What do you women think about BLACK COCK?

Discussion in 'Women's Issues' started by Imported, Jan 29, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. thirdlegmeat

    thirdlegmeat Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Someone recently posted a link to an article where Lexington Steele is talking about his life as a pornstar and his large penis.

    Whoever has that could you please post it again, as it relates to this post.

    But I'll go ahead and highlight a key point: Lex, himself, said he was "only 10 3/4 inches long." He also acknowledged that people often exaggerate his size, but that he doesn't like doing that because it's dishonest. Now 10 3/4 inches is still HUGE. But John Holmes was documented at over 12"...approaching 13 if I remember correctly.

    I know that an edict came from "Naughty" for us to stop acting like children, but I think honest debate is healthy. And besides, I've never been one to avoid speaking the truth for fear of offense. That kind of appeasement never accomplishes anything.

    Anyway, the article was recently discussed on LPSG a couple of months ago, and the link was posted. If someone has this, please post it again.

    Thanks.
     
  2. blar

    blar New Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    lol we would need to buy penis sized boxing gloves and duke it out
     
  3. D_Humper E Bogart

    D_Humper E Bogart New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,226
    Likes Received:
    2
    I ain't winning this round. Maybe I'll enter the beauty contest. ;)
     
  4. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    51
    doubtless_mouse: JayRanner1 - The site you linked to is so full of fallacies and stereotypical information as to be worthless. The Author uses text out of context and uses little tricks to add credibility to his idea. (an example of this is the changing of the text color to match the picture of Darwin, this makes the reader think that the following text is from Darwin when it in fact is not). The author references Natural selection, but only gives the "layman’s" explanation for it. Darwin was very specific in his theory to explain that Natural Selection referred to traits in species and not individuals, yet the author uses the "Survival of the Fittest" line and the "weak took a back seat" implying that individuals did not survive.

    Another issue with this site is the authoritiveness of the site. The author very clearly states he is not a doctor, but does not list any qualification to support his theories. The site is not affiliated with any of the references he uses (and one would wonder if he obtained permission to use them). The author insults those that question his theory (calling them Short sighted whiners). The site is too opinionated, lacks any independent support (individual did no research only partial quotes to others who did). The site is clearly an advertisement for Penis Enlargement sponsors and Large Cock Porn sites, and other porn sites.

    Just because you stumbled across a site that looks like it a really study on penis size, doesn't mean it has any merit. I am a very accomplished graphic designer, and have been designing web sites for a number of years, likewise I am a fairly decent academic writer (this post should not be taken as an example of my academic writing, this is a quick note before I jaunt off to bed), if I wanted to spend the time I could develop a web site that would seem to completely refute the claims in PenisDebate.com, the site would look professional, the materials would be presented in an appealing and well written manner. The issue though isn't about how well I write or how great the web site looks; the real issue is about the content of the material posted. I would not be able to post material with reliable content because this is not my area of expertise, just like it is not the author’s expertise.

    Ramblings from the Mouse
     
  5. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yeah, sexual selection is a lot more complicated than that.

    It's a strange bit of k00kery. Until I saw that site, I'd devised the k00ks of human evolution into three categories:

    *those who think evolution can't happen
    *those who believe early hominid society was marked by endemic warfare
    *those who think humans are natural vegetarians

    But these are people who don't realize that evolution is itslef basically chaos theory.
     
  6. naughty

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    12,837
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Workin' up a good pot of mad!
    Thirdlegmeat,

    Ah, my dear we meet again! It seems we always tend to have discussion over this topic. I dont think I intended that as an edict, I believe Mark is the only one around here who can issue those. I guess it just amazes me that we seem to keep coming back to this topic over and over and over again. It seems to be a topic that causes friction and divisiveness , and though I dont generally run from discussion I have noticed that it has caused some of our black male posters a bit of distress . One person in particular even left the board because the hype about the size myth really brought him down. But since this is the LSPG, where else would it be better discussed. So, please do carry on. As is the case in all posts, that was just my .02 worth.


    naughty
     
  7. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    51
    NineInchCock_160IQ:
    all three, eh?

    that's uh... humans, gargoyles, and Oberoun's children (a.k.a. the fae folk) right?
     
  8. TragicWhiteKnight

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    260
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London & Manchester, with lots of commuting betwee
    all three, eh?

    that's uh... humans, gargoyles, and Oberoun's children (a.k.a. the fae folk) right?
    [post=282255]Quoted post[/post]​
    [/b][/quote]

    I think the last person to believe there were only three races was Wagner: giants, dwarves and humans [or blacks, Jews and whites, respectively]
     
  9. naughty

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    12,837
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Workin' up a good pot of mad!
    Gentlemen,

    What exactly would you call them then? I am only using the terminology still in use today. Personally I think we are all just variations on the same theme. But because we have in reality based so much in this world on race (using the terminology) and ethnicity I am using those terms. Being a mutt myself I really dont like any of the characterizations. Dont look for things to pick apart in what I said .Look at the intent behind it.

    Naughty
     
  10. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yanno, I was listening to "Ride of the Valkyries" the other day, and I got a sudden urge to invade Poland. LOL

    Seriously, usually three races is used by k00ks to "prove" that this or that came from somewhere else. So if a statue of an Indian in Mexico has thick lips or a big nose, that's proof of Malians founding ancient Mexico. Or if a skull's found in North America where the nasal index or cephalic index is just a little low (even though both are typically lower, at least among plains tribes, than they are in Caucasians), it's proof Indians wiped out whites who were in North America before Indians some time in the Lower Holocene -- while still managing to wipe out large Pleistocene mammals like mammoths, megatheria. and saber-tooth tigers. (One of these days, I expect they'll blame us for the extinction of the trilobite.)

    Wait . . . Black giants? Outside of eastern Africa, they're typically no taller than anyone else. Sometimes extremely short.

    naughty -- from the Enlightenment to UNESCO, different naturalists came up with two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, twelve, fifteen, twenty-six, thirty-three, sixty, or sixty-three races, depending on the person's preference. It's like how Japanese swear they can spot a Korean, but most of us can't tell the difference.
     
  11. Pene_Negro_Grande

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Right Next To You
    First of all - take it from a black man - big dicks on black guys are stereotypes...I think big dicks are evenly distributed between all races...And I don't have a problem admitting that I am average - no gigantic cock here - but no complaints yet either...And I don't discriminate when it comes to color when it comes to hooking up - even though I probably definitely would prefer some sort of minority...And no4wg - I have a personality that would blow your mind...Just joking - a little...Some of the coolest people I have met or had the pleasure of hooking up w/were a different race than myself...I mean I have been w/white, black, asian, latin and all the mixes in between...That is what is cool about our world - lots of variety...But the biggest turn on for me is a girl of Carribean decent w/a British accent - I eat that up...
     
  12. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    51
    NineInchCock_160IQ:
    Yanno, I was listening to "Ride of the Valkyries" the other day, and I got a sudden urge to invade Poland. LOL

    Seriously, usually three races is used by k00ks to "prove" that this or that came from somewhere else. So if a statue of an Indian in Mexico has thick lips or a big nose, that's proof of Malians founding ancient Mexico. Or if a skull's found in North America where the nasal index or cephalic index is just a little low (even though both are typically lower, at least among plains tribes, than they are in Caucasians), it's proof Indians wiped out whites who were in North America before Indians some time in the Lower Holocene -- while still managing to wipe out large Pleistocene mammals like mammoths, megatheria. and saber-tooth tigers. (One of these days, I expect they'll blame us for the extinction of the trilobite.)

    Wait . . . Black giants? Outside of eastern Africa, they're typically no taller than anyone else. Sometimes extremely short.

    naughty -- from the Enlightenment to UNESCO, different naturalists came up with two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, twelve, fifteen, twenty-six, thirty-three, sixty, or sixty-three races, depending on the person's preference. It's like how Japanese swear they can spot a Korean, but most of us can't tell the difference.
    [post=282420]Quoted post[/post]​
    [/b][/quote]




    No no no no... Native American Indians are really from Jerusalem. They used to be white like all of the people God loves but God turned their skin red as punishment for killing one of the other Israeli tribes in America. It's all in the book of Mormon. Jesus people, read something once in a while. :angry:





    seriously though... as I mentioned in some other thread, I think the whole concept of "race" is bupkiss. I mean, it's not as if an asian and a latino or an african and a jew hook-up they are going to have infertile offspring. All you really have is differences in the degree of prevalence of certain dominant genes that do affect personal apperance in different regions of the world. You also have common culture springing up which often gives rise to intermarriage and establishement of new "races"... people connected by religion, language, politics or geography. Regions that are close together have people with more in common genetically than regions that are far apart. Which is why, for instance, Koreans look more like Japanese than they do like the Portuguese. Personally I think there is a huge difference between the way Koreans look and the way the Japanese look. Tragic, you honestly can't spot the difference? The more exposure you have to people of a certain ethnicity the less similar they all start to look to each other..

    In my opinion, either there is ONE race, the human race, or else you need to include WAY more than 3. I don't even know which 3 you're talking about, even from an ethno-centric American WASP point of view I'd at least expect "whites", "blacks", "asians" and "latinos" to make the cut (sometimes "Arabs" or "Jews" but they're not that important). Though this kind of limited labeling says nothing of the differences between Greeks and Swedes, Mestizos and Quiche, Persians and Jews, Eskimos and Cherokee, Tutsis and Hutus, or Samoans and Punjabi... of which there are many... some more pronounced than others.

    Just some food for thought. Hey if anyone else wants to invade Poland I'm up for it. Beautiful women and good ice cream there...

    :ninja: <--- hey look it&#39;s Ted Danson.
     
  13. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    51
    NineInchCock_160IQ:
    well... you could say you have dated a wide variety of men from many different ethnic backgrounds. Include which if you feel it&#39;s necessary.

    My first girlfriend was predominantly "caucasian" (though this is misleading too... most "whites" are not from the Caucus mountains), she was mostly German, a little Native American, family from Alabama. My second girlfriend was African-American on her father&#39;s side, family from South Carolina, and her mother&#39;s side was from Panama, with a bit of Mexican, Jamaican and African thrown in for flavor. After her I dated a Vietnamese girl for 3 months and a Bolivian girl off and on for a while... several other dates and brief relationships between then and now. Most interesting background of anyone I&#39;ve dated so far I think was the girl from Baltimore I met who was 1/4 Scottish, 1/4 Nepalese/East Indian, and the rest from Belize and a mix of African, French, Creole and Hispanic blood. She was cool.
     
  14. naughty

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    12,837
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Workin' up a good pot of mad!
    Dear Nine inch,

    I will elaborate. I meant that I have dated men of European descent, Asian descent and African American ( which in most cases is multi- racial). Perhaps I will use these continental distinctions in the future. By the way, those combinations sound positively delightful. and quite attractive. Since so many of us are a simmering stew of ethnicity if can be hard to know exactly what is in there at all times. I was only going by what I was told.


    Naughty
     
  15. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    51
    NineInchCock_160IQ:
    That&#39;s cool. Variety is the spice of life right? and yes, a lot of people these days are pretty mixed-up, particularly in the great melting pot of the USA, which I think is a good thing. Ethnic purity just leads to shallow gene pools and people with limited perspective. Making those continental distinctions you mentioned is a little more clear, but still I think this can be a little nonsensical. I mean.. Irish and Greek people usually get clumped together as "caucasians", Turks and Pakistanis often get grouped together as "Arabs" or "Mid-Easterners" (or sometimes incorrectly as "Persians"), East Indians and the Japanese are both considered "Asian".... and yet... Greeks have more in common genetically with Turks than they do with Irish, Turks have more in common with Greeks than they do with Pakistanis, Pakistanis have more in common with Indians than they do with the Turks, and Indians share more with Pakistanis than they do with the Japanese.

    Also, calling someone multi-racial, like you suggested the majority of African-Americans are (presumably since many. mostly due to a long history of rape by slaveowners, have some European or Native American blood in them) seems a little shortsighted. The implication here would be that certain races have been around indefinitely and that there are a set number of "pure" or "core" races that have always been. This is nonsense, regardless of whether you are a Creationist and believe we all descended from Adam and his rib, or a Darwinist and think we all came from the same randy amoeba, or you worship Odin and Thor and believe the earth was formed from the corpse of the giant Ymir and humans were made from two pieces of driftwood. We are all racially mixed.
     
  16. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    o/~ . . . Dum dum dum dum dum . . . o/~

    (Okay, I&#39;ve been watching too much South Park.)
     
  17. naughty

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    12,837
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Workin' up a good pot of mad!
    Alright then,

    This is all well and good in theory but in the real world people are quick to place themselves and others in categories . There are even individuals who think they are definitely one thing or another and find out through DNA testing that they have none of the ancestry they have been claiming. This topic leaves me reeling and rocking.


    Naughty
     
  18. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    DNA means Daddy Not Available.

    Seriously, though, I&#39;ve seen such DNA tests. It seems to be circular reasoning.
     
  19. Knight

    Knight New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sheffield, England
    I&#39;m 1/16th Italian (great great grandmother was Italian, from Lavangha (I know I spelt it wrong hehe). That must be where I got my penis from cos all Italians are hung lol. Really though, I did get the skin type that browns easily and for me really does go brown hehe I could pass off as &#39;black&#39;...Race stereotypes, the good and the bad will always be around, as will fish and chips :D

    So yeah...thats about all I have to say...what does it mean? Not sure. :p
     
  20. Blood rose

    Blood rose New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    From what I&#39;ve read is that the black(or Sub-Saharan African for the politicaly correct) male penis tends to be larger in the flaccid state. This is said to be because of the African environment, and less fat was needed around the genital area. Most of the data that presented a "large ERECT male penis" usually has something later descriping the black male intelligence as being "lower". Hinting or actually saying that black men are uncontrolable beasts that go around and rape things. Clearly racist findings. Other such stereotypes have hit Italians and Jews. The Eastern Asian penis tends to be so because of a long history of their diet(or current diet).

    * I&#39;m ignoring Kinsey studies because I don&#39;t trust that bastard, he has screwy sample size studies. I&#39;ve read some things about how Kinsey purposely changed a lot of his samples and surveys to meet his "findings".
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.