Post: #76

(06-29-2018 03:07 PM)Simeon_Strangelight Wrote:  In a controlled series of “displacement trials,” the vagina was loaded with this fake semen, and the phalluses were inserted at varying depths (to simulate thrusting) and removed, whereupon the latex orifice was examined to determine how much semen had been displaced from it. As predicted, the two phalluses with the coronal ridges displaced significantly more semen from the vagina (each removed 91 percent) than the “headless” control (35.3 percent).

While I have no doubt that the coronal ridge is effective at removing semen, correlation does not imply causation.

First of all, ejaculation expels the semen much deeper into the vagina (much of it is past the cervix within a minute) than a penis can reach to extract. Why else would we be able to cum for a foot or more when mere dripping would have sufficed?

Secondly, conception can occur from very small amounts of semen. Even if you somehow extracted 99% of it within a few minutes, that remaining 1% would still have a such a large lead that barring impaired sperm motility the follow-up ejaculation would have no chance of overtaking it.

Thirdly, even in cavemen times it doesn't sound feasible that males are running trains on a female and all getting it done within a few minutes where that ridge could have made any difference. Even the most sexually active apes and monkeys don't mate that often either.

Post: #77

(06-29-2018 04:48 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  First of all, ejaculation expels the semen much deeper into the vagina (much of it is past the cervix within a minute) than a penis can reach to extract. Why else would we be able to cum for a foot or more when mere dripping would have sufficed?

Secondly, conception can occur from very small amounts of semen. Even if you somehow extracted 99% of it within a few minutes, that remaining 1% would still have a such a large lead that barring impaired sperm motility the follow-up ejaculation would have no chance of overtaking it.

Thirdly, even in cavemen times it doesn't sound feasible that males are running trains on a female and all getting it done within a few minutes where that ridge could have made any difference. Even the most sexually active apes and monkeys don't mate that often either.

This is pretty much all incorrect.

The cervix is a powerful filter designed to keep sperm OUT of the vaginal canal. When women orgasm, the cervix opens and sucks semen into the vaginal canal, greatly increasing the odds of successful insemination. The cervical filter is signifcantly weaker for a while after orgasm, so if your girl cums, and then you ejaculate in her, your sperm make it into her vaginal canal at a far higher rate. This is how women's bodies subconsciously favor one man over another, by allowing the favored man's sperm better access to their eggs. They fuck the beta male for his resources, but then orgasm for the alpha male to ensure they carry his child, and give the beta sperm no chance.

For an explanation of why your second point is wrong, please read this wikipedia article:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_competition

As for your third point, men banging women in quick succession happens in all manner of scenarios, and it would definitely provide a large advantage in sperm wars to clear out competitors sperm from the woman before inserting your own. For example, pretend a group of cavemen conquer a neighboring tribe, and quickly begin taking turns on the fertile looking women. In this exact case, which has happened pretty frequently through evolutionary history into modern times, a larger penis would be an advantage.

Post: #78

Thanks, those are great explanations that make more sense. However, is the third one really realistic? Most of human evolution (cavemen included) had no warfare at all.

These things started happening around 10-20 000 years ago or so when population densities finally allowed for "conquest", but is 20 000 years really enough to evolve an actual physical difference/appendage as opposed to some minor hormonal or digestive changes that we've seen?

p.s. check out this regarding the cervix and sperm:

Quote:Sperm can breach the cervix less than 90 seconds after ejaculation, and can be found in the fallopian tubes as soon as five minutes after ejaculation. If the woman has already ovulated, and there is a viable egg waiting in one of the fallopian tubes, conception occurs as soon as a sperm fertilizes the egg.

http://www.sophisticatededge.com/how-lon...-take.html

Post: #79

(06-29-2018 06:21 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Thanks, those are great explanations that make more sense. However, is the third one really realistic? Most of human evolution (cavemen included) had no warfare at all.

These things started happening around 10-20 000 years ago or so when population densities finally allowed for "conquest", but is 20 000 years really enough to evolve an actual physical difference/appendage as opposed to some minor hormonal or digestive changes that we've seen?

p.s. check out this regarding the cervix and sperm:

Quote:Sperm can breach the cervix less than 90 seconds after ejaculation, and can be found in the fallopian tubes as soon as five minutes after ejaculation. If the woman has already ovulated, and there is a viable egg waiting in one of the fallopian tubes, conception occurs as soon as a sperm fertilizes the egg.

http://www.sophisticatededge.com/how-lon...-take.html

Watch this, it's interesting:




Sperm competition occurs in all the mammals we descended from, and was almost certainly present throughout all of human evolution. Whether organized warfare was present 20kya I cannot say, but the likelihood that females were inseminated by multiple men in short time frames is 100%. Therefore, the same principles still apply.

You also mentioned in a previous post about men ejaculating harder than should be necessary to inseminate women. This is true, but it happens because the male body is trying to ejaculate as many sperm into the woman as possible with each muscular contraction, to maximize the odds of successfully fertilizing an egg.

In "Sperm Wars" Robin Baker explains how it usually takes a critical mass of sperm to successfully fertilize an egg. Semen and sperm actually have special chemical properties that help this process, so its not as simple as a single sperm making it to the egg, you need a sperm army to successfully capture the flag. If the woman's body is game, though, it can definitely happen within minutes.

Post: #80

(06-29-2018 06:21 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Thanks, those are great explanations that make more sense. However, is the third one really realistic? Most of human evolution (cavemen included) had no warfare at all.

These things started happening around 10-20 000 years ago or so when population densities finally allowed for "conquest", but is 20 000 years really enough to evolve an actual physical difference/appendage as opposed to some minor hormonal or digestive changes that we've seen?

p.s. check out this regarding the cervix and sperm:

Quote:Sperm can breach the cervix less than 90 seconds after ejaculation, and can be found in the fallopian tubes as soon as five minutes after ejaculation. If the woman has already ovulated, and there is a viable egg waiting in one of the fallopian tubes, conception occurs as soon as a sperm fertilizes the egg.

http://www.sophisticatededge.com/how-lon...-take.html

Essential viewing, as well.

Post: #81

Sure are a lot of dicks in this thread.

Post: #82

Imagine the uproar if I hosted dating "FOR MEN WHO LIKE TIGHT PUSSY"

Post: #83

(06-30-2018 04:17 AM)RatInTheWoods Wrote:  Imagine the uproar if I hosted dating "FOR MEN WHO LIKE TIGHT PUSSY"

   

Post: #84

Fat women at NYC hung parties be like:

Post: #85

(06-29-2018 03:07 PM)Simeon_Strangelight Wrote:  

(06-29-2018 02:58 PM)RedPillUK Wrote:  

(06-29-2018 01:46 PM)Ringo Wrote:  

(06-29-2018 01:02 PM)jeffreyjerpp Wrote:  The penis needs to act as a plunger, where it can penetrate the vagina deeply and effectively, and trap other mens cum behind the head (hence the arrowhead design of the penis). During pullout, the penis will literally then remove the other cum from the vagina, so there are fewer sperms from other men to compete with for the egg.

This is equally as informative as it is disgusting.

I seriously doubt this is true, it just sounds like a bullshit idea someone thought up. I doubt it would be make a good or effective 'plunger', and I doubt anyones ever tried this sick experiment to find out whether there's any truth to this.

It's actually widely accepted as fact - you can question of course the opinions of current science, but it sounds logical to me.

Even the leftist scum have no trouble admitting it:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/0...42613.html

This has been tested before:

Quote:Specifically, the coronal ridge offers a special removal service by expunging foreign sperm. According to this analysis, the effect of thrusting would be to draw other men’s sperm away from the cervix and back around the glans, thus scooping out the semen deposited by a sexual rival.

You might think this is all fine and dandy, but one can’t possibly prove such a thing. You’d be underestimating Gallup. In a series of studies published in Evolution and Human Behavior, Gallup and a team of his students put the semen displacement hypothesis to the test using artificial human genitalia of different shapes and sizes. Findings from the study may not have “proved” the semen displacement hypothesis, but they certainly confirmed its principal points.

The researchers selected several sets of prosthetic genitals from erotic novelty stores, including a realistic latex vagina, sold as a masturbation pal for lonely straight men, and three artificial phalluses. Whereas the first two phalluses closely resembled an actual human penis, varying only in the coronal ridge properties, the third (the control phallus) was the bland and headless horseman of the bunch.

Next, the researchers borrowed a recipe for simulated semen. The recipe “consisted of 0.08 cups of sifted, white, unbleached flour mixed with 1.06 cups of water. This mixture was brought to a boil, simmered for 15 minutes while being stirred, and allowed to cool.”

In a controlled series of “displacement trials,” the vagina was loaded with this fake semen, and the phalluses were inserted at varying depths (to simulate thrusting) and removed, whereupon the latex orifice was examined to determine how much semen had been displaced from it. As predicted, the two phalluses with the coronal ridges displaced significantly more semen from the vagina (each removed 91 percent) than the “headless” control (35.3 percent).

I see that they got their dig in at straight men. What is the target market for artificial phalluses?

Post: #86

(06-28-2018 03:49 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Has any serious scientist or academic types ever bothered to investigate why some men have larger penises?

There are two aspects of evolution: natural selection and sexual selection. Natural selection is aspects of your environment (including the society) that make you more likely to arrive at a mating opportunity, e.g. disease resistance, strength, strong bones. Sexual selection are traits that make you more likely to be selected by females once a possible mating opportunity arises.

The distribution of traits you find in humans are which were selected most in natural and sexual selection. So in terms of penises it's not a surprise that micro-penis (around 2.5" or less is) is present in only about 1 in 200 males. Particularly in times when there was no stigma with going nude, that wasn't going to whet girl's leaf or make it easy to get her pregnant.

So it's no surprise that the average penis size more or less mirrors the average depth of a vagina (+ a bit of fat/angle). The average penis is about 5.25" and the average vagina about 4.5" when aroused. Then you look at other species and you'll find the same thing. Same across continents. Asian men are about 4.25" on average and then women and their vaginas are smaller. West African men are about 6.25" on average and the women are bigger with deep Penis fits in vagina.

The way the distribution of a trait in society shifts is if it becomes more useful for reproducing over multiple generations. Given that penis size fits quite nicely with vagina size it's apparent that it is a deep evolutionary trait that has moved slowly with other traits. The evidence in terms of the distribution of penis size tells you that penis that are overly small or overly large compared to a vagina are deselected. It's not an evolutionary factor beyond that.

There was no reason in history for larger penises to be selected naturally or sexually. Trying to glug on a mega-cock is a modern luxury for fat schlubs from New York, it seems. And by the looks of it, it doesn't look like they're going to be flooding the gene pool any time soon.

*

Being in the changing room at the swimming pool in Russia for two months (where guys walk around rude with abandon) has convinced me that the scientific literature on penis size is correct, though you'd be hard pushed to believe it in contrast to self-reporting, which seems to be about 1.5-2" over actual size.

From the reliable and uniform scientific literature that uses the BPEL measure (pushing a ruler into any fat next to the penis) a 7" penis is possessed by around 1 in 12 guys. For 8 inches you are looking at about 1 in 300 and 9 you are probably looking at 1 in 10,000 if not more.



It's very apparent that women also lie or are clueless on penis size. In such videos/literature as above, these women who say they've had a decent number of men have tried a few 8s, a 9 or a 10. Bullshit. You've had sex with 20 guys and somehow slept with a throng from the vag-crushing 0.01%.

There's a good site (can't find it) that shows a girl holding up various sizes of length and girth cylinders next to her vagina. 9 inches is utterly ridiculous, which is why it's so rare. Even 7 is going to give a girl a deep stir. For most women, a legitimate 7 is going to cause pain.

I suspect most of the people in that video are using the butt-pressed measuring method.

Post: #87

Good Looking Loser has experimented a lot on penis size and girth - you can increase especially the latter.

https://www.goodlookingloser.com/get-hun...enis-girth

I am somewhat above average occasionally hurting some girls. But it interests me on how much especially the girth can be expanded.

Also - for anyone looking for a boner of a testosterone-laden 15yo:

1x Multivitamin: https://www.swansonvitamins.com/swanson-...-240-sgels
2-4x daily Ecklonia cavia: https://www.swansonvitamins.com/doctors-...0-veg-caps

Post: #88

(06-30-2018 12:03 PM)gework Wrote:  

(06-28-2018 03:49 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Has any serious scientist or academic types ever bothered to investigate why some men have larger penises?

It's very apparent that women also lie or are clueless on penis size. In such videos/literature as above, these women who say they've had a decent number of men have tried a few 8s, a 9 or a 10. Bullshit. You've had sex with 20 guys and somehow slept with a throng from the vag-crushing 0.01%.

There's a good site (can't find it) that shows a girl holding up various sizes of length and girth cylinders next to her vagina. 9 inches is utterly ridiculous, which is why it's so rare. Even 7 is going to give a girl a deep stir. For most women, a legitimate 7 is going to cause pain.

I suspect most of the people in that video are using the butt-pressed measuring method.

In addition to that we now have, thanks to digital age, a generation of men who have grown up watching women getting fucked by mega sized cocks their whole life. It's a big insecurity and even more so a huge business for all kinds of snake oil dick pills.


It's very similar to why incels are so obsessed with looks. They spent their days watching good looking men on TV and other media and not realize most people are average.

Post: #89

(06-29-2018 01:46 PM)Ringo Wrote:  

(06-29-2018 01:02 PM)jeffreyjerpp Wrote:  The penis needs to act as a plunger, where it can penetrate the vagina deeply and effectively, and trap other mens cum behind the head (hence the arrowhead design of the penis). During pullout, the penis will literally then remove the other cum from the vagina, so there are fewer sperms from other men to compete with for the egg.

This is equally as informative as it is disgusting.

This is the same reason that vacuum lines on your car have a penis-shaped nub. Easy to slide them on, a pain in the ass to pull them off.

Post: #90

(06-29-2018 01:35 AM)polar Wrote:  

(06-28-2018 10:02 PM)YoungBlade Wrote:  Gentlemen,



https://www.kgw.com/mobile/article/news/...fec5f27c08

I've got em covered guys. Let me go through my sent folder.

I'll need Suits to help narrow it down to 3600, though.

Stumbled across this thread and was about to shitpost in response to this post, then I saw I did that already.

The woes of being a long term RVF member...

Post: #91

I always assumed the shape was for the foreskin to sit behind so that you don't snap your string.