best of craigslist > seattle > Why 10" Dicks are Rare Indeed...
Originally Posted: 2003-11-28 10:30pm

Why 10" Dicks are Rare Indeed...

Why 10" Dicks are Rare Indeed....

Being a social misfit like the rest of you CL addicts, I had too much time on my hands (the right hand only, the left was, as usual, busy playing with the sorry appendage that masquerades as a 'schlong' for your truly) and started cruising the best of CL. I found this nugget:

"Now, a recent survey (Wessels, H, TF Lue, and JW McAninch, 1996, Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: Guidelines for penile augmentation, Journal of Urology, 156: 995-997) reports an average erect penis length of 5.07 inches with a standard deviation of 1.14 inches.

Assuming a Gaussian distribution, the confidence interval is erf(std.dev./sqrt(2)). We're interested in the chances of being outside that interval on one side of the bell curve, so we subtract that number from 1.0 and divide by 2.

The result is that 0.000854% of the population has a penis which, when erect, is 10 inches or longer."

I can't vouch for the math of the postee, since I am not really in the mood to look up Gaussian distribution and the associated error function calculations (besides my left hand, at this moment is quite busy providing my amygdala with rather wondrous sensations to act on) but I can tell you that large populations do follow this distribution and hence the outlier calculations are well within reason....

The question is why? Why indeed?

The answer is surprising simple...it has to do with evolutionary biology. Despite the myth of equine-esque schlong as being attractive to the opposite sex (and it may very well be true) the nature abhors freaks UNLESS they provide an advantage for the future generations. Let's take a look-see when Mr. 10" is doing its job...

Please follow the penis head, in a manner of speaking, on its journey inside the dripping wet vagina of the most willing and accepting female. The 10" homes right in and "presses" hard against the opening of the cervix (folks! That is PAINFUL!). Assuming the owner of this gem is also a "renaissance" dude and is quite willing to curb his instinct (crying out for pounding) and instead delivers a smooth as a concerto performance and crescendos gently kissing the deeps within the said dudette with his penis head. Regardless, the gushing semen doesn't have much space to maneuver and a goodly sum of it is likely to be plastered deep inside the uterus.

Now if you have ever seen a semen sample under 800X on the stage of a phase-contrast microscope, it is quite a sight. The little fuckers rush along twisting this way, then that way, following chemical impulses as mindlessly as their owner was acting during their birth. Some or big, some are small, some are limp, some are fat, some going in circles and some rushing headlong; an amazing amount of kinetic energy trying to score the holy egg.

As we all know, it is the (statistically speaking again) survival of the fittest in this mad marathon/bet-your-fucking-existence-on race to the end. An average penis like my 5.5" couldn't possibly deposit the ejaculate so close to the egg that it would be within easy reach of the aspirants (we are talking microscopic stuff here dudes...). Hence only the VERY best among the millions of the potential "yours trulies" have any prayer of scoring...

The said 10" incher though (impressive as it looks pressing hard against the poor little uterus) couldn't help but leave the whole glob within walking distance (so to speak) of the prize. There is not much of a race of the chemically fittest: it's equal opportunity here for the hoi-ploi, and the freaks with twisted tails, mashed-in heads, broken backs, humpbacks, no-tails, fin-heads, half-heads, double-heads, etc, etc. One WRONG flip of the tail and BANG, the egg is YOURS!

Nature being nature, doesn't quite follow the anti-abortion dictates of our most-revered bible-thumping moral-majority, and 9 out of 10 times summarily rejects these grossly deformed (chemically speaking) embryos ... along with their potential 10" schlongs.

And to think that this would happen IF the unholy load actually "lands" gently enough to produce the said scenario. Most likely the FORCE of the ejection (what with the 10" owners being appropriately well endowed in the ejection load/speed department too; it's only fair) would force a goodly number of potential junior-10-inchers smack inside the fallopian tubes. And guess what? Here comes a dangerous form of pregnancy (ectopic). This time surgical aid may be needed to remove the potential Junior-10-incher. So the 10" schlong owner is not only doomed in his (statistically siginificant) procreations but is also a danger to the female recipient! If there ever was a poetic justice in a double-whammy, this gotta be it:)

In nature, it is never the selection of the "best" or the "largest", it is always the selection of the "most adequate" that matters.

As far as I am concerned, (had I the necessary flexibility) I would bow down and kiss my fat-little 5.5 incher; go ahead, you may keep your 10" monstrosity... you are doomed anyway!

It may not merit an "Honorary Causa" from the Stanfraud U. (I love this name, thank you anon-CL postee who came up with this), but it does explain why ONLY 0.000854% of the males are endowed with anything approaching 10 inches.

.....time to go massage the ego of my 5.5 incher:)

P.S. come to think of it, the massive girth of my rather short 5.5 incher, sort of "paves the way" for an easy birth of the junior. This is indeed an evolutionary advantage and the 22nd century just might belong to my male progenies sporting 4-inch circumference on just-the-right-size and quite-fashionable/highly-sought-after 5.5 inches! Cool, eh?




post id: 20041464

email to friend

best of [?]