Penis Size: The True Average

If you want to see ‘average’ just download any real amateur porno movie or ‘homemade’. I don’t think you will see there often 8x6 or even 7”.

One more thing. When I started PE I was 4.7” EL(now almost 6”) thinking that I was ‘average’. I have been always confused by the fact that most of PE’rs that I can see here report to start at 6” or even 7” which is average or even big(7”). Why is that? Should it not be the way that majority of PEr’s are small guys? Why we can see more PE starters with 6-7” than with 4-5”? I guess there are two possibilities:

-Number of ‘5 inch dicks’ in population is very small
-Most of the people ‘add’ some length to their units

What you think of that? :)

I think it’s the psychology of the “Average Penis” coming into play, the group that wants size most and willing to do something about it are the slightly below/low end average to average sized guys say 5-6.5” BPEL.

There was a health program here with a surgeon who performed penis enlargements and he said nearly all his patients were normal sized if not slightly above average, but he didn’t actually state a size, hardly any qualified as micro-penis.

I think the smaller guys have either accepted their size, growing up small and it hasn’t really affected their quality of life; or they see PE as a scam and going to visit a PE site has negative feedback that they don’t want to hear more of, - I do penis enlargement exercises == “I have a small penis.”

It burned me that at 6.75” BPEL start size that only equated to maybe 5.5” NBP, and we all heard of the average size of 6”. I just needed to get to above average say 6.5” NBP.

I think there’s a similar thing with ambition and drive to get a promotion, those in the lower middle to middle class were most determined to get ahead.

The bigger guys seem to like to talk more about themselves in this forum. I bet you that a large number of men here who contribute little are average and below—which is a shame, really.

I agree with motivated, for every active poster I’m sure there’s 10 lurkers (active lurkers not just members who have signed up before).

My hypothesis for a large proportion of average-sized guys doing PE is this: The idea of spending months or years doing PE sounds much better if it will give you a *big* dick as opposed to an *average* dick. Those who are smaller might think that all this dedication to “just get an average dick” isn’t worth it, while those of us (myself included) see all of this work as worth it since it will bump us into the upper percentiles. Knowing that I have a real chance at getting in the top 10% in length and top 5% (or better) in girth really gives me motivation. If I knew that I probably would never get beyond the top 30%, it would be tough to stay the course. Just a thought.

Good question, Disi! Also, I liked your comment about homemade amateur porn as a reality check; nude beaches and the like can serve a similar function.

First note that the best poll here actually shows that the average Thunder’s Place starting size is about 6” BPEL. So as Motivated suggests (and is often said here), the bigger dudes may just be more vocal about their sizes. Iamaru made a great compendium of threads that highlight the existence of guys with smaller pensises on the forum, however.

It’s also my opinion that many PEers probably measure their penises in somewhat absurd ways — the Members Pics section is full of fine illustrations (you’d think people who are going to show their measurement technique to everyone else would be more conservative!) — and obsessive, skin-breaking, belly-pressing, sagging-tape-measure techniques, of course, will inflate figures a bit. If you want to compare yourself to the average found in medical studies, it’s important to use a reasonable, straightforward technique, whether BP or NBP. Stand up straight, push your erection parallel to the floor (perpendicular to the body), put the ruler directly above the penis, etc.

And finally there is the blatant exaggeration factor, as you point out, which also shouldn’t be discounted when you see size claims here.

Very perceptive analysis, Butterbean. For related reasons, perhaps, research shows that silver medal winners in the Olympics are less happy, on average, than bronze medal winners (!!). For those who are interested, the full paper referenced on that page can be found here

Just considering my personal situation, I do agree with the initial measurements in the forum being wrong, actually for not knowing the differences in size caused by measuring methods, let’s say BP to the side, standing, sitting and top BP. Consider this, my first measurement was 17.3cm (6.81”) BP but this was taken from the side sitting. Just measured today, I am 19.8cm (7.79”)BP measuring from the top of the shaft, I haven’t lost any gains in one year of no PE, but now I know the differences between measuring methods, so I tried measuring in different ways, to the side I am 20.8cm not really pushing it like I used to, then I measured to the side sitting 21.3cm (8.38”) and if I really push 21.8cm and I thought WTF 2cm (.78”) of difference not too far from 1”. What I really don’t know is that if while I was gaining the difference in the measurements was greater, but if the difference was always the same then I gained more than what I have stated in the members database. Note to newbies, know how to measure properly in the beginning and know the difference in size caused by all measuring methods. Just my two cents.

Thank you all guys.

Well, frankly I thought it works the other way. Guys who are average say ‘aaa, I am average-there are smaller than me’ and guys who are really small are really motivated to be big. That was the case with me(starting 4.7EL).I believe that was also the case with BIB and YGuy. Guys who are small have nothing to lose and they PE all the time.. Just my thought.

Does an ‘average’ size dick actually exist outside of penis research statistics?

How many women actually look at a guy and think, ‘hmmmm that’s an average dick,’ or ‘ahhhh, that’s an average dick.’

I think in reality there are only two types of dick, larger and smaller.

Either larger or smaller than one’s own or larger or smaller than the guy you are screwing. It is all relative. Any real meaningful comparison should be with real alternatives.

I have to remark from my understanding unlike Thunder’s Place nearly all surveys measure the WIDEST part of the penis for girth. This could be glans, upper, mid or base of the shaft. Personally I think its pretty valid except for the glans measurement. The glans is far too soft to be considered for girth.

Great thread, thanks PG. What I think is just as interesting as the average is the standard deviation. This measures how spread out the data points are, about two thirds of data points are within one standard deviation on each side. So if you’re one sd above the norm, expect to be larger than five out of six data points. This assumes a normal distribution (bell curve) which is probably very accurate overall, but not so accurate at the exremes of the curve, that is, several sd away from average. The israeli study had a bpel of 5.35” and a sd of 0.67 inches. So if this study is accurate, at 7” bpel, I’m two and a half standard deviations above the israeli average. This is a figure I find very interesting, and very cool. This would put me at roughly the top one percent of israeli men for bpel. I couldn’t find sd’s for other studies, except the korean one which is disputed (though if it’s accurate, I’m almost seven sd’s above the norm!), since I don’t have access the full report for the nih website, can anyone with access check it out for me? Thanks.

PS. For any further questions about normal distributions, please see wikipedia.

One question comes to mind about the Kinsey data (even though it’s self-reported and subject to potential bias) and that question is can such bias fully reconcile the Kinsey data with these more recent size surveys - or, is there something else at work. The question was triggered in my mind by a comment made in one of Dr Michael Pezzi’s eBooks to the effect that men today are not the men their grandfathers were (as to penile size) because of the suspected negative impact that xenoestrogens, plasticizers, and pesticides were having on sexual development especially in male children in the developed countries. In other words, Pezzi suggests an average of 5.1 inch which is an inch removed from Kinsey. As the effects of chemicals in the envirtonment tend to be cumulative over time and the pollution has intensified over say the last 40-50 years, we may be experiencing another more radical form of “Generation Gap.” I don’t have a clear answer, but I thought it interesting to pose the question.

All the Best,

MrTiPS

One of the studies on the first post had sizes for younger and older men. The older were larger flaccid, the younger were a little bigger erect. Of course there’s many variables, like the younger ones probably had all the food they need growing up.

Extra note on sd: I’ve seen figures in various studies (not sure how scientific they were) from two thirds to three quarters of an inch.

Joe_joe, great post! I too was interested in standard deviations and wanted to include that information in the first post in this thread. Unfortunately I found SDs for only a couple of the studies — the ones you mentioned — so I didn’t feel I had enough data to make any strong conclusions about distributions. If anyone has access to more full texts than I do, I’d like to see the SDs for some of the larger and more representative studies.

MrTips, there actually have been at least a couple threads about whether penis size might be shrinking in the last few generations due to environmental contaminants (or something else). Hopefully someone can remember the thread titles and post a link here…