Why men who are obsessed with their cock's size should relinquish patriarchy ;-)

According to Carole Jahme, female "power" (read: choice) might endow males more efficiently than any penis-enhancing trick will do - at least on the long run.

Incidentally, this is the best argument I've seen supporting the claim that our paleolithic ancestors thrived under matriarchical or gender-equal rule:

The larger human penis suggests that hominids needed to keep females with choice sexually satisfied. Ancestral females would have experienced a sexual freedom denied in Western cultures today and it has been suggested that our ancestors went through a period of matriarchy and enhanced female choice.

Tags: apes, evolution, matriarchy, patriarchy, penis, penis size

Views: 2977

Replies to This Discussion

which is exactly why I sometimes write that it was men with small penis' who invented religion and monogamy in order to secure power, artificially, against women with choice and the men who could please them. :)
Love you guys fiercely, but can we lose the body snarking on men with small penises? They already cop enough shit from other men who think penis size = power. They don't need it from those of us who are supposed to be fighting against gender stereotypes.

Jaume, that was an interesting article explaining why human penises differ from other primates. It certainly shows the power of sexual selection at work, especially where pleasure forms a part of the selection process.
sorry, but I'm not going to lose it :)

You know the saying, big cars little... I believe men, throughout all of human history, have compensated for some weakness by emphasizing power grabs such as religion. This is not some 'stereotype' it's an anthropoligical observation.

PCness is not relevant to me.
So you also agree with men thinking women with big boobs are stupid? Or people thinking fat people are unclean and lazy?

People may compensate for weaknesses, but only if the general population perpetuates a myth that a particular physical characteristic is a weakness.

I know guys with small penises who are the biggest supporters of feminism that I've ever met. I've met guys with big dicks who are just that - big dicks. I'd rather focus on the behaviour rather than trying to attribute it to a body part. After all, if you say all arseholes have small penises by extension you are assuming any man with a small penis is an arsehole. Hardly fair on the nice men with petite genitalia.

Associating having a big penis with being a worthwhile human being is just feeding into the patriarchal bullshit that men (with large penises, oddly enough) have been spreading for aeons. Not only does this myth denegrate men with smaller pensises, it implies that women, who obviously have no penis, are not as good as those big-dicked men either.
It may not be kind or politically correct, but our biology and anthropology is neither kind nor politically correct. It's not about whose nice and who's not nice... I have plenty of male friends who I have no idea of their size and don't care. You say they are arseholes, those are your words not mine. I never even implied that. It's your right to ignore the evolutionary process that affects our society, just don't expect to stifle others...
Defending non-huge penises: some guys will message me about their big cocks (does that really work, ever?) and I think, don't they realize that could hurt? I mean women have vagina sizes too, and if I'm only 6 inches deep then I don't need a 9 inch penis...either he'll be dissatisfied, or I'll be broken! There are plenty of other women who feel the same; only some are "size queens".

Also, I've heard that some guys with big penises don't bother to learn how to be a good lover, because they think that by having a big penis, they have a monopoly on good sex. I've also heard it can be more difficult to maintain an erection, because there's a lot more to maintain.

Hey, if you have a small penis, or even erectile dysfunction, that doesn't mean you can't be a good lover...just as long as your hands and tongue work...

Still, I can see how women with choice in sex partners would lead to evolution of males, if the ones who women went for were the ones reproducing. (In that case, being able to give a woman orgasm would also matter.) This could be factual whether it is politically correct or not. Some physical features are preferred over others, and it doesn't help anything to pretend that they aren't. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of exceptions.
What does men who are obsessed with their penis size have to do with feminism?

It's not a matter of obsession at all. I remain convinced by anthropological and biological evidence that Homo sapiens is a species which throughout its long history had exhibited female choice of mate, the opposite of male choice of mate. If one can agree with that, then the corollary, is that men with small penises compensated, yes they may compensate by being more attentive lovers (tho in my experience that hasn't been the case), or by providing more riches, or by displaying more power. The point is that previous to religious cultures, males with larger equipment didn't need power structures. It's the males without power who designed power structures to dominate women. That may not be relevant to male/female relationship patterns in today's society, but it is entirely relevant to how women lost power. I would like to see a return to female choice of mate, along with an end to all religions, they go hand in hand. Then again, may not... or may indeed be relevant. From my travels, I have found that societies which have more sexual freedom in general have less female domination.

Female power and male domination are at the very core of the feminist debate, so in my opinion, it is totally relevant.

Conversely, it is why small breasted women are getting enhancements, to satisfy this modern male domination of the world. Were we women holding enough power, we wouldn't need such devices.

TBT666, you said, "I remain convinced by anthropological and biological evidence that Homo sapiens is a species which throughout its long history had exhibited female choice of mate, the opposite of male choice of mate." Were this true we wouldn't be dimorphic. The larger size of men is indicative of male's deciding mating, probably by fighting with each other for "rights" to control women.
You may believe that but it's not what the evidence points to.  It's essentially a selection mechanism similar to birds who have huge displays. The scientist refered to in the OP is by no means alone in this matter. Unfortunately, as long as we live in a patriarchy (and a religious one to boot), it will remain an unpopular scientific explanation. As the saying goes, the closer the science gets to humans...

Huh.

"The point is that previous to religious cultures, males with larger equipment didn't need power structures. It's the males without power who designed power structures to dominate women."

Do you have any evidence to support the thesis that men in power have smaller penises?  Now, or at any time in history?

No, of course you don't.  Its just another one of your silly pseudo-science whims.

I'm beginning to suspect that the human male evolved such a large penis in order for you to hang all your scientific phalacies on it.

Sorry, could not resist the pun.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

MJ

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service