Now: (August 20 2007) 6.6" BPEL x 4.81" EG. Half way towards my goal! | Current Stats
Short term goal: (3-4 months) 6.8" BPEL, 5.0" EG.. Long term goal (1+ yr): 7.5" BPEL, 5.5" EG.
The numbers on the left are the number of members who fall into each size category. Almost 60 members were at the average of just over 6 inches when the data were analyzed. Each bar represents a group of individuals at a given size (bottom number) before and after their course of PE (however long that might have taken).
Ahh, it’s the days.
To me, this graph says that everybody had exactly the same gains. The sizes globally move up. Is that right or wrong?
EDIT: I just realised this graph doesn’t relate gains. Both bar graphs are different shapes.. Ahhh I’m confused.
So why is average percieved as small? What makes our minds see it as such and some women think of it as small?
beenthere, nobody really wants “average.” Think about it…average looks, average height, average income, average intelligence….average penis. Call me cynical, but I think the whole concept of “average” is merely a consolation to those who fall below the “good” or “excellent” ranges (in whatever area we’re discussing). Asshole outlook? Perhaps - but also realistic, I think.
Originally Posted by beenthere
Looking back I know that when I was 6.25 bp (about 5.75 nbp)x 4.75 girth base, 4.5 girth mid, (and probably about 4.25 girth shaft top underneath the head) I had a gf make a small type remark even though she didn’t mean anything negative towards me when she said it, and another gf called me pencil dick during an argument. My visable dick was 5.75 nbp x 4.50 (girth measurements averaged together).
This underscores the point - even your girth average was barely below the Kinsey average (and remember, the Kinsey procedure used girth at its greatest point, so your 4.75 base was barely below the 4.9 or so “average”). Does having 0.15” less girth make you a “pencil dick”?
Originally Posted by beenthere
According to what we know from charts, that falls within average range. I think the reason why an average size dick can be percieved as small is a result of when either girth or length or both barely make it into the average range.
That is good example of where volume comes in. Women may not know volume numbers, hell I don’t even know volume numbers, but it seems to me that they percieve volume. That is why I was small to them, and quite possibly to others. My girth pulled my volume down….
Yeah, I’ve rattled about this for a while. When a woman speaks of an ex being “big,” almost always she’s intuitively referring to his “volume” (without even realizing this concept, of course). When her current beau hears this, he starts thinking “length,” etc. As we all know, a guy can be 1 1/2” - even 2” - shorter than another guy, yet still have a “bigger” dick. With that much of a length discrepancy, the woman would probably notice that the other guy was “longer,” but she’ll still be thinking about how the hard fatty felt inside her.
And, if she were comparing the 2 to one of her gal pals, I’d bet she’d describe the 6 x 6 guy as having a “bigger” dick than the 7.5 x 5 fellow (and he would, by almost 2 1/4 cubic inches).
Last edited by wadzilla : 05-28-2007 at .
In the poll forum I found and bumped a volume chart that Johan began years back. It only had about 80+ votes, and since the time I bumped it the other day it has increased to 90+ votes. A curve is showing, but the percentages don’t appear stable and more votes are needed. The length and girth charts have 1000s of votes but the volume chart is struggling for votes, even though, in my opinion now, it’s a more practical chart.