Thunder's Place

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

More recent girth studies

And yet we ourselves cannot judge ourselves even from our own pics.

Point is that the whole numbers game is a thing we get into for our own selves— which is fine— but at the end of the day have little or nothign to do with the experiences of any but the highest mileage of gals.


WE are the 99% 'WE are the people you depend on; we cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls. We drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Don't f&ck with us'-- Madame DeFarge

"Rope trades @$10 a yard. I wonder if they even know that?"- Capitalist

Originally Posted by sentii
I feel that most women these days have seen hundreds if not thousands of cocks on the internet.
I think this is true-ish. The Internet has certainly changed things.

There is a generational divide, however. Women of my day would rarely look at such stuff. It would be highly unusual for them.

These days I think the young women are much more likely to, at least a few times out curiosity if nothing else, and there do seem to more who enjoy porn unto itself (though nowhere near the same degree that young men do).

Originally Posted by androNYC
That has little to no bearing on the personal experience of any lady of our affections.
This is very true.

In my experience most of what is discussed around here regarding size is of very little importance to women. Or it is of nominal interest. They determine what size you are, naturally, but only because you have sex. They decide if they like it (the sex, I mean, not the penis per se) and are willing to do so on an ongoing basis, and then their mind turns to other questions. Such as that Kate Spade bag they have their eye on. Or a better set of curtains for the living room.

Otherwise: Penises? What about them?

Originally Posted by androNYC
Point is that the whole numbers game is a thing we get into for our own selves— which is fine— but at the end of the day have little or nothign to do with the experiences of any but the highest mileage of gals.
Agreed. I have only met one true size queen in my life, and maybe a handful of posers. The rest couldn’t care less, as a rule.

Originally Posted by androNYC
But let’s just say that she ran across three outliers that were all 95th %-ile types— her experience will skew her grokking of the size continuum regardless of what the general distribution is and where you fall on it.
Such a woman would be very rare indeed, statistically. Talk about Stranger in Strange Land.

Still, if you run into this type of gal. It’s important not to get into a fight with her where you call names. Should you be unlucky enough to do so (particularly as part of a bad break-up or divorce) you’re likely to be called ‘small dick’ and you will be scarred for life and end up on a Penis Enlargement forum.

Wait, did I just post that? :D

Originally Posted by androNYC
Isn’t the issue the LIQ (Lady In Question) and not simply numbers generally?
Always.

And once you start living with them the important things are:

Are you making enough money? When can we go on vacation? Did you feed the dog? Did you take out the garbage? I Just cleaned! Why the hell did you track all this dirt into the living room?

It’s a good thing they have boobies and look so cute and sexy. I’m just sayin’.


Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.

After: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.

God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:

Yeah, while the majority of porn consumers are still going to be male I think the average young woman - assuming she’s not from a very conservative/religious background - will probably have seen at least some HC porn by the time she’s, say, in her early 20s. But then, I’m sure seeing a big dick on a screen is a very different proposition from seeing that same dick in the flesh, let alone touching it or having inside her. So even if a young woman has been *visually* exposed to Mandingo-sized cocks, that by no means implies she’d be able to handle one in real life.

I once saw a study that said women watch basically as much porn as men (couple of years a go, it was in a newspaper). But I’m sure there are studies that say otherwise, too. Since the internet, women can watch porn without anyone else knowing (and without paying money, which lowers the bar even more for them), they don’t have to ‘go out and get porn’, which most women with self respect probably wouldn’t do. I think a serious percentage of women at least below 40 have seen way more porn than we’d like to believe, at least in my very secular part of the world. I once asked a female friend what she was going to do for easter, she said she and a friend were going to stay home and watch gay porn, like it was the most natural thing in the world. I get a similar vibe from online forums where such things are discussed. There’s also that study where women and men were shown porn while things such as blood flow/heat to the sex organs were being monitored and there was no significant difference in activity. In other words, the whole ‘women aren’t visual’ thing might not be true.

Originally Posted by wibble
No, the writer says “The scientific community considers that any penis fitting within the mean + or - 2 standard deviations is perfectly normal….From the above data, it appears that more than 95% of the penises can be considered normal. And 2/3 of the penises are average (+ or - one standard deviation).” The idea that “95% of penises can be considered normal” doesn’t come from any “data” at all, it comes from “the scientific community“‘s definition of “normal”, i.e. within 2SD of the mean! It’s a circular argument and a completely arbitrary figure.

Thanks for the stats lesson but I’m well aware of the difference between mean and median. I’m not sure what you’re trying to illustrate by making up such an unlikely collection of penises. Dick length and girth might not be exactly normally distributed but they’re probably pretty close, just like height, weight etc. (c.f. the central limit theorem) However the tables shown on that website have figures that are so close to the likelihood intervals of the normal distribution - basically exactly the same but for rounding errors, probably - that clearly what they’ve done is calculated the mean and SD for a sample of dicks and then used those two numbers (for each measurement) to draw up a table of percentages for <1, 1-2 and >2 SDs from the mean, assuming length and girth are normally distributed.

My whole point was that penis size is a normal distribution.

Almost every single study out there has shown a normal distribution, with roughly the same mean and SD, for both Girth and Length.


Kdong Starting: 7.1 x 5.125 vol = 14.84 cu. in. Current: 7.375 BPEL 5.5 MSEG = 17.7 cu. in. GOAL --> 8.5 x 6.5 vol: 28.6 cu. in.

Took Time off, lost some gains-- started back 5/13/15

Can anyone tell me how they measure girth? Is it base girt, middle shaft girth or upper shaft girth? Is there some kind of standard when it comes to measuring girth? Some people tells me that you shold measure where your dick is fatest (for me thats the base and thats almost a 6”). But the girth of my upper shaft is only 5”, middle shaft its around 5.3”. So which one of these measurements should I use to compare myself to the average?

I think the more rigorous studies measure at two or three points and take the average - that would make the most sense, I think. Either that or the middle of the shaft.

I don’t know, but it makes sense if they are measuring for condoms that they would be measuring the parts of the shaft that the condom needs to ‘grip’ best, so a mid-shaft measurement makes most sense.

Most (but not all) guys have their largest girth at the base, but that is neither useful for condom size, nor is it ever a legitimate measurement, in my opinion, to state for girth if it is considerably larger than the rest of your shaft. If someone states that they have 6” girth, but the vast majority of their shaft is 5”, they are fooling themselves!


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

I just wanted to say that for all of the guys out there questioning the methodology for obtaining accurate measurements is out there if you look for it.

I can’t remember each site off the top of my head, but I remember being surprised at the lack of consistency in measuring. If you think these studies are mostly done mid-shaft, you’re wrong. Some are done at the top of the shaft of the penis, some are done at the base, some are done with the thickest point, some might even include the head in this.

The point I am trying to make is that for all of the people who want to make the 4.8 measurements in the collection of studies, or the 5 in other internet studies the mid-shaft, the base or whatever, it’s not that simple at all. I think people are picking mid-shaft arbitrarily because it seems like the mean of multiple averages if there is a uniform distribution—for me the mid-shaft is the smallest point on my dick so I’d prefer not haha, but given the studies I think that the only real way you measure girth is if you have average a few random places on the penis shaft and take the average, and then according to all studies done by actual physicians/medical team, the average will probably in the range of the study.

I wish I had known enough to measure my girth when I began PE. I was focused on adding length. Looking back, I guess I started off pretty thick, maybe 5.5” mseg. I had gotten married at 20 and hadn’t fucked more than 5 or 6 women before I got married. A few commented that I was big, but I really didn’t know much about average sizes, etc. This was in the late 70s before the proliferation of porn to vhs, then dvd and internet porn.

I came across the Tom Hubbard forum while I was still married and did some jelqing and manual stretches. I got the length I wanted and my dick also seemed thicker. My wife told me many times that my dick was bigger than usual. After my divorce in 2002, I got quite a lot of pussy. Every one of the women made unsolicited comments about my size. Guys who know me from when I posted more know that I never felt big, despite the unsolicited praise.

The point is that when I finally got around to measuring girth, I was over 6” mseg and almost 7” at the base. I learned the toilet paper roll test and noticed that most of the time I couldn’t get my cock in when it was flaccid. I think the huge comments result from the girth more than the length. Women are not used to a really fat cock or so it seems, even when they have had some good length previously. So the notion that really fat cocks are less common than really long cocks may have some substance, based on my personal experiences.


Measurements: 11/06: 7.75" bpel/ 6.25" mseg.

Doggman,

I agree. An unusually thick penis is probably rarer than the ostensible 10 inch penis. I think the thing with length is that only two or three guys out of a hundred can measure at a true 7NBP+, but if you’re a thinner guy at that length (As most are), girls will exaggerate 7-7.5 NBP out to 9 or 10 inches. That said, a true 9-10 inches NBP is probably such a rarity that I don’t even know that Mandingo is that big, but since girls aren’t aware of girth sizes they will be even more impressed with 6+ when maybe one guy they’ve been with has ever been that large. I am just curious, how big is your flaccod as you say you can’t fit it in a TP roll? That must be huge.

Very good points UT. I’m generally right at 5.5” mid-shaft flaccid girth, so the head usually gets in the roll and then it stalls out about half-way down the shaft.


Measurements: 11/06: 7.75" bpel/ 6.25" mseg.

Doggman, thanks for the response. I’ve always found the TP roll to be sort of weird. Even at around 5.25 with an austere measurement, it’s possible to get in a TP roll that is about 5.375 inches around. If you subtract the extra space, from the cardboard it should be right on in thickness, but it doesn’t always seem to work that way.but I think it takes about 5.5 to truly get shut down on the tp test.

Originally Posted by doggmann

The point is that when I finally got around to measuring girth, I was over 6” mseg and almost 7” at the base. I learned the toilet paper roll test and noticed that most of the time I couldn’t get my cock in when it was flaccid. I think the huge comments result from the girth more than the length. Women are not used to a really fat cock or so it seems, even when they have had some good length previously. So the notion that really fat cocks are less common than really long cocks may have some substance, based on my personal experiences.


I can not get into a TPR at 5” FG

My varies from 5” to 5” 1/2 Flaccid girth though .


[9/2010] 7*6 NBPEL/8*6 BPEL pic's Not PEing anymore. (as of Nov '10)

[12/2011] 7.37" NBPEL * 6.4"

[1/2013] Current stats:7.37 NBPEL * 6.5.

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:03 PM.