Does the Golden Ratio hold the Ideal Penis Size?

So after doing a little research about the golden ratio, I was wondering if basing the dimensions of your penis to match the golden ratio, 1.618…?

So if one were to have an 8” length x 5” girth Then 8/5=1.6, or pretty much 1.618 its still close. REGARDLESS OF THAT, consider how common the golden ratio is and is a proportion that exhibits the most beauty 100% of the time, so why not have not a small dick, or even a dick that is TOO BIG!

Maybe what we really need all along was a healthy balance of length and girth proportioned to the golden ratio!

Here are some proportions I made… you can technically base these off either you flaccid or EL.

3” length 1.854” girth *I hope you’re flaccid for your sake!* ~.~

4” length 2.427” girth *Jelqs, have you heard of them?* :3

5” length 3” girth *Average Joe* :|

6” length 3.7” girth *Daytime Job* :)

7” L 4.326” G *Mack Daddy* >:]

8” L 4.944” G *Man Whore* $$$$

9” L 5.562” G *Porn Star* 8——-D

10” L 6.18” G *SCREAMING GIRLS* >A<

11” L 6.798” G *CRYING GIRLS* TAT

12” L 7.416” G *FAINTED GIRLS* X______X

I would assume that most of the most praised members on TPF are close to these type of proportions? Lets see how many people to post their measurements currently!

My dimensions are… 9”EL x 5.5” MSEG, and at first I didn’t feel I made my goals but after realizing the golden ratio…

9 / 5.5= 1.6363636363…. and the golden ratio is 1.618, so it is fairly close, if I get it closer to 9” 5.562” girth, the more perfect and aesthetic it will be! SO, I am hereby abandoning a 6” girth, and not just simply because it is too big for a woman, it technically is too big for a reason, it’s because any length/girth proportion is smaller or larger will absolutely determine how another naturally views your dick as too small or a dick that looks scary and they might not fuck you, or make sex too difficult to be pleasurable. Most likely the perfect size ratio lies within this age old mathematical secret…

And Hell, if you really want to go INTO DEPTH, give this number a shot, the golden ratio is irrational but still could be useful to know as many numbers as possible! For the perfectionist PEers out there!

1.618033988749894848204586834365638117720309179805 76286213544862270526046281890…

I am glad to notice this amazing number, please do your own research if you do not know what this ratio is, there is tons of info documented on it, it is AMAZING! :D

Now I can have the PERFECT COCK? SWEEEEET ^3^

Steelrod

I am a student of Elliott Wave Theory (stock market forecasting) and it’s based on Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio or golden mean aka Phi. I like your novel approach to Phi and the ideal penis proportions. Maybe it applies to the ratio of length to diameter or radius instead of circumference or girth. For example I have a EL of 6” and a G of 5” for a ratio of 1.20 not even close to Phi so I guess I have a lot of work to do! However, a G of 5” = a diameter of 1.5915 so the ratio of G to D = 1.592 which is very close to 1.618 only off by 0.026 or 1.6%. The radius which is half the diameter is R = 0.7957 or 1/2 of the diameter. I’m not sure where this is going but there are many relationships to consider e.g. L:G, L:D , L:R and maybe the ratio of each to each other e.g. L:D =A and L:D =B and L:R=C and the ratios of A:B and A:C and then the ratio each of them. I haven’t calculated these but they may hold some key to Phi and the Golden Ratio and therefore the “Golden Penis”

I any case your observation is very interesting and maybe is a good guide to the perfect proportions for the penis!

Cheers.

I think your way off because of the small girth sizes listed. Girth is way more important to women than length.

It would be nice as I find the Golden Ratio elegant— but I gotta cosign thor

That was my first thought when I saw listed girths. Golden ratio promotes more length and less girth and that’s not acceptable because girth is the pleasure bringer. :)

When it comes to penis sizes, I’d say the perfect ratio is about 1.3, e.g.:

8.5”x6.54”
8”x6.15”
7.5”x5.77”
7”x5.38”
6.5”x5”
6”x4.62”

Much more proportional.

I mean, seriously, who would want 3.7” EG on 6” BPEL penis? That’s miserable. Also, 5.25” is way too little for a 8.5” BPEL penis.

Dang steelrod 9” huh? Ever consider posting pics? I like seeing guys larger than myself for motivation.

Given that very few would have the perfect ratio (whichever ratio it was, as taurus noted above) it would be even more complicated by having the equivalent among females - not only your ratio, but also that of the woman to make the “golden match”.

Very good point. I am really just 7.5 or so NBP on a good day, definitely not huge, but the girth is what girls like. Even when I was 6” NBP the girth was still why they thought I had a big dick.

I think proportionality also depends on who carries the penis. For me 8” NBPEL x 5.75” (or that ratio) would be closer to ideal because I’m relatively slim and have longer arms. If I was a huge, thick, muscular guy, then 8” BPEL x 6.15” would better suit me. But I guess it’s real just personal preference but I kinda feel the same with breasts and their turn-on potential. It’s not just the size that matters but the proportions. Maybe girls feel differently about penises, because feel is also important. I’m not sure?

As mgus noted maybe the “golden match” is the key so our quest should then be to find the matching female organ to make the match golden! As my girlfriend reminded me when I commented about my concern about the size of my penis and her ability to feel me inside of her, she said that “your not small” and that her vagina is a “potential space” that expands to accommodate the size of the penis. She prefers the girth over the length as it tends to “stretch” her out and that seems to give her more pleasure. I think that both length and girth are a double winner!

Cheers to making the “golden match”!

The link below gives an good explanation to the Golden Ratio or Golden Section as it’s also called and it’s presence in the dimensions of the human body. I think steelrod is on to something. It maybe more a matter of finding and comparing the proper measurements to each other.

Another good site is

Another really thorough source is in the last volume of: Newman, “The World of Mathematics”. Most relationships that are natural science where the golden number is applicable generally have to do with like kind—that is, lengths to lengths ,volumes to volumes etc. So with penises you might intuit that the relation of the flacid lenth might be on average .618 to erect length of 1. In “organic growth ,then I do not think you can relate girth (implying area) to length to any purpose. The famous chambered nautilus relates volume to volumes in the golden number. The giant sunflower (Heliantus Maximus) relates seed rows to seed rows—that is, if you count the perimeter row of seeds and count the seeds from the ouside spiralling to the center ,the relationship is 1.618. Kudos to all you guys who have responded to this very interesting thread. I knew tha Bohm would come aboard on this —he being one of the few I ever remember that could use the words penis and aesthetic in the same paragragh.

So if I am 6.75” bpel, 5” g, i am 1.35 ratio. Is that bad?

I think this stuff has come up before but some interesting quotes on male/female preference for leg length to height ratio. Maybe they should do one for female preference for girth to length penis ratio. Then again it might just add more fuel to our body dysmorphic tendencies.

"Here, we study how leg length influences attractiveness in men and women. Stimuli consisted of seven different pictures of a man and seven pictures of a woman in which the ratio between leg length and height was varied from the average phenotype by elongating and shortening the legs. One hundred men and 118 women were asked to assess the attractiveness of the silhouettes using a seven-point scale. We found that male and female pictures with shorter than average legs were perceived as less attractive by both sexes. Although longer legs appeared to be more attractive, this was true only for the slight (5%) leg length increase; excessively long legs decreased body attractiveness for both sexes."

"Our results differ as well from those obtained by Swami et al. (2006) who found that shorter legged men are perceived as more attractive."

Check out fig 1 and 2:

http://www.femi ninebeauty.info … ngth.polish.pdf