Dickpill: Difference between revisions

Please do note that the reason why a difference of 0.806 inches between the preferred girth and the theoretical maximum for girth is believable and why the difference a difference of 0.6039 inches between the preferred length of 6.4 inches and the theoretical maximum bone pressed length of 7 inches is dubious is two fold. The first reason being that girth has a greater effect of absolute size as compared to length. Let's take the preferred penis of 6.4 inches in length and 4.9 inches in circumference. If we kept girth the same but increased length to the theoretical maximum of 7 inches, absolute size or volume only increase by 9.98%; however if we kept length the same and increased girth to the theoretical maximum of 5.706 inches, absolute size increase by an astounding 35.60%. Thus, when its effect on absolute size is taken into account instead of doing a one dimensional analysis, the relative difference between the theoretical maximum bone pressed length and preferred length is only about a 10% relative difference, but for girth this is about 35%. Which is why I consider it dubious that the difference between the preferred length and the theoretical maximum is only 0.6039 inches, relatively speaking, that's not much of a difference (which means that the sensation experienced wouldn't be all that different either) and is thus highly suspect (indicating once again that the females might of inflated their preferred size), it's quite absurd to suggest that a slight adjustment of 10% in length will cause enough problems for a woman to leave her partner as he is now too large. The difference between the preferred girth and length however, relatively speaking, is quite large (35%) and it is far more believable that the increase in girth would cause sufficient pain that the woman might consider leaving her partner.  

However, the reported preferred length of 6.4 inches is fraught with problems and is likely to of been inflated by the females in the sample as it is the most mathematically inconsistent for the following reasons: Non-bone pressed length is far too rare for there to even be a preference for it, with almost universally all of the women never experiencing it; Bone pressed length, however, fares little better, whilst being more common the majority of women could not possibly experience a penis with bone pressed length of 6.4 inches and is thus too rare for there to be a preference for it. Length seems to be more inaccurately recalled than girth (it seems like women underestimate, but according to one of the authors the opposite could be true, do note research penis size recall in women is nascent). For both Non-bone pressed as well as bone pressed lengths, the difference between the preferred length and the theoretical maximum is too small a difference to justify a woman suddenly leaving her partner on the basis of him being too large. All the mathematics point to there being an inflation in the reported preferred length in men in the sample.

On an interesting note, [https://calcsd.netlify.app/preferences CalcSD visualised the spread of the reported preferences of the above study] using the supplemental data.<ref>https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133079</ref> On the Graph, we find that a (or at least a few) women reported a size preference from around (and I'm eyeballing here) of 8.6 inches in length and 6.5 inches in girth. Now let's note the following, there were around 75 participants on average having 6 lifetime partners; this means that collectively they've each experienced 450 men. A bone pressed penis of 8,6 inches corresponds with a greater the 99.99% percentile (4.5 SD away from average and 1.6x larger than average) whereas a non-bone pressed penis of 8,6 inches corrosponds with, an even, greater than the 99.99% percentile (5.4 SD away from average and 1.7x larger than average) and finally a girth of 6.5 inches corresponds with the 99.99% exactly. Now, instead lets calculate the probability that, collectively, that any woman (never mind at average preference) from the study could of possibly reported these measurments given their collective sexual experience of 450 men. As a group (or the chance that at least one of the 450 had a penis of these measurments) the odds of encountering encountering a penis of length 8,6 inches is (bone pressed) 2.2% and (non-bone pressed) 0,45% and the odds of encountering a penis of girth 6,5 inches is 4.40%. As we can see, the woman/women whom reported the largest size preference out of the entire group could not of possibly had sex with the penis size preference they'd reported, even if they'd slept with all 450 of the men.  

On a final note, the graph illustrated by CalcSD has three especially dense for reported penis size preference; these areas roughly corrosponded with the following lengths (going from most dense to least dense):