<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_04_1649259</id>
	<title>New Research Suggests G-Spot Doesn't Exist</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1262592360000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>krou writes to tell us that according to a new study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, a team from King's College London has found <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8439000.stm">no evidence to suggest that the G-Spot actually exists</a>, and they believe it may be a myth encouraged by magazines and sex therapists.  The study performed is the largest of its kind, including some 1,800 women, and still was unable to find meaningful proof.  Of course, the studies were probably all led by men, who everyone knows can't find the G-Spot anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>krou writes to tell us that according to a new study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine , a team from King 's College London has found no evidence to suggest that the G-Spot actually exists , and they believe it may be a myth encouraged by magazines and sex therapists .
The study performed is the largest of its kind , including some 1,800 women , and still was unable to find meaningful proof .
Of course , the studies were probably all led by men , who everyone knows ca n't find the G-Spot anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>krou writes to tell us that according to a new study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, a team from King's College London has found no evidence to suggest that the G-Spot actually exists, and they believe it may be a myth encouraged by magazines and sex therapists.
The study performed is the largest of its kind, including some 1,800 women, and still was unable to find meaningful proof.
Of course, the studies were probably all led by men, who everyone knows can't find the G-Spot anyway.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645346</id>
	<title>What?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>They <i>asked</i>?  That's it?<br>
<br>
*sigh*<br>
<br>
For a minute there, I thought I'd found my new dream job.  "Now, tell me if this makes you have an orgasm.  Don't worry, it's for science."</htmltext>
<tokenext>They asked ?
That 's it ?
* sigh * For a minute there , I thought I 'd found my new dream job .
" Now , tell me if this makes you have an orgasm .
Do n't worry , it 's for science .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They asked?
That's it?
*sigh*

For a minute there, I thought I'd found my new dream job.
"Now, tell me if this makes you have an orgasm.
Don't worry, it's for science.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30664704</id>
	<title>Damn Guys</title>
	<author>zguy</author>
	<datestamp>1262706600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Get a life.  The spot is real.  I know!  Just get hold of it.  It's not that hard to find...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get a life .
The spot is real .
I know !
Just get hold of it .
It 's not that hard to find... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get a life.
The spot is real.
I know!
Just get hold of it.
It's not that hard to find... ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; I have to post AC on this one..</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://sleeper.blogsome.com/2007/05/31/how-to-find-a-g-spot/" title="blogsome.com" rel="nofollow">Here's a map</a> [blogsome.com] for those who don't know.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; TFA is a piece of crap story.  It's very small on some women, but I've always managed to find it.   Any women who haven't had it explored, drop me a line.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; It does exist on both men and women.   It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; On women from inside, touching towards the abdomen, you will feel a spongy area.  Just up (towards her head) from there is it.  It's not in exactly the same place on everyone, but it's there.  Every woman is a bit different on how manipulating it feels best for them too.  Experiment, and learn what your lover is telling you.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; You can manipulate it from outside too.  Basically, pressure on the abdomen, just above the pubic bone, curling your fingers down (towards her feet) slightly.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The combination of those will drive her wild.  With enough practice, you can hit it right off every time.  After a few demonstrations, even the threat of it can drive her to an orgasm.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  The combination works much better on skinny women.  The external stimulus simply doesn't work well through layers of fat. (no offense to large women, just the facts)</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The g-spot can be reached from the rectum also, but there is more stuff in the way.  Some women like it that way though.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; As for fingers in my rectum..  Well..  I'd prefer that be left alone.  I'm perfectly content having orgasms without anything in my ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>    I have to post AC on this one. .     Here 's a map [ blogsome.com ] for those who do n't know .
: )     TFA is a piece of crap story .
It 's very small on some women , but I 've always managed to find it .
Any women who have n't had it explored , drop me a line .
: )     It does exist on both men and women .
It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside .
    On women from inside , touching towards the abdomen , you will feel a spongy area .
Just up ( towards her head ) from there is it .
It 's not in exactly the same place on everyone , but it 's there .
Every woman is a bit different on how manipulating it feels best for them too .
Experiment , and learn what your lover is telling you .
    You can manipulate it from outside too .
Basically , pressure on the abdomen , just above the pubic bone , curling your fingers down ( towards her feet ) slightly .
    The combination of those will drive her wild .
With enough practice , you can hit it right off every time .
After a few demonstrations , even the threat of it can drive her to an orgasm .
: ) The combination works much better on skinny women .
The external stimulus simply does n't work well through layers of fat .
( no offense to large women , just the facts )     The g-spot can be reached from the rectum also , but there is more stuff in the way .
Some women like it that way though .
    As for fingers in my rectum.. Well.. I 'd prefer that be left alone .
I 'm perfectly content having orgasms without anything in my ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    I have to post AC on this one..
    Here's a map [blogsome.com] for those who don't know.
:)
    TFA is a piece of crap story.
It's very small on some women, but I've always managed to find it.
Any women who haven't had it explored, drop me a line.
:)
    It does exist on both men and women.
It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside.
    On women from inside, touching towards the abdomen, you will feel a spongy area.
Just up (towards her head) from there is it.
It's not in exactly the same place on everyone, but it's there.
Every woman is a bit different on how manipulating it feels best for them too.
Experiment, and learn what your lover is telling you.
    You can manipulate it from outside too.
Basically, pressure on the abdomen, just above the pubic bone, curling your fingers down (towards her feet) slightly.
    The combination of those will drive her wild.
With enough practice, you can hit it right off every time.
After a few demonstrations, even the threat of it can drive her to an orgasm.
:)  The combination works much better on skinny women.
The external stimulus simply doesn't work well through layers of fat.
(no offense to large women, just the facts)
    The g-spot can be reached from the rectum also, but there is more stuff in the way.
Some women like it that way though.
    As for fingers in my rectum..  Well..  I'd prefer that be left alone.
I'm perfectly content having orgasms without anything in my ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646234</id>
	<title>yes dear......</title>
	<author>inerlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1262599740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>my wife says it exists... so it must....</htmltext>
<tokenext>my wife says it exists... so it must... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my wife says it exists... so it must....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646996</id>
	<title>oh my turn!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262602920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My research shows grass does not exist!<br>My research shows trees do not exist!<br>My research shows research does not exist!</p><p>click my links! pay me attention! read my banner ads!  hurray!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My research shows grass does not exist ! My research shows trees do not exist ! My research shows research does not exist ! click my links !
pay me attention !
read my banner ads !
hurray !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My research shows grass does not exist!My research shows trees do not exist!My research shows research does not exist!click my links!
pay me attention!
read my banner ads!
hurray!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1262597340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anything that convinces a woman she can enjoy sex is a good thing. They have a hard enough time dealing with religious guilt / social mores.</p></div><p>So, tell me, how is 1948?  It's been so long since anyone last visited...</p><p>Seriously man, give me a break.  Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago.  With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a "safe" alternative these days, along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world, I'd say that old-school mentality on this topic is pretty much toast.</p><p>Not to mention the way that Hollywood has pretty much shit on the entire aspect of Marriage with their here-today-gone-tomorrow mentality of a once-sacred bond, completely disrespecting it, and championing the divorce rate.  That in itself utterly disgusts me to the point of suggesting a law that states that both parties lose all financial stake should they choose to divorce, with the funds being dispersed to various charities.</p><p>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything that convinces a woman she can enjoy sex is a good thing .
They have a hard enough time dealing with religious guilt / social mores.So , tell me , how is 1948 ?
It 's been so long since anyone last visited...Seriously man , give me a break .
Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago .
With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a " safe " alternative these days , along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world , I 'd say that old-school mentality on this topic is pretty much toast.Not to mention the way that Hollywood has pretty much shit on the entire aspect of Marriage with their here-today-gone-tomorrow mentality of a once-sacred bond , completely disrespecting it , and championing the divorce rate .
That in itself utterly disgusts me to the point of suggesting a law that states that both parties lose all financial stake should they choose to divorce , with the funds being dispersed to various charities.Of course , Bill " Cigar " Clinton did n't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact , which can tend to influence an entire generation as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything that convinces a woman she can enjoy sex is a good thing.
They have a hard enough time dealing with religious guilt / social mores.So, tell me, how is 1948?
It's been so long since anyone last visited...Seriously man, give me a break.
Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago.
With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a "safe" alternative these days, along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world, I'd say that old-school mentality on this topic is pretty much toast.Not to mention the way that Hollywood has pretty much shit on the entire aspect of Marriage with their here-today-gone-tomorrow mentality of a once-sacred bond, completely disrespecting it, and championing the divorce rate.
That in itself utterly disgusts me to the point of suggesting a law that states that both parties lose all financial stake should they choose to divorce, with the funds being dispersed to various charities.Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649470</id>
	<title>G Spot explained (seriously)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262614080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you stroke and apply pressure to the "g spot", especially with the oft-cited "come here" motion, you are pushing and helping to trap blood flow in the clitoral region, just like how similar pressure would do so to a man's erection.  The result is more sensation and sensitivity in the engorged clit and related area... The effectiveness of this varies by woman, but that pretty much explains it right there. It's not like a second clitoris or anything like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you stroke and apply pressure to the " g spot " , especially with the oft-cited " come here " motion , you are pushing and helping to trap blood flow in the clitoral region , just like how similar pressure would do so to a man 's erection .
The result is more sensation and sensitivity in the engorged clit and related area... The effectiveness of this varies by woman , but that pretty much explains it right there .
It 's not like a second clitoris or anything like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you stroke and apply pressure to the "g spot", especially with the oft-cited "come here" motion, you are pushing and helping to trap blood flow in the clitoral region, just like how similar pressure would do so to a man's erection.
The result is more sensation and sensitivity in the engorged clit and related area... The effectiveness of this varies by woman, but that pretty much explains it right there.
It's not like a second clitoris or anything like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646018</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study &amp; then some</title>
	<author>sgt\_doom</author>
	<datestamp>1262598960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever read <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Women-Who-Love-Sex-Experience/dp/0967270502" title="amazon.com">Gina Ogden's book</a> [amazon.com] (Women Who Love Sex)?</p><p>There's a great chapter in there about women who "think off" (that is, mentally initiate their own orgasm).</p><p>I believe in the male's case it is referred to as premature ejaculation or something similar?  Hell, if they can't find their own G-spots they can just think themselves off......</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever read Gina Ogden 's book [ amazon.com ] ( Women Who Love Sex ) ? There 's a great chapter in there about women who " think off " ( that is , mentally initiate their own orgasm ) .I believe in the male 's case it is referred to as premature ejaculation or something similar ?
Hell , if they ca n't find their own G-spots they can just think themselves off..... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever read Gina Ogden's book [amazon.com] (Women Who Love Sex)?There's a great chapter in there about women who "think off" (that is, mentally initiate their own orgasm).I believe in the male's case it is referred to as premature ejaculation or something similar?
Hell, if they can't find their own G-spots they can just think themselves off......</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645972</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot to tell him to get off your lawn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot to tell him to get off your lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot to tell him to get off your lawn.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651516</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>nlindstrom</author>
	<datestamp>1262629380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh dear $DEITY, that was easily the most brilliant troll I've read in a long, long time.  And you owe me a new keyboard, this one is now soaked with coffee.  Well played sir, well played.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh dear $ DEITY , that was easily the most brilliant troll I 've read in a long , long time .
And you owe me a new keyboard , this one is now soaked with coffee .
Well played sir , well played .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh dear $DEITY, that was easily the most brilliant troll I've read in a long, long time.
And you owe me a new keyboard, this one is now soaked with coffee.
Well played sir, well played.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645986</id>
	<title>The best and only real g-spot</title>
	<author>Stan92057</author>
	<datestamp>1262598780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The best and only real g-spot, is your is between your partners ears. It just that simple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best and only real g-spot , is your is between your partners ears .
It just that simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best and only real g-spot, is your is between your partners ears.
It just that simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645366</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot."</p><p>"If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one."</p><p>

STAND BACK!  I'M GOING TO TRY PSEUDOSCIENCE!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The women in the study , who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins , were asked whether they had a G-spot .
" " If one did exist , it would be expected that both identical twins , who have the same genes , would report having one .
" STAND BACK !
I 'M GOING TO TRY PSEUDOSCIENCE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot.
""If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one.
"

STAND BACK!
I'M GOING TO TRY PSEUDOSCIENCE!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647016</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>xirusmom</author>
	<datestamp>1262602980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe we should start a club or something...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe we should start a club or something.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe we should start a club or something...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645890</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>cdrudge</author>
	<datestamp>1262598420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Screwed up the closing quote tag...</p><blockquote><div><p>Seriously man, give me a break. Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago. With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a "safe" alternative these days, along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world, I'd say that old-school mentality on this topic is pretty much toast.</p></div></blockquote><p>Well I guess that's all fine and dandy if you want to be married to today's typical 12 year old.  Apparently my 30 year old wife and I have a little more old-school mentality then today's kids.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Screwed up the closing quote tag...Seriously man , give me a break .
Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago .
With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a " safe " alternative these days , along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world , I 'd say that old-school mentality on this topic is pretty much toast.Well I guess that 's all fine and dandy if you want to be married to today 's typical 12 year old .
Apparently my 30 year old wife and I have a little more old-school mentality then today 's kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screwed up the closing quote tag...Seriously man, give me a break.
Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago.
With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a "safe" alternative these days, along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world, I'd say that old-school mentality on this topic is pretty much toast.Well I guess that's all fine and dandy if you want to be married to today's typical 12 year old.
Apparently my 30 year old wife and I have a little more old-school mentality then today's kids.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645282</id>
	<title>It's OK</title>
	<author>d34dluk3</author>
	<datestamp>1262596320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. has been able to find it either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one on / .
has been able to find it either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one on /.
has been able to find it either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646354</id>
	<title>I'll find it for them</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262600160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The women that denied having a G-spot just haven't had sex with me yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The women that denied having a G-spot just have n't had sex with me yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The women that denied having a G-spot just haven't had sex with me yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650570</id>
	<title>Erogenous Zone</title>
	<author>vga\_init</author>
	<datestamp>1262621220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Different people have different erogenous zones... you just have to learn to live with that.  Satisfying someone sexually is totally unique to them, so you'll never get a formula that works universally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Different people have different erogenous zones... you just have to learn to live with that .
Satisfying someone sexually is totally unique to them , so you 'll never get a formula that works universally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Different people have different erogenous zones... you just have to learn to live with that.
Satisfying someone sexually is totally unique to them, so you'll never get a formula that works universally.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634</id>
	<title>Shhhhhhhh!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've just managed to convince my wife that her "g-spot" is actually located in her throat -- don't ruin this for me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've just managed to convince my wife that her " g-spot " is actually located in her throat -- do n't ruin this for me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've just managed to convince my wife that her "g-spot" is actually located in her throat -- don't ruin this for me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646276</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1262599920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"The combination of those will drive her wild."</i> <p>
Err...who cares? As long as you get yours...right?</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>
Actually, I joke...it is fun to get chicks off too, just more of a challenge. Guys? We're easy...I wonder why women are so hard to get off though, in general? I know some chicks...will cum just with a good fucking, but, then lots of others, you need a couple hours and heavy machinery.</p><p>
If I happen to stick with a single girl for awhile...I make a deal. That night sex, is for them. I'll do what I have to as long as they want to get them off...(I'll get off too). <b>However</b>, my time is morning time....morning sex. It is all about me on that one...I get up, get in and bang off once or twice...this works out especially well before work. But no having to bother with cuddling, hugging...again, that is for her time at night.</p><p>
I figure it is fair, and I always wake up with a smile on my face. Good morning, &gt;BANG, what's for breakfast?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The combination of those will drive her wild .
" Err...who cares ?
As long as you get yours...right ?
: ) Actually , I joke...it is fun to get chicks off too , just more of a challenge .
Guys ? We 're easy...I wonder why women are so hard to get off though , in general ?
I know some chicks...will cum just with a good fucking , but , then lots of others , you need a couple hours and heavy machinery .
If I happen to stick with a single girl for awhile...I make a deal .
That night sex , is for them .
I 'll do what I have to as long as they want to get them off... ( I 'll get off too ) .
However , my time is morning time....morning sex .
It is all about me on that one...I get up , get in and bang off once or twice...this works out especially well before work .
But no having to bother with cuddling , hugging...again , that is for her time at night .
I figure it is fair , and I always wake up with a smile on my face .
Good morning , &gt; BANG , what 's for breakfast ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The combination of those will drive her wild.
" 
Err...who cares?
As long as you get yours...right?
:)
Actually, I joke...it is fun to get chicks off too, just more of a challenge.
Guys? We're easy...I wonder why women are so hard to get off though, in general?
I know some chicks...will cum just with a good fucking, but, then lots of others, you need a couple hours and heavy machinery.
If I happen to stick with a single girl for awhile...I make a deal.
That night sex, is for them.
I'll do what I have to as long as they want to get them off...(I'll get off too).
However, my time is morning time....morning sex.
It is all about me on that one...I get up, get in and bang off once or twice...this works out especially well before work.
But no having to bother with cuddling, hugging...again, that is for her time at night.
I figure it is fair, and I always wake up with a smile on my face.
Good morning, &gt;BANG, what's for breakfast?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speaking from personal experience as one of the few men on slashdot who's been laid, the G-spot is totally bogus. <br> <br>

However -- there is a hot-button place which is guaranteed to get her off: her anterior and posterior fornices (singlular <i>fornix</i>). <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Female\_anatomy.png" title="wikimedia.org" rel="nofollow">Picture.</a> [wikimedia.org]

My foolproof technique is to "pinch" the sides of the cervix with my two fingers and then slide the "pinch" forwards and backwards around her cervix so that my fingertips meet in the "front" and the "back while stimulating the anterior and posterior fornices. Kinda hard to describe. <br> <br>

Women frequently complain that messing with the cervix is uncomfortable. DUH, the cervix is a hard "button". You need to get to the soft, sensitive "cul de sac" <i>surrounding</i> the base of the cervix. It can be hard to do with a penis, penises tend to be bigger and dumber than fingers are.<br> <br>

Even with your fingers it can be tough. You may not even be able to reach the fornix if your woman has a deep vagina. Also, don't neglect the clitoris. It is not just that little nub, the clit is a series of expansive bulbs which almost envelops the vagina itself. <br> <br>

best of luck. You can do it. Use the force.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking from personal experience as one of the few men on slashdot who 's been laid , the G-spot is totally bogus .
However -- there is a hot-button place which is guaranteed to get her off : her anterior and posterior fornices ( singlular fornix ) .
Picture. [ wikimedia.org ] My foolproof technique is to " pinch " the sides of the cervix with my two fingers and then slide the " pinch " forwards and backwards around her cervix so that my fingertips meet in the " front " and the " back while stimulating the anterior and posterior fornices .
Kinda hard to describe .
Women frequently complain that messing with the cervix is uncomfortable .
DUH , the cervix is a hard " button " .
You need to get to the soft , sensitive " cul de sac " surrounding the base of the cervix .
It can be hard to do with a penis , penises tend to be bigger and dumber than fingers are .
Even with your fingers it can be tough .
You may not even be able to reach the fornix if your woman has a deep vagina .
Also , do n't neglect the clitoris .
It is not just that little nub , the clit is a series of expansive bulbs which almost envelops the vagina itself .
best of luck .
You can do it .
Use the force .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking from personal experience as one of the few men on slashdot who's been laid, the G-spot is totally bogus.
However -- there is a hot-button place which is guaranteed to get her off: her anterior and posterior fornices (singlular fornix).
Picture. [wikimedia.org]

My foolproof technique is to "pinch" the sides of the cervix with my two fingers and then slide the "pinch" forwards and backwards around her cervix so that my fingertips meet in the "front" and the "back while stimulating the anterior and posterior fornices.
Kinda hard to describe.
Women frequently complain that messing with the cervix is uncomfortable.
DUH, the cervix is a hard "button".
You need to get to the soft, sensitive "cul de sac" surrounding the base of the cervix.
It can be hard to do with a penis, penises tend to be bigger and dumber than fingers are.
Even with your fingers it can be tough.
You may not even be able to reach the fornix if your woman has a deep vagina.
Also, don't neglect the clitoris.
It is not just that little nub, the clit is a series of expansive bulbs which almost envelops the vagina itself.
best of luck.
You can do it.
Use the force.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</id>
	<title>help</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262599920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, with all of the suggestions here, I am <b>SO CLOSE</b> to finding my G-spot and I just need a bit of help.</p><p>So I've got two fingers in (relax guys, I am legal, just turned 19 last week), and curled backward to do the 'come here' sign, but backwards, since I am doing this to myself. I am almost two inches in, and it is starting to feel good, but my fingers are short. My question is this: Should I try to go deeper by inserting a third finger, or will this just make my thumb jamb up against my balls?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , with all of the suggestions here , I am SO CLOSE to finding my G-spot and I just need a bit of help.So I 've got two fingers in ( relax guys , I am legal , just turned 19 last week ) , and curled backward to do the 'come here ' sign , but backwards , since I am doing this to myself .
I am almost two inches in , and it is starting to feel good , but my fingers are short .
My question is this : Should I try to go deeper by inserting a third finger , or will this just make my thumb jamb up against my balls ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, with all of the suggestions here, I am SO CLOSE to finding my G-spot and I just need a bit of help.So I've got two fingers in (relax guys, I am legal, just turned 19 last week), and curled backward to do the 'come here' sign, but backwards, since I am doing this to myself.
I am almost two inches in, and it is starting to feel good, but my fingers are short.
My question is this: Should I try to go deeper by inserting a third finger, or will this just make my thumb jamb up against my balls?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30680334</id>
	<title>Unfortunatly...</title>
	<author>RivenAleem</author>
	<datestamp>1262860740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... nobody can be told where the G-Spot is, you must see it for yourself</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... nobody can be told where the G-Spot is , you must see it for yourself</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... nobody can be told where the G-Spot is, you must see it for yourself</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647206</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>shadowmas</author>
	<datestamp>1262603820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>before we get to the g-spot, could someone tell me what this vagina you all keep talking about is?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>before we get to the g-spot , could someone tell me what this vagina you all keep talking about is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>before we get to the g-spot, could someone tell me what this vagina you all keep talking about is?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647958</id>
	<title>Yes, they do</title>
	<author>SlightOverdose</author>
	<datestamp>1262607060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My Ex Girlfriend sure as hell had a G-spot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My Ex Girlfriend sure as hell had a G-spot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Ex Girlfriend sure as hell had a G-spot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648688</id>
	<title>From an actual girl's mouth</title>
	<author>Gaygirlie</author>
	<datestamp>1262610660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is bullshit. I've got a g-spot and I know where to find. It's a rather fun area to play with and I don't need scientists telling me that it doesn't exist, thank you very much.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is bullshit .
I 've got a g-spot and I know where to find .
It 's a rather fun area to play with and I do n't need scientists telling me that it does n't exist , thank you very much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is bullshit.
I've got a g-spot and I know where to find.
It's a rather fun area to play with and I don't need scientists telling me that it doesn't exist, thank you very much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647570</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>EvilStein</author>
	<datestamp>1262605440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a lot of things that can cause a female to lose interest in sex. She might have a thyroid problem. Low estrogen levels. Heck, even testosterone levels (yes, women have it too) can affect it significantly.<br>Does she have kids? Pregnancy can really tear a woman up inside. Bladder prolapses, uterus prolapses, etc. Both can affect sex in a negative manner. She might be blaming you (the man) for 'not getting her off' but she really might be having some issues that are actually preventing her from getting off. It might not be you.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p>In order to find out, your relationship needs to have something important - communication. She needs to be able to say "Ok, I'm not enjoying sex as much as I should, so instead of casting blame I'm going to talk to my ob/gyn about it." Getting to that step is very very difficult for way too many women.</p><p>source: wife has been in ob/gyn for over 12 years and deals with this on a daily basis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a lot of things that can cause a female to lose interest in sex .
She might have a thyroid problem .
Low estrogen levels .
Heck , even testosterone levels ( yes , women have it too ) can affect it significantly.Does she have kids ?
Pregnancy can really tear a woman up inside .
Bladder prolapses , uterus prolapses , etc .
Both can affect sex in a negative manner .
She might be blaming you ( the man ) for 'not getting her off ' but she really might be having some issues that are actually preventing her from getting off .
It might not be you .
: PIn order to find out , your relationship needs to have something important - communication .
She needs to be able to say " Ok , I 'm not enjoying sex as much as I should , so instead of casting blame I 'm going to talk to my ob/gyn about it .
" Getting to that step is very very difficult for way too many women.source : wife has been in ob/gyn for over 12 years and deals with this on a daily basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a lot of things that can cause a female to lose interest in sex.
She might have a thyroid problem.
Low estrogen levels.
Heck, even testosterone levels (yes, women have it too) can affect it significantly.Does she have kids?
Pregnancy can really tear a woman up inside.
Bladder prolapses, uterus prolapses, etc.
Both can affect sex in a negative manner.
She might be blaming you (the man) for 'not getting her off' but she really might be having some issues that are actually preventing her from getting off.
It might not be you.
:PIn order to find out, your relationship needs to have something important - communication.
She needs to be able to say "Ok, I'm not enjoying sex as much as I should, so instead of casting blame I'm going to talk to my ob/gyn about it.
" Getting to that step is very very difficult for way too many women.source: wife has been in ob/gyn for over 12 years and deals with this on a daily basis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651658</id>
	<title>Re:K, what?</title>
	<author>adamchou</author>
	<datestamp>1262630940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>one of several significant stimulus points</p></div><p>There are actually quite a few. For those that don't know them, here's a good <a href="http://www.heretical.com/miscella/g-spots.html" title="heretical.com">list of the 4</a> [heretical.com] I've learned of</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>one of several significant stimulus pointsThere are actually quite a few .
For those that do n't know them , here 's a good list of the 4 [ heretical.com ] I 've learned of</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one of several significant stimulus pointsThere are actually quite a few.
For those that don't know them, here's a good list of the 4 [heretical.com] I've learned of
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645776</id>
	<title>I am vindicated...</title>
	<author>Phoobarnvaz</author>
	<datestamp>1262598000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I knew it!!! Never had a problem finding the F or H spots...but never the G.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I knew it ! ! !
Never had a problem finding the F or H spots...but never the G .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I knew it!!!
Never had a problem finding the F or H spots...but never the G.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645958</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>New Research Suggests G-Spot Doesn't Exis<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... was unable to find meaningful proof...</p></div><p>FFS.  I expect this drivel from regular media, but this place is supposed be be by/for intelligent people.  There is a huge difference between proving a negative and not being able to prove anything.  From the body of the summary, the headline should say that the study was study is inconclusive... unless they were actually able to find evidence against it's existence... which is not what the summary says.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>New Research Suggests G-Spot Does n't Exis ... was unable to find meaningful proof...FFS .
I expect this drivel from regular media , but this place is supposed be be by/for intelligent people .
There is a huge difference between proving a negative and not being able to prove anything .
From the body of the summary , the headline should say that the study was study is inconclusive... unless they were actually able to find evidence against it 's existence... which is not what the summary says .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New Research Suggests G-Spot Doesn't Exis ... was unable to find meaningful proof...FFS.
I expect this drivel from regular media, but this place is supposed be be by/for intelligent people.
There is a huge difference between proving a negative and not being able to prove anything.
From the body of the summary, the headline should say that the study was study is inconclusive... unless they were actually able to find evidence against it's existence... which is not what the summary says.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647772</id>
	<title>Junk Science</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262606160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've had first hand experience with several lovers who went absolutely <b> <i>CRAZY WILD</i> </b> when I inadvertently "found" their <i>G Spot</i>, and this was 20 years before anyone heard of a G Spot.</p><p>So, I'd postulate <i>something</i> was/is going on with these women in the so called <i>G Spot</i> area, it's <b>there</b> for them, no matter what some "<i>scientists</i>" seem to believe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've had first hand experience with several lovers who went absolutely CRAZY WILD when I inadvertently " found " their G Spot , and this was 20 years before anyone heard of a G Spot.So , I 'd postulate something was/is going on with these women in the so called G Spot area , it 's there for them , no matter what some " scientists " seem to believe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've had first hand experience with several lovers who went absolutely  CRAZY WILD  when I inadvertently "found" their G Spot, and this was 20 years before anyone heard of a G Spot.So, I'd postulate something was/is going on with these women in the so called G Spot area, it's there for them, no matter what some "scientists" seem to believe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645370</id>
	<title>Ridiculous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I found my girlfriend's while in college. While stimulating her manually once, I started to keep track. She had 54 orgasms in a row. I was ready for some more, but, after about a half hour of it, she was worn out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I found my girlfriend 's while in college .
While stimulating her manually once , I started to keep track .
She had 54 orgasms in a row .
I was ready for some more , but , after about a half hour of it , she was worn out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found my girlfriend's while in college.
While stimulating her manually once, I started to keep track.
She had 54 orgasms in a row.
I was ready for some more, but, after about a half hour of it, she was worn out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649138</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Progman3K</author>
	<datestamp>1262612520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.</p><blockquote><div><p>If that's true, I am sure the current generation will be influenced by George "WMD" Bush's antics and subsequent representation after the facts...</p></div></blockquote></div> </blockquote><p>shutupshutupshutup</p><p>Don't let another priceless scientific discussion on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. get turned into another political flamefest</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , Bill " Cigar " Clinton did n't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact , which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.If that 's true , I am sure the current generation will be influenced by George " WMD " Bush 's antics and subsequent representation after the facts... shutupshutupshutupDo n't let another priceless scientific discussion on / .
get turned into another political flamefest</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.If that's true, I am sure the current generation will be influenced by George "WMD" Bush's antics and subsequent representation after the facts... shutupshutupshutupDon't let another priceless scientific discussion on /.
get turned into another political flamefest
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646954</id>
	<title>I call Bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262602740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I call bullshit on this article.</p><p>I found it right <a href="http://www.wendys.com/legal.jsp" title="wendys.com">here.</a> [wendys.com]</p><p>And I quote:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The following trademarks used herein are the property of Oldemark, LLC and licensed to Wendy's International, Inc.</p><p>3 Tour Challenge, Best Hamburgers And A Whole Lot More, Big Bacon Classic, Big Classic, Biggie, Biggie Size, Cheddar Lovers, Chicken Temptations, Choose Fresh Choose Wendy's, Classic Double, Classic Single, Classic Triple, Create A Combo, Dave's Biggie, Dave Thomas, Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption (and design), Deletree Conmigo, Eat Great, Even Late!, En Wendy's Comer Es M&#225;s Rico, Garden Sensations, <b>G</b>arden <b>Spot</b></p> </div><p>...</p><p>If Wendy's got one, then every woman with a hot and juicy does!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I call bullshit on this article.I found it right here .
[ wendys.com ] And I quote : The following trademarks used herein are the property of Oldemark , LLC and licensed to Wendy 's International , Inc.3 Tour Challenge , Best Hamburgers And A Whole Lot More , Big Bacon Classic , Big Classic , Biggie , Biggie Size , Cheddar Lovers , Chicken Temptations , Choose Fresh Choose Wendy 's , Classic Double , Classic Single , Classic Triple , Create A Combo , Dave 's Biggie , Dave Thomas , Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption ( and design ) , Deletree Conmigo , Eat Great , Even Late ! , En Wendy 's Comer Es M   s Rico , Garden Sensations , Garden Spot ...If Wendy 's got one , then every woman with a hot and juicy does !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I call bullshit on this article.I found it right here.
[wendys.com]And I quote:The following trademarks used herein are the property of Oldemark, LLC and licensed to Wendy's International, Inc.3 Tour Challenge, Best Hamburgers And A Whole Lot More, Big Bacon Classic, Big Classic, Biggie, Biggie Size, Cheddar Lovers, Chicken Temptations, Choose Fresh Choose Wendy's, Classic Double, Classic Single, Classic Triple, Create A Combo, Dave's Biggie, Dave Thomas, Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption (and design), Deletree Conmigo, Eat Great, Even Late!, En Wendy's Comer Es Más Rico, Garden Sensations, Garden Spot ...If Wendy's got one, then every woman with a hot and juicy does!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645414</id>
	<title>Really on Slashdot?</title>
	<author>Rogue974</author>
	<datestamp>1262596800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Come on, we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about this here?  Let me sum up all the comments that are forth coming.

Jokes about<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers not being able to get out of the basement to get a girl let alone knwoing about their G-Spot.

The 3 women on slashdot offering their opinion, which will lead to a bunch  of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers being surprised that there are women on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.

Comments about how we welcome our new G-spot overlords.  Yes, it makes no sense but most reading this are saying, woman, what is that?  G-Spot, what is that...must be some new kind of fembot, cue the overlord jokes.

Imagine a Beowoulf Cluster of these....

The person always complaining about how<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. sucks now and how this is not new about something tech related

Someone correcting my grammar/spelling mistakes followed by someong correcting their and a spiral for the grammar/spelling Nazis...Jsut for those people in case I don't have enough, I is not bengi thiking that yous peopel is being knwoing Engrish prperly, not like it maters anyway on a plaec of blogging.

The few<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers who claim to have dated women and know where the G-Spot is and are trying to prove they are a man here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.

I think I about covered it all...next topic...please.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on , we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about this here ?
Let me sum up all the comments that are forth coming .
Jokes about /.ers not being able to get out of the basement to get a girl let alone knwoing about their G-Spot .
The 3 women on slashdot offering their opinion , which will lead to a bunch of /.ers being surprised that there are women on / .
Comments about how we welcome our new G-spot overlords .
Yes , it makes no sense but most reading this are saying , woman , what is that ?
G-Spot , what is that...must be some new kind of fembot , cue the overlord jokes .
Imagine a Beowoulf Cluster of these... . The person always complaining about how / .
sucks now and how this is not new about something tech related Someone correcting my grammar/spelling mistakes followed by someong correcting their and a spiral for the grammar/spelling Nazis...Jsut for those people in case I do n't have enough , I is not bengi thiking that yous peopel is being knwoing Engrish prperly , not like it maters anyway on a plaec of blogging .
The few /.ers who claim to have dated women and know where the G-Spot is and are trying to prove they are a man here on / .
I think I about covered it all...next topic...please .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on, we are supposed to have a meaningful discussion about this here?
Let me sum up all the comments that are forth coming.
Jokes about /.ers not being able to get out of the basement to get a girl let alone knwoing about their G-Spot.
The 3 women on slashdot offering their opinion, which will lead to a bunch  of /.ers being surprised that there are women on /.
Comments about how we welcome our new G-spot overlords.
Yes, it makes no sense but most reading this are saying, woman, what is that?
G-Spot, what is that...must be some new kind of fembot, cue the overlord jokes.
Imagine a Beowoulf Cluster of these....

The person always complaining about how /.
sucks now and how this is not new about something tech related

Someone correcting my grammar/spelling mistakes followed by someong correcting their and a spiral for the grammar/spelling Nazis...Jsut for those people in case I don't have enough, I is not bengi thiking that yous peopel is being knwoing Engrish prperly, not like it maters anyway on a plaec of blogging.
The few /.ers who claim to have dated women and know where the G-Spot is and are trying to prove they are a man here on /.
I think I about covered it all...next topic...please.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646302</id>
	<title>Obligitory Godwin Thread</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262600040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know who else didn't believe in the g-spot?  Nazis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know who else did n't believe in the g-spot ?
Nazis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know who else didn't believe in the g-spot?
Nazis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645470</id>
	<title>Looking for funding for my own study...</title>
	<author>quasi13</author>
	<datestamp>1262596980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I will not stop searching for the g-spot until I find it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I will not stop searching for the g-spot until I find it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will not stop searching for the g-spot until I find it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653072</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262690580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh no, say it taint so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh no , say it taint so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh no, say it taint so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654620</id>
	<title>Can't give up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262706180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Despite all the scientific evidence that the g spot doesn't exist my wife is still making me search for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite all the scientific evidence that the g spot does n't exist my wife is still making me search for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite all the scientific evidence that the g spot doesn't exist my wife is still making me search for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164</id>
	<title>Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anything that convinces a woman she can enjoy sex is a good thing. They have a hard enough time dealing with religious guilt / social mores.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything that convinces a woman she can enjoy sex is a good thing .
They have a hard enough time dealing with religious guilt / social mores .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything that convinces a woman she can enjoy sex is a good thing.
They have a hard enough time dealing with religious guilt / social mores.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645380</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1262596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you study 1,800 women if they have a spot thats not visible? Of course, there's the fun solution, but 1,800 women is still going to take some time, and you have to actually learn where the spot is before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you study 1,800 women if they have a spot thats not visible ?
Of course , there 's the fun solution , but 1,800 women is still going to take some time , and you have to actually learn where the spot is before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you study 1,800 women if they have a spot thats not visible?
Of course, there's the fun solution, but 1,800 women is still going to take some time, and you have to actually learn where the spot is before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646700</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I for one welcome our new G-Spot stimulating overlords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one welcome our new G-Spot stimulating overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one welcome our new G-Spot stimulating overlords.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645872</id>
	<title>Re:K, what? Bad Methodology</title>
	<author>Damek</author>
	<datestamp>1262598300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>femurs? gspots? sadness for humanity. who are you with? communicate with them! so simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>femurs ?
gspots ? sadness for humanity .
who are you with ?
communicate with them !
so simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>femurs?
gspots? sadness for humanity.
who are you with?
communicate with them!
so simple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645264</id>
	<title>The G-Spot is not a myth!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652896</id>
	<title>Bullshit research.</title>
	<author>rew</author>
	<datestamp>1262688180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I've gathered from the shabby reporting around this weird research is that their research model is completely flawed.</p><p>What they have proven is that the women's perception of the G-spot does NOT depend on genetics. Fine!</p><p>So: "all women have a G-spot" is just as likely as "no woman has a G-spot". And most likely: "the activation of the G-spot depends on how it's stimulated".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I 've gathered from the shabby reporting around this weird research is that their research model is completely flawed.What they have proven is that the women 's perception of the G-spot does NOT depend on genetics .
Fine ! So : " all women have a G-spot " is just as likely as " no woman has a G-spot " .
And most likely : " the activation of the G-spot depends on how it 's stimulated " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I've gathered from the shabby reporting around this weird research is that their research model is completely flawed.What they have proven is that the women's perception of the G-spot does NOT depend on genetics.
Fine!So: "all women have a G-spot" is just as likely as "no woman has a G-spot".
And most likely: "the activation of the G-spot depends on how it's stimulated".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649398</id>
	<title>Re:Rim Shot!</title>
	<author>AleBaba</author>
	<datestamp>1262613720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>???

I do rimshots all the time for which I use a stick in my left or right hand or sometimes (for the sake of mere brutality) both together, but orifice? What orifice?</htmltext>
<tokenext>? ? ?
I do rimshots all the time for which I use a stick in my left or right hand or sometimes ( for the sake of mere brutality ) both together , but orifice ?
What orifice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>???
I do rimshots all the time for which I use a stick in my left or right hand or sometimes (for the sake of mere brutality) both together, but orifice?
What orifice?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30656288</id>
	<title>My G-Spot experience.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262712900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I too thought it was a myth but it's not. It very much depends on the girl AND your technique.  One chick I used to nail LOVED to be finger-banged. I tried to find the g-spot and every time I was close she always told me it felt odd as it gave her a sensation of wanting to pee. I figured it HAD to be it, so I pressed on and told her to just go with it, which she did..... until she ERUPTED and basically shot her load all over me! And it was a LOT! At first I thought it was pee, but ya no it wasn't... or it didn't seem like it. She went CRAZY! I also got to cum on her as well just to make it even steven.

This other girl DETESTED anything but a cock going into her vaj. She wouldn't even use tampons so that was a dilemma for sure but oddly enough, she did not mind in the least a nice finger jammed into her ass while getting fucked.

Chicks are weird like that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I too thought it was a myth but it 's not .
It very much depends on the girl AND your technique .
One chick I used to nail LOVED to be finger-banged .
I tried to find the g-spot and every time I was close she always told me it felt odd as it gave her a sensation of wanting to pee .
I figured it HAD to be it , so I pressed on and told her to just go with it , which she did..... until she ERUPTED and basically shot her load all over me !
And it was a LOT !
At first I thought it was pee , but ya no it was n't... or it did n't seem like it .
She went CRAZY !
I also got to cum on her as well just to make it even steven .
This other girl DETESTED anything but a cock going into her vaj .
She would n't even use tampons so that was a dilemma for sure but oddly enough , she did not mind in the least a nice finger jammed into her ass while getting fucked .
Chicks are weird like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I too thought it was a myth but it's not.
It very much depends on the girl AND your technique.
One chick I used to nail LOVED to be finger-banged.
I tried to find the g-spot and every time I was close she always told me it felt odd as it gave her a sensation of wanting to pee.
I figured it HAD to be it, so I pressed on and told her to just go with it, which she did..... until she ERUPTED and basically shot her load all over me!
And it was a LOT!
At first I thought it was pee, but ya no it wasn't... or it didn't seem like it.
She went CRAZY!
I also got to cum on her as well just to make it even steven.
This other girl DETESTED anything but a cock going into her vaj.
She wouldn't even use tampons so that was a dilemma for sure but oddly enough, she did not mind in the least a nice finger jammed into her ass while getting fucked.
Chicks are weird like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649676</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262615400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that you dungeon master!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that you dungeon master !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that you dungeon master!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645714</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And for undiluted and unbiased results they asked 1800 virgins...</p><p>I'd like to try my own method for finding out their G-spot but that's another topic altogether... and I have a preference for MILF meat, yarr.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And for undiluted and unbiased results they asked 1800 virgins...I 'd like to try my own method for finding out their G-spot but that 's another topic altogether... and I have a preference for MILF meat , yarr .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And for undiluted and unbiased results they asked 1800 virgins...I'd like to try my own method for finding out their G-spot but that's another topic altogether... and I have a preference for MILF meat, yarr.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645794</id>
	<title>Re:My Wife Thinks it Exists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is</p></div></blockquote><p>

Yes she did.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is Yes she did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is

Yes she did.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647620</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262605620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the above post pretty much sums up why this research is important. Every discussion of the "G-spot" typically ends with a woman saying something akin to, "I don't care what some man said, I know when someone hits my G-spot." Of course, this is flawed. The so-called G-spot in pop-culture terms is a catch-all term for "erogenous zone". Typically any erogenous zone that is unusual, internal or otherwise difficult to stimulate is immediately associated with this term, but this is incorrect.</p><p>The G-spot is a very specific location which some researchers believed may develop along with the clitoris, and might even have been associated with the same nerves. It is this specific spot, the theory went, that allows certain women to experience vaginal orgasms more easily than others and seems to be associated with a thickening of the anterior wall of the vagina. The problem with experimentation is that such stimulation typically occurs under extremely subjective conditions, and when simulated in more clinical conditions is likely to produce contradictory results.</p><p>Posters here have talked about stimulating the cervical region, external or anal stimulation of the uterine or cervical area and so on. These are all perfectly legitimate erogenous zones in some women, but understand that they have nothing to do with the G-spot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the above post pretty much sums up why this research is important .
Every discussion of the " G-spot " typically ends with a woman saying something akin to , " I do n't care what some man said , I know when someone hits my G-spot .
" Of course , this is flawed .
The so-called G-spot in pop-culture terms is a catch-all term for " erogenous zone " .
Typically any erogenous zone that is unusual , internal or otherwise difficult to stimulate is immediately associated with this term , but this is incorrect.The G-spot is a very specific location which some researchers believed may develop along with the clitoris , and might even have been associated with the same nerves .
It is this specific spot , the theory went , that allows certain women to experience vaginal orgasms more easily than others and seems to be associated with a thickening of the anterior wall of the vagina .
The problem with experimentation is that such stimulation typically occurs under extremely subjective conditions , and when simulated in more clinical conditions is likely to produce contradictory results.Posters here have talked about stimulating the cervical region , external or anal stimulation of the uterine or cervical area and so on .
These are all perfectly legitimate erogenous zones in some women , but understand that they have nothing to do with the G-spot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the above post pretty much sums up why this research is important.
Every discussion of the "G-spot" typically ends with a woman saying something akin to, "I don't care what some man said, I know when someone hits my G-spot.
" Of course, this is flawed.
The so-called G-spot in pop-culture terms is a catch-all term for "erogenous zone".
Typically any erogenous zone that is unusual, internal or otherwise difficult to stimulate is immediately associated with this term, but this is incorrect.The G-spot is a very specific location which some researchers believed may develop along with the clitoris, and might even have been associated with the same nerves.
It is this specific spot, the theory went, that allows certain women to experience vaginal orgasms more easily than others and seems to be associated with a thickening of the anterior wall of the vagina.
The problem with experimentation is that such stimulation typically occurs under extremely subjective conditions, and when simulated in more clinical conditions is likely to produce contradictory results.Posters here have talked about stimulating the cervical region, external or anal stimulation of the uterine or cervical area and so on.
These are all perfectly legitimate erogenous zones in some women, but understand that they have nothing to do with the G-spot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645672</id>
	<title>Re:K, what? Bad Methodology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot. If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one.</p></div> </blockquote><p>So this study is about whether identical twins both self-report the same data.  It's possibly a badly executed study on genetics, but it certainly does not study what the headline says.</p><p>In a different study, the spot was found during physical examination, and reportedly can be increased in size through vigorous stimulation.  I know, citation needed, but I remember facts better than URLs.</p><blockquote><div><p>"This is by far the biggest study ever carried out and shows fairly conclusively that the idea of a G-spot is subjective."</p></div> </blockquote><p>No, the idea of whether you have one is subjective.  Whether you actually have one should be as subjective as whether you have a femur.</p><blockquote><div><p>Dr Petra Boynton, a sexual psychologist at University College London, said: "It's fine to go looking for the G-spot but do not worry if you don't find it. It should not be the only focus. Everyone is different."</p></div></blockquote><p>Sounds reasonable...</p><blockquote><div><p>Recently Italian scientists claimed they could locate the G-spot using ultrasound scans.  They said they had found an area of thicker tissue among the women reporting orgasms.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sounds like actual evidence...</p><blockquote><div><p>But specialists warned there could be other reasons for this difference.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Sounds speculative.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The women in the study , who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins , were asked whether they had a G-spot .
If one did exist , it would be expected that both identical twins , who have the same genes , would report having one .
So this study is about whether identical twins both self-report the same data .
It 's possibly a badly executed study on genetics , but it certainly does not study what the headline says.In a different study , the spot was found during physical examination , and reportedly can be increased in size through vigorous stimulation .
I know , citation needed , but I remember facts better than URLs .
" This is by far the biggest study ever carried out and shows fairly conclusively that the idea of a G-spot is subjective .
" No , the idea of whether you have one is subjective .
Whether you actually have one should be as subjective as whether you have a femur.Dr Petra Boynton , a sexual psychologist at University College London , said : " It 's fine to go looking for the G-spot but do not worry if you do n't find it .
It should not be the only focus .
Everyone is different .
" Sounds reasonable...Recently Italian scientists claimed they could locate the G-spot using ultrasound scans .
They said they had found an area of thicker tissue among the women reporting orgasms.Sounds like actual evidence...But specialists warned there could be other reasons for this difference .
Sounds speculative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot.
If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one.
So this study is about whether identical twins both self-report the same data.
It's possibly a badly executed study on genetics, but it certainly does not study what the headline says.In a different study, the spot was found during physical examination, and reportedly can be increased in size through vigorous stimulation.
I know, citation needed, but I remember facts better than URLs.
"This is by far the biggest study ever carried out and shows fairly conclusively that the idea of a G-spot is subjective.
" No, the idea of whether you have one is subjective.
Whether you actually have one should be as subjective as whether you have a femur.Dr Petra Boynton, a sexual psychologist at University College London, said: "It's fine to go looking for the G-spot but do not worry if you don't find it.
It should not be the only focus.
Everyone is different.
"Sounds reasonable...Recently Italian scientists claimed they could locate the G-spot using ultrasound scans.
They said they had found an area of thicker tissue among the women reporting orgasms.Sounds like actual evidence...But specialists warned there could be other reasons for this difference.
Sounds speculative.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262604180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...Sounds like you've been reading too much sensationalistic media. While these things do happen, I don't think they are as widely indulged in as you believe. Even with a more liberal attitude in society, you don't think people are still self-conscious about sex and their bodies? Just as many kids are getting purity rings and indulging in other weird virginity rituals, as are experimenting with anal and oral sex.</p></div><p>Well, you be the judge.  See if you can dig up an article that speaks about 5th-graders experimenting with oral sex as an "alternative" from newsprint 30 years ago.  How about one that reports that over 40\% of <i>women</i> have been unfaithful in their marriage.  How about pictures of women in thong bikinis or underwear?  Ever wonder that it's <b>because</b> of the in-your-face prevalence of sex in general that things like "purity rings" were invented less than 20 years ago?  There's a reason we didn't have "virginity rituals" in the 1950s.  <i>Because we didn't need to.</i>  Yes, somehow, I do believe that men and women in general have broken out of MANY layers of sexual "shells" in the last 30 years.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It seems to me that marriage is just as popular as ever. The Gen-Y kids seem to love it, which is weird for me as a Gen-Xer - where the influence of feminism and career-driven women made marriage less popular for my generation. Women of Gen-X were very skeptical of marriage, and the way Gen-Y acts today would seem very backwards and anti-feminist to them.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, you know what is also at an all-time high of popularity?  <b>Divorce.</b>  So, what exactly does that say about the true "popularity" of marriage?  It's rather obvious that Hollywood has reduced this sacred act down to nothing more than a publicity stunt in many cases, so I'm supposed to believe that others don't do the same?  Is it popular because more people love the idea of being together and remaining faithful to one person for the rest of their lives(yeah right, ashleymadison), or does it have more to do with the size of the ring on her finger, and the "awesome" factor of the wedding event itself?</p><p>And yes, this generation IS really that narcissistic, and unfortunately in debt up to their eyeballs trying to prove it.  Sad, but true.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Sounds like you 've been reading too much sensationalistic media .
While these things do happen , I do n't think they are as widely indulged in as you believe .
Even with a more liberal attitude in society , you do n't think people are still self-conscious about sex and their bodies ?
Just as many kids are getting purity rings and indulging in other weird virginity rituals , as are experimenting with anal and oral sex.Well , you be the judge .
See if you can dig up an article that speaks about 5th-graders experimenting with oral sex as an " alternative " from newsprint 30 years ago .
How about one that reports that over 40 \ % of women have been unfaithful in their marriage .
How about pictures of women in thong bikinis or underwear ?
Ever wonder that it 's because of the in-your-face prevalence of sex in general that things like " purity rings " were invented less than 20 years ago ?
There 's a reason we did n't have " virginity rituals " in the 1950s .
Because we did n't need to .
Yes , somehow , I do believe that men and women in general have broken out of MANY layers of sexual " shells " in the last 30 years.It seems to me that marriage is just as popular as ever .
The Gen-Y kids seem to love it , which is weird for me as a Gen-Xer - where the influence of feminism and career-driven women made marriage less popular for my generation .
Women of Gen-X were very skeptical of marriage , and the way Gen-Y acts today would seem very backwards and anti-feminist to them.Unfortunately , you know what is also at an all-time high of popularity ?
Divorce. So , what exactly does that say about the true " popularity " of marriage ?
It 's rather obvious that Hollywood has reduced this sacred act down to nothing more than a publicity stunt in many cases , so I 'm supposed to believe that others do n't do the same ?
Is it popular because more people love the idea of being together and remaining faithful to one person for the rest of their lives ( yeah right , ashleymadison ) , or does it have more to do with the size of the ring on her finger , and the " awesome " factor of the wedding event itself ? And yes , this generation IS really that narcissistic , and unfortunately in debt up to their eyeballs trying to prove it .
Sad , but true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Sounds like you've been reading too much sensationalistic media.
While these things do happen, I don't think they are as widely indulged in as you believe.
Even with a more liberal attitude in society, you don't think people are still self-conscious about sex and their bodies?
Just as many kids are getting purity rings and indulging in other weird virginity rituals, as are experimenting with anal and oral sex.Well, you be the judge.
See if you can dig up an article that speaks about 5th-graders experimenting with oral sex as an "alternative" from newsprint 30 years ago.
How about one that reports that over 40\% of women have been unfaithful in their marriage.
How about pictures of women in thong bikinis or underwear?
Ever wonder that it's because of the in-your-face prevalence of sex in general that things like "purity rings" were invented less than 20 years ago?
There's a reason we didn't have "virginity rituals" in the 1950s.
Because we didn't need to.
Yes, somehow, I do believe that men and women in general have broken out of MANY layers of sexual "shells" in the last 30 years.It seems to me that marriage is just as popular as ever.
The Gen-Y kids seem to love it, which is weird for me as a Gen-Xer - where the influence of feminism and career-driven women made marriage less popular for my generation.
Women of Gen-X were very skeptical of marriage, and the way Gen-Y acts today would seem very backwards and anti-feminist to them.Unfortunately, you know what is also at an all-time high of popularity?
Divorce.  So, what exactly does that say about the true "popularity" of marriage?
It's rather obvious that Hollywood has reduced this sacred act down to nothing more than a publicity stunt in many cases, so I'm supposed to believe that others don't do the same?
Is it popular because more people love the idea of being together and remaining faithful to one person for the rest of their lives(yeah right, ashleymadison), or does it have more to do with the size of the ring on her finger, and the "awesome" factor of the wedding event itself?And yes, this generation IS really that narcissistic, and unfortunately in debt up to their eyeballs trying to prove it.
Sad, but true.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>A beautiful mind</author>
	<datestamp>1262597100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Fantastic methodology there! We won't actually study the person, we'll just ask them! What an awesome popularity contest.</p></div></blockquote><p>
They didn't just merely ask them, they asked identical twins and used the twins as controls of what the other had said. What they basically determined is that for a phenomena that is supposed to be a sensory experience - an orgasm inducing spot - the identical twins couldn't agree (from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot) where that spot actually is, supporting the notion that it doesn't exist in the first place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fantastic methodology there !
We wo n't actually study the person , we 'll just ask them !
What an awesome popularity contest .
They did n't just merely ask them , they asked identical twins and used the twins as controls of what the other had said .
What they basically determined is that for a phenomena that is supposed to be a sensory experience - an orgasm inducing spot - the identical twins could n't agree ( from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot ) where that spot actually is , supporting the notion that it does n't exist in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fantastic methodology there!
We won't actually study the person, we'll just ask them!
What an awesome popularity contest.
They didn't just merely ask them, they asked identical twins and used the twins as controls of what the other had said.
What they basically determined is that for a phenomena that is supposed to be a sensory experience - an orgasm inducing spot - the identical twins couldn't agree (from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot) where that spot actually is, supporting the notion that it doesn't exist in the first place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647374</id>
	<title>orignal url</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1262604540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> here <a href="http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123232355/abstract" title="wiley.com">http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123232355/abstract</a> [wiley.com]<br>abstract of article</p><p>Genetic and Environmental Influences on self-reported G-Spots in Women: A Twin Study<br>Andrea Virginia Burri, MSc, Lynn Cherkas, PhD, and Timothy D. Spector, MD<br>Department of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, London, UK<br>Correspondence to  Andrea Burri, MSc, Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 EH7, UK. Tel: 00447943802987; Fax: 004402071886718; E-mail: andrea.burri@kcl.ac.uk, tim.spector@kcl.ac.uk<br>Copyright &#169; 2009 International Society for Sexual Medicine<br>KEYWORDS<br>G-Spot  Twin Study  Genetics  Heritability<br>ABSTRACT</p><p>Introduction. There is an ongoing debate around the existence of the G-spot&mdash;an allegedly highly sensitive area on the anterior wall of the human vagina. The existence of the G-spot seems to be widely accepted among women, despite the failure of numerous behavioral, anatomical, and biochemical studies to prove its existence. Heritability has been demonstrated in all other genuine anatomical traits studied so far.</p><p>Aim. To investigate whether the self-reported G-spot has an underlying genetic basis.</p><p>Methods. 1804 unselected female twins aged 22&ndash;83 completed a questionnaire that included questions about female sexuality and asked about the presence or absence of a G-spot. The relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors to variation in the reported existence of a G-spot was assessed using a variance components model fitting approach.</p><p>Main Outcome Measures. Genetic variance component analysis of self-reported G-spot.</p><p>Results. We found 56\% of women reported having a G-spot. The prevalence decreased with age. Variance component analyses revealed that variation in G-spot reported frequency is almost entirely a result of individual experiences and random measurement error (&gt;89\%) with no detectable genetic influence. Correlations with associated general sexual behavior, relationship satisfaction, and attitudes toward sexuality suggest that the self-reported G-spot is to be a secondary pseudo-phenomenon.</p><p>Conclusions. To our knowledge, this is the largest study investigating the prevalence of the G-spot and the first one to explore an underlying genetic basis. A possible explanation for the lack of heritability may be that women differ in their ability to detect their own (true) G-spots. However, we postulate that the reason for the lack of genetic variation&mdash;in contrast to other anatomical and physiological traits studied&mdash;is that there is no physiological or physical basis for the G-spot. Burri AV, Cherkas L, and Spector TD. Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported G-spots in women: A twin study. J Sex Med **;**:**&ndash;**.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>here http : //www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123232355/abstract [ wiley.com ] abstract of articleGenetic and Environmental Influences on self-reported G-Spots in Women : A Twin StudyAndrea Virginia Burri , MSc , Lynn Cherkas , PhD , and Timothy D. Spector , MDDepartment of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology , King 's College London , London , UKCorrespondence to Andrea Burri , MSc , Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology , King 's College London , St. Thomas ' Hospital , Westminster Bridge Road , London SE1 EH7 , UK .
Tel : 00447943802987 ; Fax : 004402071886718 ; E-mail : andrea.burri @ kcl.ac.uk , tim.spector @ kcl.ac.ukCopyright   2009 International Society for Sexual MedicineKEYWORDSG-Spot Twin Study Genetics HeritabilityABSTRACTIntroduction .
There is an ongoing debate around the existence of the G-spot    an allegedly highly sensitive area on the anterior wall of the human vagina .
The existence of the G-spot seems to be widely accepted among women , despite the failure of numerous behavioral , anatomical , and biochemical studies to prove its existence .
Heritability has been demonstrated in all other genuine anatomical traits studied so far.Aim .
To investigate whether the self-reported G-spot has an underlying genetic basis.Methods .
1804 unselected female twins aged 22    83 completed a questionnaire that included questions about female sexuality and asked about the presence or absence of a G-spot .
The relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors to variation in the reported existence of a G-spot was assessed using a variance components model fitting approach.Main Outcome Measures .
Genetic variance component analysis of self-reported G-spot.Results .
We found 56 \ % of women reported having a G-spot .
The prevalence decreased with age .
Variance component analyses revealed that variation in G-spot reported frequency is almost entirely a result of individual experiences and random measurement error ( &gt; 89 \ % ) with no detectable genetic influence .
Correlations with associated general sexual behavior , relationship satisfaction , and attitudes toward sexuality suggest that the self-reported G-spot is to be a secondary pseudo-phenomenon.Conclusions .
To our knowledge , this is the largest study investigating the prevalence of the G-spot and the first one to explore an underlying genetic basis .
A possible explanation for the lack of heritability may be that women differ in their ability to detect their own ( true ) G-spots .
However , we postulate that the reason for the lack of genetic variation    in contrast to other anatomical and physiological traits studied    is that there is no physiological or physical basis for the G-spot .
Burri AV , Cherkas L , and Spector TD .
Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported G-spots in women : A twin study .
J Sex Med * * ; * * : * *    * * .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> here http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123232355/abstract [wiley.com]abstract of articleGenetic and Environmental Influences on self-reported G-Spots in Women: A Twin StudyAndrea Virginia Burri, MSc, Lynn Cherkas, PhD, and Timothy D. Spector, MDDepartment of Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, London, UKCorrespondence to  Andrea Burri, MSc, Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 EH7, UK.
Tel: 00447943802987; Fax: 004402071886718; E-mail: andrea.burri@kcl.ac.uk, tim.spector@kcl.ac.ukCopyright © 2009 International Society for Sexual MedicineKEYWORDSG-Spot  Twin Study  Genetics  HeritabilityABSTRACTIntroduction.
There is an ongoing debate around the existence of the G-spot—an allegedly highly sensitive area on the anterior wall of the human vagina.
The existence of the G-spot seems to be widely accepted among women, despite the failure of numerous behavioral, anatomical, and biochemical studies to prove its existence.
Heritability has been demonstrated in all other genuine anatomical traits studied so far.Aim.
To investigate whether the self-reported G-spot has an underlying genetic basis.Methods.
1804 unselected female twins aged 22–83 completed a questionnaire that included questions about female sexuality and asked about the presence or absence of a G-spot.
The relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors to variation in the reported existence of a G-spot was assessed using a variance components model fitting approach.Main Outcome Measures.
Genetic variance component analysis of self-reported G-spot.Results.
We found 56\% of women reported having a G-spot.
The prevalence decreased with age.
Variance component analyses revealed that variation in G-spot reported frequency is almost entirely a result of individual experiences and random measurement error (&gt;89\%) with no detectable genetic influence.
Correlations with associated general sexual behavior, relationship satisfaction, and attitudes toward sexuality suggest that the self-reported G-spot is to be a secondary pseudo-phenomenon.Conclusions.
To our knowledge, this is the largest study investigating the prevalence of the G-spot and the first one to explore an underlying genetic basis.
A possible explanation for the lack of heritability may be that women differ in their ability to detect their own (true) G-spots.
However, we postulate that the reason for the lack of genetic variation—in contrast to other anatomical and physiological traits studied—is that there is no physiological or physical basis for the G-spot.
Burri AV, Cherkas L, and Spector TD.
Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported G-spots in women: A twin study.
J Sex Med **;**:**–**.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646674</id>
	<title>Sure it exists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's called a 3 karat diamond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called a 3 karat diamond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called a 3 karat diamond.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647074</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262603220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>Fantastic methodology there! We won't actually study the person, we'll just ask them! What an awesome popularity contest.</p></div></blockquote><p>They didn't just merely ask them, they asked identical twins and used the twins as controls of what the other had said. What they basically determined is that for a phenomena that is supposed to be a sensory experience - an orgasm inducing spot - the identical twins couldn't agree (from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot) where that spot actually is, supporting the notion that it doesn't exist in the first place.</p></div><p>so they have "proven" that female twins don't have g-spots.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fantastic methodology there !
We wo n't actually study the person , we 'll just ask them !
What an awesome popularity contest.They did n't just merely ask them , they asked identical twins and used the twins as controls of what the other had said .
What they basically determined is that for a phenomena that is supposed to be a sensory experience - an orgasm inducing spot - the identical twins could n't agree ( from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot ) where that spot actually is , supporting the notion that it does n't exist in the first place.so they have " proven " that female twins do n't have g-spots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fantastic methodology there!
We won't actually study the person, we'll just ask them!
What an awesome popularity contest.They didn't just merely ask them, they asked identical twins and used the twins as controls of what the other had said.
What they basically determined is that for a phenomena that is supposed to be a sensory experience - an orgasm inducing spot - the identical twins couldn't agree (from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot) where that spot actually is, supporting the notion that it doesn't exist in the first place.so they have "proven" that female twins don't have g-spots.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648388</id>
	<title>Only on Slashdot . . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262609280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only on Slashdot can a story about sex be primarily categorized as 'humor.'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only on Slashdot can a story about sex be primarily categorized as 'humor .
'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only on Slashdot can a story about sex be primarily categorized as 'humor.
'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649072</id>
	<title>Genius move!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262612100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It probably went like this:</p><p>The "team", still gasping for air, after the 1800 gals: -- "We couldn't find any G-point or whatever; maybe it does not exist..."<br>An "impartial" observer: "What? Was the sample vicious or what?"<br>The team: "Maybe if we expand the sample... but that would take years! Oh, well, it's a dirty job -- but someone's got to do it."</p><p>My hat's off...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It probably went like this : The " team " , still gasping for air , after the 1800 gals : -- " We could n't find any G-point or whatever ; maybe it does not exist... " An " impartial " observer : " What ?
Was the sample vicious or what ?
" The team : " Maybe if we expand the sample... but that would take years !
Oh , well , it 's a dirty job -- but someone 's got to do it .
" My hat 's off.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It probably went like this:The "team", still gasping for air, after the 1800 gals: -- "We couldn't find any G-point or whatever; maybe it does not exist..."An "impartial" observer: "What?
Was the sample vicious or what?
"The team: "Maybe if we expand the sample... but that would take years!
Oh, well, it's a dirty job -- but someone's got to do it.
"My hat's off...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646230</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262599740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Furthermore, throughout your orgasm, if you put pressure on this "man pussy" region and It will re-direct the ejaculation into your bladder, making zero mess.  It makes your next pee a slight bit more frothy, but that's about the only side effect.  Very handy!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Furthermore , throughout your orgasm , if you put pressure on this " man pussy " region and It will re-direct the ejaculation into your bladder , making zero mess .
It makes your next pee a slight bit more frothy , but that 's about the only side effect .
Very handy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Furthermore, throughout your orgasm, if you put pressure on this "man pussy" region and It will re-direct the ejaculation into your bladder, making zero mess.
It makes your next pee a slight bit more frothy, but that's about the only side effect.
Very handy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646268</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262599920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another sad gay dude trying to convince more people to become gay because all his partners keep dying of HIV.<br>Enough already. There's a reason the vast majority of the world considers homosexuality to be abberant, unhealthy behavior.<br>Promoting it will only endanger the lives of more clueless individuals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another sad gay dude trying to convince more people to become gay because all his partners keep dying of HIV.Enough already .
There 's a reason the vast majority of the world considers homosexuality to be abberant , unhealthy behavior.Promoting it will only endanger the lives of more clueless individuals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another sad gay dude trying to convince more people to become gay because all his partners keep dying of HIV.Enough already.
There's a reason the vast majority of the world considers homosexuality to be abberant, unhealthy behavior.Promoting it will only endanger the lives of more clueless individuals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654934</id>
	<title>Warning: Car analogy</title>
	<author>MasterOfGoingFaster</author>
	<datestamp>1262707560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It took a long time for me to find that spot on my GF, but when I did, it opened the floodgates. Shortly afterward, some of her friends started hitting on me. She's not my GF anymore.</p><p>I can't find the spot everytime.  But I find it often enough that my "research" concludes that it exists.  Not sure if every girl is "wired" so that it works.</p><p>Of course, we need a car analogy for<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p><p>I guess it is like my old Chevy.  There was this place on the starter where you could put a screwdriver and short the connection between the solenoid and positive terminal, and it would start the engine.  It's not a place identified on any drawing, but anyone who has done the trick knows the spot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It took a long time for me to find that spot on my GF , but when I did , it opened the floodgates .
Shortly afterward , some of her friends started hitting on me .
She 's not my GF anymore.I ca n't find the spot everytime .
But I find it often enough that my " research " concludes that it exists .
Not sure if every girl is " wired " so that it works.Of course , we need a car analogy for /.I guess it is like my old Chevy .
There was this place on the starter where you could put a screwdriver and short the connection between the solenoid and positive terminal , and it would start the engine .
It 's not a place identified on any drawing , but anyone who has done the trick knows the spot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It took a long time for me to find that spot on my GF, but when I did, it opened the floodgates.
Shortly afterward, some of her friends started hitting on me.
She's not my GF anymore.I can't find the spot everytime.
But I find it often enough that my "research" concludes that it exists.
Not sure if every girl is "wired" so that it works.Of course, we need a car analogy for /.I guess it is like my old Chevy.
There was this place on the starter where you could put a screwdriver and short the connection between the solenoid and positive terminal, and it would start the engine.
It's not a place identified on any drawing, but anyone who has done the trick knows the spot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647844</id>
	<title>Apply a little common sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262606580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of our sexuality and sexual response occurs between our ears.  There probably isn't any part of our identity that is more personal and individual, and I personally suspect that applies as much if not more so to women as it does to men.  When I was a teenager, I knew a pair of identical twin women who lived on my block.  One was very feminine and hetero, had a kid she was devoted to and multiple boyfriends.  The other was a very masculine lesbian.  Other than hair style and clothing choices, they looked and sounded exactly the same.  They had the same hardware but were running entirely different software.  They were otherwise very close too, even having one of those anecdotal "twin moments" as teenagers, where one knew the other was hurt by intuition.  The more masculine of the two had skipped school and was spending the day in a woods that was one of her favorite hangouts, climbing trees.  She fell and broke a leg.  The feminine twin, at school, became so distraught with a feeling that her sister was in trouble that she convinced the teacher to let her go to the office, where she called her father at work and told him where to find her sister.  I was told this story by the high school science teacher that had them in class, years later.  He was admitting to me that there were some things he had witnessed that could not be explained by science yet.  I confirmed the story later with their Dad, who had retired and spent his time painting art in his garage, which I passed on my way home from school.  The first point of all of that is that genetics doesn't entirely dictate your individual sexuality or your personal sexual experience.  The second point is that not everything that we experience can be explained by a scientific theory.  If women experience this, regardless of a physical structure to blame it on, so what?</p><p>I personally believe it does exist.  I've been with my wife almost 20 years, and have only managed to find it about 3 times though, and none of those were planned or managed by using fingers or toys designed for the purpose (even though we have used them).  The one thing in common was that I was entering from behind and she had her hips tilted forward slightly, because that is what she thought was feeling best at the time.  Each time I was moving slowly and pressing firmly, and when I hit the spot she went wild.  One of those times, my knees slipped during her frenzy and I lost the spot, and she was angry with me, emotionally only; intellectually she knew that was silly and that it wasn't my fault.  We've never managed to repeat by attempting to find it.  Her needs and wants are different almost every time though, she's quite the challenge, and never predictable.  I do get a similar kind of reaction from her out of reverse cowgirl, but she always prefers me on top and to be able to see my face, so we don't do it that often.  Still, I suspect we're somehow stimulating the spot when doing that too, albeit with a little less direct pressure.  In each of those cases, she was almost totally out of control, and crying after we had finished.  While she does enjoy it when it is happening, she gets scared of how it "takes over".  There is definitely something special going on there.</p><p>Reading through the rest of the comments, there's a lot of juvenile reaction to this topic.  Much of it is sexist or downright imbecilic.  Take the time to educate yourself a little, first about your own gender, and then about the other(s).  I would suggest, for the younger of you who still might be redeemable,  http://www.scarleteen.com/ .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of our sexuality and sexual response occurs between our ears .
There probably is n't any part of our identity that is more personal and individual , and I personally suspect that applies as much if not more so to women as it does to men .
When I was a teenager , I knew a pair of identical twin women who lived on my block .
One was very feminine and hetero , had a kid she was devoted to and multiple boyfriends .
The other was a very masculine lesbian .
Other than hair style and clothing choices , they looked and sounded exactly the same .
They had the same hardware but were running entirely different software .
They were otherwise very close too , even having one of those anecdotal " twin moments " as teenagers , where one knew the other was hurt by intuition .
The more masculine of the two had skipped school and was spending the day in a woods that was one of her favorite hangouts , climbing trees .
She fell and broke a leg .
The feminine twin , at school , became so distraught with a feeling that her sister was in trouble that she convinced the teacher to let her go to the office , where she called her father at work and told him where to find her sister .
I was told this story by the high school science teacher that had them in class , years later .
He was admitting to me that there were some things he had witnessed that could not be explained by science yet .
I confirmed the story later with their Dad , who had retired and spent his time painting art in his garage , which I passed on my way home from school .
The first point of all of that is that genetics does n't entirely dictate your individual sexuality or your personal sexual experience .
The second point is that not everything that we experience can be explained by a scientific theory .
If women experience this , regardless of a physical structure to blame it on , so what ? I personally believe it does exist .
I 've been with my wife almost 20 years , and have only managed to find it about 3 times though , and none of those were planned or managed by using fingers or toys designed for the purpose ( even though we have used them ) .
The one thing in common was that I was entering from behind and she had her hips tilted forward slightly , because that is what she thought was feeling best at the time .
Each time I was moving slowly and pressing firmly , and when I hit the spot she went wild .
One of those times , my knees slipped during her frenzy and I lost the spot , and she was angry with me , emotionally only ; intellectually she knew that was silly and that it was n't my fault .
We 've never managed to repeat by attempting to find it .
Her needs and wants are different almost every time though , she 's quite the challenge , and never predictable .
I do get a similar kind of reaction from her out of reverse cowgirl , but she always prefers me on top and to be able to see my face , so we do n't do it that often .
Still , I suspect we 're somehow stimulating the spot when doing that too , albeit with a little less direct pressure .
In each of those cases , she was almost totally out of control , and crying after we had finished .
While she does enjoy it when it is happening , she gets scared of how it " takes over " .
There is definitely something special going on there.Reading through the rest of the comments , there 's a lot of juvenile reaction to this topic .
Much of it is sexist or downright imbecilic .
Take the time to educate yourself a little , first about your own gender , and then about the other ( s ) .
I would suggest , for the younger of you who still might be redeemable , http : //www.scarleteen.com/ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of our sexuality and sexual response occurs between our ears.
There probably isn't any part of our identity that is more personal and individual, and I personally suspect that applies as much if not more so to women as it does to men.
When I was a teenager, I knew a pair of identical twin women who lived on my block.
One was very feminine and hetero, had a kid she was devoted to and multiple boyfriends.
The other was a very masculine lesbian.
Other than hair style and clothing choices, they looked and sounded exactly the same.
They had the same hardware but were running entirely different software.
They were otherwise very close too, even having one of those anecdotal "twin moments" as teenagers, where one knew the other was hurt by intuition.
The more masculine of the two had skipped school and was spending the day in a woods that was one of her favorite hangouts, climbing trees.
She fell and broke a leg.
The feminine twin, at school, became so distraught with a feeling that her sister was in trouble that she convinced the teacher to let her go to the office, where she called her father at work and told him where to find her sister.
I was told this story by the high school science teacher that had them in class, years later.
He was admitting to me that there were some things he had witnessed that could not be explained by science yet.
I confirmed the story later with their Dad, who had retired and spent his time painting art in his garage, which I passed on my way home from school.
The first point of all of that is that genetics doesn't entirely dictate your individual sexuality or your personal sexual experience.
The second point is that not everything that we experience can be explained by a scientific theory.
If women experience this, regardless of a physical structure to blame it on, so what?I personally believe it does exist.
I've been with my wife almost 20 years, and have only managed to find it about 3 times though, and none of those were planned or managed by using fingers or toys designed for the purpose (even though we have used them).
The one thing in common was that I was entering from behind and she had her hips tilted forward slightly, because that is what she thought was feeling best at the time.
Each time I was moving slowly and pressing firmly, and when I hit the spot she went wild.
One of those times, my knees slipped during her frenzy and I lost the spot, and she was angry with me, emotionally only; intellectually she knew that was silly and that it wasn't my fault.
We've never managed to repeat by attempting to find it.
Her needs and wants are different almost every time though, she's quite the challenge, and never predictable.
I do get a similar kind of reaction from her out of reverse cowgirl, but she always prefers me on top and to be able to see my face, so we don't do it that often.
Still, I suspect we're somehow stimulating the spot when doing that too, albeit with a little less direct pressure.
In each of those cases, she was almost totally out of control, and crying after we had finished.
While she does enjoy it when it is happening, she gets scared of how it "takes over".
There is definitely something special going on there.Reading through the rest of the comments, there's a lot of juvenile reaction to this topic.
Much of it is sexist or downright imbecilic.
Take the time to educate yourself a little, first about your own gender, and then about the other(s).
I would suggest, for the younger of you who still might be redeemable,  http://www.scarleteen.com/ .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649852</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262616540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because finding the g-spot is like finding the hood release on some foreign made car.</p><p>There's a g-spot there though. My extensive research turned up some "hot to" videos on some porn sights  (I visited for research purposes only)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because finding the g-spot is like finding the hood release on some foreign made car.There 's a g-spot there though .
My extensive research turned up some " hot to " videos on some porn sights ( I visited for research purposes only )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because finding the g-spot is like finding the hood release on some foreign made car.There's a g-spot there though.
My extensive research turned up some "hot to" videos on some porn sights  (I visited for research purposes only)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</id>
	<title>K, what?</title>
	<author>stonecypher</author>
	<datestamp>1262596140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a large, easily felt physical outcropping which is one of several significant stimulus points.  Maybe it's not the grafenberg spot, but it's what we think of when we hear g-spot.</p><p>There's a reason that people believe in this thing, ask for it to be stimulated on certain moods, et cetera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a large , easily felt physical outcropping which is one of several significant stimulus points .
Maybe it 's not the grafenberg spot , but it 's what we think of when we hear g-spot.There 's a reason that people believe in this thing , ask for it to be stimulated on certain moods , et cetera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a large, easily felt physical outcropping which is one of several significant stimulus points.
Maybe it's not the grafenberg spot, but it's what we think of when we hear g-spot.There's a reason that people believe in this thing, ask for it to be stimulated on certain moods, et cetera.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650470</id>
	<title>Re:My Wife Thinks it Exists</title>
	<author>anethema</author>
	<datestamp>1262620320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed, you stroke her Gspot,. she is stroking your ego.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , you stroke her Gspot, .
she is stroking your ego .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, you stroke her Gspot,.
she is stroking your ego.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647002</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262602920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This study is yet another piece of controversy on the topic.  There have been peer-reviewed studies that have gone both ways on the issue.</p><p>Probably the main complicating factor is that the G-spot is about stimulating skene's/paraurethral gland(s), aka, the "female prostate".  What develops into the prostate in men develops into this in women.  Our bodies are homologous; we develop from the same immature organs, just to different degrees, shapes, sizes, etc.  The secretions from it match those of seminal fluid quite closely.</p><p>Just like the prostate can be stimulated in men, so can the female prostate.  The problem is that while it's smaller in women, it varies dramatically in size, and can even have degenerated so much that it's outright missing.  So right off the bat, you have a huge selection bias problem that you need to neutralize in your studies.  A woman with a missing female prostate may well have less stimulation by focusing on that one area, leading to the opposite effect in your study and canceling out positive results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This study is yet another piece of controversy on the topic .
There have been peer-reviewed studies that have gone both ways on the issue.Probably the main complicating factor is that the G-spot is about stimulating skene 's/paraurethral gland ( s ) , aka , the " female prostate " .
What develops into the prostate in men develops into this in women .
Our bodies are homologous ; we develop from the same immature organs , just to different degrees , shapes , sizes , etc .
The secretions from it match those of seminal fluid quite closely.Just like the prostate can be stimulated in men , so can the female prostate .
The problem is that while it 's smaller in women , it varies dramatically in size , and can even have degenerated so much that it 's outright missing .
So right off the bat , you have a huge selection bias problem that you need to neutralize in your studies .
A woman with a missing female prostate may well have less stimulation by focusing on that one area , leading to the opposite effect in your study and canceling out positive results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This study is yet another piece of controversy on the topic.
There have been peer-reviewed studies that have gone both ways on the issue.Probably the main complicating factor is that the G-spot is about stimulating skene's/paraurethral gland(s), aka, the "female prostate".
What develops into the prostate in men develops into this in women.
Our bodies are homologous; we develop from the same immature organs, just to different degrees, shapes, sizes, etc.
The secretions from it match those of seminal fluid quite closely.Just like the prostate can be stimulated in men, so can the female prostate.
The problem is that while it's smaller in women, it varies dramatically in size, and can even have degenerated so much that it's outright missing.
So right off the bat, you have a huge selection bias problem that you need to neutralize in your studies.
A woman with a missing female prostate may well have less stimulation by focusing on that one area, leading to the opposite effect in your study and canceling out positive results.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645452</id>
	<title>Rim Shot!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Q: How do you spell clitoris?"<br> <br>
A: I don't know, but I had it on the tip of my tongue just a moment ago.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Q : How do you spell clitoris ?
" A : I do n't know , but I had it on the tip of my tongue just a moment ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Q: How do you spell clitoris?
" 
A: I don't know, but I had it on the tip of my tongue just a moment ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654602</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>bluefoxlucid</author>
	<datestamp>1262706120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is very well thought out.  If you touch her here she loses her ability to talk in more than a stammer and her whole body clenches down, and she goes off fast and repeatedly.  Okay, good enough for me; fuck you and fuck your science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is very well thought out .
If you touch her here she loses her ability to talk in more than a stammer and her whole body clenches down , and she goes off fast and repeatedly .
Okay , good enough for me ; fuck you and fuck your science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is very well thought out.
If you touch her here she loses her ability to talk in more than a stammer and her whole body clenches down, and she goes off fast and repeatedly.
Okay, good enough for me; fuck you and fuck your science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</id>
	<title>Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262595960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the crowd goes wild..</p><p>On a more serious note, why do you have to make it so technical? Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others. If girls say that specific area pleasures them more, you don't have to make tons of researches about it. You can just believe it. And like with  everything else sexual, it can difference between people.</p><p>If you are coming (as a man, and as a hint for slashdot's girls), stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful. It's even possible to come just by stimulating that area, without touching your dick (I've done it). That is actually what's called men  "g-spot", while technically its deeper in your ass, but you can stimulate it somewhat from under your balls too. If you're not up for gay sex, you can of course ask your girl to put a finger in your ass and try to stimulate it from there.</p><p>Also why not just experience? Girls tend to let you know what feels good, in a way or another. Or just ask her if she has spotted it and help you stimulate it. It will be slighty different with every girl, because everyones body and sexuality is slighty different.</p><p>If there's one area in your life thats not all technical and about science, let it be sex, and just have fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the crowd goes wild..On a more serious note , why do you have to make it so technical ?
Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others .
If girls say that specific area pleasures them more , you do n't have to make tons of researches about it .
You can just believe it .
And like with everything else sexual , it can difference between people.If you are coming ( as a man , and as a hint for slashdot 's girls ) , stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful .
It 's even possible to come just by stimulating that area , without touching your dick ( I 've done it ) .
That is actually what 's called men " g-spot " , while technically its deeper in your ass , but you can stimulate it somewhat from under your balls too .
If you 're not up for gay sex , you can of course ask your girl to put a finger in your ass and try to stimulate it from there.Also why not just experience ?
Girls tend to let you know what feels good , in a way or another .
Or just ask her if she has spotted it and help you stimulate it .
It will be slighty different with every girl , because everyones body and sexuality is slighty different.If there 's one area in your life thats not all technical and about science , let it be sex , and just have fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the crowd goes wild..On a more serious note, why do you have to make it so technical?
Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others.
If girls say that specific area pleasures them more, you don't have to make tons of researches about it.
You can just believe it.
And like with  everything else sexual, it can difference between people.If you are coming (as a man, and as a hint for slashdot's girls), stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful.
It's even possible to come just by stimulating that area, without touching your dick (I've done it).
That is actually what's called men  "g-spot", while technically its deeper in your ass, but you can stimulate it somewhat from under your balls too.
If you're not up for gay sex, you can of course ask your girl to put a finger in your ass and try to stimulate it from there.Also why not just experience?
Girls tend to let you know what feels good, in a way or another.
Or just ask her if she has spotted it and help you stimulate it.
It will be slighty different with every girl, because everyones body and sexuality is slighty different.If there's one area in your life thats not all technical and about science, let it be sex, and just have fun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645362</id>
	<title>New Research Suggests  Slashdot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is finally running out of lame stories to copy from other URLs.</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSdKmX2BH7o" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Fuck you.</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>Yours In Novosibirsk,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is finally running out of lame stories to copy from other URLs.Fuck you .
[ youtube.com ] Yours In Novosibirsk,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is finally running out of lame stories to copy from other URLs.Fuck you.
[youtube.com]Yours In Novosibirsk,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645386</id>
	<title>The G-Spot...</title>
	<author>TheDarAve</author>
	<datestamp>1262596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is a bar in Guam. Not hard at all to find actually, unless you're really drunk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is a bar in Guam .
Not hard at all to find actually , unless you 're really drunk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is a bar in Guam.
Not hard at all to find actually, unless you're really drunk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645658</id>
	<title>Re:Rim Shot!</title>
	<author>kaizendojo</author>
	<datestamp>1262597520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Rim Shot!</p></div><p> 
Sorry, you have the wrong orifice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rim Shot !
Sorry , you have the wrong orifice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rim Shot!
Sorry, you have the wrong orifice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646048</id>
	<title>I can assure you it's there,</title>
	<author>iq in binary</author>
	<datestamp>1262599080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You just haven't had it stimulated before. This is sadly an indicator of the poor work done by their sexual partners, and doesn't prove if it's there or not.<br>As a man who has researched very heavily into female anatomy specifically in regards to errogenous zones, I have never failed to find a woman's clitoris, g-spot or perineum. Most women are very surprised when it is stimulated for the first time, usually during oral sex. Using two fingers with the come hither gesture is generally the most effective, although stimulating it with the penis is easy enough if you modify the missionary position so that her knees are in her chest or her calves are on either side of your neck. Any position that makes the angle of entry point towards her pelvic bone towards the center will do so.<br>While I may not be a doctor or researcher, I can tell you with \%100 certainty that there is a g-spot, I just can't tell you what it's does for every woman (I haven't slept with them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-p).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You just have n't had it stimulated before .
This is sadly an indicator of the poor work done by their sexual partners , and does n't prove if it 's there or not.As a man who has researched very heavily into female anatomy specifically in regards to errogenous zones , I have never failed to find a woman 's clitoris , g-spot or perineum .
Most women are very surprised when it is stimulated for the first time , usually during oral sex .
Using two fingers with the come hither gesture is generally the most effective , although stimulating it with the penis is easy enough if you modify the missionary position so that her knees are in her chest or her calves are on either side of your neck .
Any position that makes the angle of entry point towards her pelvic bone towards the center will do so.While I may not be a doctor or researcher , I can tell you with \ % 100 certainty that there is a g-spot , I just ca n't tell you what it 's does for every woman ( I have n't slept with them : -p ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You just haven't had it stimulated before.
This is sadly an indicator of the poor work done by their sexual partners, and doesn't prove if it's there or not.As a man who has researched very heavily into female anatomy specifically in regards to errogenous zones, I have never failed to find a woman's clitoris, g-spot or perineum.
Most women are very surprised when it is stimulated for the first time, usually during oral sex.
Using two fingers with the come hither gesture is generally the most effective, although stimulating it with the penis is easy enough if you modify the missionary position so that her knees are in her chest or her calves are on either side of your neck.
Any position that makes the angle of entry point towards her pelvic bone towards the center will do so.While I may not be a doctor or researcher, I can tell you with \%100 certainty that there is a g-spot, I just can't tell you what it's does for every woman (I haven't slept with them :-p).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645314</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't usually put my head inside a vagina, but maybe it's just me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't usually put my head inside a vagina , but maybe it 's just me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't usually put my head inside a vagina, but maybe it's just me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647102</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>MindPhlux</author>
	<datestamp>1262603340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hahahahahahaha</p><p>this is the greatest post slashdot will ever see</p><p>seriously, just shut the site down now</p><p>the project that was slashdot has ended.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hahahahahahahathis is the greatest post slashdot will ever seeseriously , just shut the site down nowthe project that was slashdot has ended .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hahahahahahahathis is the greatest post slashdot will ever seeseriously, just shut the site down nowthe project that was slashdot has ended.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652202</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1262723640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>the area between your balls and asshole</p></div></blockquote><p>There's a name for that, but I don't remember what it is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the area between your balls and assholeThere 's a name for that , but I do n't remember what it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the area between your balls and assholeThere's a name for that, but I don't remember what it is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30655034</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1262708040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>STAND BACK! I'M GOING TO TRY PSEUDOSCIENCE!</p></div><p>Be careful <a href="http://qqaaqq.com/spit/erotic/fat-twins2.jpg" title="qqaaqq.com">what you ask for</a> [qqaaqq.com].</p><p>some more lower case junk here to pacify the filter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>STAND BACK !
I 'M GOING TO TRY PSEUDOSCIENCE ! Be careful what you ask for [ qqaaqq.com ] .some more lower case junk here to pacify the filter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>STAND BACK!
I'M GOING TO TRY PSEUDOSCIENCE!Be careful what you ask for [qqaaqq.com].some more lower case junk here to pacify the filter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404</id>
	<title>My Wife Thinks it Exists</title>
	<author>Vornzog</author>
	<datestamp>1262596800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit, g-spot, and a more nebulous 'vaginal' one.  She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is - that opened the flood gates to a whole bunch of really good sex.</p><p>Does the g-spot exist?  Who cares.  Something in the general vicinity of where my wife thinks her g-spot is can be stimulated to bring her to orgasm.  Happy wife -&gt; more sex -&gt; happy me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit , g-spot , and a more nebulous 'vaginal ' one .
She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is - that opened the flood gates to a whole bunch of really good sex.Does the g-spot exist ?
Who cares .
Something in the general vicinity of where my wife thinks her g-spot is can be stimulated to bring her to orgasm .
Happy wife - &gt; more sex - &gt; happy me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit, g-spot, and a more nebulous 'vaginal' one.
She never had an orgasm until I figured out where her supposedly non-existent g-spot is - that opened the flood gates to a whole bunch of really good sex.Does the g-spot exist?
Who cares.
Something in the general vicinity of where my wife thinks her g-spot is can be stimulated to bring her to orgasm.
Happy wife -&gt; more sex -&gt; happy me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653576</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262697720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Girls tend to let you know what feels good, in a way or another."</p><p>I've met girls that are so out of touch with their bodies that it is pointless to ask them, seriosuly, I've met girls that can't articulate what makes them feel good to any degree of specificity, and I dumped these girls like rocks when I found them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Girls tend to let you know what feels good , in a way or another .
" I 've met girls that are so out of touch with their bodies that it is pointless to ask them , seriosuly , I 've met girls that ca n't articulate what makes them feel good to any degree of specificity , and I dumped these girls like rocks when I found them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Girls tend to let you know what feels good, in a way or another.
"I've met girls that are so out of touch with their bodies that it is pointless to ask them, seriosuly, I've met girls that can't articulate what makes them feel good to any degree of specificity, and I dumped these girls like rocks when I found them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648278</id>
	<title>Conduct your own experiment.</title>
	<author>Seor Jojoba</author>
	<datestamp>1262608800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have to go try it yourself, giving or receiving, whichever is appropriate.  If you hit the spot right, and the subject can feel it, then it is usually really obvious to the person getting stimulated.  Subjective reports shouldn't be the basis of a scientific study, which is part of the problem here.  From a man's point of view, you have to know the woman well enough to judge her reactions and how much you can trust her recounting of an experience.  From a woman's point of view, you just have to be able to judge what physical actions cause your orgasm.  These subjective things don't translate into a scientific study well, but that is plenty for an individual to figure out for him or herself if a form of sexual stimulation is legitimate or not.  There are many things that you can form a reasonable individual opinion about that are hard or impossible to evaluate through the scientific method.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to go try it yourself , giving or receiving , whichever is appropriate .
If you hit the spot right , and the subject can feel it , then it is usually really obvious to the person getting stimulated .
Subjective reports should n't be the basis of a scientific study , which is part of the problem here .
From a man 's point of view , you have to know the woman well enough to judge her reactions and how much you can trust her recounting of an experience .
From a woman 's point of view , you just have to be able to judge what physical actions cause your orgasm .
These subjective things do n't translate into a scientific study well , but that is plenty for an individual to figure out for him or herself if a form of sexual stimulation is legitimate or not .
There are many things that you can form a reasonable individual opinion about that are hard or impossible to evaluate through the scientific method .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to go try it yourself, giving or receiving, whichever is appropriate.
If you hit the spot right, and the subject can feel it, then it is usually really obvious to the person getting stimulated.
Subjective reports shouldn't be the basis of a scientific study, which is part of the problem here.
From a man's point of view, you have to know the woman well enough to judge her reactions and how much you can trust her recounting of an experience.
From a woman's point of view, you just have to be able to judge what physical actions cause your orgasm.
These subjective things don't translate into a scientific study well, but that is plenty for an individual to figure out for him or herself if a form of sexual stimulation is legitimate or not.
There are many things that you can form a reasonable individual opinion about that are hard or impossible to evaluate through the scientific method.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646474</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262600700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd mod you insightful.</p><p>Back college - yes, I got some, I had a 2yr intimate relationship, and she was all about exploring - anyway -  in I've been with lots of women who only ever had clitoral Os. When I did the g-spot thing, they absolutely were astounded and wanted to know what I did. Several have said I gave the best O of their life. So asking women isn't asking the most authoritative person. I think what they should have done is get talented people like me (and others, because I'll be the first to admit, while talented I am *not* the best) to do our thing and have them report the difference between our clitoral stimulation and g-spot stimulation techniques. And I bet you that if full-body convulsions are any indication, they are quite different!</p><p>Yes, the above may sound boastful, particularly on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. but it is the honest truth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd mod you insightful.Back college - yes , I got some , I had a 2yr intimate relationship , and she was all about exploring - anyway - in I 've been with lots of women who only ever had clitoral Os .
When I did the g-spot thing , they absolutely were astounded and wanted to know what I did .
Several have said I gave the best O of their life .
So asking women is n't asking the most authoritative person .
I think what they should have done is get talented people like me ( and others , because I 'll be the first to admit , while talented I am * not * the best ) to do our thing and have them report the difference between our clitoral stimulation and g-spot stimulation techniques .
And I bet you that if full-body convulsions are any indication , they are quite different ! Yes , the above may sound boastful , particularly on / .
but it is the honest truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd mod you insightful.Back college - yes, I got some, I had a 2yr intimate relationship, and she was all about exploring - anyway -  in I've been with lots of women who only ever had clitoral Os.
When I did the g-spot thing, they absolutely were astounded and wanted to know what I did.
Several have said I gave the best O of their life.
So asking women isn't asking the most authoritative person.
I think what they should have done is get talented people like me (and others, because I'll be the first to admit, while talented I am *not* the best) to do our thing and have them report the difference between our clitoral stimulation and g-spot stimulation techniques.
And I bet you that if full-body convulsions are any indication, they are quite different!Yes, the above may sound boastful, particularly on /.
but it is the honest truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645400</id>
	<title>Let me at 'em</title>
	<author>Joolz50</author>
	<datestamp>1262596800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about they give me 1800 women, and I'll decide wether or not a g-spot exists</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about they give me 1800 women , and I 'll decide wether or not a g-spot exists</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about they give me 1800 women, and I'll decide wether or not a g-spot exists</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648614</id>
	<title>Clarification</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262610180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's disappointing that by this day and age there aren't enough sexually confident women for this to be cleared up by now. Based on my own experience there's an area in the vagina (not a spot) that responds better to sexual stimulation (the entire vagina responds, this area is just better). It happens to extend from about 2 to about 5 inches in on the side of my stomach.</p><p>My theory for this is as follows: due to the shape of my vagina and/or the shape of penises (circumsized?)  that area has been more stimulated during sex thus causing the nerves in that area to become more dense. It happens over such a long period of time that it's difficult to remember a time when good sex didn't feel as physically awesome. But it's ridiculous to think that someone could actually be genetically missing that; or even that sex can't feel good without that buildup. It's just mental hangups for girls that prevent them from enjoying sex<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:( If you think about it open-mindedly most of you can relate to that hangup though -- any guys who are unwilling to let someone stimulate them anally. Supposedly anal for guys can feel really good (I dunno, I'm a girl) but most guys have mental hangups about that. If someone wants to find one specific spot though, that'd be the clitoris which is totally different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's disappointing that by this day and age there are n't enough sexually confident women for this to be cleared up by now .
Based on my own experience there 's an area in the vagina ( not a spot ) that responds better to sexual stimulation ( the entire vagina responds , this area is just better ) .
It happens to extend from about 2 to about 5 inches in on the side of my stomach.My theory for this is as follows : due to the shape of my vagina and/or the shape of penises ( circumsized ?
) that area has been more stimulated during sex thus causing the nerves in that area to become more dense .
It happens over such a long period of time that it 's difficult to remember a time when good sex did n't feel as physically awesome .
But it 's ridiculous to think that someone could actually be genetically missing that ; or even that sex ca n't feel good without that buildup .
It 's just mental hangups for girls that prevent them from enjoying sex : ( If you think about it open-mindedly most of you can relate to that hangup though -- any guys who are unwilling to let someone stimulate them anally .
Supposedly anal for guys can feel really good ( I dunno , I 'm a girl ) but most guys have mental hangups about that .
If someone wants to find one specific spot though , that 'd be the clitoris which is totally different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's disappointing that by this day and age there aren't enough sexually confident women for this to be cleared up by now.
Based on my own experience there's an area in the vagina (not a spot) that responds better to sexual stimulation (the entire vagina responds, this area is just better).
It happens to extend from about 2 to about 5 inches in on the side of my stomach.My theory for this is as follows: due to the shape of my vagina and/or the shape of penises (circumsized?
)  that area has been more stimulated during sex thus causing the nerves in that area to become more dense.
It happens over such a long period of time that it's difficult to remember a time when good sex didn't feel as physically awesome.
But it's ridiculous to think that someone could actually be genetically missing that; or even that sex can't feel good without that buildup.
It's just mental hangups for girls that prevent them from enjoying sex :( If you think about it open-mindedly most of you can relate to that hangup though -- any guys who are unwilling to let someone stimulate them anally.
Supposedly anal for guys can feel really good (I dunno, I'm a girl) but most guys have mental hangups about that.
If someone wants to find one specific spot though, that'd be the clitoris which is totally different.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645650</id>
	<title>Wow....</title>
	<author>CaptScarlet22</author>
	<datestamp>1262597520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where do you sign up for a team like that?!?!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where do you sign up for a team like that ? ! ? ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where do you sign up for a team like that?!?!?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208</id>
	<title>Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>As most of slashdoters have not seen the G-spot either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As most of slashdoters have not seen the G-spot either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As most of slashdoters have not seen the G-spot either.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645424</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>their hearts must *not* be *truly* klingon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>their hearts must * not * be * truly * klingon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>their hearts must *not* be *truly* klingon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647212</id>
	<title>we need more data ...</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1262603820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where do we sign up to help?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where do we sign up to help ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where do we sign up to help?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646576</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Stregano</author>
	<datestamp>1262601060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lol, you said bone</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lol , you said bone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lol, you said bone</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647960</id>
	<title>Re:K, what? Bad Methodology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262607060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, but were they Swedish twins?</p><p><div class="quote"><div><p>The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot..</p></div></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , but were they Swedish twins ? The women in the study , who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins , were asked whether they had a G-spot. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, but were they Swedish twins?The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646724</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one that noticed that all they did for this "study" was ask twins if they both had G-spots?  I mean, seriously?</p><p>This wasn't "research", this was a survey.  Given the fact that finding the G-spot is largely dependant on your partner, two twins could easily have different experiences.</p><p>What they should have done is if one twin reported having a G-spot and the other did not, then test both women in the same spot (the area the first twin reported the g-spot to be located).  If they are both stimulated the same, boom, you've found your g-spot.  If only the twin who reported the g-spot showed increased stimulation, then you know it's all psychological.</p><p>You could then compare the results to known stimulators, like the clitoris, and see if the g-spot is really any better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one that noticed that all they did for this " study " was ask twins if they both had G-spots ?
I mean , seriously ? This was n't " research " , this was a survey .
Given the fact that finding the G-spot is largely dependant on your partner , two twins could easily have different experiences.What they should have done is if one twin reported having a G-spot and the other did not , then test both women in the same spot ( the area the first twin reported the g-spot to be located ) .
If they are both stimulated the same , boom , you 've found your g-spot .
If only the twin who reported the g-spot showed increased stimulation , then you know it 's all psychological.You could then compare the results to known stimulators , like the clitoris , and see if the g-spot is really any better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one that noticed that all they did for this "study" was ask twins if they both had G-spots?
I mean, seriously?This wasn't "research", this was a survey.
Given the fact that finding the G-spot is largely dependant on your partner, two twins could easily have different experiences.What they should have done is if one twin reported having a G-spot and the other did not, then test both women in the same spot (the area the first twin reported the g-spot to be located).
If they are both stimulated the same, boom, you've found your g-spot.
If only the twin who reported the g-spot showed increased stimulation, then you know it's all psychological.You could then compare the results to known stimulators, like the clitoris, and see if the g-spot is really any better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648430</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262609460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The G-spot can move.  My last girlfriend had a G-spot I could hit until I took her virginity, after which I couldn't reach it anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The G-spot can move .
My last girlfriend had a G-spot I could hit until I took her virginity , after which I could n't reach it anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The G-spot can move.
My last girlfriend had a G-spot I could hit until I took her virginity, after which I couldn't reach it anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649912</id>
	<title>Re:g-what?</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1262616960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Is this something that will bepart of the next stable gnome release?</p></div></blockquote><p>

Actually it was a nightclub, didn't stay open long because...<br> <br>

Nobody could find it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this something that will bepart of the next stable gnome release ?
Actually it was a nightclub , did n't stay open long because.. . Nobody could find it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this something that will bepart of the next stable gnome release?
Actually it was a nightclub, didn't stay open long because... 

Nobody could find it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646120</id>
	<title>Re:My Wife Thinks it Exists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262599380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My wife has all 3 of those kinds of orgasms as well as the 4th - anal.  The best ones are a combination of multiple types.</p><p>And as far as she (and I) are concerned the g-spot is very real.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife has all 3 of those kinds of orgasms as well as the 4th - anal .
The best ones are a combination of multiple types.And as far as she ( and I ) are concerned the g-spot is very real .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife has all 3 of those kinds of orgasms as well as the 4th - anal.
The best ones are a combination of multiple types.And as far as she (and I) are concerned the g-spot is very real.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648522</id>
	<title>Re:seriously, lacks intelligence</title>
	<author>O'Nazareth</author>
	<datestamp>1262609880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Jesus appears on your toast, you cannot say God exists.</p><p>The penis camera exists. I think the first one was made in the beginning of te 80s. There are some researchers who rebuild one from time to time. But I do not think it gave any significant result.</p><p>While the fluid from female ejaculation does exist... it is no evidence for any link with the supposed G-spot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Jesus appears on your toast , you can not say God exists.The penis camera exists .
I think the first one was made in the beginning of te 80s .
There are some researchers who rebuild one from time to time .
But I do not think it gave any significant result.While the fluid from female ejaculation does exist... it is no evidence for any link with the supposed G-spot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Jesus appears on your toast, you cannot say God exists.The penis camera exists.
I think the first one was made in the beginning of te 80s.
There are some researchers who rebuild one from time to time.
But I do not think it gave any significant result.While the fluid from female ejaculation does exist... it is no evidence for any link with the supposed G-spot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645448</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1262596920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The dumb thing about this study is that they <i>ask</i> women if they have a G-spot.</p><p>Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.</p></div><p>Men aren't aware of prostate glands until they are in their 40's and they need to pee 30 times a day. They then bow to Lord Flowmax in humble gratitude.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit , with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men do n't have prostate glands or spleens.Men are n't aware of prostate glands until they are in their 40 's and they need to pee 30 times a day .
They then bow to Lord Flowmax in humble gratitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.Men aren't aware of prostate glands until they are in their 40's and they need to pee 30 times a day.
They then bow to Lord Flowmax in humble gratitude.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648708</id>
	<title>hahaha</title>
	<author>cntThnkofAname</author>
	<datestamp>1262610720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I knew it!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I knew it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I knew it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645358</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait what?.. Oh I get it! Everyone who reads slashdot is a nerd, therefore socially retarded and doesn't have a girlfriend. AHAHAHA dude nice joke, reminds me of my highschool days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait what ? . .
Oh I get it !
Everyone who reads slashdot is a nerd , therefore socially retarded and does n't have a girlfriend .
AHAHAHA dude nice joke , reminds me of my highschool days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait what?..
Oh I get it!
Everyone who reads slashdot is a nerd, therefore socially retarded and doesn't have a girlfriend.
AHAHAHA dude nice joke, reminds me of my highschool days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646078</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1262599200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Any women who haven't had it explored, drop me a line.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div><p>I suppose that's the downside of posting anonymously...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any women who have n't had it explored , drop me a line .
: ) I suppose that 's the downside of posting anonymously.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any women who haven't had it explored, drop me a line.
:)I suppose that's the downside of posting anonymously...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652322</id>
	<title>Re:K, what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262724900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It' a tumor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It ' a tumor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It' a tumor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645952</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1262598660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>the identical twins couldn't agree (from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot) where that spot actually is, supporting the notion that it doesn't exist in the first place.</p></div></blockquote><p>Thus also proving that fingerprints don't exist.  This methodology is suspect at best.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the identical twins could n't agree ( from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot ) where that spot actually is , supporting the notion that it does n't exist in the first place.Thus also proving that fingerprints do n't exist .
This methodology is suspect at best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the identical twins couldn't agree (from the cases where both of them said they have a g-spot) where that spot actually is, supporting the notion that it doesn't exist in the first place.Thus also proving that fingerprints don't exist.
This methodology is suspect at best.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646730</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Research?</p><p>Hahahaha!<br>Hope they were more practical than technical.<br>Because I dunno about you, but I can see some guy in a sterile lab with giant stainless steel tables and forceps, trying to stimulate the g-spot with a remote controlled phallus.<br>Enough to turn anyone off, and stop normally hot areas from working.</p><p>Nothing beats the hot and dirty fingers in and curled up, repeatedly applying pressure to the slightly rough textured flesh behind the pelvic bone.<br>I don't care if it doesn't exist in textbooks. It's definitely there for most women.</p><p>That said, some don't seem to have it.<br>I even met one girl who enjoyed stimulating the labia more than the clitoris.</p><p>Funnily enough, everyone's different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Research ? Hahahaha ! Hope they were more practical than technical.Because I dunno about you , but I can see some guy in a sterile lab with giant stainless steel tables and forceps , trying to stimulate the g-spot with a remote controlled phallus.Enough to turn anyone off , and stop normally hot areas from working.Nothing beats the hot and dirty fingers in and curled up , repeatedly applying pressure to the slightly rough textured flesh behind the pelvic bone.I do n't care if it does n't exist in textbooks .
It 's definitely there for most women.That said , some do n't seem to have it.I even met one girl who enjoyed stimulating the labia more than the clitoris.Funnily enough , everyone 's different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Research?Hahahaha!Hope they were more practical than technical.Because I dunno about you, but I can see some guy in a sterile lab with giant stainless steel tables and forceps, trying to stimulate the g-spot with a remote controlled phallus.Enough to turn anyone off, and stop normally hot areas from working.Nothing beats the hot and dirty fingers in and curled up, repeatedly applying pressure to the slightly rough textured flesh behind the pelvic bone.I don't care if it doesn't exist in textbooks.
It's definitely there for most women.That said, some don't seem to have it.I even met one girl who enjoyed stimulating the labia more than the clitoris.Funnily enough, everyone's different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645984</id>
	<title>Moreover...</title>
	<author>sjonke</author>
	<datestamp>1262598780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... chances are that the study was actually carried out on men</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... chances are that the study was actually carried out on men</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... chances are that the study was actually carried out on men</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645892</id>
	<title>Re:Shhhhhhhh!</title>
	<author>PrescriptionWarning</author>
	<datestamp>1262598420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>just try not to induce her Gag-spot</htmltext>
<tokenext>just try not to induce her Gag-spot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just try not to induce her Gag-spot</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647098</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1262603280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's can be partially accessed from outside on males- it's called the "million dollar" spot.</p><p><a href="http://www.malesexresearch.com/" title="malesexresearch.com">http://www.malesexresearch.com/</a> [malesexresearch.com] (warning: this is an ad site for a sex toy (tho work safe).  There used to be some non-sales sites with this information but they went away.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's can be partially accessed from outside on males- it 's called the " million dollar " spot.http : //www.malesexresearch.com/ [ malesexresearch.com ] ( warning : this is an ad site for a sex toy ( tho work safe ) .
There used to be some non-sales sites with this information but they went away .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's can be partially accessed from outside on males- it's called the "million dollar" spot.http://www.malesexresearch.com/ [malesexresearch.com] (warning: this is an ad site for a sex toy (tho work safe).
There used to be some non-sales sites with this information but they went away.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646948</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Nathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1262602740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.</p></div><p>Dude, remember to <a href="http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/e7cabbb13c\_crazy\_hill.jpg" title="heraldinteractive.com">whom</a> [heraldinteractive.com] he's married to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , Bill " Cigar " Clinton did n't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact , which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.Dude , remember to whom [ heraldinteractive.com ] he 's married to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.Dude, remember to whom [heraldinteractive.com] he's married to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648642</id>
	<title>The G-Spot is not a myth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262610360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The G-spot is not a myth.. the female orgasm, now <em>that's</em> the myth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The G-spot is not a myth.. the female orgasm , now that 's the myth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The G-spot is not a myth.. the female orgasm, now that's the myth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645730</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>CrzyMiky</author>
	<datestamp>1262597760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am truly amazed this is on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. however.. as well as being a geek, I have studied human sexuality for many years.
There are many practices that recognize the 'G' spot in females. It is EASILY felt with ones finger in the upper wall of the vagina, as a slightly more dense, raised portion. GUYS: try massaging this area, and THEN have your lady tell you she has no
Gspot.

Yes, I am a man, and Im not gay.. but I AM a master of the Tao, and Native American Sensuality.
The ignorance of some studies amazes me.

CrzyMiky</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am truly amazed this is on / .
.. however.. as well as being a geek , I have studied human sexuality for many years .
There are many practices that recognize the 'G ' spot in females .
It is EASILY felt with ones finger in the upper wall of the vagina , as a slightly more dense , raised portion .
GUYS : try massaging this area , and THEN have your lady tell you she has no Gspot .
Yes , I am a man , and Im not gay.. but I AM a master of the Tao , and Native American Sensuality .
The ignorance of some studies amazes me .
CrzyMiky</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am truly amazed this is on /.
.. however.. as well as being a geek, I have studied human sexuality for many years.
There are many practices that recognize the 'G' spot in females.
It is EASILY felt with ones finger in the upper wall of the vagina, as a slightly more dense, raised portion.
GUYS: try massaging this area, and THEN have your lady tell you she has no
Gspot.
Yes, I am a man, and Im not gay.. but I AM a master of the Tao, and Native American Sensuality.
The ignorance of some studies amazes me.
CrzyMiky</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647380</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1262604540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to worry, I am a professional in this field and have the equipment to reach any Gspot on most species.<br>Drop me a line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to worry , I am a professional in this field and have the equipment to reach any Gspot on most species.Drop me a line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to worry, I am a professional in this field and have the equipment to reach any Gspot on most species.Drop me a line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646868</id>
	<title>KSpot? Oh please!</title>
	<author>Sloppy</author>
	<datestamp>1262602440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't be fooled; this so-called "research" was funded by the KDE project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't be fooled ; this so-called " research " was funded by the KDE project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't be fooled; this so-called "research" was funded by the KDE project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648246</id>
	<title>Meh</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1262608680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any man knew that already. Let's be serious, a place we can't find by driving and poking around simply CAN NOT EXIST! Hell, even the few brave amongst as that steeped down to asking for directions couldn't find it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any man knew that already .
Let 's be serious , a place we ca n't find by driving and poking around simply CAN NOT EXIST !
Hell , even the few brave amongst as that steeped down to asking for directions could n't find it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any man knew that already.
Let's be serious, a place we can't find by driving and poking around simply CAN NOT EXIST!
Hell, even the few brave amongst as that steeped down to asking for directions couldn't find it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645754</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your not supposed to use the head with the eyes, ears, nose, and mouth on it. Use the other one....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your not supposed to use the head with the eyes , ears , nose , and mouth on it .
Use the other one... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your not supposed to use the head with the eyes, ears, nose, and mouth on it.
Use the other one....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645314</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649092</id>
	<title>Different G-spots? Maybe.</title>
	<author>phreakincool</author>
	<datestamp>1262612280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I was 11, I made my first girlfriend come just by massaging her lower, inner thighs and knees.  Fuck a G-spot.  Donna C. -  if you're reading this... Hi!</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was 11 , I made my first girlfriend come just by massaging her lower , inner thighs and knees .
Fuck a G-spot .
Donna C. - if you 're reading this... Hi !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was 11, I made my first girlfriend come just by massaging her lower, inner thighs and knees.
Fuck a G-spot.
Donna C. -  if you're reading this... Hi!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30672562</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>Kodack</author>
	<datestamp>1262805240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You will not be able to reach it yourself, your wrist just doesn't bend far enough to give you the leverage you need. Your best bet is to get a product from an adult store that is custom made for the job. It will have the angle you need to reach it yourself. Good luck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You will not be able to reach it yourself , your wrist just does n't bend far enough to give you the leverage you need .
Your best bet is to get a product from an adult store that is custom made for the job .
It will have the angle you need to reach it yourself .
Good luck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You will not be able to reach it yourself, your wrist just doesn't bend far enough to give you the leverage you need.
Your best bet is to get a product from an adult store that is custom made for the job.
It will have the angle you need to reach it yourself.
Good luck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650582</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1262621340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, I am a man, and Im not gay..</p></div><p>Sounds like a case of <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuspiciouslySpecificDenial" title="tvtropes.org">suspiciously specific denial</a> [tvtropes.org] to me...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I am a man , and Im not gay..Sounds like a case of suspiciously specific denial [ tvtropes.org ] to me.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I am a man, and Im not gay..Sounds like a case of suspiciously specific denial [tvtropes.org] to me...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645844</id>
	<title>Re:K, what?</title>
	<author>Damek</author>
	<datestamp>1262598240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also - How about people just talk to each other during physical intimacy (and before!!!) and figure out what each finds pleasurable? Why is this so hard for some? Sheesh. (*weeps for humanity*)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also - How about people just talk to each other during physical intimacy ( and before ! ! !
) and figure out what each finds pleasurable ?
Why is this so hard for some ?
Sheesh. ( * weeps for humanity * )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also - How about people just talk to each other during physical intimacy (and before!!!
) and figure out what each finds pleasurable?
Why is this so hard for some?
Sheesh. (*weeps for humanity*)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646850</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262602320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; It does exist on both men and women.   It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside.</p></div><p>So you're saying you've found this spot on BOTH women &amp; men?</p><p>interesting</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>    It does exist on both men and women .
It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside.So you 're saying you 've found this spot on BOTH women &amp; men ? interesting</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
    It does exist on both men and women.
It can also be slightly manipulated from the outside.So you're saying you've found this spot on BOTH women &amp; men?interesting
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645372</id>
	<title>It most certainly is not a myth.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Repeated direct observation has utterly convinced me that there is both something in the area of the spot in question, and that it can lead to female ejaculation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Repeated direct observation has utterly convinced me that there is both something in the area of the spot in question , and that it can lead to female ejaculation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Repeated direct observation has utterly convinced me that there is both something in the area of the spot in question, and that it can lead to female ejaculation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646388</id>
	<title>To quote George Carlin</title>
	<author>zorro-z</author>
	<datestamp>1262600340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always wanted to work in a deli, just so a woman would come in and ask me to give her some tongue. Then I could tell her, "sorry, I don't get off until 5:00!" Then she'd tell me "I don't get off at all, that's why I'm looking to buy some tongue!"</p><p>Thank you very much; I'm here all week. Try the veal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always wanted to work in a deli , just so a woman would come in and ask me to give her some tongue .
Then I could tell her , " sorry , I do n't get off until 5 : 00 !
" Then she 'd tell me " I do n't get off at all , that 's why I 'm looking to buy some tongue !
" Thank you very much ; I 'm here all week .
Try the veal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always wanted to work in a deli, just so a woman would come in and ask me to give her some tongue.
Then I could tell her, "sorry, I don't get off until 5:00!
" Then she'd tell me "I don't get off at all, that's why I'm looking to buy some tongue!
"Thank you very much; I'm here all week.
Try the veal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646374</id>
	<title>They assumed to much...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262600280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While your story sounds nice it doesn't make the study any better.</p><p>Because what if one of those twins was more sexually active than the other ?</p><p>Their conclusion will then basically boil down to: "If you never had sex you don't have a g-spot".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While your story sounds nice it does n't make the study any better.Because what if one of those twins was more sexually active than the other ? Their conclusion will then basically boil down to : " If you never had sex you do n't have a g-spot " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While your story sounds nice it doesn't make the study any better.Because what if one of those twins was more sexually active than the other ?Their conclusion will then basically boil down to: "If you never had sex you don't have a g-spot".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652772</id>
	<title>Re:My Wife Thinks it Exists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262686560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit, g-spot, and a more nebulous 'vaginal' one.</p></div><p>My own wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit, vaginal and anal. And she can (and loves to) experience them simultaneously. I can tell you my fingers are as supple as a pianist after 15 years ! And like you: Happy wife -&gt; more sex -&gt; happy me!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit , g-spot , and a more nebulous 'vaginal ' one.My own wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit , vaginal and anal .
And she can ( and loves to ) experience them simultaneously .
I can tell you my fingers are as supple as a pianist after 15 years !
And like you : Happy wife - &gt; more sex - &gt; happy me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit, g-spot, and a more nebulous 'vaginal' one.My own wife claims she notices three distinctly different kinds of orgasms - clit, vaginal and anal.
And she can (and loves to) experience them simultaneously.
I can tell you my fingers are as supple as a pianist after 15 years !
And like you: Happy wife -&gt; more sex -&gt; happy me!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645934</id>
	<title>Imagine</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1262598600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A beowulf cluster of these g-spots</p><p>this is slashdot after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A beowulf cluster of these g-spotsthis is slashdot after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A beowulf cluster of these g-spotsthis is slashdot after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645920</id>
	<title>Re:K, what?</title>
	<author>t0p</author>
	<datestamp>1262598540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I was schooled on the G-Spot by a former girlfriend, she said it was an area on the front wall of the vagina.  I could certainly feel the slight swelling that she guided me to.  I stimulated it by performing doggy-style or by lifting her legs and thrusting upwards.  There was certainly <em>something</em> there that she enjoyed having stimulated.  Other women also enjoyed it.  But some others didn't experience the same sensations.  So maybe it isn't real.  But who cares?  If some women think it's there and enjoy its stimulation, then it's real enough for them.  Which is the important thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was schooled on the G-Spot by a former girlfriend , she said it was an area on the front wall of the vagina .
I could certainly feel the slight swelling that she guided me to .
I stimulated it by performing doggy-style or by lifting her legs and thrusting upwards .
There was certainly something there that she enjoyed having stimulated .
Other women also enjoyed it .
But some others did n't experience the same sensations .
So maybe it is n't real .
But who cares ?
If some women think it 's there and enjoy its stimulation , then it 's real enough for them .
Which is the important thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was schooled on the G-Spot by a former girlfriend, she said it was an area on the front wall of the vagina.
I could certainly feel the slight swelling that she guided me to.
I stimulated it by performing doggy-style or by lifting her legs and thrusting upwards.
There was certainly something there that she enjoyed having stimulated.
Other women also enjoyed it.
But some others didn't experience the same sensations.
So maybe it isn't real.
But who cares?
If some women think it's there and enjoy its stimulation, then it's real enough for them.
Which is the important thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651972</id>
	<title>That's called the "prostate".</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262634660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And it&rsquo;s more effective to stimulate is from the inside. If you know what I mean.</p><p>No. That doesn&rsquo;t make you gay. If another man would be involved, <em>then</em> it would be gay. ^^</p><p>BTW: TMI? Pff... You&rsquo;re pussies! After seeing every shocker on the net, nothing can unsettle me anymore.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And it    s more effective to stimulate is from the inside .
If you know what I mean.No .
That doesn    t make you gay .
If another man would be involved , then it would be gay .
^ ^ BTW : TMI ?
Pff... You    re pussies !
After seeing every shocker on the net , nothing can unsettle me anymore .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it’s more effective to stimulate is from the inside.
If you know what I mean.No.
That doesn’t make you gay.
If another man would be involved, then it would be gay.
^^BTW: TMI?
Pff... You’re pussies!
After seeing every shocker on the net, nothing can unsettle me anymore.
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30672492</id>
	<title>There definately IS a female G-Spot</title>
	<author>Kodack</author>
	<datestamp>1262804940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I read about a study like this it really makes me wonder about the people who formed these conclusions. There was a similar debate in the recent past about the female orgasm being fake as well.</p><p>I'm going to be frank and if you are easily offended stop reading now.</p><p>I'm not a doctor or a sex therapist but I have a girlfriend and together we both have first hand experience with the g-spot. I am not going to debate whether it is a separate nerve bundle or the physiology or lack there of. My argument in favor of it existing is one of experience. Without getting graphic, there are several ways for a woman to reach orgasm, and dependent upon how she is stimulated, it will result in different types of orgasm. Both in intensity, and physical and biological responses such as increased secretions and the color and texture of them.</p><p>When the gspot is stimulated and induces an orgasm, the excretions that result are unlike those obtained from any other stimulation. The color is different, and it comes from a different place in the vagina. The smoking gun is that it can not be replicated by stimulating her in any other way than that spot.</p><p>My opinion is that there is a nerve bundle that stimulates a woman similar to the prostate on a man, the result of which is a thick white fluid, almost like paste being excreted. Clitoral and vaginal orgasms do not result in this type of excretion.</p><p>I'm not arguing the mechanics of the g-spot, only the results. If it were non-existant then the orgasm would be as well, since the orgasm is real the spot must be as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I read about a study like this it really makes me wonder about the people who formed these conclusions .
There was a similar debate in the recent past about the female orgasm being fake as well.I 'm going to be frank and if you are easily offended stop reading now.I 'm not a doctor or a sex therapist but I have a girlfriend and together we both have first hand experience with the g-spot .
I am not going to debate whether it is a separate nerve bundle or the physiology or lack there of .
My argument in favor of it existing is one of experience .
Without getting graphic , there are several ways for a woman to reach orgasm , and dependent upon how she is stimulated , it will result in different types of orgasm .
Both in intensity , and physical and biological responses such as increased secretions and the color and texture of them.When the gspot is stimulated and induces an orgasm , the excretions that result are unlike those obtained from any other stimulation .
The color is different , and it comes from a different place in the vagina .
The smoking gun is that it can not be replicated by stimulating her in any other way than that spot.My opinion is that there is a nerve bundle that stimulates a woman similar to the prostate on a man , the result of which is a thick white fluid , almost like paste being excreted .
Clitoral and vaginal orgasms do not result in this type of excretion.I 'm not arguing the mechanics of the g-spot , only the results .
If it were non-existant then the orgasm would be as well , since the orgasm is real the spot must be as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I read about a study like this it really makes me wonder about the people who formed these conclusions.
There was a similar debate in the recent past about the female orgasm being fake as well.I'm going to be frank and if you are easily offended stop reading now.I'm not a doctor or a sex therapist but I have a girlfriend and together we both have first hand experience with the g-spot.
I am not going to debate whether it is a separate nerve bundle or the physiology or lack there of.
My argument in favor of it existing is one of experience.
Without getting graphic, there are several ways for a woman to reach orgasm, and dependent upon how she is stimulated, it will result in different types of orgasm.
Both in intensity, and physical and biological responses such as increased secretions and the color and texture of them.When the gspot is stimulated and induces an orgasm, the excretions that result are unlike those obtained from any other stimulation.
The color is different, and it comes from a different place in the vagina.
The smoking gun is that it can not be replicated by stimulating her in any other way than that spot.My opinion is that there is a nerve bundle that stimulates a woman similar to the prostate on a man, the result of which is a thick white fluid, almost like paste being excreted.
Clitoral and vaginal orgasms do not result in this type of excretion.I'm not arguing the mechanics of the g-spot, only the results.
If it were non-existant then the orgasm would be as well, since the orgasm is real the spot must be as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649624</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>PaganRitual</author>
	<datestamp>1262615100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have no mod points so I just have to meaninglessly post and say that I had to stifle laughter for a long while after reading this at my desk at work. Nothing says I'm not working like laughing like an idiot for no reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no mod points so I just have to meaninglessly post and say that I had to stifle laughter for a long while after reading this at my desk at work .
Nothing says I 'm not working like laughing like an idiot for no reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no mod points so I just have to meaninglessly post and say that I had to stifle laughter for a long while after reading this at my desk at work.
Nothing says I'm not working like laughing like an idiot for no reason.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645704</id>
	<title>Re:Rim Shot!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The same could be said for rim shots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The same could be said for rim shots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same could be said for rim shots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645452</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647712</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262605920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, you be the judge. See if you can dig up an article that speaks about 5th-graders experimenting with oral sex as an "alternative" from newsprint 30 years ago. How about one that reports that over 40\% of women have been unfaithful in their marriage. How about pictures of women in thong bikinis or underwear? Ever wonder that it's because of the in-your-face prevalence of sex in general that things like "purity rings" were invented less than 20 years ago? There's a reason we didn't have "virginity rituals" in the 1950s. Because we didn't need to. Yes, somehow, I do believe that men and women in general have broken out of MANY layers of sexual "shells" in the last 30 years.</p></div><p>
I love the implication that because no one wrote about it, it obviously didn't happen.  And what exactly is wrong with thong bikinis?  Are you arguing that the human body is naturally sinful?  I think that men and women in general have many more shells to break out of.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>Divorce.</b></p> </div><p>
I believe the common counter argument here is that while divorce may be at an all time high, its not a result of more unfaithfulness.  Rather that people cheat in roughly the same ratios as before, but now its more acceptable to divorce a cheating spouse.  Especially if you're a woman capable of working now so you don't have to divorce your steady income with your husband.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And yes, this generation IS really that narcissistic, and unfortunately in debt up to their eyeballs trying to prove it. Sad, but true.</p></div><p>
The irony of this quote is massive.  We're not the generation that went our entire lives spending 110\% of our income.  The GenY'ers could never come close to the narcissism of the baby boomers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you be the judge .
See if you can dig up an article that speaks about 5th-graders experimenting with oral sex as an " alternative " from newsprint 30 years ago .
How about one that reports that over 40 \ % of women have been unfaithful in their marriage .
How about pictures of women in thong bikinis or underwear ?
Ever wonder that it 's because of the in-your-face prevalence of sex in general that things like " purity rings " were invented less than 20 years ago ?
There 's a reason we did n't have " virginity rituals " in the 1950s .
Because we did n't need to .
Yes , somehow , I do believe that men and women in general have broken out of MANY layers of sexual " shells " in the last 30 years .
I love the implication that because no one wrote about it , it obviously did n't happen .
And what exactly is wrong with thong bikinis ?
Are you arguing that the human body is naturally sinful ?
I think that men and women in general have many more shells to break out of .
Divorce . I believe the common counter argument here is that while divorce may be at an all time high , its not a result of more unfaithfulness .
Rather that people cheat in roughly the same ratios as before , but now its more acceptable to divorce a cheating spouse .
Especially if you 're a woman capable of working now so you do n't have to divorce your steady income with your husband.And yes , this generation IS really that narcissistic , and unfortunately in debt up to their eyeballs trying to prove it .
Sad , but true .
The irony of this quote is massive .
We 're not the generation that went our entire lives spending 110 \ % of our income .
The GenY'ers could never come close to the narcissism of the baby boomers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you be the judge.
See if you can dig up an article that speaks about 5th-graders experimenting with oral sex as an "alternative" from newsprint 30 years ago.
How about one that reports that over 40\% of women have been unfaithful in their marriage.
How about pictures of women in thong bikinis or underwear?
Ever wonder that it's because of the in-your-face prevalence of sex in general that things like "purity rings" were invented less than 20 years ago?
There's a reason we didn't have "virginity rituals" in the 1950s.
Because we didn't need to.
Yes, somehow, I do believe that men and women in general have broken out of MANY layers of sexual "shells" in the last 30 years.
I love the implication that because no one wrote about it, it obviously didn't happen.
And what exactly is wrong with thong bikinis?
Are you arguing that the human body is naturally sinful?
I think that men and women in general have many more shells to break out of.
Divorce. 
I believe the common counter argument here is that while divorce may be at an all time high, its not a result of more unfaithfulness.
Rather that people cheat in roughly the same ratios as before, but now its more acceptable to divorce a cheating spouse.
Especially if you're a woman capable of working now so you don't have to divorce your steady income with your husband.And yes, this generation IS really that narcissistic, and unfortunately in debt up to their eyeballs trying to prove it.
Sad, but true.
The irony of this quote is massive.
We're not the generation that went our entire lives spending 110\% of our income.
The GenY'ers could never come close to the narcissism of the baby boomers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646712</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>wat</htmltext>
<tokenext>wat</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wat</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650694</id>
	<title>This and "blue balls"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262622300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm also posting AC, but I, too, have never failed to find it. But yes, people are different. Some people don't like it; many do. It's there, and I'm kind of tired of reading that it isn't.

</p><p>I'll file this in the same drawer as when my (female) sex ed. teacher said that "blue balls" don't exist, and were just made up by men trying to pressure women into sex. Yes, they do exist, and hurt like a mofo (but only happen when you're a young stud). However, no, that isn't a reason to have sex with a guy you don't want to have sex with. He can solve that physical problem all by himself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm also posting AC , but I , too , have never failed to find it .
But yes , people are different .
Some people do n't like it ; many do .
It 's there , and I 'm kind of tired of reading that it is n't .
I 'll file this in the same drawer as when my ( female ) sex ed .
teacher said that " blue balls " do n't exist , and were just made up by men trying to pressure women into sex .
Yes , they do exist , and hurt like a mofo ( but only happen when you 're a young stud ) .
However , no , that is n't a reason to have sex with a guy you do n't want to have sex with .
He can solve that physical problem all by himself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm also posting AC, but I, too, have never failed to find it.
But yes, people are different.
Some people don't like it; many do.
It's there, and I'm kind of tired of reading that it isn't.
I'll file this in the same drawer as when my (female) sex ed.
teacher said that "blue balls" don't exist, and were just made up by men trying to pressure women into sex.
Yes, they do exist, and hurt like a mofo (but only happen when you're a young stud).
However, no, that isn't a reason to have sex with a guy you don't want to have sex with.
He can solve that physical problem all by himself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646292</id>
	<title>bs...</title>
	<author>SD-Arcadia</author>
	<datestamp>1262599980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Newcomers.. ofcourse GSpot exists. <a href="http://www.headbands.com/gspot/" title="headbands.com">http://www.headbands.com/gspot/</a> [headbands.com]
<br>
It's just discontinued and we all use this now instead: <a href="http://mediainfo.sourceforge.net/en" title="sourceforge.net">http://mediainfo.sourceforge.net/en</a> [sourceforge.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Newcomers.. ofcourse GSpot exists .
http : //www.headbands.com/gspot/ [ headbands.com ] It 's just discontinued and we all use this now instead : http : //mediainfo.sourceforge.net/en [ sourceforge.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Newcomers.. ofcourse GSpot exists.
http://www.headbands.com/gspot/ [headbands.com]

It's just discontinued and we all use this now instead: http://mediainfo.sourceforge.net/en [sourceforge.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650564</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1262621160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, don't neglect the clitoris. It is not just that little nub, the clit is a series of expansive bulbs which almost envelops the vagina itself.</p></div><p>Actually, I have a theory on this (backed up by a paper I read once - don't laugh, people do research this kind of stuff). My theory is that the sensitive nerve cluster that (for men) is in the glans is (in women) stretched out along the length of the vagina but is mostly protected by the vaginal muscles. The clit is one end of the nerve cluster, and at various other points (the 'g-spot', and just up behind the cervix, among others) it may be close enough to the interior surface to be stimulated. It just depends how the whole area develops.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , do n't neglect the clitoris .
It is not just that little nub , the clit is a series of expansive bulbs which almost envelops the vagina itself.Actually , I have a theory on this ( backed up by a paper I read once - do n't laugh , people do research this kind of stuff ) .
My theory is that the sensitive nerve cluster that ( for men ) is in the glans is ( in women ) stretched out along the length of the vagina but is mostly protected by the vaginal muscles .
The clit is one end of the nerve cluster , and at various other points ( the 'g-spot ' , and just up behind the cervix , among others ) it may be close enough to the interior surface to be stimulated .
It just depends how the whole area develops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, don't neglect the clitoris.
It is not just that little nub, the clit is a series of expansive bulbs which almost envelops the vagina itself.Actually, I have a theory on this (backed up by a paper I read once - don't laugh, people do research this kind of stuff).
My theory is that the sensitive nerve cluster that (for men) is in the glans is (in women) stretched out along the length of the vagina but is mostly protected by the vaginal muscles.
The clit is one end of the nerve cluster, and at various other points (the 'g-spot', and just up behind the cervix, among others) it may be close enough to the interior surface to be stimulated.
It just depends how the whole area develops.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646232</id>
	<title>I am dissapointed in you \.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262599740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are nerds. We don't do sex. We dwell in our basements and code stuff. Even now. It's 22:07. I have opened text editor, mysql console, todo list, rapidsvn and some paused porn movie. Never been near woman for ages. Who write these sex stories on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. anyway? What's even the G-spot man? Some brand new google crap? No thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are nerds .
We do n't do sex .
We dwell in our basements and code stuff .
Even now .
It 's 22 : 07 .
I have opened text editor , mysql console , todo list , rapidsvn and some paused porn movie .
Never been near woman for ages .
Who write these sex stories on / .
anyway ? What 's even the G-spot man ?
Some brand new google crap ?
No thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are nerds.
We don't do sex.
We dwell in our basements and code stuff.
Even now.
It's 22:07.
I have opened text editor, mysql console, todo list, rapidsvn and some paused porn movie.
Never been near woman for ages.
Who write these sex stories on /.
anyway? What's even the G-spot man?
Some brand new google crap?
No thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649416</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>PaganRitual</author>
	<datestamp>1262613840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>GTFO BITCH WE'RE DOIN SCIENCE</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>GTFO BITCH WE 'RE DOIN SCIENCE</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GTFO BITCH WE'RE DOIN SCIENCE</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650816</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262623260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't usually put my head inside a vagina, but maybe it's just me.</p></div><p>You did once...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't usually put my head inside a vagina , but maybe it 's just me.You did once.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't usually put my head inside a vagina, but maybe it's just me.You did once...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645314</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645430</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well if they don't know that they have one, what exactly is the point?  Of course it would probably be more accurate to ascertain whether or not there is a denser collection of nerves in a certain place on their anatomy but I'd guess that dissection isn't popular with living subjects...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well if they do n't know that they have one , what exactly is the point ?
Of course it would probably be more accurate to ascertain whether or not there is a denser collection of nerves in a certain place on their anatomy but I 'd guess that dissection is n't popular with living subjects.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well if they don't know that they have one, what exactly is the point?
Of course it would probably be more accurate to ascertain whether or not there is a denser collection of nerves in a certain place on their anatomy but I'd guess that dissection isn't popular with living subjects...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651002</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>drsmithy</author>
	<datestamp>1262624520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Unfortunately, you know what is also at an all-time high of popularity? Divorce.</i>
</p><p>The difference between "then" and "now", is that "then" people who got married but shouldn't have had to stick it out in misery (or, at best, contentment) for the rest of their lives.  "Now", they get divorced and try to \_enjoy\_ the rest of their lives, because divorce is no longer the social and legal "nuclear option" it used to be.
</p><p>Why do you even care about other people's attitudes towards marriage ?  Do you think how "sacred" your marriage is, is measured by how other people feel about it ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , you know what is also at an all-time high of popularity ?
Divorce . The difference between " then " and " now " , is that " then " people who got married but should n't have had to stick it out in misery ( or , at best , contentment ) for the rest of their lives .
" Now " , they get divorced and try to \ _enjoy \ _ the rest of their lives , because divorce is no longer the social and legal " nuclear option " it used to be .
Why do you even care about other people 's attitudes towards marriage ?
Do you think how " sacred " your marriage is , is measured by how other people feel about it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Unfortunately, you know what is also at an all-time high of popularity?
Divorce.
The difference between "then" and "now", is that "then" people who got married but shouldn't have had to stick it out in misery (or, at best, contentment) for the rest of their lives.
"Now", they get divorced and try to \_enjoy\_ the rest of their lives, because divorce is no longer the social and legal "nuclear option" it used to be.
Why do you even care about other people's attitudes towards marriage ?
Do you think how "sacred" your marriage is, is measured by how other people feel about it ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649150</id>
	<title>Who cares!!!</title>
	<author>AthleteMusicianNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1262612580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pleasuring her is not my primary concern.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pleasuring her is not my primary concern .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pleasuring her is not my primary concern.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648172</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>lot3k</author>
	<datestamp>1262608380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The dumb thing about this study is that they <i>ask</i> women if they have a G-spot.</p><p>Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.</p></div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...or that 5 year olds don't have a large intestine, only small.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit , with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men do n't have prostate glands or spleens .
...or that 5 year olds do n't have a large intestine , only small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.
...or that 5 year olds don't have a large intestine, only small.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647004</id>
	<title>Re:K, what?</title>
	<author>ozbird</author>
	<datestamp>1262602920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>There's a large, easily felt physical <b>outcropping</b> which is one of several significant stimulus points.</p></div></blockquote><p>No, that's the geologist-spot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a large , easily felt physical outcropping which is one of several significant stimulus points.No , that 's the geologist-spot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a large, easily felt physical outcropping which is one of several significant stimulus points.No, that's the geologist-spot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645810</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Damek</author>
	<datestamp>1262598120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So do boys! As a boy myself, I wish more boys &amp; girls would read stuff like "Yes Means Yes"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... jesu christu why is it so hard for human beings to treat each other like human beings and enjoy themselves and each other! I hate "wester society" (for lack of a better umbrella term).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So do boys !
As a boy myself , I wish more boys &amp; girls would read stuff like " Yes Means Yes " ... jesu christu why is it so hard for human beings to treat each other like human beings and enjoy themselves and each other !
I hate " wester society " ( for lack of a better umbrella term ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So do boys!
As a boy myself, I wish more boys &amp; girls would read stuff like "Yes Means Yes" ... jesu christu why is it so hard for human beings to treat each other like human beings and enjoy themselves and each other!
I hate "wester society" (for lack of a better umbrella term).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651102</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1262625480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My experience (in more detail above), is that the g-spot required an emotional component to activate (the first time) and a higher than average arousal level to activate (the first time).  Once activated, it got easier over time.  However, my current gf can't get it with her toys yet while I can set her off repeatedly with them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My experience ( in more detail above ) , is that the g-spot required an emotional component to activate ( the first time ) and a higher than average arousal level to activate ( the first time ) .
Once activated , it got easier over time .
However , my current gf ca n't get it with her toys yet while I can set her off repeatedly with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My experience (in more detail above), is that the g-spot required an emotional component to activate (the first time) and a higher than average arousal level to activate (the first time).
Once activated, it got easier over time.
However, my current gf can't get it with her toys yet while I can set her off repeatedly with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308</id>
	<title>Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>Idimmu Xul</author>
	<datestamp>1262596440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot. If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Fantastic methodology there! We won't actually study the person, we'll just ask them! What an awesome popularity contest.</p><p>In other news God does exist, 10/10 Christians guarantee it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The women in the study , who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins , were asked whether they had a G-spot .
If one did exist , it would be expected that both identical twins , who have the same genes , would report having one .
Fantastic methodology there !
We wo n't actually study the person , we 'll just ask them !
What an awesome popularity contest.In other news God does exist , 10/10 Christians guarantee it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The women in the study, who were all pairs of identical and non-identical twins, were asked whether they had a G-spot.
If one did exist, it would be expected that both identical twins, who have the same genes, would report having one.
Fantastic methodology there!
We won't actually study the person, we'll just ask them!
What an awesome popularity contest.In other news God does exist, 10/10 Christians guarantee it!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646164</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1262599500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless those twins all had identical lovers, I don't see how this is relevant. The question is whether it exists at all.</p><p>Unfortunately, I suspect a properly scientific study would require some scientist to learn to find it, and then attempt to find it on each of the women in the study. But that affects the sample population quite a lot, I'd think -- down to "women who like casual sex with scientists."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless those twins all had identical lovers , I do n't see how this is relevant .
The question is whether it exists at all.Unfortunately , I suspect a properly scientific study would require some scientist to learn to find it , and then attempt to find it on each of the women in the study .
But that affects the sample population quite a lot , I 'd think -- down to " women who like casual sex with scientists .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless those twins all had identical lovers, I don't see how this is relevant.
The question is whether it exists at all.Unfortunately, I suspect a properly scientific study would require some scientist to learn to find it, and then attempt to find it on each of the women in the study.
But that affects the sample population quite a lot, I'd think -- down to "women who like casual sex with scientists.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649390</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>bmecoli</author>
	<datestamp>1262613660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't be a pussy, jam your whole fist in there!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't be a pussy , jam your whole fist in there !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't be a pussy, jam your whole fist in there!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647028</id>
	<title>How to Find the G Spot (Simple Instructions)</title>
	<author>yttrstein</author>
	<datestamp>1262603040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you're a dude:<br><br>1. with your palm face up, stick your middle finger as far as it will go into a dudette's vaginal canal<br>2. still with your palm face up, point back at yourself with your middle finger.  Your middle finger should now be meeting resistance from the underside of the dudette's pubic bone.<br>3. move the tip of your finger around a little bit until you feel something a bit like fish gills.<br><br>That's what you're looking for.<br><br>If you're a dudette:<br><br>1. with your palm face down, stick your middle finger as far as it will go into your vaginal canal<br>2. still with your palm face down, curl your middle finger back towards your palm.  Your middle finger should now be meeting resistance from the underside of your pubic bone.<br>3. move the tip of your finger around a little bit until you feel something a bit like fish gills.<br><br>That's what you're looking for.<br><br>These "scientists" evidently aren't having very good sex.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're a dude : 1. with your palm face up , stick your middle finger as far as it will go into a dudette 's vaginal canal2 .
still with your palm face up , point back at yourself with your middle finger .
Your middle finger should now be meeting resistance from the underside of the dudette 's pubic bone.3 .
move the tip of your finger around a little bit until you feel something a bit like fish gills.That 's what you 're looking for.If you 're a dudette : 1. with your palm face down , stick your middle finger as far as it will go into your vaginal canal2 .
still with your palm face down , curl your middle finger back towards your palm .
Your middle finger should now be meeting resistance from the underside of your pubic bone.3 .
move the tip of your finger around a little bit until you feel something a bit like fish gills.That 's what you 're looking for.These " scientists " evidently are n't having very good sex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're a dude:1. with your palm face up, stick your middle finger as far as it will go into a dudette's vaginal canal2.
still with your palm face up, point back at yourself with your middle finger.
Your middle finger should now be meeting resistance from the underside of the dudette's pubic bone.3.
move the tip of your finger around a little bit until you feel something a bit like fish gills.That's what you're looking for.If you're a dudette:1. with your palm face down, stick your middle finger as far as it will go into your vaginal canal2.
still with your palm face down, curl your middle finger back towards your palm.
Your middle finger should now be meeting resistance from the underside of your pubic bone.3.
move the tip of your finger around a little bit until you feel something a bit like fish gills.That's what you're looking for.These "scientists" evidently aren't having very good sex.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645478</id>
	<title>Does it matter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to claim it's irrelevant if there is such a thing as a g-spot physically. If your partner has a specific spot (in addition to the clitoris) in her genitals which by the way of stimulation induces a torrent of orgasms we might as well call it a g-spot. The single most important "sex organ" is the human brain anyway, does it matter exactly how something works if it works?</p><p>Granted, it's nice to understand stuff scientifically and all. But in my experience sex it more of an art than science...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to claim it 's irrelevant if there is such a thing as a g-spot physically .
If your partner has a specific spot ( in addition to the clitoris ) in her genitals which by the way of stimulation induces a torrent of orgasms we might as well call it a g-spot .
The single most important " sex organ " is the human brain anyway , does it matter exactly how something works if it works ? Granted , it 's nice to understand stuff scientifically and all .
But in my experience sex it more of an art than science... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to claim it's irrelevant if there is such a thing as a g-spot physically.
If your partner has a specific spot (in addition to the clitoris) in her genitals which by the way of stimulation induces a torrent of orgasms we might as well call it a g-spot.
The single most important "sex organ" is the human brain anyway, does it matter exactly how something works if it works?Granted, it's nice to understand stuff scientifically and all.
But in my experience sex it more of an art than science... ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646750</id>
	<title>Re:K, what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who thinks that there is one and only one stimulus spot on the female genitalia needs to consult <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Clitoris\_inner\_anatomy.gif" title="wikimedia.org" rel="nofollow">a map of the area</a> [wikimedia.org]. Those wings you see there? Those are as pleasurable as the clit, but because they are buried under tissue they are more challenging to get at.  I'm pretty sure that the G-Spot is a combination of mood + hitting these things.

</p><p>Note that this particular map of the female genitalia is fairly recent -- mid 80s if I recall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who thinks that there is one and only one stimulus spot on the female genitalia needs to consult a map of the area [ wikimedia.org ] .
Those wings you see there ?
Those are as pleasurable as the clit , but because they are buried under tissue they are more challenging to get at .
I 'm pretty sure that the G-Spot is a combination of mood + hitting these things .
Note that this particular map of the female genitalia is fairly recent -- mid 80s if I recall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who thinks that there is one and only one stimulus spot on the female genitalia needs to consult a map of the area [wikimedia.org].
Those wings you see there?
Those are as pleasurable as the clit, but because they are buried under tissue they are more challenging to get at.
I'm pretty sure that the G-Spot is a combination of mood + hitting these things.
Note that this particular map of the female genitalia is fairly recent -- mid 80s if I recall.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646366</id>
	<title>It does exist</title>
	<author>CranberryKing</author>
	<datestamp>1262600280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it's just that google has kept it in beta.</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's just that google has kept it in beta .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's just that google has kept it in beta.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650744</id>
	<title>Re:I can assure you it's there,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262622660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd have sworn I've slept with you based on your post;) You're bang on (no pun intended;) regarding positioning). As a woman (yes apparently at least four women read<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.), I can say it exists beyond a shadow of a doubt. The study sounds flawed and ludicrous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd have sworn I 've slept with you based on your post ; ) You 're bang on ( no pun intended ; ) regarding positioning ) .
As a woman ( yes apparently at least four women read / .
) , I can say it exists beyond a shadow of a doubt .
The study sounds flawed and ludicrous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd have sworn I've slept with you based on your post;) You're bang on (no pun intended;) regarding positioning).
As a woman (yes apparently at least four women read /.
), I can say it exists beyond a shadow of a doubt.
The study sounds flawed and ludicrous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645388</id>
	<title>Been on FARK</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And talked to death there . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><p>Most Slashdotters think a Vagina is that blurred area over the crotch in pictures of the only naked women they've ever seen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And talked to death there .
. .Most Slashdotters think a Vagina is that blurred area over the crotch in pictures of the only naked women they 've ever seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And talked to death there .
. .Most Slashdotters think a Vagina is that blurred area over the crotch in pictures of the only naked women they've ever seen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646352</id>
	<title>Listen to the porn stars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262600160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to Nina Hartley it does exist. I'm inclined to trust her judgment on this one.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to Nina Hartley it does exist .
I 'm inclined to trust her judgment on this one .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to Nina Hartley it does exist.
I'm inclined to trust her judgment on this one.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30657860</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262717940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>    I suspect there are more of us... and if the g-spot doesn't exist-it sure fooled me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>Of course they would have discounted my data as I am bi.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I've never heard of diet or exercise increasing the chance of finding or having a g spot, as one of the guys involved in the study mentions.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I definitely think their methodology is flawed and their results completely wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect there are more of us... and if the g-spot does n't exist-it sure fooled me ; ) Of course they would have discounted my data as I am bi .
        I 've never heard of diet or exercise increasing the chance of finding or having a g spot , as one of the guys involved in the study mentions .
        I definitely think their methodology is flawed and their results completely wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>    I suspect there are more of us... and if the g-spot doesn't exist-it sure fooled me ;)Of course they would have discounted my data as I am bi.
        I've never heard of diet or exercise increasing the chance of finding or having a g spot, as one of the guys involved in the study mentions.
        I definitely think their methodology is flawed and their results completely wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646788</id>
	<title>Probably does exist but that doesn't matter</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1262602140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that women obsess over their looks, weight and relationship before during and after sex. Of course they're not going to enjoy as much if at all while worrying if the guy is looking at their fat or what the effects of the bit of chocolate they ate over lunch will be.
<br> <br>
This does not apply to all women but it certainly applies to heck of a lot more women than men. Women tend to be more emotional and will let things get to them more where as guys are more likely not to care and therefore enjoy sex more often.
<br> <br>
It is because of this little theory that I'm sure the person who enjoys sex the most is the least emotional person and therefore Spock probably enjoys sex more than any person should legally be allowed to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that women obsess over their looks , weight and relationship before during and after sex .
Of course they 're not going to enjoy as much if at all while worrying if the guy is looking at their fat or what the effects of the bit of chocolate they ate over lunch will be .
This does not apply to all women but it certainly applies to heck of a lot more women than men .
Women tend to be more emotional and will let things get to them more where as guys are more likely not to care and therefore enjoy sex more often .
It is because of this little theory that I 'm sure the person who enjoys sex the most is the least emotional person and therefore Spock probably enjoys sex more than any person should legally be allowed to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that women obsess over their looks, weight and relationship before during and after sex.
Of course they're not going to enjoy as much if at all while worrying if the guy is looking at their fat or what the effects of the bit of chocolate they ate over lunch will be.
This does not apply to all women but it certainly applies to heck of a lot more women than men.
Women tend to be more emotional and will let things get to them more where as guys are more likely not to care and therefore enjoy sex more often.
It is because of this little theory that I'm sure the person who enjoys sex the most is the least emotional person and therefore Spock probably enjoys sex more than any person should legally be allowed to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646250</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Z00L00K</author>
	<datestamp>1262599860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anything that makes sex enjoyable... Oh how wrong that could get!</p><p>Anyway - stimulation is more than one single spot, it's a full body experience. And every person is different, and it's an adventure to find the right spots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anything that makes sex enjoyable... Oh how wrong that could get ! Anyway - stimulation is more than one single spot , it 's a full body experience .
And every person is different , and it 's an adventure to find the right spots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anything that makes sex enjoyable... Oh how wrong that could get!Anyway - stimulation is more than one single spot, it's a full body experience.
And every person is different, and it's an adventure to find the right spots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652216</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1262723760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what about the Democrats who voted for war right along with him?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what about the Democrats who voted for war right along with him ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what about the Democrats who voted for war right along with him?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647320</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262604300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>you're obviously american.</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're obviously american .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're obviously american.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648032</id>
	<title>duhree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262607480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And people wonder why girls typically don't major in computer science...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And people wonder why girls typically do n't major in computer science.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And people wonder why girls typically don't major in computer science...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650004</id>
	<title>That's waht they said...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262617500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hah! That's what they said with Wi-Fi and today it covers nearly the entire planet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hah !
That 's what they said with Wi-Fi and today it covers nearly the entire planet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hah!
That's what they said with Wi-Fi and today it covers nearly the entire planet!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647344</id>
	<title>Research Dollars</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1262604420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know where the money came from for this research, but boy did their sponsors get defrauded.<br>I've done many more years of research personally into this subject than any college kids could<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,probably put together.<br>In my research, when the particular position of my throbbing love club massages the spot in question, young, old<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,fat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,thin, married and single all agree.<br>"oooooh daddy fly! You rock my world like no one else. "<br>I suppose this research is probably biased by the cunnilinguistic school of thought and should be ignored outright. It's practitioners are hungry for dominance in her field. Some say they are only equipped for that and not G-spot research by shortcomings in other areas.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Anyone needing an on hand experiment conducted can send her round for confirmation of my findings. She must be a disease free example.A waiver must be signed absolving me from all pregnacies of wives, girlfriends,mothers etc... You may observe, but in a professional way, quietly and clandestinely.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Lets end bunk research by making an example of Kings College. Bring them on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know where the money came from for this research , but boy did their sponsors get defrauded.I 've done many more years of research personally into this subject than any college kids could ,probably put together.In my research , when the particular position of my throbbing love club massages the spot in question , young , old ,fat ,thin , married and single all agree .
" oooooh daddy fly !
You rock my world like no one else .
" I suppose this research is probably biased by the cunnilinguistic school of thought and should be ignored outright .
It 's practitioners are hungry for dominance in her field .
Some say they are only equipped for that and not G-spot research by shortcomings in other areas .
          Anyone needing an on hand experiment conducted can send her round for confirmation of my findings .
She must be a disease free example.A waiver must be signed absolving me from all pregnacies of wives , girlfriends,mothers etc... You may observe , but in a professional way , quietly and clandestinely .
          Lets end bunk research by making an example of Kings College .
Bring them on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know where the money came from for this research, but boy did their sponsors get defrauded.I've done many more years of research personally into this subject than any college kids could ,probably put together.In my research, when the particular position of my throbbing love club massages the spot in question, young, old ,fat ,thin, married and single all agree.
"oooooh daddy fly!
You rock my world like no one else.
"I suppose this research is probably biased by the cunnilinguistic school of thought and should be ignored outright.
It's practitioners are hungry for dominance in her field.
Some say they are only equipped for that and not G-spot research by shortcomings in other areas.
          Anyone needing an on hand experiment conducted can send her round for confirmation of my findings.
She must be a disease free example.A waiver must be signed absolving me from all pregnacies of wives, girlfriends,mothers etc... You may observe, but in a professional way, quietly and clandestinely.
          Lets end bunk research by making an example of Kings College.
Bring them on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647204</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1262603760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a shame some overly-sensative virgin modded you down for your one snarky comment.  The rest of your post is very useful.  I've never fisted (I'm a big guy) but I've had everything else up in there and found that and several other areas which are very responsive once the girl is aroused.  --- And that's a key.  Sex has many different rising states of arousal and things which are unpleasant at arounsal level 1, are mindblowing at arousal level 11.  (and I'd say<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... with all deference to spinal tap... that there are more than 11 distinct levels of arousal).</p><p>Mod this one up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a shame some overly-sensative virgin modded you down for your one snarky comment .
The rest of your post is very useful .
I 've never fisted ( I 'm a big guy ) but I 've had everything else up in there and found that and several other areas which are very responsive once the girl is aroused .
--- And that 's a key .
Sex has many different rising states of arousal and things which are unpleasant at arounsal level 1 , are mindblowing at arousal level 11 .
( and I 'd say ... with all deference to spinal tap... that there are more than 11 distinct levels of arousal ) .Mod this one up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a shame some overly-sensative virgin modded you down for your one snarky comment.
The rest of your post is very useful.
I've never fisted (I'm a big guy) but I've had everything else up in there and found that and several other areas which are very responsive once the girl is aroused.
--- And that's a key.
Sex has many different rising states of arousal and things which are unpleasant at arounsal level 1, are mindblowing at arousal level 11.
(and I'd say ... with all deference to spinal tap... that there are more than 11 distinct levels of arousal).Mod this one up!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645402</id>
	<title>seriously, lacks intelligence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I knew this was a study to absolutely find proof that it exists, I would ask ALL women that have g spots to come forward, and of these I would pick 1000 ( atleast 10\% will be enough to get what I need)). Then I would start by going in with a camera to pin point the exact location and type of tissue that the gspot is composed of....as I am sure it would be slightly different then the rest, as to allow a better stimulation.</p><p>Next I would then map out the exact production  of ??? hormone that is released from this area or secretion, I am not sure what it is called (placenta...? yuk) I would then use this to help me promote the finding of the gspot in women that could not have gspot orgasm, or normal women, (90\%)</p><p>I would then ask another 1000 candidates to come forward for testing to help find the gspot, this would entail possible stimulation and multi orgasm... as I would be relentless in finding that damn gspot.</p><p>After sending in the camera to find similar tissues, which might be present in enough of 10\% (100) cases...then I would proceed to stimulate the area until the area secreted that placenta like liquid that so many women can squirt while filming those p0rnos.</p><p>As for the rest of the story, well I am sure you can figure it out. I am not a doctor, and yet I can easily find the best way to get proof of the gspot. I know it exists myself, so I can assure you that this method would probably work....except I dont need reassurance....I get enough of that when I have to change the bedsheets.</p><p>And as for the dorks who try to sell you on the fact that it does not exists, well, they could not find it, and they never will....it hides from those not worthy. I have seen the holy grail, and felt its wetly presence and can speak from experience, it does exist.</p><p>So when you are hungry for a drink, and too tired to get up during the middle of the night, you can always go under the covers for a refreshing beverage as this is exactly what the gspot is for!</p><p>
&nbsp; nuff said</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I knew this was a study to absolutely find proof that it exists , I would ask ALL women that have g spots to come forward , and of these I would pick 1000 ( atleast 10 \ % will be enough to get what I need ) ) .
Then I would start by going in with a camera to pin point the exact location and type of tissue that the gspot is composed of....as I am sure it would be slightly different then the rest , as to allow a better stimulation.Next I would then map out the exact production of ? ? ?
hormone that is released from this area or secretion , I am not sure what it is called ( placenta... ?
yuk ) I would then use this to help me promote the finding of the gspot in women that could not have gspot orgasm , or normal women , ( 90 \ % ) I would then ask another 1000 candidates to come forward for testing to help find the gspot , this would entail possible stimulation and multi orgasm... as I would be relentless in finding that damn gspot.After sending in the camera to find similar tissues , which might be present in enough of 10 \ % ( 100 ) cases...then I would proceed to stimulate the area until the area secreted that placenta like liquid that so many women can squirt while filming those p0rnos.As for the rest of the story , well I am sure you can figure it out .
I am not a doctor , and yet I can easily find the best way to get proof of the gspot .
I know it exists myself , so I can assure you that this method would probably work....except I dont need reassurance....I get enough of that when I have to change the bedsheets.And as for the dorks who try to sell you on the fact that it does not exists , well , they could not find it , and they never will....it hides from those not worthy .
I have seen the holy grail , and felt its wetly presence and can speak from experience , it does exist.So when you are hungry for a drink , and too tired to get up during the middle of the night , you can always go under the covers for a refreshing beverage as this is exactly what the gspot is for !
  nuff said</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I knew this was a study to absolutely find proof that it exists, I would ask ALL women that have g spots to come forward, and of these I would pick 1000 ( atleast 10\% will be enough to get what I need)).
Then I would start by going in with a camera to pin point the exact location and type of tissue that the gspot is composed of....as I am sure it would be slightly different then the rest, as to allow a better stimulation.Next I would then map out the exact production  of ???
hormone that is released from this area or secretion, I am not sure what it is called (placenta...?
yuk) I would then use this to help me promote the finding of the gspot in women that could not have gspot orgasm, or normal women, (90\%)I would then ask another 1000 candidates to come forward for testing to help find the gspot, this would entail possible stimulation and multi orgasm... as I would be relentless in finding that damn gspot.After sending in the camera to find similar tissues, which might be present in enough of 10\% (100) cases...then I would proceed to stimulate the area until the area secreted that placenta like liquid that so many women can squirt while filming those p0rnos.As for the rest of the story, well I am sure you can figure it out.
I am not a doctor, and yet I can easily find the best way to get proof of the gspot.
I know it exists myself, so I can assure you that this method would probably work....except I dont need reassurance....I get enough of that when I have to change the bedsheets.And as for the dorks who try to sell you on the fact that it does not exists, well, they could not find it, and they never will....it hides from those not worthy.
I have seen the holy grail, and felt its wetly presence and can speak from experience, it does exist.So when you are hungry for a drink, and too tired to get up during the middle of the night, you can always go under the covers for a refreshing beverage as this is exactly what the gspot is for!
  nuff said</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647670</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot agrees...</title>
	<author>sebastianlacuesta</author>
	<datestamp>1262605800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, I have not seen it, but I have touched it. And believe me, most women have it. See: <a href="http://blog.innerpendejo.net/2007/09/como-dar-un-masaje-a-una-mujer-para-que-tenga-orgasmos-multiples.html" title="innerpendejo.net" rel="nofollow">http://blog.innerpendejo.net/2007/09/como-dar-un-masaje-a-una-mujer-para-que-tenga-orgasmos-multiples.html</a> [innerpendejo.net] (text in spanish, video in english). Not with 100\% of the girls, but it works. Enjoy it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I have not seen it , but I have touched it .
And believe me , most women have it .
See : http : //blog.innerpendejo.net/2007/09/como-dar-un-masaje-a-una-mujer-para-que-tenga-orgasmos-multiples.html [ innerpendejo.net ] ( text in spanish , video in english ) .
Not with 100 \ % of the girls , but it works .
Enjoy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I have not seen it, but I have touched it.
And believe me, most women have it.
See: http://blog.innerpendejo.net/2007/09/como-dar-un-masaje-a-una-mujer-para-que-tenga-orgasmos-multiples.html [innerpendejo.net] (text in spanish, video in english).
Not with 100\% of the girls, but it works.
Enjoy it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646898</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262602500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My previous girlfriend had one; you could feel the obviously different, spongy mound of tissue on the inside front of her vagina.  And she had wild, squirting orgasms when it was stimulated.</p><p>My current girlfriend may or may not have one; I've searched repeatedly and found nothing.  Maybe she doesn't have one, maybe it's deeper than my fingers can reach.  Whatever.  It's clitoral stimulation or nothing with her.</p><p>If you'd asked either if they had one, at least at one point in their lives, they would have said no.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My previous girlfriend had one ; you could feel the obviously different , spongy mound of tissue on the inside front of her vagina .
And she had wild , squirting orgasms when it was stimulated.My current girlfriend may or may not have one ; I 've searched repeatedly and found nothing .
Maybe she does n't have one , maybe it 's deeper than my fingers can reach .
Whatever. It 's clitoral stimulation or nothing with her.If you 'd asked either if they had one , at least at one point in their lives , they would have said no .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My previous girlfriend had one; you could feel the obviously different, spongy mound of tissue on the inside front of her vagina.
And she had wild, squirting orgasms when it was stimulated.My current girlfriend may or may not have one; I've searched repeatedly and found nothing.
Maybe she doesn't have one, maybe it's deeper than my fingers can reach.
Whatever.  It's clitoral stimulation or nothing with her.If you'd asked either if they had one, at least at one point in their lives, they would have said no.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645416</id>
	<title>I'll try to be diplomatic about this...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In my, er, sample of practical application... they do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In my , er , sample of practical application... they do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my, er, sample of practical application... they do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650932</id>
	<title>Gspot doesn't exist, only until...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262624040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Google releases a product named GSpot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Google releases a product named GSpot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Google releases a product named GSpot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654484</id>
	<title>No wonder Italians are so popular</title>
	<author>cavebison</author>
	<datestamp>1262705520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They at least <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7254523.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">claim to know where it is</a> [bbc.co.uk].

Amusingly, this was listed as a related story beside TFA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They at least claim to know where it is [ bbc.co.uk ] .
Amusingly , this was listed as a related story beside TFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They at least claim to know where it is [bbc.co.uk].
Amusingly, this was listed as a related story beside TFA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646966</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>xirusmom</author>
	<datestamp>1262602860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>oh, do we?</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh , do we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh, do we?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645426</id>
	<title>g-what?</title>
	<author>AntEater</author>
	<datestamp>1262596860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this something that will bepart of the next stable gnome release?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this something that will bepart of the next stable gnome release ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this something that will bepart of the next stable gnome release?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645864</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Abreu</author>
	<datestamp>1262598300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.</p></div><p>If that's true, I am sure the current generation will be influenced by George "WMD" Bush's antics and subsequent representation after the facts...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , Bill " Cigar " Clinton did n't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact , which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.If that 's true , I am sure the current generation will be influenced by George " WMD " Bush 's antics and subsequent representation after the facts.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.If that's true, I am sure the current generation will be influenced by George "WMD" Bush's antics and subsequent representation after the facts...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646238</id>
	<title>Surveys?</title>
	<author>UnSlashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1262599800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Their "proof" that the G spot doesn't exist consists of asking women if they have them.  So if I ask people is they have a spleen or a vameronasal organ and 46\% say they don't, then we can prove that those organs don't exist?

A nerve bundle is a piece of physical anatomy, you should be able to prove if it exists or not based on cadaver research.  If there is an anatomical nerve cluster, then you stimule the area on living women, have a control group where you stimulate a random area of the vulva, and compare fMRI tests.  Surveys are nonsense if you are trying to prove the existence of a piece of physical anatomy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their " proof " that the G spot does n't exist consists of asking women if they have them .
So if I ask people is they have a spleen or a vameronasal organ and 46 \ % say they do n't , then we can prove that those organs do n't exist ?
A nerve bundle is a piece of physical anatomy , you should be able to prove if it exists or not based on cadaver research .
If there is an anatomical nerve cluster , then you stimule the area on living women , have a control group where you stimulate a random area of the vulva , and compare fMRI tests .
Surveys are nonsense if you are trying to prove the existence of a piece of physical anatomy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their "proof" that the G spot doesn't exist consists of asking women if they have them.
So if I ask people is they have a spleen or a vameronasal organ and 46\% say they don't, then we can prove that those organs don't exist?
A nerve bundle is a piece of physical anatomy, you should be able to prove if it exists or not based on cadaver research.
If there is an anatomical nerve cluster, then you stimule the area on living women, have a control group where you stimulate a random area of the vulva, and compare fMRI tests.
Surveys are nonsense if you are trying to prove the existence of a piece of physical anatomy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648076</id>
	<title>Re:What is the definition of the G-spot anyway?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262607780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you have to ask you've never hit it.<br>It's something that you never want to leave when you're there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have to ask you 've never hit it.It 's something that you never want to leave when you 're there ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you have to ask you've never hit it.It's something that you never want to leave when you're there ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Morals went out the window about 2 generations ago</p></div><p>Umm, read the post again. It says "mores" not "morals" - different things.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a "safe" alternative these days, along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the world</p></div><p>Sounds like you've been reading too much sensationalistic media. While these things do happen, I don't think they are as widely indulged in as you believe. Even with a more liberal attitude in society, you don't think people are still self-conscious about sex and their bodies? Just as many kids are getting purity rings and indulging in other weird virginity rituals, as are experimenting with anal and oral sex.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Not to mention the way that Hollywood has pretty much shit on the entire aspect of Marriage with their here-today-gone-tomorrow mentality of a once-sacred bond,</p></div><p>It seems to me that marriage is just as popular as ever. The Gen-Y kids seem to love it, which is weird for me as a Gen-Xer - where the influence of feminism and career-driven women made marriage less popular for my generation. Women of Gen-X were very skeptical of marriage, and the way Gen-Y acts today would seem very backwards and anti-feminist to them.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.</p></div><p>Right, so how do you explain this trend towards marriage and traditional values in the generation that would have been young enough to be influenced by Clinton? I think you're just projecting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Morals went out the window about 2 generations agoUmm , read the post again .
It says " mores " not " morals " - different things.With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a " safe " alternative these days , along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the worldSounds like you 've been reading too much sensationalistic media .
While these things do happen , I do n't think they are as widely indulged in as you believe .
Even with a more liberal attitude in society , you do n't think people are still self-conscious about sex and their bodies ?
Just as many kids are getting purity rings and indulging in other weird virginity rituals , as are experimenting with anal and oral sex.Not to mention the way that Hollywood has pretty much shit on the entire aspect of Marriage with their here-today-gone-tomorrow mentality of a once-sacred bond,It seems to me that marriage is just as popular as ever .
The Gen-Y kids seem to love it , which is weird for me as a Gen-Xer - where the influence of feminism and career-driven women made marriage less popular for my generation .
Women of Gen-X were very skeptical of marriage , and the way Gen-Y acts today would seem very backwards and anti-feminist to them.Of course , Bill " Cigar " Clinton did n't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact , which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.Right , so how do you explain this trend towards marriage and traditional values in the generation that would have been young enough to be influenced by Clinton ?
I think you 're just projecting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Morals went out the window about 2 generations agoUmm, read the post again.
It says "mores" not "morals" - different things.With 12-year olds experimenting with oral and anal sex as a "safe" alternative these days, along with the Internet feeding those wicked desires to show off to the worldSounds like you've been reading too much sensationalistic media.
While these things do happen, I don't think they are as widely indulged in as you believe.
Even with a more liberal attitude in society, you don't think people are still self-conscious about sex and their bodies?
Just as many kids are getting purity rings and indulging in other weird virginity rituals, as are experimenting with anal and oral sex.Not to mention the way that Hollywood has pretty much shit on the entire aspect of Marriage with their here-today-gone-tomorrow mentality of a once-sacred bond,It seems to me that marriage is just as popular as ever.
The Gen-Y kids seem to love it, which is weird for me as a Gen-Xer - where the influence of feminism and career-driven women made marriage less popular for my generation.
Women of Gen-X were very skeptical of marriage, and the way Gen-Y acts today would seem very backwards and anti-feminist to them.Of course, Bill "Cigar" Clinton didn't help matters much either with his antics and subsequent representation after the fact, which can tend to influence an entire generation as well.Right, so how do you explain this trend towards marriage and traditional values in the generation that would have been young enough to be influenced by Clinton?
I think you're just projecting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645392</id>
	<title>What is the definition of the G-spot anyway?</title>
	<author>BoxedFlame</author>
	<datestamp>1262596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it's just "some area inside the vagina that is more sensitive than the rest" then just by the uneven expression of genes is almost HAS to exist. If you define it as "some area inside \_all\_ vaginas that will \_always\_ produce an orgasm is stimulated" then by definition it does not exist.</p><p>But of course, this is probably just the normal case of media misrepresenting the findings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's just " some area inside the vagina that is more sensitive than the rest " then just by the uneven expression of genes is almost HAS to exist .
If you define it as " some area inside \ _all \ _ vaginas that will \ _always \ _ produce an orgasm is stimulated " then by definition it does not exist.But of course , this is probably just the normal case of media misrepresenting the findings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's just "some area inside the vagina that is more sensitive than the rest" then just by the uneven expression of genes is almost HAS to exist.
If you define it as "some area inside \_all\_ vaginas that will \_always\_ produce an orgasm is stimulated" then by definition it does not exist.But of course, this is probably just the normal case of media misrepresenting the findings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645966</id>
	<title>Some have them, some don't</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My wife has a prominent one that works as advertised. Manual stimulation is far more effective than penile, but penile can work in various positions if her arousal level is high.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife has a prominent one that works as advertised .
Manual stimulation is far more effective than penile , but penile can work in various positions if her arousal level is high .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife has a prominent one that works as advertised.
Manual stimulation is far more effective than penile, but penile can work in various positions if her arousal level is high.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650296</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1262619420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others. If girls say that specific area pleasures them more, you don't have to make tons of researches about it. You can just <b>stimulate</b> it.</p></div><p>Fixed.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Seriously, though - there are definitely some areas inside the vagina that do a lot more for the girl than other areas. And in my limited experience, they're different for each girl. Knowing how to find those areas through reading her body language is what differentiates a good lover from a mediocre one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others .
If girls say that specific area pleasures them more , you do n't have to make tons of researches about it .
You can just stimulate it.Fixed .
; ) Seriously , though - there are definitely some areas inside the vagina that do a lot more for the girl than other areas .
And in my limited experience , they 're different for each girl .
Knowing how to find those areas through reading her body language is what differentiates a good lover from a mediocre one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Different areas stimulate differently and some are more powerful than others.
If girls say that specific area pleasures them more, you don't have to make tons of researches about it.
You can just stimulate it.Fixed.
;)Seriously, though - there are definitely some areas inside the vagina that do a lot more for the girl than other areas.
And in my limited experience, they're different for each girl.
Knowing how to find those areas through reading her body language is what differentiates a good lover from a mediocre one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648958</id>
	<title>Re:Shhhhhhhh!</title>
	<author>swb</author>
	<datestamp>1262611680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, they made a movie about that called "Deep Throat".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , they made a movie about that called " Deep Throat " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, they made a movie about that called "Deep Throat".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</id>
	<title>This is science?</title>
	<author>Mongoose Disciple</author>
	<datestamp>1262596260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The dumb thing about this study is that they <i>ask</i> women if they have a G-spot.</p><p>Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit , with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men do n't have prostate glands or spleens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652482</id>
	<title>I Call Bullshit</title>
	<author>Hann1bal</author>
	<datestamp>1262683560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.headbands.com/gspot/v26x/index.htm" title="headbands.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.headbands.com/gspot/v26x/index.htm</a> [headbands.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.headbands.com/gspot/v26x/index.htm [ headbands.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.headbands.com/gspot/v26x/index.htm [headbands.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653668</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>carolfromoz</author>
	<datestamp>1262699040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It is EASILY felt with ones finger in the upper wall of the vagina, as a slightly more dense, raised portion.</p> </div><p>That's the cervix! And I don't like anyone touching that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is EASILY felt with ones finger in the upper wall of the vagina , as a slightly more dense , raised portion .
That 's the cervix !
And I do n't like anyone touching that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is EASILY felt with ones finger in the upper wall of the vagina, as a slightly more dense, raised portion.
That's the cervix!
And I don't like anyone touching that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645792</id>
	<title>Useless Study</title>
	<author>rcolbert</author>
	<datestamp>1262598060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's incomprehensible that the question is even contemplated 'does it exist?'  - Of course it does.  However, the 'where' is the easiest part of the equation.  The more important questions of 'when to start looking for it' and 'what to do when you locate it' are never even mentioned in passing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's incomprehensible that the question is even contemplated 'does it exist ?
' - Of course it does .
However , the 'where ' is the easiest part of the equation .
The more important questions of 'when to start looking for it ' and 'what to do when you locate it ' are never even mentioned in passing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's incomprehensible that the question is even contemplated 'does it exist?
'  - Of course it does.
However, the 'where' is the easiest part of the equation.
The more important questions of 'when to start looking for it' and 'what to do when you locate it' are never even mentioned in passing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645524</id>
	<title>Re:Vaginas on /.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful. It's even possible to come just by stimulating that area, without touching your dick (I've done it).</p></div><p>
I laugh at the ones who modded this up and missed this little gem.
<br> <br>
It's a good lesson for all the new mods - just because a post is first or long doesn't mean it's good. Or in this case, doesn't make you wish you hadn't read it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful .
It 's even possible to come just by stimulating that area , without touching your dick ( I 've done it ) .
I laugh at the ones who modded this up and missed this little gem .
It 's a good lesson for all the new mods - just because a post is first or long does n't mean it 's good .
Or in this case , does n't make you wish you had n't read it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>stimulating the area between your balls and asshole makes your orgasm a lot more powerful.
It's even possible to come just by stimulating that area, without touching your dick (I've done it).
I laugh at the ones who modded this up and missed this little gem.
It's a good lesson for all the new mods - just because a post is first or long doesn't mean it's good.
Or in this case, doesn't make you wish you hadn't read it!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647418</id>
	<title>Re:help</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1262604660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course you may experience some discomfort as the stainless steel is rather cold in January.<br>Butt I speculum you are right.<br>Just bend over a bit farther and have a look up for yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course you may experience some discomfort as the stainless steel is rather cold in January.Butt I speculum you are right.Just bend over a bit farther and have a look up for yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course you may experience some discomfort as the stainless steel is rather cold in January.Butt I speculum you are right.Just bend over a bit farther and have a look up for yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651106</id>
	<title>Absence of Evidence</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1262625480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>!= evidence of absence. This is especially true when the researchers narrow their data selection down so as to exclude many who might have the most experience with this as well as those most likely to even answer.</p><p>For the sake of illustration (full color, staple through the navel of course) let us consider an equivalent form of the study coming from the 'other side'. Let's start with the hypothesis that there exists on the male's prostate a pressure sensitive region so that manipulation, primarily of direct pressure, results in sexual stimulation up to and including orgasm. The primary means of manipulation is insertion of an object or body part through the anus. Subjective reports regarding this often say this orgasm is superior to other methods of stimulation. In our investigation, let's specifically exclude gay and bisexual males, and those with multiple partners. Oh, and by the way, we researchers are all women.</p><p>Now, how many of our restricted subject pool will have experienced this, how many will admit to it, how many will admit to it to a woman? And after we gather the data which has been so selectively elicited, how long do you think we'll keep our jobs after claiming that the lack of self-report of experience in this proves that there is no such reaction to prostate manipulation, and even if there is, those men are imagining it? If, that is, we are even allowed to publish it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>! = evidence of absence .
This is especially true when the researchers narrow their data selection down so as to exclude many who might have the most experience with this as well as those most likely to even answer.For the sake of illustration ( full color , staple through the navel of course ) let us consider an equivalent form of the study coming from the 'other side' .
Let 's start with the hypothesis that there exists on the male 's prostate a pressure sensitive region so that manipulation , primarily of direct pressure , results in sexual stimulation up to and including orgasm .
The primary means of manipulation is insertion of an object or body part through the anus .
Subjective reports regarding this often say this orgasm is superior to other methods of stimulation .
In our investigation , let 's specifically exclude gay and bisexual males , and those with multiple partners .
Oh , and by the way , we researchers are all women.Now , how many of our restricted subject pool will have experienced this , how many will admit to it , how many will admit to it to a woman ?
And after we gather the data which has been so selectively elicited , how long do you think we 'll keep our jobs after claiming that the lack of self-report of experience in this proves that there is no such reaction to prostate manipulation , and even if there is , those men are imagining it ?
If , that is , we are even allowed to publish it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>!= evidence of absence.
This is especially true when the researchers narrow their data selection down so as to exclude many who might have the most experience with this as well as those most likely to even answer.For the sake of illustration (full color, staple through the navel of course) let us consider an equivalent form of the study coming from the 'other side'.
Let's start with the hypothesis that there exists on the male's prostate a pressure sensitive region so that manipulation, primarily of direct pressure, results in sexual stimulation up to and including orgasm.
The primary means of manipulation is insertion of an object or body part through the anus.
Subjective reports regarding this often say this orgasm is superior to other methods of stimulation.
In our investigation, let's specifically exclude gay and bisexual males, and those with multiple partners.
Oh, and by the way, we researchers are all women.Now, how many of our restricted subject pool will have experienced this, how many will admit to it, how many will admit to it to a woman?
And after we gather the data which has been so selectively elicited, how long do you think we'll keep our jobs after claiming that the lack of self-report of experience in this proves that there is no such reaction to prostate manipulation, and even if there is, those men are imagining it?
If, that is, we are even allowed to publish it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647326</id>
	<title>G-spot got removed</title>
	<author>formfeed</author>
	<datestamp>1262604300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It got removed because it went "dead or dormant"
<br>
You can read about it here :

<a href="https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gspot/+bug/361175" title="launchpad.net" rel="nofollow">https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gspot/+bug/361175</a> [launchpad.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It got removed because it went " dead or dormant " You can read about it here : https : //bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/ + source/gspot/ + bug/361175 [ launchpad.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It got removed because it went "dead or dormant"

You can read about it here :

https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gspot/+bug/361175 [launchpad.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647742</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262606040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The dumb thing about this study is that they <i>ask</i> women if they have a G-spot.</p><p>Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.</p></div><p>The flaw in your logic is assuming that there is any other methodological tool. The so-called G-spot is a specific location, not the oft-arm-waved pop-culture concept. It exists. The question has never been one of anatomy. It's one of response. Some women report sensitivity to the point of nearly automatic orgasm. Some women report zero sensitivity. This report attempts to refine these self-assessments by comparing them across genetically similar and genetically identical siblings.</p><p>There's nothing wrong with the study in this respect, only a limited capacity for gathering data, as clinical environments do not yield useful results (and there are massive ethical questions involved to boot).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit , with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men do n't have prostate glands or spleens.The flaw in your logic is assuming that there is any other methodological tool .
The so-called G-spot is a specific location , not the oft-arm-waved pop-culture concept .
It exists .
The question has never been one of anatomy .
It 's one of response .
Some women report sensitivity to the point of nearly automatic orgasm .
Some women report zero sensitivity .
This report attempts to refine these self-assessments by comparing them across genetically similar and genetically identical siblings.There 's nothing wrong with the study in this respect , only a limited capacity for gathering data , as clinical environments do not yield useful results ( and there are massive ethical questions involved to boot ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The dumb thing about this study is that they ask women if they have a G-spot.Shit, with that methodology and the right sample population I can prove that men don't have prostate glands or spleens.The flaw in your logic is assuming that there is any other methodological tool.
The so-called G-spot is a specific location, not the oft-arm-waved pop-culture concept.
It exists.
The question has never been one of anatomy.
It's one of response.
Some women report sensitivity to the point of nearly automatic orgasm.
Some women report zero sensitivity.
This report attempts to refine these self-assessments by comparing them across genetically similar and genetically identical siblings.There's nothing wrong with the study in this respect, only a limited capacity for gathering data, as clinical environments do not yield useful results (and there are massive ethical questions involved to boot).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194</id>
	<title>I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this article on slashdot for the three of us women?  Or are there more women lurking than we knew about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this article on slashdot for the three of us women ?
Or are there more women lurking than we knew about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this article on slashdot for the three of us women?
Or are there more women lurking than we knew about?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651672</id>
	<title>Re:Hillariously Flawed Study</title>
	<author>adamchou</author>
	<datestamp>1262631120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All that shows is that one knows how to stimulate the g-spot and the other doesn't. There are plenty of women that don't know where their spot is at.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that shows is that one knows how to stimulate the g-spot and the other does n't .
There are plenty of women that do n't know where their spot is at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that shows is that one knows how to stimulate the g-spot and the other doesn't.
There are plenty of women that don't know where their spot is at.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646628</id>
	<title>Good job, scientists!</title>
	<author>GodfatherofSoul</author>
	<datestamp>1262601240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now, you need to disprove the pesky myth of the female orgasm!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , you need to disprove the pesky myth of the female orgasm !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, you need to disprove the pesky myth of the female orgasm!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646934</id>
	<title>It exists..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262602680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here is my experience with three different girls.</p><p>1st, it isn't active in any girl I've met (I'm sure they exist but I havn't met them)</p><p>2nd, when I followed the procedure in Don Hick's book (I forget the title) it worked perfectly with two of them.  It was took more patience with the third but she hadn't had sex at all in a long time.  All also began to ejaculate the first time or soon after second time.  This is not urine.  They can do this several times and then go have a full pee afterwards.  It's important to stay lubricated and hydrated.</p><p>3rd, once it was active and a girl had a few orgasms that way, then her entire vagina also woke up over the next few months until there were many areas (in this supposedly low nerve area) which she would respond with orgasms.  Typically, they could have 20-30 orgasms over 2-3 hours.</p><p>Hick's book basically says, lots of kissing, petting, and foreplay until her chest flushes and she starts involuntarily moving her pubic area.  Then (and only then) go in to the area inside on top, about the length of your middle finger inside, find a spongy area (under her clitoris) and begin a gentle circular motion about about 1 cycle per second while continuing to keep your head near her head.</p><p>It's best to keep your own pants on and make sure there is no pressure on her to have a climax.  Just say romantic things about wanting to make her feel good- no goal.  And if it doesn't work, you don't make a big deal out of it.</p><p>---</p><p>As much as I support the scientific method, I can see how these things wouldn't come up in a science laboratory.  They are a bit sterile.</p><p>In my own body, it can take 20-30 minutes before everything wakes up.  There is a very distinct feeling like having an alcholic drink that hits at about 20 minutes when nerves on the left side wake up and warm feelings spread down the leg and across the back and inside the left pelvic girdle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is my experience with three different girls.1st , it is n't active in any girl I 've met ( I 'm sure they exist but I hav n't met them ) 2nd , when I followed the procedure in Don Hick 's book ( I forget the title ) it worked perfectly with two of them .
It was took more patience with the third but she had n't had sex at all in a long time .
All also began to ejaculate the first time or soon after second time .
This is not urine .
They can do this several times and then go have a full pee afterwards .
It 's important to stay lubricated and hydrated.3rd , once it was active and a girl had a few orgasms that way , then her entire vagina also woke up over the next few months until there were many areas ( in this supposedly low nerve area ) which she would respond with orgasms .
Typically , they could have 20-30 orgasms over 2-3 hours.Hick 's book basically says , lots of kissing , petting , and foreplay until her chest flushes and she starts involuntarily moving her pubic area .
Then ( and only then ) go in to the area inside on top , about the length of your middle finger inside , find a spongy area ( under her clitoris ) and begin a gentle circular motion about about 1 cycle per second while continuing to keep your head near her head.It 's best to keep your own pants on and make sure there is no pressure on her to have a climax .
Just say romantic things about wanting to make her feel good- no goal .
And if it does n't work , you do n't make a big deal out of it.---As much as I support the scientific method , I can see how these things would n't come up in a science laboratory .
They are a bit sterile.In my own body , it can take 20-30 minutes before everything wakes up .
There is a very distinct feeling like having an alcholic drink that hits at about 20 minutes when nerves on the left side wake up and warm feelings spread down the leg and across the back and inside the left pelvic girdle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is my experience with three different girls.1st, it isn't active in any girl I've met (I'm sure they exist but I havn't met them)2nd, when I followed the procedure in Don Hick's book (I forget the title) it worked perfectly with two of them.
It was took more patience with the third but she hadn't had sex at all in a long time.
All also began to ejaculate the first time or soon after second time.
This is not urine.
They can do this several times and then go have a full pee afterwards.
It's important to stay lubricated and hydrated.3rd, once it was active and a girl had a few orgasms that way, then her entire vagina also woke up over the next few months until there were many areas (in this supposedly low nerve area) which she would respond with orgasms.
Typically, they could have 20-30 orgasms over 2-3 hours.Hick's book basically says, lots of kissing, petting, and foreplay until her chest flushes and she starts involuntarily moving her pubic area.
Then (and only then) go in to the area inside on top, about the length of your middle finger inside, find a spongy area (under her clitoris) and begin a gentle circular motion about about 1 cycle per second while continuing to keep your head near her head.It's best to keep your own pants on and make sure there is no pressure on her to have a climax.
Just say romantic things about wanting to make her feel good- no goal.
And if it doesn't work, you don't make a big deal out of it.---As much as I support the scientific method, I can see how these things wouldn't come up in a science laboratory.
They are a bit sterile.In my own body, it can take 20-30 minutes before everything wakes up.
There is a very distinct feeling like having an alcholic drink that hits at about 20 minutes when nerves on the left side wake up and warm feelings spread down the leg and across the back and inside the left pelvic girdle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646468</id>
	<title>Test that Myth!</title>
	<author>jacksinn</author>
	<datestamp>1262600700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's see Mythbusters try this one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see Mythbusters try this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see Mythbusters try this one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649242</id>
	<title>Re:My Wife Thinks it Exists</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262613060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and there is an anal orgasm, which is very satisfactionary, as a woman told me. I think most women do not know this, or do not have experienced it, because they don't like anal sex.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and there is an anal orgasm , which is very satisfactionary , as a woman told me .
I think most women do not know this , or do not have experienced it , because they do n't like anal sex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and there is an anal orgasm, which is very satisfactionary, as a woman told me.
I think most women do not know this, or do not have experienced it, because they don't like anal sex.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647866</id>
	<title>Re:Really on Slashdot?</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1262606760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope - there is also a class of Slashdotters who work on the basis of factual evidence, and actually have a life.</p><p>I have both.  Those researchers really need to work on their fact gathering.  And sexual technique.</p><p>First off, the G-spot is a side effect from how we grow into man or woman, and it's easy to locate on a recent anatomic drawing.</p><p>Secondly, once you find it there isn't a chance you'll be allowed to forget it by your partner<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-).</p><p>Thirdly, if you can't find it try getting her aroused first, that makes it easier to find.  In some women it is the *only* way to find it, and I personally don't think you should approach the subject (and location) without that arousal anyway (tip: also keep your nails trimmed and filed).  "Brace yourself" only worked for Mrs Doubtfire..</p><p>Fourth but not least, the Net isn't exactly short of instructions on how to locate it, which further suggests the researchers can't tell their rear end from their elbows (which may explain something<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope - there is also a class of Slashdotters who work on the basis of factual evidence , and actually have a life.I have both .
Those researchers really need to work on their fact gathering .
And sexual technique.First off , the G-spot is a side effect from how we grow into man or woman , and it 's easy to locate on a recent anatomic drawing.Secondly , once you find it there is n't a chance you 'll be allowed to forget it by your partner : - ) .Thirdly , if you ca n't find it try getting her aroused first , that makes it easier to find .
In some women it is the * only * way to find it , and I personally do n't think you should approach the subject ( and location ) without that arousal anyway ( tip : also keep your nails trimmed and filed ) .
" Brace yourself " only worked for Mrs Doubtfire..Fourth but not least , the Net is n't exactly short of instructions on how to locate it , which further suggests the researchers ca n't tell their rear end from their elbows ( which may explain something : - ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope - there is also a class of Slashdotters who work on the basis of factual evidence, and actually have a life.I have both.
Those researchers really need to work on their fact gathering.
And sexual technique.First off, the G-spot is a side effect from how we grow into man or woman, and it's easy to locate on a recent anatomic drawing.Secondly, once you find it there isn't a chance you'll be allowed to forget it by your partner :-).Thirdly, if you can't find it try getting her aroused first, that makes it easier to find.
In some women it is the *only* way to find it, and I personally don't think you should approach the subject (and location) without that arousal anyway (tip: also keep your nails trimmed and filed).
"Brace yourself" only worked for Mrs Doubtfire..Fourth but not least, the Net isn't exactly short of instructions on how to locate it, which further suggests the researchers can't tell their rear end from their elbows (which may explain something :-).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645414</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645450</id>
	<title>That's not the only flaw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262596920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Drawing the conclusion that there is no G-spot because it isn't \_genetically\_ determined is ludicrous. It's like saying humans don't have fingerprints because identical twins have different patterns.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Drawing the conclusion that there is no G-spot because it is n't \ _genetically \ _ determined is ludicrous .
It 's like saying humans do n't have fingerprints because identical twins have different patterns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drawing the conclusion that there is no G-spot because it isn't \_genetically\_ determined is ludicrous.
It's like saying humans don't have fingerprints because identical twins have different patterns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646692</id>
	<title>Very bad between the sheets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the title of this article should be: "New research proves that G-Spot research team is abysmal between the sheets."</p><p>Really, anyone even remotely experienced at lovemaking (with women) knows that the G-Spot is real. If you're a lucky woman it is even pretty easy to find.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the title of this article should be : " New research proves that G-Spot research team is abysmal between the sheets .
" Really , anyone even remotely experienced at lovemaking ( with women ) knows that the G-Spot is real .
If you 're a lucky woman it is even pretty easy to find .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the title of this article should be: "New research proves that G-Spot research team is abysmal between the sheets.
"Really, anyone even remotely experienced at lovemaking (with women) knows that the G-Spot is real.
If you're a lucky woman it is even pretty easy to find.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650492</id>
	<title>Re:That's not the only flaw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262620500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can find it when you have sex at lodicrous speed!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can find it when you have sex at lodicrous speed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can find it when you have sex at lodicrous speed!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645360</id>
	<title>If my girl thinks it exists</title>
	<author>ifwm</author>
	<datestamp>1262596680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And she thinks I can find it, then <b>who cares what anyone else thinks</b>?</p><p>Even if it's bullshit, who is getting hurt here?</p><p>Oh right, this is where people chime in with "what about people who are making themselves miserable trying to find it", as if those people actually exist...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And she thinks I can find it , then who cares what anyone else thinks ? Even if it 's bullshit , who is getting hurt here ? Oh right , this is where people chime in with " what about people who are making themselves miserable trying to find it " , as if those people actually exist.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And she thinks I can find it, then who cares what anyone else thinks?Even if it's bullshit, who is getting hurt here?Oh right, this is where people chime in with "what about people who are making themselves miserable trying to find it", as if those people actually exist...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647762</id>
	<title>Re:Shhhhhhhh!</title>
	<author>cheros</author>
	<datestamp>1262606160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congratulations - you have scored the first ROFL class comment of 2010 for me.</p><p>Thanks (wiping tears out of my eyes).  Hahahaha..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations - you have scored the first ROFL class comment of 2010 for me.Thanks ( wiping tears out of my eyes ) .
Hahahaha. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations - you have scored the first ROFL class comment of 2010 for me.Thanks (wiping tears out of my eyes).
Hahahaha..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645990</id>
	<title>Wait...what!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought GSpot was just a piece of software for identifying codecs.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSpot</p><p>No wonder my boss looked at me funny when I recommended she try GSpot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought GSpot was just a piece of software for identifying codecs.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSpotNo wonder my boss looked at me funny when I recommended she try GSpot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought GSpot was just a piece of software for identifying codecs.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSpotNo wonder my boss looked at me funny when I recommended she try GSpot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648848</id>
	<title>Re:Placebo effect is just fine thanks</title>
	<author>TapeCutter</author>
	<datestamp>1262611200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After that rant I can only conclude you are either not old enough to remeber "the good old days", or you missed out on the fun part of puberty.
<br> <br>
People always think the current crop of kids behave worse than they did, it's a common mistake called nostalgia and otherwise intelligent people have been doing it for millenia...
<br> <br>
<i>"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers." - Socrates.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>After that rant I can only conclude you are either not old enough to remeber " the good old days " , or you missed out on the fun part of puberty .
People always think the current crop of kids behave worse than they did , it 's a common mistake called nostalgia and otherwise intelligent people have been doing it for millenia.. . " The children now love luxury ; they have bad manners , contempt for authority ; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise .
Children are now tyrants , not the servants of their households .
They no longer rise when elders enter the room .
They contradict their parents , chatter before company , gobble up dainties at the table , cross their legs , and tyrannize their teachers .
" - Socrates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After that rant I can only conclude you are either not old enough to remeber "the good old days", or you missed out on the fun part of puberty.
People always think the current crop of kids behave worse than they did, it's a common mistake called nostalgia and otherwise intelligent people have been doing it for millenia...
 
"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise.
Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households.
They no longer rise when elders enter the room.
They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
" - Socrates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646114</id>
	<title>Re:This is science?</title>
	<author>tehdaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1262599380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> They should have also asked if they had a prefrontal cortex. You know - to weed out those without a brain....<p>T</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should have also asked if they had a prefrontal cortex .
You know - to weed out those without a brain....T</tokentext>
<sentencetext> They should have also asked if they had a prefrontal cortex.
You know - to weed out those without a brain....T</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645706</id>
	<title>All of you are missing the point....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262597700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The existence of such a thing is irrelevant. The intimate and passionate search for your partners ecstasy in its varied and wondrous versions, is by itself purpose enough. Just as I do not pray to find the existence or location God on  Google Maps, I pray so I may become closer to my relationship to God.<br>If all men/women spent time discovering every inch of the person they love a map of O' spots would be irrelevant. Each person is different and they change over time. Constant renewal of discovery it critical to the love life.</p><p>Married 23 years and still learning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The existence of such a thing is irrelevant .
The intimate and passionate search for your partners ecstasy in its varied and wondrous versions , is by itself purpose enough .
Just as I do not pray to find the existence or location God on Google Maps , I pray so I may become closer to my relationship to God.If all men/women spent time discovering every inch of the person they love a map of O ' spots would be irrelevant .
Each person is different and they change over time .
Constant renewal of discovery it critical to the love life.Married 23 years and still learning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The existence of such a thing is irrelevant.
The intimate and passionate search for your partners ecstasy in its varied and wondrous versions, is by itself purpose enough.
Just as I do not pray to find the existence or location God on  Google Maps, I pray so I may become closer to my relationship to God.If all men/women spent time discovering every inch of the person they love a map of O' spots would be irrelevant.
Each person is different and they change over time.
Constant renewal of discovery it critical to the love life.Married 23 years and still learning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647714</id>
	<title>Re:I can assure you it's there,</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1262605920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You just haven't had it stimulated before. This is sadly an indicator of the poor work done by their sexual partners, and doesn't prove if it's there or not.
</p></div><p>The idea that it's always the guy's problem is a load of shit. The idea that after, for instance 10 partners, if a woman hasn't had an orgasm that it's the guy's fault is BS. The only common factor in those 10 experiences is the woman so odds are its her fault especially when the G-spot and whole "come hither" information isn't exactly new info.
<br> <br>
I know women who can't find their own. So if they can't do it then they certainly can't expect a guy to just know how to get her off. Likewise some women suck at giving hand/blow jobs.
<br> <br>
People aren't just automatically born with the information to satisfy the opposite sex. People need to learn to talk about sex and find out what gets each other off. Having an orgasm is more more about your mental state than some bit of flesh. Which also gets to the other point. Women are more emotional and about to have hang-ups about their body which will stop them from fully enjoying sex. You'll get further sexually and in general just by making a woman feel good about her body.
<br> <br>
That's why it's good to ask about their experiences on with sex and masturbation and if you find some 30+ year old woman who hasn't been able to get herself off then it's pretty safe to say you should avoid having sex with her because she probably has issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You just have n't had it stimulated before .
This is sadly an indicator of the poor work done by their sexual partners , and does n't prove if it 's there or not .
The idea that it 's always the guy 's problem is a load of shit .
The idea that after , for instance 10 partners , if a woman has n't had an orgasm that it 's the guy 's fault is BS .
The only common factor in those 10 experiences is the woman so odds are its her fault especially when the G-spot and whole " come hither " information is n't exactly new info .
I know women who ca n't find their own .
So if they ca n't do it then they certainly ca n't expect a guy to just know how to get her off .
Likewise some women suck at giving hand/blow jobs .
People are n't just automatically born with the information to satisfy the opposite sex .
People need to learn to talk about sex and find out what gets each other off .
Having an orgasm is more more about your mental state than some bit of flesh .
Which also gets to the other point .
Women are more emotional and about to have hang-ups about their body which will stop them from fully enjoying sex .
You 'll get further sexually and in general just by making a woman feel good about her body .
That 's why it 's good to ask about their experiences on with sex and masturbation and if you find some 30 + year old woman who has n't been able to get herself off then it 's pretty safe to say you should avoid having sex with her because she probably has issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You just haven't had it stimulated before.
This is sadly an indicator of the poor work done by their sexual partners, and doesn't prove if it's there or not.
The idea that it's always the guy's problem is a load of shit.
The idea that after, for instance 10 partners, if a woman hasn't had an orgasm that it's the guy's fault is BS.
The only common factor in those 10 experiences is the woman so odds are its her fault especially when the G-spot and whole "come hither" information isn't exactly new info.
I know women who can't find their own.
So if they can't do it then they certainly can't expect a guy to just know how to get her off.
Likewise some women suck at giving hand/blow jobs.
People aren't just automatically born with the information to satisfy the opposite sex.
People need to learn to talk about sex and find out what gets each other off.
Having an orgasm is more more about your mental state than some bit of flesh.
Which also gets to the other point.
Women are more emotional and about to have hang-ups about their body which will stop them from fully enjoying sex.
You'll get further sexually and in general just by making a woman feel good about her body.
That's why it's good to ask about their experiences on with sex and masturbation and if you find some 30+ year old woman who hasn't been able to get herself off then it's pretty safe to say you should avoid having sex with her because she probably has issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648948</id>
	<title>Of course...</title>
	<author>Temkin</author>
	<datestamp>1262611620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course they can't find the G-spot.  They're British!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course they ca n't find the G-spot .
They 're British !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course they can't find the G-spot.
They're British!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30657860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30655034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30672562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_04_1649259_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645658
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649398
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645264
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645644
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645570
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649676
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646276
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650694
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646078
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646898
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30653576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30654934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645366
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30655034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645430
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646674
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30657860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30672562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646712
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645314
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650816
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646238
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649912
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645864
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652216
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30649138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646948
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645930
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647320
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647294
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651002
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647712
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645952
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647074
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30648430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646018
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30652322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30651658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647960
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30645844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_04_1649259.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30646048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30650744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_04_1649259.30647714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
