6.3" to 6.4" is the average of guys that use their site to compete & see who has the biggest penis. It's not the average of the general population of the world.
So the "average" is the virtual penis average, not the "average" for anything else.
Average penis size. Size distribution. Verified data.
- Thread starter mika
- Start date
6.3" to 6.4" is the average of guys that use their site to compete & see who has the biggest penis. It's not the average of the general population of the world.
So the "average" is the virtual penis average, not the "average" for anything else.
6.4 inches erect is what the Durex condom study found as well. That appears to be the average bone pressed erect length. You can check Durex's site. We have two separate studies here and both of them came to the conclusion that 6.4 inches is the average. What more do you want? The Durex study has nearly 3,000 participants. Do you want to get them all in a gymnasium and inspect each one your self? I hate to be so harsh but, 6.4 seems to be the average. Now, we must deal with it. Even a test conducted here at the gym said the average was 6.3 inches after about 200 people's starting stats were observed. So, three different studies so far say 6.4 or so and you guys still want to cry foul?
I'm going to ignore any study/data that uses the word "cocks" their graphs...
Oneinchwonder, that's exactly what I would expect from any study that claims to be scientific. That Durex study was an online survey, if I remember correctly. There's a clear pattern of the self-measuring studies and the studies involving self selection having higher averages.
Do you know if that Durex study even instructed the guys how to measure? I don't remember. I'm sure I could pick up at least a half inch if I were to engage in creative measuring.
I seriously think that Durex study is worthless.
The best post I've seen that summarizes the scientific penis size studies is one at Th***er's P**ce. I hope it's OK to include a link to there. If not, I apologize, and please remove. A lot of the studies listed there have much smaller averages than the anonymous surveys Here's the post:
Penis Size: The True Average - Th***er's P**ce Free Penis Enlargement Forums
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 44,277
- Reaction score
- 1,162
- Points
- 133
Not sure how you concluded that I am "making this up." But, you have your opinion and that is that. You can find the information if you use the search function on the gym or you can go to durex's website. Anyway, just because those sizes can be verified that doesn't mean that they are the average. I can verify that the average human male height is 6'7" inches tall. But, I don't think we are interested in the average height of NBA players.
I found a good website, or I believe it is good, and they lay out the average size penis for each country they have investigated. I thought it was pretty neat. Website is below.
I must apologize though. I am just very insecure about my penis size and when I find studies that confirm that I am not much bigger than my "perceived" average then I seem to hold them to a higher standard. I just seems unlikely that I have a larger than average penis, probably because I have experienced it my whole life and it doesn't seem to be very big to me. I don't want to have sex because I am afraid women will look at it and not think it is big. I know it is stupid. I understand it is not healthy to think this. But, I can't help but get very nervous around women and it is what led me to performing PE. Anyway, here is the website.
http://www.andromedical.com/products/penis-enlargement-products/world-penis-sizes/
I'm more inclined to believe that study as it seems the data was gathered by doctors who I doubt were just taking the word of those involved. The Durex study was self-reported and the study posted here was dependent upon people to measure their penises and then send the pictures into a website, how many guys that are smaller are going to do that?
Edit: Of course the figures are a bit modest, so perhaps they don't use bone-pressed figures. Also, France is doing suspiciously well. Not saying it's reliable, but it seems moreso than the others.
Edit: Of course the figures are a bit modest, so perhaps they don't use bone-pressed figures. Also, France is doing suspiciously well. Not saying it's reliable, but it seems moreso than the others.
Last edited:
vulcan
Retired Moderator, PE Gym Editor, PEGym Hero
I think that global averages are not much use as the average varies alot depending on where you live
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 9,338
- Reaction score
- 313
- Points
- 0
I agree totally. This was not a random sample. I would bet such a sample here at the Gym would come up with the same sort of results.
Not sure who you are talking to, but if it is me then here is my answer. From what I have seen we have a very diverse group of people on this forum. Sure, it appears most of the members are from the USA and that is cool, but I think it is nice to see a perspective on overall penis size averages.
Although, I must digress from my holistic approach. I live in the USA and I do not intend to move anywhere else soon. Maybe in a few years I will move outside of the USA, but not in 2011. So, I am only interested in the USA average. If I move to France, Germany or Sweden though, where my lineage goes, then I would like to know those averages as well. I know, I am pathetic. But, I want to know if my dick is hanging lower than the "average" man out there.
FYI, I think it is kinda interesting to see that my lineage plays a part in my penis size. I mean, if you look at that website Germany and France have pretty big averages. Interesting, huh?
HA! Were they measuring from their ass holes? This doesn't seem real since I've read a lot of the EXPERIENCED mods here say it's about 5.5-5.8 BPEL and a 4.9 girth.
NP97
Retired ModeratorPEGym Hero
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2009
- Messages
- 7,896
- Reaction score
- 211
- Points
- 0
Not sure but i think you are agreeing with me? I agree with you about the French, they tend to be on the bigger side, dont know why its just my observation.
oh and another thing.. if humans are getting taller with each generation shouldnt the average penis be going up too??
Looks weird... numbers don't make too much sense and the resolution for the girth is not high enough. half inch increments are fine for length but girth needs to be done in quarter inch increments due to the lower "max" possible and the spread.
Penis length spans from 3-10 inches on that but girth in general spans from 3.5-6. the resolution needs to be much higher in girth.
Penis length spans from 3-10 inches on that but girth in general spans from 3.5-6. the resolution needs to be much higher in girth.
That penis-size-around-the-world map is interesting, but I don't think you can really do direct comparisons of the countries without looking at the details of the studies. The map makes no attempt to normalize the data.
For example, the average length for the US on that map is 5.07, which is the number from the Wessels study. That is an NBPEL number. I'm sure the numbers for some of the countries are BPEL. Also, as far as I know, the Lifestyles Cancun study was NBPEL, and the sample in that study was most likely American, for the most part. That study came up with a much higher average length of 5.877. So if the people who made that map chose to use the Cancun study instead of Wessels, the US would be in the second group from the top instead of the fourth. If the Cancun study had used BPEL, and they used that number on the map, the US would probably be rivaling the French.
I think there are just too many variables, like the amount of self selection and self measuring, to do direct comparisons. Also, I've seen several studies that include guys with ED, so that can affect the results too. I'm not sure if any of these are on the map.
The map is pretty nice though. The window at the bottom tells you the organization that did the study and the year, when you click on the country. So it is possible to do comparisons if you dig a little deper.
For example, the average length for the US on that map is 5.07, which is the number from the Wessels study. That is an NBPEL number. I'm sure the numbers for some of the countries are BPEL. Also, as far as I know, the Lifestyles Cancun study was NBPEL, and the sample in that study was most likely American, for the most part. That study came up with a much higher average length of 5.877. So if the people who made that map chose to use the Cancun study instead of Wessels, the US would be in the second group from the top instead of the fourth. If the Cancun study had used BPEL, and they used that number on the map, the US would probably be rivaling the French.
I think there are just too many variables, like the amount of self selection and self measuring, to do direct comparisons. Also, I've seen several studies that include guys with ED, so that can affect the results too. I'm not sure if any of these are on the map.
The map is pretty nice though. The window at the bottom tells you the organization that did the study and the year, when you click on the country. So it is possible to do comparisons if you dig a little deper.
