fender412002
Member
Posts: 859
|
I've copied this from a UK site called female first. I found it interesting.
For starters it is the visual impact. A bigger, fuller, longer penis is just more manly, more powerful, more masculine to look at and admire. A man who has a large, thick penis with a nice meaty head on it is just plain damn sexy to look at--period! It excites you and titillates. It speaks as a testament to sexual prowess and manliness for the pure raw visceral longing it generates. Compare this to a man with a stumply little C*** still looking like it needs to grow up. On an adult man it is just a comical sad little joke and it does nothing to inspire sexual excitement. Really, the only thing such a small dick is for is to highlight by negative example the real status of manhood by being a counter example to a man who is in possession of a manly size C***.
Then there are the very real physical reamisters. For one thing a penis that is fuller means it has more girth, which in turn will stimulate the vagina, particularly the vaginal lips far more than a thinner penis. Feeling a large, thick C*** sliding in and out, tugging at your labia truly excites you far more superiorly than a skinnier penis. The length too is important. Contrary to the myth that a woman's sensation ends after the first third of her vagina, a woman can indeed feel sexual stimulation in the depths of her vagina. A long, full penis just gives you that filled up feeling, where you feel the warmth and manly fullness of the man inside of you, expanding you, stimulating you, and fulfilling you in everyplace and in ways that a smaller endowed man is just physically incapable of accomplishing.
And in my experience a larger endowed man just lasts longer. I do not know why that is, but I can honestly say that men of average to smaller size just do not last as long, nor are as readily up for subsequent sex. In striking contrast a larger endowed man has more stamina, which women naturally equate with greater masculinity, has a shorter refractory period, and able to sexually perform not only for a longer period of times but for a greater number of times as well.
All this for a woman translates to more intense, powerful, vagina-wide orgasms, more of them in one time, and more of them in greater number of sessions.
Orally as well, a larger penis is just more satisfying, since there is more to suck and lick and kiss and make love to. Feeling a man's large C*** in your hand is by itself just a *huge* turn on or seeing that beautiful bulge growing in his pants is enough to get you wet in anticipation. But see a well hung man's gorgeous manhood revealed, particularly for the first time, standing in proud erection is to evoke that deep eons long natural urgings and longings of loving worshipfulness.
Let's just face it, size definitely matters and bigger is indeed better. It is really not a mystery as to why women prefer larger sized penises. Most women will not say it aloud but lets face it, it is what excites us more than anything with perhaps the exception of a warm, s*******ed tongue. After all, you don't find the romance novel industry or porn film industry populated with men with average or small little dicks right? It just isn't a female fantasy. Prowess and masculinity is what excites us and a larger endowed man exudes that sexually far far more than a smaller endowed male, no matter what social status that smaller dick male might have.
This is why size matters and why we women prefer bigger cocks.
Hope I have not made an guy out there feel bad, but you asked the question and on here (the internet) we women do not have to be so guarded and have to censure our natural inclinations and perfectly normal feelings that is perfectly natural.
fender
|
fender412002
Member
Posts: 859
|
Another poster on female first goes on to write:
I do not think that you have any need to make an apologia for your natural desires. I agree with you. I think we should be all free to express ourselves and our true desires.
I am a psychological graduate student concentrating on evolutionary psychology. Interestingly enough Helen Fisher, the noted anthropologist offered a very insightful analysis for the reamisters why women prefer larger endowed males. There have been others, even men, that concluded the same thing, but it is just more credulous to me as a woman when I read and related intimately with what another woman is saying. Basically, larger pensis size correlates with more dominance in males and also a higher ability to inseminate a woman. There is also strong evidence to show that larger endowed males produce not only more testosterone, but more sperm that is of a healtier quality, where the seamen of men who are more endowed are also able to more readily form a protective barrier that seals that and protects their sperm within womb. Even more amazingly is that a larger endowed penis literally acts like a plunger, able to create a large suction effect that effectly displaces the sperm of rival males. There are also a host of "sperm wars" that go on as well and it is truly fascinating, owed to our polygamous ancestral heritage and fierce sexual competition.
Thus, from an evolutionary perspective, then, men who were more endowed had more testosterone. Testosterone has been correlated with a host of male advantages, including more fertility, energy, alertness, resourcefulness, and even intelligence (incidentally Einstein was rumored to have been well endowed not only with a large cerebrum but also a large penis, as it was references in several correspondences from a few of his former lovers). What this means then is that a woman inseminated by a male who was more endowed passed on to his future misters the same evolutionary advantages. In times women who came to prefer men with larger penises had a greater chance to produces such alpha males and flowers that would seek them out, furthering their evolutionary success. Still there is much genetic variation and sexual rivalry, owed to the instinctual drive of the female of the species to procreate with male members of outside groups. This has been well documented in a host of primate species and is owed to preventing inbreeding within a population. Hence, there will me females that will mate with men with a range of penis sizes, accounting for the variability we see. Nevertheless, the strong sexual female preference for a larger endowed male still exists due to this common ancestral origin.
I not only relate to this, but as an Asian woman, where Asian women are often said to not have such a want for a bigger penis because we are very "tight," I further find the explanation very satisfying. Even among many Asian cultures, women are quite unabashed about their larger penis preference. This is particularly true among Thai and Filipino women and surveys in even Japan, which is readily losing its male-dominate hold on women there, is the preference for larger sized penises being made. Only really in Asian cultures that put a large social taboo or restraint on sexual expression do Asian women curtail their desires. This includes China and Korea, but interestingly enough in Taiwan, who are genetically identically to their Chinese counterparts, the Taiwanese women state a strong preference to larger sized penises.
Indeed, I think Asian women are "tighter" but this doesn't take away from the desire and preference for a larger penis. Physically, the vagina is a very accommodating organ, capable of stretching some five times its relaxed state, hence easily accommodating any size penis. I think many women who have difficulty in dealing with a larger sized penis are ones that are not lubricating or sexually relaxing enough to enjoy it. Before I became sexually active, I had great difficulty accommodating even a small penis. I was just psychologically not able to relax and feel free with my body to lubricate and enjoy sex that way. Now I can and if I want I can really tighten up and keep even the smallest man out. I have to be genuinely excited and relax to take a largely endowed man but I can and have and honestly the sex is hotter with a larger endowed man.
fender
|
swhwwfubbbd
Member
Posts: 157
|
#7 · Edited by: swhwwfubbbd
|
 |
I suppose larger penis is a matter of degree in the female urge. Many Ladies will on a fully critically conscious level say that "size isn't everything" and yet know from my own relationship that the thought of a larger cock is actually very sexually stimulating for my wife when in the bedroom and playing in the moment.
Now it is true that women have until recently been constrained by choice only within their own ethnicities and so constrained by that ethnicities general penis sizes. If we were to see Asian women going for larger over preference for their own. If we saw Caucasian women taking the same preference - if we saw increasing numbers doing the same then there would perhaps be something to argue the case that larger cock in a womans mind is more necessary than not. But its not the only indicator perhaps.
We could spend forever arguing out what women want perhaps its best to see from the past what women wanted and might help us project to the future what they will want.
I've enclosed a heap of quotes from a book - 'The Mating Mind' written by a evolutionary psychologist
The Mating Mind.
“By primate standards, humans look strange, even after we step out
of our sport utility vehicles. Compared with other apes, we have
less hair on our bodies, more on our heads, whiter eyes, longer
noses, fuller lips, more expressive faces, and more dextrous hands.
In most species, sexual ornaments like long head hair, hairless
skin, and full lips would have evolved only in males, because
females would have been the choosy sex. Males have few
incentives to reject any female mates. The fact that both human
sexes evolved distinctive sexual ornaments shows that both female
choice and male choice was important in human evolution. If
both sexes were choosy about bodies, they might also have been
choosy about minds.
Not only do we look different from other apes, but each human
sex also has distinctive body traits shaped by sexual selection. Men
are taller and heavier on average than women, with more upper
body strength, higher metabolic rates, more hair, deeper voices,
and slightly larger brains. Some of these traits may have evolved
for sexual competition against other males. But male bodies are
also living evidence of the sexual choices made by ancestral
females. Men grow beards, and possess penises that are much
longer, thicker, and more flexible than those of other primates.
These are more likely to reflect female choice than male competition.
Women also evolved to incarnate male sexual preferences.
Women have enlarged breasts and buttocks, narrower
waists, and a greater orgasmic capacity than other apes.
Sexual selection has also made male bodies grow according to
a higher-risk, higher-stakes strategy. For males there is a higher
incidence of birth defects, more death in infancy, higher mortality
at every age, earlier senescence, and greater variation in health,
strength, body size, brain size, and intelligence. This risky, go-forbroke
strategy suggests that sexual competition among males was
often a winner-takes-all contest. It was better to take a big gamble
on producing the most attractive image during a short peak,
rather than aiming to create a mediocre impression over a long
period of time.”
“The most sexually selected parts of our bodies have been
neglected in theories of human evolution because they don't
fossilize. Sexual choice sculpts body ornaments out of muscle, fat,
skin, and nerves, often without leaving many clues in the bones.
This makes it hard to know when and where these traits evolved.
We don't know how hairy our ancestors were a million years ago,
whether Homo erectus males had huge penises, or whether
Neanderthal females had large breasts. But we do know that our
body's sexual ornaments are universal across human groups, so
they must have evolved at least 60,000 years ago or so, when
human groups colonized different areas of the world.”
“Penises, clitorises, breasts, and beards are fascinating not only in
their own right, but also for what they reveal about sexual selection
among our ancestors.”
“Even within a species, sexual selection produces diversity
between populations. In humans, the runaway effect can take
different populations ("ethnicities," "races") off in different evolutionary
directions, ornamenting them with different face shapes
and body traits. Where the divergence has no apparent
relationship to different climates or ecological challenges, it
probably arose through sexual selection. Human populations
differ markedly in skin color, eye color, hair length, facial features,
breast size, and penis size.”
“The Evolution of the Penis
Sexual reproduction does not really require many sex differences.
Males must make sperm, and females must make eggs. But males
do not have to grow penises, and females do not have to grow
clitorises. Male frogs and birds do not have penises. Genitalia are
products of sexual choice, not requirements for sexual reproduction.
The traditional distinction between "primary" sexual
traits (such as penises) and "secondary" sexual traits (such as
beards) is misleading. Perhaps for reamisters of Victorian propriety,
Darwin wrote as if female choice applied only to the secondary
sexual traits. But modern biologists view penises themselves as
targets of sexual choice. Biologist William Eberhard has argued
convincingly that male genitals in a wide range of species are
shaped as much by female choice as by the demands of sperm
delivery
Adult male humans have the longest, thickest, and most flexible
penises of any living primate. The penises of gorillas and
orangutans average less than two inches when fully erect, and
those of chimpanzees average only 3 inches. By contrast, the
average human penis is over 5 inches when erect. The longest
medically verified human penis was about 13 inches when erect,
more than twice the average length.
Even more unusual than the length of the human penis is its
thickness. Other primate penises are pencil-thin, whereas the
erect human penis averages over one inch in diameter. Also, most
other primates have a penis bone called the "baculum," and
achieve erections mostly through muscular control, like a winch
raising a rigid strut. The penis bone is typical of most mammals.
By contrast, the male human relies on an unusual system of
vasocongestion. The penis fills with red before copulation, like
a blimp inflating before flight.”
“Male humans
show many adaptations for sperm competition, both physical and
mental. For example, some studies have shown that when a
woman returns home from a long trip, her partner tends to
produce a much larger ejaculate than normal, as if to overwhelm
any competitor's sperm that may have found its way into his
unwatched partner's vagina.
However, comparimisters of male testicles across species reveal
that penises did not evolve purely for spermatic firepower. Among
primates, the intensity of sperm competition correlates much
more strongly with testicle size than with penis size. For example,
male chimpanzees face much greater sperm competition than
humans. When female chimps ovulate, they copulate up to fifty
times a day with a dozen different males. In response, male chimps
have evolved huge, 4-ounce testicles to produce sperm, but only
small, thin penises to deliver it. At the other extreme, male
silverback gorillas guard their harems vigilantly and violently, and
tolerate no sperm competition, so they have evolved very small
testicles. Humans have moderately sized testicles by primate
standards, indicating that ancestral females copulated with more
than one male in a month fairly often. Sequential fidelity to
different men in different months would not produce any sperm
competition, because each egg would be exposed only to one
man's sperm. The fact that male human testicles are larger than
those of gorillas is one of the strongest pieces of evidence that
ancestral females were not strictly monogamous.”
“I suspect that few modern women would not
be happy with a sexual partner who had a penis of chimpanzee
design—less than three inches long, half an inch thick, and rigid
with bone. Of course, no single sexually selected trait is a
guarantee of satisfaction. Sexual selection works on the principle
of all else being equal. Given two otherwise identical hominid
males, if female hominids consistently preferred the one with the
longer, thicker, more flexible penis to the one with the shorter,
thinner, less flexible one, then the genes for large penises would
have spread. Given the relatively large size of the modern human
penis, it is clear that size mattered. If it had not, modern males
would have chimp-sized sexual organs.
So, why did picky female hominids start selecting for larger
penises? Perhaps upright walking gave females a better view of
male genitals. Anthropologist Maxine Sheets-Johnstone has
argued that bipedalism may have evolved in part because it
makes penile display more effective. She observed that in other
primates, bipedal standing and walking are most often done by
males displaying their penises to potential mates. Bipedal genital
displays to strangers are now considered a criminal offense rather
than a legacy of primate courtship. Likewise, the male openlegged
sitting position, still universal across cultures, resembles
open-legged penile displays by chimpanzees. If Sheets-Johnstone
is right that bipedalism originated as a form of male sexual display,
then here is another example of an evolutionary innovation
originating through sexual selection and later proving useful for
survival.”
“In a human female with concealed ovulation, a male's
sexual ability may influence whether she keeps copulating with
him, and that will determine his likelihood of producing offspring
with her. If she rejected him after one or two unexciting
encounters, he is very unlikely to man her youngren.
The duration and intensity of copulatory courtship in a
species is a clue to the power of female choice. If efficient
sperm delivery were the only point of copulation, a single
thrust would be sufficient. Tomcats use this hit-and-run
strategy. Copulation in most birds is very brief, and this
absence of copulatory courtship is probably why birds have not
evolved penises. Most primates make several separate
"mounts" and several thrusts per mount before ejaculating.
Copulatory thrusting seems designed to maximize the
intensity, duration, and rhythmicity of tactile stimulation
delivered to the female genitals. Delivering stimulation in
addition to delivering sperm suggests that female choice has
been important.
Copulatory courtship was probably especially important among
hominids. Continuous sexual receptivity and concealed ovulation
gave our female ancestors an unprecedented opportunity for
testing males as sexual partners, while running a lower risk per
copulation of unwanted pregnancy than any other primate did.
Sex during menstruation, pregnancy, and breast-feeding would
also have given ample opportunity for judging potential long-term
lovers by their copulatory s*******s.
In species that do not use copulatory thrusting, especially
insects, penises evolve more obvious tactile stimulators: nubs,
spikes, ridges, curls, barbs, hooks, and flagella. Male insects often
try to push each other off during copulation, so copulatory
thrusting would risk disengagement. Better to lock the genitals
together and have internal flagella to excite the female. With
primates, it is not so common for male rivals to swarm over
females knocking each other off. This allows couples a bit more
copulatory leisure, with more complex movements favoring
simpler penis designs. The human penis is especially streamlined
because ancestral females apparently favored whole-body
copulatory movement over the flagellar vibrations favored by
female insects. Perhaps whole-body copulatory movements,
requiring much more energy than waving a couple of vibrators on
the end of the glans, were better indicators of physical fitness. It is
not clear whether many middle-aged men do actually have heart
attacks during vigorous sex with mistresses, but this plausible risk
reveals the energetic costs of human copulation, and one way that
female demands for tactile stimulation separate the healthy from
the unhealthy. The loss of the baculum (penis bone) also reveals
female choice for tactile stimulation. Since male human penises
become erect with red rather than muscle and bone, this gives
them more flexibility, and permits a greater range of copulatory
positions. Although bonobos also enjoy face-to-face copulation,
their positional variety pales in comparimister to the Kama sutra.
Human penises evolved as tactile stimulators for use in copulatory
courtship. Further research may clarify whether penises and
copulatory courtship evolved mostly as fitness indicators or just as
sexually selected entertainment.
Female hominids may not have preferred thicker, longer, more
flexible penises per se. They may simply have liked orgasms, and
larger penises led to better orgasms by permitting more varied,
exciting, and intimate copulatory positions. This rather contradicts
the view of the penis as a symbol of male domination. If we
were a species in which males dominated the sexual system, we
would have one-inch penises like dominant gorillas. The large
male penis is a product of female choice in evolution. If it were
not, males would never have bothered to evolve such a large,
floppy, red-hungry organ. Ancestral females made males evolve
such penises because they liked them.”
http://www.cuckoldplace.com/10_77714_1.html
|
