The 5 Perviest Scientific Studies Ever Published

5 Testing Whether or Not Women Are Into Bangin' Monkeys

Some of the most famous research ever conducted on human sexuality was that of Alfred Kinsey, who published a landmark series of studies into what turns men on sexually. Though groundbreaking, Kinsey's studies dealt mainly with the question of men's sexuality, and Canadian scientist Meredith Chivers of Queen's University, Ontario, wanted to investigate the other end of the gender spectrum. Apparently, part of her study focused on the question of how badly the average woman would want to fuck a monkey.

The study targeted a range of human sexual configurations -- straight men, gay men, straight women, and lesbians -- and hooked them up to a device called a photoplethysmogram, which sounds incredibly technical, but basically just measures how DTF your naughty bits are at a given time, which would probably do great on the retail market.

After that, the study participants were shown a variety of porn -- gay, lesbian, straight, and just naked people walking along a beach like it ain't no thing -- and were asked about how turned on they were by each individual video. Of course, because they were also hooked up to the genital equivalent of a lie detector, their "honest" answers were measured against the horrid truth. The results were about what you would expect for men and lesbians -- gay men were aroused by gay sex, lesbians by lesbian sex, straight men by heterosexual sex. Straight women showed varying degrees of arousal during all of the iterations. But that wasn't the most interesting part ...

Because scientists are just the academically qualified version of trolls, the researchers had an ace up their sleeve -- along with the regular human porn that the participants had expected, they included footage of bonobo apes fully going at it. In addition, because the natural sound on the videos didn't fully convey the extent of the apes' enthusiasm, the videos were overlaid with sound effects of apes getting each other off like porn stars in a cheap Brazzers clip.

As you could imagine, when asked about how aroused they were by explicit ape sex, everyone responded hell to the fuck no. But the photoplethysmogram said otherwise -- men of either orientation were pretty much unimpressed by the bonobos, but the women were betrayed by science, displaying "strong and swift" genital arousal in response to seeing apes make the beast with two backs.

So science has finally answered the age-old question of whether women are more turned on by primate intercourse than men are, and the answer is a resounding yes. We can probably expect further investigation with lemurs, alligators, and armadillos until either the funding runs out or they get through all the animals, whichever comes first.

4 Making Sex Toys Bone Each Other (Complete With Fake Semen)

Something that has puzzled and delighted humans since we parted ways with the apes on the evolutionary tree is why we have much bigger schlongs than our primate cousins. Beside the fact that this was surely the driving force that made us the lords of the animal kingdom, science figures that it can't be an accident -- evolution made human males extra well hung for a reason, and after many nights staring inquisitively down at their babymakers, they decided to find out why.

One theory is that the size and shape of the penis makes it act like a kind of scoop to displace semen that has been left over from your lover's most recent previous conquests. This dick shovel enables the man to bump competing sperm out of the way in order to give his own little swimmers the best chance at reaching the goalpost.

How do you test such a hypothesis? One way would be to actually get down and dirty with your significant other and then ask to conduct some tests afterward in the interest of science, but because that's too straightforward, researchers came up with an alternative method that involved a trip down to the local sex shop.

The scientists spent some not-at-all-awkward time at a purveyor of sexy merchandise to obtain three dildos (one large, one small, and one bullet-shaped to act as a control) and a fake vagina. They created a substitute semen mix from corn starch that was "judged by three sexually experienced males to best approximate the viscosity and texture of human seminal fluid." Yep, that happened.

From there, the only thing to do was to make the fake genitalia fuck each other vigorously. Then tests were done to determine how much of the corn starch man batter had been scooped out after each simulated rogering.

The result was that the fake dicks did indeed scoop 90 percent of the fake splooge out of the fake vagina, with the exception of the bullet-shaped dildo, which displaced much less due to its pitiful lack of a glans. The experiment vindicated the theory of the scientists who were presumably able to take the tools of their trade home with them for ongoing study.

3 Holding a Pop Quiz...While Masturbating

Scientists at MIT wanted to test the scientific validity of the old adage that men tend to make really bad decisions when they're horny. This might seem like it speaks for itself, but science has never been one to accept that kind of wishy-washy answer. They wanted to measure exactly how the firmness of one's erection correlates with the shittiness of one's decision-making ability. And, really, there was only one way to do it -- get some dudes good and randy.

The study made use of a specially designed computer and program, which were made specifically to be used with one's non-dominant hand. We probably don't need to explain why, but we will anyway.

The computer program was set up so that the 35 male participants were able to scroll through a series of pornographic images and were asked to jerk off to whichever images aroused them, keeping score of how horny they were at any given moment, a score which they kept track of using a "thermometer" graphic on the right of the screen.

At this point, the participants probably figured this was the easiest and most fun money they had ever made, but any time the horniness meter exceeded 75 percent, they were suddenly bombarded with a question like, "Oh, hey, by the way, could you imagine ever being turned on by an animal?"

The subjects were asked to answer each question honestly as it popped up at the height of their arousal, under the assumption that the thought process behind each answer would come directly from their dick-brains as they scrambled to get back to the porn, like frantically grappling for the mouse when an ill-timed pop-up advertisement appears just as Jenna Jameson is getting into the heat of things.

Questions ranged from fairly tame -- about the attractiveness of women's shoes, an obese woman, or a sweaty woman -- to more intense -- questions about things like being tied up. And then things got darker when participants were asked about their willingness to have sex with an underage girl or an animal. Subjects were also asked whether they would ever try to obtain sex by drugging a woman, getting her drunk, or lying about loving her.

The results, unfortunately, do nothing for our faith in humanity. The report revealed a general trend toward men's willingness to agree to morally questionable shit when their dicks were sufficiently hard, as opposed to the answers they provided to the same questions after they'd settled down and wiped the sweat off their brow. And to answer your question: Yes, a few of the men said they could imagine being sexually excited by an animal, which is a few more than the zero we would have expected in that small of a sample size.

2 Ambushing Hungry Students to Rate Titties

It's a truth universally acknowledged that, for college-age boys, the two most important things in their hierarchy of needs are food and boobs. But science wants to explore this deeper -- namely, how does being hungry affect your love of boobs?

Some researchers at the University of Westminster sought to answer this hard-hitting question by asking students either entering or exiting the campus dining hall whether they would mind stepping over here and looking at these boobs for a minute. After signing "informed consent" paperwork in which they were presumably informed what breasts are and consented to being exposed to them, students were shown a series of pictures of boobies and asked to rate how attractive they found each pair.

Of all the things that are worth delaying dinner for, the chance to ogle some boobs would have to be way up there. The study nabbed 65 participants as they were headed to dinner and a further 58 who had just eaten but were nevertheless keen to indulge in a dessert of breasticles.

Once the researchers were no longer semi-hard and the results were collated, they found that hunger does indeed appear to affect the way men think about boobs. Specifically, the hungrier they are, the more they prioritize bigger funbags over smaller ones. Scientists theorize that it might have something to do with the way we're genetically prone to associate bigger breasts with being more well-fed, and so when a hungry man sees large boobs, it's kind of like seeing the Golden Arches in the middle of the Sahara.

The study was compelling enough that the researchers managed to convince the powers that be that it warranted more investigation, and thus to fund a trip to Borneo to investigate the phenomenon with even hungrier people. That's how a group of scientists were able to score a titty-watching assignment and a free holiday. Or, as we like to call it, doing science right.

1 Showing a Crowded Lecture Hall Your Erection...For Science!

Giles Brindley was a British physiologist who had a particular fascination with urology (aka dick studies). Before Viagra and drugs of more questionable efficacy sold through spam email, Brindley was a pioneer in the field of chemically induced erections and was instrumental in the discovery of several drugs that, when mainlined into his dong, could turn it harder than adamantium.

As you would probably expect from a man who dedicated his life's work to measuring dick hardness, Brindley was also more than a little eccentric, as evidenced by a famously out-of-the-box lecture he conducted in 1983.

Brindley held the seminar, hosted in Las Vegas, to show the results of his research into bitchin' rock-hard erections, and the audience was already a little suspicious when he turned up to the lecture in a pair of sweatpants, as though he'd just crawled out of bed and wasn't sure where he was. Soon he revealed that, like any number of Spider-Man's rogues gallery, he'd been testing the chemical concoctions (concocktions?) on himself.

The audience was then treated to a number of images of Brindley's own penis in differing stages of hardness, blown up to Godzilla-dick proportions through a slide projector. But this only foreshadowed the true horror -- when it came time to reveal his latest miracle drug, he declared that he'd injected himself with it in his hotel room immediately before the presentation, and that he was still standing at full salute.

To illustrate, he dropped his sweatpants and revealed to everyone the glory of his fully engorged science boner.

Apparently misinterpreting the audience's expressions of stunned disbelief for polite curiosity, Brindley invited them to "confirm the degree of tumescence" of his rigid old-man member, and shuffled toward the audience, pants at his ankles, dick swinging proudly like a pendulum of horror.

Only after several women in the front row screamed did he realize that he'd badly miscalculated the mood of the room, and he abruptly hitched up his pants and terminated the lecture. We assume this was probably the most attention anyone's ever paid to a science lecture.

Science has an undeserved reputation for being boring. Show your friends the sexy, terrifying non-boring truth by clicking the Facebook share button below.

Related Reading: Other ways scientists like to research? By whipping butts of course. But they are doing some good, like proving that reality TV is the downfall of our society.