Original article: https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bju.15926 https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111... Coupl

Original article: https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bju.15926 https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111... Couple issues with the way this study was conducted / the claims being made: 1. I'm not sure artists try to always show the "ideal" of anything. Does every artists always try to paint a 'perfect' face? There are a ton of contextual factors at play into what is depicted. 2. All art is a reaction to prior work, whether intentional or not. Otherwise, based on this study, should we expect art to depict gigantic leg sized dongs in the future? The artists intention with the size of the wiener is a huge unknown variable. Given how sizes 'exploded' in the 21st century compared to prior time periods, I think this is greatly at play. 3. Art comes in many forms, making an apples to apples comparison impossible. How can you compare a renaissance wang from an abstracted anaconda? They mention a link to porn. I agree this is likely the cause of lower male self-esteem about their pocket snakes. Not sure young men are getting these thoughts from art class.