Friday, February 22, 2008


Okay, I'll be first to admit I'm a little naive when it comes to the nitty gritty of making whoopsie, know....a lady. I'm married by the way, so let's not make any premeptive assumptions here about my sexuality - I'm as red-blooded and able to talk cars/sport/Hifis as the next man.

Anyway, I've always considered the 'G spot' to be something of a myth. It's not, as some fellas will think, the clitoris - that little nub of flesh most attentive blokes will rub with all the sensitivity of a blacksmith grinding down metal. It's actually never been medically identified. It's the sort of X-factor of the vagina, you've either got it...or you ain't.

Something of a thorny issue I suppose. If you're one of the 40% who do, life holds so much promise. Whilst the other 60% are doomed to a life of smiling politely at their they dutifully grind away.

An interesting report on BBC's site today, showed that some Italian scientists have identified a slightly thicker bit of the front wall of the vagina appears to house the G spot. Reading the article I'm not entirely convinced all sounds a bit ambiguous. What I would be more convinced by would be something that looked like a button - preferably large, with 'push me' stencilled on the front.

Yup...I'm a typical fella in that I need 'absolutes' not wishywashy answers. I don't want to hear that it's some nebulous 'region' of flesh that's slightly thicker in some woman than others, I want a damned component, dammit....something I can see, and aim for.

So until somebody in a white lab coat can photograph some explicit thingy and explain how it works with a nice big diagram, I'll continue to be something of a sceptic, and suggest that the G spot, has more to do with a woman's state of mind...or....perish the thought, the dexterity and skill of her ape-fisted fella.

Friday, February 08, 2008


Well, what a buzz of response to this story. I listened to the radio interview yesterday morning on Radio 4, and I was thinking then, as he spoke, that the phone lines very soon were going to be melting.

What has quickly happened with the story though, as always seems to happen, is that the media have very deliberately turned what was said it something that wasn't. They've taken his comments out of context in order to get headlines that will have all of us decent folk coughing and spluttering into morning coffees. I've yet to see the tabloid headlines this morning...but I can pretty well imagine what they might be.

So...what was Williams advocating? Well...he's a very 'woolly' speaker that's for sure, using ambiguous, carefully chosen phrases, and it does take a little work to unravel what his intended message is. However....I believe what his message was, was this:

'Why don't we allow the muslim community to arbitrate their own disagreements amongst themselves...using the acceptable elements of shariah law as a framework?'

Now looking at this, in the cold light of a new morning....I really don't think I have a problem with it. And here's why:

a. it already happens in muslim communities
b. it's no different to the Beth Din court system used by the Jewish community
c. it doesn't usurp, contradict or replace British civil and criminal law

What Rowan Williams rather inexpertly did, was announce what is already going on in a clumsy way that's got us all worked up over absolutely nothing. I suppose, the silver lining in this sorry little episode that no doubt will sell a lot more papers, is that I have been reassured by the almost universal condemnation of any kind of religious inroads being made into the legal system of this country.

And that's something, to be honest, to feel very comfortable about.