The article says that ANU scientists did research with 105 Canberra women, between 20 and 40 years old, to determine what made a man attractive. They had 53 3D images of naked men for assessment, created using natural variations in size and body shape which they got from an Italian project measuring 3300 young men (why, oh why, did I study soil!?!?!).
The results gave some interesting data - well, that were written up in the newspaper anyway.
- Women can assess a man as unattractive in 3 seconds flat.
- Women find tall men with long penises most attractive.
- Women had a clear preference for men with penises in excess of 13 cm in their flaccid state (penis length varied from 5 cm to 13 cm), which is larger than the penis supported by 95% of the male population.
This has me thinking... how often do you see a flaccid penis if you're not married/living in a relationship with a man?
Maybe I led a sheltered life but I rarely saw flaccid penises... usually they were somewhat aroused by the time my eyes, or hands, were on them. After the event I would have seen them flaccid but my memory would have been of them much bigger.
So, do we really want 13 cm long flaccid penises? Or has this research been skewed because of the flaccid nature?
Don't penises have varying abilities to enlarge? Some smaller sized flaccid penises are actually very impressive when aroused, whereas some larger flaccid penises don't grow that much. Or am I again making assumptions from not enough sample size (if only I'd measured 3300 young Italian men)?
Personally, I have a limit on penis size. You know, some of those hugely endowed porn stars make me wince. If they're too long and/or too thick, my body just goes a little cold and scared. But maybe I'm a chicken!
Anyway, I'm not convinced by this research. I think I'd like to have been a partcipant. Or even a researcher and made the penises all aroused.
Any thoughts on penis size, or this research?