Frenchman straight and remarks on penis size

Discussion in 'New Member Introductions' started by averageplus, Nov 26, 2009.

  1. averageplus

    averageplus New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2009
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    France
    Hi, I am writing on the first time on this site.
    Frenchman, straight, married, four kids, 48 y o, slim, dark hair, green eyes, 185 cm tall.
    I thought I had an average penis, until 3 years ago. Then, there was an occasion when three women, another man and I were looking at a nude man making fun with his penis. They all said he was big there, and I found him normal.
    Therefore, I started to look for the facts on Internet.

    Some remarks now:

    What concerns the reality of erect size, there is plenty of distorted surveys and amopng the serious ones, some are uncomplete. Let's get past the internet survey based on self-statement. Turn down the official and technically organized surveys, where people are told how to measure correctly but measure and report by themselves (in this category, I found that the old but famous MacKinsey survey, in spite of all its qualities such as broadness of survey in numbers and concerns).
    Then, there are surveys where men are measured by a reliable staff, doctors or not.

    You may, as I did, find them in medical periodicals where summaries may be read for free. Also the survey on american students in Cancun you mentionned belong to those reliable ones, as it banned any attemps of magnifying individual results.
    Now, amid these surveys, when reading the way they were performed, you notice biases.
    The most frequent bias is collecting the sample of the survey. Compulsory participation to it, as it can only be done in large military ranks (I am thinking of one in Korea and one in Italia, both being undoubtably reliable, on large numbers, especially supporting no bias, except for the age, and both show quite modest averages), is impossible to attain.
    In Cancun, there were more than one thousand male students, of which only four hundred took freely part, of which one hundred could not attain a state proper to measurement. The problem is : were all the hundreds of students who did not participate equal, on average, with those who could be measured ? I would bet no.
    An other bias is : students are significantly taller on average of course than the whole american male population, event excluding the men over 60 of age. And studies prove that there is some imperfect relationship between stature and penis length (always on average), as is suggested also in medical studies on the role of growing hormone. So the result may not match reality of the whole population.
    Even in medical studies, I noticed one (in Jordania or Iran, I read it long ago) that compared a sample of men consulting for sexual desorders with a sample of men without disorders, with a large size difference betwwen both samples.
    So exit the samples of men consulting for troubles (including samples of men consulting because they think they are too short !) Another study had the extremely good idea of measuring men when really erect and when flacid, the medics tearing the penis by the discovered glans as far as possible (the point where you start feeling moderate pain). This is precious, in that a majority of medical measurement are proceded on flacid extended penises, with the assumption that it gives the same result as when fully erect, because full erection consists in going to the limits of the cavernous bodies, which makes them rigid.
    Now, the flacid extended penis was, on average, 5 millimeters shorter than the same fully erect penis (remember it was the same sample).
    By the way, I regret that most surveys were performed without measuring the width or the girth of the organs in full effort (girth seems to be about 2,9 times the width at its maximum), and I confirm what wrote about measuring : a rigid rule on top of the erect penis of the standing man, parallel to the ground, pressing significantly, but not hurting, against the pubic bone (so as to eliminate as much as possible the bias of fat differences just over the penis; what concerns me, being not fat, I made out that I am 13 millimeters longer when measuring scientifically this way, than when laying the rule with no pressure at all, the last measure resulting in the visible protuding part of the penis). Parallel to the ground is important, because if not, you loose or gain easily one or more centimeters. Also I have noticed that one should not sit, because then the basin bends insensibly, but it gives you 7 or 9 millimeters more, which is nice but nicely cheating, what I refuse to do.

    So, I viewed some summaries and built a small table to make comparisons and averages.
    The mean caucasian attain 137 millimeters in length (5,6 inches), 39 millimeters in width (1,54 inches) or about 114 millimeters in girth (4,49 inches).
    Then there are at least three surveys which I presume to be reliable :
    121 mm in Iran, 112 mm in Korea, 139 mm in Nigeria. Remember that I added 5 millimeters to all measurements on flacid stretched penises, as a study clearly proves there is some 5 mm differences between both ways of measuring.
    The Nigeria survey is also interesting in that it delivers also the extremes in the rather small sample o 115 men measured : the shorter one had 75 mm flacid extended, the longer one 195 mm, and there were as many men over 129 mm than were under 129 mm, then you MUST add 5 mm to compare.

    The suvey performed in Cancun has many qualities whatever, especially, on a rather large sample, the distribution of lengths and girths. I am prone to believing that they may be used as a reliable distribution around the average, but this average being reduced to the 137 mm caucasian average for instance.
    Though, the standard deviation in Cancun was 21 mm, while only 17 mm in Greece.
    If you suppose a standard deviation could be 20 mm, it means that 67 % of the Caucasians measure 117 to 157, the rest being shorter or longer, then 97,5 % betwwen 97 and 177 mm long, and so on.
    I do believe it is not accurate : the curve of frequency is not perfectly symetric on each side of the average. One could suppose that the standard deviation is shorter and shorter when going from average towards zero, and gets longer and longer when parting from average towards phenomenal (and rarest) lengths.

    Length is nice, but it seems that, when assuming they give attention to size of penis, most women prefer a thick dick average in length, to along dick average in girth.

    I hope I could contribute, with this, to better asserting reality, even if fantasy has its charms.
     
  2. Yorkie

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,024
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    102
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Yorkshire, UK
    I can see why your first post has taken so long! Welcome to the site... :cool:
     
  3. Pecker

    Pecker Retired Moderator
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    83,922
    Likes Received:
    34
    You're gonna run out of stuff to say.

    Welcome.
     
  4. Bimanhung

    Bimanhung Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Messages:
    266
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    21
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    let's see some pics of your French meat
     
  5. Mr. Snakey

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    24,702
    Likes Received:
    25
    Welcome.:smile:
     
  6. averagepenis69

    averagepenis69 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2009
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    what is average to some is large to others.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted