mimimum size to consider it big
- Thread starter B_tallbig
- Start date
judging from your lack of pics i'd say you fall into the 85% of 'small' men then.... (I know you say you're a woman but seriously... )
i think
a) you're a troll. in that case, get a fucking life
b) you watch WAY too much porn. get a fucking life.
I have a thick 7". It's not huge, but believe me my g/f is more than happy with it. She's slept with 13 guys - only 2 were bigger than me. And before you try it - yes, I know that's the truth. Long story.
'Big' starts around 7 - 7.5" I'd say, depending on girth.
D_O_Revoir
Account Disabled
Principessa
Expert Member
If average is between 5-6".... big begins at 6.1". I kind of think there are levels of big though. 6-8 being big. anything over 8 being huge.
At least someone on here has some common sense for the real world!:up:
7-9 being big. anything over 9 being huge is closer... i think....?
the_reverend
Sexy Member
it is all relative. i'd say if you've got an "average" length but a big girth, you'd be big...whereas longer length with average to small girth might not be as impressive.
that said, i'd say around 6.5-7 inches long by 5-5.5 inches around is a good "baseline" for considering it big. but everyone's going to have a different standard because "big" is subjective. the fact that my penis IS 7x5.5 might be biasing me. lol! since the only penis i have to deal with is my own, as long as the girl i'm with thinks it's big, then not a whole lot else matters.
no, the devil is six...and if the devil is six, then GOD IS SEVEN! THEN GOD IS SEVEN! THEN GOD IS SEVEN!
(this Pixies reference brought to you by awesomeness)
that said, i'd say around 6.5-7 inches long by 5-5.5 inches around is a good "baseline" for considering it big. but everyone's going to have a different standard because "big" is subjective. the fact that my penis IS 7x5.5 might be biasing me. lol! since the only penis i have to deal with is my own, as long as the girl i'm with thinks it's big, then not a whole lot else matters.
no, the devil is six...and if the devil is six, then GOD IS SEVEN! THEN GOD IS SEVEN! THEN GOD IS SEVEN!
(this Pixies reference brought to you by awesomeness)
My own personal opinion of what's average is a length of 5.5" to 6.5" and a girth of 5" to 5.5". With that in mind, I would say "big" starts about half an inch above those statistics, for both meaurements. (So 7"x6" is my answer, though I would rather measure on volume so an decrease in one measurement can be counterbalanced by an increase in the other.)
Ugh, I really don't give a shit about penis size. I like mine.
Ugh, I really don't give a shit about penis size. I like mine.
the_reverend
Sexy Member
the average girth, as i understand it, is actually a bit lower than that...closer to 4, i believe. otherwise, everyone's been lying to my ass about having a thick cock. lol!
if you dig it and your partner digs it, that's all that really counts.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Posts
- 1,154
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 689
- Points
- 433
- Age
- 38
- Location
- Schaumburg (Illinois, United States)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
anything over 7 is abover avergae mine is 8.5 and i know its big...i just really really wish it was bigger
rimmer9
Expert Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2007
- Posts
- 1,230
- Media
- 8
- Likes
- 188
- Points
- 208
- Location
- Midlands UK
- Sexuality
- 50% Straight, 50% Gay
- Gender
- Male
SereneBlue
Experimental Member
There are people on this board who can vouch that I am indeed female. :wink:
Straight_ish said:
Wow. Why such Holy Rage over my categories? Because you only qualify as medium in them? Nobody has to agree with my categories nor did I ever claim such.
1) I am no troll. I was posting my opinions. My categories are strictly my own and I was answering the OP's post. I have a right to them the same as you do in insisting your cock is large.
2) I seldom, if ever watch porn.
BTW...nowhere in my post did I say average was somehow unsexy, unpleasurable, unappealing or undesirable. Most of the men I've been with fall in that category so it's not as if I think it's something to be avoided or derided.
Principessa
Expert Member
Here I go again.
This is exactly what I was talking about in other threads. What IS what? Nobody knows. It's all estimation and personal perspective.
It's a simple math problem.
Take the full range of sizes rare or not and then do an even division.
This is the working theory I use to measure penis length.
Men go from 1 inch erect to let's say 14 inches erect.
We take this 14 and divide it into 7 pieces.
| -1-2+ | 3-4+ | 5-6+ | 7-8+ | 9-10+ | 11-12+ | 13-14+ |
The plus (+) stands for every fractional before the next category.
Originally I used a 3-category scale (Small, Medium, Large) but that puts too many of different sizes in same category where function is not similar enough.
Then I said try a 5-category scale (X-Small, Small, Medium, Large, X-Large) but there was still problems with bad groupings based on function.
So I went to next odd number 7 which gave a better grouping for similar function in size.
| X-Small | Small | Medium-Small | Medium | Medium-Large | Large |
| X-Large |
From root to 2-plus is Category 1 = X-Small
From 3 to 4-plus is Category 2 = Small
From 5 to 6-plus is Category 3 = Medium-Small
From 7 to 8-plus is Category 4 = Medium
From 9 to 10-plus is Category 5 = Medium-Large
From 11 to 12-plus is Category 6 = Large
From 13 to 14-plus is Category 7 = X-Large
Each category grouping would get a similar reaction from onlookers and "boudoir users". They function similarly.
This undoes personal POV and bias of experience. Some people simply don't know how penises vary. They don't recognize true breadth of the sizes. Some people don't think double-digit men exist. Nor do they think men can come in 2's and 3's.
Unfortunately using the English System with inches is still a little flawed because it might not perfectly capture the degree of difference in sensation which is why I propose a brand new scale for measuring generic stand-in name for the base unit being PU = Penile Unit. A better name can of course take the place of that. :tongue:
In the Metric System with centimeters 1 inch = 2.54 centimeters so you would deal with a bunch of decimals that nobody will retain in their heads. People always round off ugly fractions and decimals.
| -2.54-7.61+ | 7.62-12.69+ | 12.7-17.77+ | 17.78 cm-22.85+ |
| 22.86-27.93+ | 27.94-33.01+ | 33.02-38.09+ |
See how that looks? This is why I say a new scale based on sensation rather than old arbitrary size should be used to better determine the function of different sized penises. Which also need women to be measured so we can finally know vagina size a little better than Kama Sutra's "Deer", "Mare", and "Elephant".
By taking the male "Hare", "Bull", Horse" Kama Sutra divisions a little further in this way we can figure out strategies for each size in the penetration act. Which can alleviate anxiety and complexes. A lot of problem is many men don't know exactly HOW to "work it". And there's not enough concrete information to give a real answer right now. The science of sex must build right along with the art of sex. Right now everybody's doing trial and error.
The division must always be done with an odd number to leave a perfect middle category. A division of 9 may be more accurate but I used a range of 14 and a divisor of 7 to make it easy to read.
Serene Blue is sort of on the same wavelength as what I put down here. Those who see 8 and 9 as large may not realize just how large penises come in. It's not a scale of most common occurence. Simply a flat scale of the whole range of human penis size. Personal POVs can be kept but at least with this scale you'll have an independent objective determiner of what's what.
Next I will devise a circumference scale.
You can wake up now. Story's over.
John Lucas
This is exactly what I was talking about in other threads. What IS what? Nobody knows. It's all estimation and personal perspective.
It's a simple math problem.
Take the full range of sizes rare or not and then do an even division.
This is the working theory I use to measure penis length.
Men go from 1 inch erect to let's say 14 inches erect.
We take this 14 and divide it into 7 pieces.
| -1-2+ | 3-4+ | 5-6+ | 7-8+ | 9-10+ | 11-12+ | 13-14+ |
The plus (+) stands for every fractional before the next category.
Originally I used a 3-category scale (Small, Medium, Large) but that puts too many of different sizes in same category where function is not similar enough.
Then I said try a 5-category scale (X-Small, Small, Medium, Large, X-Large) but there was still problems with bad groupings based on function.
So I went to next odd number 7 which gave a better grouping for similar function in size.
| X-Small | Small | Medium-Small | Medium | Medium-Large | Large |
| X-Large |
From root to 2-plus is Category 1 = X-Small
From 3 to 4-plus is Category 2 = Small
From 5 to 6-plus is Category 3 = Medium-Small
From 7 to 8-plus is Category 4 = Medium
From 9 to 10-plus is Category 5 = Medium-Large
From 11 to 12-plus is Category 6 = Large
From 13 to 14-plus is Category 7 = X-Large
Each category grouping would get a similar reaction from onlookers and "boudoir users". They function similarly.
This undoes personal POV and bias of experience. Some people simply don't know how penises vary. They don't recognize true breadth of the sizes. Some people don't think double-digit men exist. Nor do they think men can come in 2's and 3's.
Unfortunately using the English System with inches is still a little flawed because it might not perfectly capture the degree of difference in sensation which is why I propose a brand new scale for measuring generic stand-in name for the base unit being PU = Penile Unit. A better name can of course take the place of that. :tongue:
In the Metric System with centimeters 1 inch = 2.54 centimeters so you would deal with a bunch of decimals that nobody will retain in their heads. People always round off ugly fractions and decimals.
| -2.54-7.61+ | 7.62-12.69+ | 12.7-17.77+ | 17.78 cm-22.85+ |
| 22.86-27.93+ | 27.94-33.01+ | 33.02-38.09+ |
See how that looks? This is why I say a new scale based on sensation rather than old arbitrary size should be used to better determine the function of different sized penises. Which also need women to be measured so we can finally know vagina size a little better than Kama Sutra's "Deer", "Mare", and "Elephant".
By taking the male "Hare", "Bull", Horse" Kama Sutra divisions a little further in this way we can figure out strategies for each size in the penetration act. Which can alleviate anxiety and complexes. A lot of problem is many men don't know exactly HOW to "work it". And there's not enough concrete information to give a real answer right now. The science of sex must build right along with the art of sex. Right now everybody's doing trial and error.
The division must always be done with an odd number to leave a perfect middle category. A division of 9 may be more accurate but I used a range of 14 and a divisor of 7 to make it easy to read.
Serene Blue is sort of on the same wavelength as what I put down here. Those who see 8 and 9 as large may not realize just how large penises come in. It's not a scale of most common occurence. Simply a flat scale of the whole range of human penis size. Personal POVs can be kept but at least with this scale you'll have an independent objective determiner of what's what.
Next I will devise a circumference scale.
You can wake up now. Story's over.
John Lucas
SereneBlue
Experimental Member
Bingo. Thank you John.
My scale accounts for the truly large too. They are human too and their cocks do count. Since I do take them into account it modifies my scale...which means...what is large for most people is only medium to me.
Now...ask me what I'm willing to consider for *sleeping* with another guy and you'll get a different answer. For the record I do NOT think small is inferior, unsexy or undesirable.
