April 25, 2012

expert reaction to new anatomical study of the G-Spot

A study published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine purported to document that the G-Spot does anatomically exist, despite the fact the structure of this elusive structure has never previously been determined.

Prof Kevan R Wylie, Consultant in Sexual Medicine, NHS, Sheffield Hallam University, & University of Sheffield, and Associate Editor at Journal of Sexual Medicine, said:

“This latest case report proposes a further explanation to the presence of a distinct anatomical entity as the G-spot. This is a solitary post mortem case report in a woman whose orgasmic history and experiences are not described by the author. Explicit details of the sexual history, specialist scans (such as MRI) and possibly subsequent dissection case reports will be necessary to substantiate the existence of such an entity before this becomes accepted as the anatomical structure of the G-spot responsible for orgasm. Regardless, sexual medicine physicians and sexologists are in agreement that maximising orgasmic experiences allow for sexual pleasure and rewards of intimacy regardless of the anatomy and physiology responsible for such and beyond the more disputed reproductive advantages of an orgasm.

“The human clitoris-urethra vaginal complex (also known as the G-spot) has been a source of mystery and debate over decades for sexologists and sexual medicine physicians alike. The distinction between clitoral and vaginal orgasm is a well-rehearsed discourse.

“The exact anatomy responsible for vaginal orgasm remains unclear with reports of increases in the thickness of the urethra vaginal space being responsible for women who experience vaginal orgasm. It is proposed that glandular components of the female prostate (periurethral glands) may be the structure responsible. Other scientists have described the Kobelt venous plexus as responsible for orgasm following this structure being repeatedly crushed by the pressure of the penis during intercourse. The distance of the clitoris and the urethral meatus is a further possible link to vaginal orgasm through a couple of possible mechanisms. Alternatively, the G-spot could be explained due to the congested and engorged clitoral bulbs adjacent to the anterior vaginal wall occurring during sexual arousal.”

Dr Petra Boynton, Lecturer in Health Services Research, University College London, said:

“The current study is based on an autopsy of one woman. This is not going to be representative of all women. But rather than using it to add to the debate of do/don’t women have a g-spot journalists could use this opportunity to ask critical questions about the quality of existing research, what problems this can cause women and their partners, who benefits from the continued g-spot debate, and examine how we might instead celebrate diversity in sexual pleasure.

Additional information from Dr Boynton:

“Over the past five years there have been a series of papers published that claim to prove or disprove the existence of the g-spot. These studies have been limited by a number of problems including a small number of unrepresentative participants having their vaginas examined through ultrasound, or larger studies of women using self-report surveys with confusing questions such as: ‘Do you believe you have a so called G spot, a small area the size of a 20p coin on the front wall of your vagina that is sensitive to deep pressure?’.

“Despite these limitations the media response to these studies has been enthusiastic and uncritical. Often framing the research as a debate, asking women to say whether they can or can’t experience g-spot orgasm. It has rehearsed misleading stereotypes such as the idea women’s sexuality is understudied, that women’s orgasms are complex and mysterious, that women are unreliable in their sexual response, or that there are superior forms of orgasm that can be related to specific parts of the body.

“The media benefit from this as it generates debate and allows a discussion of sex that isn’t too frank but does sound scientific. Drug companies benefit as they have offered unlimited grants to some of these studies. Cosmetic surgeons benefit as they can use this research to indicate why g-spot amplification should be performed (despite it having tragic consequences for many women). Sex toy stockists benefit as they can sell products aimed at either stimulating the g-spot or the clitoris (depending on whether the g-spot is supposed to exist or not).

“However, women and their partners miss out as these studies do not fully explore the diverse ways women may experience arousal. We know that men experience pleasure and the sensation of orgasm in different parts of their genitals (for example the testicles or head of the penis). We also know that some men prefer to orgasm via oral sex or anal sex rather than penis-in-vagina sex. Yet we do not have numerous conflicting studies suggesting men who report pleasure from testicular stimulation are deluded, missing out, or need to learn to experience pleasure in other parts of their genitals. Or sell sex toys or advice manuals that encourage men to learn to enjoy vaginal sex rather than oral or anal penetration because these are ‘superior’. Yet we persistently try and make out there are unique parts of the female genitals that should or should not be stimulated to encourage orgasm. And we seem obsessed with proving or disproving that orgasms ‘happen’ in the g-spot (or not).”

‘G-Spot Anatomy: A New Discovery’ by Adam Ostrzenski, published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine on Wednesday 25th April.