is average small?

[fournineteenfiftynine]

I'm kinda new to the gay scene but have probably been with 20 guys in the last two years...I would say almost all of them were over 7 inches. I am 5.5 inches and only one guy was smaller than me. I am supposedly exactly average, but I think it is small and my experience has born this out. I heard somewhere that there was some research that the average gay penis is one inch larger than the straight population. Wondering about your experience?

 

[hungteen19921992]

I have no idea whether penis size studies discriminated straight men from gay men, but I'm pretty sure they didn't. I also highly doubt that gay men naturally have larger penises...

Since you "would say" most of them were over 7 inches, you may be getting an inaccurate idea of how big they really were realistically.

By the way, having a small penis is not equivalent to an average penis at all. Small penised men (like micro size!) have a lot more to worry about than someone with an average one, and would kill just to have one that is average, let alone big. That said there are men with small ones that are proud of their members and I also respect that.

 

[MrHangman]

If I had to guess I'd say that 5.5 - 6.5 is the average range. Above or below that is "small" or "big" but that's only talking length. It's much harder to judge girth. I've never really seen a "skinny" dick, but I have seen fat ones. And then the rest of them were around 5" in girth. I'd like to say that 4.75" - 5.25" is an average girth, but really honestly I've never been able to measure the girth of a dick by looking at it.

I've heard the gay dicks are bigger theory too, and I have no conclusive scientific to back that up. But what I can tell you is that of the dicks I have seen in my life, they've all been bigger than me (and I stand at an honest 6"). But what people have told me is that I'm more likely to come across larger penis sizes because those with those larger sizes would probably be the more willing ones to compare because they aren't inhibited by fears of being small.

Oh yeah, also dude. Don't let porn and LPSG skew your idea of what is average. Although, you have been intimate with a lot of men. Are you sure you're measuring yourself correctly?

Look dude. Your penis size is great. I'm sure you are satisfied. I bet your lovers were satisfied. In the end penis size doesn't even matter to anyone else but yourself. Look dude, you've got a sex life twice as active as mine. You're a winner. You're doing good. Don't let something like this tear your mind up.

 

[ShannonH]

The studies that show gay men as longer aren't anywhere near an inch longer. The standard deviation on penis length (in any study that measures it) is at best 0.7", so one group being a full inch longer is extremely improbable. Some studies have shown a statistically significant difference in gay men, but statistically significant just means that the difference is slightly above experimental error.
In other words, there are some studies that show gay men are longer by about the minimum amount that it's even measurable in a mid-sized study.

For a really light-weight and funny introduction to this subject in statistics, check out this XKCD:
xkcd: Significant

 

[art]

By definition, no. BY the time you "poll" a larger sample, you'll find average pretty much where it should be.

 

[D_Pokin Joe Frazier]

I'm kinda new to the gay scene but have probably been with 20 guys in the last two years...I would say almost all of them were over 7 inches. I am 5.5 inches and only one guy was smaller than me. I am supposedly exactly average, but I think it is small and my experience has born this out. I heard somewhere that there was some research that the average gay penis is one inch larger than the straight population. Wondering about your experience?

You are on the low end of average. You can not compare yourself to people on this site because the average is not the norm

 

[minimag]

If average weren't average it wouldn't be called average.

 

[ShannonH]

If average weren't average it wouldn't be called average.

Yep.

People also like to talk about the "high" or "low" range of average. A 'range' with respect to an average (or a median, which I think makes more sense with body sizes -- the average isn't always where 50% are bigger and 50% are smaller) should be taken as 1 standard deviation away, since that's effectively where most of the sample falls.

Standard deviation is the average amount that something varies from the average. Whenever people here talk about what constitutes a "big" or "small" dick, the only good way to do this is to just look at the standard deviation. Being within one standard deviation is what you should consider the 'average' range, being above one but within two deviations is 'small' or 'big', and anywhere outside of 2 would be 'tiny' or 'huge'. Outside 3 is an extremely uncommon occurrence, and is considered medically abnormal.

So these numbers are from some higher deviating studies, but the highest deviation is 0.7", and the average most medical studies place for BPEL is 5.5" or a little below that.

-2 dev : 4.1"
-1 dev : 4.8"
0 : 5.5"
+1 dev : 6.2"
+2 dev : 6.9"

We seem to naturally understand deviation when it comes to human height : someone a few inches taller than someone else is noticeably much taller, even though as a percentage difference in height that's generally <4%. Our brains know what the variability is, so we naturally see these few inches of height difference as a major difference in size. We apply the same thinking to dicks, but since we don't really know the numbers someone an inch longer than someone else looks (and is) a lot longer, but we often believe that's 2-3 inches more.

 

[bassman70]

Yep.

People also like to talk about the "high" or "low" range of average. A 'range' with respect to an average (or a median, which I think makes more sense with body sizes -- the average isn't always where 50% are bigger and 50% are smaller) should be taken as 1 standard deviation away, since that's effectively where most of the sample falls.

Standard deviation is the average amount that something varies from the average. Whenever people here talk about what constitutes a "big" or "small" dick, the only good way to do this is to just look at the standard deviation. Being within one standard deviation is what you should consider the 'average' range, being above one but within two deviations is 'small' or 'big', and anywhere outside of 2 would be 'tiny' or 'huge'. Outside 3 is an extremely uncommon occurrence, and is considered medically abnormal.

So these numbers are from some higher deviating studies, but the highest deviation is 0.7", and the average most medical studies place for BPEL is 5.5" or a little below that.

-2 dev : 4.1"
-1 dev : 4.8"
0 : 5.5"
+1 dev : 6.2"
+2 dev : 6.9"

We seem to naturally understand deviation when it comes to human height : someone a few inches taller than someone else is noticeably much taller, even though as a percentage difference in height that's generally <4%. Our brains know what the variability is, so we naturally see these few inches of height difference as a major difference in size. We apply the same thinking to dicks, but since we don't really know the numbers someone an inch longer than someone else looks (and is) a lot longer, but we often believe that's 2-3 inches more.

So a length of 7 3/4 bp(about 7 nbp) is 2 deviations above average? I consider myself on the entry level side of big, and not huge. Girth is 5 5/8. What is a standard deviation away from average when speaking of girth?

 

[ShannonH]

So a length of 7 3/4 bp(about 7 nbp) is 2 deviations above average? I consider myself on the entry level side of big, and not huge. Girth is 5 5/8. What is a standard deviation away from average when speaking of girth?

Yep, studies vary, but most would put it at somewhere just below 7" for 2 above. The biggest average study (not self-reported) with the biggest variance gives a 7.5" as 2 above, which is significantly bigger than 7" but puts anything mid-7s and up as an exceptionally long dick.

I think mraverage.com gives the best analysis of the lifestyles study. Personally I think it's a good study, but the only problem is the self-selection of the sample candidates. Since a lot of smaller-dicked men probably opted out, it makes more sense to assume the median's the average here.
So their girth median is 4.65", with a deviation of 0.5". So same chart
-2 : 3.65"
-1 : 4.15"
0: 4.65"
+1: 5.15"
+2: 5.65"

So you're around 2 standard deviations above for girth

 

[Frnkd213]

Yep, studies vary, but most would put it at somewhere just below 7" for 2 above. The biggest average study (not self-reported) with the biggest variance gives a 7.5" as 2 above, which is significantly bigger than 7" but puts anything mid-7s and up as an exceptionally long dick.

I think mraverage.com gives the best analysis of the lifestyles study. Personally I think it's a good study, but the only problem is the self-selection of the sample candidates. Since a lot of smaller-dicked men probably opted out, it makes more sense to assume the median's the average here.
So their girth median is 4.65", with a deviation of 0.5". So same chart
-2 : 3.65"
-1 : 4.15"
0: 4.65"
+1: 5.15"
+2: 5.65"

So you're around 2 standard deviations above for girth

This could be a thread in itself but, deviating slightly from the OP question, I am +1 in length and 0 in girth. good to know.

regarding the OP, I agree with everyone here so far, you're sampling is very small but with your luck of finding hung guys, 1 out of 20 being smaller than you, thats pretty good odds. I would conclude than that : there is a significant chance of you finding a big dick man than not, so life in the dick world will be favorable for you as you have a gaydar of selecting hung dudes. Lucky you! :biggrin1:

 

[fournineteenfiftynine]

If I had to guess I'd say that 5.5 - 6.5 is the average range. Above or below that is "small" or "big" but that's only talking length. It's much harder to judge girth. I've never really seen a "skinny" dick, but I have seen fat ones. And then the rest of them were around 5" in girth. I'd like to say that 4.75" - 5.25" is an average girth, but really honestly I've never been able to measure the girth of a dick by looking at it.

I've heard the gay dicks are bigger theory too, and I have no conclusive scientific to back that up. But what I can tell you is that of the dicks I have seen in my life, they've all been bigger than me (and I stand at an honest 6"). But what people have told me is that I'm more likely to come across larger penis sizes because those with those larger sizes would probably be the more willing ones to compare because they aren't inhibited by fears of being small.

Oh yeah, also dude. Don't let porn and LPSG skew your idea of what is average. Although, you have been intimate with a lot of men. Are you sure you're measuring yourself correctly?

Look dude. Your penis size is great. I'm sure you are satisfied. I bet your lovers were satisfied. In the end penis size doesn't even matter to anyone else but yourself. Look dude, you've got a sex life twice as active as mine. You're a winner. You're doing good. Don't let something like this tear your mind up.

Thanks for the words of wisdom. What I didn't say was I found a great guy that I have been in a relationship with for 8 months....he is about 7 but he loves being fucked by my 5.5er. Lucky I am...

 

[B_duanculo]

Yep, studies vary, but most would put it at somewhere just below 7" for 2 above. The biggest average study (not self-reported) with the biggest variance gives a 7.5" as 2 above, which is significantly bigger than 7" but puts anything mid-7s and up as an exceptionally long dick.

I think mraverage.com gives the best analysis of the lifestyles study. Personally I think it's a good study, but the only problem is the self-selection of the sample candidates. Since a lot of smaller-dicked men probably opted out, it makes more sense to assume the median's the average here.
So their girth median is 4.65", with a deviation of 0.5". So same chart
-2 : 3.65"
-1 : 4.15"
0: 4.65"
+1: 5.15"
+2: 5.65"

So you're around 2 standard deviations above for girth

Yep.

People also like to talk about the "high" or "low" range of average. A 'range' with respect to an average (or a median, which I think makes more sense with body sizes -- the average isn't always where 50% are bigger and 50% are smaller) should be taken as 1 standard deviation away, since that's effectively where most of the sample falls.

Standard deviation is the average amount that something varies from the average. Whenever people here talk about what constitutes a "big" or "small" dick, the only good way to do this is to just look at the standard deviation. Being within one standard deviation is what you should consider the 'average' range, being above one but within two deviations is 'small' or 'big', and anywhere outside of 2 would be 'tiny' or 'huge'. Outside 3 is an extremely uncommon occurrence, and is considered medically abnormal.

So these numbers are from some higher deviating studies, but the highest deviation is 0.7", and the average most medical studies place for BPEL is 5.5" or a little below that.

-2 dev : 4.1"
-1 dev : 4.8"
0 : 5.5"
+1 dev : 6.2"
+2 dev : 6.9"

We seem to naturally understand deviation when it comes to human height : someone a few inches taller than someone else is noticeably much taller, even though as a percentage difference in height that's generally <4%. Our brains know what the variability is, so we naturally see these few inches of height difference as a major difference in size. We apply the same thinking to dicks, but since we don't really know the numbers someone an inch longer than someone else looks (and is) a lot longer, but we often believe that's 2-3 inches more.

thanks for the numbers! still find it hard to believe 4.65 is average though, i almost NEVER see girths smaller than mine and i am 4.8

This could be a thread in itself but, deviating slightly from the OP question, I am +1 in length and 0 in girth. good to know.

regarding the OP, I agree with everyone here so far, you're sampling is very small but with your luck of finding hung guys, 1 out of 20 being smaller than you, thats pretty good odds. I would conclude than that : there is a significant chance of you finding a big dick man than not, so life in the dick world will be favorable for you as you have a gaydar of selecting hung dudes. Lucky you! :biggrin1:

ye me too (+1 length and 0 in girth)

 

[B_chinagirl4u2]

average range (worldwide) I would say is 4.5 - 5.5"

 

[Cranky4u]

I pack 4 inch sot and grow to 8 inch rock hard & str8...check my vid or on chat....if I was in China, would I be considered a monster?

 

[dirkjesje]

I pack 4 inch sot and grow to 8 inch rock hard & str8...check my vid or on chat....if I was in China, would I be considered a monster?

I think that they rather consider you as a tourist.
Or are you the one that regurlarly swims in the Scottisch Highlands?
Nessie please wear next time a swimsuit

 

[B_lykaner]

I see different average sizes pretty much daily at the gym and I do find the majority of men to be small. I'm "very large" when soft and it causes men around me to get erections, and so I've often seen their hard stats, and also found them to be quite small.

I guess it's like being a millionaire and looking at people just out of college.

 

[bobg4400]

Yep.


Outside 3 is an extremely uncommon occurrence, and is considered medically abnormal.

So these numbers are from some higher deviating studies, but the highest deviation is 0.7", and the average most medical studies place for BPEL is 5.5" or a little below that.

-2 dev : 4.1"
-1 dev : 4.8"
=0 : 5.5"
+1 dev : 6.2"
+2 dev : 6.9"

So +3 would be 7.6
and +4 would be 8.3
and +5 would be 8.8
Guess that puts a lot of people on the site as 'medically abnormal ' then, considering the number of 8x6's and the 9+ inches
But seriously it would probably be funny to screw with the scientists if an lpsger discovered they were running a study on penis size in their city and got all the largest memebers to participate.

 

[ShannonH]

So +3 would be 7.6
and +4 would be 8.3
and +5 would be 8.8
Guess that puts a lot of people on the site as 'medically abnormal ' then, considering the number of 8x6's and the 9+ inches
But seriously it would probably be funny to screw with the scientists if an lpsger discovered they were running a study on penis size in their city and got all the largest memebers to participate.

-2.5 deviations below is considered a micropenis, so +3 deviations above would be a macropenis I guess.
A lot of it comes down to measurement methodology too. Improper measuring technique can lead to 2" more in some cases. I think it only really makes sense to measure NBP but just kind of slide your fat up if you have it, since there's no point in measuring how much your ruler bends up in to your belly.

As we've seen in the $2 club, "I don't believe 12..13" threads, etc. even on this site, a true, verified 8"+ is really, really rare. There are plenty of guys (myself included) who can get well above 8" if they use more optimistic measuring techniques, but to compare against a study you need to follow the same methodology that they did.

Since people don't like to generally think in terms of methodology and statistics, the result is usually huge arguments back and forth about what exists and doesn't exist. I think the truth is, that you'll probably see plenty of 9-10" dicks using one measuring technique, and almost none using a different one. The guys who show up in the 7-8 range in medical studies are probably at the same size as 9-10" in self-reporting. They have a huge dick in either case, which is why I think looking in terms of deviations is way more valuable than just raw numbers. It gives a better sense of just how big you are, while just knowing the inches would only be more useful if you're trying to measure out space for a cabinet with it.

 

[bassman70]

-2.5 deviations below is considered a micropenis, so +3 deviations above would be a macropenis I guess.
A lot of it comes down to measurement methodology too. Improper measuring technique can lead to 2" more in some cases. I think it only really makes sense to measure NBP but just kind of slide your fat up if you have it, since there's no point in measuring how much your ruler bends up in to your belly.

As we've seen in the $2 club, "I don't believe 12..13" threads, etc. even on this site, a true, verified 8"+ is really, really rare. There are plenty of guys (myself included) who can get well above 8" if they use more optimistic measuring techniques, but to compare against a study you need to follow the same methodology that they did.

Since people don't like to generally think in terms of methodology and statistics, the result is usually huge arguments back and forth about what exists and doesn't exist. I think the truth is, that you'll probably see plenty of 9-10" dicks using one measuring technique, and almost none using a different one. The guys who show up in the 7-8 range in medical studies are probably at the same size as 9-10" in self-reporting. They have a huge dick in either case, which is why I think looking in terms of deviations is way more valuable than just raw numbers. It gives a better sense of just how big you are, while just knowing the inches would only be more useful if you're trying to measure out space for a cabinet with it.

Everyone's fat pad is different though. I have almost an inch, but it's very soft and easily compresses nearly to the bone if a woman grinds it. You may only see about 7", but she's getting close to 7 3/4" of my dick in certain positions. On the other hand, a 300 lb man with a 3 inch fat pad shouldn't be partaking in these type of studies without considering the bigger problem(no pun intended).