Do Ants Have Assholes?

by Jon Butler, Bruno Vincent

The zany, laugh-out loud, Sunday Times bestseller and number one Amazon.co.uk bestseller.

Do Ants Have Assholes? And 106 of the World's Other Most Important Questions is a hilarious, over-the-top parody of bestsellers like Do Men Have Nipples? Jon Butler and Bruno Vincent have dreamed up a venerable, historic (and imaginary) newspaper. It's a home for sensible and settled minds in a world where newness and excitement seem in danger of overwhelming common sense, decency, and good, solid conservatism.

When this newspaper's serious readers have serious questions, they write to the "Questions and Answers Page." Do Ants Have Assholes? is a collection of what these imaginary readers write in:

"If a deaf man goes to court, is it still called a hearing?" "What have the Romans ever done for us?" "If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do they all have to drown?"

The only thing crazier than the readers' questions are the questions' answers. You won't be able to stop laughing.

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Humor, Comedy

192 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2007

Reviews

[Baba]

A collection of silly questions and answers originally published in the 'Corrections & Clarfications' (intentional typo), letters page of The Old Git magazine. Questions such as 'Why can't girls throw?', 'What are the benefits of smoking?' and my favourite.. 'What do NASA scientists say instead of "it's not rocket science"'. Unfortunately in my opinion the questions were often funnier than the supposedly funny answers more often than not. 4 out of 12, Two Stars

201o read

[Midnightcollage]

A parody of all those brilliant question books that are out there. If you bought this, thinking it would be a normal book of silly questions that people ask, but genuinely want to know the answers to, you'll be disappointed. Like I was :(

[Loy Machedo]

Do Ants Have Arseholes is the sad bad and tad attempt of Jon Butler and Bruno Vincent, to either show you what a disaster a blank pathetic directionless scientific endeavor can take human beings or in simple words, how to make yourself a look like a fool for the rest of your careers.
Where I assumed this would be a creative blend of science and universal discovery, I was disappointingly and shamefully bored to death hearing strange noises come out from every orifice by body thanks to the squeals of moronic disposition that was excreted out of this waste of paper.
Questions like, “When sign makers go on strike, do they carry signs?"; "If one synchronised swimmer drowns, do they all drown?"; "Why isn't there mouse-flavoured cat food?"; "Why is there only one Monopoly Commission?" were answered in the most banal and dull manner, that you would just consider using this as a torture device to drive your enemies crazy.
May be the authors forgot to ask just one question.
"Is it possible to bore someone to death?"
Well, I would just say that the answer would be, purchase this book and listen to yourself reading it. You most probably will.

[Frank Steele]

I am currently enjoying it, and find it very enlightening, but I must say that on page 124 of my copy, there is a question answered by 3 "contributers," all in the negative, but I can answer a resounding "YES," and if I had space here, I could offer proof. Instead, let me just say that my proof is anecdotal, involving a full grown rottweiler, a bic pen, and me, mowing the lawn and spying a dog turd in the yard encasing said pen. It was sort of a spiral.

[Cindy (BKind2Books)]

This is not a serious non-fiction book, but rather a tongue-in-cheek book with very typically British humor. For example, one of my favorite questions (and for me the questions were the most humorous as some of the British cultural allusions were beyond me) was : "If a deaf man goes to court, is it still called a hearing?"

[Bill]

Abso-bloody-lutely hilarious. I was about halfway through before I realised that all these questions and answers were made up for publication as a regular item in a humourous magazine. If you want a damned good laugh then read this!

[Casey]

Once I realized this entire book from the questions asked, the answers given and the people who wrote in were a parody I enjoyed many laughs and giggles out loud.
If you are easily offended or don't have an open sense of humor this book is NOT for you!

[Oana]

The opposite of what I had in mind when I bought the book. Still, I tried to understand the motivation behind writing it (be it a parody or however one may call it) but no... I couldn't understand why this book appeared in print. Beats me.

[Xu Yin]

sadly I am not one of those who think this is funny...

[William]

I gave this a one because there are no zeros. I like books of questions but only when the answers make sense. The answers bordered more on the stupid than they did on the funny.

[David Mitchell]

My review linked.

Five stars for the answer that presented the world the colour "Simon".

[Lisa Bentley]

When I saw the title of this book – Do Ants Have Arseholes? – I genuinely found myself curious to know the answer. Do they? Surely they do. And that was the reason why I picked up this copy at my local charity shop.

What kept me reading Do Ants Have Arseholes? was the fact that the book is chock full of whimsy and silliness and I do love the silliness. As you get further and further into the book the questions become sillier and the answers to the silly questions become all the more ludicrous. It is very entertaining.

For anyone who likes a dollop of daftness to their day then I fully recommend Do Ants Have Arseholes? It is guaranteed to make you smile.

Do Ants Have Arseholes?…and other bloody ridiculous questions by Jon Butler and Bruno Vincent is available now.

[Simone]

Dovedu si představit, že styl humoru v této otázka/odpověď knize může leckomu připadat spíše trapný. Já se bavila náramně.
Otázky a především odpovědi, které do fiktivního časopisu posílali taktéž fiktivní čtenáři, nejspíš neposkytnou uspokojující moudra, ale zaručeně pobaví. Obzvlášť povedené byly odpovědi, které na sebe reagovaly. A k tomu ještě interní poznámky editora směrující k sekretářce.

[Mike H]

This book is a parody question and answers section of the fictional “Old Git” magazine. A collection of funny questions and answers/correspondence between the readers which is forced and cringy from the beginning.

Having picked this and it’s sequel up from a second hand bookshop, I’m very glad I only paid $6 for the pair. Not sure however if I’ll read the sequel.

[John Naylor]

A parody of New Scientist publications like "Does Anything Eat Wasps?"

There is some humour here but it is disguised well. The concept could be realised a lot better. Not even bad enough to recommend.

[Alexx Pym]

No idea why I was given this as a child. A little humour to be had but as others have said the made-up questions are usually funnier than the made-up answers. Other than that, a bit up it's own arse (bad pun but still about as funny as the majority of this tryhard book).

[Ietrio]

Mild shock value and a type of humor made to have the generator look witty. I disliked it all.

[Chris]

It's okay

[Manish]

It ranges midway from hilarious to a cringeworthy textual soup which is an okayish rip off of the New Scientist book series.

[Lee]

Libro scritto da Inglesi per gli Inglesi e che solamente gli Inglesi possono comprendere.
Al di là dei riferimenti prettamente britannici che un continentale non può cogliere né apprezzare, ritengo che ci sia anche una cera dose di British humor che non guasta mai, se solo si capisse di che cosa si stia parlando.
Mi chiedo perché lo si sia voluto tradurre e immettere sul mercato italiano.

[Gabrielle Young]

Absolutely ridiculous!

[Tinkers Tribe]

Don't bother reading this book. It's just a waste of valuable time. The questions are ridiculous and the answers, majority of the time were not even relevant.

[Peter Stewart]

Could of gone into more depth but fair

[Stace]

Poor, unimpressive tosh!

[Emma]

Looking for some light comic relief on my long trek home from work last night, I found this on my ipod and thought I would have a listen. I have never been more disappointed. I'd expected it to be a bit silly for comic effect, but this was just pure rubbish. I really didn't enjoy listening to it and contemplated switching it off at a number of points. Perhaps this works as a book, but as an audio book it fails. For a start you can't tell where one question - and the subsequent commentary - ends and another one starts, they all just seem to merge which makes it very difficult to follow as a listener. Maybe this is better if you can dedicate your full attention to it, but this is definitely not one I would put myself through again.

[Kate (Looking Glass Reads)]

This is a very short book that attempts to answer funny, absurd questions in funny, absurd ways. Sometimes it hits the mark. But there are very few sections that I found memorable. I'm struggling to remember much of what occurred in the book, and I generally remember all of the odd, strange facts gleaned from books like this. It's a shame, but it's staying on the bookshelf, at least for now.

[Amy]

I got this book for christmas as I like this type of silly book. However, it will be going in the next charity shop bag that comes through my door!

This wasn't the best of these books I have read by far and I can safely say I didn't enjoy it. If like me you thought this book would be of normal question and answers your wrong, its not funny but stupid!

[Edwina Book Anaconda]

The only funny thing about this book is the title.
It's so bad that I had to FORCE myself to finish it.
If I believed in burning books then this would be somewhere very near the top.
Don't waste your time.

[Martin]

A silly, funny spoof of "silly question" books, it's an entertaining pasttime, if you don't care for actual scientific answers, or anything close to resembling an actual answer to the question. Which I do.

[E.Christie]

so funny