An Experiment in Nudity: Top 10 Female Names on Google

First Result:
Margaret "Dink" Nolan, the Bond girl from Goldfinger. A Bond girl at No. 1! That' promising ...

Overall Front-Page Strength:
... And, then there's a whole bunch of professors and school teachers, including that physicist lady in the first row who studies asteroids. Seriously, this is like a feminists' dream, here. There's six Ph.D.s and zero thong models. That's ... progress we guess.

Porn Index:
Turning off Google's SafeSearch adds a single image of an almost-completely clothed Margaret Lee to the front page.

Seriously, Google, where is that pic not considered "safe?" Iran? Are you worried about the children? The children see more scantily-clad women in a Hanes commercial. Otherwise, nothing.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
1 out of 5 Boobles. Margaret is a respectable woman, but she's no damned harlot. Moms, you want to keep your girl off the stripper pole, name her Margaret.

First Result:
Dorothy and Toto dolls surrounded by a bunch of giant virtual-reality raspberries for some reason.

It should be noted that if the search-engine gods had any taste in movies, the No. 1 image would have been this photo of Dorothy Stratten from the far-superior Galaxina.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
Of the first five images, only the fifth is a moderately hot girl dressed up as Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz, making her hotter or less hot depending on how many of your neighbors you've been legally required to introduce yourself to. Pretty much the entire front page is dominated by The Wizard of Oz (Ms. Galaxina was relegated to the fourth row). However, we did get a nice Halloween costume idea:

For the girlfriend, not for us.

Porn Index:
Considering we've never met a woman named Dorothy under the age of 70, we were holding our breath as we turned SafeSearch off.

It's mostly just a row of little girls in The Wizard of Oz outfits, thank God. Down the page, you do eventually get the arbitrary topless woman cupping her boobs. That's not good, considering that even googling the word "sofa" gets you a half-naked woman in the first row.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
1.5 Boobles. Good for people with a The Wizard of Oz fetish. Bad for the rest of us.

First Result:
A model named Susan Van Tassal who appears to be urinating into her hand in a dark room.

Honestly, we're not sure what to think about that.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
Besides the urinating model, the first row features an attractive older lady who looks pissed off that you're looking at her, Susan Sarandon, and some girl who just borrowed a hat from one of the Fly Girls from In Living Color. After that, more professor types with .edu domains. Who'd have thought "Susan" would rival "Margaret" in the "Most Likely to Cure Cancer" category?

Porn Index:
The clothing flies off about one-third of the entries when you turn SafeSearch off. There are no less than four pictures of Susan Ward in various states of undress, but counter balancing it are a bunch of naked pictures of girls who look too young to use Google without SafeSearch, let alone appear on the page.

Also, a woman named Suan Owens who has written a book or made an album called Tanging the Hump:

We clicked that one (as you can see from the purple border) and we were hugely disappointed.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
2 out of 5 Boobles. It' all or nothing with Susan: Ph.D or porn.

First Result:
Our first Maria image uses the twin excuses of high art and soft focus to sneak full-frontal nudity under the Google SafeSearch filter. That' gotta count for something.

We went ahead and MS Painted some underpants for her.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
Maria brings the strongest starting five so far. And, no Maria is not disqualified just because two of the first five are Maria Sharpova. Don't look at us like that Margaret and Dorothy, we didn't make up the rules. OK, we did. Now, go back to studying molecules or whatever and let us continue what we're doing over here.

Porn Index:
With the filter off, there's quite a bit of some young lady named Maria Ozawa, whose apparently unfamiliar with the dynamics of button-up sweaters and short schoolgirl skirts. Then, near the bottom of the page, we get a pic of a completely naked Maria the robot, from Metropolis:

Freaking Internet.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
2.5 out of 5 Boobles. Strongest Booble rating thus far, though they were one Maria Sharapova away from being Susan.

First Result:
A bunch of creepy pictures of Rachel from Friends bending over at the beach.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
After No. 1' creepy stalking, Jennifer settles into a nice rhythm. There' a young lady named Jennifer Barretta, who apparently misunderstood her friends' invitation to a pool party, because she' in a bikini and playing billiards. This is from one of those magazines where it' supposed to be hot to show a girl doing stuff that they don't think women should be good at. There' also some Jennifer Love Hewitt and Jennifer Lopez thrown in, so it' almost not fair.

Porn Index:
Minus SafeSearch, it' pretty much just more revealing versions of the same. There' one of those fake celebrity photo shops of Jennifer Aniston at No. 1 on a site called AllSciFi. Either this site is cynically trying to snare nerds by promising sci-fi and giving pornography, or Photoshopping Jennifer Aniston' head onto a masturbating girl is the loosest definition of science fiction we've ever heard.

You may think that's the saddest possible thing a young male could get turned on by, but just a few inches down AllSciFi proves you wrong:

We're not saying you've misjudged your readers, AllSciFi, but we're pretty sure the only people who ever pleasured themselves watching Dirty Dancing only had eyes for Patrick Swayze.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
4.0 out of 5 Boobles. Jennifers have a bunch of celebrity talent, but they must be punished for brining back those Dirty Dancing memories.

First Result:
Elizabeth Hurley. Enough said.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
Aside from that first picture of Liz Hurley, it's all downhill. We do learn the answer to questions such as: Would Queen Elizabeth be any less ugly without the lace throat collar that makes her look like a lizard?

Porn Index:
For some reason, turning SafeSearch off makes the good Elizabeth Hurley picture dissapear. There is definitely more pornography than on most, but for some reason turning off SafeSearch actually gives you more pictures of the Queen, too, including one that makes her look like an alien in disguise:

The lovely Shannon Elizabeth helps but ... wait a second. Elizabeth is her last name. That doesn't count, does it?

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
2 out of 5 Boobles. Too much Queen Elizabeth, and one point deducted for cheating.

First Result:
Somehow, even with SafeSearch on the first picture is a naked woman. Apparently Google, like us, underestimated the name Barbara. Just two images over is a topless, edlerly Barbara Golden, utterly destroying the entire concept of a "safe"-image search forever and ever.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
Once you get past the boob infiltration, you find a group of regular women who are maybe a little more attractive than their peers. Surprisingly, just the one pic of Barbara Bush and not a single Barbra Streisand. Nice.

Porn Index:
Turn off SafeSearch and it's a bucket O' Porn--nine of the first 10 pictures--and serious porn at that.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
3 out of 5 Boobles. Since the first image with SafeSearch on involved full-frontal nudity, we're going to give Barb the benefit of the doubt. It's definitely the name that most exceeded expectations.

First Result:
Linda Cardellini, that girl from stuff on TV.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
There's Linda Caredllini looking very serious in a few pictures, some lady from the '50s, and then we drop off the continental shelf with satellite photos of Hurricane Linda and a bunch of women your mom has played bridge with at one time or another.

Porn Index:
Turning off SafeSearch makes one new pic appear in the top row. It's Cardellini sitting on a bed that was apparently deemed unsafe by the 1950s MPA Rating Board.

Aside from that hard-core bed-sitting action, there's exactly one porn pic on the whole page. That's 50 percent fewer than what Barbara had with SafeSearch on. Apparently all of Linda Lovelace's work pre-dates the Internet, because other than what you see above, it's all hurricanes and PTA.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
1.5 out of 5 Boobles. Linda is an average-looking name. If you're not a mother of three and you're not Linda Cardellini then you're probably a hurricane.

First Result:
The first image is a Photoshop pic of news anchor Patricia Del Rio which looks OK from afar ...

... but when you click through, you realize they've done something with Photoshop that makes it look like her face is melting.

Overall Front-Page Strength:
You've got a healthy dose of the mom from Everybody Loves Raymond and Patricia Arquette, some dude' fiancé posing next to a water fall, and our first furrie! Hey, it' about time! About .5 percent of our audience was getting antsy out there.

Porn Index:
Turn off SafeSearch and suddenly it's rainin' porn. Man, ain't nothin' that could ruin the mood now! Porn as far as the eye can see! Let's scroll alllll the way to the bottom of the page ...

WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!

WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT?!? GET THAT THING AWAY FROM MY BONER!

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
3 out of 5 Boobles. We don't want to discuss this any further.

First Result:
Well, the good news is it's a naked woman, even on SafeSearch:

The bad news: It's Mary Magdalene from the Bible. So, enjoy your eternal hellfire.

Overall Front Page Strength:
Pictures of boats outnumber hot women 3-1. Jesus' mom makes an appearance. The rest are just regular people. About what you'd expect, we suppose.

Porn Index:
A second, bigger picture of the naked Mary Magdalene shows up, and the fact that it wasn't visible on SafeSearch probably makes some important point about the arbitrary nature of censorship. We have little else to do but contemplate such matters, because there isn't a speck of nudity anywhere else on the page.

And get this: No porn appears until the ninth page of results! Holy crap! This is the Internet, people. You Google the word "shirt" and half the first row is porn:

You Google "Mary" and you don't get a picture of a woman touching a man's wiener until the 165th result. That doesn't seem possible.

Overall Ranking (On a scale of 1 to 5 Google Boobs):
0 out of 5 Boobles. Religious icons are frowning at us and apparently making dozens of the women keep their clothes on, too.