The OG G-Spot Paper Summary
Welcome to another SSL summary of an article relating to female orgasm in a scientific journal. My goals with these is to find some balance between conveying the valuable details of an article, but also trying to make make it a bit more succinct and accessible.
I’m on a kick to summarize a solid selection of female ejaculation or squirting papers because I feel like there has been a sharp increase in questions about it, depictions of it, and sexpert advice on it. I have a few already, but I should really have more of a selection here, ya know. I’m starting this new sprint with this 1950 article because it’s often mentioned as one of the first modern discussions of the ‘G-Spot.’ However, it was not called that at the time because the term “G-Spot” was actually coined in about 1980 in a paper related to the 1981 book, “The G-Spot and Other Recent Discoveries about Female Sexuality.” They named it ‘the G-Spot’ after Grafenberg - the author of this here paper we will be summarizing.
“The role of urethra in female orgasm.” Gräfenberg, Ernest. The International Journal of Sexology. 1950. vol. III, no. 3: 145-148. You can find the full PDF HERE (you can find this PDF pretty easily in a variety of places, but I like this one because it is a copy of the actual pages of the journal and you can see pieces of the articles before and after this one - including one about a British sex survey created in the wake of the Kinsey Report on Male Sexuality. For time reference, 1950 was after Kinsey’s study on males came out, but before his study on females came out.)
You can check out the list of all the past Scientific Journal Article Summaries HERE.
QUICK OVERVIEW (My personal description with my opinions included)
First off, I want to make it clear that this is not an actual scientific study. It does not use the scientific method to create and run an experiment. It is not a study, and it’s not a review of other studies. It’s more of an opinion article by a New York gynecologist, Dr. Grafenberg, based on his personal observations and discussions with his patients (and, I don’t know, I get the vibe that he’s kinda throwing in his experiences with lovers too...maybe even patient/lovers???).
So, there’s no actual studied observations to pull from here. However, it’s an important piece of history because it’s got some cool, progressive elements that influenced future thought and research. At the same time, I would add that it also included some as-expected-from-1950 stuff, and also a touch of wildly unhinged statements. It’s a fun mix.
It’s cool and progressive because it seems to be putting forth ideas and realistic understandings of female sexual functioning that didn’t really hit popular culture for another 20-40 years. For instance:
He pushes back on the idea of women being called frigid just because they can’t orgasm vaginally with their husbands. He basically says a woman isn’t frigid if she can orgasm clitorally, orgasm with women but not men, or can orgasm with one man but not another. Respect to you, 1950’s doctor.
He also does note the reality of female ejaculation/squirting. Although he doesn’t specifically call it that, he does describe sexual expulsion of fluids from the urethra that he does not believe is urine.
He also describes the swelling of the urethra and surrounding erectile tissue that can be felt though the lower front wall of the vagina. He speaks of the sensitivity to touch and pressure related to that and how stimulation of that area can cause sexual expulsion of fluids from the urethra. That’s still the basic understanding of “The G-Spot,” and stimulating that is still understood to be one way of eliciting ejaculation or squirting. (I would note, though, that the term ‘G-Spot’ over the last 40 years has also taken on lots of other, non verified meanings including a magical button in the vagina that causes orgasms as well as ejaculations and squirting)
He also just got some things wrong because it wasn’t understood back then. For instance:
He wrongly indicates that glands at the opening of the vagina (Bartholin’s Glands) create vaginal lubrication. It wasn’t until 16 years later that Masters and Johnson proved lubrication seeps through the vaginal wall as a result of increased blood flow during sexual arousal.
He insinuates that masturbation in older women can lead to inflammation of the clitoris that causes hypersensitivity and loss of ability to stimulate the clit to orgasm. There’s no evidence that this is a problem that exists for masturbation and older women. In fact studies have shown older women (and men) should expect to have normal, although sometimes a bit slower, sexual functioning through to orgasm. My guess is Grafenberg is actually describing some sort of treatable vulva irritation issues.
He also said some things I would classify as straight up bonkers. For instance:
He uses his “experience with numerous woman” to describe the arousal and ‘orgasms’ from stimulating the front vaginal wall. However, he doesn’t say anything about any specific study he did that these women were part of. Was there a study he’s not disclosing? Was he sexually stimulating his patients during examinations? Is he just recounting his personal sexual experiences? It’s strange and suspect for publication in a Scientific Journal article.
Similarly he tells a story of a patient unable to orgasm with her older husband and worried about being frigid. He asks her if she’s ever orgasmed with another man. She says no. However, later she calls him anonymously in the middle of the night and says he was right. Sounds to me like a sus story for a scientific journal.
He says that “there is no part of the female body which does not give sexual response.” He goes on to give some examples, saying, “inserting the penis between the two breasts lead to an orgasms.” I mean, for the person with the penis, yes, but the person with the breast? He also says, “insertion of the penis in the external orifice of the ear,” is an illustration of the variable erotic zones in women. But, dude. is it, though???
He tells a story of a patient that lost vaginal orgasm completely, but “orgasm could be achieved with a finger in the anus and the penis in the vagina.” That’s all he says about it. Nothing about why or how she lost it. How she previously achieved vaginal orgasm. How he came to learn about this situation or even if it was verified in any way other than her just telling him. And...ya know, I can’t help but wonder from how this was phrased and randomly added in this paper…was it his penis in that patient’s vagina and his finger in that patient’s butt that heroically got her “vaginal orgasm” back???
Also, just in general, the arguments are not very clear. The writing is a bit all over the place, and although there is some good info in here, it feels a bit like a dude stream of consciousness telling you things he’s seen sexually in women over the years.
THE ARTICLE SUMMARY
In these summaries, you can assume that anything I write is a genuine attempt to reflect what is said in the paper - even if it's shortened or summarized. My opinions, if I have any to add, will either be inside brackets likes these [ME:], or in a section headed in a way that clearly lets you know these are personal opinions. All quotes are from this article unless specifically noted.
Frigidity, Orgasm, and the Vagina and (these sections are mine, not Dr. Grafenberg’s. This article actually has no sections)
“A rather high percentage of women do not climax in sexual intercourse.” The frigidity rated vary among authors from 10-80%, but they can’t really be compared because of how frigidity is defined in such various ways.
A woman should not be considered frigid just because she cannot orgasm vaginally. Lesbians are frigid with men, but not women. Some women are frigid with one man but not another. Some women enjoy normal heterosexual intercourse, but don’t orgasm. Many “frigid” women love all the aspects of necking. “A woman with only clitoris orgasm is not frigid and sometimes is even more active sexually, because she is hunting for a male partner who would help her to achieve the fulfillment of her erotic dreams and desires.”
[ME: I’m not completely sure what that quote means or if it means anything really, but I like saying a woman that can only have clitorally stimulated orgasms is not frigid. That was progressive at the time.]
He goes on to describe a patient, worried about being frigid, that kept pestering persistently about why she couldn’t have an orgasm with her much older husband. He got bored by her questions and asked if she’d tried relations with another man. She said no and left his office reflectively. In the middle of the next night, he got a call from a familiar (but anonymous) voice that told him he was right. She never asked further questions.
[Me: I’ll be honest, this feels way too much like hearsay to be in a scientific journal. If I’m real honest, it feels like a strange, kind of arrogant dramatizations of what he hoped or imagined would happen. If I’m at my most terribly honest, I imagine this was a situation where he had sex with a patient that couldn’t orgasm with her older husband, and she ‘orgasmsed’ with him, but he couldn’t tell it that way in the paper, but also wanted to brag about it. That’s just where my mind went. Give it no credence. ]
What really is the criteria for sexual satisfactions? Sexologists should understand what they are talking about before problems of female satisfaction can be solved. [ME: he should probably take that advise himself]
He says that despite lots of literature, “our knowledge of the mechanism and the localisation of the final climax is insufficient. Different organs and their stimulation work as a trigger and cause an increase of the sexual "potential" up to the level where the orgasm goes off. One could suppose that the clitoris alone is involved in causing excitation, since this organ is an erotic center even before puberty, though it is aided by other erotogenic zones”
[ME: First, it is true that at that time, there wasn’t great physiological data about female orgasm. It wasn’t until 1966 that Masters and Johnson’s work was released and changed that. Second, that ‘erotic center, even before puberty’ statement, seems to be coming from Freud’s infamous, and completely baseless but incredibly popular at the time, assertion that the erotic center should be moved from the external clitoris during childhood to the inside of the vagina in order to achieve true maturity and thus orgasm from penetrative sex - aka not become a frigid wife. I’m not completely sure why I’m pointing that out, but I think in some way it shows that Grafenburg was pushing back on Freud’s idea of Frigidity while also keeping it at the center of serious discussion about female sexual functioning]
Grafenberg says there are countless areas of the body that can elicit sexual satisfaction. “There are so many that we can almost say that there is no part of the female body which does not give sexual response, the partner has only to find the erotogenic zones.”
[ME: This feels like a completely bonkers, yet strangely contemporary, way to speak about the female body - because the male body is rarely spoken about like this. It’s as if ladies are somehow magical beings that can elicit orgasm out of any and every part of their body without any actual evidence to back that up.]
He describes a few different non-clit possible erotic zones. “Kissing the nipples, touching them with the penis, or inserting the penis between the two breasts lead to an orgasm. Cunnilingus or even insertion of the penis in the external orifice of the ear are other illustrations of the variability of the erotogenic zones in females.” Even later in the article he kind of randomly adds this paragraph that feels not super related to the ones around it. “It is possible to cause an orgasm merely by using some stimulating sentence. Such a reaction follows the laws of the unconditioned reflexes.” [ME: Somehow I feel like it’s a bit unhinged to include cunnilingus and putting a penis in the earhole together as somewhat equally erotic situations for a woman. I also object to the idea that a penis between a lady’s breasts or saying a stimulating sentence to her would cause orgasm.]
He also kind of veers off and discusses how in post-menopausal women, masturbation can cause the clit, particularly under the clitoral hood, to get inflamed, making it hypersensitive and unable to produce orgasm. He says that “the erotogenic power of the clitoris passes then mostly to the neighborhood of the genital organs, to the inside of the small labia, or to the pubic region of the abdomen.” He notes the anal entrance can be used as well - not for anal intercourse but for a finger insertion. Then he tells a story of another of his patients that lost her vaginal orgasm completely, “but orgasm could be achieved with a finger in the anus and the penis in the vagina.”
[Me: This paragraph also seems a bit unhinged. He goes from saying older women lose their ability to stimulate their clit to orgasm because it gets inflamed and hypersensitive, but then uses a patient example that has nothing to do with losing her clitorally stimulated orgasm, but instead losing her vaginal orgasm. Then I guess the moral of the story is that if you stick a finger up her butt, that can bring a vaginal orgasm back? And also, about the clit inflammation in old age - he has no data to back that up, and I’m not vulva specialist, but there doesn’t seem to be any studies about that as a problem, much less a natural part of growing older. In fact, Masters and Johnson, who actually did a specific study on orgasm in older people, overall reported normal, although somewhat slower, arousal and orgasm functioning. My guess is that Grafenberg’s statement refers to some other irritating, yet treatable vulva conditions that may be more prominent in old age.]
He also said frigidity after hysterectomy may happen as well - most likely when they remove large parts of the vagina. [Me: which I believe is not a common practice today]
He claims that the uterus and cervix do not take part in producing orgasm, even though there have been claims that there is a sucking in of sperm by the cervix into the uterus.
[Me: What does the cervix’s part in sucking up sperm during an orgasm have to do with the cervix’s part in producing orgasm. I mean I agree that stimulation of the cervix or uterus has not been shown to cause orgasm. However, the way he made that connection is just an example of the kind of chaotic nature of Grafenberg’s arguments and language in this paper, which is just sort of annoying and creates a lot of pretend meaning where there really is none.]
Anyway, Grafenberg goes into description of the experiment but doesn’t give details or citations to reveal who did this study. Apparently the women participants had ‘frequent sex” with “satisfying orgasm” with a cervical cap filled with contrast oil. X-rays show the contrast oil was never ‘sucked up” into the cervix.
[Me: This study does seem to hold up, though. Dr. Elisabeth Lloyd investigates this idea that female orgasm actually helps fertility by getting the sperm to the egg quicker. She reviews all the studies out there, including one similar to this, and also finds that there’s no solid evidence that this is the case.]
He then discusses the current skepticism around the idea of vaginal orgasms based on Kinsey reporting lack of nerve endings in the vagina [Me: this is based on a Q-tip test Kinsey and team did in the vagina where they noted when women reported feeling it; and also on lack of survey reports of vaginally stimulated orgasm from the women Kinsey and team interviewed throughout the 30’s].
“Some investigators of female sex behavior believe that most women cannot experience vaginal orgasm because there are no nerves in the vaginal wall. In contrast to this statement by Kinsey, Hardenberg mentions that nerves have been demonstrated only inside the vagina in the anterior wall, proximate to the base of the clitoris [ME: actually it seems there is a small amount of nerves distributed fairly evenly throughout the the entirety of the vaginal walls- although nowhere near the amount of nerves in places like the clitoral glans]. This I can confirm by my own experience of numerous women. An erotic zone always could be demonstrated on the anterior wall of the vagina along the course of the urethra. Even when there was a good response in the entire vagina, this particular area was more easily stimulated by the finger than the other areas of the vagina. Women tested this way always knew when the finger slipped from the urethra by the impairment of their sexual stimulation. During orgasm this area is pressed downwards against the finger like a small cystocele protruding into the vaginal canal. It looked as if the erotogenic part of the anterior vaginal wall tried to bring itself in closest contact with the finger. It could be found in all women, far more frequently than the spastic contractions of the levator muscles of the pelvic floor which are described as objective symptoms of the female orgasm by Levine. After the orgasm was achieved, a complete relaxation of the anterior vaginal wall sets in.”
[Me: First, is it strange to you all that he says “from my own experience with numerous woman” instead of something like my experience testing numerous female patients? Doesn’t it sound like he’s telling you his personal sexual experiences? I mean he says the word ‘test’ but doesn’t reference any specific testing he was doing. He is describing his experience of how women reacted to sexual stimulation and orgasm. Was this some undisclosed scientific experiment he was doing, or just sexual encounters he’s had, or did he sexually stimulate his patients during examination? It’s unclear, but I would say highly suspect in relation to how we should perceive the ‘data’ he’s putting forth. I mean, if these were sexual partners or patients that were being sexually stimulated, they have every reason to, oh I don’t know, fake an orgasm for him. And when he says it could be found in all women…how many women was he talking about that he ‘experienced’?]
[Me: That quoted paragraph above is kind of all over the place and kind o hard to follow, but this is my personal perception of what he’s talking about. I believe that he is describing his experience specifically about stimulating the ‘G-Spot’ area in the vagina with his finger (and I don’t know if these were patients or sex partners or test subjects, but it doesn’t matter too much to this assessment). He describes women noticing when he moved stimulation to other areas of the vagina because it was less stimulating to them. He says this to support the idea that there is tactile sensitivity in the vagina. He describes feeling the protrusion (G-Spot, aka urethra and surrounding erectile tissues felt though the wall of the vagina) pressing down during “orgasm,” and he says that was a far more frequent occurrence than feeling the involuntary rhythmic pelvic muscle contractions that are known to be markers of orgasm (note: this is about 16 years even before Master’s and Johnson showed that muscular marker in thousands of physical observations orgasms and cemented it as a marker). So, what makes sense to me is that Grafenberg was stimulating in a way that elicits ejaculation or squirting, but doesn’t seem to elicit orgasm. They are different things, and he wasn’t feeling the muscular markers of orgasm because he wasn’t doing things that would sensibly elicit orgasm, even though he used the word ‘orgasm’ to describe what was happening. He was feeling the results of ejaculations or squirting (or faking - that’s always a possibility too). My point is, this article likely confuses 2 different sexual responses and calls them all ‘orgasm.’ It’s pretty much what even progressive and thoughtful sexperts do today, but it is problematic for creating good experimental data and accurate advice about what different kinds of stimulation are likely to elicit in a female body. All that to say, he’s on the early ends of this type of research, so I’ll forgive him this confusion. I’m not so forgiving about current confusing language and ignorance on this topic.]"
The Urethra Related to Sex, Lubrication, and Liquid Expulsion Through the Urethra
Grafenberg moves on to saying erotogenic zones in the urethra “are sometimes the cause” of urethral masturbation. He tells a story of two young girls he’s seen that each stuck a hairpin up their urethra moving it forward and backwards, but “during the ecstasy of orgasm” the pin went into the bladder. It caused problems, obviously, and they had to be removed. He then goes on to say, without describing how he knows this, that “Since the old hairpins are no more in use, pencils are used for urethral onanism (aka masturbation). They are longer than the hairpins and do not glide into the bladder so easily, though they cause a painful urethritis.” (AKA inflammation and irritation of the urethra). He thinks men might be into this too. “I saw a patient with a rifle bullet which glided into his bladder. He had played with it while he was lonesome on duty on New Years Eve.”
He says the female urethra also seems to be surrounded by erectile tissues, like the male urethra is, because it enlarges during stimulation and can be felt easily. He says it swells a lot at the end of orgasm and the most stimulating part is where it comes out from the neck of the bladder.
[Me: He is correct that, although it’s not quite the same swelling tissue as surrounds the male urethra, there does seem to be erectile tissue around the female urethra. As for what he says is the most stimulating part of the urethra, I don’t know. I mean, he doesn’t give any evidence for that to be true or really even define what ‘most stimulating’ means]
He then says that some women have complained that their sexual feelings were impaired when using a diaphragm pessary as birth control. However, their “orgastic capacity” was restored by using a plastic cervical cap instead, which did not cover the erogenous zone on the front wall of the vagina (aka G-Spot). He said those complaints were more common in Europe than in the U.S.
[Me: It’s of note that Grafenberg does have some unique insight into this. He created one of the first IUDs - Grafenberg’s Ring - when he was in Germany, where he practiced medicine from about 1905 to 1940. He was Jewish and eventually imprisoned there until Margret Sanger ransomed him out, and he came to the US and started a practice.]
He says the glands around the vaginal opening have a lubricating effect - especially the Bartholin Gland. [Me: this was proven incorrect by Masters and Johnson about 15 years later. The lubrication actually seeps through the vaginal walls as a result of the increased pelvic blood flow during sexual arousal].
About the lubrication he says, “Sometimes the mucus is produced so abundantly and makes the vulva slippery, that the female partner is inclined to compare it with the ejaculation of the male.” [ME: this statement makes it seem to me like getting enough lubrication to make the vulva slippery is, like, not usual? That seems like a problem.]
Then he does seem to be describing squirting. “Occasionally the production of fluids is so profuse that a large towel has to be spread under the woman to prevent the bed sheets getting soiled. This convulsory expulsion of fluids occurs always at the acme of the orgasm and simultaneously with it. If there is the opportunity to observe the orgasm of such women, one can see that large quantities of a clear transparent fluid are expelled not from the vulva, but out of the urethra in gushes. At first I thought that the bladder sphincter had become defective by the intensity of the orgasm. Involuntary expulsion of urine is reported in sex literature. In the cases observed by us, the fluid was examined and it had no urinary character. I am inclined to believe that "urine" reported to be expelled during female orgasm is not urine, but only secretions of the intraurethral glands correlated with the erotogenic zone along the urethra in the anterior vaginal wall.”
[Me: 1. What does he mean when he says ’observed by us’? Who is ‘us’? If there were actual studies he and a team performed he doesn’t describe them at all. 2. I’ll just point out that he is using the word ‘orgasm’ here, when he’s actually describing ejaculation or squirting. They are different things, and although it is possible to have an orgasm and ejaculation for females at the same time, much like in males, it’s more likely that he is calling ejaculation/squirting an ‘orgasm’ because that’s what he’s done throughout the article. Sensibly, at this time in history, there isn’t much knowledge about this, and it wouldn’t make sense for him to have precise and careful language around these different physiological sexual reactions. Ssadly, now we do have precise and careful language, but unfortunately even progressive and thoughtful sexperts still just call everything and anything orgasm - so it’s not like we’re doing better with this than Grafenberg was doing 75 years ago.]
At this point he starts talking about specifics of what sexual stimulation works best for women, and again, it’s kind of chaotic and unclear.
“The intensity of the orgasm is dependent on the area from which it is elicited. Mostly, cunnilingus leads to a more complete orgasm and (consequent) relaxation.”
But he also says, “intercourse from the back of the woman is the most natural one,” believing it is the best way to stimulate the anterior (front) wall of the vagina where the urethra is, and that it’s sensibly the best because that’s how our 4-legged ancestors did it.
He also, though, says that “The woman-on-top posture is more stimulating as the erotogenic parts come in contact better. The angle which is formed by the erected penis and the male abdomen has a great influence on the female orgasm.”
[Me: I honestly don’t know what exactly he means with the last one. Is he talking about the ability to angle the woman’s body so the external clit can rub against the man’s abdomen. Or, is he talking about some type of angle of the penis inside the vagina? It’s not clear, and thus not that helpful, but it’s also just kinda like, his opinion, man. And, ya know, he says in a couple different ways in this paper that pretty much any part on a woman can cause orgasm, so I don’t even know why he’d bother going into detail because anything you do to her should work, right?]
He ends with:
This short paper will, I hope, show that the anterior wall of the vagina along the urethra is the seat of a distinct erotogenic zone and has to be taken into account more in the treatment of female sexual deficiency.”
[ME: I mean, he was right that there is sexual functioning related to the stimulation of the ‘g-spot’ and it’s pretty cool he was saying it so boldly at this time in history. That sexual functioning is more realistically described as ejaculation or squirting instead of ‘orgasm’ as he often described it. However, at that time the difference between orgasm and ejaculation in women and how to talk about that was not at all clear, so I get it. I don’t get contemporay, educated sex professionals still doing that same thing, but I digress]
ALSO - There’s another good summary of this Grafenberg Paper HERE in case you are interested.
