[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by chImp at 02 Jul 2003 05:12:42: Ivan, I really missed you
As an answer to: Re: size...ralesk written by Ivan at 02 Jul 2003 02:01:16:
and your speculative theories.
1) Ivan: 2 inch sized erect penis is not normal. Just because you say it is, doesn't make it so. Your second statement - 4-8inches is a better assumption. Please explain to me why a 2 inch sized erect cock is a normal one. Explain how exactly you deranged mind defines the term "normal" .
2) Explain why "normal" is a meaningless term for penises. What other objects is this term meaningless for, in your opinion?
3) Explain why you mean by "G-spot" and post a link to a scientific site where such a spot has been proven to exist.
4) And finally, here is something that would sound quite shocking for people like Rood: "as long as it functions well, you've got it all". Please explain to Rood and other NORM geeks what exactly you meant by that.
Thanks!
>Don't be put out by Ralesk's comment. It's just that 'normal' is such a nebulous term, particularly in this context, where variety is what is normal. Compare it to height. Someone 5 feet tall may ask if that is normal, and of course it is. Someone 7 feet tall might ask the same question, and he should get the same answer. Both are normal. "Normal" is a meaningless term for penis size in the same way - normal can be anything from 2 - 10 inches. However, for healthy pleasurable sex generally from about 4 - 8 inches is good. Less than that, it gets harder to get to the G-spot and to get enough stimulation yourself and several positions become undoable; larger than than and you're likely to cause more annoyance or outright pain during intercourse than pleasure unless you are quite careful. So is your penis size normal? Of course, it is, and so would a lot of other sizes. Better yet, your penis is the right size, so as long as it functions well, you've got it all.
- I apologize to AJ chImp 7/02/2003 05:20 (4)
- re: chImp's Elitism... Ralesk 7/02/2003 07:26 (3)
- Re: re: chImp's Elitism... chImp 7/02/2003 15:24 (2)
- Re: re: chImp's Elitism... Rood 7/03/2003 03:59 (0)
- Re: re: chImp's Elitism... Ralesk 7/02/2003 17:07 (0)