Penis size correlated by race is so much BS
Don't believe me? Do a google search: "penis size correlated by race" and find one, one scientifically based study that comes to that conclusion.
The coolnurse study is a "self selected" survey, not a scientific study.
There have been several studies regarding the average size of the human penis. The majority of such studies could be unreliable due to self-selection bias: men with a smaller than average penis might be less likely to allow themselves to be measured, while men with a larger than average penis might be more likely to allow themselves to be measured. It is unknown if this conjectured self-selection bias has been confirmed by any studies, or if any studies have attempted to account for potential self-selection bias regarding penis size.
Differences in average penis size among races has been a subject of considerable controversy.
The cultural issues involved with the question of race and penis size are complex, with both larger and smaller penises used as justification for regarding other races as inferior; as evidence of an oversexed and brutish animal nature in the former case, or of sexual inadequacy in the latter case. In general, there is a tendency to see the penis size of one's own group as the "right" size, compared with those of others.
There is considerable debate as to whether specific racial variations in penis size exist, and if they do, whether observed variations can be explained in terms of other factors such as correlations of penis size to body size. In any case, within-group variation in penis size (±30%, see above) seems to be considerably larger than claimed between-group variation of average penis size (±4%, see below).
To date, there has been no conclusive evidence that race and penis size are at all correlated and all studies that have been done have been rejected by the scientific community due to inaccuracy, respondent bias, or unverifiable claims.
Based on the hypothesis that anatomical differences exist among regions, a series of FHI studies were conducted in three Asian countries to compare small and standard width condoms (3.9 cm and 4.9 cm), and in three African countries to compare larger and standard width condoms (5.5 cm and 5.2 cm). According to FHI, "Among the African sites, breakage rates were slightly higher and slippage was slightly lower for the smaller of the two condoms being compared."[33] The data from the Asian sites was inconsistent.[34][35] FHI concluded that "almost none of the differences in breakage and slippage rates from either the Asian or African sites were statistically significant. Thus, results from these studies pertaining to penis size and condom failure were inconclusive."[36]
In a British questionnaire examining condom use and reproductive health, the authors stated that "penis size could affect condom failure". 281 out of 300 questionnaires were returned to the British clinic. “In their responses 188 men considered themselves white, 76 black, and 14 Asian.” The cross-sectional study looked at race factors on condom use. In this study, 18% (14) African descent, 7% (14) Caucasians and no Asians reported frequent breakage. 28% (4) Asian, 20% (15) black, 19% (35) white men reported occasional breakage. In contrast, 21% (3) Asians, 8% (6) African descent and 2% (3) Caucasians reported frequent complete slippage. "An important cause of a condom coming off, paradoxically, is that it may be too tight. Difficulty rolling the condom fully down the shaft allows the ring to enter the partner and be rolled off the penis. If a condom is tight breakage may be due to placing fingers inside the ring to drag on the condom; this accounts for breakage occurring most often at the closed end (S L Solanti, personal communication)." These results cannot be taken as fact due to this being a questionnaire, the small sampling size, and the truthfulness of the respondents. [37]
Family Health International states "The World Health Organization bases its specifications for condom width on consumer preference and penis size, citing three studies. The studies uses varying methods of measurements between sources, such as maximum circumference (US measurements) instead of base circumference (Thai measurements). The Kinsey reports were based on self-reported results from African and Caucasian Americans. Taken together, the studies show significant variations in penis size within the three population groups, but also indicate that African American men on average have a slightly wider and longer penis size, Australian and Caucasian American men have a medium size, and Thai men a slightly narrower and shorter size." The WHO document referred to only specifies data for the US, Australia and Thailand, and not races in general.[38]
One of the earliest researchers on the subject, Frantz Fanon, covers this subject in some detail in Black Skin, White Masks (1952), where he tends towards the view that the supposed positive correlation between penis size and African ancestry is erroneous, a conclusion that he also supports with statistics.
In 2001 Schneider et al, tested Korean men whose age ranged from 18-19 and 40-68 and measured an erect length of 14.48 cm for the former and 14.18 cm for the latter (14.48±5.7 in, 14.18±5.58 in).
The BBC reported an Indian Council of Medical Research study finding that "about 60% of Indian men have penises which are between three and five centimetres shorter than international standards used in condom manufacture."[39] However, the study also stated that "data collected in Mumbai till 2001 showed that 60% of the participants measured 126 to 156 mm [5 to 6.1 inches] in length."[40] So, according to the study, most Indian men have penises within the average human size range.[40]However, 70% of the men that participated in the Research Study were 140-160 cm tall. The international size standard for condom length is 150mm to 180mm (6 to 7 inches),[41] larger than the average human penis size; thus, the average human penis falls short of international condom size standards, and the charge that Indian men have smaller penises on average than non-Indian men is misleading and possibly racist. [42]
In a 2005 study, "Penile measurements in normal adult Jordanians and in patients with erectile dysfunction," the purpose of the work was to determine penile size in adult normal (group one, 271) and impotent (group two, 109) men. In group one mean midshaft circumference was 8.98±1.4 cm (3.54±0.55 in), mean flaccid length was mean 9.3±1.9 cm (3.66±.75 in), and mean stretched length was 13.5±2.3 cm (5.31±.91 in). In group two, mean flaccid length was 7.7±1.3 cm (3.03±.51 in), and mean stretched length was 11.6±1.4 cm (4.57±.55 in).[43]
A survey in October 2004 conducted in Hong Kong, measured the flaccid penis size of 148 ethnic Chinese volunteers aged between 23 and 93. The average length of their flaccid penises was 8.46cm which compared favourably with similar studies on other men overseas. Chan Lung Wai director of the Urology Center at the Union Hospital who headed the study suggested that "Hong Kong people are no smaller than western men, where their penises are concerned". Other studies of average penis lengths conducted on men overseas included Germans 8.6cm, Israelis 8.3cm, Indians 8.7, Turks 7.8, Filipinos 7.35, Armenians 8.7, Greeks 8.6, Nigerians 9.2, Americans 8.8 and Italians at 9cm.
not really that big but people do gather around and gaze upon its magnificance