Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!basser!pete
From: pete@basser.oz (Peter Merel)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,aus.followup
Subject: Re: Female Orgasms and the G-spot
Message-ID: <2669@basser.oz>
Date: 26 Oct 89 08:49:11 GMT
References: <2599@basser.oz> <1701@moondance.cs.uq.oz> <2610@basser.oz> <1902@moondance.cs.uq.oz> <2662@basser.oz> <1947@moondance.cs.uq.oz>
Organization: Dept of Comp Sci, Uni of Sydney, Australia
Lines: 18

In article <1947@moondance.cs.uq.oz> ant@batserver.cs.uq.oz writes:
>pete@basser.oz (Peter Merel) writes:
>Unfortunately I am not prepared to spend the time that you have looking for
>articles to the contrary.  I think however I could find an equally convincing
>array of articles denying the existance of the G-Spot.  It is the same with
>anything that is not completely understood in science I suppose.

Read 'em again, ant. Those articles DO deny the existance of a G-spot. If you
mean articles denying vaginal erotic sensitivity - I couldn't find any. I
still haven't looked up Hoch & Alzate in the SCI, but will do sometime in
the next week.

For CC: the fluid I observed was clear, more viscous than I would expect
urine to be, and without any of the attendant odour of urine. The females in
question were healthy specimens as far as they or I know.
-- 
"A dog don't want a bone / That's why he buries it"
- James Brown                                                  pete@basser.oz.AU