I found something odd at a .gov website: Penis size: Survey of female perceptions of sexual satisfaction. The conclusion is hardly shocking:
Women reported that penis width was more important for their sexual satisfaction than penis length. The results were statistically significant. Penis width needs to be given more consideration, and taken into account when one discusses penis size.
…but this is apparently supposed to be a surprise because it contradicts the conclusion of Masters and Johnson, as if people learned about sex from them and not from porn and, well, having sex.
The methodology is rather funny:
To test the notion of the possible importance of length vs. width and female sexual satisfaction, two male undergraduate college students – both popular athletes on campus…
Oh, if only… If only it continued, “one with a long narrow penis, the other with a short wide penis…”, but it doesn’t. They had these two guys ask 50 girls who they considered sexually active if penis width or length was more important. 45 said width. It seems odd that these guys were asked to contact women who they most likely knew personally and may have had sex with. This introduces a huge potential bias. The respondents’ answers could have been colored by what they knew about the surveyors’ penises and their inclination to boost, spare, or hurt their feelings. Of course, this doesn’t really matter because the whole survey is unimportant.
My point is simply that many people are struggling financially, but they need not worry because the government is here to tell us that chicks prefer fat dicks.
I found this while looking for the story of Juan Baptista dos Santo and Blanche Dumas(nudity), a man and a woman with a total of six legs, two penises, two vaginae, and two voracious sexual appetites. That link claims the two got it on, but another source says, “While there is no evidence that the two had illicit meetings, there is great rumor of a brief affair.”