G-spot Flips Alleged Researchers the Bird

Hawkeye* posted a BBC article today, entitled The G-spot 'doesn't appear to exist', say researchers. Always interested in the topic, I clicked through.

Now, I knew I'd be mad.

I was beginning to hope that g-spot as myth was being put to rest. So to read another set of researchers naysaying what the fuck I know is going on in my body, well, there's no way my reaction was going to be calm. But I didn't think I'd be this mad.

The article is uses words like "figment" and phrases like "the idea of a G-spot is subjective" and "encouraged by magazines and sex therapists."

Alright, I thought, maybe it's the media twisting words. So I found the abstract of the article: Genetic and Environmental Influences on Self-reported G-Spots in Women: A Twin Study.

Phew, I thought. Oh aha! I thought. See! I thought. It's about the fallibility of self-report! Not about the mythic- oh.

Here's are a couple of quotes from the abstract. Written by the alleged researchers:

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.

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.

Allegedly highly sensitive? And you can fairly hear the acid condescension dripping off that "genuine." Nice bone to throw us there, with that "women [may] differ in their ability to detect their own (true) G-spots" before driving it home that you think we're all too easily swayed by sex therapists and fucking Cosmo to know what's happening when we put our fingers there, yeah, right there.

What is that parenthetical "true" doing there? Can women detect their own (fake) g-spots with statistical ease? Feels to me like it's just there to make sure there isn't even a whiff of having taken the g-spot seriously in the first place.

The level of personal disdain and venom that seeps through the stuffy writing is uncomfortable to read.

I'll throw them a bone and say yeah, there are probably tons of people out there who have really small g-spots that are either really hard or impossible to find. And that among those who have found them, there are probably tons who don't dig the sensation that much; or all the time; or whatever. Individual human anatomy and sexual response are both variable. Shocking.

Hey! Here's a thought.

Why don't you ask women to self-report on their appendices?

I mean my sister, whose appendix almost burst, could most certainly give you details about what it felt like and where it was. But mine's never been irritated in such a way that it's swelled up. So I couldn't tell you what it feels like. Don't think I haven't looked! My lover touches me in that general area all the time! And once I tried pressing really hard where the research says it's supposed to be. Still nothing! I will tell you, then, that I don't have one.

And if I don't have one but she does, then we're probably all making this shit up.

*Props to Hawkeye for posting it and giving me the idea for the title.