The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
What's the evolutionary advantage for massive difference in human cocksize?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:36 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Was just talking to Gemini about this. What we essentially came up with is this:
Smaller organs were likely selected for due to a large protruding organ being metabolically expensive to grow and maintain in terms of blood flow, calories etc, and it being a liability in battle, and when running through harsh terrain brush, trees etc, and also especially in colder climates. But at the same time, the fact that it is so costly yet certain sub-populations developed huge organs shows that in these populations it must have been under tremendously strong selection due to it conferring such a strong advantage despite all of the risks. And that advantage it thinks has to do with two things--one humans being bipedal and thus having their penis on permanent display, the large organ becomes a status symbol that this creature is so fit that it can absorb the extra risks. Sort of conveying I'm so fit yet I can have this excessive organ and still beat you. So females select it for that reason and it also wards off other males from wanting to compete for the female. And then also due to the huge advantage it gives in extra female sexual pleasure, with smaller and medium organs causing almost no pleasure to females and large organs resulting in a huge amount. |
 |
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:39 PM Author: Turquoise Clown Space *montage of guys dying from getting their huge dicks cut off in battle, getting their dicks caught on trees and rocks, bitten off by animals, etc* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819458) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:40 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder 180 imagery (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819465) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:41 PM Author: yellow weed whacker garrison tl;dr "i analyzed the history of big cocks while salivating" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819470) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:43 PM Author: yellow weed whacker garrison chat gpt:
The argument that larger size is strongly selected against because of:
calorie cost blood flow demands combat/terrain disadvantage
…doesn’t hold much weight biologically.
Compared to organs that actually consume energy (brain, muscle, immune system), the penis:
is not metabolically expensive to maintain is not a meaningful liability in movement or survival is typically flaccid and not “protruding” in a way that affects running or fighting
So there’s no strong evidence of survival-based pressure pushing size down. |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:45 PM Author: yellow weed whacker garrison So what explains variation?
The most grounded explanation is actually pretty simple:
Normal biological variation (like height, hand size, etc.) Weak sexual selection at most No strong directional pressure pushing size dramatically up or down
In evolutionary terms, it’s likely a trait that:
varies isn’t strongly selected against isn’t strongly selected for either |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:46 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder lol this is so low iq. literally evolutionary bio 101: if a trait is an outlier compared to all related species, there is a reason for it. Humans have a much bigger size compared to other primates in the great ape family and there is massive variation among human populations. This isn't explained by "normal variation". That's hand-waving. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819493) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:45 PM Author: Turquoise Clown Space There's survivor bias here, all the mega-dicked men died off already. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819485) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:46 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder This is a weak objection. Evolution doesn't work on big, obvious disasters; it works on tiny margins. In the wild, there is no such thing as a "free" trait. If a structure isn't actively helping you survive or reproduce, evolution tends to prune it away to save resources. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819491) |
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:40 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Another thing we discussed, although gemini admits its controversial is the potential that since female orgasms are a rare event, they could have actually evolved in tandem with large penises so that ONLY large penises activate them so that the female orgasm becomes a kind of gatekeeper mechanism for evaluating fit mates (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819464) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:49 PM Author: vermilion thriller cuckoldry circlehead most women arent size queens though and report being able to achieve orgasm best with boyfriend grade penises. i think you're probably right that having a big dick relative to your race was probably an evolutionary advantage, and that having a big dick for your race = more orgasms. but i think niggers have bigger dicks because sheboons are larger than other women. and more petite women will have more orgasms with austure classy b grade cocks. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819502) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:50 PM Author: Soul-stirring ultramarine mexican azn ljl. “My downwardly mobile girlfriend says the size is perfect for her!” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819511) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:52 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Yeah I think this is probably the more grounded analysis. I intentionally made the OP troll-baity. I'll have to think about it though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819517) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:03 PM Author: vermilion thriller cuckoldry circlehead FEMALE ORGASMS ARE A MYTH BUT WHEN THEY DO HAPPEN IT'S ONLY FROM 14INCH COKE CAN DARNELL COCKS. TRUST ME, IVE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON BLACKED.COM. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819556) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:27 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Oh female orgasms are very real. I just think in women who have a large C-V distance, it is much more likely for the orgasms to happen with LARGE men. That's goy superstar who thinks women are always faking it. Besides I already told you I basically agree with what you just wrote. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819629) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:41 PM Author: vermilion thriller cuckoldry circlehead no im just acknowledging your bait and mocking those people, not you (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819666) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 10:08 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder One thing I'll say now that I thought of it is that there is a lot of research saying that women choose large penises for hookups and boyfriend-grade ones for ltrs. So I'm wondering if the mechanism is complex and lies somewhere in this dynamic? What if the true answer is that bigger penis conveys enough physical signal that it can override the emotional connection found in actual pair bonding. A female might have orgasms easier if she has strong bonding feelings with him, but also a large dick can be auto-attractive in acute situations and make up for no deep feels. So it isn't a simple matter of small beta-provider vs. alpha big-cock but a more nuanced tradeoff. Where being a committed partner (which results in stronger feels) is a legit evolutionary pay-off (and a big one because the male is more likely to stay and help raise babydood), but also the bigcock study has something she can't resist that sometimes gets a babydood in there that the "beta" ends up raising. I think a story like this is less compelling to anyone who has investment in the argument but is more likely to touch reality with actual dynamics (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49820790) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 3:18 PM Author: Stimulating splenetic death wish mood I have a top 3%tile cock especially when considering it’s a BJC so prob 1-2% and I’ve noticed the only consistent factor in female orgasms is how much the women pursued me or is into me vs me being into them
I’ve only been dealing with women who are clearly into me for last 3-4 yrs now and I can’t think of one sexual encounter where the women hasn’t came multiple times more before I even had a chance
Before when sportfucking and just pounding any hole and also not caring if the women even died on my dick some didn’t cum (lol who gives a fuck I know)
But also with BJC the ones into me cum from any position and the ones that were meh mostly came when they were on top grinding their filthy gash and clitclunge on me
Fuck sex is so vile and abhorrent lmao |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:46 PM Author: Soul-stirring ultramarine mexican azn lmao at that closing argument. while obviously true, i’m skeptical that female preference played a huge role in prehistoric sexual selection. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819494) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:51 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Have you heard of clitoral-vaginal distance research? It showed that the distance between the clit and vaginal opening is hugely correlated with potential for female orgasm. One of the leading explanations coming from this is that since the clit comes directly from the same substrate as penile tissue in embryo growth and there isn't a direct reproductive need for orgasm, at least not as tightly coupled with ejaculation, female orgasms could just be the result from being made from the same tissue and are a kind of "accident". I don't find this fully convincing, but I think its interesting. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819512) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:54 PM Author: Soul-stirring ultramarine mexican azn what kind of poaster would i be if i weren’t deeply familiar with the latest clitoral-vaginal distance research? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819522) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:58 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Exactly. Research where scientists measure the distance between the clits and cunts of women is the best kind and should be required reading. Also lol at anyone who isn't measuring their potential mates distances at this point. It's such an easy way to orgasm-maxx and you can get "8 inch" orgasms out of a chick with a mere 6 inches if she's a real outlier (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819533) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 1:52 PM Author: Indigo duck-like shrine factory reset button "I prefer a small, delicate, slender penis over a large girthy mancock", said no straight or bi-chick ever in the history of human kind, past, present or future. hth (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819518) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:34 PM Author: razzle poppy church selfie I thought this was settled (ie made up given that it’s “evolutionary biology” but a popular enough theory that it’s widely believed/accepted) that this was explained by the correlation between more competition and partner sharing in warmer/milder climates and less in colder/harsher climates. Ie both longer and thicker cocks are advantageous to “cut to the front of the line” with competitor sperm by optimizing placement relative to conception and “scooping out” rival sperm. Laughable to think female orgasm plays any role, but it makes a lot of sense that hypergamous females are the selection pressure for bigger dicks and they are somewhat bimodally distributed with female genes that promote pair bonding and monogamy. |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:40 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Plunger theory is one of the leading explanations, but that doesn't mean its legit. Personally I think it's a low iq made-up just-so story. Gallup’s famous "scooping" experiments didn't use real humans. They used latex models and artificial semen in a laboratory. It didn't account for vaginal lubrication, the "tenting" effect during arousal (pussy canal expanding), or the variable muscle contractions of the pelvic floor. For the plunger to work as a "displacement tool," humans would need to have been mating in "trains" or rapid-fire succession. While this happens in chimpanzees (who have huge testicles but small penises) and niggers (who have huge penises and testicles), the evidence for this being the primary human mating ritual for 200,000 years is thin. Semen displacement only matters if a rival mated with the female within the last 24–48 hours. If most ancestral humans were pair bonded or even loosely serial monogamous, the "plunger" is a piece of hardware that only gets used 1% of the time. Evolution usually doesn't build expensive specialized tools for 1% use cases. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819663) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:56 PM Author: razzle poppy church selfie “ For the plunger to work as a ‘displacement tool,’ humans would need to have been mating in ‘trains’ or rapid-fire succession.” This is how most of nature works, so it doesn’t seem that implausible to think that humans 100-200k years ago would have been more gang rapey in their procreation methods, see also human females in 2026 having fantasies and involuntary orgasms in response to rape stimulus. Pretty sure that populations that were stable and relatively monogamous/pair-bonded over multiple generations still got more hypergamous under various types of environmental threats (eg males in tribe decimated and remaining males need to impregnate the surplus of women, or tribe is defeated and women become concubines for men of victorious tribe, etc.). See eg https://medium.com/bouncin-and-behavin-academy/the-forgotten-prehistoric-war-that-killed-95-of-all-men-5a474c75278e (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819714) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 9:59 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder Humans don't have advertised ovulation the way chimps do though (visible swelling). Hiding ovulation forces a male to stay around for days or weeks to ensure paternity. This favors long-term investment (the Provider/Partner ritual) over the Plunger/Competitor ritual. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49820775) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:59 PM Author: Stimulating splenetic death wish mood Cortisol spikes in the Mother from environmental dangers during gestation suppressing DHT levels at key periods (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49819726) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 9:48 PM Author: Honey-headed harsh newt mental disorder (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857316&forum_id=2...id.#49820755) |