funone_X: Doesn't it seem like cocks are generally getting bigger as the years go on, just like there are alot more taller guys these days than in the yrs past. just look at stats on sports teams for instance, there are alot more guys over 6'5 than in the past and seems to me like alot more cocks over 9" these days. and whats with the young guys gettin so long already ,just barely startin puburty and some of them are 8-9" . i remember growin up and 9" seemed like so huge and very few had 9" , now ,its still considered big, but it seems more widespread now. and i know alot of it is because we never had the lpsg or web back then to expose our sizes, but still, anyone else agree that cocks are getting generally bigger through the yrs.?
Krowax: Surveys show that the avarage dick size is the same as it was 15 (or more) years ago. So no.
Donk: The only thing that's getting bigger are guys' imaginations.
I think the internet has encouraged more guys to claim 9" or more. I first got on AOL almost 10 years ago and discovered that it was the one place where you could talk freely with anonymous strangers about penis size. Even back then, many guys already were obviously measuring in "AOL inches". But most claimed only 8 inches. When I reported my honest 11", it was usually viewed as an outrageous lie. More recently, 9" seems to be the bare minimum for internet liars and there are an amazing number of internet penises that dwarf my real one. I think it's just a matter of competitive exaggeration--when everyone's at least 8", it no longer seems big, so they have to make their lies bigger to come out ahead.
Since LPSG came along to give me an outlet for discussing this topic, I very rarely do it on AOL anymore. I think most of the regular posters here are honest about their size and I have encountered more guys here in my actual size range than I ever expected to. But that doesn't mean there are more large penises in existence, just that this forum gives us a place to gather that never existed before.
I think the internet has encouraged more guys to claim 9" or more. I first got on AOL almost 10 years ago and discovered that it was the one place where you could talk freely with anonymous strangers about penis size. Even back then, many guys already were obviously measuring in "AOL inches". But most claimed only 8 inches. When I reported my honest 11", it was usually viewed as an outrageous lie. More recently, 9" seems to be the bare minimum for internet liars and there are an amazing number of internet penises that dwarf my real one. I think it's just a matter of competitive exaggeration--when everyone's at least 8", it no longer seems big, so they have to make their lies bigger to come out ahead.
Since LPSG came along to give me an outlet for discussing this topic, I very rarely do it on AOL anymore. I think most of the regular posters here are honest about their size and I have encountered more guys here in my actual size range than I ever expected to. But that doesn't mean there are more large penises in existence, just that this forum gives us a place to gather that never existed before.
Valkyrie: Yep - agree with Donk - most of the time it's imagination talking.
10-12" is huge, 9" is truly big, 8" is well above average, 7" is in the very upper ranges of average, between 5-6" is average (depending on what survey you trust), under 5" you're getting into smaller than average. There are of course also the exceptions - those above 12" - but those are rare, and quite often fabricated measurements. Now there _are_ 12" and above that I quite honestly believe are true - including some members of this group. But without some sort of photo proof to back that size up, I'm kind of leary...
/Val
10-12" is huge, 9" is truly big, 8" is well above average, 7" is in the very upper ranges of average, between 5-6" is average (depending on what survey you trust), under 5" you're getting into smaller than average. There are of course also the exceptions - those above 12" - but those are rare, and quite often fabricated measurements. Now there _are_ 12" and above that I quite honestly believe are true - including some members of this group. But without some sort of photo proof to back that size up, I'm kind of leary...
/Val
Krowax: I reckon anything over 8.5 is huge (depends on the girth too aswell. 8.5x5 isn't huge imo, but 7x7 is etc.). But I'm a straight guy, maybe I shouldn't say anything 
.
.Ineligible: I agree with Krowax, though I'd consider 8" pretty huge in reality. Donk is right, people are lying more outrageously than they used to, in efforts to keep up. It must send a very discouraging message to the people who are honest.
It is plausible that people are developing a bit sooner than they used to, so young guys appear to be bigger; but most will stop growing sooner. But the young guys are under pressure to fib, too.
Of course, somewhere like here there won't be 'typical' values, anyway, even from those who are honest (which I like to think is the majority).
It is plausible that people are developing a bit sooner than they used to, so young guys appear to be bigger; but most will stop growing sooner. But the young guys are under pressure to fib, too.
Of course, somewhere like here there won't be 'typical' values, anyway, even from those who are honest (which I like to think is the majority).
Solis24: With the facilitation of information exchange through internet, chat, and just a general relaxing of people's attitude towards sex, it would be logical that you would hear about larger penises more often. You're in contact with many more sources of information and are hence more susceptible to hear/read something about it so it would be easy to think that there's more. Much in the same way, because more and more gay guys are coming out, some people tend to think that there are many more gays now than some 50 years ago but maybe it's just because it's less of a big deal now than it used to be so you hear more about it.
On a non-sexual note, some people even claim that the end of the world is near just because "more and more disasters are occuring". Are there really more or have the media gotten a lot more efficient at relaying information, causing us to be aware of more disasters than we normally would? I choose the latter...
Back to the original topic, there is of course the hypothesis that all the hormone-laden food we eat has affected us in a way, the younger generation more visibly so. A lot of the meat we eat in North America has been boosted with hormones to make the animals grow more meat, just think of chicken breasts. These hormones aren't necessarily broken down in the cooking process and may affect our bodies as a consequence, which could be a reason as to why teens seem to physically mature more quickly than a few decades ago. While I'm still skeptical about this one, I can't really dismiss it either.
Ok, bottom line, I think I can think, but I don't know for sure
On a non-sexual note, some people even claim that the end of the world is near just because "more and more disasters are occuring". Are there really more or have the media gotten a lot more efficient at relaying information, causing us to be aware of more disasters than we normally would? I choose the latter...
Back to the original topic, there is of course the hypothesis that all the hormone-laden food we eat has affected us in a way, the younger generation more visibly so. A lot of the meat we eat in North America has been boosted with hormones to make the animals grow more meat, just think of chicken breasts. These hormones aren't necessarily broken down in the cooking process and may affect our bodies as a consequence, which could be a reason as to why teens seem to physically mature more quickly than a few decades ago. While I'm still skeptical about this one, I can't really dismiss it either.
Ok, bottom line, I think I can think, but I don't know for sure
Donk: [quote author=Solis25 link=board=meetgreet;num=1064920944;start=0#6 date=10/01/03 at 06:10:33]While I'm still skeptical about this one, I can't really dismiss it either. [/quote]
Well, I can. Here's why: the only scientific evidence available directly contradicts it. If anything, it indicates the opposite.
The 50+ year old Kinsey study found an average length of just over 6 inches and, for years, that was conventional wisdom. (Yes, I know that study is flawed. But do you know of a better one from 50 years ago?) More recent studies put the average at below 5.5".
If anything, according to these studies, the average penis is getting smaller. More likely, the average human penis has stayed the same size over the last 50 years and the newer studies only prove that Kinsey's was flawed.
Well, I can. Here's why: the only scientific evidence available directly contradicts it. If anything, it indicates the opposite.
The 50+ year old Kinsey study found an average length of just over 6 inches and, for years, that was conventional wisdom. (Yes, I know that study is flawed. But do you know of a better one from 50 years ago?) More recent studies put the average at below 5.5".
If anything, according to these studies, the average penis is getting smaller. More likely, the average human penis has stayed the same size over the last 50 years and the newer studies only prove that Kinsey's was flawed.
[quote author=Donk link=board=meetgreet;num=1064920944;start=0#7 date=10/01/03 at 20:17:54]
If anything, according to these studies, the average penis is getting smaller. More likely, the average human penis has stayed the same size over the last 50 years and the newer studies only prove that Kinsey's was flawed.[/quote]
Despite the flaws in the Kinsey protocol, there is another possible reason for the apparent loss of 0.5 inches or so. Health authorities are sounding the warning that Americans are becoming heavier, moving toward obesity. It would seem that a little extra fat on an average man could cause a loss of length of this magnitude.
If anything, according to these studies, the average penis is getting smaller. More likely, the average human penis has stayed the same size over the last 50 years and the newer studies only prove that Kinsey's was flawed.[/quote]
Despite the flaws in the Kinsey protocol, there is another possible reason for the apparent loss of 0.5 inches or so. Health authorities are sounding the warning that Americans are becoming heavier, moving toward obesity. It would seem that a little extra fat on an average man could cause a loss of length of this magnitude.
funone_X: thanks for all your input everyone , I tend to believe the internet does not always have honest answers, cuz most of the the time you never see these people in person anway .I think most on this board are being pretty honest, minus a few maybe.
Another thing i was thinkin and this is a little off the subject but related, with penis enlargement advancing , not to the point of being completly safe , surgically, but at least in LA here you see adds about it all the time,saying these procedures are done all the time. I wonder how many guys really do get a substantial enlargement. I know most of you here on lpsg are pretty natural, well almost everyone,(guy that is up to 17" with 3 surguries. lol, enough said
Another thing i was thinkin and this is a little off the subject but related, with penis enlargement advancing , not to the point of being completly safe , surgically, but at least in LA here you see adds about it all the time,saying these procedures are done all the time. I wonder how many guys really do get a substantial enlargement. I know most of you here on lpsg are pretty natural, well almost everyone,(guy that is up to 17" with 3 surguries. lol, enough said
Krowax: [quote author=ericbear link=board=meetgreet;num=1064920944;start=0#8 date=10/01/03 at 23:26:32]
Despite the flaws in the Kinsey protocol, there is another possible reason for the apparent loss of 0.5 inches or so. Health authorities are sounding the warning that Americans are becoming heavier, moving toward obesity. It would seem that a little extra fat on an average man could cause a loss of length of this magnitude. [/quote]
No, since all "serious" surveys use BONEPRESSING as the method of measuring. That way you push through the fat to the pubic bone to make sure that the fat doesn't do any difference. If the avarage bone pressed measurement is 6", then the measurement from the skin at the base (without pressing in) is about 5-5.5 on avarage.
Despite the flaws in the Kinsey protocol, there is another possible reason for the apparent loss of 0.5 inches or so. Health authorities are sounding the warning that Americans are becoming heavier, moving toward obesity. It would seem that a little extra fat on an average man could cause a loss of length of this magnitude. [/quote]
No, since all "serious" surveys use BONEPRESSING as the method of measuring. That way you push through the fat to the pubic bone to make sure that the fat doesn't do any difference. If the avarage bone pressed measurement is 6", then the measurement from the skin at the base (without pressing in) is about 5-5.5 on avarage.
Ineligible: Actually I don't think I've seen any serious surveys that used bonepressing as their principal measurement, though I have seen one that measured the fat-pad depth as an extra. There are several that I haven't seen the original publications of, though.
Krowax: Hmm, I've seen a couple of swedish surveys that used bonepressing, and ended up at 6". Also www.sizessurvey.com is bonepressed. Although the participants measure themselves, so the _real_ avarage probably is like.. 0.3" shorter or so (since people have a way of rounding decimals up, 6.35 becomes 6.4 etc).
Other than that, most other surveys I've read have been using bonepressed measurements.
Other than that, most other surveys I've read have been using bonepressed measurements.
Similar threads
