New Generation Bigger Penis?
- Thread starter stud23nyc
- Start date
If that is the case it's probably due to diet habits (growth hormones fed to cattle and what not) and lifestyle instead of evolution. Like how some studies show girls are starting their periods earlier.
B_ScaredLittleBoy
Experimental Member
Evolution takes millions of years and wouldn't happen over 30 years. I think there have always been as many endowed men now as there were before. It's inherited from somewhere...either father or mother. Some say it comes from the mother's side although I think it's the father's.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
Boys are going through puberty earlier now than use to be the case. And the average height has increased. I have no doubt that the true average, meaning if one could literally measure every live person born in a certain year, that there would be slight differences, though I doubt it would vary an inch or more.
I have to disagree about evolution though. While the average length might take several generations to be enough that a person could see with a naked eye, we find that many acts of evolution happened suddenly to one member of a species and then spread rapidly thorughout the species.
The average age for first period for girls was 16 during the American Revolution. It has dropped several years. It appears that puberty has dropped significanlty for boys since the American Revolution. However, that kind of information concerning the average age to begin puberty over 200 years ago is not available.
I have to disagree about evolution though. While the average length might take several generations to be enough that a person could see with a naked eye, we find that many acts of evolution happened suddenly to one member of a species and then spread rapidly thorughout the species.
The average age for first period for girls was 16 during the American Revolution. It has dropped several years. It appears that puberty has dropped significanlty for boys since the American Revolution. However, that kind of information concerning the average age to begin puberty over 200 years ago is not available.
Strange how that works. You'd think for example that I'd be the roughly the same as my dad, but I'm five inches taller and bigger in the pants too (don't ask me how I know, long story).
yeah it wouldn't be evolutionary with this time frame....
here is a theory.... if penis size is genetic (father or mother), you could do a study on if larger dudes had more sexual partners than avg. If that is the case, the likelihood statistically of more kids carrying these genetic traits over time may be true, and evetually the average will increase slightly. If women carried the trait, then I don't know that it would influence the world average that much, except if women carried the trait had 2+ children, because isn't the average 1 point something, children per female?
but there are SO many factors.... #1 ... is penis size genetic? #2... safe sex measures, #3....etc.
it could be a factor that could influence a change in size over time. I wouldn't expect a change in "average size" in one or two or three generations, just for the statistical numbers, but perhaps in a couple of hundred years, (if this theory were true), I could see the average go up 1/2" to 1".
here is a theory.... if penis size is genetic (father or mother), you could do a study on if larger dudes had more sexual partners than avg. If that is the case, the likelihood statistically of more kids carrying these genetic traits over time may be true, and evetually the average will increase slightly. If women carried the trait, then I don't know that it would influence the world average that much, except if women carried the trait had 2+ children, because isn't the average 1 point something, children per female?
but there are SO many factors.... #1 ... is penis size genetic? #2... safe sex measures, #3....etc.
it could be a factor that could influence a change in size over time. I wouldn't expect a change in "average size" in one or two or three generations, just for the statistical numbers, but perhaps in a couple of hundred years, (if this theory were true), I could see the average go up 1/2" to 1".
pronatalist
Sexy Member
Actually, what you think you may be seeing is more "natural selection." If being more endowed aids in more successful reproduction, then those people who are better endowed may tend to have bigger families, and the bigger families spread to a larger proportion of the overall population, as nature favors that which results in more reproduction. The genes that make people more sexually endowed, or to birth babies easier, may tend to proliferate faster. That's not "evolution," but "natural selection." And of course I would advocate passing on the "family jewels" to many offspring. Why waste such an "asset?"
Also, better nutrition seems to be driving the trend towards earlier puberty, and that may tend towards longer and thicker penises as well? Trends towards people getting taller (and fatter) have been noted in the last century or so. They had to widen the grand stairs in the recent Titanic movie, because the actors are bigger than the people were back in 1912.
But probably the best explanation, is that there may actually be little such change at all. What we really see, is more public discussion on the internet and size-obsessed porn. Not long ago, many people perhaps were just as big, but hardly anybody knew except for their mates, who probably didn't realize it either, because they didn't know so much about what the "average" size typically is. Maybe we have more awareness, not more size on average. As with the news. So much bad news, but not long ago, you might not have heard the bad news of your own town, before all the satelite-linked TV networks.
But wouldn't it be cool, if human penises really were getting bigger? Partly as a result of the human race naturally growing more numerous as well.
Also, better nutrition seems to be driving the trend towards earlier puberty, and that may tend towards longer and thicker penises as well? Trends towards people getting taller (and fatter) have been noted in the last century or so. They had to widen the grand stairs in the recent Titanic movie, because the actors are bigger than the people were back in 1912.
But probably the best explanation, is that there may actually be little such change at all. What we really see, is more public discussion on the internet and size-obsessed porn. Not long ago, many people perhaps were just as big, but hardly anybody knew except for their mates, who probably didn't realize it either, because they didn't know so much about what the "average" size typically is. Maybe we have more awareness, not more size on average. As with the news. So much bad news, but not long ago, you might not have heard the bad news of your own town, before all the satelite-linked TV networks.
But wouldn't it be cool, if human penises really were getting bigger? Partly as a result of the human race naturally growing more numerous as well.
I would say yes. I coach some kids in afterschool programs. Age between 14 - 17. when they hit the showers, I notice some the 14 yo have started getting hairy chests, and are developing quicker and bigger in the penis dept. There is one in question, he's 16, he's like a walking carpet already, and well endowed. He's also tall and well defined. (that's all I can say about a 16 y/o).
When I was a teenager, I was hung at 16, and I had a hairy chest, but nothing like some of these kids today..
When I was a teenager, I was hung at 16, and I had a hairy chest, but nothing like some of these kids today..
I don't doubt that's true, but it's due to nutrition, chemicals in food, and other stuff, not evolution happening in a few decades. And, by the way, I can think of at least three friends of mine in high school who already had furry, not just a light dusting of hair, chests by the time they were 16.
pronatalist
Sexy Member
Women seem to be sprouting their boobs young as well.
Puberty is coming earlier, and yet we put off marriage later and later. I wish some would speak up for how some may actually be ready and mature enough to marry younger these days.
Nature seems to be saying to people, that we aren't reproducing enough these days.
Ok, this topic has been brought up so many times and the information is almost always wrong. I am not an evolutionary biologist, but I'm studying in a related field (genetics) and know quite a bit about evolution. Evolution is always occurring, and it may in fact be selecting for a bigger penis (sexual selection, not natural selection -- I doubt a bigger penis delivers sperm THAT much better). However, it does NOT happen over the span of two or three generations, as some people here seem to think. Think about the evolution of wolves to dogs. This is an ideal example because it represents mostly artificial selection from humans (choosing only ancient wolves with a mild temperament for breeding). This process took a LONG time. I realize that more genes are being affected from wolf to dog than for penis to bigger penis, but it would still take quite a bit longer than three generations, especially since different areas in the world are so different culturally and because the immigration of people, combined with interracial marriages, would dilute any sexual selection that may have occurred in one area. It's not like in the old days where transportation was restricted -- people can and do go anywhere in the world now. This would delay the process of selection for a bigger penis even further. Plus, the sheer size of the population, even in one country, is so large that unless you're stuck on an island having sex with some closeish relatives, the process of selection for a bigger penis would take even longer (there's no founder effect going on in this case).
In addition, I would be willing to bet my life on the fact that penis size is a complex trait controlled by several genes and the regulation of those genes (and hormone regulation as well). Scientists like to pretend that we know so much about human genetics and constantly cite examples like cystic fibrosis being caused by a mutation in one gene, but the truth is we know crap about human genetics and almost everything is controlled by many genes. Most of our knowledge about complex traits (which include height, build, etc.) is solely from association studies, which aren't very accurate and make it difficult to track genes. Plus, the fact that penis size is a little taboo means that relatively few association studies between penis size and gene expression levels, or genetic mapping experiments (complicated in humans because ethically we can't pick two ideal subjects and get them to mate, so instead it's more association studies and linkage studies) have been done compared to other things. So we don't know much about penis genetics. It is probably decided by contributions from both parents on somatic chromosomes. I doubt it comes specifically from the father because the Y chromosome contains very few genes (however, it is possible that paternal imprinting DOES designate that penis size comes from the father -- but we know almost nothing about imprinting and epigenetics because it's VERY difficult to study). It could also have X-linked contributions, meaning penis size is at least in part inherited from your mother. However, since women have two X chromosome (one from their mother and one from their father), two siblings could have drastically different penis sizes depending on which X chromosome they inherit. This would FURTHER slow down evolution of penis size, because even families with a "big penis gene" (which doesn't exist) may also have a "small penis gene". Plus, there's also the possibility that these "big penis" people are carriers for a small penis.
For proof that penis size is a complex trait, let's assume it isn't and say it is solely designated from the father. All brothers would have the same sized penis (although they may vary slightly because of environmental factors). Anecdotally, this isn't the case. Let's assume it's X-linked and inherited from the mother. All brothers would be one of two possible sizes (again with environmental impacts). Anecdotally, there have been many people saying that a family with three brothers has a small, medium and large size (bad wording, but look up the millions of threads on this forum about brothers and you'll see my point).
I hope you understand what I'm getting at. Penis size is genetically very complex, and evolution does not occur over three generations within a population of the size of the world (or even just the US, since many people on this board are from there). If penis sizes are getting bigger it is solely due to environmental changes. Likewise with height and age of puberty onset. I doubt penises are getting significantly bigger, but if they are I would say it wouldn't be by much (environmental cues can only affect penis size so much, with the exception of severe malnutrition). Plus, those relating a perceived penis size increase to the confirmed height increase don't realize how different the development of both processes is.
Science is really hard. Please stop trying to explain it in very simple terms with nothing backing up your claims. I hope this lays to rest this huge debate about penis evolution (although the debate on the increase of penis size in younger generations is still valid -- but if this is occurring, I would suspect that the next generation will not have changed much because the environmental factors are probably already about as influential as they get, barring feeding two-year old kids Red Bull everyday).
In addition, I would be willing to bet my life on the fact that penis size is a complex trait controlled by several genes and the regulation of those genes (and hormone regulation as well). Scientists like to pretend that we know so much about human genetics and constantly cite examples like cystic fibrosis being caused by a mutation in one gene, but the truth is we know crap about human genetics and almost everything is controlled by many genes. Most of our knowledge about complex traits (which include height, build, etc.) is solely from association studies, which aren't very accurate and make it difficult to track genes. Plus, the fact that penis size is a little taboo means that relatively few association studies between penis size and gene expression levels, or genetic mapping experiments (complicated in humans because ethically we can't pick two ideal subjects and get them to mate, so instead it's more association studies and linkage studies) have been done compared to other things. So we don't know much about penis genetics. It is probably decided by contributions from both parents on somatic chromosomes. I doubt it comes specifically from the father because the Y chromosome contains very few genes (however, it is possible that paternal imprinting DOES designate that penis size comes from the father -- but we know almost nothing about imprinting and epigenetics because it's VERY difficult to study). It could also have X-linked contributions, meaning penis size is at least in part inherited from your mother. However, since women have two X chromosome (one from their mother and one from their father), two siblings could have drastically different penis sizes depending on which X chromosome they inherit. This would FURTHER slow down evolution of penis size, because even families with a "big penis gene" (which doesn't exist) may also have a "small penis gene". Plus, there's also the possibility that these "big penis" people are carriers for a small penis.
For proof that penis size is a complex trait, let's assume it isn't and say it is solely designated from the father. All brothers would have the same sized penis (although they may vary slightly because of environmental factors). Anecdotally, this isn't the case. Let's assume it's X-linked and inherited from the mother. All brothers would be one of two possible sizes (again with environmental impacts). Anecdotally, there have been many people saying that a family with three brothers has a small, medium and large size (bad wording, but look up the millions of threads on this forum about brothers and you'll see my point).
I hope you understand what I'm getting at. Penis size is genetically very complex, and evolution does not occur over three generations within a population of the size of the world (or even just the US, since many people on this board are from there). If penis sizes are getting bigger it is solely due to environmental changes. Likewise with height and age of puberty onset. I doubt penises are getting significantly bigger, but if they are I would say it wouldn't be by much (environmental cues can only affect penis size so much, with the exception of severe malnutrition). Plus, those relating a perceived penis size increase to the confirmed height increase don't realize how different the development of both processes is.
Science is really hard. Please stop trying to explain it in very simple terms with nothing backing up your claims. I hope this lays to rest this huge debate about penis evolution (although the debate on the increase of penis size in younger generations is still valid -- but if this is occurring, I would suspect that the next generation will not have changed much because the environmental factors are probably already about as influential as they get, barring feeding two-year old kids Red Bull everyday).
I disagree with that blurb. The average age was probably 2 or 3 years younger seeing as how women were married up and shelling out newborns at 14-15 back then. :tongue:
No, I don't think penises are getting bigger and I have to agree with those who point out that neither evolution not natural selection, nor even sexual selection are at work here. To presume that kids are more endowed because women are choosing larger men is preposterous. Pretty much every one who wants a kid has one and guys with small penises are just as likelyto have 4 kids with their spouse or significant other. The idea that there is this whole population of below average guys who aren't getting any and can't find women because of their size just doesn't make sense.
As far as hormones are concerned, most of those found in our food and water supply have a detrimental effect on the development of male sex organs.
As far as hormones are concerned, most of those found in our food and water supply have a detrimental effect on the development of male sex organs.
Another thing based on the last post and several others. People are treating natural selection, sexual selection and evolution as completely different things when they're not. Natural selection = survival of the fittest (loosely put). Sexual selection = the most sexually desirable have more offspring. They're both kind of related. However, the most important point is that natural and sexual (and artificial) selection are the CAUSES of evolution. Evolution should not be treated as a separate entity from selection because it is derived from it.
I hate to nitpick, but, technically speaking, Wolves and Dogs are the same species. :wink:
yes, I know these are all part of the same process: natural selection leads to evoution, etc. I was simply trying to be as complete as possible in pointing out that no version of this process is at play in the penis size of young kids.
If penises are getting bigger on average, which I doubt, it is probably related to people growing taller which is mostly due to nutrition, is it not?
I do think that over the last 30 years, more and more chemicals are used in the proccessing of food, packaged or otherwise. Especially growth hormones fed to animals, which we in turn consume. I to have seen 11 and 12 y/o girls with developped chest. My nephew at 9 started getting pubic and underarm hairs. This was not common 35 years ago.
I don't think of it as evolution, but folks playing with Mother Nature by altering the food animals eat.
I don't think of it as evolution, but folks playing with Mother Nature by altering the food animals eat.
Similar threads
