The Clitoris Has Been Lost to Science for Centuries, but It’s Making a Comeback

The vulva has long been ignored in anatomical study. But scientists and doctors are making strides in mapping its pleasure center, the clitoris, and improving sensation for survivors of genital cutting.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In October researchers at the Oregon Health & Science University announced that they approximated the number of nerve fibers in the human clitoris that are responsible for sexual pleasure—more than 10,000—for the first time ever. In comparison with the penis, which has been studied extensively, the vulva has been largely ignored in anatomical study.

“I mean, like, the general story of the clitoris is that it appears to have been lost and found throughout history,” says Rachel E. Gross, a science journalist and author of Vagina Obscura, a book that explores how science has long viewed the female body with a narrow focus on reproduction and how that’s changing.

It was only about 20 years ago that urologist Helen O’Connell comprehensively mapped the clitoris for the first time using microdissection and magnetic resonance imaging, proving that what we see above the surface is just a small part of the entire structure below. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Clitoral anatomy is still making its way into medical textbooks, in part through the advocacy of one woman named Jessica Pin, who lost clitoral sensation after undergoing plastic surgery on her labia in 2004. 

“I realized that surgeons were doing surgeries they were never trained to do on anatomy they were never taught,” Pin wrote in an email. “The dorsal nerves of the clitoris were omitted from every anatomy textbook I could find. They were omitted from every OB/GYN textbook I could find. They were nowhere described in plastic surgery or OB/GYN literature. They were nowhere considered in literature on female genital cosmetic surgery. Surgeons were operating blind to nerves.” 

Pin considers what she went through a form of “preventable genital mutilation,” caused by “carelessness and taboo around female sexuality.” 

As late as the mid-20th century, clitoridectomies, or the removals or reductions of the clitoris, were overtly practiced in the U.S. and U.K. to prevent masturbation. And in the mid-19th century, such surgeries were performed as a “cure” for “hysteria” and attitudes such as a “distaste for marital intercourse” and “a great distaste for her husband.” According to an estimate by UNICEF, today at least 200 million girls and women in 31 countries have been subjected to genital cutting, otherwise known as female genital mutilation, or FGM.

In California, Marci Bowers, a gynecologist focused primarily on gender-affirming surgery, performs clitoral reconstruction procedures for survivors. While genital cutting has been shown to cause severe pain, bleeding, infections, urinary problems and childbirth complications, very little research has investigated its impact on sexual function and solutions. 

“When you think that this affects 200 million women worldwide, it’s an embarrassingly small amount of attention,” Bowers says. “It was really interesting when I began interviewing patients who had undergone FGM, and their primary motivation for getting the surgery was not sex or sexual feeling even; it was the sense that their identity had been taken from them.”

In the fifth and final episode of Scientific American’s documentary series A Question of Sex, we meet Bowers and one of her patients to understand what it means for science to prioritize female pleasure.

Watch This Next

This article was supported by the Economic Hardship Reporting Project. This Scientific American documentary was shot on Blackmagic Design cameras.  

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe