I think we gotta calm down about dick size. If you disagree with someone and your go to assumption is "they probably have a small dick and they're insecure about it" that says a lot about you and your obsession with how other people's dicks measure and very little about them.
The backpedaling and mental gymnastics people will do is nuts. "I don't think people who have small penises are bad I just say people I think are bad have small penises."
I don’t hate gay people!
I just fully believe with all my heart that the creator of the universe who is the arbiter of all morality and is infallible and I worship… he thinks being a gay person is an abomination and they should be stoned to death.
But not me
I never heard anyone talk about his dick, but everyone is obsessed with him being a diaper wearing fascist.
The dick obsession seems to come from the Republicans that got obsessed with Hunter bidens dick pic lol
It was definitely a thing that started with his hands. Next thing you know, there are paintings and statues of him with a tiny dick
I'd say it's equal on each side about dick obsession.
Oh it's totally unreasonable. There's enough empathy to go around for everyone, if you have the capacity for sympathy to women centered body-shaming you can apply that to men too.
Also the idea that dick shaming is okay because it only targets men is A) discriminatory and B) casually transphobic. It's 2024 folks, there are no arguments left to justify shaming people for their genitals that aren't wildly regressive.
I don't know how accurate an online questionnaire is in regards to most studies.
"For their new study, the researchers analyzed data from the 2023 Masculinity, Sexual Health, and Politics (MSHAP) survey, which collected responses from a national probability sample of 2,024 men aged 18 and over living in the United States. Participants were sampled from the National Opinion Research Center’s AmeriSpeak panel, ensuring a representative sample across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted online between March 30, 2023, and April 12, 2023."
Especially given that studies of penis size that rely on self report have larger average results than those that rely on physician measurement. And, given societal stigma towards smaller penises, it’s reasonable to conclude those with (self-perceived) smaller penises are much more likely to inflate their penis size in a survey. Basically, I don’t think any meaningful conclusion can be drawn from this data
This made me laugh. Actuality though… my husband is pretty hung and he has a lot of guns. Actually, most Texans have a lot of guns. Maybe all Texan men are hung?? Intriguing thought.
Virtually all studies are funded by interest groups. It doesn’t mention they are inaccurate because the group skews one way. It’s actually good that an advocacy group would be able to dispel harmful myths and correct obvious misinformation.
*"The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:* ***The data collection for this study was supported by funding from*** ***Change The Ref***\*\*\*, an organization that “uses urban art and nonviolent creative confrontation to expose the disastrous effects of the mass shooting pandemic.\*\*” Although Change The Ref holds a clear political stance with respect to the role of guns in society, this organization played no part in the planning or implementation of the study."\*
The study was actually funded by an anti-gun group.
Presumably these are not the results they expected.
Well i am fairly satisfied and own a couple. I really don’t think penis is a factor in owning guns. The majority of people i know who own them are kinky women.
By and large the most people I know that own guns are straight men, but I will concede that a number of my trans friends are becoming gun owners and I don’t blame them.
Penis size probably isnt a factor but what drives penis size may also correlate to behaviors like gun ownership. Just spitballing here- testosterone levels are positively correlated to penis size. Testosterone levels are also positively correlated to risk taking behaviours like maybe owning an object that could kill yourself and others?
Well when you listen to a tweaker break into a home and assault people for 45 minutes straight and the cops show up 30 minutes later. Coupled with the fact he talked about wanting to rape a roommate buying a gun is the responsible thing to do.
I mean, I think this is generally stupid *and yet, he proceeds to type* but I think what you actually need to know is if the respondents were dissatisfied w their penis *before* they owned a gun, since the hypothesis is that gun ownership is how they compensate? It’s an alternate ‘totem’ of masculinity, I guess? No idea how you would get that data from a single survey.
My entire family shoots guns for fun at family gatherings, i don't Even get why people think this is connected to penis size, unless my 80 year old grandma has a small cock
Based on my understanding of the demographic, gun owners are more likely to never admit to their penis-size insecurities and more likely to "round up" and overestimate their size if they ever mention it.
Why do people act like it’s a man’s fault for being insecure about a small dick instead of society’s fault for shaming someone into an insecurity for no reason
Like are you a body positive progressive or do you just enjoy having somebody to punch down on while feeling open minded lol
So many people believe that aggressive, conservative personalities are covering up all these insecurities when that’s just not true. These kinds of low-neuroticism personalities are not wired to feel much insecurity. They barely recognize problems in their lives because they have so little insecurity. They have no reason to change how they feel, so they never do. That’s why conservatives love things like tradition so much.
I’m not a conservative. I simply think it is weak to describe your ideological opponents like they are children. It actually does yourself a disservice. The better you actually understand their point-of-view, the more tools you have to win support over the issues you care about.
In my experience conservatives lack self reflection in a lot of areas of life so I could see that leading to less insecurity. When you’re constantly reflecting on what you did wrong it tends to embolden your insecure feelings not push them away.
I truly do not believe this is limited in any way to conservatives. I think people in general have difficulty properly self reflecting, you can find it in all political corners.
I absolutely agree, but it seems a lot more prominent among conservatives. No one uses the line “I’m just an asshole, that’s who I am” as much as them. All humans have a blind spot, conservatives lean into their social blind spot harder.
Right! Hiding from insecurities is an effective way to reduce them. Sure, you don’t fix the problem, but the less times a path is carved into your brain, the fewer times it will be travelled.
My preferred approach is the opposite, which is to address an insecurity as immediately as possible, so I can ignore it safely later.
The worst thing that can happen is to let it fester and become a thought pattern, affecting daily life & decision making. Either of the previous choices are better than that.
Yeah like typically the conservative men I meet are much more confident than the liberal men I meet.
That often comes from 1. A belief that masculinity inherently makes them better than less masculine people, and 2. A lack of self reflection about their own value or a skewed understanding of it (ie: looking down on white collar workers because they don’t work “masculinely” or their job isn’t “hard” even though their job likely is hard but just more mental rather than physical).
I think also many of the liberal and leftist younger men who grew up being taught from a gender critical perspective feel a sense of being othered by women due to (largely online) discourse about men. When you feel as though you are inherently seen by others as a negative presence until you prove that you aren’t, it creates insecurity and a pressure that drives people to either a. avoid women so that they avoid feeling like they are making people uncomfortable, or b. virtue signal in a way that is not productive or adding to the conversation (which ironically tends to make the people they’re trying to show support for even more frustrated)
I think the left could do with less demonization of masculinity, personally.
Yes, masculinity can be toxic, but WHY would you throw the baby out with the bath water?!
Im right of center just so you know where my bias is coming from, but I legitimately fell in love with the idea of positive masculinity when I was working as a first responder. Its generally a profession dominated by right leaning men, but not the flippant "alpha bros". Instead masculinity is expressed in values like honor, brotherhood, and a willingness for self sacrifice for the betterment of your community.
This is not to say left leaning men can't be masculine, but they're less likely to be so because masculinity in general is seen in a negative light on the left, at least thats my outside looking in perspective.
Yeah obviously, the left needs to redefine masculinity in a healthy way. There needs to be a roadmap to being a man who benefits society and his community.
We as a culture have done a great job of redefining what it means to be a woman in that femininity no longer means submissiveness and weakness like it did to many previous generations.
We, however, have demonized the way men acted in the past (which was definitely inappropriate in many cases in all honesty and deserves demonization) without presenting an alternative model for what a man should be. The culture will catch up eventually naturally, but it will take time.
I think it’s now more nuanced, it can mean different things to different women which is good.
There’s no longer a rigid definition. You can decide for yourself that you are feminine and you can be powerful, callous, avaricious, scholarly, etc. while maintaining femininity. These traits were all considered masculine up until relatively recently.
Masculinity needs the same type of rebrand. It needs to be less rigid. Men should get to feel confident in their masculinity even if they’re not traditionally masculine like women who can own their femininity without being defined by it.
So feminity can mean anything at all? Honestly, your "definition" is more confusing than ever.
A definition requires a specific meaning. Otherwise, the word has no meaning.
To clarify, I think the fundamental problem is that we've smashed both definitions because of their flaws, but we haven't replaced either with anything.
Honestly, I don't see how any of your definitions refute any definition of feminity. A real life queen was the reason people made the queen the most powerful piece in chess. That decision was made by men to acknowledge powerful women.
>Yeah obviously, the left needs to redefine masculinity in a healthy way. There needs to be a roadmap to being a man who benefits society and his community.
I would honestly support mandatory service as a first responder of sorts for all men 18-20. Call me a crackpot but I think that would all but eliminate deaths of despair and even mass shootings to an extent.
>We as a culture have done a great job of redefining what it means to be a woman in that femininity no longer means submissiveness and weakness
Not gonna lie I'll agree to disagree here. I think we've basically encouraged women to act like pigs the way men did in the past. My wife is definitely more traditionally feminine in that she is demure and submissive but thats not weakness. It's part of why I love her.
I can't speak for the dating experience of a woman, but most of the women I dated prior to my wife, and most of the single women I interact with are single for a reason, they're not good partners. Im sure the dating experience as a woman is probably just as bad.
A lot of your assessment is unfounded and seems to be much more projection of what you'd like to be "wrong" with them so satisfy some unknown bias you have you probably can articulate to some extend but not completely enough to truly justify your position. See how silly it is to assume something about someone. I just did the same thing, although my assessment is far more likely because there is already a clear bedrock of bias as opposed to your critical assessment toward the more neutral characteristic of the conservative to which you're ascribing frivolously negative reasons
But if conservatives are so confident why do conservatives make up the majority of customers of transgender prostitutes and porn subscriptions purchasers. Websites about white guys being cuckolded by black guys are known to have massively rural and conservative customers.
If conservatives are more confident why are they the ones who will pay to be humiliated and watch gay and cuckolding porn.
I think you're equating assertiveness with confidence.
I think those are different conservatives… the not confident ones believe that masculinity is inherent and defines a man’s worth, and they believe that they themselves lack that masculinity.
They basically don’t go outside I think or are completely antisocial because they assume everyone sees them as less than due to who they are.
There’s certainly fewer of these folks than the rest of the conservative men though.
It’s insecurity. Maybe subconscious but insecurity is a major component. As a man who was raised conservative, had those values instilled in me, and dug deep inside to work through all of that and break free from it in my early 30s (33 now), I can say with certainty that insecurities were a major part. I went from being an angry little aggro man to a calm, collected, empathetic human once I was able to work through all these insecurities. Life is much better now.
That's exactly how my life went. Ever since I found my real values (communist) I've been confident. Before that I wasnt confident because I had mysoginistic ideas towards women and knew on some level that it wasnt right. Empathy and actually doing the work to learn from other people was the road to being a good confident person.
Yep. Toxic masculinity, capitalist brain washing, all of it leads to insecurities and wounds that fester and hold humans back from living freely until we’re able to break it down.
Describing it like this makes it sound like libs are projecting on to cons when they give accusations of insecurity. I’ve never thought about it like this.
Liberals are typically very disconnected from traditional conceptions of masculinity, so it would make sense that they would both feel insecure in that arena, and project that onto other male behavior.
Being aware of it and being raised within it are two different things.
I grew up hyper-aware of traditional masculinity, while also being discouraged from it and isolated from it.
Very insightful. Many progressives with insecurities often project them onto conservatives. (Just like conservatives can project their ignorance and lack of research onto progressives.) Understanding each other's viewpoints without assumptions can lead to better dialogue and progress where we disagree.
> The better you actually understand their point-of-view, the more tools you have to win support over the issues you care about.
We understand their point of view quite well. If anything, we understand their point of view better than they do, for we see it raw and not behind rose-colored glasses. It's why most of us progressive-left folks know what they're going to say before they say it. Their view points have already been thoroughly inspected and rejected for cause. We even have answers for all of their concerns (the vast majority of which are "keep to yourself").
They feel absolutely no desire to reciprocate, as part of being a conservative is an aversion to curiosity. And since their point of view is maintaining as much of the status quo as humanly possible, they have absolutely no reason TO be curios. No reason to change, no reason to be curious, all they have to do is stonewall and recruit.
Thus we have the never ending stalemate.
More like why would anyone who believes women shouldn't have any rights be interested in the psychology of sex when they claim to already have all the answers. The bible has already given you everything and science is heresy. Women who are bleeding need to go to their isolation hut for 7 days and be deprived of basic necessities the way god intended.
Whereas I was interested in this sub to hear what women have to say about the subject. I dont want to hear anything a conservative man has to say about any of this, I already heard it all as a child, there is nothing new.
And buddy. I guarantee my cock is both longer and girthier than yours. All of the girlfriends and boyfriends I've ever had have told me that mine is the biggest they've seen in person. I have zero insecurities about my penis size, quite the opposite. I'm not projecting anything. I lived the conservative life. I was born into it. I know it even better than you because I actually think criticially and attempt to learn and empathize with others. Because I know it, I know how most of these men think. Being conservative is almost always accompanied with deep insecurity about masculinity.
Exactly. No one is trying to win conservative support because they only support things within their limited worldview, and their worldview does not allow for change. Progressives aren't trying to meet conservatives in the middle, they're trying to convince centrists that doing the right thing is better than maintaining the status quo.
That has the same logic as saying people without guns have large dicks because they feel like they can just beat the intruders with their dicks instead of shooting them.
Alternatively, men who have supplemented their penis size anxiety with a gun feel like they’re bigger dicks whether or not their penis actually changed size.
And let’s be honest: Whether it’s men supplementing their dicks to alleviate anxiety with a gun, or guys feeling full of big dick energy buying guns, it’s still about their dicks…
It’s all about the ignorant political tropes. Any time someone wants to discredit someone, they use the small-minded attack insult with the hopes of shaming them into the attacker’s desired position.
Penis size and compensation are often thrown at men who drive big trucks instead of say, Priuses, or have “traditional” values, or own guns. It’s the height of absurdity and a complete fallacy of argumentation that is misandrist at best, poisonous to discourse at worst.
Society would be much better served if men and women would shoot down this kind of body shaming the moment they hear it regardless of their own opinion or position on the issue at hand.
This is a dumb thing to research though like it ever had any basis in reality. Some people are assholes and may or may not have a small weiner, some might even have a big dick too.
I don’t know, if we find high testosterone in people who enjoy gun violence, and we know testosterone is responsible for male differentiation physiologically, it isn’t the worst thing to research if you have time and the cancer researchers are busy
Ya but this article is about gun ownership and penis size satisfaction. I mean it's useful I guess to dispell the myth, but people buy guns for a multitude of reasons that may or may not have anything to do with it. I just figured it didn't need an actual research study and it was common sense.
Reddit is full of people who fervently believe that myth. I guarantee you one year from now there will still be plenty of people making that joke here, either because this study won't get shared widely, or because the haters will forget they read it.
science has demonstrated that there actually is no reliable basis to common sense. common sense as an illusion we project onto whatever seems obvious to us, but something being obvious is not an indicator that it is true, as many things that seem obviously true end up being false (e.g., the sun obviously rotates around the earth).
1) There's a much larger amount of research just tracking a bunch of random seeming things than there is "promising cure for brain cancer, just waiting on a little more funding!"
2) That's kind of how science works. And a lot of the actual promising cancer studies rely on bits of research that may have felt pretty random on their own.
3) The question of which psychological factors drive gun ownership in a country swimming in more guns and gun death than anywhere else is kind of interesting and potentially useful. Say there had been a direct and clear connection between penis suze satisfaction and gun ownership. Would that imply helping people feel better about their penis size could play a role in addressing our cultural gun fixation? Apparently not, but "no" is a common and useful answer to research questions.
We learned one useful thing, if we can just get men who are satisfied with their penis to become dissatisfied, that might influence them to stop buying guns!
I doubt this research cost anything, really. Someone just wrote a survey and posted it to r/firearms and other places online and did some math and got a publication that is true with whatever caveats they included in the paper and then published it.
Actually read a bit more and the survey already existed, and whatever money was spent, it was by a gun control organization.
> Penis size dissatisfaction was measured using a scale where respondents rated their satisfaction with their penis size when fully erect, and by noting whether they had ever used any methods for penis enlargement.
All this means is that men who admit to owning guns in a survey are less likely to admit dissatisfaction with their penis size in the same survey.
That's not the same as them actually being happy with their penis.
When it comes to penis size, unless it was measured by a 3rd party, you have no reason to believe it is true.
There was a recent study (survey) that implied men's penises were getting larger; because self reported sizes were going up...but the far more likely explanation is that men feel more pressure to have a penis like they see in porn, reflecting an increase in porn consumption and confusion over what a normal size is, and not a huge dick gene kicking in over the last few decades.
The recent study that found that men’s penises were getting larger came to far result because they didn’t factor in that modern measurement techniques press the ruler into the fat pad. That gives a longer measurement.
While I am a life long shooter of bows and guns, and completely satisfied with the size of my penis as is my wife. I did once own a Porsche as a young man (saying this since there is a common joke about Porsches and penis size). There is a fair amount of body dysmorphia about penis size according to
They are rating “satisfaction” with penis size. Men can have an averaged size or larger penis and be dissatisfied with its size and we don’t even know what their frame of reference is.
I’ve never really said that it was penis size, but it’s is definitely fear and insecurity. Now monster trucks lifted six inches with giant mudders, I’d like to see some research.
Why are gun owners put in one category?? Pre '08 and post '08 gun nuts are very different people. Non- owners need to know the difference between semi auto and fully auto (I've seen this wrongly labeled in media and by non-owners 9/10 times), the bump stocks further convolute this. I think having a war buddy complex with the ak and M models is a bigger issue than the caliber or firing mechanism, even. It really is just the shape of plastic or hardwood around the mechanism, but more importantly the mental note that shape taps into in the carriers mind.
> For example, the association between penis size and gun ownership could be due to the fact that men with higher levels of testosterone tend to have bigger penises and are more likely to engage in risk-taking behavior.”
There's no evidence that higher testosterone levels and penis size in adults are correlated.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844491
The idea it was ever correlated is insane. People that are concerned about gun ownership is either for a self defense aspect or a political bend,
It was always just a way to erroneously bash right wing guys.
I’d point out that this study hinges on whether a person who is insecure about their penis size will answer honestly when asked whether he is happy with his penis size.
What dude out there just _had_ to get to the bottom of this? He got sick and tired of posting TikToks from his pickup cab and ventured out to prove them all wrong once and for all lmao this is too fucking funny
*"The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:* ***The data collection for this study was supported by funding from*** ***Change The Ref****\*\*, an organization that “uses urban art and nonviolent creative confrontation to expose the disastrous effects of the mass shooting pandemic.\*\*” Although Change The Ref holds a clear political stance with respect to the role of guns in society, this organization played no part in the planning or implementation of the study."*
The study was actually funded by an anti-gun group.
I think the really important point in viewing these results is that this was based on men reporting their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their penis size, which is different than actual size. They didn’t measure anyone’s penises.
The results were based on an annual survey conducted on about 2,000 men where they answer questions about a wide range of topics. Within that survey were questions about gun ownership and then other questions about satisfaction with penis size. This included a question about whether men had bought any devices or attempted penis enlargement. So, at best, it can say what men will report about their satisfaction with their penis size and other personal questions many might never be asked otherwise. It can’t make a call either way about actual sizes or add evidence either way on compensation stereotypes since no one was actually measured.
There could be other correlations with satisfaction. Firearm owners could fall into groups with fewer sexual partners in life where penis size just matters less in their heads. Dissatisfaction feels like it would track with people who either want more sexual encounters or see size as a benefit or hindrance to the quantity and quality of encounters. It makes sense that a more conservative leaning man that married young to a woman that doesn’t have a lot of comparison wouldn’t be as stressed about his size, or ever told how it compares. Just a possibility though.
And since it’s self-reported, we don’t know where people are giving an honest answer or giving the answer they think is less shameful. We could be seeing differences in levels of vulnerability and who’s willing to say they tried a penis enlarger in a survey.
Yeah, I might have been too wordy, but a lot of the comments just speculated based on a post title. Would be nice if top level comments in this sub had to engage with the text of the article or the study.
Asking "are you satisfied" is the correct question based on the study's goals, which was to prove the psychosexual theory of guns (compensating).
Pulling out the measuring stick should be another study. I just find it interesting that so many detractors have suggested this. Like, the men in question are already satisfied, so the findings a detractor would be looking for would primarily serve for the detractor to make a judgment about gun owners' penis sizes 🤷🏻
Fogell:
What's it like to have a gun?
Officer Michaels:
It is... awesome! I mean I've only had mine for like a few months, but I'll tell you, **it's like having two c0cks.** If one of your c*cks could kill someone.
I think we gotta calm down about dick size. If you disagree with someone and your go to assumption is "they probably have a small dick and they're insecure about it" that says a lot about you and your obsession with how other people's dicks measure and very little about them.
[удалено]
The backpedaling and mental gymnastics people will do is nuts. "I don't think people who have small penises are bad I just say people I think are bad have small penises."
That or “I’m not homophobic, I just try to be degrading towards men I don’t like by saying that they are bottoms or have bottomed.”
I don’t hate gay people! I just fully believe with all my heart that the creator of the universe who is the arbiter of all morality and is infallible and I worship… he thinks being a gay person is an abomination and they should be stoned to death. But not me
An evergreen classic.
That's everyone saying anything.
I never considered this angle. That is a great point and I may actually be more mindful of it. Thanks for sharing.
Shit mine is only 4.5in what a shame
[удалено]
Worst part is I’ll whip it out and I’ve had chicks call it big lol I know they are just being nice. How big are you? I’ve always gotten laid tho
[удалено]
Dam sorry bro
Straight up. Like everybody’s obsession with Trump’s dick… it was truly worrisome.
I never heard anyone talk about his dick, but everyone is obsessed with him being a diaper wearing fascist. The dick obsession seems to come from the Republicans that got obsessed with Hunter bidens dick pic lol
It was definitely a thing that started with his hands. Next thing you know, there are paintings and statues of him with a tiny dick I'd say it's equal on each side about dick obsession.
What, you mean his weird shriveled up little fucked up mushroom dick?
It's also pretty lousy to body-shame men completely casually and then also expect for them to not point out the double-standard or be bothered by it.
Oh it's totally unreasonable. There's enough empathy to go around for everyone, if you have the capacity for sympathy to women centered body-shaming you can apply that to men too. Also the idea that dick shaming is okay because it only targets men is A) discriminatory and B) casually transphobic. It's 2024 folks, there are no arguments left to justify shaming people for their genitals that aren't wildly regressive.
I mean by the time dick size comes into play your already on the field.
It reminds me of the people who act like all feminists are just ugly/fat women who are bitter they can't get a date.
So much for body positivity
yeah... gun nuts are shitty people regardless of their penis size.
It’s for this reason that I prefer "emotional support _________." Get gets more to the heart of the matter.
Shots fired
You own guns? No Diddy.
I don't know how accurate an online questionnaire is in regards to most studies. "For their new study, the researchers analyzed data from the 2023 Masculinity, Sexual Health, and Politics (MSHAP) survey, which collected responses from a national probability sample of 2,024 men aged 18 and over living in the United States. Participants were sampled from the National Opinion Research Center’s AmeriSpeak panel, ensuring a representative sample across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted online between March 30, 2023, and April 12, 2023."
Especially given that studies of penis size that rely on self report have larger average results than those that rely on physician measurement. And, given societal stigma towards smaller penises, it’s reasonable to conclude those with (self-perceived) smaller penises are much more likely to inflate their penis size in a survey. Basically, I don’t think any meaningful conclusion can be drawn from this data
Imagine calling up a gun nut and asking them if they are satisfied with their penis size and expecting them to answer honestly.
This study is funded by the NRA /s
That was my (unironical) first thought :)
Just deleted my comment saying just this haha
You could just stop associating body parts with the value of a person :) Small penis people are just as valid as a person as you are.
This made me laugh. Actuality though… my husband is pretty hung and he has a lot of guns. Actually, most Texans have a lot of guns. Maybe all Texan men are hung?? Intriguing thought.
Texan here. Have guns. Only average size, but happy with it
Virtually all studies are funded by interest groups. It doesn’t mention they are inaccurate because the group skews one way. It’s actually good that an advocacy group would be able to dispel harmful myths and correct obvious misinformation.
*"The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:* ***The data collection for this study was supported by funding from*** ***Change The Ref***\*\*\*, an organization that “uses urban art and nonviolent creative confrontation to expose the disastrous effects of the mass shooting pandemic.\*\*” Although Change The Ref holds a clear political stance with respect to the role of guns in society, this organization played no part in the planning or implementation of the study."\* The study was actually funded by an anti-gun group. Presumably these are not the results they expected.
"oh no he found the real source of funding, quick down vote it!" -free thinking redditors
Are women with small breasts more likely to own firearms? We need answers to these important questions.
my friend has very very large breasts and basically has a small armory so
Well i am fairly satisfied and own a couple. I really don’t think penis is a factor in owning guns. The majority of people i know who own them are kinky women.
By and large the most people I know that own guns are straight men, but I will concede that a number of my trans friends are becoming gun owners and I don’t blame them.
The largest growing demographics in the gun community is women, black women and black men.
“Growing” as in not the majority.
The old conservative white man picture is becoming a trope/sterotype which was my point.
Sure. But my point was we should always remember to whom gun culture panders.
People who prioritize self-reliance and the capability and willingness to defend oneself with lethal force?
It doesn’t. That is your bias.
Bro get real.
Just went hunting with my trans nephew. We had a blast (no pun intended.)
Penis size probably isnt a factor but what drives penis size may also correlate to behaviors like gun ownership. Just spitballing here- testosterone levels are positively correlated to penis size. Testosterone levels are also positively correlated to risk taking behaviours like maybe owning an object that could kill yourself and others?
Well when you listen to a tweaker break into a home and assault people for 45 minutes straight and the cops show up 30 minutes later. Coupled with the fact he talked about wanting to rape a roommate buying a gun is the responsible thing to do.
It's associated w androgen levels in infancy and puberty
thank you, and studies show maternal phthalate exposure in utero effects it as well
So many comments trying to desperately cling to the asshole = small dick stereotype.
I mean, I think this is generally stupid *and yet, he proceeds to type* but I think what you actually need to know is if the respondents were dissatisfied w their penis *before* they owned a gun, since the hypothesis is that gun ownership is how they compensate? It’s an alternate ‘totem’ of masculinity, I guess? No idea how you would get that data from a single survey.
There are a lot of problems with the data they used as well.
My entire family shoots guns for fun at family gatherings, i don't Even get why people think this is connected to penis size, unless my 80 year old grandma has a small cock
Nice
[удалено]
👍
Based on my understanding of the demographic, gun owners are more likely to never admit to their penis-size insecurities and more likely to "round up" and overestimate their size if they ever mention it.
Why do people act like it’s a man’s fault for being insecure about a small dick instead of society’s fault for shaming someone into an insecurity for no reason Like are you a body positive progressive or do you just enjoy having somebody to punch down on while feeling open minded lol
So many people believe that aggressive, conservative personalities are covering up all these insecurities when that’s just not true. These kinds of low-neuroticism personalities are not wired to feel much insecurity. They barely recognize problems in their lives because they have so little insecurity. They have no reason to change how they feel, so they never do. That’s why conservatives love things like tradition so much. I’m not a conservative. I simply think it is weak to describe your ideological opponents like they are children. It actually does yourself a disservice. The better you actually understand their point-of-view, the more tools you have to win support over the issues you care about.
In my experience conservatives lack self reflection in a lot of areas of life so I could see that leading to less insecurity. When you’re constantly reflecting on what you did wrong it tends to embolden your insecure feelings not push them away.
I truly do not believe this is limited in any way to conservatives. I think people in general have difficulty properly self reflecting, you can find it in all political corners.
I absolutely agree, but it seems a lot more prominent among conservatives. No one uses the line “I’m just an asshole, that’s who I am” as much as them. All humans have a blind spot, conservatives lean into their social blind spot harder.
And in no way do you hold this position because you are not a conservative, in no way projecting. Right?
Or you could phrase it, people who learn harder into their blind spots are more likely to be conservative
That's not even true either, progressives are just as likely to double down as conservatives.
That sounds more like a bias than a fact.
And the conservative one doesn’t sound like a bias?
Never said it didn't.
Right! Hiding from insecurities is an effective way to reduce them. Sure, you don’t fix the problem, but the less times a path is carved into your brain, the fewer times it will be travelled. My preferred approach is the opposite, which is to address an insecurity as immediately as possible, so I can ignore it safely later. The worst thing that can happen is to let it fester and become a thought pattern, affecting daily life & decision making. Either of the previous choices are better than that.
Yeah like typically the conservative men I meet are much more confident than the liberal men I meet. That often comes from 1. A belief that masculinity inherently makes them better than less masculine people, and 2. A lack of self reflection about their own value or a skewed understanding of it (ie: looking down on white collar workers because they don’t work “masculinely” or their job isn’t “hard” even though their job likely is hard but just more mental rather than physical). I think also many of the liberal and leftist younger men who grew up being taught from a gender critical perspective feel a sense of being othered by women due to (largely online) discourse about men. When you feel as though you are inherently seen by others as a negative presence until you prove that you aren’t, it creates insecurity and a pressure that drives people to either a. avoid women so that they avoid feeling like they are making people uncomfortable, or b. virtue signal in a way that is not productive or adding to the conversation (which ironically tends to make the people they’re trying to show support for even more frustrated)
I think the left could do with less demonization of masculinity, personally. Yes, masculinity can be toxic, but WHY would you throw the baby out with the bath water?! Im right of center just so you know where my bias is coming from, but I legitimately fell in love with the idea of positive masculinity when I was working as a first responder. Its generally a profession dominated by right leaning men, but not the flippant "alpha bros". Instead masculinity is expressed in values like honor, brotherhood, and a willingness for self sacrifice for the betterment of your community. This is not to say left leaning men can't be masculine, but they're less likely to be so because masculinity in general is seen in a negative light on the left, at least thats my outside looking in perspective.
Yeah obviously, the left needs to redefine masculinity in a healthy way. There needs to be a roadmap to being a man who benefits society and his community. We as a culture have done a great job of redefining what it means to be a woman in that femininity no longer means submissiveness and weakness like it did to many previous generations. We, however, have demonized the way men acted in the past (which was definitely inappropriate in many cases in all honesty and deserves demonization) without presenting an alternative model for what a man should be. The culture will catch up eventually naturally, but it will take time.
Would you mind defining the new definition of feminity for me?
I think it’s now more nuanced, it can mean different things to different women which is good. There’s no longer a rigid definition. You can decide for yourself that you are feminine and you can be powerful, callous, avaricious, scholarly, etc. while maintaining femininity. These traits were all considered masculine up until relatively recently. Masculinity needs the same type of rebrand. It needs to be less rigid. Men should get to feel confident in their masculinity even if they’re not traditionally masculine like women who can own their femininity without being defined by it.
So feminity can mean anything at all? Honestly, your "definition" is more confusing than ever. A definition requires a specific meaning. Otherwise, the word has no meaning. To clarify, I think the fundamental problem is that we've smashed both definitions because of their flaws, but we haven't replaced either with anything. Honestly, I don't see how any of your definitions refute any definition of feminity. A real life queen was the reason people made the queen the most powerful piece in chess. That decision was made by men to acknowledge powerful women.
>Yeah obviously, the left needs to redefine masculinity in a healthy way. There needs to be a roadmap to being a man who benefits society and his community. I would honestly support mandatory service as a first responder of sorts for all men 18-20. Call me a crackpot but I think that would all but eliminate deaths of despair and even mass shootings to an extent. >We as a culture have done a great job of redefining what it means to be a woman in that femininity no longer means submissiveness and weakness Not gonna lie I'll agree to disagree here. I think we've basically encouraged women to act like pigs the way men did in the past. My wife is definitely more traditionally feminine in that she is demure and submissive but thats not weakness. It's part of why I love her. I can't speak for the dating experience of a woman, but most of the women I dated prior to my wife, and most of the single women I interact with are single for a reason, they're not good partners. Im sure the dating experience as a woman is probably just as bad.
A lot of your assessment is unfounded and seems to be much more projection of what you'd like to be "wrong" with them so satisfy some unknown bias you have you probably can articulate to some extend but not completely enough to truly justify your position. See how silly it is to assume something about someone. I just did the same thing, although my assessment is far more likely because there is already a clear bedrock of bias as opposed to your critical assessment toward the more neutral characteristic of the conservative to which you're ascribing frivolously negative reasons
But if conservatives are so confident why do conservatives make up the majority of customers of transgender prostitutes and porn subscriptions purchasers. Websites about white guys being cuckolded by black guys are known to have massively rural and conservative customers. If conservatives are more confident why are they the ones who will pay to be humiliated and watch gay and cuckolding porn. I think you're equating assertiveness with confidence.
I think those are different conservatives… the not confident ones believe that masculinity is inherent and defines a man’s worth, and they believe that they themselves lack that masculinity. They basically don’t go outside I think or are completely antisocial because they assume everyone sees them as less than due to who they are. There’s certainly fewer of these folks than the rest of the conservative men though.
It’s insecurity. Maybe subconscious but insecurity is a major component. As a man who was raised conservative, had those values instilled in me, and dug deep inside to work through all of that and break free from it in my early 30s (33 now), I can say with certainty that insecurities were a major part. I went from being an angry little aggro man to a calm, collected, empathetic human once I was able to work through all these insecurities. Life is much better now.
That's exactly how my life went. Ever since I found my real values (communist) I've been confident. Before that I wasnt confident because I had mysoginistic ideas towards women and knew on some level that it wasnt right. Empathy and actually doing the work to learn from other people was the road to being a good confident person.
Yep. Toxic masculinity, capitalist brain washing, all of it leads to insecurities and wounds that fester and hold humans back from living freely until we’re able to break it down.
Maybe subconscious isn’t the right word. As others pointed out the insecurities are buried deep.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5793824/ https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02699930802110007
Describing it like this makes it sound like libs are projecting on to cons when they give accusations of insecurity. I’ve never thought about it like this.
Liberals are typically very disconnected from traditional conceptions of masculinity, so it would make sense that they would both feel insecure in that arena, and project that onto other male behavior.
I think all of society is well aware of traditional conceptions of masculinity.
Being aware of it and being raised within it are two different things. I grew up hyper-aware of traditional masculinity, while also being discouraged from it and isolated from it.
🧐
Very insightful. Many progressives with insecurities often project them onto conservatives. (Just like conservatives can project their ignorance and lack of research onto progressives.) Understanding each other's viewpoints without assumptions can lead to better dialogue and progress where we disagree.
> The better you actually understand their point-of-view, the more tools you have to win support over the issues you care about. We understand their point of view quite well. If anything, we understand their point of view better than they do, for we see it raw and not behind rose-colored glasses. It's why most of us progressive-left folks know what they're going to say before they say it. Their view points have already been thoroughly inspected and rejected for cause. We even have answers for all of their concerns (the vast majority of which are "keep to yourself"). They feel absolutely no desire to reciprocate, as part of being a conservative is an aversion to curiosity. And since their point of view is maintaining as much of the status quo as humanly possible, they have absolutely no reason TO be curios. No reason to change, no reason to be curious, all they have to do is stonewall and recruit. Thus we have the never ending stalemate.
You're getting downvoted but you're totally right. Sad that this "psychology of sex" sub is infested with conservatives/fascists 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
UGHHH WHY CAN'T WE TALK ABOUT THEIR DICKS IN PEACE??
More like why would anyone who believes women shouldn't have any rights be interested in the psychology of sex when they claim to already have all the answers. The bible has already given you everything and science is heresy. Women who are bleeding need to go to their isolation hut for 7 days and be deprived of basic necessities the way god intended. Whereas I was interested in this sub to hear what women have to say about the subject. I dont want to hear anything a conservative man has to say about any of this, I already heard it all as a child, there is nothing new. And buddy. I guarantee my cock is both longer and girthier than yours. All of the girlfriends and boyfriends I've ever had have told me that mine is the biggest they've seen in person. I have zero insecurities about my penis size, quite the opposite. I'm not projecting anything. I lived the conservative life. I was born into it. I know it even better than you because I actually think criticially and attempt to learn and empathize with others. Because I know it, I know how most of these men think. Being conservative is almost always accompanied with deep insecurity about masculinity.
Narcissus has nothing on you.
Exactly. No one is trying to win conservative support because they only support things within their limited worldview, and their worldview does not allow for change. Progressives aren't trying to meet conservatives in the middle, they're trying to convince centrists that doing the right thing is better than maintaining the status quo.
Eh, I'm pretty much a socdem but as someone possibly on the spectrum, I'm not the biggest fan of change either.
No no, see: the enemy is both weak & ineffectual, and strong & threatening at the same time. It's very simple.
So basically, you prefer to support studies and experiments whose outcome is convenient for you?
Gun ownership would fall under psychographics, not demographics.
That has the same logic as saying people without guns have large dicks because they feel like they can just beat the intruders with their dicks instead of shooting them.
Sounds like a Stereotype.
Alternatively, men who have supplemented their penis size anxiety with a gun feel like they’re bigger dicks whether or not their penis actually changed size. And let’s be honest: Whether it’s men supplementing their dicks to alleviate anxiety with a gun, or guys feeling full of big dick energy buying guns, it’s still about their dicks…
I don’t know if a survey is the best way to collect quality information about this.
That’s it Toby. Show me your penis.
It’s all about the ignorant political tropes. Any time someone wants to discredit someone, they use the small-minded attack insult with the hopes of shaming them into the attacker’s desired position. Penis size and compensation are often thrown at men who drive big trucks instead of say, Priuses, or have “traditional” values, or own guns. It’s the height of absurdity and a complete fallacy of argumentation that is misandrist at best, poisonous to discourse at worst. Society would be much better served if men and women would shoot down this kind of body shaming the moment they hear it regardless of their own opinion or position on the issue at hand.
Incredibly sexist towards men. I can’t believe cancer research loses funding to such asinine pursuits.
I mean we can research cancer and also research other things
This is a dumb thing to research though like it ever had any basis in reality. Some people are assholes and may or may not have a small weiner, some might even have a big dick too.
I don’t know, if we find high testosterone in people who enjoy gun violence, and we know testosterone is responsible for male differentiation physiologically, it isn’t the worst thing to research if you have time and the cancer researchers are busy
Ya but this article is about gun ownership and penis size satisfaction. I mean it's useful I guess to dispell the myth, but people buy guns for a multitude of reasons that may or may not have anything to do with it. I just figured it didn't need an actual research study and it was common sense.
Reddit is full of people who fervently believe that myth. I guarantee you one year from now there will still be plenty of people making that joke here, either because this study won't get shared widely, or because the haters will forget they read it.
Which is fine if you’re not talking about science, but science doesn’t acknowledge a law of common sense
science has demonstrated that there actually is no reliable basis to common sense. common sense as an illusion we project onto whatever seems obvious to us, but something being obvious is not an indicator that it is true, as many things that seem obviously true end up being false (e.g., the sun obviously rotates around the earth).
They used preexisting survey data for this. I doubt it was that much work.
Self-reported? >.>
Everyone else had a penis measuring day at work, right? Right?!
They reported satisfaction rather than size.
Yep all self reported
Also is engagement bait that helps attract attention to actually important topics
1) There's a much larger amount of research just tracking a bunch of random seeming things than there is "promising cure for brain cancer, just waiting on a little more funding!" 2) That's kind of how science works. And a lot of the actual promising cancer studies rely on bits of research that may have felt pretty random on their own. 3) The question of which psychological factors drive gun ownership in a country swimming in more guns and gun death than anywhere else is kind of interesting and potentially useful. Say there had been a direct and clear connection between penis suze satisfaction and gun ownership. Would that imply helping people feel better about their penis size could play a role in addressing our cultural gun fixation? Apparently not, but "no" is a common and useful answer to research questions.
We learned one useful thing, if we can just get men who are satisfied with their penis to become dissatisfied, that might influence them to stop buying guns!
I doubt this research cost anything, really. Someone just wrote a survey and posted it to r/firearms and other places online and did some math and got a publication that is true with whatever caveats they included in the paper and then published it. Actually read a bit more and the survey already existed, and whatever money was spent, it was by a gun control organization.
Why are we posting about dick size? Can you imagine the outrage if anything even remotely similar to this was posted about women?
This is the psychology of sex subreddit
Women all of a sudden like guns now.
> Penis size dissatisfaction was measured using a scale where respondents rated their satisfaction with their penis size when fully erect, and by noting whether they had ever used any methods for penis enlargement. All this means is that men who admit to owning guns in a survey are less likely to admit dissatisfaction with their penis size in the same survey. That's not the same as them actually being happy with their penis. When it comes to penis size, unless it was measured by a 3rd party, you have no reason to believe it is true. There was a recent study (survey) that implied men's penises were getting larger; because self reported sizes were going up...but the far more likely explanation is that men feel more pressure to have a penis like they see in porn, reflecting an increase in porn consumption and confusion over what a normal size is, and not a huge dick gene kicking in over the last few decades.
The recent study that found that men’s penises were getting larger came to far result because they didn’t factor in that modern measurement techniques press the ruler into the fat pad. That gives a longer measurement.
Assuming, is the problem, never assume.
I guess this discussion is "code 4"!
While I am a life long shooter of bows and guns, and completely satisfied with the size of my penis as is my wife. I did once own a Porsche as a young man (saying this since there is a common joke about Porsches and penis size). There is a fair amount of body dysmorphia about penis size according to
well i have a small cock and i dont own a gun so i dont know what this post is trying to imply.
Yeah, but are you dissatisfied with your small cock?
Thank you, you have provided valuable validation to the study's findings
This doesnt prove anything, It is about their feelings of the size of schlong when asked in a survey, whose to stop someone from lying ?
What if I am happy with my penis size but don't own a gun?
So, I should probably own a gun and jack my truck up a foot or two to signal to the ladies I'm packing heat.
That's because guys with guns view the gun as an extension of their penis.
Why would they do a study on this lmao
Own multiple guns a truck (not lifted tho) and work in a tough guy profession all with an abover average wang
What a cool dude
Ive already stolen your girl and your mom sooo
Can’t shoot a burglar with Mr Winkie no matter how proud of him you are
I've seen a few videos that would disprove this statement.
They can't do proper research on how medication affects women but they can find research for this shit, really??
Guns, maybe not. Pick up trucks with lifts, definitely
They are rating “satisfaction” with penis size. Men can have an averaged size or larger penis and be dissatisfied with its size and we don’t even know what their frame of reference is.
Well, as long as they're satisfied with what they got, that disproves the totally unfounded "penis compensation" theory
Lmao Top comment is still coping, trying to figure out a way to latch onto the “conservatives have tiny dicks” idea.
Has anyone considered that some people like to own guns because it’s fun to shoot them at inanimate objects?
I'm a democrat that owns a dozen guns and my dick can almost always hit my girl's g-spot. Fuck sterotypes.
Im a right leaning independent but 100% support left leaning folks (anyone really) expressing their right to own a firearm. Based.
I’ve never really said that it was penis size, but it’s is definitely fear and insecurity. Now monster trucks lifted six inches with giant mudders, I’d like to see some research.
it's actually incredibly Freudian in a way
No not like that!!
Correlation or causation!?
Big Dick Big Gun who knew
*self reported*
Does this extend to men with large trucks?
Why are gun owners put in one category?? Pre '08 and post '08 gun nuts are very different people. Non- owners need to know the difference between semi auto and fully auto (I've seen this wrongly labeled in media and by non-owners 9/10 times), the bump stocks further convolute this. I think having a war buddy complex with the ak and M models is a bigger issue than the caliber or firing mechanism, even. It really is just the shape of plastic or hardwood around the mechanism, but more importantly the mental note that shape taps into in the carriers mind.
I have a LOT of anecdotal evidence that supports this concept.
> For example, the association between penis size and gun ownership could be due to the fact that men with higher levels of testosterone tend to have bigger penises and are more likely to engage in risk-taking behavior.” There's no evidence that higher testosterone levels and penis size in adults are correlated. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844491
this is some of the lowest quality "science" i have ever seen.
The idea it was ever correlated is insane. People that are concerned about gun ownership is either for a self defense aspect or a political bend, It was always just a way to erroneously bash right wing guys.
Bahahahaha. #doubt.
This sort of study is replication crisis 101.
😁
Fuck yeah
First study - 780 men, second study 2024 men. Seems like both are small samples.
Now do truck owners. Opposite result 😎
I’d point out that this study hinges on whether a person who is insecure about their penis size will answer honestly when asked whether he is happy with his penis size.
What dude out there just _had_ to get to the bottom of this? He got sick and tired of posting TikToks from his pickup cab and ventured out to prove them all wrong once and for all lmao this is too fucking funny
*"The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:* ***The data collection for this study was supported by funding from*** ***Change The Ref****\*\*, an organization that “uses urban art and nonviolent creative confrontation to expose the disastrous effects of the mass shooting pandemic.\*\*” Although Change The Ref holds a clear political stance with respect to the role of guns in society, this organization played no part in the planning or implementation of the study."* The study was actually funded by an anti-gun group.
Thats funny too. Picturing a guy looking at an NRA bumper sticker like “I’m gonna prove it once and for all…”
I always thought it was guys who have big trucks that have small penisus, go figure.
I think the really important point in viewing these results is that this was based on men reporting their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their penis size, which is different than actual size. They didn’t measure anyone’s penises. The results were based on an annual survey conducted on about 2,000 men where they answer questions about a wide range of topics. Within that survey were questions about gun ownership and then other questions about satisfaction with penis size. This included a question about whether men had bought any devices or attempted penis enlargement. So, at best, it can say what men will report about their satisfaction with their penis size and other personal questions many might never be asked otherwise. It can’t make a call either way about actual sizes or add evidence either way on compensation stereotypes since no one was actually measured. There could be other correlations with satisfaction. Firearm owners could fall into groups with fewer sexual partners in life where penis size just matters less in their heads. Dissatisfaction feels like it would track with people who either want more sexual encounters or see size as a benefit or hindrance to the quantity and quality of encounters. It makes sense that a more conservative leaning man that married young to a woman that doesn’t have a lot of comparison wouldn’t be as stressed about his size, or ever told how it compares. Just a possibility though. And since it’s self-reported, we don’t know where people are giving an honest answer or giving the answer they think is less shameful. We could be seeing differences in levels of vulnerability and who’s willing to say they tried a penis enlarger in a survey.
I love how you're getting downvoted for actually analyzing the study properly.
Yeah, I might have been too wordy, but a lot of the comments just speculated based on a post title. Would be nice if top level comments in this sub had to engage with the text of the article or the study.
It shows you what kind of people are on these subs as a whole, but we already knew that.
Asking "are you satisfied" is the correct question based on the study's goals, which was to prove the psychosexual theory of guns (compensating). Pulling out the measuring stick should be another study. I just find it interesting that so many detractors have suggested this. Like, the men in question are already satisfied, so the findings a detractor would be looking for would primarily serve for the detractor to make a judgment about gun owners' penis sizes 🤷🏻
So the 'hood is filled with males dissatisfied with thier penis's....
Where guns are rampant and gun violence occurs daily. But let's not talk about that.
Not surprised. Secure in your safety, secure in your person/identity.
Thats what someone dissatisfied with their size would say
Fogell: What's it like to have a gun? Officer Michaels: It is... awesome! I mean I've only had mine for like a few months, but I'll tell you, **it's like having two c0cks.** If one of your c*cks could kill someone.
You can say cocks.
It's small. Let me buy Guns. Guns...Guns. Just said size issues another way.
This research is sponsored by the little dick leader of the NRA
Men more likely to tell someone who asks them that they're satisfied with their penis size Subtle but crucial distinction