The Daily Pennsylvanian is a student-run nonprofit.

Please support us by disabling your ad blocker on our site.

Women are injecting collagen into their cooters, and I am concerned.

I imagine it all began with a woman who thought to herself, “Getting it on just isn’t as satisfying as I’d like it to be. If only there were something I could do to make sex feel better.”

And then it was conceived: the G-spot injection. The trendy new procedure comes with a nearly $2,000 price tag and temporarily inflates the enigmatic Grafenberg Spot, making it super sensitive to sexual stimulation. The injection itself uses the same ingredients that plastic surgeons use to smooth wrinkles or plump up lips.

The procedure belongs to a menage-a-trois of modern vaginal enhancements. Beyond the “G-Shot,” women are now requesting “labioplasty” (surgical reshaping of the labia to make it more symmetrical or attractive) or “vaginal rejuvenation” (removal of excess tissues to tighten and improve muscle tone within the vagina).

While I’m hardly squeamish about amping up sexual gratification, my vagina does not need rejuvenation and neither does yours.

The danger in surgically tweaking our twats is threefold. First of all, the existence of the G-spot remains controversial. No one knows where it is exactly, whether it’s sensitive because of its proximity to the urethra or the backside of the clitoris, or if it truly exists at all.

Secondly, these procedures are medically unnecessary and can potentially damage the nerve endings in the vagina — a warning offered by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which has voiced opposition to vagina upgrades.

Thirdly, and most alarmingly, procedures like the “G-Shot” imply that there’s something wrong or disorderly with a woman who doesn’t get off from intercourse alone.

So let me be clear: there is nothing wrong with a woman who feels lackluster about intercourse.

Contrary to popular belief, the vaginal canal is not a woman’s locus of pleasure. The orifice that we consider a necessity for “normal sex” actually has very few nerve endings, which benefits its primary anatomical function as a birth canal. While there is some sensitivity around the frontmost part, the entire vagina has fewer nerve endings than one of your feet.

Vaginas aside, we know that women have a built-in pleasure treasure chest: the clitoris. Packed with over 8,000 hyper-sensitive nerve endings, the clitoris — not the vagina — is the analogous structure to the male member and boasts twice the sensitivity of the penis.

Only about 30 percent of women can orgasm at all from sex that involves vaginal stimulation alone. That means as a woman, you’re more likely to be in a serious car accident in your life than you are to orgasm from what we regard as “normal sex.”

So why, then, do we regard old fashioned P-to-V intercourse as the gold standard for sex without putting the clitoris on center stage?

Sexual intercourse certainly has its merits in terms of reproduction, but especially in a college-age crowd, we aren’t hitting the sheets with the intention of becoming parents. We have sex in order to experience pleasure, and when it comes to our current standards, women are getting diddled.

The ingredients for intercourse are erection (of the penis), penetration (by the penis),and orgasm (from the penis). Where does the recipe call for women’s pleasure? Using the male model for sexual pleasure as the model for sexual pleasure cheats women out of a more promising sex life — and yes, motivates the various injections and surgical reshaping that women request instead of shifting to a more female-centric model.

I think we can do better than that.

We need not remove intercourse from our sexual repertoire, but we do need to reconsider whether or not it should be the standard for “normal sex.” A womanlier model for sex would include more oral and manual stimulation for her, and positions that target the clitoris specifically. “Foreplay” shouldn’t be regarded as a precursor to something better, but rather as a main event.

All it takes to shift the standard is speaking up about what feels good — and hey, you can save yourself about $2,000 and a five-inch needle up your hoo-ha.

Arielle Pardes is a College junior from San Diego, Calif. Her email address is You can follow her @pardesoteric. “The Screwtinizer” appears every Wednesday.

Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.