Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Mammary Glands and Perceived Performance

One year ago1, on a lark, I applied for government grant. I was talking with an old Psychology professor. He was bemoaning the fact that said government grants have been drying up because of the current administration's emphasis on commercially applicable studies, and I wanted to prove him wrong. I applied for and received a government grant, and I would like to briefly describe my study and findings.

It has been well-documented that taller men are trusted more; they get better jobs, have hotter wives, drive more expensive cars, and get elected President 88% of the time. Similar studies have been made for women, but no link has been made to a woman's height and any measurable difference in getting jobs, having fast cars or dating attractive lesbians. This scientific study attempts to link breast size, not height, with preferential treatment.

In order to conduct this study (in which we spent an incredible amount of government funds, all accounted for, by the way), we hired attractive prostitutes exotic dancers who posed as job applicants. We then selected students to evaluate these "job applicants." We standardized this study by ensuring that all exotic dancers were between the ages of 21 and 27, and that they were attractive. We also selected them to ensure a wide range of breast sizes, from petite/perky to round/curvy. Furthermore, we wrote resumes for the job applicants that were essentially identical (similar degrees and work experience).

Initially we incentivized2 the "job applicants," but we soon learned that this was a mistake in study structure. Many of the "job applicants" performed fellatio3 in order to receive their financial incentives, and thus we had to cease this once we took videos of these indiscretions for both documentation and personal use.

We asked the subjects, whose job it was to select the most qualified applicant, a series of questions concerning each applicant. Here are our results:

1. Women with smaller breasts were described as smarter 87% of the time.
2. Women with larger breasts were described as "team players" more frequently.
3. Women with smaller breasts were described as more qualified.
4. Women with smaller breasts were described as more knowledgeable in the field of study, independent of field type or hair color.
5. Women with larger breasts were described as more "outgoing", though there was little evidence that this was the case.
6. Women with larger breasts were selected for the job in virtually all mock job situations.

In summary, even if the woman was thought to be (1) smarter, (2) more qualified and (3) more knowledgeable in the field, she was still not offered the position. Large breasted women with the more "soft attributes" of being (1) a team player and (2) outgoing, qualities much harder to quantify were offered the jobs nearly every time.

From examining the evidence, and spending the remaining grant money on a graduate level statistician, we were able to statistically prove that breast size is directly proportional to job selection but inversely proportional to many of the attributes most find important in job applicant. With additional resources, we may be able to draw additional conclusions concerning breast size and perceived performance.

Is it any wonder that Wonderbra®'s tagline is "your not so secret weapon"?

Disclosure Statement: Leesa has no commercial interest in Wonderbra®, and received no personal compensation for this study.4

1Nothing in this post is real. This post is a joke, and I did not receive any government money to study anything. The sad part about this is that I have to explain this because it seems plausible. I was inspired by Hugh for this post. He posted about the Circle of Beauty. He posted an intelligent VLOG about his "circle of beauty."
2Is this a real word?
3Doesn't fellatio sound more scientific than blowjob? How many people actually read the footnotes I wonder? I better get back to writing this essay.
4Leesa did, however, accept some of the exotic dancers generous offers of performing cunnilingus on her.


Miss 1999 said...

*LOL* This was a classic! And although mock, saddly, so very, very true.

PS: I read the footnotes.

bobo said...

Oh this so should of been a real study. Surely Wonderbra can't be encouraged to cough up a few pennies?

And yes, I read the footnotes, though with the word fellatio footnoted who could resist.

I look forward to your further research on penis size and its relation to male intelligence … if that isn't dismissed out of hand as an oxymoron.

Leesa said...

miss 1999: I wanted to write more on this, but I ran out of time.

bobo: yeah, I thought about penis size, but you know, I am not sure I can do the sampling (since I am married).

LarryLilly said...


pull a Clinton. Define sex as not actually having vaginal sex, then offer hummers to male participants. Then compile your research, and well, apply for that grant. I mean, you can expand the study to measure relative percent gains in sizes of flaccid dicks to stiffy's.

OK, but it brings to mind the joke some female comedian did years ago, that said in essence that the average womans pussy was 9 inches deep, and the average mans dick was 6 inches, and well, she figured there was hundreds of miles of unsatisfied pussy in this country.

OK, sue me!

Irish Church Lady :) said...

This was very funny. You had me for awhile. I was reading in earnest waiting to see how much money you got! LOL

Your footnotes are da bomb, BTW!

kathi said...

I had a comment until I got to #4 of the post notes, now it's escaped me.

Oh yeah, according to your 'mock' study, I should be employed by now.

~Deb said...

Ha! I loved this!

What about those sexy Latina women who get all the government grants??? And no, I'm not being a racist.... *w I date a Latina. So...

RWA said...

OK, I thought this was real. I admit it.

And the part about the fellatio? That was impressive.

Leesa said...

larry: er, I am not sure I want to emulate Clinton. Or W Bush.

irish: thanks, sweetie. It was fun to write.

kathi: funny, sweetie! Funny! I just was writing stuff, not really wanting to say anything.

~deb: not racist. And it was fun writing.

rwa: I know, it sounds plausible.

Ian Lidster said...

A true study or not, I bet the findings are right on. But, of course, my wife is large-breasted and very smart, and qualified, so that makes the world much brighter for all.
This was hilarious Leesa, and I love your footnotes.


Rebecca said...

There was an actual, published study done on this subject a few years ago. The conclusion was that women with larger breasts had smaller brains. You should know better than to do a “mock” study on this subject. It’s insulting to women and not humorous.

Leesa said...

ian: thanks.

rebecca: actually, I was attempting to insult men's views of woman. Your response, while attempting to be funny, really wasn't. My point was that big breasts DON'T make women dumber, but that was lost on you.

Im A Foto Nut said...

Yes I read footnotes, and boy oh boy, I am glad I do! LOL

Leesa said...

foto: glad I ammused you!

~Deb said...

Not saying you were a racist---it's true, Latina women are more likely to receive a government grant more so than anyone else. My girlfriend did this. BUT ANYWAY, the post had nothing to do with that- just stating a 'fun fact' of it. The post was fun!