Girls, do you measure up? - Big labia important

i think he's missing the point, anyway. if all you have in front of you is what you have in front of you, you're not gonna kick her outta bed because her labia isn't long enough. you're in love, getting hot sweaty and naked with someone and suddenly since her labia isn't sticking out past her outer labia you're gonna kick her outta bed? i don't think so.

 

Mm, sure, I understand that. I was trying to make another point, though.
Statistics never express the subjective experience you're describing. Statistics are statements about groups of people. The individual is irrelevant.

So I was trying to point to a few objective facts, not to subjective experiences or opinions. Subjective experiences and thoughts like yours are important and interesting, but they are different.

 

What about them?

I don't know if you've ever had a basic science course, but that's not how science works. Science tries to explain reality by using measurable and objective criteria. Not subjective opinions or experiences.

Seamus, you are simplifying matters. This is not very useful. You have to learn to make the basic distinction between relative and absolute measurements. Within a group of Oriental people, the men with the bigger penises have the better genes. Within a group of caucasians, the same applies.

Then you also have to try to understand the very basic fact that the correlation between genetic superiority and penis-size is only one of many correlations. There are weak men with big penises, and strong men with small penises. The world is more than a penis. But this doesn't do away the fact that the correlation exists.

Finally, there is more than nature alone, there's also nurture and social factors influencing the health of people. For example, there are very strong correlations between the length of men and the wealth of the society they're living in. The wealthier a society, the taller the men. But again, do not make basic mistakes of thinking these are absolute numbers. The trend and the correlation are absolute, but not the numbers that make up the correlation. (So, to use this example: in Japan, the same correlation can be found as in Europe, namely that when the societies become wealthier, the men become taller; but Japanese men are still much taller than their European collegues.)

This is all very basic science.

When you read what I say above, you will understand that your last thought is an expression of a subjective opinion. It has no relevance to the point about the statistic correlation between the size of genitalia and the genetic health of groups of people.

One more word: socio-medical statistics have nothing to do with individuals, they merely look at correlations within and between groups of people.

Basic science.

 

Again, you make the basic mistake of thinking that statistics and correlations express opinions about individuals. That's wrong. They express objective facts about groups of people.

And indeed, it is a well-established scientific fact that there is a correlation between the size of genitals and the health and genetic strength of people.

This is not only a socio-biological fact, it is a biological fact tout court.

 

i'm sorry, but i'm just not buying their "finding" that bigger penises mean better genes. just because someone published it doesn't make it so. now what people find to be physically attractive isn't always what's better. look at the lotus foot women. people's preferences for visual and physical stimulation can become skewed by experience. there'a lot more that goes into determining the appropriateness of a breeding partner, not just genitalia size. i like my girlfriends with tiny breasts, wide asses and huge labia minora. but my husband's mouth gets to watering for plump dark haired women with huge boobs and huge labia majora. it's his type. i've seen it again and again. i enjoy the huge labia because they're fun to play with. dave likes my little labia because they're easy to stimulate and tighten up so much.

 

the "good thing" is you can rest assured and not stress about any measurement except that of your labia because as long as your labia is big you're skinny..

is that's what you're saying? i'm sorry but you're retarded. and i don't say that often.

 

..

 

dude where the fuck are you getting these statistics? this is the most retarded thing... i don't like huge labias and i highly doubt 90 percent of men do. i like vagina...the size of the inner labia hardly determines how i feel about a vagina, some look good, some not so much. i would not like it in the least if my gf decided to stretch hers out.

 

um, the body mass index thing is a crock, too. i think one of my favorite activities in college was seeing the girls in aerobics with their bike shorts on over there hefts labia majora. fit women. and i've ALWAYS had plump outter labia, even thin, even in my youth. i didn't get fat until after my daugther. and they're NO BIGGER than they were before.

 

yea, i think mr johnschlong just has a large labia fetish and is trying to get all the women out there ot feel bad about what they have in order to get them to stretch themselves out and satisfy his kinkyness.....hehe and when you said even in my youth i read even in my mouth....i thought that was hot

 

lol. if i could get my big lips in my mouth i'd chew them like bubble gum....that's the best.

 

I hate johnschlong with a passion. How can someone so fucking stupid have such belief in his worthless opinions. ****!

 

well, perhaps the intelligence level and opinions have something to do with one another. though, if i recall correctly, you don't like penny...hmmmm....

 

Well, in science, it works that way. You have the opportunity to do your own research, send it to a sexuology journal that's peer reviewed by the scientists of the community, and see if you get it published.

Until you have disproven the hypothesis, she stands.

It depends on how you define "better". In evolutionary biology, "better" means, better genes, more chances of survival and procreation.

In cultural or social or political or ideological terms, "better" may signify something else. But that has nothing to do with science.

That's true. But these are cultural curios, historical dadas with no biological relevance.

True, and I never said that genitalia size is the only factor. But it is one factor, for which the correlation has been established.

That's a subjective experience. If you add enough subjective experiences to get a statistically representative sample of a population, then you get a clear correlation: bigger labia minora signify biological health. It's been established over and over again in the zoology of primates.

And add enough differend daves and mynameiskc's together, and you get a final picture about which you can make a scientific statement.

 

If you can read and think logically, you understand that your reversal of cause and effect, is a basic mistake, which is often found in people who don't have a basic grasp of logic.

(To be more correct, we're talking about a correlation, not about causation; the two do no imply each other; but this is obviously totally beyond you.)

 

Well, the body mass index, invented in the 1870s by the great Belgian mathematician and the father of statistics, Adolphe Quételet, is a very useful index that scientists all over the planet have used for over a century now to establish correlations between certain factors involving the human body and its relationship to the medical, psychological, social and political world.

By the way, in my penis-size thread, I forgot to mention that penis size also correlates with the BMI. (That is: "skinny" men have bigger penises than "fat" men.)

Check it out here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7588582/

"It found that a man’s height bore no relation to the length of his member, but those with higher body mass indexes, or fat content, appeared to have shorter penises."

 

Okay, I just read all of this, and here's a link to another site. It's a great 'sex forum' in general, there are all kinds of topics to read, but here's one about
labia- from reading the posts, it seems men don't really care about the size of the labia, although there is a slight preference for the larger, prominent ones.

http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/ITEM/Designa.htm

scroll down to read what people think. Personally, it's the women that have more worries about the labia size than the men on the site.

 

..

 

Exactly. Women don't really care about the size of penises either.

But if you explicitely ask them what they prefer, they will state that they prefer a penis that's a big bigger and thicker than the average one. Just like men prefer larger labia over smaller ones.

It's not super important. We're not talking about the war in Congo or about nuclear proliferation. It's just a fait divers like so many fait divers on this forum. But the fact remains that men prefer large labia.

 

from the people willing to respond to that thread, there might be a slightly larger male population who prefers them large but that doesnt neccesarily reflect the desires of the community as a whole.

if i started a pissing thread, chances are a lot of people who arent into pissing would jsut ignore the thread, and i'd attract a whole bunch of people who are into pissing, then maybe i'd have 5 people say pissing is awesome and 7 people say thats jsut gross, but i wouldnt assume that 5 outta every 12 people is into pissing, i'd assume that people who thought the subject was wack before even reading it just ignored it entirely and didnt respond.

take a look at the websites available on the net, i can garantee you, you will find more porn sites dedicated to ladies fucking horses than ladies with large labias.
im pretty sure most men don't care.