Originally Posted by beenthere
So ‘quite a few’ doesn’t statistically mean much to me. Someone might only recall mostly the ones they are inclined to remember, the ones that support their own leanings. I think that is human nature. So without charts quite a few might mean a majority or it just might only mean a very small percentage that is being predominately recalled.
I’ve had similar thoughts about the problem of quantifying the reports. I remember one poster with a lot of experience who tried to put it into statistics, something like this: at 8" length, a third of all partners couldn’t take the full length, and/or had significant discomfort a third of the time. That is in the ballpark of what I have seen in the reports overall.
Based on paying a fair bit of attention to the annecdotal evidence, I think it’s fair to present the following observations regarding reports of problems with length:
7.5" length - one in four incidence of significant discomfort or incompatibility with female partners
8" length - one in three incidence of significant discomfort or incompatibility with female partners
much over 8", the incidence quickly hits one in two
I’m not quite as sure of girth, but think the following is still close to representative, and possibly even conservative:
5.5" girth - one in four incidence of significant discomfort or incompatibility with female partners
6" girth - one in three incidence of significant discomfort or incompatibility with female partners
much over 8", the incidence quickly hits one in two
In both of these dimensions, the one-in-four incidence hits right at about the 95th percentile in size for that dimension, which indicates a certain consistency to me. That would mean that a female partner would only encounter dimensions these large in one in twenty of her partners; for an average female with 4 male partners in her lifetime (http://www.kins eyinstitute.org … ources/FAQ.html ) this means that only one in 4 women would ever even experience a size that large in their entire lifetime, or a woman with relatively more experience of 20 partners (perhaps more typical of Thunder’s Place members’ partners) would only encounter dimensions that big in one of her partners. How’s that for some perspective? It’s relatively impressive that the female vagina can generally accomodate sizes that far from the average, and not surprising that a high incidence of problems would start to occur much further out from the average. And even if the statistical distribution that I’m using from is off by a fair amount, it still paints a picture that women’s incidence of discomfort with size starts to occur significantly as the male partner’s dimensions get relatively higher than average.
Reports also indicate that long term partners who experience discomfort and/or incompatibility may experience improvements over time, but some will not. Technique and positioning also help, but do not overcome all problems.
FF
Starting, summer '06: 6" EL, 6.5" BPEL, 5.5" EG / Currently: Approximately .4" length and .25" girth gains / Stretched ligs .5" - .6", increasing PBFL and flacid hang
Goal: 7.25" BPEL x 5.75" EG, currently over HALF WAY THERE! on length and ACHIEVED GIRTH!
Piercings: 4 Gauge PA (currently not wearing), Two 4 Gauge upper frenums, other non-genital