British men have bigger penises than French men, according to a new survey.
The average British man's penis size is 5.5in while erect, beating that of the French who can only manage 5.3in, but German males are exactly the European average boasting 5.7in, according to a research paper published in the respected scientific journal 'Personality and Individual Differences'.
The paper aims to find out the size of the average erect penis in each of 113 countries and men from the Republic of Congo will be pleased with the results. They are the best equipped out of any nation with a huge average manhood size of 7.1in, closely followed by Ecuador (seven inches), Ghana (6.8in) and Colombia (6.7).
''race differences in penis length''
But languishing at the bottom of the list of average penis sizes are a collection of Asian countries, with North Korea and South Korea amassing an average of 3.8in, while Thailand and China can both boast being slightly better endowed with an average of four inches.
Richard Lynn, emeritus professor or psychology at Ulster University, who is known for having controversial views on racial and national differences in intelligence, did the research and believes the survey confirms previous theories that ''race differences in penis length'' with Negroids the best endowed and Mongoloids the least.
Writing in the paper, Richard concludes: ''For most populations penis length are predictable and confirmed.''
However, Richard admits collecting a lot of his data from websites and admitted they were not verified by other academics, which has led to criticisms about his research.
Richard - who did cite two papers which gave him data for men in Korea and Malaysia - said: ''I got the data online.''
As a result, a number of critics claim the research is flawed including Jelte Wicherts, professor of methodology at Tilburg University, Holland, who has slammed the study and believes the paper shouldn't have been published.
He said: ''This is a brave paper in a controversial area but the data has no methodology and Lynn's paper should not have been published.''