Your thoughts on the divergent evolution of the male penis?

Question

As we know there are two kinds of male penis, one that is small when flaccid and grows when erect, and the other is large when flaccid and just gets erect without getting any bigger. So I was wondering what would be the biological evolutionary reasons for this difference? I was thinking that the small when flaccid type would be of benefit to the caveman hunter, who doesn't want something tripping him up, but surely the large when flaccid would be more desirable to females looking for a mate, but that would fly in the face of the "small" being better at providing food for his family..

P.S. If you're an idiot who just wants to post a stupid answer to get two points...don't bother, you only make yourself look pathetic.

This is not a question about erect size, its the difference in size when not errect. When erect, they are generally the same size. So this isn't the case that I'm concerned about my sexual performance, this is an anthropological question about human evolution.

FAO eighth_square: Would you not say that men are more attracted to women with larger breast, even though it is a known fact that smaller breast are better for breast feeding. Is it not a human misconception that bigger is better?

Answer 1

I don't think it's likely, as I don't think females really base their mate choice on penis size, flaccid or erect.
Maybe for sneaky extra pair copulations, but is flaccid penis size a reliable indicator of genetic quality or ability to provide resources? Given that you acknowledge that flaccid penis size isn't even a reliable indicator of erect penis size, it doesn't seem likely.

Answer 2

"As we know ..." ??

I have never heard of this. I doubt whether it is general knowledge, if indeed actual fact. Is it some specialised anthropological distinguishing characteristic of tribal peoples?

It all sounds suspiciously obscure to me.

However, In terms of your reductionist approach here, the theory that females are attracted to "larger" when looking for a mate strikes me as being a rather popular "male" assumption, when it is more likely a preferred mate would be a protector and provider for the continuance of her genes. Hence, in contemporary society such an attraction would manifest in the female as a "gold digger"

I would like to add, however, that I am not a supporter of reductionist theories.

Answer 3

i personally dont think a larger penis is better than a small one . the only function is to deliver sperm which both can do (i think testicles provide more information on fertility).
As for breasts larger breasts might mean more nourishment therefore indicate a large source of nutrition to offspring. that is why breast grow during pregnancy, if size was irrelevant breasts would remain the same size.

Answer 4

If women picked their mate by penis size alone, our species would have long been extinct. In evolution, penis size is not an issue at all. If it does the job, its good enough.

Answer 5

Well I am a Grower not a Shower. Like a little button mushroom but when he gets angry its a fantastic sight. In no way even a similar size to when he is asleep.

A truely glorious sight which still makes my Mrs nevous after nearly 9 years.

Your Welcome!

Answer 6

Load of blx.
2 points
It might make me look pathetic, but I do wonder what your motives are in asking such a peculiar question `cos it makes you look a sad lonely nerd.

Answer 7

I would say that those with the smaller penises evolved in a region where they would have to be on their toes, and the ones with larger penises didn't have as many natural predators.

Answer 8

What is the purpose of this question..you look pathetic talking about a penis...

Answer 9

its not the size that matters

Answer 10

get a sheep