• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

The female orgasm as you know it does not exist Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/lif

Admin

Administrator. Graeme
Staff member
he vaginal orgasm does not, and cannot, exist.
Furthermore, women do not ejaculate and the elusive, euphoric G-spot - G for "Gräfenberg" after gynaecologist Dr Ernst Gräfenberg - should perhaps be renamed the F-spot.
F for fantasy.
This is the last, anticlimactical, word on the female orgasm debate, according to a paper published in the latest issue of the journal Clinical Anatomy.
The researchers, from the Italian Centre for Sexology, argue that the only way for women to climax is through clitoral stimulation.
"Vaginal orgasm has no scientific basis and the term was invented by Freud," the authors say.
Rather, they conclude, "female orgasm is possible in all women, always with effective stimulation of the female erectile organs, eg, the female penis".
But not all sexual health professionals are happy with their ending.
It doesn't capture the complexity of female sexuality, including the female orgasm, argues Kayt Sukel, science writer and author of Dirty Minds: How Our Brains Influence Love, Sex and Relationships.
"While anatomy is important, sexual response is more than the sum of our nether regions," she says.
Sukel also points out that the researchers' dismissal of any other path to orgasm falls short for other reasons.
"In their anatomical reasoning, the authors do not explain why so many women don't climax even with sufficient clitoral stimulation – or why some are capable of orgasm in the absence of it," she says.
"They don't seem to take account of studies, outside the anatomical field, that examine the function of the vagus nerve, the role of the brain in orgasm, or how direct cervical stimulation can lead to orgasm in paralysed women."
The paper's authors argue that the female penis, aka the clitoris, is a purely external organ, thereby making an "internal" vaginal orgasm impossible.
This is contrary to the anatomical diagrams of New York's Museum of Sex and those of renowned Australian urologist Helen O'Connell.
"The clitoris is a very internal structure," O'Connell has said.
Dr Vivienne Cass of Curtin University's School of Public Health and author of The Elusive Orgasm says the clitoris is not "internal" like a kidney, but it is in a "cavity" area where the genitals lie.
"For the general public that would be seen as 'internal'," Cass says.
The paper's authors are being "pedantic about use of language", she says.
"The clitoris has long 'legs' inside the vaginal wall or behind it," sexual health therapist and Fairfax blogger Matty Silver agrees.
"If you tickle that part of the vagina, it's possible to [have an] orgasm from that."
As for orgasms via the "erotically sensitive" G-spot located (theoretically) a few centimetres inside the front vaginal wall, well ...
The 55 per cent of men who have apparently never found it should not fear, for it is but a fairy tale.
"The G-spot does not exist," the researchers state flatly, crushing the adult version of the tooth fairy fantasy.
They claim that recent "confirmations" of the G-spot have largely been made by cosmetic gynaecology clinicians who offer G-spot "augmentation".
The G-spot is "like a folk tale", the authors quote one bioethicist as saying.
"You can prove that something exists if you find it, but if you don't find it, that doesn't prove that it doesn't exist. The G-spot belongs in the same category as angels and unicorns."
Silver agrees that there is "no scientific basis" for a G-spot, but says it appears to be more of an erogenous "zone".
"It is not a spot but really an area of sensitivity created by the position of the urethral sponge lying against the vaginal wall," Cass explains.
The authors continue their sex myth debunking campaign by also rejecting the notion that female ejaculation exists.
However, they concede that "emissions", which occur via the intraurethral glands, can happen and this is a more accurate term "from a physiological point of view".
Silver agrees there is still debate around the idea of female ejaculation and what exactly it is, but says the conclusions about the female orgasm aren't quite as cut and dried as the paper's authors suggest.
They state that "female orgasm is possible in all women, always with effective stimulation" of the clitoris.
Perhaps, but Cass believes the authors' snapshot of female ecstasy is not the entire picture.
"Women can find engaging in sex to be very fulfilling and orgasm is not necessarily a part of this."
Silver, who says she has seen at least three women in the past week who have never been able to reach orgasm, agrees that "effective stimulation" is only one aspect of sexual ecstasy.
"You have to first become aroused," she says. "It's stimulation and arousal."
And, with that advice, the gauntlet is thrown.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lif...-not-exist-20141009-113cnn.html#ixzz3GkjiFqfL
 
giphy.gif
 
The names of the authors of this study suggest that they are husband and wife.

Anatomy of sex: Revision of the new anatomical terms used for the clitoris and the female orgasm by sexologists

Vincenzo Puppo and Giulia Puppo (2014)
Clin. Anat.. doi: 10.1002/ca.22471

I suggest that their marriage may be less than perfectly fulfilled.

The universality of the findings of Puppo and Puppo (2014) was refuted earlier today by my wife and myself (unpublished observations).
 
Top