andrewducker: (Default)
[personal profile] andrewducker

Date: 2014-10-18 10:37 am (UTC)
liv: oil painting of seated nude with her back to the viewer (body)
From: [personal profile] liv
From what I understand, the consensus about the G-spot in serious peer-reviewed literature is that some women have one and some don't. And yes, it's probably to do with stimulating the internal parts of the clitoris rather than being a separate structure. The anatomical variation thing means that studies that start from the assumption that it's something that all (cis) women either have or don't, just like all cis women have a clitoris, will find that there's "no such thing", but studies that are looking for anatomical variation will find a sub-population that do have a G-spot while many women genuinely don't have one.

Of course, a study that starts from the assumption that if women are anorgasmic it must be because their partners are crap at sex will probably find evidence to support that. Eg people, presumed male because lots of sex research is heterosexist, "should" focus more direct stimulation of the external clitoris and less on vaginal penetration. With that sort of assumption built into a study, the evidence would look consistent with that interpretation. Direct clitoral stimulation is probably good for lots of women and essential for women who lack a G-spot to be able to orgasm. But I think it's a mistake to claim that that type of sexual activity is more "feminist" or more pleasurable for all women.

May 2025

S M T W T F S
     1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 16th, 2025 02:37 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios