Thunder's Place

The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.

Penis size: An evolutionary perspective

Originally Posted by firegoat
The Argentine Lake Duck must be one of the most evolved creatures in the universe…. A dusk with a 16” penis! :)
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index…with-its-penis/

And some male barnacles have a penis 50x the length of their body!

Of course because some apes evolved past human to ducks and barnacles !!!

The real reason humans have large dicks, at least to me, is obviously that human females have large vaginas. Humans have much larger brains and heads than any of the others. So the babies have much larger heads. Which means vaginas need to be much larger in order to be able to give birth. The article seems like it’s all a huge load of BS. Even the original question was obnoxious.

That’s an explanation that makes much more sense to me, Sentii.

Originally Posted by marinera
A master’s degree in ‘evolutionary psychology’? I couldn’t even imagine a discipline with such a dumb name actually exists.

I agree. It’s also funny that someone with this degree would give credence to a theory which relays a poor understanding of evolution.

“It has even been theorized that bipedalism evolved in humans to allow the fashionably new, larger, flexible penis to be displayed to discerning females”

The much more likely logical connection with bipedalism and penis size would be that after the advent of bipedalism, penis size had more selective pressure from females given that this area was now constantly exposed. The idea that bipedalism developed from the reproductive advantage of standing upright to show one’s junk is one of the more fatuous theories regarding its inception.

Originally Posted by Gmoney28
The woman said we are evolved apes and thus have bigger penises. Horses have huge penises so under that theory that would mean they’re more evolved :)

No, she said our unique evolutionary pressures resulted in humans having larger penises than other apes. Evolution is not a mater of more or less. Each species emerges from its own unique set of contributing circumstances.

Originally Posted by Evo309
I agree. It’s also funny that someone with this degree would give credence to a theory which relays a poor understanding of evolution.

“It has even been theorized that bipedalism evolved in humans to allow the fashionably new, larger, flexible penis to be displayed to discerning females”

The much more likely logical connection with bipedalism and penis size would be that after the advent of bipedalism, penis size had more selective pressure from females given that this area was now constantly exposed. The idea that bipedalism developed from the reproductive advantage of standing upright to show one’s junk is one of the more fatuous theories regarding its inception.

Yes, I agree. The later makes more sense. But who cares which theories she chose to mention. They’re not hers, she was just restating the work of others. Just because one theory makes more sense to you doesn’t mean no other theories should be mentioned. I think the bulk of her article is thought provoking. That’s a good thing.

Originally Posted by MushroomHook
No, she said our unique evolutionary pressures resulted in humans having larger penises than other apes. Evolution is not a mater of more or less. Each species emerges from its own unique set of contributing circumstances.


The big flaw is that apes and humans are two different species. If you can compare apes and men, you can also compare apes and horses and come out that horses are more evoluted.

Note that if the penis of Bonobo is 8 cm, since it’s average height is 100 cm, it would have a bigger penis/body size ratio compared to humans: (8/100)*175 =14>13.

I find also the dear Carole is gladly using the term ‘Evoluted’ as synonimous of ‘Better’. There isn’t any better in nature, you can’t compare crocodiles to crows and say one is better than the other one.

Beside that, there isn’t any unquestioned study showing the avarage human penis length. I seriously doubt there are many reliable studies about the length of Bonobo’s erect length.

But these are relatively little flaws when compared to the retarded hypothesis she is pushing : 'a) women like big penises; b) men who have a bigger penis are more evoluted; c) I know that because humans have bigger penises than Gorilla's'.. I think any person with just a tiny bit of common sense and specific knowledge about anything wouldn’t say so dementia thingsl, despacing society-induced thoughts as ‘Evolution’. If one day will be demonstrated that Asians have smaller penises than Caucasian or Blacks, what would she say, that Koreans are less evoluted than Africans or Caucasians? Or is huge cocks evolution a part-time principle?

By the way, ‘Evolution’ is the study of inheritance. So again, what should mean ‘evolutionary psychology’? The study that wants to show that what we think is coming from Gorilla’s?


Last edited by marinera : 11-29-2013 at .

It would be interesting to make a Bonobo sized penis pump and see if they are evolved enough to work out what it was for - my bet is that as they like sticking their penises in anything, they would get it pretty quickly. Then if their dicks started trailing on the ground they might walk upright and evolve faster….. hehehehehe


Heat makes the difference between gaining quickly or slowly for some guys, or between gaining slowly instead of not at all for others. And the ideal penis size is 7.6" BPEL x 5.6" Mid Girth.

Basics.... firegoat roll How to use the Search button for best results

Originally Posted by marinera
By the way, ‘Evolution’ is the study of inheritance. So again, what should mean ‘evolutionary psychology’? The study that wants to show that what we think is coming from Gorilla’s?

So you don’t think the process through which we appear as a species on this planet has anything to do with how our brains work? Please elaborate.

There isn’t much to elaborate, the process through which a species appears on this planet will not explain our psychology. I never studied apes but I can say for sure that the psychology of Prof. Carole is to be a sucker.

Hey, hey lets go easy on the crazy bitch she is just trying to find her place on the to-tum pole she thinking about becoming a lesbian.

Originally Posted by marinera
The big flaw is that apes and humans are two different species. If you can compare apes and men, you can also compare apes and horses and come out that horses are more evoluted.

Sorry, no you can’t. Size is not indication of more or less evolved. It’s just a result of different evolutionary pressure.

That’s my point, actually.

By the way, if they are questioning our size, why are so focused on length? Most of women will tell you that it is girth the relevant dimension, a relatively short but girthy penis will be preferred by most women over a long and thin penis. What this makes of all this ‘big dick evolutionary theories’? And why humans go around dressed instead than showing their ‘evolutionary advantegeous’ penis? Sperm desplacement, standing because lenght of the penis etc. etc., are just a bunch of bullshits. Those guys are selling porn-induced fantasies as science-based reality.

Originally Posted by fgtttt
Reminds me of someone claiming that the shape of the glans is designed by evolution so that it will “scrape out” leftover semen from the the vagina placed there by other males, thus making it more likely for yourself to transfer your genes to the next generation.

I don’t hold this theory for very likely though, but looking at your dick and thinking of it is sort of amusing.

I thought of that as well when I read this.

Originally Posted by marinera
There isn’t much to elaborate, the process through which a species appears on this planet will not explain our psychology.

Actually, it does. But individual characteristics fall within the Gaussian distribution of the population. Everything you are is defended by your genetics. But the information in your genome share even influence on the results of the calculation with the environment in which it is executed. Add to that the fact that it a massive statistical calculation and you can see how Evolutionary Psychology may be able to theorize broad effects on population behavior, but it would have difficulty explaining individual behavior.

I’ve only bumped into EP in laymen’s books a couple of times and I actually found the theories plausible. The two books which come to mind are:

The Third Chimpanzee: The evolution and Future of the Human Animal
Jared M. Diamond

and

The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution
Gregory Chochran

I’m a huge Diamond fan (Guns, Germs and Steel) (Collapse). Third Chimp begins by defining the key differences between humans and the other chimps, then explores what may have contributed to those differences.

10,000 Yr was a fascinating subject and had some convincing case studies. But it was poorly written. Or maybe I just don’t like the sensationalistic style the writer used. The subject mater helped we endure the crappy writer. :)

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:48 PM.