Measured porn stars??

[Clod]

@sdp @TinyPrincess
Any thoughts on the outliers found in the Wessels study? I.e. Idea how they found multiple 7+ nbp as well as some uniquely small ones out of just 80 men?

 

[Ocine]

fellas if you all want a big laugh please take a look at this debate in the chris strokes thread . i havnt logged in here in a while but have had a good laugh at this. this is the most insane user i have seen.

Dr_Feelgood_LV is claiming Chris Strokes might be as big as 11.5 inches.



He also says Mark Ashley is 10 inches and mandingo is 14. yes he believes this.

criss strokes real measurement!! 6.5 INCHES!!!

He called another user out to post his measurments but this user actually looks way bigger than strokes (a genuine 8" ?)

criss strokes real measurement!! 6.5 INCHES!!!

Now how do I put this kindly. Pleas some of you talk sense into Dr Feelgood he is actually attacking other editors viciously for saying Chris Strokes is 7.5 . crazy. I am tipping you off because theres some very rational people here. See you all next year.

Welcome Back Goldzilla

I think this guy is the second account of @strivingforperfection he just want to boost his porn hero

 

[strivingforperfection]

@sdp @TinyPrincess
Any thoughts on the outliers found in the Wessels study? I.e. Idea how they found multiple 7+ nbp as well as some uniquely small ones out of just 80 men?

That study must be BS, it's so far different from the other studies.

 

[lostfeelings]

Actually he is 7.5 Bone Pressed, you are right about the girth. This is the reason I find it hard to believe him [Bigdicknerdbf] and Ed are the same length.

Holy shit! Looks 9in.

So is ~7NBP? Angles make all difference.

 

[strivingforperfection]

@Clod

The Wessels study also has such a small sample size.

As a side note, CalcSD which is really good for comparison uses that as a study, which is a shame. What I do is I just compare myself to CalcSD overall average.

I was using Western Average because that is a bit higher and I thought fairer and maybe more applicable (saying this without wanting to get into debate about race differences), but then I decided to just use the overall average (which also includes this unusually high result study) and is similar to Western Average minus this anomalistic study.

 

[Clod]

@Clod

The Wessels study also has such a small sample size.

As a side note, CalcSD which is really good for comparison uses that as a study, which is a shame. What I do is I just compare myself to CalcSD overall average.

I was using Western Average because that is a bit higher and I thought fairer and maybe more applicable (saying this without wanting to get into debate about race differences), but then I decided to just use the overall average (which also includes this unusually high result study) and is similar to Western Average minus this anomalistic study.

Agreed, I definitely think it should be taken out of CalcSD when estimating the rarity of a given length. 80 people is such a small sample size, but I can’t help but marvel at the amount of outliers on both ends of the size spectrum.

 

[cucumber-member]

whats everyone think this guy is length x girth?

 

[JGUIDO]

@Clod @strivingforperfection

Could it be that the study advertised its purpose and only 80 people showed up and it attracted those that were confident due to their size? Either way, 80 people is NOTHING when it comes to a study like this. Doesn't really mean anything IMO.

@cucumber-member

I'd say anywhere from 6x5 to 6.25x5.25

 

[Clod]

@Clod @strivingforperfection

Could it be that the study advertised its purpose and only 80 people showed up and it attracted those that were confident due to their size? Either way, 80 people is NOTHING when it comes to a study like this. Doesn't really mean anything IMO.

@cucumber-member

I'd say anywhere from 6x5 to 6.25x5.25

Right! It was done at a urology institute, so perhaps consenting patients were more likely to be outliers. Everyone packing 7+ wasn’t scared to get measured, & the smaller guys could’ve been post prostate cancer surgery, shrunken from ED, etc. Either way, the sample size fucks it up. At face value, this study would mean that a huge percentage of guys are as big as monster cock pornstars & a decent percentage of men have borderline-micropenii.

Also, agreed on this other guy’s size.

 

[st2000]

whats everyone think this guy is length x girth?

i would say the girl is very cute
considering her arm and fingers comparing to normal size .. well i would say 5 inches girth (or slighty more)
and 6,5 length or bit more
am i ok? no easy to figure out. whatever it is cute and girl is terribly cute
so.. who is she ?

 

[cucumber-member]

i would say the girl is very cute
considering her arm and fingers comparing to normal size .. well i would say 5 inches girth (or slighty more)
and 6,5 length or bit more
am i ok? no easy to figure out. whatever it is cute and girl is terribly cute
so.. who is she ?

i was also thinking around 6.5x5.25

ya she pretty cute right she littlebunnygrl from onlyfans

 

[Lance Bass]

Right! It was done at a urology institute, so perhaps consenting patients were more likely to be outliers. Everyone packing 7+ wasn’t scared to get measured, & the smaller guys could’ve been post prostate cancer surgery, shrunken from ED, etc. Either way, the sample size fucks it up. At face value, this study would mean that a huge percentage of guys are as big as monster cock pornstars & a decent percentage of men have borderline-micropenii.

Also, agreed on this other guy’s size.

So is the study legit or no?

 

[JGUIDO]

So is the study legit or no?

I think its legit but the sample is too small for it to be that meaningful compared to other studies.

 

[Add9er]

As far as I’m concerned, none of them are legit. Every one except the Italian military one has selection bias. Measuring is also subjective. Even my *self measurements* vary depending on the slightest pressure differences of measuring tape.

I don’t think the calcSD is valid either. I believe it seriously underestimates BPEL... Somehow my 3 best friends and I are all in the top 99%, lol.

 

[Add9er]

i would say the girl is very cute
considering her arm and fingers comparing to normal size .. well i would say 5 inches girth (or slighty more)
and 6,5 length or bit more
am i ok? no easy to figure out. whatever it is cute and girl is terribly cute
so.. who is she ?

No way he’s only 5 in girth. Mayyyyybe at the skinniest points. But his dick is wide as fuck upper mid shaft- easily 5.75+

 

[grandunification]

@sdp @TinyPrincess
Any thoughts on the outliers found in the Wessels study? I.e. Idea how they found multiple 7+ nbp as well as some uniquely small ones out of just 80 men?

They found several 7"+ cocks because that's a darn common size. It's not big.

 

[Add9er]

They found several 7"+ cocks because that's a darn common size. It's not big.

I hate to be as pessimistic, but I think you’re right.

 

[Lance Bass]

I think its legit but the sample is too small for it to be that meaningful compared to other studies.

They found several 7"+ cocks because that's a darn common size. It's not big.

I hate to be as pessimistic, but I think you’re right.

Ok so what’s the verdict? 7 inches is more common than we thought?

 

[Clod]

Ok so what’s the verdict? 7 inches is more common than we thought?

Unlikely. As I said, there were only 80 participants and it hasn't been replicated. It was also from 1996...

 

[MirkoCro]

Unlikely. As I said, there were only 80 participants and it hasn't been replicated. It was also from 1996...

According to my stats teacher when I was studying a sample size of 30 or greater is considered acceptable to draw conclusions from.