boosted size

1

13788

Guest
lksbigone: Do you think guys who have boosted (thru any enhancement technique) their size should have the same rights to claims of endowment?
With my mediocre claim (8X6) to endowment, I'm always disappointed learn a big guy's bragging on an endowment he "built himself". Those build yourself endowments don't have natural range of size from soft to hard, not to mention the firmness. In fairness, they can be very impressive and attractive looking. In other words: great for a stripper but a disappointment for escort service.
 

benderten2001

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2002
Posts
933
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
258
Welcome lksbigone.

You bring up a good question (I suppose) and I think I know what you're trying to say.... when there are so many "naturally large"men represented here, do those who "enhanced" their endowments (through various enlargement procedures and techniques) REALLY and TRULY belong here as representing "large"?

I have completed over two and one half years of "natural enlargement" without surgery. Fortunately for me, I have had very favorable results (increases of 2.25 inches in length and about 3/4" in girth). I did not believe those kind of results were possible at first.
But, I stayed with the regimen and never gave up. It was THAT important to me. And many other men who have tried it feel the same way. And so, it becomes (and REMAINS) a most sensitive subject to us.

I have been both determined and deliberate in my enlargement techniques to assure a natural look in girth and straightness of the shaft. My routine was not easy and had to be changed quite often to avoid any suggestion of "disfigurement" or unnaturalness even beginning to appear.

I can understand more harshly judging those results from surgical enhancements. Many of those procedures have made for some horrifying experiences for many men--tragic ones, unfortunately. But there are indeed some VERY favorable and successful NATURAL enlargement success stories out there and the results are rather impressive.

So, I'm not quite sure I would catagorize any and all "enhanced" penises as "less than a natural one."
To each his own I suppose.

Also, I'm not so sure I follow your comment on the "natural range of size from soft to hard". I have a fairly long flaccid size before erection but then, so do a lot of men who fall within my catagory of overall size. There is some fluctuation in rigidness (from time to time), but again, that's true for many men "in the upper reaches of length" anyway....Rock-hard erections do exist in the larger sizes, but truth be known, they probably all do vary from time to time...due to the physiology of what it takes to keep them that way---circulation and the like.

I certainly don't consider myself "a freak" by comparison next to a "naturally-endowed man"....far from it (and I don't think you implied that either, in your comments._ But, having gone through successful self-improvement of my size, I better appreciate the advantages of being larger while I can still can relate very well to those members on this board who are not large and wish to be. My experiece puts me in a rather unique situation I guess to better understand a number of issues we see here within the LPSG community. I am humbled by that fact.

One other thing: Your comment: "With my mediocre claim (8 x 6) to endowment"

STOP THAT! If you check statistics, you are WELL-OVER
the average size range of 5.5" length / 4.75" girth !
You ARE one of the larger men in the world! ;)
 
1

13788

Guest
mindseye: [quote author=lksbigone link=board=meetgreet;num=1048271899;start=0#0 date=03/21/03 at 10:38:18]Do you think guys who have boosted (thru any enhancement technique) their size should have the same rights to claims of endowment?  [/quote]

Hmm, do you think people who study hard at school should have fewer 'rights' than people who are gifted in intelligence? Do you think the person who built her own company from the ground up and made a fortune should have fewer 'rights' than the person who inherited wealth?

I think people who make choices about their lives and follow through with them deserve at least as much respect as people who benefit from an accident of birth.

The disappointment you feel is, frankly, selfish.
 
1

13788

Guest
AnonyMs: well, I guess you could always add the adjective to the vital stats.....

8.5 x 6.5 hard
cut
natural

OR

10.5 x 7.25 hard
cut
enhanced

if making the distinction matters that much.

BTW, mindseye, appreciate your example of a woman making it big so to speak!
 

B_DoubleMeatWhopper

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2002
Posts
4,941
Media
0
Likes
111
Points
268
Age
45
Location
Louisiana
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I don't think that it would make any difference. A big cock is a big cock regardless of how that size was attained. If you're hung naturally, well that's a big cock. If you had it 'super-sized', you still end up with a big cock. So what's the diff?
 
1

13788

Guest
xblokegb: Hi there.
This is my first post and I have to say there is so much in this group that I'm gonna have to write back about, but that's for another time.

I wondered as we were on the topic if anyone had some tips on enlargement (jelqing or whatever - hey there benderten2001). I'm wary of stuff on the net as I'm not sure if I can trust commercially motivated testimonials.

Thanks guys (and gals if you've 'helped out').

xblokegb.

7.3 x 4.9 uncut