The Politics of Penetration

Discovering the “G-Spot” in Late-20th Century America

Abstract

The Gräfenberg spot or “G-spot” was introduced to the US in the early 1980s. In a 1982 book The G Spot, the authors argued that vaginal orgasm through pressure on a specific spot in the vagina was both possible and desirable. Additionally, they argued women did not simply passively “have” G-spots, they also should do pelvic floor exercises to optimize their ability to experience vaginal orgasm. While medical researchers questioned the anatomy of the claimed G-spot, a mix of good publicity and public fascination helped bring the idea of the G-spot into the American consciousness. The concept became entangled in larger conversations about penetrative sex and heterosexuality. The G-spot promised a conservative revival of the mid-century Freudian vaginal orgasm that feminists and sexologists had since challenged. Meanwhile, the G-spot authors argued their vaginal orgasm was more modern and inclusive; it would be part of a contemporary project of broadening sexual possibilities rather than a reinstatement of an old sexual hierarchy. The text of the book and promotions around it often contradicted themselves on these points, however. Historians of sexuality and women’s and gender history have examined controversies over vaginal versus clitoral orgasm at mid-century but have given far less attention to the return of this debate in the 1980s and 1990s. With a landscape changed by 1970s feminism and sexual liberalism, the terms of the conversation were largely reimagined as questions of empowerment and individual sexual fulfillment. Amid this reimagination, though, much of the initial conversation around The G Spot framed the modernized vaginal orgasm around male pleasure, female body optimization, and heteronormativity. While some feminists rejected both the book and the G-spot concept for these reasons, sex-positive lesbian feminists actually became unlikely proponents of the G-spot in these decades, reframing it as transgressive rather than regressive.