What if your sister started dating a small?

[5104]

Honestly Lloyd, we just can't talk about Wally's perspective and whether or not there is a germ of truth in it. That's because you nor I are Wally. You "think" you understand his perspective, but, you just don't.

Science is based on forming a hypothesis and then attempting to compare the hypothesis to reality. Ideally, an experiment should be designed to test the hypothesis. Admittedly, in this thread, in this regard, I am stuck in speculative hypothesizing. Contrary to your claims, WE CAN TALK about speculation! Maybe really meant it is fruitless to talk in this case.

 

[5104]

Ever wonder to yourself: Why am I being regularly shouted down in several other threads in that regard? No, I guess not. Cuz if you were able to self-reflect, you'd perhaps understand somewhat why you getting shouted down in several other threads happens on a regular basis. Self-awareness is lacking. I think you are truly clueless about just about everything you post here, cuz it's pretty much the same regurgitation, time and time again. Again, you've got access to the Internet. Google yourself some self-help books on self-awareness and personal reflection. You would benefit greatly.

My opinions are not popular, ie. outside the mainstream in regard to some topics. Often, people would rather shout me down than deal with alternate opinions.

 

[MisterB]

Clearly, YOU wanted to know about my sister and my daughter. I was indicating that small dick size did not seem to be the case for the mates of either, though I certainly would not ask nor make efforts to know such details.

"Shit dude, do you even have a sister? A daughter? That's what this thread IS about, as fucked up as that subject might be. YOU are the one who continues to harp about "handicaps", which is NOT what this thread is about. It is about how one might/would feel if his/her sister or daughter were to date someone who is not blessed with large-sized genitals. Period. Want to discuss "handicaps" relating to penis size? Start a thread about it."

It was a simple yes or no question of do you even have a sister/daughter. CLEARLY. NO WHERE DID I STATE I WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR SISTER OR YOUR DAUGHTER. NO WHERE. That's your projection. I don't care about your sister or daughter. Or the size or lack thereof of their partner's genitals. IF I had wanted to know about your sister/daughter, I wouldn't have stated my question in yes/no fashion. My god man, you can't be this dumb! But hey, nice try!

I could PROJECT myself into such a position through imagination, however. In that case, status would not be a consideration in my mind. The very small of dick (not average or marginally below average) might have mental issues such as toxic over-compensation or other unpleasant reaction formation as a result.

Word salad. Whatever does this mean? Is this your version of stylized perspective?

BTW: Who is the troll here? You seem to be over-reaching to find criticisms and then, dramatically over-stating them.

Raises hand--Ooh Ooh, Mr. Kotter. Mr. Kotter. I know. I know.

It's YOU LLOYD. Baby, IT'S YOU. And Lloyd, seriously now, I don't have to over-reach to find squat. You do a fine job of providing the fodder to which I call you out on. It ain't no drama. Just the facts ma'am, just the facts.

 

[MisterB]

The nitpicking above seems to confirm my suspicions about your tolling style.

So, calling you out on your repeated bullshit is me trolling? Okay then...I shall troll on in style.

 

[5104]

So, calling you out on your repeated bullshit is me trolling? Okay then...I shall troll on in style.

Yes, along with the mischaracterizations.

 

[MisterB]

Science is based on forming a hypothesis and then attempting to compare the hypothesis to reality.

I agree. What exactly is your hypothesis in this case and what efforts have you made to relate such to reality?

Ideally, an experiment should be designed to test the hypothesis.

Agreed. How have you designed your experiment here to test the hypothesis?

Contrary to your claims, WE CAN TALK about speculation! Maybe really meant it is fruitless to talk in this case.

Speculation should have some basis in reality. and yep, time is more than past for you to stop talking. And not just in this case.

Admittedly, in this thread, in this regard, I am stuck in speculative hypothesizing.

Yep, you are truly stuck. So, until you can figure out how to get "unstuck", save us from further musings...

 

[MisterB]

My opinions are not popular, ie. outside the mainstream in regard to some topics. Often, people would rather shout me down than deal with alternate opinions.

See, now we're getting somewhere. I can assure you that people would NOT rather shout you down than deal with YOUR alternate opinions. As I've stated in a few posts to you, tell us why or how you feel such and such way, or how you came to feel such and such way. What was your reasoning? Got a source to cite that I can read to educate myself? Or at least help me better understand where you are coming from. Is this from your personal experience? Give us an idea of not just what you think/believe, but how you came to that thought. That's what fosters debate and discussion. It reduces derision and misunderstandings. I may not agree, but I'll be more willing to consider your alternate opinion if backed up with something, anything...except hot air.

I can't imagine any forum would be as interesting if their were not alternate opinions. But they need to be based in some type of factual reality.

 

[5104]

I can't imagine any forum would be as interesting if their were not alternate opinions. But they need to be based in some type of factual reality.

You really want me to detail more about this topic when you have failed so far to deal with the substance of what I have broached?

No, I don't think so. You are not interested in the topic unless it can be an occasion for thoughtless put-downs, etc.

 

[5104]

"Shit dude, do you even have a sister? A daughter? That's what this thread IS about, as fucked up as that subject might be. YOU are the one who continues to harp about "handicaps", which is NOT what this thread is about. It is about how one might/would feel if his/her sister or daughter were to date someone who is not blessed with large-sized genitals. Period. Want to discuss "handicaps" relating to penis size? Start a thread about it."

It was a simple yes or no question of do you even have a sister/daughter. CLEARLY. NO WHERE DID I STATE I WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR SISTER OR YOUR DAUGHTER. NO WHERE. That's your projection. I don't care about your sister or daughter. Or the size or lack thereof of their partner's genitals. IF I had wanted to know about your sister/daughter, I wouldn't have stated my question in yes/no fashion. My god man, you can't be this dumb! But hey, nice try!

You seem to be challenged in some cerebral respects. Of course, I was arguing that Wally had mischaracterized the real size issue in his "sister" example. Differences in penis size, in my learned opinion, do not drastically affect status as implied by Wally, but on the contrary, represent only relative handicaps for certain activities, depending on the details of the situation, and represent a negligible status deficit, particularly for the "brother."

I do not restrict my comments to the precise questions that might be asked. but respond with the whole context of the thread in mind.

LloydBaker said: ↑
I could PROJECT myself into such a position through imagination, however. In that case, status would not be a consideration in my mind. However, the very small of dick (not average or marginally below average) might have mental issues such as toxic over-compensation or other unpleasant reaction formations as a result.

>>>M Said: Word salad. Whatever does this mean? Is this your version of stylized perspective? >>>>

Nope! The above paragraph is not word salad. Understanding it would require only marginal familiarity with standard psychological ideas. Agreement would another issue.

 

[MisterB]

You really want me to detail more about this topic when you have failed so far to deal with the substance of what I have broached?

No, I don't think so. You are not interested in the topic unless it can be an occasion for thoughtless put-downs, etc.

No Lloyd, I don't want you detail any more about this or any other topic. Sorry, but I just don't. And please, don't project your insecurities back on me. I am interested in a variety of topics here at LPSG; however, I don't opine about that which I am not knowledgeable of. Instead, I'll ask questions. Like this one: Why do you opine about that which you are not knowledgeable? Especially when you opine about stuff other than the thread topic.

You seem to be challenged in some cerebral respects. Of course, I was arguing that Wally had mischaracterized the real size issue in his "sister" example. Differences in penis size, in my learned opinion, do not drastically affect status as implied by Wally, but on the contrary, represent only relative handicaps for certain activities, depending on the details of the situation, and represent a negligible status deficit, particularly for the "brother."

I think my "cerebral respects" are just fine, but thanks for your concern. I will admit that my cerebrum often struggles to follow your logic. Like what you wrote above. But hey, I hang in there. I'm not gonna give up. I'm not a quitter.

I do not restrict my comments to the precise questions that might be asked. but respond with the whole context of the thread in mind.

I think you have accurately and succinctly captured the essence of your struggles to be heard here at LPSG...you routinely go off on your own tangents. And they can be difficult to follow...though I do try. God, I hate to fail...

LloydBaker said: ↑
I could PROJECT myself into such a position through imagination, however. In that case, status would not be a consideration in my mind. However, the very small of dick (not average or marginally below average) might have mental issues such as toxic over-compensation or other unpleasant reaction formations as a result.

>>>M Said: Word salad. Whatever does this mean? Is this your version of stylized perspective? >>>>

Nope! The above paragraph is not word salad. Understanding it would require only marginal familiarity with standard psychological ideas. Agreement would another issue.

Again, Lloyd, I'm trying to understand where you are coming from. I'm afraid I've failed once again here. I still don't understand what you are trying to say here. At all. But I do agree you could project; hell man, you do project, regularly. That's your schtick.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

Christ on a crutch, Lloyd.

 

[TexanStar]

Christ on a crutch, Lloyd.

Haven't been keeping up with this thread, and comments like this tell me everything that's going on in so few words

 

[PeterGold]

Men see each other changing for the pool or beach, urinating in the woods, etc.

Soooo? I don't think you'll be hard when changing or taking a piss, and why should I have an interest in his size either way?

 

[5104]

Soooo? I don't think you'll be hard when changing or taking a piss, and why should I have an interest in his size either way?

The point is that men, over time, get an idea of the sized of their associates, family members, etc. Flaccid is not a reliable indicator of erect, but isn't irrelevant, either. Very large flaccid and very small are relevant. You should read the thread if you want to know why I was making the point. I didn't say you "should" have an interest!

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

Soooo? I don't think you'll be hard when changing or taking a piss, and why should I have an interest in his size either way?

Lloyd is apparently buying into the wally premise. The entire wally premise hinges upon men seeing other men and just "knowing" they are either "hung studs" or "smalls". A bulge in pants automatically means you're hung...not that maybe you have big balls...and no bulge means you're a "small", not that you're a grower not a shower.

And every guy exposes his penis every time he takes a piss in a public restroom, and displays his wares every time he changes...because, well, just because...he has no explanation.

But in his world you can let others know you're a "hung stud" by "other physical/mental signs" which he never went on to explain....again, just because. Of course, merely stuffing a sock in your shorts can get you a job, so these signs aren't foolproof...unless wally says so. Because.

 

[giantguy23]

A small man? Cool/ a small dog ... Da fuck are you doing???

 

[5104]

Lloyd is apparently buying into the wally premise. The entire wally premise hinges upon men seeing other men and just "knowing" they are either "hung studs" or "smalls". A bulge in pants automatically means you're hung...not that maybe you have big balls...and no bulge means you're a "small", not that you're a grower not a shower.

And every guy exposes his penis every time he takes a piss in a public restroom, and displays his wares every time he changes...because, well, just because...he has no explanation.

But in his world you can let others know you're a "hung stud" by "other physical/mental signs" which he never went on to explain....again, just because. Of course, merely stuffing a sock in your shorts can get you a job, so these signs aren't foolproof...unless wally says so. Because.

Yes, I've already agreed that Wally's perspective is greatly exaggerated. I was focusing on the germ of truth as you would see if you read the thread. Some said you can keep your dick size to yourself if you wish. My point was not really. The truth outs over the long term.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

Yes, I've already agreed that Wally's perspective is greatly exaggerated. I was focusing on the germ of truth as you would see if you read the thread. Some said you can keep your dick size to yourself if you wish. My point was not really. The truth outs over the long term.

I've read the thread, so don't assume that I don't agree because I somehow missed a "germ of truth" hidden within the hateful rhetoric.

So you think it's impossible to keep your erect size private. Other than a lover, nobody ever has to know. Ever. I'm a nudist and almost nobody among the hundreds of members of my resort knows my erect size.

But more importantly, nobody cares. The wally premise insists the your entire goddam life revolves around whether you are larger or smaller than 7 inches. It doesn't. Ever. You can have a small,penis and be successful, have love, and yes, date someone's sister. All you have to do is overcome your body dysmorphic disorder and accept that a small penis is fine.

 

[japetty]

I've read the thread, so don't assume that I don't agree because I somehow missed a "germ of truth" hidden within the hateful rhetoric.

So you think it's impossible to keep your erect size private. Other than a lover, nobody ever has to know. Ever. I'm a nudist and almost nobody among the hundreds of members of my resort knows my erect size.

But more importantly, nobody cares. The wally premise insists the your entire goddam life revolves around whether you are larger or smaller than 7 inches. It doesn't. Ever. You can have a small,penis and be successful, have love, and yes, date someone's sister. All you have to do is overcome your body dysmorphic disorder and accept that a small penis is fine.

Wally does live in his own little world of his ideas which are a ways out of factual or reality for that matter IMHO.

 

[creek47]

This still going on... loud noises!