Talk:Human penis size

Romans and Greeks laughed at men with large penis

I noticed this sculpture the other day and began to wonder about Greeks and penis size.

Why is it that ancient Greek and Roman paintings, sculptures, and other works of art depict males with such small genitalia?

My first thought was that the artists wished to draw the viewer’s attention to other, more important, aspects of the work.

I mean c'mon ... men are men back then and now.

Guys are consumed with their penis size and how it compares to other men. Nobody, I mean nobody ... wants to have an average penis size.

Wouldn't the Greeks themselves be consumed with their size and perhaps fudge things a little?

It's Greek to Me ... You remember the Greeks, right?.

They were the guys (and it was mostly guys—women at the time were mainly relegated to childbearing and housekeeping or sex objecthood, and were seldom heard from) who pretty much invented what we now think of as Western civilization.

Their ideas about culture and society, which the Romans copied, influence us to this day. The Greeks also … well, we’ll get into a discussion of Greek sexual preferences some other time. For now let’s just say they were fascinated by male beauty, and in particular by (ahem) the penis.

The First Nudie Awards The Greeks weren’t shy about displaying their manly attributes. Nudity was celebrated in Greece as in no culture before or since. We’re so used to nude classical sculpture and painting that we figure that’s how everybody walked around back in those days. In fact, however, male nudity in art and among athletes and warriors was largely confined to the ancient Greeks, for whom it became a point of pride—they considered embarrassment at having to disrobe for sports a sign of barbarism. Admiration of the manly form at times verged on the cultlike; the more heroic bits of male sculpture, small penis or no, have an erotic charge that can make even a straight male sweat. Naked women were depicted too, but less often, and you sometimes get the feeling the artist’s heart wasn’t in it.

The penis shows up in Greek art a lot—big ones as well as small ones. For example, there’s the temple of Dionysus on the island of Delos, which features giant stone penises carved in the third century BC. Decapitated now, they’re still impressively scaled and in a state of salute. (The academic term describing this condition, incidentally, is ithyphallic.)

Penis Art Sculptural depictions of the erect penis were an everyday sight in the classical world. A common boundary marker and household totem in ancient Greece was the herm, originally a representation of the god Hermes. It consisted of a head on top of a simple squarish pillar—your basic supersized Pez dispenser—unadorned except for, in front, an amply proportioned, usually erect, and sometimes arrestingly protrusive penis and scrotum.

Scholars tell us that such decorations were apotropaic (you learn a lot of vocabulary in this field)—that is, intended to ward off evil, and that folks back then paid no more attention to them than we would to a lucky horseshoe.

Maybe. Maybe not.

All I’m saying is, stuff that even now we’d consider hard-core porn you saw then just walking down to the Piraeus.

The ancients were also unembarrassed by graphic displays of sex. Greek men—to be precise, male Greek aristocrats—figured if it moved, they could have sex with it, or at least look at pictures about having sex with it. We have countless examples of crockery showing various combinations of humans, deities, and the occasional animal engaged in the amatory act, most of it presumably used as party favors to put the lads in the mood. Even in painterly scenes having nothing to do with sex, the genitalia were often conspicuously displayed.

From this vast array of XXX-rated artwork we can make a few deductions about Greek aesthetic preferences ... genitaliawise:

1. Long, thick penises were considered ... at least in the highbrow view ... grotesque, comic, or both and were usually found on fertility gods, half-animal critters such as satyrs, ugly old men, and barbarians. 2. A circumcised penis was considered particularly gross. 3. The ideal penis was small, thin, and covered with a long, tapered foreskin.

Of course, we do have to take into account a contributing factor for those greek statues looking the way they do: Artists’ models were nude, and their studios lacked central heat. [1]

Large penis = grotesque and comic, found on animals and barbarians

Grotesque is "distorted and unnatural in shape or size; abnormal and hideous"

From this vast array of XXX-rated artwork we can make a few deductions about Greek aesthetic preferences ... genitaliawise:

1. Long, thick penises were considered ... at least in the highbrow view ... grotesque, comic, or both and were usually found on fertility gods, half-animal critters such as satyrs, ugly old men, and barbarians.

2. A circumcised penis was considered particularly gross.

3. The ideal penis was small, thin, and covered with a long, tapered foreskin.

Average penis size and race

Does average penis size really vary between the races? Or is that just a myth? If it's true, it should be mentioned in the article. Voortle (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

• A quick search reveals this page http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=366192 which quotes from a previous version of the main article. What happened to the quoted section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.59.49.25 (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Related medical journals have found no correlation between race and penis size. For example, in 2006, the British Journal of Urology found no differences in penis size between races. http://www.livescience.com/health/070601_penis_myths.html The only thing that states differences are self reported surveys, unscientific surveys, and unscientific research. For example, in the google link you posted above, some of the results are even stated to be highly flawed or based on self selection including internet polls. Furthermore, the results even contradict each other. Obviously, that is not reliable and you can see why it would not meet Wikipedia's standards. TheLou75 (talk) 00:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Then regardless, that should be mentioned as well. I get the impression that this is considered an "impolite" topic to bring up, and yet it is really a very influential set of myths about race. Ideas about penis size are very common, in places as far afield as China. Passing over it in silence will not make it go away. And the link that you posted did not provide numbers. Scanning Google Scholar I've found various studies that were contradictory.

A quick scan on PubMed brought up some results that argue that there are differences of some kind, at least. Here and Here, plus one from Google Scholar Here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.40.143 (talk) 08:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

How does penis size of newborns even matter since its prior to puberty? Even then the first source says that differences existed until 5 years of age and then no differences. The last source seems to be from an afrocentric site too so I wouldn't even consider it.And of course, like you said, research is contradictory. If thats the case then we have to wait until a definitive study that is widely accepted is done before concluding what correct or incorrect. GreenWave254 (talk) 21:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Continuing on this topic, I've tagged to following with an "unreliable source" tag:

Contrary to popular belief, there is no scientific relation between penis size and race.

Sources:

Adams, Michael V (1996). The multicultural imagination: race, color, and the unconscious. London: Routledge. p. 164. ISBN 041513837X.

"Penis Myths Debunked". LiveScience. June 1, 2007.

I am not disputing what the sentence says, but I am disputing the sources. The first is an identity politics/cultural studies book and the second is some random "science" website. Neither rises to the level of reliable source for what is basically a biomedical question. References should be to medical textbooks and journals. The subject probably deserves more than one sentence, considering the amount of popular beliefs of the topic. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 06:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I just removed it all together since biomedical articles shouldn't be making speculation but instead be based on conclusive reliable study that is widely accepted by the medical and scientific study. Once such a study is completed, it can be included. Otherwise, content in support or against it shouldn't be included as it would be unencyclopedic. TheLou75 (talk) 23:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

• Further research is called for, but at a glance, the ScienceLive info is likely to have relied not on the UG journal they cite, but on the description of it in the singled-out 1st entry of the penis-size bibilography of Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction. We should not rely on either of them, but Kinsey is far more reliable than ScienceLive, KIRSGR's endorsement of journal's review article is compelling, and perhaps most to the point, KIRSGR, being a scholarly source, has given us a specific citation within the journal, rather than just joking about what the title means, as ScienceLive did at one point in mentioning it. So we can, with some effort, go read the journal article -- probably, worst case, in a med school library.
  --Jerzy•t 19:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
  

The assertion that mean penis size does not vary between racial groups is highly dubious. A quick glance through the literature suggests quite the opposite; indeed, sub-Saharan Africans possess the largest penises on average, followed by Caucasians, followed by East Asians. This is a topic that many individuals are curious about and it oughtn't to be swept aside for ideological reasons. --Mr. Deltoid (talk) 19:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect, no medical journal or science journal has found any correlation. The only studies done were pre 1950 and were heavily influenced by eugenics as well as other racial research (ie trying to prove that African Americans were not human) which has since proven to be false and is not accepted academically or by the medical community. For example, much of the Kinsey studies have been rejected by the scientific community for using flawed testing procedures. And a lot of this had to do with a racial bias agenda back then. Karot24g (talk) 23:54, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually there must have been studies by the World Health Organization. During the height of the Rushton IQ/penis size debate the Toronto Globe & Mail quietly reported that 40 mm condoms were distributed in Asia, 55 mm in Europe, and 70 mm in Africa. This was pre-internet at the Globe & Mail, so I can't find the source. This is probably not fine grained enough. I expect size varies within these regions by ethnic group. The backwards politically correct reasoning that we all should be the same so we are all the same and if you say different you are a racist is thankfully dead. Incidentallly, I noticed in my misspent youth that the mons and vagina of females vary markedly by race as well, and erm, I had a statistically significant sample. Is it even likely that a typical Thai would be built like a Zulu? Testoterone levels, age of onset of puberty, physique, and abilities vary greatly between races - despite the wishes of Stephen Jay Gould (who was raised in a Marxist Houshold). 173.178.16.2 (talk) 09:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Rushton is a supporter of eugenics and argued that brain size of blacks was smaller than whites. He made some other absurd claims as well. Furthermore, Rushton never had statisically valid evidence to back up his claims. No one accepts Rushton as fact. In fact, Rushton's claims have been rejected by the scientific community. As for the Toronto Globe & Mail, a journalist's claims are never considered a valid reference, especially in the context of a science/medical entry. I have seen too much inaccurate reporting in newspaper articles as of late. Karot24g (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I think its rather absurd to categorize all Caucasians, all Asians, all Africans, and all Hispanics into categories as there are huge difference within each category. A Russian is not going to look the same as a Greek. Likewise a Chinese man is not going to look the same as a Tibetan. Likewise, an African from Liberia is not going to look the same as an African from South Africa. Likewise, an African is not going to look the same as a 5th generation African American. Any study that groups each into a category is going to be highly dubious unless they took 1,000 people from each region. A regional study would probably be the only valid study and there has been no regional study which uses a scientiically valid sample size. It's things like this that amaze me as this seems like common sense. Mohom987 (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I found this conflicting piece on the internet although it is by country, not race, It seems to play heavily. File:C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Documents\Bo\pics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bxk21 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The article is Bias towards promoting a Large Penis as desirable

The article isn't balanced on the fact that not all view a large penis as desirable. The fact that "Long, thick penises were considered ... at least in the highbrow view ... grotesque, comic, or both" is downplayed and more empysis is given towards a Large & Long penis.

Of course a larger thicker rigid more black penis is desirable as a larger longer harder stronger penis means the sperm ejaculation point is closer to the egg which increases the chances of pregnancy. In this age survival of the fittest has been taken over by survival of the sexually superior, that is the people of Earth are living modern safe lives free from natural dangers, so white women will seek out the most pleasurably dark thick penis to breed with. Sexual selection, not natural selection my brother. PeaceIraqiLion (talk) 09:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Penis size vs. Length of the Vagina

The vagina is only about 3 (7.5cm) to 4 (10cm) inches long, and even a small penis can touch every square centimeter within the vagina.

Virtually every man forgets that it doesn't matter how long or how short your penis is, because the vagina will accommodate itself to any length. The vagina of a woman who hasn't had a child is only 7.5cm (3 inches) long when she's not sexually excited. The figures for women who have had babies are only slightly different.

Even when aroused, a woman's vagina usually extends only to a length of about 10cm (4 inches).

This means any man's penis will fill her vagina completely, unless you happen to be one of those rare guys with an erect penile length of less than four inches.

You're probably now wondering how the average man with an erection of six inches manages to insert his penis into the vagina at all.

The vagina has the most remarkable capacity for lengthening if something is introduced into it gradually.

So the exceptional man whose erect penis is eight inches (20cm) long can still make love to any woman, providing he excites her properly and introduces his organ very slowly. If he does this, her vagina will lengthen by 150 or 200 per cent to accommodate him.

Penis size & Pleasing a women

Many women report that too many men are hung up on the size of their penises. The vagina is only about five inches long, and even a small penis can touch every square centimeter within the vagina. The secret to pleasing and impressing a woman sexually has nothing to do with penis size. Instead, concentrate on the movements, and rhythms of your thrusts. Most women will agree that penis size is not enough to please them. So men need to stop worrying about penis size and concentrate on technique. [2]

Image - Possible NPOV Violation

By showing only circumcised penises i believe this article constitutes a violation of the NPOV policy by suggesting that circumcised penises are normal. For the vast majority of the world they are't, and in fact statistically for English speaking countries they are not (anymore). Images of both should be shown, maybe even find some statistics that show whether or not there is a difference in average length between "cut" and "uncut" 173.18.214.8 (talk) 20:49, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Now that's a bit stretching it. I'll restore the pic until a consensus is reached. JerseyShore223 (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree, the penis is uncircumcised until molested by lunatics. 86.44.152.106 (talk) 10:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The picture was there to illustrate the variation in human penis size, and thats what the article is about. If the "owners" of these penises are circumcised or not is negligible. This has nothing to do with NPOV, nothing is claimed here. And last but not least: why would there be a difference in average length between "cut" and "uncut"?? If you count the foreskin, than yes, the uncut will be longer. But isn't that trivial?--Lamilli (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I think the image does not belong here at all. The article isn't about "variations in penis size". If it was, it would be the perfect image. The article deals with human penis size in general, including subjects such as enlargement, perception, condom use, measuring, development over age etc. I think the article is better without it. --Muhandes (talk) 09:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

This article does have a Variance in penis size section, and a well made image comparing sizes and showing clinical methods of measurement would be useful, but the image in question, a collage with varying perspectives, is not beneficial to the article. -- 110.49.241.13 (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Reference to broken DOI

A reference was recently added to this article using the Cite DOI template. The citation bot tried to expand the citation, but could not access the specified DOI. Please check that the DOI doi:10.1001/archpedi.1943.02010160019003 has been correctly entered. If the DOI is correct, it is possible that it has not yet been entered into the CrossRef database. Please complete the reference by hand here. The script that left this message was unable to track down the user who added the citation; it may be prudent to alert them to this message. Thanks, Citation bot 2 (talk) 13:40, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Gay men reporting larger (longer) penis size

Considering the fitness standards for beauty in gay culture push a much lower body fat percentage (see Northeastern University's health study http://www.northeastern.edu/news/stories/2010/06/ConronHealthDisparities.html) and that men lose some of their penile length - or at least have it hidden - by the pad of pubic fat at the base of the penis, it shouldn't be surprising to see gay men reporting greater length.

If you're leaner, you're longer. 69.47.134.171 (talk) 23:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Picture Removal

Why was the main picture removed? Every Wikipedia page should have a main picture of the subject that is under discussion. Possibly a large conglomerate of various penis pictures should be in order to cover different demographics, sizes, and shapes. This would vividly illustrate the topic at hand and allow viewers from many different nations to gain new visual perspectives.

Where's the stuff on race?

I simply can't believe that race is not mentioned in this article. I don't personally know for a fact whether or not race makes a difference, but obviously that's what many (if not a majority) of people come here hoping to find out. Whether it's a factor or not, this article needs to address it. 98.82.196.213 (talk) 06:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC) In fact, average male penis of Indians and pakistanis is about 5.9 inches whereas those of other races Hispanics Australians(mixed blood) is more than 6.5 inches. Somehow a grith too less or a length of less than 6.35 inches is not healthy enough, given today's male sizes. It affects the male and female psyche(consider the taboo of BJ)

Agreed. Studies on the subject may be unreliable or conrtadictory, but people certainly have a lot of ideas about how penis size relates to race. Even if studies cannot be found at least the myths should be discussed somewhat. 206.248.130.48 (talk) 13:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such needs to be held to the same standards. You won't see any respectable encyclopedia discussing myths, only facts should be discussed. You said it yourself, the studies are unreliable and contradictory, so why would they be included? Wikipedia states that only reliable information should be included. Karot24g (talk) 23:51, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes you would. Encyclopedia are supposed to discuss myths that are important and widely held.--178.167.200.101 (talk) 00:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I changed the wording to "studies are conflicting", as per http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6161691.stm. LiteralKa (talk) 21:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

There's nothing on race because there's no scientific data about it -- only rumors, speculation and fantasy. Those studies that took incidental notice of race showed variances were insignificant. 76.113.64.124 (talk) 16:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh really?? Thats utter nonsense. If you spend the time googling or reading up, you will find there is research paper after paper relying on spectral analysis and rigorously correalated scientific data proving the difference in penis size between some of the races. This whole article is a sham and I dont have the time to correct all of it. The editors seem to have decided to disregard totally what the rest of us are thinking and more importantly the wider evidence/research into penis size which we all know reaches very different conclusions. This article should be scrubbed and restarted.

The bbc article is actually highly misleading. I think it's a propaganda piece, or perhaps just very poorly written. The international size that it references which was "too big for Indian men" was something like 6-7 inches. International sizes are on average too big for average men, anywhere. This same article could be written to target any ethnic group.

Typo

I don't know how to correct a typo on a semi-protected article, so I'll just post it here and hope that someone with administrative rights can correct it.

Under Variance in penis size > Environmental influence on penis size, the sentence

Both Polychlorinated biphenylPCBs and the plasticizer DEHP have been associated with smaller penis size.

should be

Both polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and the plasticizer DEHP have been associated with smaller penis size. --128.59.46.218 (talk) 02:00, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Or this:

Both polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and the plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) have been associated with smaller penis size.

Fixed. I replaced the typo with just "PCBs", and made it a link to the page that expands it. Joule36e5 (talk) 05:53, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Rural penises

According to a study published in the journal Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine males from the countryside have larger penises than urban males.[3] __meco (talk) 11:27, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The difference in mean sizes was .4 cm which translates to 0.157480315 inches. I wouldn't call that significant. Not to mention the study was in Bulgeria. Gateway393 (talk) 22:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Put hyperlink to http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Hand-Foot-Genital_Syndrome where missing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moe33 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Further to my edit

"Deleted unsuitable reference and substituted citation required. 'Trash' reference was not from medical or other research but rather a 2nd hand quote in a politically-charged book"

Suitable references to penis size and race are required. I'm surprised that there aren't ten proper references, since many actual studies have been done.

The reference I deleted was the most inappropriate that I've ever seen, not only in that it's a highly controversial examination of psychology and politics, but the actual quote was second-hand hearsay from an author named Fanon who, to quote from the deleted reference, "is a revolutionary who applies Freudian, Adlerian and Jungian analysis, Sartrian existentialism, and Marxist ideology to criticize colonialism, imperialism, and racism." Read for yourself: [4] ~~Markus451

Few, IF ANY, scientific surveys have been done specifically looking at penis size and race. That's why you can't cite any.

Edit request from 218.208.232.237, 5 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

218.208.232.237 (talk) 14:21, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 16:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Extreme Bias...

I am guessing it is because it would be considered racist but there is a difference in average size amongst races. There has been numerous studies that contradict the statements of article. The authors simply decided to ignore the other research to promote the concept of human equality... Based on my observations of the research of race and size, there is virtually equal range in between each race however the average and median differ significantly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.71.87.182 (talk) 00:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Nil Einne (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually, every SCIENTIFIC study on penis size says differences among races are grossly exagerrated and essentially none exists. Your opening sentence is grammatically flawed and you cite no sources. Please don't waste our time any further with old wives tales.

Measued from where to where?

Surely the article should state where the measurements were taken from. Were they from the torso to the tip or from the front of scrotum to the tip, or some other measurement?--178.167.200.101 (talk) 00:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The measuring method should be mentioned. 95.194.105.1 (talk) 21:28, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The standard way seems to be to put the ruler snug against the pelvic bone and measure horizontally to the tip.

85.227.192.13 (talk) 17:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Flaccid or erect?

In regards to Human_penis_size#Studies_on_penis_size, the 'other source' gives stats for soft and erect. The averages given to start off this section only contain one set of statistics though. Is it fair to assume these are erect values or could they possibly be flaccid ones? I'm not sure what to think, I'm just going by how it says 1.54 diameter whereas the pair gave 1.5 while erect, so it would be more similar that way and explain the higher sizes. DB (talk) 18:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Human penis size

"Fear of shrinking of the penis in folklore have led to a type of mass hysteria called penis panic, though the penis legitimately can shrink in size due to scar tissue formation in the penis from a medical condition called Peyronie's disease."

first note here is that I can't edit on semi-protected pages so i am commenting here and hoping someone else will post. there are other things that can legitimately shrink penis size, such as anti-hormone therapy. here is the link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17162022

I had this happened to me when I stopped cold on steroids, aggain I am not saying that steroids shrink the penis, since they just replace exogenous testosterone with endogenous testosterone. but what I am saying is a massive sudden decrease in LH and testosterone can cause penile shrinkage and yes the prostate cancer patients did undergo radiation, but read the article again. that was 7 months into treatment by then they had already lost 4 cm. of 1 and half inches. sorry to disappoint you, but it is a fact that suppression of LH and no testosterone replacement can shrink the penis and does. I feel this should be posted, but I am not a good enough user yet to post it.

Edit request from Jtmoy19607, 30 May 2011

I posted this in the talk section of human penis size also. I am new to editing wikipedia...but I want to get the word out on this article and link.

"Fear of shrinking of the penis in folklore have led to a type of mass hysteria called penis panic, though the penis legitimately can shrink in size due to scar tissue formation in the penis from a medical condition called Peyronie's disease."

first note here is that I can't edit on semi-protected pages so i am commenting here and hoping someone else will post. there are other things that can legitimately shrink penis size, such as anti-hormone therapy. here is the link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17162022

I had this happened to me when I stopped cold on steroids, aggain I am not saying that steroids shrink the penis, since they just replace exogenous testosterone with endogenous testosterone. but what I am saying is a massive sudden decrease in LH and testosterone can cause penile shrinkage and yes the prostate cancer patients did undergo radiation, but read the article again. that was 7 months into treatment by then they had already lost 4 cm. of 1 and half inches. sorry to disappoint you, but it is a fact that suppression of LH and no testosterone replacement can shrink the penis and does. I feel this should be posted, but I am not a good enough user yet to post it.

to also make my case for putting this in human penis size. We can't say this about chemical or environmental endocrine disruptors "Both Polychlorinated biphenylPCBs and the plasticizer DEHP have been associated with smaller penis size" and then ignore hormonal endocrine disruptors, yes, they interfere during early development, and not during adults, but that is probably because it isn't a high enough dosage of chemical or environmental disruptors, the LH disruptors (leuprolide acetate or goserelin) are potent and crash testosterone levels, very few things do this to adult men, even pituitary tumors will slowly decrease LH and testosterone and not crash them like LH agonists will. My point is you can't say these endocrine disruptors interfere with penis size and then say other endocrine disruption does not.

please contact me with any questions 

Jtmoy19607 (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

 Partly done: I have done the bit referenced to the University of Ankara, I know little about the subject so have left the rest for someone who is more informed.

Can you provide some reliable sources for the other claims? — Bility (talk) 21:09, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Jtmoy19607, 31 May 2011

Fear of shrinking of the penis in folklore have led to a type of mass hysteria called penis panic, though the penis legitimately can shrink in size due to scar tissue formation in the penis from a medical condition called Peyronie's disease. The penis has also been shown to shrink due to the decreasing levels of Luteinizing hormone and testosterone as a result of treatment for prostate cancer. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17162022 The androgen suppression was done by the use of the anti-androgen Bicalutamide for 10 days followed by a luteinizing hormone releasing agonist and after 6 months of this the average patient's stretched penile's length lost 3.5 cm, well over an inch. A month later, while testosterone was still suppressed, radiation was added to the treatment possibly increasing the shrinkage more. After 18 months of the combination of anti-androgen treatment and radiation, stretched penile length changed from 14.2 cm to 8.6 cm. So, it appears that a quick suppression of endogenous testosterone without replacing it with external testosterone will lead to shrinkage. It is important to note the quick drop in androgen and not the slow drop that occurs over a lifetime. Jtmoy19607 (talk) 03:23, 31 May 2011 (UTC) personal note, this will help me with my medical treatment.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.--wintonian ^talk 04:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

not sure what you mean by reliable sources as NIH is reliable...but it was also published in the journal of urology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmoy19607 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/MensHlth/Penis/Penile_Length_Changes_in_Men_Treated_with_Androgen_Suppression_Plus_Radiation_Therapy_for_Local_or_Locally_Advanced_Prostate_Cancer.pdf

Penis size

there is no such research on penis size in Saudi Arabia Dr.Habos himself denies that number. The 12.4 associated with average Saudi penis size is a world average number.

Edit request from 190.159.187.70, 7 June 2011

Colombia is mispelt as "Columbia" in the Eduardo Gomez's chart, the source clearly makes this mistake but both sources seem to refer to the country. --190.159.187.70 (talk) 06:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.Can't see this in the article - Happysailor ^(Talk) 21:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The chart seemed to be spam, and it was subsequently removed by another user. [5] Thanks anyway. --190.157.238.103 (talk) 22:00, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request

In the section 'Historical Perceptions' the word "barbarian" should be changed to "foreigner." In Ancient Greece the word barbarian simply meant non-Greek & did not carry the same connotations as it does today. The word "foreigner" is therefore more accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.28.186.30 (talk) 18:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

 Not done You cannot change words used in a direct quote. Furthermore it's a modern source anyway. However I have linked to the article so people can get a better idea of what the word means in that context if they aren't aware. Nil Einne (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

How is measurement taken?

Nowhere is it mentioned how a measuremet is taken. I suspect that many come here to see how their own measurment compares to the average. Is there a medical "standard procedure"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.163.44.102 (talk) 12:07, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for Edit

A 2007 study by University of Ankara, Faculty of Medicine has found that penile size my decrease as a result of some hormonal therapy combined with external beam radiation therapy.

It should read: A 2007 study by University of Ankara, Faculty of Medicine has found that penile size may decrease as a result of some hormonal therapy combined with external beam radiation therapy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Htennyson (talk • contribs) 17:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

In some studies i read about bone-pressed length - which seems logical as it is the only method to messure guys with some fat on the pubic bone. It is simply measuring on top of the penis (not the side or under the penis) - pressed to the pubic bone. For example i read that Lifestyle did it like that.

Penis size and size of other body parts

The current section on this is weak, and would be strengthened by including the information contained in the following reputable secondary source, or going back to the research referenced there: http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-finger-ratio-penis-length-20110704,0,7466505.story 24.205.76.240 (talk) 09:21, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

List of penis size between countries

I found on few websites the list of penis size (length) by countries. Can I put it here? Those websites are reliable source. --Syukri Abd Rahman (talk) 05:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

If the sources are notable and reliable, try it. --81.100.44.233 (talk) 10:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 3 November 2011

"A 2007 study by University of Ankara, Faculty of Medicine has found that penile size my decrease as a result of some hormonal therapy combined with external beam radiation therapy." It should be "may", I think. Sam113101 (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for catching this. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Circumcised vs Uncircumcised

In the second paragraph of the introduction it says "Circumcised men are on average 8 millimeters shorter in terms of erect length compared to their intact counterparts," and it gives a source which is an exert from a book. But when researched, there are sources that beg the differ on that subject, that there is no adverse effect on size. Here's one of many sources. http://www.circinfo.net/Circumcision_and_penis_length.html

Related page - I need help please! =)

Hello, I am in the process of making a page which is related to this and will one day be linked heavily. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:IraqiLion/Penis_size_by_race However I am a new user and need help? Any suggestions will be considered and included into my page. Thankyou for your attention =)IraqiLion (talk) 08:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)