Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Healthy Penis' started by Lordpendragon, Dec 27, 2005.
They're tiny - hence the compensatory appetite for weapons
Frenchmen are the largest?
I find it hard to believe that there would be such a big difference between countries such as France, Spain, Germany, and Italy, for instance.
One detail that is apt to be overlooked when reading this is that this comes from gathering the results of different studies published in different journals over different countries. It may well be that different studies used different recruitment methods (this plays a big role; if you advertise for a penis measurement study beforehand, guys with short dicks will tend to be under-represented as they will be reluctant to show up) and measurement methods (self-measurement sent through Internet or actual measurement by a qualified nurse/doctor; self-measurements are notoriously inaccurate due to size exaggeration, or measuring from a different starting point). This, in itself, would be enough to explain why we see such big differences between countries.
For such a study to be valid from a scientific point of view, one would have to make sure that the same recruitment and measurement methods were used everywhere. I'm not at all convinced that this was the case here.
Koreans got the short end of the stick on that one!
This was obviously funded by the French Govt Tourist Dept.
What a load of spam. When you click on links in that article, it takes you to a penis enlargement site. Couple that with the fact that some countries don't even have flaccid sizes reported and that makes me know that the report is bogus.
Well it's published on the internet... so I guess it must be true
A large heap of shit IMHO.
This was looked into by good ol' Kinsley, IIRC he found that there were only minor differences between races, but the average penis size of 5.5-6" is basically across the board.
Looks like it was made up based purely on racial predjudices. And from a very European point of view too.
well another big thing i can see with this site is that the studies were done with a japanese source as the primary source. meaning, were all of the "U.S. statistics" people living abroad in another country? If so, the population of U.S. data might be very small, in comparison for some of the other asian countries where the data population might be much larger, so its hard to say. I also think there shouldn't be much of a difference between european countries, especially ones that border, but then again, this looks a lot like someone got bored and published something just so people would read it, with no merit base whatsoever.
Come off it gentlemen!
It is an advertisement for penis enlargement..............just a bunch of BS........
the biggest BS of it all is the size they put greek men to be..........now give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The more "studies" I read, the more eagerly I return to Kinsey. He had a decent sample size and the study was conducted before the mass hysteria hit about penis size, so I feel the men were more likely to be honest.
i see what you mean ... but i think that's impossible - in more ways than one.
because they're actually morally bankrupt.
i quite agree. those women, i would imagine, would not be "morally bankrupt."
Interesting point about the lovely Dr. Kinsey - I suppose the fact that they were happy to do self measurement implies that it didn't occur to them that people would exaggerate.
I also wondered about the enlargement company thing - but if you were selling enlargement wouldn't you want to say that most other men are much bigger than you?
I guess that in Europe, most countries retain around 90% stereotypical ethnicity - I don't know what the etnic mix is in the US, but from an outsiders perspective, Jesse Jackson and George Bush are equally American - what I mean is that we don't have a racial stereotype for Americans, whereas we would for Greeks in Greece.
I did see a European survey in which the Poles measured top - I guess that's where they got the name for their country from then.
Not to mention, an interview with someone behind closed doors where no records were kept of names and such (before research ethics kicked in and names and personal info are kept), people were more apt to be honest: nobody knew that you were the 4 incher, if that were the case. You were just a piece of data.
Good point, but maybe instead of shaming their potential clientel, their aim was to make a larger group of people feel run-of-the-mill.. lower the average and more people are at least "average"... then you pipe in the "you should make sure you're better equipped than these guys" to grab a bigger client base.
For some reason, it's bad business to insult the size of potential clientel's packages.
I mentioned this under another subject heading, but I thought any survey is prone to ending up with slightly inaccurate data because guys' degree of erection varies, depending on how stimulated or aroused they are. If this is correct, then I would think many surveys are understating the full potential length of the people who are being measured.
As a woman, I can't duplicate the physiology of a male, but I know if I'm in the mood that feeling can decline rather quickly if I suddenly become embarrassed or distracted, or certainly have to contend with a researcher who approaches me, hands me a ruler and says, please measure yourself with this. But then I guess the problem with measurements that do take place totally in private, where no one else is around or there are no distractions, is prone to the test taker not measuring himself properly.
So I guess it comes down to who knows what's truly accurate or not!?