Re: In The Final Analysis

1

Factory or artisanally hand-stretched?


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:16 AM
horizontal rule
2

The numbers don't allow for "growers vs. showers". The erect length of my penis is probably roughly average (I haven't measured it); flaccid, it's a lot shorter 9 cm. and much experience of shared bathing facilities in my youth suggests that the same is true for a lot of people.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:17 AM
horizontal rule
3

Fluffers.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:22 AM
horizontal rule
4

People must be willing to pull way too hard on the "hand stretched" thing.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:27 AM
horizontal rule
5

I'm kind of surprised by the claimed lack of strong correlation with the size of other body parts. Anecdotally, and in what direct experience I have, there's a reasonably strong correlation with height/body-size generally. Are the studies not finding correlation with, e.g., foot-size, discounting a correlation with body size generally (that is, not correlated with foot size means, 'not correlated with differences between foot-size and what we'd predict foot-size to be from height')?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:32 AM
horizontal rule
6

5 on the heels of yesterday's explicit mention here of Buck's being a tall drink of water.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:37 AM
horizontal rule
7

That would be violating the sanctity of off-blog interaction, as well as the marital privilege, and I think probably also the Law of the Sea Treaty.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:40 AM
horizontal rule
8

The U.S. government isn't a party to at least one of those and probably two.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:45 AM
horizontal rule
9

Only a dirty liberal like LB would comply with treaties the US isn't signatory to.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:51 AM
horizontal rule
10

The almost identical distance between flaccid and erect sizes is striking. But it could just be that that the growing/showing variation is identical(ish) across almost all the normal sizes. I suppose that wouldn't be surprising but it is notable.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:51 AM
horizontal rule
11
Average length of flaccid penis stretched out by researchers (yes, that's a thing they do sometimes): 5.21 inches

I can just imagine the pre-study meeting to assign this responsibility. How hard? Until the subject winces?


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:57 AM
horizontal rule
12

"Continue test until failure."


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 6:58 AM
horizontal rule
13

Are the studies not finding correlation with, e.g., foot-size, discounting a correlation with body size generally (that is, not correlated with foot size means, 'not correlated with differences between foot-size and what we'd predict foot-size to be from height')?

That would be a standard regression analysis, so yes that is what I would expect they are doing. I.e., they are asking: "holding constant all other variables in the equation (including height), how do variations in foot size correlate with variations in penis size?" and they are finding that there is little or no correlation.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
14

11: The objective scientific standard is "until they beg for death".


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
15

It is standard. I put penis size in every model.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:13 AM
horizontal rule
16

I hope you don't use self-reported numbers.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:16 AM
horizontal rule
17

He uses the difference between self-reported and actual shoe sizes as a control. Easy-peasy.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:20 AM
horizontal rule
18

Regardless, isn't the more important question whether regular artisanal hand stretching actually increases erect length, as its proponents claim? The near perfect correlation between hand-stretched length and erect length seems to give that claim some frankly unexpected credibility.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:30 AM
horizontal rule
19

Either that or it really, really, hurts to stretch your penis too far.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:33 AM
horizontal rule
20

Regardless, isn't the more important question whether regularly wearing longer pants increases leg length, as its proponents claim? The near perfect correlation between pants length and leg length seems to give that claim some frankly unexpected credibility.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
21

I considered the criticism that I assume is being implied by the banned analogy in 20. I assume that something like the criticism that I assume is being implied by the banned analogy in 20 is actually in fact the case. But it's still a fairly striking correlation, and it seems surprising in ways that the correlation described in the banned analogy in 20 isn't at all surprising.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:50 AM
horizontal rule
22

You could go buy a penis pump and report back.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:53 AM
horizontal rule
23

22: I don't think those operate on the same principle as artisanal hand stretching, but honestly I haven't researched this issue so maybe I'm wrong. (I don't feel like googling from work. Clicking the link in the OP was bad enough.)


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:56 AM
horizontal rule
24
a new literature review of penis-size studies in BJU International

I see what they did there.


Posted by: Todd | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
25

Assuming they work by creating a partial vacuum around a penis, I don't see how it wouldn't be the same as artisanal hand stretching, except better because it isn't just a unidirectional pull.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:01 AM
horizontal rule
26

Assuming they work

That's like assuming a can opener.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:06 AM
horizontal rule
27

"Work" was maybe the wrong word there. "Assuming they are intended to function by creating..." is a better start.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:07 AM
horizontal rule
28

I'm sure they don't use a can opener.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
29

My point is that if pulling on your junk makes it bigger, then a penis pump should work because what it does is pull on your junk.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
30

The full paper is available for free. The choices are: PDF, View Full Article, Enhanced Article. I'm currently reading the enhanced one.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:10 AM
horizontal rule
31

You should find out for urple how they enhanced it.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
32

"Flaccid stretched length was measured as above while maximally extending the penis"

"Measurements made from cadavers" excluded. (Although I'm sure you could maximally extend the fuck out those.)


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:15 AM
horizontal rule
33

The numbers don't allow for "growers vs. showers".

Can one expound on the relevance of this distinction for the study? Without knowing the length of your flaccid-but-stretched penis, I can't tell what the point of comment 2 is supposed to be.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
34

32.2. Can you not donate your dick to science in your will?


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
35

Why we need a calibrated penis stretching machine for real science, urologists are too kind.

This was found by Chen et al. who reported that a minimal tension force of ≈450 g during stretching of the penis was required to reach a full potential erection length and that the stretching forces exerted by a urologist in their clinical setting were experimentally shown to be significantly less than the pressure required. This may account for a discrepancy observed in three out four of our present studies in Table 1, which measured stretched and erect length simultaneously and found that the erect length was longer than the stretched flaccid length.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
36

"It is acknowledged that some of the volunteers across different studies may have taken part in a study because they were more confident with their penis size than the general male population. "


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
37

I htink I've seen this stat quoted (here?) before:

An important observation also comes from Lever et al. who found in a large internet survey of 52 031 heterosexual men and women, 85% of women were satisfied with their partner's penis size, but only 55% of the men were satisfied with their own penis size.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:37 AM
horizontal rule
38

I've heard that length is not the sole or even most significant dimension of concern to the said women.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:40 AM
horizontal rule
39

37: One can then conclude that the number of partners is correlated with penis size.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:41 AM
horizontal rule
40

38: Penes of short duration are right out.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
41

Wait, that graph's units are centimeters?


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
42

Relevant. About using Google queries to general social science type data. The charts are cute. Apparently, nine of ten penis related queries assumed to be from men are about size.


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:43 AM
horizontal rule
43

85% of women were satisfied with their partner's penis size

In this context, "satisfied with" is really quite an impressively ambiguous phrase.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:43 AM
horizontal rule
44

The graph allows to confirm part of girl27's conjecture, OBJECTIVELY.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:44 AM
horizontal rule
45

38: Indeed. Next sentence in the OP-referenced article: only 15% of women say that erect penis size is important and erect girth is generally more important than length.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
46

erect girth is generally more important than length

Of course, anything can be taken too far, as an old boss of Buck's who used to describe himself as 'hung like a tuna can' would say.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
47

Tuna is now available in foil pouches, if that helps.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 9:06 AM
horizontal rule
48

Where did my pseud go?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
49

Into the foil pouch?


Posted by: MAE | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
50

I have limited in-person experience with penises, but of the three I've seen the most pitiable belonged to the tallest guy. About 5 inches long and half the width of a normal penis. So LB's theory is anecdatally flawed.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:49 AM
horizontal rule
51

Only four inches wide?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
52

LB's first BF, when he was in college, was being followed around semi-creepily by some [older] guy. I don't recall how the conversation went, but the gist of it was that the guy was scoping the BF due to his large calves, allegedly correlated with penis size.

Anecdatally, I am informed this is true (n=1).


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:55 AM
horizontal rule
53

I believe the first letter of the prior comment to be a typographical error.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
54

My point is that if pulling on your junk makes it bigger, then a penis pump should work because what it does is pull on your junk.

Ah, but perhaps artisanal hand-pulling works by sacrificing girth for length, in which case uniform junk-pulling is futile.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
55

I can't verify that 53 is true, except to say that I did, indeed, intend to type an A.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:57 AM
horizontal rule
56

52.2: That's a fact about a single creep and an opinion about calf/penis size.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
57

The word "me" should occur between the words "allows" and "to" in comment 44.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
58

OT: Somebody on my floor puked. It's really becoming awful.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:05 AM
horizontal rule
59

I think they went-off in the bathroom, but still.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
60

I believe 54 is correct. If I'm not mistaken the term of art is 'jelqing.' Not that I've extensively researched penis enlargement techniques or anything. It might be interesting to see if one could reverse the process, sacrificing length for girth. Maybe get a boner and then bang on the end with a mallet or something.

Also everybody should watch the documentary Unhung Hero. If you care about cocks, which you do.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
61

That hyphen was needed by the facts of grammar.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
62

It might be interesting to see if one could reverse the process, sacrificing length for girth. Maybe get a boner and then bang on the end with a mallet or something.

You just need to get a penis pump and reverse the polarity.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:18 AM
horizontal rule
63

60: Japan is way ahead of you there...


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:27 AM
horizontal rule
64

If I'm not mistaken the term of art is 'jelqing.'

My Alter Ego once linked to a video of a guy who had enlarged his penis a ridiculous amount. It was crazy awesome.

But then the video got taken down. Apo was able to find it again, but then that one came down too.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 11:54 AM
horizontal rule
65

Found it. He'd been injecting his penis with silicone.

NSFW


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 12:01 PM
horizontal rule
66

From the article:

The authors also found that the "strongest significant correlation was between flaccid stretched or erect length and height."

So to LB's question, height is correlated as you might expect, but none of the body-part correlations.


Posted by: idp | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 4:42 PM
horizontal rule
67

was "The long and short of it" too on the nose for the title, ogged?


Posted by: Turgid Jacobian | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 5:31 PM
horizontal rule
68

too on the nose

Whoah there, Pinocchio.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 5:42 PM
horizontal rule
69

Actually looking at the study, I think 13 may be wrong. They are just reporting correlations, not the results of regressions.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 3-15 8:20 PM
horizontal rule
70

Where can I go to have my penis professionally measured? I'm not sure I'm doing it right.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 6:32 AM
horizontal rule
71

70: The original paper included very specific instructions. Phrases like "flexible tape measure" and "fat pad."


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 6:35 AM
horizontal rule
72

Right, but it still seems like I need a double-blind measurement. There's just too much room for experimenter bias.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 6:37 AM
horizontal rule
73

Nobody clicked on the link in 65?


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 7:01 AM
horizontal rule
74

I have a long held fear of injecting things into penises.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 7:05 AM
horizontal rule
75

73: Sure I did. And then I heard my wife coming in and decided to avoid the inevitable discussion that would result.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 8:04 AM
horizontal rule
76

So to LB's question, height is correlated as you might expect, but none of the body-part correlations.

Which reminds me of the story about the West Indian cricketer Joel Garner, who stands, or stood in his youth, 6' 8". He was approached at a reception by some up market official woman who said, "Mr Garner, is it true, as they say, that you're built in proportion?"

Beat while Garner processes what's going.

"Madam, if I was built in proportion I'd be nine feet tall!"


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 9:34 AM
horizontal rule
77

73: You said that "apo found it" which makes it fall under the "Don't click on any link of apo's" rule.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 03- 4-15 9:37 AM
horizontal rule