Missed that. But 1200 is not nearly enough of a sample size, and it doesn't change the fact it's still not from a medical study.
Black Guys Bigger Dick Theories
- Thread starter fournineteenfiftynine
- Start date
Missed that. But 1200 is not nearly enough of a sample size, and it doesn't change the fact it's still not from a medical study.
ConanTheBarber
Legendary Member
1200 is perfectly fine as a simple size, and it has the rigour of a medical study and was even carried out by the Indian Council of Medical Research, a far cry from your initial claim that this was just self-reported nonsense.
Here's a larger quote:
The two-year study was carried out by the Indian Council of Medical Research.
Over 1,200 volunteers from the length and breadth of the country had their penises measured precisely, down to the last millimetre.
The scientists even checked their sample was representative of India as a whole in terms of class, religion and urban and rural dwellers.
Over 1,200 volunteers from the length and breadth of the country had their penises measured precisely, down to the last millimetre.
The scientists even checked their sample was representative of India as a whole in terms of class, religion and urban and rural dwellers.
But it's still not in depth. 1200 is like I said, far from a sufficient number to solidly conclude anything. And who knows about the backgrounds of all the participants. It still could easily be skewed and doesn't conclude anything from solidified standpoint.
Why are people so desperate to believe this stuff? If you ask any doctor, all they'll ever tell you is there is no proper scientific evidence to support any differences. If you want to solidly convince people, then link a medical journal that shows statistically significant differences. If there are any significant differences, these medical studies shouldn't be very difficult to find. Yet I still see nothing other than surveys of about 1000 or less people based around condom size.
andrew999999999
Cherished Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2010
- Posts
- 221
- Media
- 111
- Likes
- 391
- Points
- 158
- Location
- Manchester (England)
- Sexuality
- 69% Straight, 31% Gay
- Gender
- Male
In the 18th/19th centuary, Europeans demonised black men so that the slave trade could prosper. One of the ways they did this, was to say they had big dicks, as they were considered beastly by white men. Just like the ancient Romans and Greeks.
Then again, maybe that's bollocks too.
There are lots of different studies that clearly show that there is no difference when it comes to race.
For example:
Study in India by Promodu:
FL: 8.21cm
EL: 13.01cm
Study in Nigeria by Ajmani:
FL: 8.16cm
EL: NA
Study in the USA by Wessells:
FL: 8.85cm
EL: 12.89cm
Unless all Nigerian men are incredible growers I hightly doubt that the EL would not be near the ones of the USA and India.
If you don't believe me you can check for yourself
Wessells H, Lue TF, Mc Aninch JW. Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol 1996; 156: 995–997.
Ajmani ML, Jain SP, Saxena SK. Anthropometric study of male genitalia of 320 healthy Nigerian adults. Anthropol Anz 1985; 43: 179–186.
Promodu, K. et al. Penile length and circumference: an Indian study .International Journal of Impotence Research (2007) 19, 558–563.
As for 1200 being not sufficient. That's bullshit. Anything above N=30 is a sufficient sample size.
For example:
Study in India by Promodu:
FL: 8.21cm
EL: 13.01cm
Study in Nigeria by Ajmani:
FL: 8.16cm
EL: NA
Study in the USA by Wessells:
FL: 8.85cm
EL: 12.89cm
Unless all Nigerian men are incredible growers I hightly doubt that the EL would not be near the ones of the USA and India.
If you don't believe me you can check for yourself
Wessells H, Lue TF, Mc Aninch JW. Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol 1996; 156: 995–997.
Ajmani ML, Jain SP, Saxena SK. Anthropometric study of male genitalia of 320 healthy Nigerian adults. Anthropol Anz 1985; 43: 179–186.
Promodu, K. et al. Penile length and circumference: an Indian study .International Journal of Impotence Research (2007) 19, 558–563.
As for 1200 being not sufficient. That's bullshit. Anything above N=30 is a sufficient sample size.
Last edited:
I wouldn't want to feed much into this thread seeing it is already pretty messed up. I would agree with the guys above that the studies are pretty unreliable, because you just can't have an accurate image of an entire ethnic group based on a small number of people. These stereotypes are from the slavery days and are racist, but for some reason people enjoy this particular fetish in porn(example - Shane Diesel) and justify it by 'but oh it is just fantasy' bullshit.
Someone who has heard about this stereotype and sees two or three video of lets say Mandingo automatically assumes that all black men are that hung. They say 'look at all those big black dicks', not knowing it's only one guy and this is enough to see that they're probably subconsciously being racists. Because in Lex, Mandingo and all these guys I see individuals. These people probably think all the black men are the same. I know of this since I've met a large number of people who think like this, and I even knew a guy that sold porn on DVDs about 10 years ago and I remember him showing me a cover of a DVD that said something like '..the black destroyer - never under 14 inches!', haha. He was my cousins friend and liked selling him porn and one day he showed him the notorious rubber Insane cock brothas and while my cousin thought they were fake he kept convincing him that it's authentic. Fucking moron
Someone who has heard about this stereotype and sees two or three video of lets say Mandingo automatically assumes that all black men are that hung. They say 'look at all those big black dicks', not knowing it's only one guy and this is enough to see that they're probably subconsciously being racists. Because in Lex, Mandingo and all these guys I see individuals. These people probably think all the black men are the same. I know of this since I've met a large number of people who think like this, and I even knew a guy that sold porn on DVDs about 10 years ago and I remember him showing me a cover of a DVD that said something like '..the black destroyer - never under 14 inches!', haha. He was my cousins friend and liked selling him porn and one day he showed him the notorious rubber Insane cock brothas and while my cousin thought they were fake he kept convincing him that it's authentic. Fucking moron
khadejiacat
Expert Member
You think it might be noteworthy that the sample they studied in Nigeria were not all full grown men?True, the guys in Ghana are at least 5 inches longer on average. But so are the European guys. I guess that makes it equal again.
From your link
Now, if they had a sample drawing from men all aged 21 or more, you could say they were at least 89% grown. But since they also sampled ages 17,18,19, and 20, these would be incrementally less grown in 11% or more of the sample.
If they sampled from ages 17-23, it would seem quite possible that the majority were not full grown. 17-20 is 4 different ages. 21-23 is 3 different ages.
To put it another way, if by age 21, 89% of males are full grown, then for 20 years of age, what percentage are full grown? 85%? And for 19? 81%?
18? 75%? 17, 66%?
Now, maybe most of them were 21 or older, and just a few were 17-20 years old. Don't really know, however by the info in that abstract, I think scientifically we can at least concede the possibility the samples aren't even similarly grown in comparison to samples from other regions.
And this is to say nothing of the study not documenting erect size, which is sort of the whole point of this topic.
Now, take that Nigerian study, sample ages 17-23, which we know means they were not all full grown, maybe even most of them were not full grown, and compare with the Wessell's study:
I think it is as safe to say that the Wessells sample was as certainly full grown as the Ajmani sample was not.
And for the Indian study, the sample ages were from 18-60. The Jordanian study (Awwad et al) was ages 17-83.
Still, despite this significant discrepency, I'm not going to try and say each of those three studies are meaningless. It just means less than if it was more consistent.
LOL but seriously why is this such a finicky topic for academics? Why can't they just get samples from groups of the same age and do some consistent research across the board instead of leaving out the main measurement everyone especially on this forum thinks is the most important thing in the world. Hehe.
Last edited:
Placing this link here for posterity, which presents a tidy table of all those studies, and a couple more, recently mentioned:
International Journal of Impotence Research - Table 5 for article: Penile length and circumference: an Indian study
It does seem to have a curious suggestion, for those who like to assume. Presumably based on this we can suggest that the Caucasian groups, which is to say the studies in predominately Caucasian regions, have the largest. And that is followed by Indian, and then finally in last place the Nigerian sample.
Certainly flies in the face of the stereotypes; however, it must be reiterated that the age range for the Nigerian sample is distinctly lower than all the other studies. Maybe that explains it, or perhaps not. I do think it is significant though.
And also note that the Korean samples actually do "ring true" with the stereotype.
I think it more or less reinforces the stereotypes actually, what with Asians mostly smaller than Caucasian, while the African sample is suspect, e.g. missing data and dramatically limited age range sample.
Oh well, carry on with the controversy! Rabble rabble rabble!
International Journal of Impotence Research - Table 5 for article: Penile length and circumference: an Indian study
It does seem to have a curious suggestion, for those who like to assume. Presumably based on this we can suggest that the Caucasian groups, which is to say the studies in predominately Caucasian regions, have the largest. And that is followed by Indian, and then finally in last place the Nigerian sample.
Certainly flies in the face of the stereotypes; however, it must be reiterated that the age range for the Nigerian sample is distinctly lower than all the other studies. Maybe that explains it, or perhaps not. I do think it is significant though.
And also note that the Korean samples actually do "ring true" with the stereotype.
I think it more or less reinforces the stereotypes actually, what with Asians mostly smaller than Caucasian, while the African sample is suspect, e.g. missing data and dramatically limited age range sample.
Oh well, carry on with the controversy! Rabble rabble rabble!
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
- Posts
- 435
- Media
- 26
- Likes
- 997
- Points
- 523
- Location
- Chicago (Illinois, United States)
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
...yakkity yak yak...snakebyte just linked you multiple actual medical studies. What do you have? An article from the BBC? Lol.
Ok, so I'm trying to defend the studies you linked here, then you just turn on me?
Please, tell me then, what do you believe in terms of this racial differences argument?
Most of you are falling on your SWORDS over something so irrelevant. Who gives a flying fuck about which race is bigger. Get it up, keep it up, and have as much safe/consenting sex as humanly possible. END OF THREAD
Well, he as a point. I somewhat agree with the age difference and he was referring to the medical studies I posted. I still don't think there is a difference between black & white.
On the other hand I feel you work yourself up into a frenzy about this topic.
Similar threads
