Average Penis Size, Revisited

Are you threatening me, master Jedi?

The search engine here should bring up some info for you.

No, my young Padawan. I thought is was you that was threatening me.

Let’s not get in a pissing match here, Thunder is on the rag already.

:-piss: :explode:

I owe you one PG, no, really, I will pay it back, rest assured.

It seems to me that a height-dicksize (or footsize-dicksize) correlation cannot be ruled out a priori by noting that, for example, skeletal development is relatively independent from penile development.

A correlation may still exist: it would just be a bit trickier to explain than would be, for example, a correlation between leg size and arm size, where we could simply invoke skeletal-growth factors underpinning the sizes of both appendages. So if studies showed that there was a positive correlation between height and dicksize, we might instead explain this relationship in terms of nutritional differences (terrible malnutrition in childhood should inhibit all sorts of development…), or some other such variable (perhaps half of our study participants were Korean, and half were Kenyan; and suppose that the Koreans happened to be shorter both in height and in penis size compared to the Kenyans, i.e., that there are average group differences in both the genes influencing skeletal growth and the genes influencing penile growth). (Yes, I recognize that genetic influence on penis size, especially, will be very “indirect,” mediated by several pathways…)

So you do have to examine the actual studies. And they suggest that there might be small correlations between height and dicksize, but the overlap between the distributions for short and tall men is so huge that no one, except by chance, is going to notice the correlation by ordinary day-to-day observation. That is, knowing an individual man’s height gives you virtually no predictive power vis-a-vis his penis size: only in a very large sample of exactly recorded data will you begin to detect any relationship between the variables.

In case I wasn’t clear, my point is that empirical questions should be answered empirically when it’s easy enough to do so. There’s no reason to rely solely on known anatomical theory when pondering a possible correlation between height and penis size — why not just go out there and discover whether there is, in fact, such a correlation? If you discover a reliable correlation — one that can be replicated in other samples — then the challenge is in explaining the relationship; you may have to expand your theoretical framework to include known facts about nutrition, for example, or you may even have to consider re-investigating the “known” anatomical theory whose predictions have been contradicted by the new data. (Note that I am NOT suggesting that a height-dicksize correlation would actually be of any consequence for anatomical theory; I’m just explaining how science works, in my view. The discovery of new facts that don’t square with current theory is exactly what tends to instigate the construction of new and better theory.)

That comment about nutrition and its effect in growth (including penile growth) was a good point.

But that would not make it possible a correlation between height and penis size. If someone is lacking the right nutrients, he/she can expect a potential decline in growth AND sexual development.

Krtel, I think the problem here may simply be a miscommunication. (Forgive me if I’m wrong, but English is a second or third language for you, right?) The statistical term “correlation” means simply (this is a dictionary definition): “the simultaneous change in value of two numerically valued random variables.” Nothing about causation is implied.

So, for example, ice cream sales and shark attacks are temporally correlated in beach towns. This does not mean that one causes the other, obviously. Summer heat, a third variable, is what causes people to buy ice cream and to go to the beach; hence the correlation. Likewise, the number of churches in a city is correlated with the number of liquor stores. The third variable driving this relationship is, of course, population of the city. The correlation does not imply that churchgoers consume more liquor, or the reverse.

I am suggesting that penis size and height (or any other physical feature) may correlate; it’s an empirical question that cannot be answered a priori by theory. A correlation would not mean there is any obvious causal relationship between the two, in terms of developmental biology. Nutrition is one “third variable” I pointed out that could drive such a statistical correlation. As you said yourself, someone lacking the right nutrients may experience a decline in overall growth AND sexual development — which is exactly what’s required to drive a statistical correlation between the two variables.

Nice post. I must agree with everything you said.

By the way, English is my second language, if I can put it in those terms (portuguese is my first).

Well put Para and since the correlation was only slight to begin with, it definetly makes a strong case for a missing link

Damn, then I’m doing quite alright being half Korean on the mother’s side, being slightly more than double that in BP size.

I think it’s BS.

EJ

LOL I’ve been mentioned! 6.3 you say? I think that was my pre-PE measurement. It’s possible that I also was not pressing as hard. As for size of the penis of the male pornstar in asian porn, its very possible that large penis size is not what the asian market wants to see and/or some of the guys who get into porn are just opportunistic/impoverished type guys with average or even below average sizes. I have seen some sizeable asian penises in porn, there just haven’t been any measurements. Penises always look bigger in porn due to the camera angles, possible short stature of the male star, and petite sizes of the women involved.

As for surveys I’ve seen many. This survey is one of the more limited ones. I’ve seen a bigger global survey. You have to ignore alot of these surveys. Many are anonymous, some racial/national groups have a very small sampling size, sometimes as low as 2. The method of measuring is not fully established and enforced.

For the asian average I’ve put my trust into the little I’ve seen of nationally conducted surveys within the asian country with large samples and professional medical staff involved. Those surveys were also published in asian publications. I have to add I’ve yet to see such a survey done in Thailand. They mostly involved Japanese, Chinese, or Korean. I’m sure I posted the info before.

Maybe someone should take all the sites with legitimate looking penis size statistics surveys,those made with researchers doing the measurements.Crunch the numbers to give a means value in each percentile groups.Let’s do the average for example.

RESEARCHERS / ERECT LENGTH(not BPEL) / ERECT GIRTH

Kinsey Study(1948) / 6.21" / 4.85"

Lifestyles Condoms (2001) / 5.87" / 4.96"

UCFS (1996) / 5.1" / 4.9"

Mean Avg / 5.7" / 4.9"

The ultimate proper researched penis size survey would be one in which groups of men (100) from different countries would be measured using BPEL + EG by researchers.Some of these measurements would be videoed for authenticity.Let’s say 3000 men.Presently,a good site to visit for some more trustworthy info is:
Human penis size - Wikipedia

I’m presently doing a much needed vagina size survey. I concentrate on vagina tightness but also depth (unaroused and aroused).Much of the measurements are videoed for proof.Unlike the VaginaInstitute,which is a rip off,most of their stats are sent in by Internet survey(suspect stats) , hardly any content,few visuals,like it was hastily pasted together just to make money and rip people off.I went to their site and paid their price.I don’t mind paying for good info or entertainment.But the VaginaInstitute is truly a rip off.They want you to go to their other sites which are no doubt rip offs.

I think it’s time for both male and female genital sizes be accurately and authentically measured and made public(more so vagina size because it’s non existent).It would includes ages from 18 to 65,all nationalities, body sizes,in essences the broadest range of people possible.