Plastics lead to smaller penises

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-06-03 10:03am

Ars Technica wrote:
Plastics dominate our lives in the west. Most everything we as buy is made or wrapped in them, we wear them, travel in them, they are truly inescapable. But could the massive prevalence of plastics in the modern age cause our downfall? Pthalates, chemicals used to increase pliability in products as diverse as plastic bottles and cosmetics, are very similar to estrogen, the female sex hormone, and their widespread use has led to increased environmental contamination. The rise in levels of these compounds has been implicated in the observed fall in sperm counts over the past 50 years, and now fuels fears of feminized males, both human and animal.

Now Dr. Shanna Swan at University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in New York have linked levels of pthalates in pregnancy to the developmental abnormalities in male children:

As an index of feminization, she measured the “anogenital distance” (AGD) between the anus and to the base of the penis. She also measured the volume of each boy’s penis. Earlier studies have shown that the AGD is twice in boys what it is in girls, mainly because in boys the hormone testosterone extends the length of the perineum separating the anus from the testicles...

...When Swan’s team measured concentrations of nine phthalate metabolites in the urine of pregnant women, they found that four were linked with shorter AGD in sons born to women showing high exposure levels.

Although none of the boys developed abnormal genitals, the quarter of mothers who were exposed to the highest concentrations of phthalates were much more likely to have had boys with short AGDs compared with the quarter of mothers who had the lowest exposures to the chemicals.

And although all the boys had genitals classified as “normal”, 21% of the boys with short AGDs had incomplete testicular descent, compared with 8% of other boys. And on average, the smaller the AGD, the smaller the penis.

As usual in cases such as these, the manufacturers of these chemicals claim that increased regulation of their use is unnecessary, and that they are quite safe. I’m inclined to disagree.

Drunk Monkey · Post by **Drunk Monkey** » 2005-06-03 10:45am

What the fuck?

And to those with bigger dicks then me because I was raised around plastic.

Post by **Coyote** » 2005-06-03 12:46pm

Fuck, what about those people who were raised around plastic power lines?

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2005-06-03 01:05pm

Ummmm...From someone who has seen QUITE a few dicks in my life time from the ages 20 and up....and personally HANDLED ones from about 28 and up.....I would say this is GROSSLY overexaggerated. I don't know whether it's a gay thing, but I would have been more inclined to believe plastics made BIGGER dicks.

I know all the "average" statistics, and quite honestly i am always seeing such a preponderance of large sizes. It got to the point where I was getting a little irked and felt like saying what, is nobody hung average anymore? If I run into another 8 incher plus, I'll scream. Never mind some thick enough to break your jaw..Oops. Probably too much information.

Anyway, this is probably very very minimal in its effect IF truly accurate.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-06-03 01:59pm

Do you really think your personal experiences are with a large enough demographic to invalidate the article?

Post by **Coyote** » 2005-06-03 02:08pm

wolveraptor wrote:Do you really think your personal experiences are with a large enough demographic to invalidate the article?

Probably not, but I'd have to admit admiration if he tried!

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2005-06-03 05:05pm

Speaking as someone who has worked for a thermoplastic injection molding company for 8 years I can safely say that my dick indeed a majestic sight. We use soft PVC's with plastisizers like pthalate every day, and it hasn't shruck my dick any.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2005-06-03 05:06pm

also i'd just like to add that i find it abso-fucking-lutely hysterical that an additive used to make rigid plastics soft is alleged to shrink your dick.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-06-03 05:40pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:also i'd just like to add that i find it abso-fucking-lutely hysterical that an additive used to make rigid plastics soft is alleged to shrink your dick.

No one is saying it shrinks your current dick, it affects your children's dick

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2005-06-03 06:04pm

Do you really think your personal experiences are with a large enough demographic to invalidate the article?

They didn't give the actual amount of boys studied...so it's hard to say for certain...however in my earlier days I was a little bit *ahem* randy, and I've easily seen over a thousand.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-06-03 08:40pm

Well, has anyone ever even SEEN a less than 6" cock? I mean, really, apparently that's average: is there a conspiracy of lying on surveys to make us all look good or something? I've *heard* horror stories about really small cocks, but I dunno... I've heard speed makes you smarter too.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-06-03 11:54pm

Justforfun000 wrote:
Do you really think your personal experiences are with a large enough demographic to invalidate the article?
They didn't give the actual amount of boys studied...so it's hard to say for certain...however in my earlier days I was a little bit *ahem* randy, and I've easily seen over a thousand.

You lie...you lie like a Bush lackey, man.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-06-04 01:12am

Stark wrote:Well, has anyone ever even SEEN a less than 6" cock? I mean, really, apparently that's average: is there a conspiracy of lying on surveys to make us all look good or something? I've *heard* horror stories about really small cocks, but I dunno... I've heard speed makes you smarter too.

Go to an adult toy store and look at the sizes of dildoes and vibrators that are sold. Remember that these companies can't get away with exaggerated measurements because it would be false advertising and they could get in trouble. So when you see a dildo labeled "6 inches" in an adult toy store, it really is six inches. And when you see a dildo labeled "8 inches" in an adult toy store, it really is eight inches. And personally, I doubt that real 8-inchers are anywhere near as common as you would think if you listen to guys bragging. For females, physical pain during intercourse starts at around 7 inches.

By the way, the Kinsey Report found that the average male penis length was 5.9 inches, with 52.2% of the population below six inches in length and 20% below 5.5 inches. Only 5% were above 7 inches. Interestingly enough, they did the length measurements themselves in this study, rather than letting the men measure themselves. Other surveys using self-measurement generally indicate substantially larger average penis sizes, well over six inches. Hmmm, I wonder what that means

felineki · Post by **felineki** » 2005-06-04 01:16am

Stark wrote:Well, has anyone ever even SEEN a less than 6" cock?

I have. In fact, it's in my lap right now. You could say that I'm rather attached to it.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-06-04 01:16am

By the way, one interesting fact I learned a while ago was that studies of older men showed that penises actually shrink over time if you don't get regular sex or masturbation. In other words, use it or lose it. Those among you who aren't getting any action had better start jerking your meat or it'll start shrinking.

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2005-06-04 02:29am

You lie...you lie like a Bush lackey, man.

LOL...No I'm afraid that's the Gospel truth.

Trust me, for a gay man, that's NOT a very rare thing....Now I'm not saying I've DONE over a thousand cocks....I said SEEN.

However, the number of ones I've been personally involved with would not be and less than triple digits either.....Again, not necessarily unusual..Especially for someone my age....(35). Now the newer batch of homosexuals do not have the situation of anonymous sex being a near necessity for survival. So it's a different ball game. In the earlier days, you obviously didn't have repeats because no one wanted to be "known".

And personally, I doubt that real 8-inchers are anywhere near as common as you would think if you listen to guys bragging. For females, physical pain during intercourse starts at around 7 inches.

They aren't exactly VERY common, but from what I recall the statistics still seemed WAY too low from personal experience....However inches alone is somewhat irrelevant, especially as to desirability. What REALLY makes a nice cock is thickness. A certain meaty type quality to it esp. with foreskin (in my personal preference). Length is WAY overrated.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2005-06-04 11:28am

Stark wrote:Well, has anyone ever even SEEN a less than 6" cock?

Yes, I'm the proud owner of one.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-06-04 12:24pm

Seeing over a thousand cocks isn't so impressive if they're just pics online. Then even I could do it (if my eyes weren't burned out of their sockets).

What I find unbelievable is that you could ever have sex with people in the hundreds. I'm talking physical constraints in time here. You'd need to be doing it pretty damn often.

Furthermore, what constitutes actual intercourse for a gay man? For straights, its when tab A goes into a slot B and shoots its load. What's it for homosexuals? Up the arse? Touching genitals? Am I going to regret asking this?

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2005-06-04 06:51pm

Darth Wong wrote:By the way, one interesting fact I learned a while ago was that studies of older men showed that penises actually shrink over time if you don't get regular sex or masturbation. In other words, use it or lose it. Those among you who aren't getting any action had better start jerking your meat or it'll start shrinking.

Yeah, but if they're not getting any there isn't much of a chance to show it off, and therefore no point to it, is there?

Well, pride maybe.

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2005-06-05 02:42am

Seeing over a thousand cocks isn't so impressive if they're just pics online. Then even I could do it (if my eyes weren't burned out of their sockets).

No I meant in real life.

What I find unbelievable is that you could ever have sex with people in the hundreds. I'm talking physical constraints in time here. You'd need to be doing it pretty damn often.

Not at all. You're thinking in terms of straight sex. Consider 20 years ago....in the closet...your options are limited to cruising. Parks. washrooms, etc. There was no online available either. It could be common to go to a park and have sex (whether just mutual masturbation, oral or to the extreme of penetration) with a dozen guys. Ironically women would love the self control of gay men because the majority do everything they can to hold off from orgasm. Some people will try to get off many others before even allowing themselves to come. So say you played around with 6 guys one Saturday, next weekend you pop to a bathhouse and did mutual masturbation with a guy in the whirlpool, oral sex with 3 guys in the sauna, and 2 different bed encounters with guys in rooms.....You see where I'm going....Even at once or twice a month, in a year you could EASILY hit a couple hundred. Then put 10 years on the pic.

Now this may seen quite extreme and shocking to a straight man's experiences, but really ask yourself this question honestly.....IF you could go to a park where a few dozen gorgeous women were milling about in and all of them were looking for anonymous hot encounters, would you find this fun? Would you not want to have as sex with as many of the hot girls as you could? Now this is a purely sexual desire question and I'm not asking for moral judgements or STD scenarios, they are all relevant as to actually doing such a thing and how careful you are, yes, but not to the basic likelihood of you A) desiring such a thing, b) willing to do so if scenario was probable.

It just happens to be the way of the world that women are not generally like this. Cruising is not a reality for straight men . The closest thing possible is a hooker and she costs.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2005-06-05 04:38pm

Stark wrote:Well, has anyone ever even SEEN a less than 6" cock? I mean, really, apparently that's average: is there a conspiracy of lying on surveys to make us all look good or something? I've *heard* horror stories about really small cocks, but I dunno... I've heard speed makes you smarter too.

Yes. I have. It was extremely disappointing, especially since it was barely and inch circumference. Of all my college flings, I regret that one the most.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2005-06-05 04:43pm

wolveraptor wrote:Seeing over a thousand cocks isn't so impressive if they're just pics online. Then even I could do it (if my eyes weren't burned out of their sockets).

What I find unbelievable is that you could ever have sex with people in the hundreds. I'm talking physical constraints in time here. You'd need to be doing it pretty damn often.

In college, my roommate had a new boytoy every other week, and sometimes was sleeping with two guys in between. In two years, she'd slept with over one hundred men that I knew of.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-06-05 05:10pm

LadyTevar wrote:Yes. I have. It was extremely disappointing, especially since it was barely and inch circumference. Of all my college flings, I regret that one the most.

Are you sure you weren't drunk or something during this little encounter? There's no way somebody actually has a cock with an inch circumference. That would be less than a third of an inch diameter.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-06-05 05:21pm

Darth Wong wrote:
LadyTevar wrote:Yes. I have. It was extremely disappointing, especially since it was barely and inch circumference. Of all my college flings, I regret that one the most.
Are you sure you weren't drunk or something during this little encounter? There's no way somebody actually has a cock with an inch circumference. That would be less than a third of an inch diameter.

Indeed. It'd be the Virginia Slims of penises.