- Joined
- Mar 14, 2011
- Posts
- 1,324
- Media
- 11
- Likes
- 379
- Points
- 228
- Location
- Barrie, Ontario, Canada
- Sexuality
- 60% Straight, 40% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Many have probably seen this already, but I came across what I think is easily the most repeatable measurement methodology if you want a reliable baseline. I think anyone who is asking questions here about where they fall statistically should check this one first.
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jped/v83n5/en_v83n5a08.pdf
The sample size for 18-19 year olds (puberty complete) is about 160, so it's large enough to get a fair range. What I really like about it is that it goes in to specific detail about the one measurement methodology that doesn't have significant interobserver variation. That's the big problem with so many self-reported studies, or in comparing yourself to any study. I think a lot of people will use very forgiving measures on themselves (eg extreme bone-pressing) and then compare against a study that used a less-forgiving standard of measurement. People might compare against a study giving a 5.1" average and then conclude that they're huge, or compare against an internet study but round their own measurement down and conclude they're tiny.
This study finds that the only reliable, repeatable way to measure penis size is by RSLmax (real stretched length maximum.) They completely detail the methodology and even go as far as saying that different practitioners will get the same results and that just using a ruler is fine. The stretched-length is strongly correlated to erect length (in other words, if you have a long RSLmax then you almost certainly have a long erection.) This approach just stretches the penis as long as it will go, and presses the ruler down in to the fat pad, so the results are consistent.
The mean (ie average) which was 145mm +/- 14mm, or 5.7" with a standard deviation between 5.1" and 6.3", which is pretty much spot on with the highest averages and lowest averages studies have found.)
Most importantly it has percentile graphs so you can quickly see the percentile a measurement falls. 90th percentile is just under 170mm (6.7"), and 10th percentile is about 132mm (5.2").
What's really interesting is that the lower-percentiles are really closely grouped together, while the higher regions are pretty far apart. What that means is that even if you have a very low percentile, you'd only be half an inch shorter than the average. However, there's a wider range of big dicks out there. It really kind of points out how few noticeably small guys (free of medical abnormalities) there really are out there.
So go ahead, stretch that thing as far as it will go, push that ruler in, and know that you're doing it the right way and not just fooling yourself
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jped/v83n5/en_v83n5a08.pdf
The sample size for 18-19 year olds (puberty complete) is about 160, so it's large enough to get a fair range. What I really like about it is that it goes in to specific detail about the one measurement methodology that doesn't have significant interobserver variation. That's the big problem with so many self-reported studies, or in comparing yourself to any study. I think a lot of people will use very forgiving measures on themselves (eg extreme bone-pressing) and then compare against a study that used a less-forgiving standard of measurement. People might compare against a study giving a 5.1" average and then conclude that they're huge, or compare against an internet study but round their own measurement down and conclude they're tiny.
This study finds that the only reliable, repeatable way to measure penis size is by RSLmax (real stretched length maximum.) They completely detail the methodology and even go as far as saying that different practitioners will get the same results and that just using a ruler is fine. The stretched-length is strongly correlated to erect length (in other words, if you have a long RSLmax then you almost certainly have a long erection.) This approach just stretches the penis as long as it will go, and presses the ruler down in to the fat pad, so the results are consistent.
The mean (ie average) which was 145mm +/- 14mm, or 5.7" with a standard deviation between 5.1" and 6.3", which is pretty much spot on with the highest averages and lowest averages studies have found.)
Most importantly it has percentile graphs so you can quickly see the percentile a measurement falls. 90th percentile is just under 170mm (6.7"), and 10th percentile is about 132mm (5.2").
What's really interesting is that the lower-percentiles are really closely grouped together, while the higher regions are pretty far apart. What that means is that even if you have a very low percentile, you'd only be half an inch shorter than the average. However, there's a wider range of big dicks out there. It really kind of points out how few noticeably small guys (free of medical abnormalities) there really are out there.
So go ahead, stretch that thing as far as it will go, push that ruler in, and know that you're doing it the right way and not just fooling yourself