To respectfully attempt to refute my points would be one thing. To call them hilariously stupid is pathetic, prejudiced, and speaks volumes about you. Ahh, for the days of barbarism, where being polite was mandatory lest one had their skull sundered by an axe. Relax, not threatening anyone, just sharing Ron Howard's sentiments.
Why I should waste my time defending my comment from someone who clearly thinks himself so high and mighty, is lost on myself.
Making reference to a vagina as being part of the birth canal was intended only to bring attention to the extreme adaptability of the organ, nothing more. It is for this reason that even very petite women with relatively tight vaginas are able to eventually take hugely thick cocks the size of their own forearm, given lots of patience and know-how on the part of the penis owner. It is for this reason I have seen women go from having taken no more than 6" thick penetration, to a 7.5" or more thickness with no more than a few minutes of slow adjustment. THAT is all I was saying.
Regardless of the true motives of penissizedebate.com, you cannot dismiss everything on the entire site with one swooping statement of judgmental closed-mindedness. Most of the arguments made on that site stand up to the rigor of reason, unassailably so, much as you wish it weren't so. Much of those points I have also LIVED the reality of through the dozens of women I've been with and observed for myself the truth of it. You have a black and white mindset that a source is either 100% B.S. or 100% legit. I say, most sources of so-called authority are complete bullshit in an age where integrity is no longer valued, and the best you're ever going to get from even the most altruistic sources is maybe 90% truthfulness. That's what penissizedebate is. A collection of very fine points, with a few obvious tongue in cheek ones and possibly an ulterior overriding motive which nevertheless doesn't discount the minor premises presented therein.
You're welcome, derisive snap judgment name caller.