• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Scientists say female squirting is just peeing.

Status
Not open for further replies.
tumblr_mv1beeonUX1qleje6o1_250.gif
 
Stet said:
that's a perineal ultrasound to find a tissue structure, not an ultrasound during orgasm to discover where the fluid comes from

did you just google the word ultrasound
Click to expand...

His argument was that an ultrasound has never been used in a study like this. The article shows ultrasounds certainly have.

And no. Obviously.
 
AudioNoir said:
His argument was that an ultrasound has never been used in a study like this. The article shows ultrasounds certainly have.

And no. Obviously.
Click to expand...

"Right, there have been, but this study is the first of its kind. They used stuff like ultrasounds during quirting, which hasn't been done before."
 
Stet said:
"Right, there have been, but this study is the first of its kind. They used stuff like ultrasounds during quirting, which hasn't been done before."
Click to expand...

Except it doesn't say the ultrasounds were conducted during squirting. They were done "after the women peed, and then twice during sexual stimulation" ... whiiiiiich actually doesn't mean shit, because sexual stimulation can refer to anything in that region that stimulates.

terrene said:
The point isn't to "prove you wrong" about anything, it's to challenge your mockery of people who believe scientific consensus.
Click to expand...

Ah, so it's indeed nothing then.
 
It's a real game-changer. I know many of us thought squirting was some higher female sexual power and evidence of of a man's sexual prowess if he could bring it on.

Now it's more like "Lady, please. Down the hall and to the left."
 
I know people are (for whatever reason) quite quick to try and discount the findings here, but I'm not sure the "drank a lot and pissed" argument really holds up. lol

Especially given they emptied the bladder beforehand.

METHODS:

Seven women, without gynecologic abnormalities and who reported recurrent and massive fluid emission during sexual stimulation, underwent provoked sexual arousal. Pelvic ultrasound scans were performed after voluntary urination (US1), and during sexual stimulation just before (US2) and after (US3) squirting. Urea, creatinine, uric acid, and prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations were assessed in urinary samples before sexual stimulation (BSU) and after squirting (ASU), and squirting sample itself (S).

RESULTS:

In all participants, US1 confirmed thorough bladder emptiness. After a variable time of sexual excitation, US2 (just before squirting) showed noticeable bladder filling, and US3 (just after squirting) demonstrated that the bladder had been emptied again. Biochemical analysis of BSU, S, and ASU showed comparable urea, creatinine, and uric acid concentrations in all participants. Yet, whereas PSA was not detected in BSU in six out of seven participants, this antigen was present in S and ASU in five out of seven participants.
Click to expand...
 
commedieu said:
So if that is the post being made, it has to be met with a "yes really." considering all information. But thats if you want to understand where someone is coming from, if not, yeah, a jpg should shut down and pwn all.
Click to expand...
I'm not quite sure I understand your post, I'm sorry. :(

But if the idea is that because a handful of scientists have their disagreements that go against consensus, therefore both sides are equal, I reject that argument. There's a name for that fallacy -- false equivalence.

I haven't seen a breakdown of how many studies support pee vs. not pee, but it wouldn't be smart to go against whatever the majority scientific opinion is, and the weird mockery of that idea in this thread is disturbing.

AudioNoir said:
Ah, so it's indeed nothing then.
Click to expand...
Are you trying to actually express an idea right now? Because it's not working.
 
AudioNoir said:
Except it doesn't say the ultrasounds were conducted during squirting. They were done "after the women peed, and then twice during sexual stimulation" ... whiiiiiich actually doesn't mean shit, because sexual stimulation can refer to anything in that region that stimulates.
Click to expand...

twice during sexual stimulation actually means just before and just after the "squirting" according to the study and not vice's precis.

that's accurate to determine the changes that occur during squirting.





it also doesn't make the article you linked any more proof that this isn't a new and unprecedented measurement technique.
 
terrene said:
The point isn't to "prove you wrong" about anything, it's to challenge your mockery of people who believe scientific consensus.
Click to expand...

But your post ignores that there is a scientific community that is at odds with scientific consensus. Which was the point of saying that even scientists are at odds with consensus.
This is all just arguing for the sake of arguing over a non issue or semantics. Being obtuse, I can understand where you and Bob are coming from. But, being honest.. its friday, the hell is the end game of this exchange? There is no overwhelming consensus on squirting from the scientific community, so even the comparisons are without merit.

Outside of goal post moving?
 
commedieu said:
But your post ignores that there is a scientific community that is at odds with scientific consensus. Which was the point of saying that even scientists are at odds with consensus.
Click to expand...
Of course my post didn't ignore that. I clearly showed that there were scientists going against the grain - it's just that they were so isolated and rare compared to the thousands who believe in man-made climate change.

It's ridiculous to point to *a scientist* and say "see how legit this idea is!!?!" when the other side has thousands of scientists. The only weaker stance than that is, "well, I just *feel* differently," which I see is another popular option around here.
 
commedieu said:
But your post ignores that there is a scientific community that is at odds with scientific consensus. Which was the point of saying that even scientists are at odds with consensus.
This is all just arguing for the sake of arguing over a non issue or semantics. Being obtuse, I can understand where you and Bob are coming from. But, being honest.. its friday, the hell is the end game of this exchange? There is no overwhelming consensus on squirting from the scientific community, so even the comparisons are without merit.

Outside of goal post moving?
Click to expand...


Yeah, I don't think anyone's stance is budging on this ridiculous (albeit entertaining) discussion. It's either "many studies have been done with many conclusions", "this one is most recent so that's what I believe", or "lol piss".

I'm sort of slipping into the last one there, because this is starting to feel redundant.



Kanik said:
sLUn5os.png


It's a PNG!
Click to expand...


.... excellent. Excellent.
 
Dyno said:
It's a real game-changer. I know many of us thought squirting was some higher female sexual power and evidence of of a man's sexual prowess if he could bring it on.

Now it's more like "Lady, please. Down the hall and to the left."
Click to expand...
Making a woman cum so hard she loses bladder control is still pretty awesome.
 
AudioNoir said:
Should I have used a baseless jpeg?
Click to expand...
Yeah, go for it. Can't be any worse than what you're doing now. I'll have more that reflect the reality of scientific consensus on climate change if you want. Maybe you can concoct a jpg that explores what your definition of "baseless" is.
 
AudioNoir said:
Yeah, I don't think anyone's stance is budging on this ridiculous (albeit entertaining) discussion. It's either "many studies have been done with many conclusions", "this one is most recent so that's what I believe", or "lol piss".

I'm sort of slipping into the last one there, because this is starting to feel redundant.






.... excellent. Excellent.
Click to expand...

I dunno, it seems very serious business. Im off to get beer. Good luck.
 
terrene said:
Yeah, go for it. Can't be any worse than what you're doing now. I'll have more that reflect the reality of scientific consensus on climate change if you want. Maybe you can concoct a jpg that explores what your definition of "baseless" is.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure there's a jpg out there somewhere that reflects the sheer idiocy in comparing climate change studies to 7 women splooging into a cup.

commedieu said:
I dunno, it seems very serious business. Im off to get beer. Good luck.
Click to expand...

LOL oh fuck that! It's home time. However serious this might have started, I know when to quit when I'm lobbing ping pong balls and getting balled up turds back across the table.
 
After the third season of Masters of Sex Showtime totally should do a present-day spin-off series about this issue.
 
The consistency and odor haven't been even relatively close for me but it doesn't really matter, tbh.

I squirt. I enjoy the fuck out of it. Whatevs ~
 
It's probably piss mixed with the jizz of the last ten carriages in the train.

Edit: for clarification, this is an answer to the OP, and NOT to InfiniteBento's post above.
 
InfiniteBento said:
The consistency and odor haven't been even relatively close for me but it doesn't really matter, tbh.

I squirt. I enjoy the fuck out of it. Whatevs ~
Click to expand...
I think people are confusing "It's only urine" with "It's mostly just urine." The study says
"The present data based on ultrasonographic bladder monitoring and biochemical analyses indicate that squirting is essentially the involuntary emission of urine during sexual activity, although a marginal contribution of prostatic secretions to the emitted fluid often exists.
Click to expand...
That additional secretion likely is the reason why it's different from normal piss. On a side note, I can't believe I've spent over an hour of my day debating the merits of science in relation to squirting. Fuck my life
is awesome
.
 
AudioNoir said:
Oh, I'm sure there's a jpg out there somewhere that reflects the sheer idiocy in comparing climate change studies to 7 women splooging into a cup.
Click to expand...
How about a GIF about someone who:

1. Made the comparison about climate change and female ejaculation studies in the first place
2. Called a chart illustrating the massive scientific consensus on climate change baseless. Spoiler alert:
It isn't.
3. Then, calls the comparison they made in step 1 "idiocy."

I got one!
2516508-5567548374-Fh3ro.gif
 
Psychotext said:
I know people are (for whatever reason) quite quick to try and discount the findings here, but I'm not sure the "drank a lot and pissed" argument really holds up. lol

Especially given they emptied the bladder beforehand.
Click to expand...

So wait, after they emptied their bladder, the bladder filled again during sexual stimulation? If that's the case, is it fair to really call it piss? It's more like water or something. I had no idea the bladder could take water from the blood so quickly...
 
GameGuru59 said:
So wait, after they emptied their bladder, the bladder filled again during sexual stimulation? If that's the case, is it fair to really call it piss? It's more like water or something. I had no idea the bladder could take water from the blood so quickly...
Click to expand...

Yes, and like another poster said... the research said:

The present data based on ultrasonographic bladder monitoring and biochemical analyses indicate that squirting is essentially the involuntary emission of urine during sexual activity, although a marginal contribution of prostatic secretions to the emitted fluid often exists.
Click to expand...

So it's going to basically be extremely weak urine... but often with something extra. People too caught up on the word methinks... at its most weak, urine is basically water anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

From the LA Olympics in 2028, only biological females eligible for female events
2
71
595
jason10mm replied
Female Giants vs Male Dwarfs
34
1K
jason10mm replied
The thing this say doesn't happen but keeps happening just happened again...
12
389
RJMacready73 replied
Black Metal Without Distortion Is Just Surf Rock
Cringe 
21
638
Grenseal replied
The missing/murdered scientists has now reached 10. They seem to be connected to a similar top secret program
2
73
936
Lucie Goosey replied
Top Bottom