I appreciate the good thinking going on here. However, I want to be clear about my thoughts and my intent. In wondering whether or not average sizes are larger than typically reported, even in scientific studies, I was not necessarily implying that the studies lie or that the studies are somehow flawed. I was just wondering what other people thought based on their own experiences and their own thinking about the issue. I found it interesting that another poster almost posted the same topic the same day. My own experience seems to be in conflict with what the "experts say" and so I'm just trying to figure it out. For instance, I wonder if penis sizes vary much more than the "average" statistics imply. Just to make the point - you can come up with an average of 6 inches by having 40 guys of 4 inches and 40 guys of 8 inches and 20 guys of 6 inches. In this case, the 6 inch guy could say he was "average" when in actuality he would be the unusual one. I know there are some studies that show bar graphs that show numbers of people at each 1/4 inch increment, but I'm not sure the official scientific studies show that - I see that more at more unofficial websites.
I'm not obsessing about this, but what the heck, it seems like the appropriate place to "wonder" about it.
I'll just make one more comment and step out since I haven't seen many erect penises in my day. As for scientific studies showing those types of bar graphs, the only one that I know does so is the lifestyles report, which makes it clear that the vast majority of people fall into a relatively tight range around their reported average. If you want, I can try to find that display, but I think a link to it is on lpsg somewhere.
Also, as for the validity of scientific studies, I will say that my exposure to flaccid penises (showers mostly) suggests that the average flaccid penis falls into the range given by most studies. I figure if they are right on that, they're probably pretty close to right on the erect length.
There is the potential that the studies are biased downward by less than full erections (it would likely be hard to get completely hard in a clinical setting and very few studies use erection inducing drugs). So that might account for .25-.5 inches.
Finally, the low 5 inch figures reported typically come from reports that do not use bone-pressing as the standard (as is the custom on lpsg and when most men measure). There was one study that took into account both visibly erect length and fat pad depth to arrive at an average of 6.2 (5.1 in visible erect length on average and 1.1 in fat pad depth on average). Add in a quarter inch for a stronger erection and you might be looking at something closer to 6.5, which isn't that far off from the 7 you have in your head.
I'll hand this thread over to the straight women and gay men who are much more likely to have seen an adequate sample of fully erect penises, but I've now thrown in more than my two cents, I guess.
