Re Is it possible to get “bruised ovaries” during sex?
I strongly recommend that everyone go look at the “what sex looks like under Magnetic Resonance Imaging” link in Cecil’s column, even if it IS a PDF file, 'cause it’s simply fascinating. These people climbed into an MRI tube and had sex, all in the interests of science. Egad.
Very gonzo.
And P.S. The report says they didn’t see anything that could be a G-spot.
I saw this on a TV show. They showed a video of the, um, activity. I guess the pdf document shows a single frame from that. Or maybe there’s been more than one investigation. The participants were quite small. Have you ever been in an MRI? Imagine fitting two people in there!
I particularly enjoyed the first hand account attached wherein the Dutch lady accredited their qualifications for such an undertaking as being “former acrobats”… now there is a big top performance i could munch on circus peanuts for! :}~~~<
Somehow I picture that as how both DDG and I have sex. Wait! We don’t have sex. With each other. Er, uh, you understand what I mean.
What I meant was, that is how I picture posters such as we , who contribute rather factual answers to this board, must be thought of as having sex. Not with each other, but with our respective SO’s. Clinical.
Never mind.
[Spock]
Fascinating!
[/Spock]
I’d like to note both links included in the column are must-reads.
Also, the article that is started just below the science journal one with the MRI images of intercourse is entitled, “Shaken, not stirred: bioanalytical study of the antioxidant activities of martinis.”
Now these are some scientists I could hang out with! 
Neptune said:
They did remove the sliding table to make more space. The paper describes the participants as small to average in size, precisely for that reason.
It’s interesting that the first participants were one of the researchers and her partner. (I believe they’re the ones that were circus acrobats - there’s a note at the end of the report mentioning all this.)
And then there was this confusing note:
Wait, he does not wish to be acknowledged, so you acknowledge him? 
But what’s really strange is the article that Milossarian mentions.
WHAT?!?!?! They appear to be citing the health of a fictional character as a basis for their investigation. Holy Flying Monkeys! I think the wrong article received the Ignobel.
Hey, Buffy was cited in a governmental report on how to stop terrorists and how to stop unexpected attacks in general.
Where and when? Got a link.
You know, upon further reflection, I had another observation. The MRI sex study cited that the original participants who received full completion of the sex act were probably able to in part because of their comfort level due to having been circus performers. You know, I’m thinking that they would have done even better to use porn stars. There’s a group that shouldn’t have performance issues with being in public, on camera, being watched, etc. 
Penile fracture. Ouch!!
Penile fracture. Ouch!!
Here is Ida’s web page and her photo:
http://www.scw.vu.nl/medewerkers/com/sabelis.html
Penile fracture. Ouch!!
The funniest thing is that they used a “Siemens Vision” MRI.
I thought this whole thing sounded familiar.
The participants won an Ig Nobel prize in 2000 for this project.