Hymen myths debunked by scientific studies

Stop embarrassing yourselves.
https://reproductive-health-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12978-019-0731-8

“Conclusions about women’s and girls’ sexual history are made in some settings based on assumptions about the hymen, a small membranous tissue with no known biological function, which typically occupies a portion of the external vaginal opening in females. Clinicians, however, continue to refer to changes in the hymen to assess for a history of consensual or nonconsensual sexual intercourse. We reviewed published evidence to dispel commonly held myths about the hymen and its morphology, function, and use as evidence in cases of sexual violence.

An examination of the hymen is not an accurate or reliable test of a previous history of sexual activity, including sexual assault.

How do you even measure it? There’s no normal, even with a microscope!

Sounds like a fun wedding night.

This is just more anti-white stuff intended to make us distrust one another.

Clinicians tasked with performing forensic sexual assault examinations should avoid descriptions such as “intact hymen” or “broken hymen” in all cases, and describe specific findings using international standards and terminology of morphological features.

aka do your job, don’t be subjective?

Broken doesn’t even exist, it’s a membrane that’s already perforated in almost every case it remains. Labour doesn’t remove it. Passing a whole human through it.

We call on clinicians to consider the low predictive value of a hymen examination and to: 1) avoid relying solely on the status of the hymen in sexual assault examinations and reporting;

Pedos must love this myth so as to get away with it.

2) help raise awareness of this issue among their peers and counterparts in law enforcement and the judicial system; and 3) promote fact-based discussions about the limitations of hymenal examinations as part of clinical education for all specialties that address the sexual or reproductive health of women and girls.”

Words like intact assume they even have one (were born with one) or if they do it didn’t degrade over years (time, poor vascular supply and the weight of blood) or that they knew, magically, the prior shape of common perforations for that particular woman. A nun could have no hymen or one simply worn naturally in the teens as the body GROWS around it, it erodes regardless of the existence of men, sorry. Because it’s baby tissue. This is ridiculous. Also, with childhood sports, who’s to say what a young virgin has is the same as what she was born with? The common report anecdotally is a sudden feeling of change but not even pain, a quick “what was that?” like a sudden paper cut in cases they even remember. A lot of women aren’t even sure. Perverts lie for their sadistic fetishes of damaging women, it’s a disturbed mind who wants to cause someone internal injury (when it isn’t actually internal to begin with). Stop listening to idiots.

“We concluded that an examination of the hymen is not an accurate or reliable test of sexual activity, including sexual assault, except in very specific situations. Clinicians who perform forensic sexual assault examinations should avoid descriptions such as “intact hymen” or “broken hymen” in all cases, and describe specific clinical findings using specific medical terminology.”

Apparently faking it in ancient times with chicken blood used to be common up until the 20th century (when they used tampons with no issue). Can we please stop treating men like idiots, scared to know the truth? It’s like kissing gets you pregnant, that’s the level of dumb.
If a woman profusely bleeds, that is vaginal and indicative of male error. Anything approaching that blood supply is impossible beyond the vaginal “canal”. Literally. A man should only commence once the woman is wet or sufficiently relaxed (fingering is not a recent invention and recommended to pregnant women to reduce REAL tearing – in labour!). The female sexual response cycle STARTS with lubrication, there’s no excuse not to know that. The hymen never actually goes away, after labour it’s just reduced and shrunk back. A literal whore would still have a hymen if born with one – or “reconstruction” surgery wouldn’t be possible. Plenty of girls have no difference post-coitally in their hymen – porn is fake. As a membrane with common natural perforations, it’s ELASTIC. To use a word like “tearing” is not even wrong, medically. It has the property of elasticity. If it remains during childbirth, shut up if you think your dick will ‘destroy’ it, that’s embarrassingly naive.
Does eating remove the similar structural membranes above and below your front teeth? Of course not? The one under the tongue? No. SAME THING. Medically, the same structural production, that’s why you have it.

This is as silly as judging men by their ball seam or if one is higher than the other. Leave people alone with their perfectly valid anatomical differences!

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/317c/f15775b84434bf1a24689f55968e57eb9233.pdf
It varies greatly in shape. Its elasticity increases after puberty so that it may allow penile penetration without rupture and bleeding.

Note: it’s always elastic, it only increases after puberty.

Conclusions: Hymen is not an accurate indication of virginity. Knowledge of the hymen
anatomy and its abnormalities is essential to eliminate the misconceptions about it.”

And if the tampon=sex losers try to intrude on this topic, I’ll find you and beat you to death with my stiletto.

You don’t have one, you don’t have an opinion on what it’s like to have one. That’s called a fantasy. That’s what the mansplaining thing is actually meant to be, originally. You don’t know what periods or childbirth are like either. Appeal to ignorance plus strawman, formally. Studies say you’re wrong in your claims, medical studies such as the next one. Guys on forums lie. Blind leading the blind. Stop thinking you have a valid opinion on the medical experience of the opposite sex, you’re just idiots. Or closet trans-somethings. So nuts.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/485645
This doesn’t account for other period stuff like heavy periods (blood is heavy) or exercise but for the pedophiles reading, you are also wrong.

“External genital inspections were performed using a colposcope with an attached 35-mm camera to document the appearance of the hymen. The presence of notches or clefts was recorded during the examination, and photographs taken at ×10 magnification were used to take measurements of the width of the posterior hymenal rim.”
“Posterior hymenal notches and clefts were more common among girls admitting past intercourse (13/27 [48%]) than in girls who denied intercourse (2/58 [3%]; P = .001), but the mean width of the posterior hymenal rim was not significantly different between the 2 groups (2.5 mm vs 3.0 mm; P = .11). Two subjects who denied intercourse but had posterior hymenal clefts described a painful first experience with tampon insertion.”

Who’d be dumb enough to believe a dick would disturb a woman’s natural body? Especially permanently? Women evolved to reproduce. To give birth. They sexually selected penis size. A penis isn’t gonna damage it.
There is no rule, the remnant structure is too unique.

No significant difference with a close-up camera magnified at 10x.

Studied by medical professionals comparing to teen virgin controls.

You are wrong.

You are literally just wrong. Please stop. The stupidity is painful.

At most, half a millimeter diameter difference. That could easily be a rounding error. Pervs BTFO.

“Conclusions Deep notches or complete clefts in the posterior rim of the hymen were rare in girls who denied intercourse.

Still naturally occurring though, plus maybe sports as hidden variable. Again, there is no rule, no norm. What, do we keep women under lock and key from birth until marriage, getting fat with no exercise, for a minute or two on the wedding night that the husband wouldn’t notice if he were pure himself? Are we meant to encourage white men to defile white women for pleasure? To hurt them deliberately? I wonder who’s behind that.

This smells of gender war propaganda to make men distrust their spouse and destroy the marriage. Who’s paranoid enough to screw through a blanket? Which group has notoriously promiscuous teenage girls? Stop projecting.

Most importantly:

Subjects who admitted past intercourse still had nondisrupted, intact hymens in 52% of cases.”

52%

Multiple bouts of intercourse most likely, yep, I’ve heard this commonly from women surprised they didn’t “change”. Porn lies to you. Dicks aren’t even that big by circumference, especially compared to a baby. The domination pain element of this topic from some deviants is highly dehumanizing to wives. She isn’t broken, you just made a sacred union sanctified by God, this is so blatantly wrong as a way to discuss conservative sexuality.

Most women lie to men on the medical side because most men are too triggered for the truth.

The toxic ones lie to men for gain. Educate yourself, as much as I hate typing that. In modern times men shouldn’t be scared to frankly discuss periods with their woman either, the purpose of which is to pass what look like clots (uterine tissue) not the vaunted ‘blood’, you need to know this if you intend to marry and especially if you want to be present for a birth. No more hiding!

It’s deeply paedophilic to obsess over a structure that’s only fully “intact” in literal babies.
https://medlineplus.gov/ency/patientinstructions/000708.htm
“Girls who are diagnosed with imperforate hymen as babies most often have surgery when they are older and have just started puberty. The surgery is done in early puberty when breast development and pubic hair growth has begun.”

To see if it naturally perforates by then. Usually it does.

http://www.embryology.ch/anglais/ugenital/genitinterne05.html
“The vagina is separated from the SUG by the hymen. Its origin is not entirely clear.”
Protecting babies from microbes. That’s it. Remember, humans didn’t evolve in clean houses.
The guys making a big deal of this will likely get tricked by some nutter (serves you right) or are closet paedos. This is a creepy thing to think about for any length of time. There isn’t even a normal and a literal microscope can’t detect post-coital change in most cases. ANY change. No, looking isn’t the same.

repost, different site:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6547601/
“Conclusions about women’s and girls’ sexual history are made in some settings based on assumptions about the hymen, a small membranous tissue with no known biological function, which typically occupies a portion of the external vaginal opening in females. Clinicians, however, continue to refer to changes in the hymen to assess for a history of consensual or nonconsensual sexual intercourse. We reviewed published evidence to dispel commonly held myths about the hymen and its morphology, function, and use as evidence in cases of sexual violence.

An examination of the hymen is not an accurate or reliable test of a previous history of sexual activity, including sexual assault. Clinicians tasked with performing forensic sexual assault examinations should avoid descriptions such as “intact hymen” or “broken hymen” in all cases, and describe specific findings using international standards and terminology of morphological features.

We call on clinicians to consider the low predictive value of a hymen examination and to: 1) avoid relying solely on the status of the hymen in sexual assault examinations and reporting; 2) help raise awareness of this issue among their peers and counterparts in law enforcement and the judicial system; and 3) promote fact-based discussions about the limitations of hymenal examinations as part of clinical education for all specialties that address the sexual or reproductive health of women and girls.”

HPV contaminating gyms, doctor’s tables and virgins

Figured I’d linked this. Not clickbait.

What happens when you let the sluts run rampant.

https://theluxuryspot.com/new-hpv-warnings-you-can-get-it-at-the-gym/
https://www.thehealthsciencejournal.com/germs-in-the-gym/
https://www.womenshealthmag.com/health/a19929167/hpv-without-having-sex/

School gyms too, health hazard. It can even be on the floor.

Study link from women’s health:

http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/164.htm

“Researchers analyzed 51 studies on HPV transmission, and they noticed that the virus was found in the genital tracts of 51 percent of female virgins. This left them asking: If not through sex, how are people contracting it?”

VIRUS.

Plus the speculums they can’t actually clean?

“The second possibility makes us even more squeamish. You might be able pick up HPV by coming into contact with an infected surface at the doctor’s office or in public places like the gym. If the examining table or bike seat you sit down on in your booty shorts hasn’t been properly cleaned, you could be at risk.”

Why did people wear so many layers of clothing in public?

History was so weird. And gloves! How absurd!

Who wears gloves, the Queen? She isn’t long-lived, is she?

I’m just picturing the HPV strains of Hollywood and its forced kissing, on and off screen.

Video: Virgins, post-Revolution

That isn’t possible at all.
The Sexual Revolution was designed to reduce the pool of suitable wives.
And to a lesser extent, the suitable husbands (no cheating, no regret, can be satisfied sexually).
Virgin shaming, as it’s been dubbed, is the entire purpose.
This ‘defense’ against slut shaming is based on two lies 1. promiscuity is good for individuals and/or society and 2. sex is a sport, it is athletic and you must do it frequently and well then brag about it or you are missing out on the human experience or you’re less than human/adult. Those are both evil ways to think, if you look. Many of feminism’s problems would dry up if neither of those cruel mindsets applied to people.

It’s like introverts and extraverts, both groups will always exist.
They shine in different times but now society is larger, populations denser and we’re supposed to stay civilized.

When society favours one, things go wrong. Naturally, the sexual experiment has shown all those pesky religious types were right – adultery is up, children have more psychiatric issues than ever, various fetishes are normalized, deviants such as pedophiles are gaining acceptance in tolerance, and undeniably, there are now STDs which cannot be treated. This is a regression, society is devolving and going backwards.
Those with a natural sense of temperance and what’s been called sexual modesty, and it is natural and good to be modest (we evolved for small tribes after all) will naturally feel disgust to those.. lacking.
Those lacking it won’t understand it, and choose to project their feelings of confusion and shame onto those who feel an emotion they cannot, labeling it wrong and unnatural to soothe their conscience (it’s really prostitution the longer you think about the requirements, all intended to serve).

This is the one type of freedom that is bad for humans. Always has been. The neuro-pull is too strong.
It might be acceptable – if contraception didn’t exist.
However, sexuality is the most destructive force in society and contraception makes this more toxic.
Sex is neither a need nor a right. Never has been. It is a drive and desire.
Society must never confuse the words. This is the big lie.
It doesn’t help that a cynical society only sexualises (even children) to sell you things, to use this weakness against your best interest.

Video: Virgin before marriage or not?

Literally the best video I’ve ever seen on this topic.

Pair bonding is chemical and sex-based.

That glue is meant to be for marriage and pair bonding is impaired in both sexes.

The haters will be jealous you aren’t rushing to the divorce courts.

Cheating risk is lower too.

It’s all around better.

I disagree with the idea that she isn’t superior. Morally, she is superior. She demonstrated the virtue of chastity, that makes her superior. She just doesn’t use it as an excuse to treat normal people like dirt, which is arrogance.

Related.

Link: “How do I know if I’m a virgin?”

Don’t laugh, it’s a good question. No judgement here.

I was linked to this by a girl concerned about an arranged marriage.

It’s accurate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/how-do-i-know-if-im-a-virgin/

I’m posting it here because there are many attempts by ‘men’ to lie about ‘deflowering’ girls, describing levels of blood loss that would cause her to pass out and require a transfusion in A&E. Or they give vivid, almost Mills & Boon level erotic descriptions of what ‘breaking’ her felt like.

go away leave ew eurgh gimme space tony stark no gross

They are lying. 

It just makes you look bad and worse, ignorant of basic anatomy.

Trigger warning: the gore women have to put up with for life but men get all squeamish about because you’re softer than us.

Less known is the fact that ‘inadequate’ lubrication (caused by the man being bad at it) can cause microtears from the friction in the vagina (internally) and that may be causing the blood sometimes seen (still, not much, barely like ‘spotting’ for a period, don’t look that up). That’s a reason to be ashamed of yourself, not proud, and certainly never bragging, pay her medical bills and spend the next year minimum making it up to the poor girl, since it can cause serious scarring, increased risk of catching STDs by the internal wounds and fertility issues (this also happens in rape, so yeah, be very very nice since conditional instructions are a basic part of consent).

This video gets all of it right bar one thing.

Virginity does exist. That’s an SJW lie. Simply the common premise based on a Hollywood trope is wrong. The anatomical one. Virginity isn’t anatomical. No animal has anatomical virginity to my knowledge, that wouldn’t make any evolutionary sense and they would’ve gone extinct. The cellular shedding required of the reproductive tract would build up and cause a lethal infection.

Virginity is behavioural. More specifically, an omission of behaviour. Hence, men can be virgins.

It is cruel and evil to base a test of human value on anatomy, that nobody can help. Imagine if women judged men entirely on their foreskins. Imagine it. You’d be pissed. Imagine if you could be killed for lacking a foreskin. Whatever the reason you don’t have one. This is one of the rare times the broken feminist clock is right, that’s barbaric.

So why do we women have a hymen (some of us, others aren’t born with one)?

It protects the area during development. You know how little kids tend to stick any random object up their nose?…. Yeah…..

I’m not completing that sentence for you.

How could we prove that hypothesis?

Easy – does it thin over time? As in, it becomes less protective the likelier you are to require the tract for reproduction?

YES! And nobody seems to mention this. It thins over time. So an adult virgin woman may look anatomically indistinguishable from a massive slut of the same age. The only thing that really wrecks a hymen, stretching it or changing blood flow patterns until it recedes? Child birth.

So really it has nothing to do with sex per se, but whether you’ve pushed another human out there. Which is… fair enough, actually.

No celibacy or virgin shaming

http://sluttygirlproblems.com/guide/deal-sexual-pressure/#.Vkt0zrfhDZ4

It’s bizarre to mock people for the default, something they were born as. Shaming virgins for NOT doing something has never made logical sense, except to make sluts feel better about their non-sexual desirability and scupper the competition by making them conceal their advantage.

This doesn’t solely apply to traditional women, either.

I don’t know any masculine men who define their masculinity by their sex lives.

Honestly, not a one. They have other stuff going on, and whatever happens there, they don’t kiss and tell and keep that stuff private – one reason people respect them.

As one guy put it a tad bluntly, ‘dogs rut and they aren’t men either’.

Reminded me of the foolish definition of man as bipedal and featherless so some smartass philosopher plucked a chicken and said “Behold! A man!”

It’s the one biological function people feel the need to brag about, but it makes them look bad.

Life outcomes of age at first sex suggest age of consent too early

http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/10/18/timing-of-first-sex-has-far-reaching-relationship-effects/46256.html

The ‘too early’ group did just as poorly as the so-called ‘on time’. However, on-time is defined as a legal construct, it’s arbitrary and artificial.

This suggests the common age of consent (16-18) is set too early and should be enforced better without exception (based on age similarity, for example).

Considering longer schooling into the 20s forbidding the time for family rearing, failure to thrive/immaturity and longer time to rites of passage like moving out, a later age of consent too would make logical sense, especially in light of the psychiatric (personal) and societal damage (communal ripple effect) of being too early.

btw study applies to men and women

We need to break out of this feminist Sexual Revolution delusion that sex is always cheap, easy, harmless fun with no serious consequences – in spite of all the mounting evidence to suggest otherwise. Everything we do young has a later effect on our life, good or bad, how can something as big as sex be any different?

Video: Virgin Shaming

I explained my take on the subject in the post Breasts are Beautiful and the history of how the flip of reverted moral expectations happened.
Nowadays, women get “virgin-shamed” more than men…. by sluts. Always by sluts, in fact, because they themselves lost something (innocence, truthfully, and pair-bonding ability, which the promiscuous lack) they subconsciously recognise is valuable to men, and since they cannot regain it, they can bully the competition into evening the playing field. This is why it’s so hard for the good guys to find women with a simply low count, women are lied to – by other women. [e.g. You have to, he’ll love you, you’re damaged]. Later on, these sluts get cut off socially, (I believe this is why) but the damage by that point is already done (usually because the bullying works or leaves a mark). It started with women, and this gave men license to do it as well (and to their own sex at ever-earlier ages). Doesn’t make it right, since unlike slut shaming, which has medical backing, everyone was born a virgin. It’s a default. There’s nothing wrong with it. Assuming a person is happy with it, they shouldn’t be pestered about that state when it’s the most intimate choice you’ll ever make, it’s a simple fact of liberty that if you wish to abstain from doing something with your body, you can.

Male virgin shaming isn’t something I’m properly qualified to discuss (being a woman). However, I think it’s a different issue to the female type because women process sex differently, intimately, and making love before our independently chosen time can screw us up for life, and to know another person, of your own sex, manipulated you into ruining something so beautiful? No wonder.

Telegony studies and the future of sperm-paternity studies

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12373/abstract

Newly discovered non-genetic mechanisms break the link between genes and inheritance, thereby also raising the possibility that previous mating partners could influence traits in offspring sired by subsequent males that mate with the same female (‘telegony’). In the fly Telostylinus angusticollis, males transmit their environmentally acquired condition via paternal effects on offspring body size. We manipulated male condition, and mated females to two males in high or low condition in a fully crossed design. Although the second male sired a large majority of offspring, offspring body size was influenced by the condition of the first male. This effect was not observed when females were exposed to the first male without mating, implicating semen-mediated effects rather than female differential allocation based on pre-mating assessment of male quality. Our results reveal a novel type of transgenerational effect with potential implications for the evolution of reproductive strategies.

Full PDF here: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12373/pdf

Could this be the arbiter of female hypergamy? The reason women consistently underestimate their partner count? The reason for the classical association with purity in chaste women?
Certainly there is a new direction in studying maternal quality, we know for a fact that pregnant women receive stem cells from the foetus, and these usually include crossing the blood-brain barrier and becoming brain cells.

This study of blood finds male cells where they shouldn’t be in a mother, with such a heavy impact on its host it might impact organ donation.

In conclusion, we show for the first time functional evidence for transmaternal cell flow resulting in Ag-specific T-cell priming and resulting in microchimerism in mother’s offspring.

This is called fetomaternal microchimerism, where a new organism (in this case, baby) pollutes the purity of the mother’s cells (unkind metaphor but apt). The record for how long this phenomena has lasted in its host, this ‘new lineage’, is 27 years. Fertility window time.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC40117/

The future direction is clear, there is a biological basis for slut shaming. As these studies scale up, the prospect of transfer is almost guaranteed, given these findings across species. For example, human trials have only included fertilizations (foetuses) thus far as previous acceptable (testable) material and not simple sperm or RNA presence, which would involve taking samples from all of a woman’s previous lovers. The lack of experiment with modern computing of samples has left the subject wide open to speculation again. Consider the societal implications, whatever the actual transfer percentage.

It might be a few errant proteins, the odd specific DNA fragments, but do you really think men won’t care?