Size matters, or does it?
by Star 
What is so special about something being big?
What is remarkable about big buildings, big bridges, big airplanes,
big vessels, big whales, and big elephants over their smaller counterparts?
How about big penises and big breasts? Is it a universal law that
the bigger an object is, the better it is? Let's take the size
of the penis and breasts as an example and go from there. The question
is: why do most of us think that having big breasts and/or penises
is better? And why do some of us get obsessed with the idea to
the point that we are ready to go through the hell of penile enlargement
surgery or silicone breast implants with their unknown long-term
side effects? Is it because having a big penis is cool? Or is having
big breasts more sexually appealing? And if this is true, then
why is it so?
Did you know that only the external one-third (about four centimeters)
of the vaginal canal contains sensory nerves required for stimulation
and orgasm? No need to mention that the clitoris is
located on the outside. If this is the case, then a willy will
do the job as long as the willy owner knows how to use it. So why
bother with trying to stimulate the internal two-thirds of vaginal
canal where there is no sensory receptors to receive the stimuli?
Don't you think according to the laws of physics, an individual
with a big penis simply wastes a lot of energy by doing unnecessary
work?
What is the myth behind big breasts?
Why do Baywatch viewers go crazy watching a pair of skin-covered
silicone spheres? Did you know that on the average, human breasts
receive more or less the same number of sensory neurons regardless
of how big or small they are? If this is the case, then according
to the laws of physics one can conclude that breasts with the same
number of sensory nerves but smaller surface area are more sensitive.
This rationale follows the well-known pressure equation in physics,
P= F/A, where P is pressure, F is force, and A is surface area.
Therefore, the smaller the breasts are, the larger the stimulus
pressure would be; this means that small breasts can be stimulated
easier, and more effectively. So considering this, why bother with
big breasts and big silicone balls?
You can apply the above pressure equation for the penis as well,
where a penis with smaller head and body but the same number of
sensory neurons can be stimulated much more than the larger organ.
I wish that I could witness a conversation between a male mouse
and a male elephant or between a female mouse and a dairy cow over
who enjoys sex more as compared to the other one.
If we take a look at the first half of the 20th century, we would
see women with reasonable amount of flesh on their bodies who were
sexy, foxy, and adorable. How about these days? Well, we all must
be tall, skinny, and have a pair of silicone balls hanging there.
No need to explain why except to remind you that it is just another
corporate brainwash of the late 20th century; where another niche
is created in the marketing of cosmetics, fashion, plastic surgery,
clothes, shoes and you name it.
By the way, did I tell you about my size? |
by Martin Willett
No Star, you didn't.
I can tell you that the idea that only the outer third of the
vagina can feel the penis is wrong. There may be different kinds
of nerves there but the vagina is sensitive all the way in to the cervix
and a woman does know when the cervix has been pushed by an object inside
the vagina. How that information will be processed by the brain is a
moot point. It is almost certainly context sensitive, I doubt many women
orgasm when having a gynaecological examination. The sensations will
probably be interpreted differently by different women and at different
times in the same woman. If a woman has learned to associate an uncomfortable
fullness in the upper vagina with great sexual pleasure then for her
size will matter. For many other women yes, they can tell the difference
but it doesn't really matter that much either way. Size probably does
matter a lot for sex toys, but it would rarely be a woman's top priority
in the choice of a long term mate. And if it was would you really be
interested in a woman who judged men with a ruler?
I also strongly suspect that the dimensions of the vagina you have stated
are measuring the vagina in the normal state. (As if any woman would
feel normal with her feet round her ears and a ruler disappearing into
her nether regions...) When a woman becomes sexually excited the vagina
elongates. It is quite simple to measure a penis in either the erect
or flaccid state and get a clear measurement, but a vagina is by its
nature more of a potential space than an actual space, it isn't clear
as to how to measure its size.
There's more to sex than filling a vagina, a lot more. Surveys of women's
attitudes to penis size regularly show that any preference women have
is relatively unimportant, a good lover with a small penis is better
than a selfish oaf with a large one. Penis size obsession is far more
common among men. Naturally most women would prefer a reasonably large
penis and a great lover. Our species are never satisfied with our lot
in life so why should willies be an exception?
If you buy that patch, those pills or that surgery, even if it worked
and filled her to the brim she'd still find a reason to find fault. She
would consider you too vain, too willing to waste money and she would
be suspicious about whether you were doing it to impress another woman!
As for breasts my attitude is rather similar to that of most women's
preferences with penises: I prefer sensitive small breasts to great big
insensitive pillows, but I'd be happiest of all with significantly above
average size, real, pert, bouncy, sensual and sensitive. But I'm sensible
enough to know that such perfection is very rare and I'm content to compromise
on almost any feature except availability.
|
|
