Does size matter to Chinese men?

That’s something you can measure for yourself.

The Discussion: 27 Comments

Out of curiousity…where do people get the statistics for penis lengths?

Who organizes these surveys?

Who takes part in penis surveys?

How many actually give an honest answer?

June 28, 2005 @ 9:53 am | Comment

I don’t mind behing honest. My penis is only two inches…..from the floor.

June 28, 2005 @ 9:57 am | Comment

At least your nose is long, American Man. 😉

June 28, 2005 @ 10:00 am | Comment

Danwei know for sure how to draw eyeballs for his blog. searching pictures of half naked women on official Chinese media is his hobby. 🙂 go, go, go, Danwei!

June 28, 2005 @ 3:48 pm | Comment

Have you seen his site meter? He gets millions of hits, all from guys fishing for porn! Richard why don’t you include booby pics?

June 28, 2005 @ 4:07 pm | Comment

Oh come on. If people want porn they can just go to Xinhua.

June 28, 2005 @ 5:05 pm | Comment

Ivan, that’s where he gets most of those hot photos. (Really.)

June 28, 2005 @ 5:08 pm | Comment

Did you know a blue whale has a penis that measures over 5 meters with testacles weighing in at a hefty 10 kilograms? Somehow this makes me feel inadequate. 🙁

June 28, 2005 @ 5:59 pm | Comment

Wow, those blue whales will have friends for the rest of their lives.

June 28, 2005 @ 7:10 pm | Comment

Re: Chinese men, who cares about slight variance in the dimensions of a detail when the overall package is so very nicely crafted.

June 28, 2005 @ 7:19 pm | Comment


June 28, 2005 @ 7:21 pm | Comment

Speaking of whale penises (how often can I start a post with that?) …

Male-male sexual activity is actually pretty common among various species of whale — as it is throughout nature, although you won’t hear that in school.

I will never forget a particular photo showing two male whales having some fun. The whales were apparently just below the surface of the water, bellies-upward. The only thing appearing above the surface were two enormous anaconda-like penises, intertwined.

If anyone is interested in homosexuality in nature, there is a truly outstanding encyclopedic work, “Biological Exuberance”, by Bruce Bagemehl (St. Martin’s Press, 1999). Over 700 incredibly well-documented pages, including many photos. You will be amazed at how common homosexuality is in nature – including same-gender pairs mating for life and rearing young.

From female grizzlies pairing off, to the very special form of “necking” only performed between two male giraffes (just prior to getting it on), it is quite an eye-opener.

June 28, 2005 @ 7:31 pm | Comment

That’s intriguing Slim, because as you may know one of the evangelicals’ favorite arguments is the rather absurd, “No other animal on earth practises homosexuality,” thus proving (in their demented eyes) that it’s unnatural and thus ungodly and evil.

Of course, they never let logic get in their way. No other animal on earth uses gas stoves, air conditioning, hydraulic tools or even shakes hands with one another. Does that make all these things evil and unnatural?

June 28, 2005 @ 7:38 pm | Comment

Richard, exactly. Bad things are found throughout nature, too – infanticide, rape, etc. But arguing that homosexuality is wrong because it is “unnatural” is absolutely contrary to a mountain of evidence.

Perhaps even more salient is that, the closer you get to humans along the evolutionary chain, you find homosexual behavior (male and female) become increasingly common.

I plug “Biological Exuberance” whenever I get the chance. The sheer scale of the evidence documented (largely collected by biologists and other professional observors) moves the issue beyond question.

June 28, 2005 @ 7:58 pm | Comment

It seems so sensible. Try explaining it to an evangelical or a Mormon. Yikes. (And I know more than one gay Mormon — can you imagine the misery they must go through during adolescence?)

June 28, 2005 @ 8:00 pm | Comment

Richard, I think Myrick noted on Asaipundit yesterday that this was a plagiarism of Xiaxues’ post.

I know, I know…a Chinese news agency plagiarizing someone else’s work…never.

June 28, 2005 @ 8:00 pm | Comment

Xiaxue, the Singapore blogger?? Incredible.

June 28, 2005 @ 8:01 pm | Comment

In this case, you’d be wrong Gordon. Xiaxue’s “colorful” method of measuring penises isn’t actually unique and its been floating around for a while. Secondly, Xiaxue’s post was in colloquial Singaporan English while Xinhua’s article is in party dictated standard Chinese. It’s not plagiarism in the slightest.

June 28, 2005 @ 8:21 pm | Comment

Hey..just passing on what I read over at Asiapundit.

June 28, 2005 @ 8:52 pm | Comment

Don’t forget too, that Freud’s entire theory of psychoanalysis is based on his underlying assumption that all human beings are inherently bisexual, and that it is perfectly natural for people to develop differing sexual preferences when maturing psycho-sexually. Freud too, incidentally, mentioned, though only very briefly, the fact that both bisexualitiy and homosexuality are common to the animal world. He argued, explicitly, that there is absolutely nothing wrong or unnatural about homosexuality, or bisexuality, or hetrosexuality. He also argued that people can sometimes change their sexual preferences, that sexual tastes, if you like, can sometimes change.

What I also find fascinating about Freud, is that he was also way ahead of his time in other ways as well. For example, he struggled with the terms “masculine” and “feminine” because in order to explain his ideas, he had to use them. But he recognised the fact that all human beings possess qualities that are both “feminine” and “masculine” – he recognised that he was trapped by language! These two terms, he said, are really quite meaningless. They are merely social constructs. These ideas didn’t become popular among Western sociologists until the late 1960s.

If you are interested in reading more about this, I suggest Juliet Mitchell’s ground-breaking book, Psychoanalysis and Feminism, first published by Penguin books back in 1974, but an updated edition was released back in the year 2000. Mitchell is a Marxist Freudian Feminist (ie. of the Frankfurt School, like Adorno, Marcuse, – you can check all of her quotes and references to Freud, as I did. Most are taken from his Essays on Sexuality.

Boy George, in his first biography, Taking it like a Man, also discusses this, his views are pretty much the same as Mitchell’s and Freud’s. I haven’t actually read Boy George’s book, but a huge extract was published in The Guardian (or maybe it was The Times) back in 1995. I remember reading it one Saturday morning over a coffee at a cafe in Hampstead.

Mark Anthony Jones

June 28, 2005 @ 10:03 pm | Comment

I imagine if People’s Daily is screening this, they’ll take it as a cue to start including penis measurements in the GDP.

June 28, 2005 @ 11:11 pm | Comment

“Gross Domestic Penis”, growing at a rate of ten percent per year.
“As we all know, it can be very convenient and good for overall development. But we must try to keep stability.”

June 29, 2005 @ 12:01 am | Comment

Well, Shanghai’s impressive postmodern highrises, like the Jinmao Tower, the Mariott Hotel building, and even the Pudong Tower – they most certainly can all be read as being phallic monuments to China’s booming economic success, erect with optimism!

That is certainly how I have always viewed them.

Mark Anthony Jones

June 29, 2005 @ 12:11 am | Comment

2.5 inches?! Who would admit to that? I mean, if it’s 1.6-3.5 on average out of action, you mean for some it gets SMALLER?

June 29, 2005 @ 3:44 am | Comment

Chinese men ARE truly debonair!

June 29, 2005 @ 11:06 pm | Comment

BTW,I have an imposter.My penis is ON the floor.Who ever you are I am flattered.

June 29, 2005 @ 11:07 pm | Comment

Would you date a man with a colostomy bag?Those are sexy.The only thing sexier than a Chinese man is a Chinese man with a colostomy bag.Preferably overflowing.

June 29, 2005 @ 11:10 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.