The Instigator
SolonKR
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
TheShaun
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Resolved: The G-Spot is a Myth

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
SolonKR
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,545 times Debate No: 86163
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (42)
Votes (4)

 

SolonKR

Pro

I will argue that the G-Spot is a myth. The BoP falls on me.
1st round acceptance only.
No new arguments in the last round.
TheShaun

Con

Since it has already been scientifically proven to exist, you lost this debate before it even started. In the future, don't state your misinformed opinions about subjects that have already been proven or debunked.

Also, don't even waste your time requesting a citation for the scientific research. You should know how to use google by now since even small children already do. I will not do the work for you. Take responsibility for your own education like any adult should and go look up the information yourself.

In conclusion, you're an idiot when you say stupid things like that.
Debate Round No. 1
SolonKR

Pro

Con has certainly come out swinging (contrary to the rules, I might add), but no matter how hard he swings, he will not be able to stimulate the mythical G-spot. I may be a virgin, but I can compensate for that with the one and only source for friends, information, and everything: the Internet. The always-fair-and-balanced Huffington Post informs me that belief in the existence of such a wives' tale is to be not "cliterate" (1). This infallible source has informed me that female orgasms in fact come from stimulation of the clitoris, which is the source of every female orgasm. Also, the clitoris is like a mini-penis, which is pretty cool. The scientific evidence to suggest the existence of the G-spot just isn't there; it is a myth created by Big Pharma to sell dubious "sex-enhancing" procedures, denounced by The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2). When doctors who spend many of their waking hours examining buttholes, consequently devoid of most passions in life, write such a scathing critique, it is obvious that something is egregiously wrong.

However, if that's not enough, consider an even MORE impartial source: Salon.com. It goes a bit more in-depth, noting that an area--the area of the "G-spot" is sexually erogenous, but concludes something so amazing, something so breathtaking, that I had to look at it three times, call every female I know, and spend 3 years in a Buddhist temple contemplating existence. This fact? The entire vagina is an erogenous zone (3). The G-spot might be real in the same sense that I can arbitrarily denote an A-spot, B-spot, and C-spot-run, but to claim it exists in the common understanding of the term, as a magical zone that can make poorly-trained men look like a sex god, is just false.

I might be a little short in the "anecdotal evidence" category for this, but my wife, Windows Eight, directed me to yet another fact that makes my virginity true serenity. 80% of women admit to faking orgasms (4). So, the next time you've got your hand shoved inside your lady-friend's lady parts, just remember, there's an 80% chance that she's lying to you every night. No wonder men don't trust women.

I have easily disproved the existence of the G-spot, but all of this evidence leads to an even bigger point. Based on the evidence I have presented, I posit that women do not actually exist at all, but are artificial beings created by the government. Think about it. The clitoris is like a tiny penis inside the vagina. 80% of women fake orgasms, 0% of men do. Men are generally physically stronger. There are arbitrary denotations of parts of the female body that have been proven false. This makes it abundantly clear: women are the products of not-yet-perfected scientific surgeries performed by the government on men. Why else would they have such trouble orgasming, and have small penises inside them?

If all this wasn't being hidden from us, why isn't there an episode of Mythbusters about it?

As Dwight D. Eisenhower famously warned, the military-industrial complex has come down upon us. Big Brother is watching. I pray to Breitbart and AlterNet that you all stay safe.

Sources:
1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
2. http://www.acog.org...
3. http://www.salon.com...;
4. http://www.nbcnews.com...
TheShaun

Con

Against your rules? Fact is all that matters. You can shove your personal rules where the sun don't shine. You are scientifically proven wrong years before you ever started this debate. Don't throw a childish tantrum about rules. You are scientifically proven wrong. You lose. Period.

Your only source is the internet? Troll.

"The always-fair-and-balanced Huffington Post" what a joke. Another obvious troll.

Yeah, I stopped reading once I saw you get all your info from a borderline tabloid. Two of your links weren't even about the G-spot. The other two are not trusted sources. They are organizations known to be bias just like fox news. You're only hurting your case here.

Anyone who votes on this debate can easily google the facts about it and see many scientific research articles that prove the G-spot is a real thing. Any of them who have had relations with a woman using his digits can also call you a fool or liar. And Any female who has had any sexual stimulation from the inside WILL tell you that you're wrong. You simply lose.

Go ahead and cry again about how I approach it. I have zero tolerance for stupid people and I will not play nice with you. If you want to be taken seriously and be treated like an adult, then start acting like one and stop saying stupid things that were proven wrong many years ago. I'm not here to be nice or polite. I'm here to reveal truth. Screw your feelings. Me hurting your feeling or me being rude does not change the facts. The facts are the ONLY part that matters. Grow up.
Debate Round No. 2
SolonKR

Pro

Con continues to lash out with fighting words. Such words are fitting to his position, as he has nothing concrete to actually support his government-propagandized ideas. I agree that fact is paramount in this debate; I have used nothing but the highest quality sources, while Con has no rebuttal other than, “but, science.” I have scienced far more than he has scienced in this debate; so hard, in fact, that I may have broken my science. Con’s attacks on my sources are unwarranted, as they provided links to the original studies, which is far more than Con has been able to do. I am also here to reveal truth. For example, Abraham Lincoln was a space pirate. It’s true. I read it online.

Also, Con’s contention that one can easily “[G]oogle the facts” is true. In fact, I Googled them to find the very sources I presented in my opening round. I’m glad that he and I are in agreement that my side is the objectively correct one.

I have no idea what Con is going on about when he says that two of my sources are not about the G-spot and therefore irrelevant; I clearly tied each source to my case. It must be more Big Pharma attempted cover-ups.

“Any of them who have had relations with a woman using his digits can also call you a fool or liar. And Any female who has had any sexual stimulation from the inside WILL tell you that you're wrong.”

Again, I demonstrated that 80% of “females” fake orgasms. So, men’s experiences are automatically void, and the “female” testimony is highly questionable. Again, it is the tiny penis known as the clitoris that causes actual orgasms, as I proved last round. Get cliterate.

I feel no need to advance more positive arguments in this round, as Con has let every single one of my points stand. Of course he has, as I am objectively correct. The G-spot doesn’t exist for two reasons, as I showed: 1) The clitoris is responsible for the “female” orgasm, and 2) Women don’t exist. I wish that Con could attain this basic level of cliteracy, but as he is clearly an agent of Big Pharma, it makes sense that he denies the basic facts in front of him.

However, perhaps there is a small chance that Con is, in fact, genuinely incredulous. In that case, I will set down another argument in logical premises:

    1. I think, therefore I am.

    1. Because I am, I am part of reality.

    1. Perception is the means by which we can analyze reality.

    1. Either my perception is sound, or is not sound.

    1. If my perception is not sound, then the world as I know it does not exist.

    1. If the world as I know it does not exist, the surgically altered males commonly known as “females” do not exist.

    1. Therefore, Con must acknowledge that my perception is sound.

    1. I perceive that I am in fact the only living being on this planet.

    1. Therefore, I am the only living being on this planet.

    1. Because I am male, and the only living being, females do not exist.

I rest my case. I shall not cry. I cannot cry, when I am in the course of the noblest of causes--the defense of reason. I shall not allow Big Pharma to distort the realities of everyday life. I must rise to the occassion to defend the American Dream and the American way of life. This blatant distortion of the facts is a criminal act by our government, seeking to oppress us all. Obama, Bush, Clinton, other Bush, Reagan... even Washington is not innocent of this most heinous of crimes. This is so scandalous that even A People's History of the United States is unwilling to mention the countless government gender-reassignment facilities. That's the true nature of Area 51. I have always fought for the truth and will continue to do so.

Just remember, as the reincarnation of Jesus (Milton Friedman) said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." We must stop this terrible government program of gender reassignment. Spread the words, and tell your friends with the hashtag #WeAreAllMenInside
TheShaun

Con

You outed yourself as a troll once you started talking about Lincoln being a space pirate. You just forfeit. Have a nice day :)
Debate Round No. 3
SolonKR

Pro

Evidentally, my opponent doesn't believe in space pirates either. I thought it was common knowledge, so posting conclusive photographic evidence shouldn't be a violation of the rules, as the argument was made last round: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...

With that out of the way, I shall conclude this long and tumultous debate that will forever be a cornerstone of American political history.

I have truly demonstrated my cliteracy throughout the course of this debate. That small penis known as the clitoris has become the mighty penis of truth and justice. As the old saying goes, a penis in the hand is worth two in the bush, so I hope that everyone has been sufficiently repulsed by the facts that I have brought to life to turn to their own devices.

Big Pharma has attempted to bring us down, but the facts do not lie. There are no women in this world, and anyone who says otherwise is just attempting to control your life, steal your wife, and fill your days with strife, yo. Take care, and beware, it's a perfect time to be scared. Oh boy, there's no joy, the man is using you as a toy. Big Pharma lies; they won't say why, but they're trying to make you die.

I have fulfilled my BoP more than adequately with specific information and citations, as well as logical analysis. Big Pharma has only thrown empty assertions.
Take these lessons to heart, my children, and vote Pro in peace.
TheShaun

Con

Obvious troll is obvious.
Debate Round No. 4
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by mostlogical 11 months ago
mostlogical
Get Cliterate lol
Posted by TheShaun 11 months ago
TheShaun
@Stonehe4rt "you will not change or learn anything from talking with you". There is nothing for me to learn from you that I am not already aware.

"However what you stated was not fact". The G-spot's existence IS a fact. The proof I referred to is multiple scientific studies that prove every claim of the G-spot being a myth completely wrong. I just didn't hand deliver the proof to anyone, I told you how easily it can be found so you can go look for yourself. I will NOT do other people's legwork for them.

"Well the debate is questioning then too so you must prove them as well". Actually, I don't. Their proof already proves themselves.

"unable to convince people of the truth." Then that is their loss.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 11 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Well it seems you obviously aren't not very maluable of a person. So as I can see you will not change or learn anything from talking with you, then I will let this rest and say your right. Your right that good and bad can be seen as subjective, your right that the G-spot exist, your right. However what you stated was not fact, as it was brought to question you cannot claim something is fact with just your opinion. You may have reason to believe that it was real, however the proof you offered and the like was also subjective, since the debate was questioning such things. How do you know that the info you got was wrong? Because others proved it? Well the debate is questioning then too so you must prove them as well and ect.... I understand that you are obviously right, but for fact and debate's sake which you do not care for, I was suggesting you be "better" (subjective, yes but when it comes down to it, everything is subjective.) Your choice of you want to comply to be "better" or you can stay as you are and unable to convince people of the truth.
Posted by TheShaun 11 months ago
TheShaun
@Stonehe4rt What I stated about the G-spot is a fact. I am not required to carry proof around in my pockets for every statement I make. You are currently sitting at a computer with internet access, you can locate the proof just as fast as I can. My "philosophy" is to only state things that can be proven. The facts about the topic CAN be proven if you go look where I suggested. The proof exists and is easily obtainable whether I deliver it to you or you go get it yourself. Though, you'll have to go get it yourself. I gave you the directions there, I'm not going to be your chauffeur.

Also, I am not going out of my way to have "improper conduct" (which is your opinion), I naturally respond like this towards stupidity. "Improper conduct" is a subjective label. It's your opinion. Mine is that my conduct is perfectly deserving when dealing with people making uneducated statements.

"I assure you will do better."? What part of 'I don't care what this site or anyone on it thinks.' do you not understand? I will not ever play by your high school debate team style expectations. My purpose is purely to correct people's information by any means I feel are necessary. You can take any thoughts you have that exists outside my purpose and shove them where the sun doesn't shine, because they are useless to me and I do not care.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 11 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Well did you speak any fact? No you stated you opinion. Fact is backed with proof, you gave no proof, hence you did not adhere your philosophy, regardless of kind or mean, if you had done as you believe and just stated the facts instead of going out of your way to have improper conduct, I assure you will do better.
Posted by TheShaun 11 months ago
TheShaun
@Stonehe4rt I don't care what THIS website thinks, nor do I care what it's version of winning is. Only who spoke the truth matters. Also, I haven't made any statements out of anger. If you actually believed I was angry, then you should either start studying psychology or never attempt to analyze someone through their posts again, because you are awful at it.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 11 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Well the fact here is that on THIS website you are losing the debate. Not being accused of losing. Another fact is that illogical angry is what caused the lose. The stubbornness to reject this notion will most likely cause this to repeat in the future. If you truly value logic so greatly then you should know there is no reason to express angry towards your opponents and just show the proof, which would have done you wonders.
Posted by TheShaun 11 months ago
TheShaun
@Stonehe4rt A website and over-opinionated people accusing me of losing is of no concern to me. The REAL winner is the one who provided the factual information. As for kindness, people that are too lazy to learn the facts about a topic before they run their mouth about it does not deserve any politeness from me. My politeness is reserved for the people who actually put more effort into learning something than they do running their mouth about it.
Posted by Stonehe4rt 11 months ago
Stonehe4rt
Exactly I hear you, that's why I said morals would need to be defined because different people have different takes on it. However kindness is a proven fact that would have let you win this debate. It's something that maybe your morals don't care about but it was the solution to the problem you faced, however you did not practice it, that's the only reason that you fell here.
Posted by TheShaun 11 months ago
TheShaun
@Stonehe4rt Morals are subjective. Respect is subjective. My own morals are the only ones I am concerned with and I couldn't care less about anyone's respect. I also don't care what anyone's idea of winning is. Who spoke the truth is the only part I care about.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid 12 months ago
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
SolonKRTheShaunTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Despite Con's bizarre tactic of mic dropping after insulting stupidity, repeatedly. Pro kept going with his vision, and handing Con the mic again. Sources: Pro used them to support humorous statements. Con suggested people Google it themselves, which equates to not having any at all. Argument No Vote. Pro's were more entertaining, by far than watching grumpy cat pout. However, the silliness did not convince me that the G-spot was a myth. They were entertaining, not "convincing".
Vote Placed by SactownBoom 1 year ago
SactownBoom
SolonKRTheShaunTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro kept tongue firmly implanted in cheek through entire debate. Con just seems to have gotten angry, and getting angry on the internet is never a good look. Just kept repeating the troll accusation instead of breaking down or offering any substance in response.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
SolonKRTheShaunTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con offered no rebuttals to any of Pro's claims and accused him of being a troll on multiple occasions. Since Pro's burden was automatically fulfilled because his arguments weren't questioned the arguments points goes to Pro. Since Con referred to Pro as a troll conduct also goes to Pro because, whilst Pro's burden is proven wrong scientifically speaking, it still does not warrant the use of name calling because there is a lot of scientific evidence that goes against simple facts that we assume to be scientific truisms. Since Pro provided detailed and well sourced arguments the usage of the word troll to describe Pro was not warranted and conduct goes to him consequentially.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
SolonKRTheShaunTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Good read. I laughed XD. Pro asserts that while the female orgasm may exist, there is no evidence to support that it is actually related to stimulation of the supposed G-Spot, as well as claims that women do not actually exist - further eliminating the possible existence of the female G-Spot. Con opts not to rebuttal said claims nor provides arguments of his or her own (more convincing arguments point to Pro). Instead Con resorts to an aggressive barrage of insults which I deem to be poor conduct; Pro keeps in good spirits and continues almost unaffected (better conduct point to Pro). Pro provides web article sources to support his claim; Con offers no sources other than the blanket term "science" (sources point to Pro).