. Is the female G-spot truly a distinct anatomic entity? J Sex Med 20129:719–726.


How Women REALLY Feel About Penis Size

In previous blog posts, I’ve tried to reassure anxious men that penis size doesn’t matter to the substantial majority of women. And every time, comments have poured in from gals calling me a fool, saying that size matters a great deal to them.

Okay, size matters to some women. I’ve never said it didn’t. But based on decades of conversations with sex therapists and many women, I’ve concluded that the substantial majority of women don’t care, that they’d rather be with men who are warm, kind, solvent, caring, and funny, who share their values and interests than one who has a phone pole in his pants. Unfortunately, I couldn’t back that up with research because I knew of no study that explored women’s feelings on the subject. Now the verdict is in.

Recently, researchers at UCLA and Cal State Los Angeles published a report showing that 84 percent of women feel “very satisfied” with their man’s penis size. Fourteen percent wish it were larger and 2 percent would prefer smaller. The 84 percent figure means that seven out of every eight women think their man is just fine, corroborating my assertion that size doesn’t matter to the substantial majority of women.

This study is particularly persuasive because its methodology goes way beyond your run-of-the-mill survey of 100 college undergraduates. The researchers posted their questions on MSNBC.com and got responses from 26,437 women ages 18 to 65. Respondents were a self-selected group, which raises questions about demographic representation. But 26,437 is a huge number, a number so large that statistically it obviates concerns about self-selection and strongly suggests that the findings are truly valid.

Women Feel More Satisfied Than Men About Men’s Size

The survey also attracted responses from 25,594 men. Two-thirds of them rated their penises as “average,” exactly matching what the women said about their partners. But women were only half as likely as men to call their man’s penis “small,” and were more likely to call it “large.”

  • Men who called theirs “small:” 12 percent
  • Women who called their man’s “small:” 6 percent
  • Men who called theirs “large:” 22 percent
  • Women who called their man’s “large:” 27 percent

From Ancient Greece to Michelangelo to Porn

Our equation of manhood with a big penis stands in marked contrast to how the ancients viewed genital size. In Aristophanes’ play, The Clouds (423 B.C.), a character admonishes delinquent young men that if they continue to behave badly, as punishment, their penises will grow larger, but that if they repudiate their wicked ways, their organs will remain as they should be, small.

Five centuries later, the Roman novel, Satyricon, (c. 50 A.D.) describes bathers at a public bath who make fun of one character’s large penis, calling it as ridiculous as contemporary reactions to the outsized shoes of circus clowns. Like the Greeks, the ancient Romans thought the most attractive penises were on the small side.

The classic view that small is beautiful persisted through the Renaissance. Consider Michelangelo’s David or male nude sculptures by other artists of that period. The penises are surprisingly small. At that time, “masculinity” had less to do with the size of a man’s penis than with the size of his scrotum. A big scrotum that hung full and low suggested large testicles, which in turn, suggested great potency. During the Renaissance, penises were considered little more than incidental injection devices for what really counted, sperm.

That changed in the second half of the nineteenth century as photography (invented around 1840) and motion pictures (1890) paved the way for modern pornography. Porn has always been primarily a masturbation aid for men. Male masturbation is all about erections, so porn transformed penises from injection devices into the center of attention—and for portrayal in photography or film, the bigger the better.

Got a Ruler?

To most people, “penis size” implies length. Some two dozen studies have measured it. Most measure on the top side from the pubic bone at the base of the penis to the tip of the glans—without pushing the ruler into the gut or pulling on the shaft to stretch it. The results:

  • The typical flaccid penis is 3.5 inches long. (Small flaccid penises grow more to erection than large flaccid organs.)
  • Only 2.5 percent of erections measure less than 3.8 inches.
  • 13.5 percent is 3.8 to 4.5 inches.
  • 68 percent is 4.6 to 6.0 inches.
  • 13.5 percent is 6.1 to 6.8 inches
  • And only 2.5 percent are longer than 6.9 inches.

Ironically, among women who said they care about size, fewer care about length than girth.

Be All You Can Be

The taller the man, the longer his arms and legs—and penis. But according to the survey, compared with the shortest men (5 feet 2 inches) the tallest (over 6 feet 4 inches) reported feeling only slightly more satisfied with their size.

Weight is another story. The slimmest men are much happier about their penis size than men who are obese. This makes sense because as weight increases, the lower abdominal fat pad grows and envelopes the base of the penis, making it look considerably smaller.

Want to make the most of what the good Lord gave you? Forget all the pills and potions advertised on the Internet. They’re all cynical frauds. To be all you can be between the legs, lose weight. But do it for yourself because there’s an 84 percent chance that the woman in your life is perfectly happy with your penis as it is.

Lever, J. et al. “Does Size Matter? Men’s and Women’s Views on Penis Size Across the Lifespan,” Psychology of Men and Masculinity (2006) 7:129.


Does the G-spot really exist?

Is the search for the elusive G-spot over? After decades of debate about its so-called discovery by German gynaecologist Dr Ernst Grafenberg, scientists at the University of Sheffield have said there is no evidence to support its existence.

But are they right? Femail asked six women (and one man) to settle the argument once and for all. We ask does it really exist?

Jane Gordon, 45, is divorced and has two daughters, Bryony, 22, Naomi, 19, and a son Rufus, 11. She lives in West London and says:

Apart from the Holy Grail and my car keys, there is probably nothing on earth that has been more rigorously pursued than the G-spot. The news that we can all stop searching for it will come as a blessed relief to all womankind.

Not, mind you, that it will come as any surprise to us because, as it turns out, the whole idea of our having some secret 'seat of pleasure' was - wouldn't you know it? - thought up by a man.

But it's my guess that, in the course of his research into female sexuality, Dr Grafenberg, the German researcher who 'discovered' it in 1944, misinterpreted something that Frau Grafenberg was trying to tell him.

His belief that the shrill scream that his wife emitted after hours of his selfless probing was an expression of pure pleasure rather than plain irritation was simply a classic (and costly) example of male/ female misunderstanding.

Cherri Gilham, 49, is a writer and former model who is working on a new book, her Men-oirs. She is divorced with a grownup son and shares a West London house with three men and her dog. Cherri says:

I was once in bed with Sylvester Stallone - during a brief fling in his Rocky heyday - when he cheekily asked: 'Where's your erogenous zone?'

I said: 'Third finger on my left hand.' However, now he and all mankind will no longer have to ask, as scientists have concluded that the G-spot doesn't exist. There's a G-zone instead.

Right from the start I was suspicious of the G-spot, as I could never pinpoint mine. It seemed to keep moving and was never in the same place.

Years ago I gave up reading women's magazines because they made me feel inadequate at not finding this magic location.

So I couldn't be happier now to hear that 'the whole area is an erogenous zone', as I'd long suspected - especially as some of mine seem to exist underneath the arches of my feet. I bet Dr Grafenberg never thought of looking there. . .

Virginia Ironside, 59, is an agony aunt and writer. She is divorced and lives in West London. Virginia says:

As one who has spent many fruitless and unhappy nights hunting high and low for my own personal G-spot, I'm delighted to hear that, in fact, it does not exist. Indeed, if someone would show me where the rumour is buried, I would happily dance on its grave.

There was 'simultaneous orgasm', 'multiple male orgasm', and those 'erogenous zones' which mean that we had to put up with our partners consulting diagrams of the female body, and then twiddling at our earlobes, or trying to find special places on our necks or thighs that they were sure would send us into spasms of ecstasy.

To make it even more mysterious, I seem to remember you had to press very hard to find it, but the minute you did - wow! Fireworks! Of course, all those women who tried to find it but didn't, felt dreadfully sexually undermined.

After years of chasing these sexual holy grails, my conclusion is that the best thing is if everyone assumes that sex is a pretty dreary experience.

That way, if anyone feels even the faintest twinge of pleasure they will feel happy and fulfilled. The G-spot was simply a fairy-tale, like the 'perfect man' or the 'perfect woman'.

Tess Stimson, 36, is a novelist and professor of creative writing at the University of South Florida. She is divorced and has three children aged eight, five and six months. Tess says:

For years I thought the G-spot was a myth. I spent most of my time in bed playing a horizontal version of Twister, trying to manoeuvre myself into a position where I felt tingling rather than the unpleasant friction you associate with a new pair of shoes.

Eventually, I decided the G-spot was an urban myth or, at best, a catch-all term. Like the idea of a guardian angel. Nice concept - now let's get real.

It took an American to show me that Santa Claus does exist. There I was, lying in bed enjoying a rather pleasant warm-bath sensation and sucking in my tummy, the way you do with a new man. And then out of nowhere it happened. Starbursts in all directions, choirs of angels, the lot. It took me a full five minutes to regain consciousness.

'Do you know what you just did?' I gasped.

'Oh,' he said calmly. 'You mean this?'

The G-spot exists. Trust me.

Author Kathy Lette, 42, is married and lives in London with her two children. She says:

To G-spot or not to G-spot, that is the question. For over half a century, men have been heading south with a compass, a miner's helmet and a list of edible berries - searching for the elusive G-spot.

And the rewards for successfully mapping our gynaecological geography have been great. Female response was ecstatic. Finding a woman's G-spot, well, it was Oh! Oh. OH. What a feeling!

Among sexologists, however, a severe case of scepticaemia broke out. They maintained that the entire anterior wall was full of sensitive, highly erogenous glandular tissue and that there was not one particular 'spot'.

But what did women think? Well, basically, anything that got blokes to double park in our erogenous zones was just fine by us.

Because the pathetic truth is that most men seem to think that the Kama Sutra is an Indian takeaway and that 'mutual orgasm' is an insurance company.

So the elusive G-spot doesn't exist after all. I can't say the news has come as a total shock to me. I've always felt the G-spot was the Loch Ness Monster of erogenous zones: we've all heard about it and while we have never stumbled across it ourselves, we all know somebody who claims to have done so.

That is, of course, until you examine it more closely and it always turns out to be a friend of a friend that has seen the mysterious creature. And, in my experience, the G-spot is the same.

I don't believe any woman will be too devastated at the news that there is no such thing. After all, how can you miss something you never had?

And if most men can't find a clearly labelled item on a refrigerator shelf, what chance did they ever have of finding something so hidden away as the G-spot?

Mail sketchwriter Quentin Letts, 40, is married to Lois. They live in Gloucestershire and have three children - Claud, five, Eveleen, four, and twomonthold Honor. He says:

For much of the past millennium, great explorers such as Sir John Franklin and John Cabot searched for the elusive, mysterious North-West Passage linking the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

Man's search for women's Gspot has been much the same. It has continued for generations and has almost always ended in disaster and emotional frostbite.

Blokes tremble at its name - and such an odd name, at that. Gspot: it sounds more like a brand of breath freshener or gym shoe. Whatever happened to F-spot, Espot and their predecessors?

There are few things more baffling to a young man than female plumbing.

We might be good at hotwiring a Ford Mondeo or connecting a washing machine into the mains, but a woman's anatomy is beyond a normal lad's comprehension.

Girlfriends don't come equipped with a user's handbook.

In my very limited experience, the G-spot seems to be a bit of a fidget: there one minute, gone the next. It's like trying to swat a bluebottle.

In my youth, thinking myself a Leslie Phillips charmer, I seem to recall tickling one girlfriend on the nape of her neck with a seagull feather. I thought it would send her crazy, but it just made her sneeze.

Maybe it is all rather demeaning, too. Surely the real G-spot should be inside the brain, for love and romance are at their best when the mind is stimulated.

It should not just be about finding some red button marked ' hooters' and giving it a good punch.

How boring and workmanlike sex would be if all you had to do was reach down to a secret switch underneath the dashboard to send your sweetheart into overdrive.

I'd like to be able to say that my wife's G-spot and I were on intimate terms, and I bet she'd like me to be able to say so, too.

Dream on. Like explorers Franklin and Cabot, we men are up there on the poop deck, icicles on our noses as we peer uselessly into the fog of the sex war.


RELATED ARTICLES

Growing pains: Pagonis said she always felt different with constant hospital visits but didn't learn the full truth about her condition until a college instructor described the hormone syndrome one day during class

Body confident: Pagonis now uses the first name 'Pidgeon,' doesn't identify as female or male and works as an artist and intersex activist against surgery

Pagonis now uses the first name 'Pidgeon', doesn't identify as female or male and works as an intersex activist against surgery.

Using social media to voice her thoughts, she recently tweeted: 'Diagnosed [with] testicular feminization (AIS) & labeled male pseudo-hermaphrodite exist in the gray. But, I believe, so does everybody.'

Pagonis' advice for parents with intersex infants?

'Take them home and love them . just the way they are.'

Alice Dreger, a Northwestern University ethicist and author, says it makes sense for parents to raise affected kids as boys or girls.

'But sometimes we get that gender assignment wrong. And in those cases it's particularly important that we've not done unnecessary interventions.'

WHAT IS ANDROGEN INSENSITIVITY SYNDROME?

Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) is when a person who is genetically male (who has one X and one Y chromosome) is resistant to male hormones (called androgens). As a result, the person has some or all of the physical traits of a woman, but the genetic makeup of a man.

It is caused by genetic defects on the X chromosome. These defects make the body unable to respond to the hormones that produce a male appearance.

Complete androgen insensitivity prevents the penis and other male body parts from developing. At birth, the child looks like a girl. The complete form of the syndrome occurs in as many as 1 in 20,000 live births.

How many male traits people have differ in incomplete AIS. A person with complete AIS appears to be female but has no uterus, and has very little armpit and pubic hair. At puberty, female sex characteristics - such as breasts - develop. However, the person does not menstruate and become fertile.

Persons with incomplete AIS may have both male and female physical characteristics. Many have partial closing of the outer vaginal lips, an enlarged clitoris, and a short vagina.

Complete AIS is rarely discovered during childhood. Sometimes, a growth is felt in the abdomen or groin that turns out to be a testicle when it is explored with surgery.

Most people with this condition are not diagnosed until they do not get a menstrual period or they have trouble getting pregnant.

Incomplete AIS is often discovered during childhood because the person may have both male and female physical traits.

Tests used to diagnose this condition may include blood work, genetic testing or a pelvic ultrasound.

When it comes to treatment, testicles that are in the wrong place may be removed when a child finishes growing. Estrogen replacement can also be prescribed after puberty.

Vocal: Using social media to voice her thoughts, she recently tweeted: 'Diagnosed [with] testicular feminization (AIS) & labeled male pseudo-hermaphrodite exist in the gray. But, I believe, so does everybody.'

Idea exchange: It's estimated that at least 1 in 5,000 U.S. babies are born each year with intersex conditions

Pagonis hopes that by speaking out about her condition she can help comfort others with AIS.

Efforts in the medical sphere also are underway to change the way intersex children are treated.

'The way that we took care of things in the past. where there was a fair amount of secrecy, where there was surgery done in the infant state, and potentially irreversible surgery, is probably not the best way to go about things,' said Dr. Earl Cheng, who runs the two-year-old sex development disorders program at Chicago's Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital.

The program is one of several nationwide that employ a team of specialists including surgeons, hormone experts, genetic counselors, psychologists and ethicists.

The team helps families weigh their options, including whether surgery should be considered at all.

It's estimated that at least 1 in 5,000 U.S. babies are born each year with intersex conditions.

Some affected children have typical male or female chromosomes, but genetic glitches and hormonal problems that begin in the womb, cause genitals to resemble those of the opposite sex.

Others have a male-female blend of sex chromosomes and reproductive organs.


Watch the video: Does The G-Spot Really Exist? (December 2021).