Size?

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-16-2007
Size?
27
Tue, 01-16-2007 - 12:14pm

Size?



  • What is the biggest "size" you have ever had?


You will be able to change your vote.


Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-20-2004
In reply to: longandstrong
Tue, 01-23-2007 - 3:42am

I, certainly, do believe there are racial differences. We can see it in the color of our skin. The direction of our hair folicles, etc. What determines these traits are the cells of our body. These cells are past from us to our offspring.

I do believe African men are larger, but nature has a way of equalizing, so that must mean African women are larger vaginally.

But what I find most interesting is that when people say physical attributes, they often only refer to the exterior, but your internal organs also have physical properties as well. It's known that people of Asian decent metabolize medicine at a different rate, so Asian people are often given lower doses of medicine.

Some ethnicities are more susceptible to certain kinds of diseases. It's also very possible that certain ethnicities have more aptitude to solve certain type of problems and appear smarter as their problem solving lends itself to the way our society is structured.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2005
In reply to: longandstrong
Wed, 01-24-2007 - 3:06am

You brought up something that is hardly ever mentioned, and that was the part where you said black women can handle more. While the subject of whether black men are bigger or not is a well known topic, you'll be hard pressed to read or hear anything when it comes to black women. I know of a few guys that have brought it up, and each one said that they could hit bottom with some white women but never with the black women. Not much to go on, but I think that helps to show that black men are in general bigger, and visa versa, when it's taken into consideration with other ways to go by. However, these aren't necessaily good studies to go by, but it's all we have. Kinsey was a self measured poll that was done long ago. If it can be trusted, black men were only a bit bigger in overall average, but had a much higher percentage of long ones and much lower incidence of small ones. Kinsey is a suspect study in that the overall averages are higher than other studies. Kinsey is a rare study in that it did include black men and break down the race differences. Another reference is that of a French surgeon that claimed black men were on average 7 1/8" long and 2" thick, white men 5 3/4" long and 1 3/4" thick, and Asian men 4 3/4" long and 1 1/2" thick. Can it be trusted? For what it's worth, his statement about the average size of white men does match up very closely with the results of a study done by Lifesyles condoms of 301 white males at a springbreak back in 2001. Also, he claimed that black women were deeper.

I think that if someone is prone to believe it is so then that is the way it will stay in their minds, and if someone is prone to not believe it is so then that is the way it will stay in their minds also.

Sometimes 'myths' are going to be false, and sometimes myths are going to be true, but it really has become apparent to me that myths are often true and false. In other words, there is often some partial truth to myths. For instance, many believe it's just a complete myth that height and penis size correlate. Someone asks and usually everyne will respond adamently that there is absolutely no connection. However, a poll done by over 1000 guys at a forum I belong to clearly indicated a moderate correlation. Not strong, but not weak either. However, the shoe size vs penis size did turn out to be a weak correlation. Another one that everyone responding will say means nothing whatsoever is when someone asks if flaccid size means anything for erect size. It's commonly thought that short flaccids are growers and long flaccids are showers that hardly grow. That the growers will catch up with the showers upon erection. From what I studied in the penis size database, I found that the shorter flaccids did indeed grow more, but did not catch up. So that belief is partially true and partially false, just like I'm finding out about other beliefs everytime I have a good way to research it. Of course I'm just speaking in general. Saying 'correlation' doesn't mean I'm saying an absolute. From person to person one can't tell for sure. Correlation means the chances are increased. Another correlation I found is that the longer the penis the thicker the girth tends to be. It's a moderate to strong correlation. That one surprised me somewhat at first, but I'm not really surprised afterwards.

Once again, there are plenty of exceptions to any of this.




Edited 1/24/2007 3:11 am ET by been-there
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2006
In reply to: longandstrong
Wed, 01-24-2007 - 5:18pm

7 Inches
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2006
In reply to: longandstrong
Fri, 01-26-2007 - 1:36pm

Nearly eight and a half inches. Yes, he was white. No, he wasn't Ron Jeremy. Or Tommy Lee.

I know this opens a can of worms (pardon the pun), but here goes: Is it possible that black men are slightly larger than average size because black cultures are far more likely to show off the penis in their mode of dress...thus leading women to choose the larger man, thus making it more likely to carry the "big penis" gene to the next generation?

Stay with me on this. For the past 2,000 years or so, black cultures have had modes of dress which are far more revealing than white or asian cultures. When it's 104 degrees outside, a skimpy loincloth is all you need. Conversely, if you're in Sweden, the gentlemen are more likely to dress in layers. And most Asian cultures seem to prize modesty.

Is it possible then, that over the past 2,000 years, there has been a slight bias toward the men with larger penises having a better likelihood of reproducing, with that bias being more strong in cultures where the length of the penis is more readily apparent to the woman in everyday life? In other words, if the mode of dress reveals the length of the penis, is it likely, over a long period of time, that the more well-endowed men are slightly favored for reproduction?

Discuss.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-29-2006
In reply to: longandstrong
Fri, 01-26-2007 - 2:35pm
It's your "can of worms".
If one were to examine the history of African nations over the past 2000 years, one would find that rape has never been an uncommon occurrence, and thus, it isn't surprising that their gene pool may well produce a disproportionate number of larger males.
It's a fact that this continues today in those countries where there is civil distress and waring between the various tribes and/or religious cultures.
What might be equally interesting would be to discover just why it is that many women, regardless of their race, are able to control their vaginal muscles in order to make do with any size penis provided to them, whereas others just can't quite muster the effort up to do so.
once.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-20-2004
In reply to: longandstrong
Fri, 01-26-2007 - 4:50pm
curvykate in your example you would have to assume that a larger penis is more preferable?.. why would that be? I dont think they ever even considered a longer penis would be a better impregnator..lol
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-19-2006
In reply to: longandstrong
Sat, 01-27-2007 - 9:06am

the biggest fantasy that I ever had was that you would quit obsessing about your size

I have seen penises that were too small for my personal taste and I have seen *ONE* that was too big but I gave it a try anyway. The too big one was on a caucasian male, and it may not have been any longer than 9 1/2 inches, but the girth was bigger than my wrist by far! BUT the person that sent me running from the room with my knees shaking (took me by the biggest suprise) was just somewhere in the ordinary size range. I would think if you want to have that affect on someone you should try concentrating on technique so that your swollen head doesn't deflate.

BTW, have you talked about your penis on the "Is it Meant To Be?" board?



Pages