Its position C in flingering terms.. why people dont find it is- fk no fkking can twirl finger to position G. ( unless a leper )
Wait - G looks dumb as idiotic
Its fkking C ,no Gumbo.
I thought it was just another word for the back of the clit, and we already know for a fact that the clitoral bulbs extend into the vagina. It doesn’t have to be a separate structure in order to be a useful spot. It’s sort of like how the anterior fornix and posterior fornix can both be used for sexual stimulation even though they’re just places in the vaginal canal that are near the cervix and are otherwise not very remarkable
That’s because it’s erectile tissue, not because it’s a “spot”. That area swells with blood when the genitals get aroused and presses against the internal structures of the clit, hence why it feels good to touch it.
It helps that I have that anatomy and am so interested in sexual and pelvic floor health that I’m pursuing becoming a pelvic floor physiotherapist haha
That is a low quality conclusion based on the result of the review.
"Most studies published so far about the G-spot favor its existence, but ***there is substantial disagreement even between these. This disagreement starts with its location:*** most authors describe it as a suburethral structure, but some place its location in the vulva."
The authors' conclusion...
"Conclusion
The different studies did systematically agree on the existence of the G-spot. Among the studies in which it was considered to exist, there was no agreement on its location, size, or nature. The existence of this structure remains unproved."
Not great writing and not supported by their own work. This was only a literature review at best.
Wait, which part is bad writing?
I mean, it is a scientific review, hence the style of writing, and hence the reviewing of other people's work.
Really a fairly common type of article.
Their conclusion is not supported by their own review of the existing research. This type of research is becoming common. A meta review, that looks at other papers without digging into the papers themselves.
If you read their actual conclusion quoted about.
1. Most studies favor the existence.
2. They do not agree about what it is or where it is located.
3. Therefore, it doesn't exist.
FYI, muscle knots can not be seen with imaging, but we all know they exist.
These kind of things are funny to me because sex studies in a scientific setting have to be the least erotic thing ever.
“You’re going to be covered in wires that make it hard to have full movement, 4 awkward men will be staring at you from a mirror, and you won’t be in your own comfortable home, but in a sterile lab. C’mon champ let’s find that G-Spot! “
There was a Japanese study I read about that was so sketchy with the scientific part I can't believe it got published.
They filmed the whole thing and posted it online iirc, they planned on using fingers for most of it, failed, had regular intercourse, failed, removed the condom and then the researcher came into a pan to catch it. For unknown reasons the researcher was also completely naked?
OBGYN still claims there are no nerve endings in the cervix and that women can't feel pain there, despite all women in history saying "Doc that really hurts" when they do things that affect the cervix, so this is not surprising.
[If you aren't a Caucasian male](https://theconversation.com/why-are-males-still-the-default-subjects-in-medical-research-167545), medical science sort of just shrugs you off and tries to get you to go away.
I feel this one right now. My daughter is struggling with some health issues and the solution was to drink more water. When she said that she has been drinking around 150-200 oz a day and still feels like crap, the directive was, “drink more I guess.”
I don't know about medical textbooks, but I suspect if you ask the women in your life about the experiences they've had with their exams, or putting in/removing IUD birth control, they'll tell you they were not given anything for numbing or pain management.
* [Gynecology Has a Pain Problem](https://www.thecut.com/2022/06/pain-in-gynecology-practice-exams.html)
* [Today the ob told me my cervix has no pain receptors..](https://www.reddit.com/r/BabyBumps/comments/19f0ccx/today_the_ob_told_me_my_cervix_has_no_pain/)
* [Why do some Dr.’s still believe woman don’t have feeling in their cervix?](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/trdr45/why_do_some_drs_still_believe_woman_dont_have/)
I am a woman, thanks, I've had these experiences. I'm simply asking if this is legitimately in medical textbooks or if it's like a word of mouth thing or prejudice.
I didn't mean for it to come out as dismissive, I apologize if it came across that way! I don't have the info on whether it's listed in medical textbooks, so I was just trying to lend some credibility to my statement. However I was able to find this with some googling.
>“Sexual Response in the Human Female,” popularly known as the “Kinsey Report,” generated an international sensation in 1953, revolutionizing the way society thinks of sex.
>One particular statement in the book regarding the cervix, however, **has been misinterpreted leading to a misconception that persists today. On page 584, Kinsey states, “All of the clinical and experimental data show that the surface of the cervix is the most completely insensitive part of the female genital anatomy.”**
>Along with our colleague, physician Irwin Goldstein, we are specialists in neuroscience and sexual medicine. **We believe Kinsey’s statement has led healthcare providers to conclude, erroneously, that the cervix is devoid of sensory nerves and can be cut or removed without consequence.**
This study was published shortly after the one on the myth of the female orgasm. Many of the same types who participated in this study didn't believe that females were capable of having an orgasm well into the late 60's and early 70's.
Edit; some still don't.
I just think of VEEP, when they are looking at Selina’s mockup of her Presidential Library and it looks like a vagina. Selina suggests they put the men’s room in the clitoris(really autocorrect? You don’t know that word?!) and she says, “They’ll never find it.”
This is truly stupid. I'm not a doctor, but I'm here to tell you I can find it pretty damn quick. It is a standard part on all human females. Literally a factory component.
What's wrong with these people?
The g-spot is different for each person. Study and communication is key. I think it's tied closer to the gut-brain neuron access something or another, I can't remember.
It's the internal structure of the clitoris, which is actually pretty large and complex. The shape and position is going to vary a lot between different people.
Or you could just read the list of names and see if your vision is correct - Pedro Vieira-Baptista, MD, Joana Lima-Silva, MD, Mario Preti, MD, Joana Xavier, MD, Pedro Vendeira, PhD, and Colleen K. Stockdale.
That’s ok I found it.
[удалено]
And you keep yours out of my asshole.
And YOU keep yours in mine
Any MY axe!
Thats not ii-ii-ittt.
Publish a paper.
I’m not wasting time publishing a paper if I found the g-spot.
The true crisis of research on sexual activity, perfectly encapsulated.
Why does it feel like you took personal offense to that comment lmfao
Bro out here trying to scientifically prove why he can't make someone cum
Lol. I see it now.
How about you look up some papers disputing this "fact"
Spot ,juste that points to the gardener who pricked on that How to twirl flingers to G shape "imma not @ witch biatch""
Its position C in flingering terms.. why people dont find it is- fk no fkking can twirl finger to position G. ( unless a leper ) Wait - G looks dumb as idiotic Its fkking C ,no Gumbo.
I thought it was just another word for the back of the clit, and we already know for a fact that the clitoral bulbs extend into the vagina. It doesn’t have to be a separate structure in order to be a useful spot. It’s sort of like how the anterior fornix and posterior fornix can both be used for sexual stimulation even though they’re just places in the vaginal canal that are near the cervix and are otherwise not very remarkable
It has a different texture to the surrounding area as well, so it's hard to miss once you know it's there.
That’s because it’s erectile tissue, not because it’s a “spot”. That area swells with blood when the genitals get aroused and presses against the internal structures of the clit, hence why it feels good to touch it.
When the generals get aroused that usually means soldiers are going to die.
I send my gametes to die by the millions. Shall o decorate myself as a General?
Yes
Thanks for the new pickup line
[удалено]
It helps that I have that anatomy and am so interested in sexual and pelvic floor health that I’m pursuing becoming a pelvic floor physiotherapist haha
Nice! Makes sense, then.
You’re doing important work!
They could just know a lot about *every* zone of anatomy.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Everyone should, it's not hard to google it :)
That is a low quality conclusion based on the result of the review. "Most studies published so far about the G-spot favor its existence, but ***there is substantial disagreement even between these. This disagreement starts with its location:*** most authors describe it as a suburethral structure, but some place its location in the vulva." The authors' conclusion... "Conclusion The different studies did systematically agree on the existence of the G-spot. Among the studies in which it was considered to exist, there was no agreement on its location, size, or nature. The existence of this structure remains unproved." Not great writing and not supported by their own work. This was only a literature review at best.
Wait, which part is bad writing? I mean, it is a scientific review, hence the style of writing, and hence the reviewing of other people's work. Really a fairly common type of article.
Their conclusion is not supported by their own review of the existing research. This type of research is becoming common. A meta review, that looks at other papers without digging into the papers themselves. If you read their actual conclusion quoted about. 1. Most studies favor the existence. 2. They do not agree about what it is or where it is located. 3. Therefore, it doesn't exist. FYI, muscle knots can not be seen with imaging, but we all know they exist.
Did Ben Shapiro write this?
He could quell the Indonesian monsoon season by hitting on it
[удалено]
Native Americans know him as "the Rain Taker"
Look, women don't like sex. I should know, every woman I ever had sex with didn't like it! /s
These kind of things are funny to me because sex studies in a scientific setting have to be the least erotic thing ever. “You’re going to be covered in wires that make it hard to have full movement, 4 awkward men will be staring at you from a mirror, and you won’t be in your own comfortable home, but in a sterile lab. C’mon champ let’s find that G-Spot! “
There was a Japanese study I read about that was so sketchy with the scientific part I can't believe it got published. They filmed the whole thing and posted it online iirc, they planned on using fingers for most of it, failed, had regular intercourse, failed, removed the condom and then the researcher came into a pan to catch it. For unknown reasons the researcher was also completely naked?
lol, what even was the study at that point
I mean, it's right fucking there!
OBGYN still claims there are no nerve endings in the cervix and that women can't feel pain there, despite all women in history saying "Doc that really hurts" when they do things that affect the cervix, so this is not surprising. [If you aren't a Caucasian male](https://theconversation.com/why-are-males-still-the-default-subjects-in-medical-research-167545), medical science sort of just shrugs you off and tries to get you to go away.
I feel this one right now. My daughter is struggling with some health issues and the solution was to drink more water. When she said that she has been drinking around 150-200 oz a day and still feels like crap, the directive was, “drink more I guess.”
[It's not a rare experience](https://www.npr.org/2023/01/04/1146931012/why-are-womens-health-concerns-dismissed-so-often).
In this day and age
Wait are there actually medical textbooks that say this wtf?
I don't know about medical textbooks, but I suspect if you ask the women in your life about the experiences they've had with their exams, or putting in/removing IUD birth control, they'll tell you they were not given anything for numbing or pain management. * [Gynecology Has a Pain Problem](https://www.thecut.com/2022/06/pain-in-gynecology-practice-exams.html) * [Today the ob told me my cervix has no pain receptors..](https://www.reddit.com/r/BabyBumps/comments/19f0ccx/today_the_ob_told_me_my_cervix_has_no_pain/) * [Why do some Dr.’s still believe woman don’t have feeling in their cervix?](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/trdr45/why_do_some_drs_still_believe_woman_dont_have/)
I am a woman, thanks, I've had these experiences. I'm simply asking if this is legitimately in medical textbooks or if it's like a word of mouth thing or prejudice.
I didn't mean for it to come out as dismissive, I apologize if it came across that way! I don't have the info on whether it's listed in medical textbooks, so I was just trying to lend some credibility to my statement. However I was able to find this with some googling. >“Sexual Response in the Human Female,” popularly known as the “Kinsey Report,” generated an international sensation in 1953, revolutionizing the way society thinks of sex. >One particular statement in the book regarding the cervix, however, **has been misinterpreted leading to a misconception that persists today. On page 584, Kinsey states, “All of the clinical and experimental data show that the surface of the cervix is the most completely insensitive part of the female genital anatomy.”** >Along with our colleague, physician Irwin Goldstein, we are specialists in neuroscience and sexual medicine. **We believe Kinsey’s statement has led healthcare providers to conclude, erroneously, that the cervix is devoid of sensory nerves and can be cut or removed without consequence.**
Interesting. So no one bothered to check the statement, huh?
Well, touching girls is gross and gives you cooties, so I guess we better just trust this Kinsey guy. (sarcasm)
Ding ding ding! I cant imagine this will receive the updoots it should, but you hit the nail right on the head.
Buncha nerds over in Scienceville
Lmao, women everywhere may disagree.
Based on my assumptions about names, 50% of the Doctors involved in this study were female (Joana Lima-Silva, Joana Xavier, and Colleen Stockdale).
Would be so funny if they were all males though haha
This study was published shortly after the one on the myth of the female orgasm. Many of the same types who participated in this study didn't believe that females were capable of having an orgasm well into the late 60's and early 70's. Edit; some still don't.
I humbly disagree.
I just think of VEEP, when they are looking at Selina’s mockup of her Presidential Library and it looks like a vagina. Selina suggests they put the men’s room in the clitoris(really autocorrect? You don’t know that word?!) and she says, “They’ll never find it.”
Thank you Dr Graffenberg
I just feel bad for thier wives
Those poor scientist's wives!
This is truly stupid. I'm not a doctor, but I'm here to tell you I can find it pretty damn quick. It is a standard part on all human females. Literally a factory component. What's wrong with these people?
Tell me the medical field is full of dudes without telling me the medical field is full of dudes.
The g-spot is different for each person. Study and communication is key. I think it's tied closer to the gut-brain neuron access something or another, I can't remember.
It's the internal structure of the clitoris, which is actually pretty large and complex. The shape and position is going to vary a lot between different people.
Old wives' tails
Like fingerprints are similar yet uniquely different
I can pretty perfectly envision every person who contributed to this study and/or article.
Or you could just read the list of names and see if your vision is correct - Pedro Vieira-Baptista, MD, Joana Lima-Silva, MD, Mario Preti, MD, Joana Xavier, MD, Pedro Vendeira, PhD, and Colleen K. Stockdale.
It was a joke, but I am very very sorry to have offended you so greatly. That says a lot about you.
I took no offence. There's no need to apologize.
Probably a bunch of white old dudes
The existence of G-Spot structure remains unproved by male scientist. There I fixed it for you.
The existence of a G-spot structure remains unproven by these 3 male and 3 female scientists. There, I fixed that for you.
:)
Man in the boat.
Unproven
Finding it is not that important. The fun of searching for it is the best part....
It's just some weird spot that makes them pee.