Penis Size: The True Average

Correct me if I’m wrong, sta-kool, but I believe you are standing by your statement in a prior post that the Lifestyle study was BP.

You should state that, if you are, otherwise it’s a bit ambiguous to people who have not encountered your earlier post:
Average

Only lifestyles knows for sure, and they haven’t published their study anywhere.

I’ve speculated that I *think* it might have been bonepressed or semibone pressed based on various descriptions of methodology in popular articles and some comparison data, because the average was very close or the same to a known bone pressed study.

I think are all in that post you linked.

Anyway I don’t think we will know for sure unless lifestyle actually makes the study available. The descriptions in popular articles are ambiguous I think because they are popular writers…the reporters probably aren’t describing things precisely or no about BPEL.

Nonetheless I hope what I quoted helped answer joeym75ld's question about was length top measured and was girth midshaft

Here is a link to a site that contains the Kinsey girth data: http://www.cond omerie.com/webs … php?language=en . The girth data on Thunder’s Place (/kinsey_penis_g … enis_Girth_Data) has some errors in it and doesn’t sum to 100%. The study in the above link is cited by the Kinsey Institute so it should be correct.

That pretty much confirms what I’ve seen here, if your girth is 5.5 or above thats top 10%.

Although I must say I find it amusing that even in scientific research reports there can be ambiguity around measurement technique. Take, for example, the two quotes from the “methods” section, which reference the usage instructions for the two different types of devices:

“Subjects were instructed to position the Erectiometer approximately two-thirds up the penile shaft from the base, and were asked to obtain their own readings of the Erectiometer. “

And then for the other device:
“In the studies in which we used this gauge, subjects were asked to place it two-thirds of the way down the shaft of the penis toward the base.”

So one is two thirds UP and the other is only one third UP. Neither is a midshaft measurement. The measurement points are on opposing “halves” of the length of the penis. And yet the researchers note drily “Furthermore, we found relatively large discrepancies between these two gauges (Janssen, Vissenberg, Visser, & Everaerd, in preparation). “

Duh.you think?

Here’s a study I haven’t heard mention of:

"Test-retest reliability of the measurement of penile dimensions in a sample of gay men."
Harding, Richard ; Golombok, Susan E.

Although self measured it may be worth inclusion here. They obtained mean dimensions of approximately 6"x5".

How about some of these:

http://www.altp enis.com/penis_ … ze_survey.shtml

http://www.altp enis.com/penis_ … ze_survey.shtml

http://www.altp enis.com/penis_ … rage_size.shtml

6 x 5

Interesting links.

I like the global averages. To say THE average is applicable to all men doesn’t seem right in my opinion.

Most guys here would say average is 5x5 or 6x5 or whatever. Does this apply to asians too?

Thanks for adding that link here! The purpose of my original post in this thread was to compile all studies where a third party measured, so I won’t be adding that study, but it’s an interesting one.

If you can find a more detailed description of that world-average compilation, Tossed Salad, I’d be excited to add any third-party-measured studies that aren’t in my first post in this thread. I suspect that some of those data are from self-report surveys, unfortunately.

I believe these results (except for Korea #2) were done by 3rd parties, hence the opening paragraph:

A study in my opinion is questionable but a journal (I’m guessing they’re referring to a Medical Journal) is generally produced by a medical association or a group of doctors/specialists.

Like I said about Korea #2:

LoL!

Although I do wish they left references to the Journal’s and Studies they used because even I feel a little sceptical.

But still, I prefer these averages then making a generalisation about overall average.

TS, I certainly agree that dick size, like height, can be expected to vary somewhat among different populations and sub-populations, due to differences in environment (e.g., nutrition) and genes.

I guess the other question is, How do you determine a set average when the population is continuing to grow and multiply?

It’s a good point, and the answer is that you can’t. Averages surely change over time due to different environmental factors, same as height averages change over time. I would assume that average dick size is probably increasing in places in the world that are continuing to develop economically.

The main point of this thread is just that there have been tons of large scientific studies done on penis size using lots of different populations, and none of them has placed the average size above 5-6” (some lower!). To many dudes on this forum, that will be no surprise, but others seem convinced that most guys are packing 6-7”, which just isn’t true.