>>935675176
>>935675211
Strikingly similar results. Did you target them at a specific demographic?
Looks consistent with this:
>https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8243978/
>mean (SD) erect penis length was 16.78 (2.55) and mean (SD) erect penis circumference was 12.03 (3.82)
Some well-endowed guys like
>>935675860 read studies claiming averages of 4.5-5.5 inches, and get used to thinking of themselves as top 1%, rather than top 30%. If they back down and admit to themselves they're wrong, it hurts their ego.
Some facts I've observed:
Guys don't typically lie, they may exaggerate by 0.5 (rounding up from a half number) but many don't even do that, especially in anonymous settings (what's the point?)
Assuming 50% of guys naturally measure around full numbers and 50% around half numbers, and 50% of guys who measure around half numbers exaggerate by 0.5 inches, a survey average of 6.5 inches would actually be a real average of... 6.37 inches? Insignificant difference.
Even assuming that 50% of all men exaggerate by 0.5, it's still 6.25 inches, way higher than averages of 5.1 in older studies that claimed 6 inches was the top 1%.
