What Other Group Has To Put Up With This?

[ItsAll4Kim]

Over time, with things that happen under normal socializing activities, men tend to see or glimpse the penises of their peers.

True, seeing an erect one is very rare. However, rightly or wrongly, estimates are made from flaccid dimensions. At the extremes of size this information is automatically gained when, for example, peeing in the woods, even when not facing each other. Digging it out as opposed to letting it flop out is pretty obvious. For those in the average range, peeing in the woods might not be determinative at all. But, of course, no one makes "average penis jokes." They make "small penis jokes."

I happen to have new living arrangements for about 10 months. 2 men I now associate with frequently for family reasons have seen my penis and I have seen theirs. In both cases because of being at the YMCA with respective families and using the locker room. Another guy might have some awareness from a hiking trip we took with our families. Though not directed at me, I heard 1 guy "joshing" another that "I didn't think it was that cold today" when he noticed him struggling to pee.

It took several months before we actually saw each other at the Y though we were there together routinely. Sure, I could have taken extraordinary step to avoid being seen through all this. However, in my estimation, that would give a worse impression than my small penis itself.

I have been asked this before, I answered though in less detail. People laugh it off as a small penis joke.

This is just more of the same assumption that coworkers are somehow always going to socialize, that these social situations somehow always wind up with two men in a locker room or even more ridiculously peeing in nature while facing each other. There are no "extraordinary steps" needed to avoid being seen. Don't get naked. Don't face people when you pee in the woods. This isn't difficult or extraordinary at all.

These social situations can happen. But they don't have to happen. If you want your privacy it is easily afforded even IN these situations. And the vast majority of men do not socialize with coworkers, ESPECIALLY MANAGEMENT....certainly not enough of them to set up your vaunted hierarchy, even IF they caught a glimpse of dick, and even if they decided to use dick size to determine who gets promoted (an assumption made by someone who clearly never was a manager).

You've built a house of cards. The foundation is the assumption of knowledge of size. It's a false assumption. If someone sees your dick, it's because you let them. Nobody told you to pee facing someone else. Nobody forced you to be naked in a locker room. If you did this, especially with this hierarchy paranoia, you did so on purpose.

As you know, I'm a nudist. I control who sees me nude. Outside nudist venues, I do not let anyone randomly view me nude. Ever. I never included coworkers in even the knowledge of my nudism. I don't discuss it with randos. Ever. Even someone such as myself, who is fine being nude among friends, is not so cavalier as to have no control over who sees me. For non-nudists, there is virtually no situation where a random coworker or friend would ever view them nude unless they chose to do so.

And within my nudist community, dick size, which IS well known, has never had a bearing on who led, who followed, who did anything. We are all just people. We happen to enjoy being without clothes when the weather is nice. We have all the same flaws and hang ups as everyone else. There is no utopia. There are disagreements, affairs, fights, grudges. But not once have I witnessed dick size as a factor. And that's in an environment where dick size IS known. In a work environment in the US in the last 40 years? No, that's not something people know unless you want them to know.

 

[Brian S]

Over time, with things that happen under normal socializing activities, men tend to see or glimpse the penises of their peers.

True, seeing an erect one is very rare. However, rightly or wrongly, estimates are made from flaccid dimensions. At the extremes of size this information is automatically gained when, for example, peeing in the woods, even when not facing each other. Digging it out as opposed to letting it flop out is pretty obvious. For those in the average range, peeing in the woods might not be determinative at all. But, of course, no one makes "average penis jokes." They make "small penis jokes."

I happen to have new living arrangements for about 10 months. 2 men I now associate with frequently for family reasons have seen my penis and I have seen theirs. In both cases because of being at the YMCA with respective families and using the locker room. Another guy might have some awareness from a hiking trip we took with our families. Though not directed at me, I heard 1 guy "joshing" another that "I didn't think it was that cold today" when he noticed him struggling to pee.

It took several months before we actually saw each other at the Y though we were there together routinely. Sure, I could have taken extraordinary step to avoid being seen through all this. However, in my estimation, that would give a worse impression than my small penis itself.

I have been asked this before, I answered though in less detail. People laugh it off as a small penis joke.

Ah yes, the age-old tradition of bosses taking their male employees into the woods for a nice piss, hoping to judge them on their "flop quotient".

"Hmm...I know it's impossible to tell with him facing away from me and all, but I just don't feel like his flop quotient was big enough. Here I once thought Barnes would be perfect for promotion, but now I'm not so sure..."

 

[MisterB]

Ah yes, the age-old tradition of bosses taking their male employees into the woods for a nice piss, hoping to judge them on their "flop quotient".

"Hmm...I know it's impossible to tell with him facing away from me and all, but I just don't feel like his flop quotient was big enough. Here I once thought Barnes would be perfect for promotion, but now I'm not so sure..."

Yeah, but how about that Noble guy? I think he's got potential.

 

[Llbaker]

These social situations can happen. But they don't have to happen. If you want your privacy it is easily afforded even IN these situations. And the vast majority of men do not socialize with coworkers, ESPECIALLY MANAGEMENT....certainly not enough of them to set up your vaunted hierarchy, even IF they caught a glimpse of dick, and even if they decided to use dick size to determine who gets promoted (an assumption made by someone who clearly never was a manager).

I wonder what world you live in. . . In my experience there is always an "in group" that socializes running the organization. Yup, you don't need to be part of it and you don't need to get the benefits.

What nonsense you write.

 

[Llbaker]

The bottom line is that your definition and use of "phallocracy" is flat out wrong. It has nothing to do with penises. Nothing that *I* wrote has changed what *you* wrote in this regard.

I already put the 2 sentences in the same post for comparison. You changed the meaning entirely for the sake of your argument.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

I already put the 2 sentences in the same post for comparison. You changed the meaning entirely for the sake of your argument.

Both mean that in your worldview, men with large penises use them to inflict pain, figuratively or literally, on women and smaller men. No difference. Wake up, take your meds, eat a sandwich. We get your gist.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

I wonder what world you live in. . . In my experience there is always an "in group" that socializes running the organization. Yup, you don't need to be part of it and you don't need to get the benefits.

What nonsense you write.

You don't need to show your dick to be part of the club. You don't even need a dick. I have been on all sides of that. In the club, way not in the club, in management, and as a business owner. Dick size unknown. Dick size irrelevant to ANYTHING to do with business, unless you were in porn.

It's clear why you were held back professionally. Your reasoning is beyond stupid. If I'm in a work team, and I have responsibility to get things done...to make money for the company... I need my key players to perform at their assigned tasks. Again, unless it's porn, possession of a penis is irrelevant. Possession of a large penis is even less relevant. Who gets results? Who gets along with others? Who can lead, who can take direction, who can be taught, who can teach, WHO MAKES US MONEY? These are the criteria in team building. If dick size made money, you can be damned well sure it would be well known and exploited. Business is business.

But dick size doesn't make money. So nobody gave a shit about your dick at work. Sorry.

 

[Llbaker]

But dick size doesn't make money. So nobody gave a shit about your dick at work. Sorry.

I see you have forgotten entirely my point that personality and peer group status is partially determined over a lifetime by dick status, hence the obsession of men with dick size and the culture-wide disparagement of the small under the cover of humor. Your response is always "see a therapist" which I'm not opposed to as I freely admit that the small dick social handicap can be and is over-come by some.

There must be a denied issue very deeply embedded which you feel compelled to deny.

 

[Llbaker]

Both mean that in your worldview, men with large penises use them to inflict pain, figuratively or literally, on women and smaller men. No difference. Wake up, take your meds, eat a sandwich. We get your gist.

Definitely not as I have explained.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

I see you have forgotten entirely my point that personality and peer group status is partially determined over a lifetime by dick status, hence the obsession of men with dick size and the culture-wide disparagement of the small under the cover of humor. Your response is always "see a therapist" which I'm not opposed to as I freely admit that the small dick social handicap can be and is over-come by some.

There must be a denied issue very deeply embedded which you feel compelled to deny.

I haven't forgotten it, and fuck you for the insult.

The statement you quoted has nothing to do with your lifetime of dick status bullshit. Nobody at work cares about your dick. Women only peripherally care about your dick, and then it's just as likely they'll be happy or not, with whatever size you are.

My response is often (not always, Mr. Equivocation) to seek therapy, because what you and a few others say is so far out in the fringe that it indicates obsession as well as possibly dysmorphia. YOU are obsessed with dick size. Normal people can put things in......

Perspective

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

Definitely not as I have explained.

Then get better at explaining.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

Definitely not as I have explained.

But absolutely as you have written.

I don't think you know the half of it yet. The phallocracy is about dominating, hurting, raping, torturing, ruining, etc. with a large penis women and men perceived as not masculine. The phallocracy is not about pleasuring women with a large penis.

Your definition, cleaned up so it reads like an actual sentence:
The phallocracy is about men with a large penis dominating, hurting, raping, torturing and ruining women and men perceived as not masculine.

The actual definition of phallocracy:

"a society or system which is dominated by men and in which the male sex is thought superior"

No mention of large penises. No mention of penises at all. No mention of torture and pain, rape and ruin. Nothing at all like your extrapolated idea of what a phallocracy is.

 

[Llbaker]

Normal people can put things in......

Perspective

Not likely as indicated by this site, universal appeal of vicious small dick humor, etc.

 

[Llbaker]

No mention of large penises. No mention of penises at all. No mention of torture and pain, rape and ruin. Nothing at all like your extrapolated idea of what a phallocracy is.

Do you really expect the phallocracy to publish the complete definition? Anyway, if maleness is superior, then a larger penis is "more male" and superior to small. After all it is testosterone that signals the penis to grow in the womb and at puberty. It's impolitic to mention, but "small dick" humor reveals the truth.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

Do you really expect the phallocracy to publish the complete definition?

Going right to the tinfoil-hat conspiracy? There are literally dozens of dictionaries. The internet is a free space to express. Yet only you have amended this definition. If such a thing existed, why would the real definition be hidden? Given the cowardice to reveal oneself (in direct contradiction to your claim that everyone knows anyway), why would large men fear putting it in writing? As usual, your pretzel logic can't be straightened.

Anyway, if maleness is superior, then a larger penis is "more male" and superior to small.

Maleness isn't superior. That isn't established. And if greater physical size were superior, then obesity would be extremely desirable.

You just spout off as if merely uttering words made them true.

After all it is testosterone that signals the penis to grow in the womb and at puberty.

So?

It's impolitic to mention, but "small dick" humor reveals the truth.

Your truth, perhaps. Not everyone else's.

 

[Llbaker]

It is the culture that says and always has said that maleness is superior. Nowadays, it is admitted that the phollocracy is arrayed against women and something is being done about it, or at least attempted, through the women's movement, etc.

What you are helping to suppress for some reason, Kim, is that the phallocracy through it's hierarchical structure is also arrayed agains the less masculine and, also, specifically, the less phallic.

No, small dick humor reveals the truth about society, providing a window for all who want to look and understand.

 

[ItsAll4Kim]

It is the culture that says and always has said that maleness is superior. Nowadays, it is admitted that the phollocracy is arrayed against women and something is being done about it, or at least attempted, through the women's movement, etc.

What you are helping to suppress for some reason, Kim, is that the phallocracy through it's hierarchical structure is also arrayed agains the less masculine and, also, specifically, the less phallic.

No, small dick humor reveals the truth about society, providing a window for all who want to look and understand.

I'm not suppressing anything. You are making a case. You have no actual evidence to support it. My refusal to simply accept your case because you say so is not "suppression". There is zero evidence that penis size has anything at all to do with how the world is run. Get over it.

 

[Llbaker]

I'm not suppressing anything. You are making a case. You have no actual evidence to support it. My refusal to simply accept your case because you say so is not "suppression". There is zero evidence that penis size has anything at all to do with how the world is run. Get over it.

Everything anyone says is their theory, though, in your case, it is always the establishment paradigm. Of course, when I say you are suppressing that is my theory which you reject.