平特五不中

Take-home message:
-Women have an organ analogous to the male prostate that is able to produce a liquid that can be ejaculated upon orgasm. Not all women produce ejaculate.
-The scientific study of female ejaculation and the female prostate has been greatly hindered by bad science, cultural taboos and sexism.

Female ejaculation, or the emission of a clear/whitish fluid from the female genitalia upon orgasm, was first referenced in Indian poems from the 7^th and 11^th centuries in rather stunning detail. made the of what would later be named the female prostate in 300 BC, and all made further description of female ejaculation prior to 1700.

In 1642 a Dutch researcher,, made a clinical description of the female prostate using modern scientific methods. In the 1800鈥檚, characterized the organ further and replaced its name with his own, calling it the.

But from here on the story of female ejaculation gets messy. Societal ideas of femininity, masculinity, gender and sexuality seemed to influence the scientific study of female ejaculation. A lot of good studies on the topic got overlooked, and some bad science got overused.

The tale of female ejaculation and the female prostate is important to tell not only because many women still struggle with orgasms, sexual fluids and their sex lives, but also because it serves as a shining example of how culture can influence science.

So, without further ado, let鈥檚 get down to the nitty gritty.

A Remake of an Old Classic: Can Women Ejaculate?

At the beginning of the 20^th century a renaissance of female ejaculation studies occurred. Early papers discussing the phenomenon lacked a unified opinion on whether a liquid may exit a woman鈥檚 genitals upon orgasm, and if it did, where it came from or what it was made of.

(now famous for first describing the) introduced a controversial idea in the 1950鈥檚 when he postulated that stimulation of the G-spot was responsible for the ejaculation of fluid through the Skene鈥檚 glands. Despite his status as a respected researcher of the female ejaculation were seen by academia as anecdotal at best and falsified at worst.

If the work of experts was not being recognized, it seemed unlikely that others would have luck publishing pro-female ejaculation research. And indeed, after Grafenberg came a of outright rejecting the notion of female ejaculation. Notably, even, famous for inventing the, and in many ways the father of modern sexology, on the topic of female ejaculation, claiming that it truly was contractions of the vagina pushing out the fluid from the vaginal walls, and therefore not an 鈥渁ctual ejaculation.鈥�

The in support of female ejaculation that were published postulated that female ejaculation might originate from small glands located just below the urethra. At the same time, another theory started making waves:that female ejaculation was just urinary incontinence.

But, for all of the papers being published, no actual studies were being performed. It wasn鈥檛 until the 80鈥檚 that studies of female ejaculation started occurring and turning up evidence for female ejaculation. A of on this subject in the mid 80鈥檚 consider to be the first 鈥渉ard鈥� research done on this subject. It was a case study and 鈥減rovided objective evidence supporting the hypothesis that female ejaculation, a partial, infertile homologue of male ejaculation, exists,鈥� and that it was at least in part from urine.

Are You Sure You鈥檙e Not Just Peeing? Really Sure?

The landscape of research shifted slightly after this case study, as the goal was no longer to prove or disprove the existence of the female ejaculation, but now to classify its composition and source.

To do this, 1980鈥檚 that either definitively classified urine and ejaculate as two distinct fluids or came to no conclusion at all. The only studies opposing this conclusion were performed by, and. Goldberg tested six women, Alzate only one. While Goldberg concluded that 鈥渢he ejaculate and urine seem to be one and the same,鈥� Alzate only wrote that the ejaculate and urine were chemically indistinguishable. Nonetheless it鈥檚 础濒锄补迟别鈥檚 study that was cited again and again as proof that female ejaculate was urine.

The 80鈥檚 and 90鈥檚 saw more that proved the non-urine nature of female ejaculate, so with the existence and nature of the ejaculate seemingly sorted, research shifted to finding its source.

Do Women Have A Prostate?

De Graaf had the term female prostate for the female ejaculatory organ, but this terminology had been rejected and reworked into the Skene鈥檚 glands, since it wasn鈥檛 thought the female prostate (if it even existed) was analogous to the male prostate. Well, the late 80鈥檚 saw the 鈥榝emale prostate鈥� for this organ, as the evidence mounted for the analogous nature of the male prostate gland and Skene鈥檚 glands.

The evidence pointed to a female prostate that was the source of female ejaculate, as well as a highly functioning hormone producing organ, with function to the male prostate., who performed hundreds of autopsies, chemical and clinical experiments, that 鈥渢he female prostate was observed at autopsy in two thirds of women of reproductive age鈥�. He also wrote that there was massive variation in prostate size, function and component ratio from woman to woman. These variations could explain why only some women ejaculate, and why the volume and colour of that ejaculate seemed so variable.

With the name 鈥渇emale prostate鈥�, semantic arguments seemed to dominate the conversation. over minute anatomical points, and whether the prostates found in women could be considered 鈥渨ell developed.鈥� They argued that since female ejaculate served no reproductive function, it shouldn't be called ejaculate. And they argued over the very. Did an ejaculation originate, by definition, exclusively from a penis? Did an ejaculation need to contain sperm?

Thankfully, in 2001 the Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology the Skene鈥檚 glands back to female prostate鈥欌�� and ended this tedious terminology argument once and for all.

Regardless of what it was called though, it seemed that the world had finally reached a consensus that women have prostates and can expel a fluid upon orgasm that is not urine. Research in support of female ejaculation, and systematic reviews, like by Pastor, further highlighted that female ejaculation was not due to urinary incontinence.

Thus, the long debate seems to have ended.

听

Ok, Women Have Prostates. So, What?

21^st century studies have been able to make great progress characterizing the female prostate. We now know it can suffer from the same diseases as the male prostate, like carcinoma, prostatitis, and prostate cancer. We also know that may be, and that these glands can develop.

New studies have found antimicrobial compounds, similar to those found in male ejaculate, in female ejaculate. So, it may be that female ejaculation could confer a protection against UTIs.

One of the last remaining mysteries was highlighted in a that took pelvic ultrasounds of seven women who self-reported experiencing ejaculation. It found that before and after orgasm the bladders of the women were empty, but during the build up to orgasm, the bladder rapidly filled, and then rapidly emptied upon ejaculation. This large-volume ejaculate was found to be chemically similar to the women鈥檚 urine (though not identical).

The to women not only ejaculating but experiencing: a small-volume ejaculate that is milky in colour and that originates primarily from the prostate, and a clear, larger-volume ejaculate originating primarily from the bladder.

Bad Science Doesn鈥檛 Only Affect Scientists

The bad science that paved the historical road of female ejaculation has had some serious effects. Our sordid history of female prostate denial has created a society unwilling to accept its existence, despite the scientific evidence.

For instance, have shown that people with vaginas are only shown reaching orgasm in pornographic movies in 18% of cases, with female ejaculation being shown 5% of the time, (As opposed to 78% and 90% respectively for men).

In pornographic depictions of female ejaculation, claiming that the fluid ejaculated is really urine. They justified this on the basis that urine is unsterile and could cause an infection if a participant had an open wound. That鈥檚 true of all sexual fluids, but I don鈥檛 see them banning male ejaculation.

It鈥檚 hard (if not impossible) to quantify the effects the non-acceptance of female ejaculation has had on women. In the most serious sense, cases of female prostate cancer and chronic UTIs have likely gone undiagnosed or untreated. In a less life-threatening sense, many women have had to face a body of evidence that denies their everyday sexual experience. A quote from a on this topic really highlights what women who ejaculated were up against: 鈥淭he ignorance and/or confusion still prevalent among women about the anatomy and physiology of their sexual organs may make them mistake either vaginal lubrication or stress urinary incontinence for an 鈥榚jaculation鈥�.鈥�

We should let the long journey to the 鈥渄iscovery鈥� of the female prostate serve as a cautionary tale. When we let poorly performed studies, misinterpreted results, and gendered assumptions drown out real evidence, we make mistakes, delay discoveries, and end up looking pretty dumb in retrospect.

I am fascinated that there still remain mysteries to uncover about our bodies, and truly excited to see what research is being done on female ejaculation and the female prostate now. I鈥檓 also waiting with bated breath to see when Gray鈥檚 Anatomy decides include the female prostate in its textbooks.

Want to comment on this article?