Jump to content
Mental Support Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

About Reality

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The problem is not if it's true. The problem is that people are blaming the penis for it and blaming you for the penis, rather than constant bullying and shaming. It's not you who is the problem. But this unfortunately won't change anything and we won't change society anytime soon.
  2. Is that what you were told or is that what you believe? I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but this is a rare phrasing and there actually are people with this kind of "sissyfication" fetish in which people with small penises should "accept that their only pupose is to (esp. sexually) worship big cock". I'm not shaming these people, but I want to make sure everyone is aware that this is not a fetish forum and fetish posts might have harmful to deadly effects. As I said, if that's an actual experience you had without your consent, I hope you don't believe them and know that people who actually
  3. Hey! Good thing you reached out! Now, first: did you ever get your testosterone checked? Normally this shouldn't help with size after puberty, but there's some anecdotal evidence that it could (though, that's if you had a micropenis). It might help with erectile function, muscular size and confidence. Second: with excess skin, you mean abdominal skin and the skin near the penis , right? If you mean your scrotum (which can lead to erectile difficulties), you should make sure you don't have a penoscrotal fusion. You can see what it looks like here (NSFW - educatio
  4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4558040/ Some of their claims are absolute BS due to Methology (e.g. if women can remeber the size). The preference seems kind of legit tho. Note that it doesn't say 6.3+. Additionally, you did not provide any evidence that the 80-20 rule could be applied to penis size. Don't know why you would try to get access to one of these useless studies then though. There does not seem to be any notable and reproducable correlation. And if there was. If you look at the visualization of correlation you see that it would still be of no real u
  5. Yeah, that's pretty far from reality. Women's preferences average out at around 6" even with 3D models. Which is still above average, but even with 5" you are good to go with the vast majority if you set it up right. The shaming is a problem but overestimating everything doesn't make it better. Yes. In the meta-analysis you will find at least one study for every correlation you can dream of. Almost . I don't see how that would change anything though. You're free to believe whatever you want. Nonetheless, getting confident is a big step in the right direction and for many accep
  6. It overstates them for multiple reasons. First, even though you don't want to hear it, the stretched length average overstated the erect one in the biggest study to date. BUT in the studies where they measured both, erect length was in fact longer. Second, studies with 6" are often not only self-selected (as are all legal studies) but also self-measured. That's complete garbage by default. By the way, the study clearly states that around 10,000 out of the 15,000 men were not urology patients asked if they want to take part, but rather volunteers who took part just to get meas
  7. Unfortunately, this is not necessarily what happens though. The problem of "Low rates of men actually seeing a urologist when they have issues" was discussed even within the first semester of medicine (depending on your choice of specialization in that course). Generally, people are highly influenced by what they expect to happen. People who are afraid of dentists might loose all of their teeth to avoid it. Men afraid to get a finger up their ass die due to prostatate cancer, just to avoid... well... I don't even know what they think would happen... "becoming gay" or some other weird irr
  8. What does that have to do with my quote? Anyway, I never researched that topic so I can't comment on it, sorry.
  9. Well yes, but actually no. I studied it for 2 semesters and I'm still enrolled but i currently don't plan on finishing it. Nonetheless, I still research stuff I'm interested in and you can get the exact same information a medical professional gets in your local library or on the internet. I don't have a way to make your thing bigger by default. Getting harder errections might help (cock rings, viagra, cialis, testo etc.). Flaccid size might decrease with higher blood pressure, so I would try to keep that down - as should anybody anyway, so measure your blood pressure. Trimming your
  10. This wouldn't matter as long as it's distributed similarly. You will never be able to determine an exact value anyway. I would love to see the studies though! The 700 erect measurements from the 15.000 men study actually showed a smaller average than the 14.000 stretched ones. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bju.13010
  11. Unfortunately, as long as you receive Testosterone, it won't make a difference. If your gonadotropin (LH and FSH) levels would be too low there would be many things you could do. Clomiphene, Tamoxiphene, Enclomiphene, hCg (LH supplement), FSH injections (e.g. puregon) etc. These drugs make it possible to raise testosterone whilst not lowering the volume of the testicles and preserving fertility. Unfortunately, this stuff was rejected by the governments without any rational reason until the research companies went either bancrupt or the patents expired so that research isn't profitable an
  12. This is - the way you phrase it - simply factually wrong and illegal, no matter how often you repeat it. Even if urologists were able to force people to be measured, people with small penises are far less likely to go to urologists due to the fear of being shamed. If it's actually usual to measure the penis where you come from, this effect will increase. Plus these urologists did and do not force the people who go there to be measured. It is not part of their usual examination (atleast where I come from ) and there is no medical reason for doing so (if it's not to keep track of DHT-
  13. First off: when I say confronted with shaming, I'm talking about stuff like movies, news, music, celebraties, friends, social media, porn etc. Everyone was confronted with this at some point. Most even regularly, if not daily. What I'm talking about here is that you would have to think this way, even if that stuff didn't exist. Noone knows what would happen then, because that reality doesn't exist, no matter how satisfactory your sex is. I assume however, that the ones who are anatomically able to have pleasurable sex would not have any problem in that imaginatory reality. Therefore
  14. Oh, and on a sidenote. I think it's weird how people say that someone with a fancy car for example (same goes for certain behaviours), would try to compensate for his penis. I'd like to know how this would be possible, because: a) You would have to not only accept that society thinks your size makes you "lack" something, but rather be truly convinced by yourself that that's the case. In other words: You would have to think this way without ever being confronted with any shaming. You can't compensate for something unless this is true, otherwise you're compensating for the lack of acc
  15. The problem I see in this comment is that the fact why she said it is pretty obvious (it didn't need further elaboration imo) and actually worse than just jokes. People are actually following through on what they joke about. This is not just trying to hurt others anymore. There was noone around she wanted to hurt. People with small penises are, even if unconsciously, actually and unironically considered worse human beings. Her phrasing and way of thinking manifests that treating people like second class citizens is not the root of the problem and the penis is to blame. A therapist s
  • Create New...