Consensus On Length Gains?

Copy paste from Wikipedia: “The suspensory ligament of the penis is attached to the pubic symphysis, which holds the penis close to the pubic bone and supports it when erect. The ligament does not directly connect to the Corpus cavernosum penis, but may still play a role in erectile dysfunction.[1] The ligament can be surgically lengthened in a procedure known as ligamentolysis, which is a form of penis enlargement.[2]”

“Body of the penis (corpus): The pendulous part of the penis. It has two surfaces: dorsal (posterosuperior in the erect penis), and ventral or urethral (facing downwards and backwards in the flaccid penis). The ventral surface is marked by the penile raphe. The base of the body of penis is supported by the suspensory ligament which is attached to the pubic symphysis. [5]”

Those ligaments are the anchor of the penis in the pelvis. When I do stretches I don’t feel tension in the body of the penis itself, but behind it, at the anchor point. No exhaustion in the penis itself, only in the anchor area. Since surgery is made for penis enlargement, this obviously does not apply only to flaccid, but also erect appearance, which is the case for me. When doing exercises for girth this doesn’t include the anchor area, but only the body of penis, thus exhaustion in the body of penis. Obviously so called ligament stretches change the anchor point of the body of penis, moving it further outside the body, resulting in greater length, both flaccid and erect. That is what I experienced and the results I got.

In addition: stretching upwards or straight ahead feels tension in different points of the anchor area. Also, in that area are real muscles involved, different from the body of the penis, that is no real muscle. Muscles can be deformed much easier.

We’ve been in agreement this whole time lmao. I was arguing against the “ligament gains” you get from downwards stretching, whilst you guys were arguing for the “ligament gains” you get from upwards stretching.

So we have three types of gains we need to name:

1) The gains you get from making the penis bigger (inner or outer penis):
“Tunica gains” still works.
2) The gains you get from downwards ligament stretching (from straightening the inner penis):
What do we call these? “Ligament gains?”
3) The gains you get from stretching the anchor point:
What do we call these? “Anchor point gains”?

Thanks for your help guys.

I agree. I think any kind of stretching be it manual or with devices as a whole stretch both, ligaments and the body of penis. Thus actually no way to “hit” specifically one of them.

However manual stretches in different directions make it possible to hit different areas of ligaments, as I explained before. Also, I did not use heat, which is said to improve exercises for the body of the penis, to which I agree. Still I had my length gains. This is logical, because I felt the stretches in the ligaments, not the body of penis. This might indicate, that heating or not can be a way to separate the both potencial sources of penis growth: ligaments and body of the penis. You could use for length ligament stretches without heat and for girth different exercises including heat.

With manual stretching, you can definitely target either ligaments or tunica.

Doing the inverted v or a stretch, will cause you to feel tension in the tunica.

Manually stretching straight down, you will feel it in the ligaments.

At least that is my experience.

There is also the option to sever the suspensory ligament altogether. Ligamentolysis has been hit-or-miss over the years, but most credible surgeons who’ve performed this insist that a post-op stretching regimen is required to cement gains. This specific procedure has been in refinement for multiple decades, but my internal reporting suggests we’re starting to see some headway as far as consistency is concerned.

Flaccid length is often more apparent immediately post-op than erect gains.

I have one Clinic who will be promoting a 1-Inch Guarantee soon, but I remain respectfully skeptical; their Surgeon has been stellar in all other areas of Urological Surgery which is why I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt. Not so much the 1-inch claim in my opinion, but any positive yield in length is a major step forward in this field.

Personally, I wouldn’t recommend considering this route if you’re already above-average in length, I think hard-gainers and “shorter” guys are probably better candidates. To each their own though, none of these techniques, surgical or otherwise, aren’t without risk.

This supports the idea that stretching the ligaments will or can add to erect length.

Is that correct?

Imo the fact that the surgery provides more flaccid length than erect length would support the opposite.

After talking with Bangel and A69, I think I’ve come to the conclusion that the ligament only matters in relation to the inner penis. If the inner penis is longer than the ligament allows it to be, it will simply curve and the length will be wasted. So if our inner penis becomes longer, our ligament must be loosened for the gains to be realized. What do you think?

I agree with the theory. However to me, it seems that it would support the idea that there are potentially substantial gains to be made by stretching the ligaments.

Yes, in my opinion and experience it does as stated some posts ago.

I don’t understand this explanation, may be my English isn’t sufficient, my apologies.

The body of the penis is one unit, part of which is outside the body, the visible penis, part of it inside the body, you call it inner penis. But it is one piece. The idea here is very simple: move the whole body of penis further outside the body by stretching/deforming the anchoring unit, moving the anchoring point ahead. Visible longer penis, both flaccid and erect. Theoretically same gains in both states. BPFL: 5 in + 1 in => BPFL 6 in; BPEL: 6 in + 1 in => BPEL 7 in. 1 inch is in that example the moving of the anchoring point of the body of the penis. It’s not about real growth/deformation of the body of the penis itself, it’s all about getting it further outside the body.

Again yes.

tl,dr: I was arguing against the “up-down” ligament. They were arguing for the “back-front” ligament. I agree with them.

Yeah we were just talking about different ligaments. “Ligament gains” as they were defined in the old days were the result of <downwards> stretching. In my previous post I was talking about that, and how it is only helpful to allow inner penis gains to be used. (Bib hung straight down or even backwards.)

Bangel and A69 were talking about the type of “Ligament gains” that you get from <upwards> stretching. When you do this, the tension bypasses the up-down part of the suspensory ligament and hits 1: the inner penis and 2: the anchor point. They claimed that stretching the anchor point will loosen it and give you more dick to use. I agree with this. (I still think they made tunica gains as well, as it is obviously impossible to hit the anchor point without hitting the tunica.)

Yes, of course, most likely and individually different you hit the tunica as well. As I said before we should not think that it’s possible to seperate the both through exercises fully. However I felt exhaustment in the anchor point, not in the tunica, did this for years and most likely had my major gains from ligaments. Some in tunica for sure, too. Besides while doing almost only stretches for length I had some minimal girth gains, too.

Thus guys, experiment with different techniques, find out what works best for you, and stick with it as long as it’s effective. As one member uses to say: may the gains be with you!

It is difficult to separate the two completely.

It is not so difficult to emphasize on one or the other.