There’s no G-Spot??

by Jason Stotts

In an interesting turn of events, the BBC is reporting that the g-spot may be a myth, in their piece called “The G-Spot ‘Does Not Appear to Exist,’ says Researchers.”  To quote the article: “The elusive erogenous zone said to exist in some women may be a myth, say researchers [from King’s College in London] who have hunted for it.”  This should come as shocking news to the women who frequently experience g-spot stimulation and report that it is different from other vaginal stimulation.  Unfortunately, reporting seems to be the problem as the study did not actually involve any science, but merely asked respondents to self report whether they thought they had a g-spot. I can’t even make stuff like this up.  “The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot.”  One of the authors of the reports that: “This is by far the biggest study ever carried out and shows fairly conclusively that the idea of a G-spot is subjective.”  From the self-reports of only 1800 women (and no bisexual or lesbian women, since they were purposefully excluded), the researchers can now say that such a spot must be a myth, or else these women would have known about it.  Frankly, it is a shame that this kind of thing passes for science.

The webcomic XKCD makes a good point about the silliness of the article with their new comic “G-Spot”:

It really doesn’t matter if the researchers fail to find it through a flawed study based on self reporting (which is hardly science).  Violet Blue makes a great point by comparing it to asking straight men whether the prostate exists based on self-reporting.  The idea is just because a man has never reached into his ass to feel his prostate, does not mean it is not there. The same goes for the g-spot.

One of the few things that I can agree with in this study is the principle that: “It is rather irresponsible to claim the existence of an entity that has never been proven.” Unfortunately, this principle works better as an argument against any kind of god, for which no evidence could exist, than against the g-spot, for which much evidence does exist.  Also, in the interest of philosophical precision, the g-spot is not an entity but a part of an entity (this may explain why they couldn’t find it).