A Collection Of Penis Studies

[Knight]

http://www.measurection.com/forums/showfla...2235/Main/22234

Discuss

 

[Dr Rock]

well, it seems the koreans* sure do a lot of dick size studies.

* I'm assuming this is south korea, since any figures released by the north korean government would undoubtedly give an average length of at least 18".

 

[wispandex_bulge]

Studies are great but I alwasy take them with a grain of salt...after all there is a LOT of variation amon the studies...each one probably has a huge stddev...and obviously if you did statsitical analysis the studies have a huge stddev among them...

 

[SomeGuyOverThere]

Im suprised how many of them take average as just under 5", I thought 5" was on the low side of average.

(but I did skim that article, so I might have misinturpreted)

 

[jay_too]

Maybe I have not seen that many erect penes....oh OK, dicks; but I remember in high school showers one day that we discussed length of dicks. It was a consensus of some horny teens that the average length was probably 7.0 inches. We thought that the increase in dick size probably followed the increase in height of the population.

Before you ask, No, we did not whip out the tape every time we saw a hard one and say, "Dude, let me measure that Thang."

jay

 

[Freddie53]

Originally posted by Knight@May 4 2005, 05:53 PM
http://www.measurection.com/forums/showfla...2235/Main/22234

Discuss

[post=308016]Quoted post[/post]​

First an average also includes the bottom or in this case the shortest dicks and that is what brings down the average. At first I thought the numbers were off. Then they gave the last measurement which is ruler along top pressed into the fat pad. I didn't do any real figuring, but that alone seems to add over a 1/2 inch. Then one of the studies showed that men over 40 have penises that I would assume aren't as big as they once were. Erect penises are full of blood. I am sure cirrculation plays a role.

In the locker room, how many guys with less than three inches erect are going to expose themselves if they can help it? Not many. So the locker room averages often leave out those under four and certainly those under three inches in length.

But any study can't be totally accurate because it is based on volenteers. It would be wrong to pick certaIn emergency rooms and measure every male past 18. Even then we would have to have hospitals all across the world involved. That is not going to happen.

I noticed that the largest dick in several studies is not really that long. And I know I personally have seen dicks longer than 7 inches. And I didn't have to measure to know that. So studies may be skewed at the upper range and at the lower range.

All in all, still the same. A majority of adult penises are going to fall between 5 and 7 inches erect. Study after study seems to show us this. And really a difference between 5.24 and 5.32 and someone could say that one size is larger than the other. Well technically yes, but significantly, NO.

 

[blackwood]

Originally posted by jay_too@May 5 2005, 08:51 PM
Maybe I have not seen that many erect penes....oh OK, dicks; but I remember in high school showers one day that we discussed length of dicks. It was a consensus of some horny teens that the average length was probably 7.0 inches. We thought that the increase in dick size probably followed the increase in height of the population.

Before you ask, No, we did not whip out the tape every time we saw a hard one and say, "Dude, let me measure that Thang."

jay

[post=308353]Quoted post[/post]​

------------

Jay_too

Constant reference to "studies", "averages", little'uns, big'ens, huge as heck, matters not in the day to day sexual miilieu of a man and due to bias" results are erratic and confusing.

Got what you got, Will have what you''ll have. Way beyond our control. We need to know what to do with what we have to the best of "hot" sexual technique.

We should all enjoy, and basically I think we do. Awful lot of people in the world.


blackwood :grr:

 

[FonsworthBentleyIII]

Originally posted by blackwood+May 5 2005, 08:57 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(blackwood &#064; May 5 2005, 08:57 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-jay_too@May 5 2005, 08:51 PM
Maybe I have not seen that many erect penes....oh OK, dicks; but I remember in high school showers one day that we discussed length of dicks. It was a consensus of some horny teens that the average length was probably 7.0 inches. We thought that the increase in dick size probably followed the increase in height of the population.

Before you ask, No, we did not whip out the tape every time we saw a hard one and say, "Dude, let me measure that Thang."

jay

[post=308353]Quoted post[/post]​

------------

Jay_too

Constant reference to "studies", "averages", little&#39;uns, big&#39;ens, huge as heck, matters not in the day to day sexual miilieu of a man and due to bias" results are erratic and confusing.

Got what you got, Will have what you&#39;&#39;ll have. Way beyond our control. We need to know what to do with what we have to the best of "hot" sexual technique.

We should all enjoy, and basically I think we do. Awful lot of people in the world.


blackwood :grr:

[post=308422]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]


well said blackwood

 

[LuckyLuke]

Originally posted by SomeGuyOverThere@May 5 2005, 08:03 PM
Im suprised how many of them take average as just under 5", I thought 5" was on the low side of average.

(but I did skim that article, so I might have misinturpreted)

[post=308340]Quoted post[/post]​

I also thought 5" was on the low side of average, but being a gay male with loose morals, I can honestly say that 5" is pretty damn common. Just going by all the erect cocks I&#39;ve personally seen &#39;close-up&#39; and in person, I&#39;d say anything over 7 is pretty darn rare and 5 seems to be by far the most common. For what that&#39;s worth. Rule number one, guys seem to lie alot about size. I&#39;ve definitely witnessed guys with whom I&#39;ve had &#39;carnal knowledge&#39; brag to someone else that they had 7 or 8 or whatever - yet I knew them to be 5 or 6 in reality.

 

[Alley Blue]

Originally posted by LuckyLuke+May 6 2005, 10:50 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(LuckyLuke &#064; May 6 2005, 10:50 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-SomeGuyOverThere@May 5 2005, 08:03 PM
Im suprised how many of them take average as just under 5", I thought 5" was on the low side of average.

(but I did skim that article, so I might have misinturpreted)

[post=308340]Quoted post[/post]​

I also thought 5" was on the low side of average, but being a gay male with loose morals, I can honestly say that 5" is pretty damn common. Just going by all the erect cocks I&#39;ve personally seen &#39;close-up&#39; and in person, I&#39;d say anything over 7 is pretty darn rare and 5 seems to be by far the most common. For what that&#39;s worth. Rule number one, guys seem to lie alot about size. I&#39;ve definitely witnessed guys with whom I&#39;ve had &#39;carnal knowledge&#39; brag to someone else that they had 7 or 8 or whatever - yet I knew them to be 5 or 6 in reality.

[post=308715]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

That&#39;s pretty funny luke
I really thought that guys in general where pretty always 7 and over........I guess its really 7 and under :mellow:

 

[RawDog]

At the end of the original link was a link to another article. In that one it said...

"It&#39;s no advantage to have a long penis. Statistically speaking, men with long penises are more likely to be quite narrow and impotent," he says. Typically, long penises are not very wide. Therefore they&#39;re less rigid. And that&#39;s bad for sexual performance.

This is the first time I hear this bit of info. Anyone here think that&#39;s true? Frankly, I think it&#39;s BS, but in all honesty have never seen a cross referenced analysis done.

 

[Freddie53]

Originally posted by muttley@May 11 2005, 08:13 AM
At the end of the original link was a link to another article. In that one it said...

"It&#39;s no advantage to have a long penis. Statistically speaking, men with long penises are more likely to be quite narrow and impotent," he says. Typically, long penises are not very wide. Therefore they&#39;re less rigid. And that&#39;s bad for sexual performance.

This is the first time I hear this bit of info. Anyone here think that&#39;s true? Frankly, I think it&#39;s BS, but in all honesty have never seen a cross referenced analysis done.

[post=310038]Quoted post[/post]​

Since length is not important anymore and guys are sending their extra length dicks to the recycle bin, do you think I could exchange mine for one of them :evilgrin:

This is interesting. The first site listed the study by the University of California at San Francisco and the average for that study was 5.1 inches in length. Of course I like that study. I am just about 5.1 inches now. Was a little longer at one time.

This new study lists it as 5.5 inches in length.

This new research doesn&#39;t give much information about the validity and reliability of the survey. So to me it goes in the file with the rest of them. As in, OK so that is what that survey said, doesn&#39;t make it so, but then it may be on the money.

In real research, it is blind, meaning that the subjects aren&#39;t aware of what is being tested or what outcome is wanted. That is impossible with this. Surveys aren&#39;t really scientific research, but they are the closest we can come to.

I strongly question the quote above. I am no doctor, but I would think that the circulatory system and its relationship to the penis would determine hardness. After all the penis get hard from being engorged with blood. So a penis that can become completely submerged in blood is going to be stiffer than one that is not so engorged. I don&#39;t see how that relates to penis length. It does relate to age, health and arousal level though.

Again, as been stated over and over. Most men are going to fall between 5 to 7 inches in length. All the surveys will agree on that. It appears that girth is just as important as length to women. And hardness is going to depend on the individual guy.

When a guy is aroused and ready to go, I don&#39;t think surveys are on his mind.

 

[ArcanuS]

I agree with lucky Luke... 7&#39;&#39; or more is pretty rare in a gay world... I can tell it for sure.... Studies? Well... Only the nonnational and nongeomaped studies are relevant on the general level... all of other are in a common level... this is a second one i think.

 

[KinkGuy]

Originally posted by ArcanuS@May 11 2005, 06:17 PM
7&#39;&#39; or more is pretty rare in a gay world...

[post=310254]Quoted post[/post]​

No more or less rare than the general population.

 

[ArcanuS]

Yep I know &#39;cose I made some heteros guys into gay ppl........ And, I promise that I will do that again ....... But SOME is not relevant as 100-200......Well, I hope that i&#39;ll aproach my goal.....hahahha...joke

 

[Alley Blue]

Originally posted by ArcanuS@May 12 2005, 12:35 AM
Yep I know &#39;cose I made some heteros guys into gay ppl........ And, I promise that I will do that again ....... But SOME is not relevant as 100-200......Well, I hope that i&#39;ll aproach my goal.....hahahha...joke

[post=310259]Quoted post[/post]​

ArcanuS, do you model?........you hot..... :evilgrin:

 

[ArcanuS]

Nope, but I had invitiations to that hob......Sincerly (written correctly?), I do not like a ppl who are models.... Why?...Well, I had several oportunities to talk (or even more) with them, and, for my taste, they are.....well......they are almost crazy (in negative context).....

 

[cebe]

Some reflections on statistical studies :

Statistical values are good to find a mean of a population, but the more you deviate from that mean, the less it is significant. Especially extremes are not reliable. If I refer to those studies, I simply not exist .
Take another area : look in your neighbour, or in your whole town, and take a sample of 1000 persons. Chances are that the heaviest one will be under 150kg (330lb), and the statistical mean 75 (165lb). This last figure is correct, but can one say the maximum possible weight for a human is 150kg? No, for sure, and I can say I&#39;ve seen a women over 300kg (660lb) (exactly 732lb in fact). This demonstrates, even if statistical studies are useful and reliable to find a mean in a population, they are totally unable to give a "possible" maximum.

So take statistics for what they are and don&#39;t try to extrapolate impossible deductions
Hi all