Ask a gynecologist anything

[MadDog]

[timmahh]

Originally Posted by Turkeybaster115

I don't think you understood my question. I'm over 6 inches in length, and I'm not trying to brag here cuz porn dudes easily put me to shame, and I have no girth.

Did no one else bother to make jokes at this?

[CollinsE90]

Originally Posted by BTM

You would be looking to show that there is no discernible difference in the amount of pregnancies per instance of intercourse for varying penis lengths, given that pregnancy is a viable outcome (no contraceptives are used). It is obvious that the Chinese are capable of reproducing, for which pregnancy is a pre-requisite condition. The fact that the Chinese are capable of becoming pregnant does not speak to their efficiency of the matter, which is what the question is.

The question is basically, "are larger penises more effective at creating pregnancy?" The fact that relatively smaller ones can also create pregnancy does not tell you anything relevant to answering this question. Like you said, there are WAY too many external factors to be able to definitively say, "the most populous country in the world is characterized by men with relatively small penises, therefore, larger penises are no more efficient at creating pregnancy than smaller ones." Pregnancy rates do no directly indicate birth rates. Even if they did, you need to worry about infant mortality rate, standardize for the female's fertility, popularity of contraceptives, etc...

All you've really said is that China is the most populous country in the world, and Chinese men have relatively small penises. You cannot correctly infer anything regarding the length of a penis' effectiveness for creating a pregnancy from these two statements.

Originally Posted by turb0

yep for all we know chinese have sex 10x more than the average person, and although smaller penis = less chance of pregnancy, their extra horny-ness more than makes up for it.

China is the most populated country in the world, with a One-Child rule. So birth rates are irrelevant, he asked if size matters in becoming pregnant. Obviously they don't have a problem with that or they wouldn't institute such a rule to prevent over-population. How many times you have sex is irrelevant because that isnt what he asked and you both are taking the question too literal.

All I was saying is that if size mattered, China wouldn't be as populated or even have a One Child rule because it would be tougher for them to get pregnant.

Sure you can throw in other variables, but that wasn't my point and wasn't stating that my example PROVES anything, I just stated it was a good guess that it doesn't matter. So in short, my statement never was to be taken literally because I wasn't attempting to prove anything, only point out the obvious.

[BTM]

You have no idea how populated China would be without all their birth constraints. The effectiveness of an action needs to be expressed as a rate, which you also have completely ignored. I could go on...

At this point, I'm not going to start teaching you statistical inference, which is completely based in logic, which you obviously have an extremely limited understanding of. I'm not further derailing this thread because you have no idea what constitutes a logical statistical relationship.

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by BTM

You would be looking to show that there is no discernible difference in the amount of pregnancies per instance of intercourse for varying penis lengths, given that pregnancy is a viable outcome (no contraceptives are used). It is obvious that the Chinese are capable of reproducing, for which pregnancy is a pre-requisite condition. The fact that the Chinese are capable of becoming pregnant does not speak to their efficiency of the matter, which is what the question is.

The question is basically, "are larger penises more effective at creating pregnancy?" The fact that relatively smaller ones can also create pregnancy does not tell you anything relevant to answering this question. Like you said, there are WAY too many external factors to be able to definitively say, "the most populous country in the world is characterized by men with relatively small penises, therefore, larger penises are no more efficient at creating pregnancy than smaller ones." Pregnancy rates do no directly indicate birth rates. Even if they did, you need to worry about infant mortality rate, standardize for the female's fertility, popularity of contraceptives, etc...

All you've really said is that China is the most populous country in the world, and Chinese men have relatively small penises. You cannot correctly infer anything regarding the length of a penis' effectiveness for creating a pregnancy from these two statements.

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by BTM

You have no idea how populated China would be without all their birth constraints. The effectiveness of an action needs to be expressed as a rate, which you also have completely ignored. I could go on...

At this point, I'm not going to start teaching you statistical inference, which is completely based in logic, which you obviously have an extremely limited understanding of. I'm not further derailing this thread because you have no idea what constitutes a logical statistical relationship.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by KGB7

You're right. You can correctly infer that Chinese men are not 0% effective at creating pregnancy. That's about it.

[CollinsE90]

Originally Posted by BTM

At this point, I'm not going to start teaching you statistical inference, which is completely based in logic, which you obviously have an extremely limited understanding of which. I'm not further derailing this thread because you have no idea what constitutes a logical statistical relationship.

You're leaving the thread because you have nothing else to refute, I never stated anything to PROVE anything and you took it that way. Not my fault you take everything as a statistic and further digress a simple statement to much more than it needed to be. Using an ad hominem as your argument reasoning also doesn't provide for a quality argument, so I guess I shouldn't teach you how to properly argue without big words and a wikipedia link because clearly you have no idea in what institutes a logical argument.

[BTM]

If you had an actual rebuttal, you wouldn't be reduced to posting the same meme over again...

[BTM]

Originally Posted by CollinsE90

You're leaving the thread because you have nothing else to refute, I never stated anything to PROVE anything and you took it that way. Not my fault you take everything as a statistic and further digress a simple statement to much more than it needed to be. Using an ad hominem as your argument reasoning also doesn't provide for a quality argument, so I guess I shouldn't teach you how to properly argue without big words and a wikipedia link because clearly you have no idea in what institutes a logical argument.

You provided statistics to support your argument. How is this not trying to prove what you said? I obviously thought of statistics, because it's what you not only originally stated, it's also what you used as support.

Is this place on retard pills today?

[KGB7]

Originally Posted by BTM

If you had an actual rebuttal, you wouldn't be reduced to posting the same meme over again...

The Meme is the rebuttal!


You took a fly and turned it to an elephant. Stop over complicating shit.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by KGB7

The Meme is the rebuttal!


You took a fly and turned it to an elephant.

Sue me...internet...serious business

[CollinsE90]

Originally Posted by BTM

You provided statistics to support your argument. How is this not trying to prove what you said? I obviously thought of statistics, because it's what you not only originally stated, it's also what you used as support.

Is this place on retard pills today?

I didn't post stats, I posted a logical reason with common knowledge(It's common knowledge Asians have the smallest average penis, and common knowledge China is the highest populated country) ending in "A safe bet". Retard pills must be on your desk as well if you decide to take my simple statement into what this has become, arguing a simple assumption never intended to prove anything. The doctor in this thread who went to school for it can post proven statistics to either agree with me or disagree with me.

[MadDog]

Somebody is getting Butthurt. Fill out this form and send it to someone who cares. Oh, and have some

[BTM]

lol

[BTM]

Bored so what the hell:

Originally Posted by CollinsE90

I didn't post stats,

"over populated" comes from population density (population per square mile) = statistic
"most populated" (not highest populated) comes from number = statistic
"average penis length" comes from sum of length from a presumably representative sample n divided by the n = statistic (and I'd probably use median here which is better for dealing with outliers)

"A safe bet".

Even this is a leap of faith based on your premise

The doctor in this thread who went to school for it can post proven statistics to either agree with me or disagree with me.

He went to medical school, not "how big the penis that impregnated this woman is and was she more or less predisposed to becoming pregnant because of this" school

[CollinsE90]

lol, Like I said I used common knowledge and you just saw statistics, and you're just fishing for something to grasp to win this one. Now you're even going to argue what qualifications a OB/GYN has. Not my fault you have an inferiority complex that you need to take a small assumption and show everyone how smart you are.

[BTM]

Not my fault you're an idiot

[CollinsE90]

lol, 4 years at Arizona in economics, and working for your dad makes you so much smarter than me.

You're a hoot with a major inferiority complex.

[Blake]

lol are we really arguing about chinese penis sizes?

[KGB7]

We arguing about who can out dumb each other. I think....

[Blake]

Originally Posted by KGB7

We arguing about who can out dumb each other. I think....

makes perfect sense now. besides, anyone can win an internet argument with thesaurus.com