I've been wondering about this. One of my male friends said this is true but i don't really believe him. So what do you think about this? If you have real prove according to websites feel free to link them. Thank you and take care.
2007-01-15 15:05:23 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health ➔ Men's Health
If that were true, guys would all wear clown shoes. Everything I've read has said that is a myth. Good night!
About the answerer above who says that the distance between the tip of the index finger and the wrist is approximately the length of the penis, she is wrong. It's only a coincidence. That distance measures about 7.5" on me, and that is approximately 2" above the average penis length of 5.5". Just in case you're curious, mine is about 5.5" or 6" long . . . it varies slightly depending on my mood and the state of my body. And it's curved, so if I get very aroused, it becomes difficult to measure (it appears shorter sometimes because I can't measure it right). Good night!
2007-01-15 15:14:59 · answer #1 · answered by anonymous 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Size 13
2016-05-24 20:08:58 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
John D is a total idiot. That stuff he posted is total B.S.
Additionally, circumcision has no effect on the length, at all.
As everyone here has told you, these are all myths. I don't know why people have this 6' = big penis idea in mind, but it's way off.
Your height does not have anything to do with it.
However! Your weight does. The fatter, the shorter. This is due to comparison, and also because the penis actually does 'shrink' to an extent. Get a fay guy to work out and become skinny and he won't be happy because he's thin. ;)
2007-01-15 17:32:17 · answer #3 · answered by Deutscher Eishockey Bund 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing as far as any other body part is always right to clue you into knowing this, but it is to my experience that the size of the hands is more closer to being true than any other body part. A lot of the times, the length is the same as from the point of their index finger to their wrist. Just my experience...
2007-01-15 15:11:36 · answer #4 · answered by jlynna10 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it doesn't. Some say big hands, some say a big nose, and yes some say big feet, but none of them are actually proof. Some little guys have more than most guys over 6'. Don't judge a book by it's cover. LOL
2007-01-15 15:09:40 · answer #5 · answered by Fruit Cake Lady 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well think of it like this!,IF a man is6'ft tall,you take the hight ,size of hands and feet divide 50%of size,add the weight by 50% and over all mass by 50 % your average is roughly 7.5 %. Basicly works out to 1/2of the body size ,and a little more if the person is circumcized.Even with the math it;s still guesswork.
2007-01-15 15:45:42 · answer #6 · answered by john d 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Nope not true. But I'm sure there are a lot of guys out there trying to say it is true. That is if they have large feet. ;o) But don't believe em. Only seeing is believing ;o)
2007-01-15 15:26:21 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is an old wives tale. Member size is determined by the member size.
2007-01-15 15:09:59 · answer #8 · answered by PADRES FAN 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know. In my experience (which is admittedly very limited), it does not. Of the two guys I been with, both had large feet, but only the second one also had a large "member."
2007-01-15 15:10:12 · answer #9 · answered by spunk113 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a myth. I dated guys with small feet and, big "members" and others that have big or long feet with average "members." They have what God gave them...has nothing to do with "feet."
2007-01-15 15:10:23 · answer #10 · answered by josiegirl 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋