SIZE

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2005
SIZE
31
Tue, 06-07-2005 - 4:46pm
i have a friend i went to school with and we got on the subject of size. well after her divorce she dated a guy who she said was 10" and very thick, and had a huge head on it. she said the 3 main differnces was when he first slipped it in, being he was so thick, it felt better since she said that first strioke is the best part of intercourse, second when he was all the way inside of her feeling his head deep inside rubbed something a normal mans penis didnt and third when he was thrusting she said she said she always had the sensation of the long strokes but at the same time ther was always 5 or 6" inside of her
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-26-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 4:42pm

If you read the link I provided in my other post, if I'm not mistaken, they mention that they also discovered that the anterior wall during arousal becomes more sensitive than in it's unaroused state. Something to which I can personally attest to. That could be the reason more women prefer girth.

As far as length, the average woman's vagina is about 4" deep. If you include the outer vulva as another barrier for the penis(probably an additional 3/4") she can most likely accomodate most penises(5") even without ever getting aroused(tenting). I know that in my normal state, I can put one of my fingers(about 3 1/2") inside of me and feel my cervix and yet I can accommodate DH during arousal just fine(he's around 8"). The only time I have a problem is when I'm on top. I need to use my legs to support myself because I can't sit straight on him...it becomes uncomfortable--I can't grind myself into him. In any other position, I have no problem. Even with tenting, there's just so much I can take. ;-)




Edited 6/17/2005 4:59 pm ET ET by rain_dancer_iam
Imagination is more important than knowledge." (Albert Einstein )
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-22-2003
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 5:06pm
There can never be enough threads about this important topic.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-22-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 5:41pm

Excellent reminder, rain!

In fact, didn't they also suggest at one point that the 'accomodation' limit itself actually "varies" in an individual woman with different sex events as well? I thought it was based upon being more or less aroused or something like that during each different event, even though its so slight many times that its hardly noticeable. I'll have to look that up again.

 

C  H  A  R  A  C  T  E  R

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-06-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 6:27pm

> I don't think that a 7" or a 4" penis would feel that much different to her.

Not counting girth, that's probably true? I've known dozens of women and have been told I'm above average. I've found the first inch or two of all my partners to be very responsive to stimulation, and that a 4" penis is sufficient to massage the g-spot. I've found that tenting adds about 2-4" to their internal length. When attempting to be completely enveloped, I extend under their cervix and gently push against the back of their organ and still have an inch or more left. It's a very fine line between pain and pleasure back there for a woman. My partners say it feels like it's up to their stomach, touches a new spot, they get a very filled sensation they haven't experienced. Other than some like their cervix nudged and touched, a 4" penis is capable of making the earth move for a woman.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-26-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 6:36pm
Oops! I think I may have made a blunder. I'm not positive though because both may work, but I think that statement(I'm trying to collect what my thoughts were at the time of writing it) was suppose to read..."I don't think that a 7" or a 4" (vagina) would feel that much different to (him). Oh well... ;-)
Imagination is more important than knowledge." (Albert Einstein )
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-26-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 6:40pm
...the article mentions a few times that the participants described their state during the experiment as being somewhat aroused and also their orgasms as being superficial. I definitely believe that there is a correlation between the amount of arousal and physiological changes. I'm looking forward to future experiments...wherein the height of arousal is at a maximum and the orgasms are explosive. ;-)
Imagination is more important than knowledge." (Albert Einstein )
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-06-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 7:31pm
I'm sure I misread the post. Yes, since most of a guy's nerve endings are at the end, it doesn't take much penetration to make a guy happy. Just as most women are able to enjoy their "potential space" being completely filled and emptied, maybe the equivalent male sensation is muscled walls caressing the head. Longer is better.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-22-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Fri, 06-17-2005 - 7:44pm

>>I definitely believe that there is a correlation between the amount of arousal and physiological changes. I'm looking forward to future experiments...wherein the height of arousal is at a maximum and the orgasms are explosive.<<

As some of us on this board have mentioned before, check out the cul de sac stories and then guess why we don't have any guilt in stating that we enjoy a perfect fit. "Explosive" orgasms for ya...WHEW! ;D

 

C  H  A  R  A  C  T  E  R

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-20-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Sun, 06-19-2005 - 5:18am
It also looks like the MRI shows that there is a "G" spot, and its not a myth..lol
(erectile material on the anterior vag. wall surrounding the urethra.)
Para , not every woman likes the cul-de-sac area to be stimulated..
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-26-2004
In reply to: bill1975
Sun, 06-19-2005 - 10:02am

This is what it said about the G-Spot): "These images did not show widening of the vaginal canal, structures suggesting a Gräfenberg spot, or a separate reservoir of fluid indicating "female ejaculation."

Of course, this could also correlate to the amount of arousal(which they described as average) and subsequent orgasm(which they described as superficial). That, plus they only used eight women.

"(erectile material on the anterior vag. wall surrounding the urethra.)"
"Para , not every woman likes the cul-de-sac area to be stimulated..}"

I don't think that they are necessarily one and the same. As I understood the findings, they weren't speaking about the extra sensitivity of the anterior fornix(post tenting) only(cul de sac area) but more of the anterior wall(the whole length, not just a portion) itself. That's what I experience. If I'm very aroused I feel sensitivity on both walls posterior and anterior...not necessarily only deep inside(cul de sac).

This is only the beginning. Technology will clear up many misconceptions about both the male and female bodies. I'd wish they'd hurry. ;-)

Imagination is more important than knowledge." (Albert Einstein )