Are attitudes to size changing?

LGX

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Posts
625
Media
0
Likes
236
Points
263
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
If anything, that which is deemed an acceptable comment in the general media has been expanded to include digs based on size, so I wouldn't say attitudes have changed in a positive way in general.

What may have changed is the education of the individual who has learned the falsity of stereotyping and the truth about female preferences, i.e., that women are not nearly as impressed with big dicks as men are.

What I have noticed about discussions, whether here or on other forums, is the tendency to categorize everything into one of two sizes--big or small, with anything not considered big to be considered small, when in truth "average" covers probably 70% of all men, with average coming in at 5-6 inches. Average is neither big nor small. It is "average."

Whatever is not large is denigrated as small. This is probably just a continuation of the male obsession with penis-power, but for those of us who have been around the block, it is tiresome, if we give it any thought.

My male self-esteem in the sex department is based on my ability to give sexual pleasure to my wife. My dick is big enough to do the job, so that ends my concerns in the size department. Is it a humongous, throbbing baton of man-meat so large that she gasps when she sees it? Is it a monster cock? Uh, no. It's a handy and serviceable 6X6. As one of many tools in my arsenal of creativity it performs its function.

Instead of obsessing about my body I focus on what she wants/needs at the moment and what I can do to make it happen.
The problem I see too, is that 'average' nowadays has too big of a range. Most studies say the average is between 5'' and 7''. I hate the way that's written. That's a big range, so big really only starts pretty much @ 8''. When it comes to statistical analysis, you have to get teh average and anything above that is big and below that is 'small'. Just a pet peeve.
 
7

720800

Guest
My first guess, pussyfying of mankind.

We are in a society in western europe at least where the least valued person should be made to feel welcome sometimes to expense of the most valued member.


For example, climbing trees in school is no longer possible because the weaker children might hurt themselves or even worse die.

No feelings can ever be hurt, emotional or physical and I believe that that is what produces pussies, just not the right kind.

So talking about big things being better might make the people with no so big things feel insecure.

His argument is not wrong it is just poorly communicated and out of context. Current studies support the way in which today's youth is handled has produced a nation of narcissists. Merit is constantly given to underachievement and combined with unrealistic goal setting that sets children up for failure; depression is found resultant to this once they enter adulthood and reality sets in.

With that being said, society has changed in their overall understanding and recognition of many social and psychological issues. Today it is greatly abused and used as a crutch by many, but mental illnesses are finally becoming properly diagnosed and treated so it makes sense that personal views are receiving greater attention as well. There is also a great fear that personal opinion offends people and you always see this on this news, there's a daily new report on who's been offended or sued for self expression. I was scouted for lacrosse and played football and wrestling as well and ultimately wrestled in college for a bit and personally saw growing up parents who were terrible to their kids, verbally abused and had a friend who was on the wrestling team who was physically abused by his father.

I also do think sexuality is greatly dismissed in the US as I am a lover of foreign films. Their values on sexuality is much more open than ours in the United States, some of the most well done movies by director Gaspar Noe (Irreversible, Enter the Void) feature great sexuality and this seems to offend less now. Recently the film "120 Days of Sodom", made back in 1950's I think and based on the novel of the 1800's, lost its global ban for its graphic portrayal of violence and sexuality after many such as Martin Scorsese recognized it for its artistic value.

Bear with me I know this is a long answer, but I like to be thorough. The internet has also be the most effective channel for communication that does not discriminate, look at how silly the premise of this website is haha. So I believe that greater expression, understanding, and communication are the causal factors of your outgrowth of your generation ILIW to my generation (early 20's) of "pussies" haha.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

D_Aberchirder_Crustinuts

Account Disabled
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Posts
619
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
53
I was alive in the 80s and 90s and I don't recall the "common media" saying that size was everything. Examples?

ILIW, I'm with srdude on it. Are you over 40 (just wondering, and no offense)?

I would say nineties is probably where it got rolling, but didn't get really bad until Y2K (along with reality TV, Walmart's Taylor Swift, materialistic thug pop and all that other doo doo).

Take Care
 

bobg4400

Loved Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Posts
2,718
Media
1
Likes
521
Points
258
Location
UK
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
ILIW? What does that mean?
What's with the green arrows Crunch?

Oh and yeah my generation is totally becoming more depressed/set up for failure. We're beomcing more self-orientated too what with people constantly updating facebook/twitter about what meal they just ate or how they took the biggest shit ever. I wouldn't say narcissitic since that implies a level of manipulation an deindividualizing of everyone else which most people don't do.
They're just more vain.
 
Last edited:
7

720800

Guest
Hahaha I swear I have seen people with posts on Facebook about that...Twitter I just use for updates of art releases otherwise I'd blow my fuckin brains out! Narcissism is defined by at least 5 of the 9 characteristics for true classification. The main thing about narcissists is not necessarily manipulation nor physical separation, it's more of an issue concerning greater self-worth and self-entitlement above the world around you whether you deserve it or not. Here is the classification from the American Psychiatric Association DSM:
Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder


A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
(3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
(4) requires excessive admiration

(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
 

bobg4400

Loved Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Posts
2,718
Media
1
Likes
521
Points
258
Location
UK
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Hahaha I swear I have seen people with posts on Facebook about that...Twitter I just use for updates of art releases otherwise I'd blow my fuckin brains out! Narcissism is defined by at least 5 of the 9 characteristics for true classification. The main thing about narcissists is not necessarily manipulation nor physical separation, it's more of an issue concerning greater self-worth and self-entitlement above the world around you whether you deserve it or not. Here is the classification from the American Psychiatric Association DSM:
Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder


A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
(3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
(4) requires excessive admiration
(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes


Yaaaayyy!!! 9/9 Do I get an award? :biggrin1:


I actually got numbers 2,5 and 8 but only the first bit of 8.

Guess I'm borderline or something :rolleyes:
 

Pdawg

Just Browsing
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Posts
27
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
86
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
My first guess, pussyfying of mankind.

We are in a society in western europe at least where the least valued person should be made to feel welcome sometimes to expense of the most valued member.


For example, climbing trees in school is no longer possible because the weaker children might hurt themselves or even worse die.

No feelings can ever be hurt, emotional or physical and I believe that that is what produces pussies, just not the right kind.

So talking about big things being better might make the people with no so big things feel insecure.

Well said! Agree!!!
 
7

720800

Guest
Haha that's because you didn't take Dr. Drew's official test! I got pretty close to a 100% and I was classified as an extreme case with a picture of Heidi Fleiss along with the severity of my "problem" haha.

Everyone has a bits and pieces of every disorder, but that makes you normal. It's just when you cover all areas of a psychological of personality disorder that means you need help...or you may find yourself on the side of the New Jersey Turnpike testing positive for cocaine with an underage Filipino hooker...or your just Lawrence Taylor haha
 

dirkjesje

Loved Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Posts
1,407
Media
26
Likes
674
Points
258
Location
belgium
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
I was alive in the 80s and 90s and I don't recall the "common media" saying that size was everything. Examples?
Well I didn t noticed it either. I think it's just inverse.

Even in the seventies, in my college time, there was only Playboy, not Playgirl. We only saw limp dicks when showering.
We had no clue what average was, and no-one around me gave a shit about that.

Porn was almost non-existant, more sex movies, like Tiroler sex with a lot of humour, till the late 80's.
The first XXX-movie that I saw was Deep Throat, and the accent was not the size of the dick, but still humour.
Then with the introduction of internet mid 90's, you could freely download some pics, but had to pay for 1-minute movies, and wait several minutes to download it.
End 90's that changed, and more and more the accent became bigger is better. And... the popups came with penis enlargements. In female glossy magazines, they openly discussed the best lovers size.
Suddenly the size of a penis became important.

The pills/herbal supplements were using fake studies to alter the average. Sometimes so ridiculous that they used a "porn average".
That's the best way to have a broad market of "small dicks". Instead of 1 on 6; now 5 on 6 were "small". Include some fake interviews of woman and insecure young people today will try it.

On several fora, you see young-twentiers (male/female) claiming just below porn-sizes. They give a socially expected answer.
And yes, size isn't everything, but no one wants to be small in a world of big dicks.
 

D_Dick_S_Lapp

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Posts
934
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
51
As a youngster in the 80s and 90s, I remember that size was everything. common media would say as such, and in common society size was prized.

But now, it seems even in common media, people are saying that size is not everything. It is true, it's not, since not every woman likes a big cock (granted).

What is the cause of this change? is it because we are more open about sex, and people are just saying what they think more? Or are we now better educated about sex, and have realised that not everybody necessarily does give a shit about size?

I think knowledge coupled with different kinds of women's rights movements coupled with technology coupled with the use of that technology is whats changing the idea of size.

Men finding out that women do enjoy their size is a welcome change but that i think was only allowed to happen once respect for women became (or came close to) ok.

Then with technology people found out that smaller in most cases actually could mean better.

An where else could a guy hear from other women that being big really isn't all that important? Technology mixed with intelligent and caring individuals that is. You'll have your trolls here and there.
 

patronpk

Experimental Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Posts
236
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
103
Location
Washington state
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
On the 'Pat & Sam' productions, there is a young man by name of Dylan..talks about his lack of 'size', etc. Very hot, cute young guy with no pretentions...fun to watch & that smaller weiner squirts a sizable load ! We need more like him on videos !
 

Peacemusic

Cherished Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Posts
158
Media
0
Likes
362
Points
133
Sexuality
No Response
The size issue is and always a creation of the porn industry and eroticism in general. The idea is to create a fantasy to get everybody off. Though it was done differently the concept dates back to the cave dwellings. The idea was that larger equalled more potency and therefore more masculine or manly.

The reality is that the porn industry can with correct camera angles make an average sized guy look far larger than he really is.

The other thing that they do to create the fantasy is to look for physically small people in perfect proportion with larger than average genitalia. The same is true for both male and females.

Having been around a few in person, I can tell you that Jeff Stryker is no more than about 5'5" tall. I can tell you that Al Parker was about 5'6" tall, Melchor Diaz was probably no more than 5'4". "Lance" was about 5'5" tall and the list goes on.

The only ones of the older guard of above average height were Ed Wiley and Steve York. Ed was about 6" even, as was York. Ed truly was one who did qualify as Monster Cock. York was not far behind.
Did You Meet Melchor Diaz?