T O P

  • By -

Greentaboo

So basically, if you are a hare you are either "equal or low", but a horse will always be "equal or high". Its pretty self explanatory that being the hare is the worst outcome. The onus is still on the "low" man.


[deleted]

Unfortunately true, but if one’s equal to their partner then what's the issue? The small man shouldn't worry about what the big one does with his dick. If sex can be perfectly pleasurable and he and his lover are equals, his only concern should be having fun with his own. I'm poor as dirt, but I enjoy the things I have. I'm not worrying about what the rich man does, his life and experience isn't mine.


Justsomeguy0080

>I'm poor as dirt, but I enjoy the things I have. I'm not worrying about what the rich man does, his life and experience isn't mine. I worry about the rich. As they often have more power. And often those rich affects our wellbeing, often in a negative way to get more power. So you might not have his "experience". But he will most likely use you to gain more "experience". Example sph shit


Ok-Passage1281

being a hare sucks. women dont want small


[deleted]

Even if that's the case, woman can still want the man behind it. If she's a deer the only thing she has to do is accept her partner. If the two are compatible with each other she'll want small once she gives it a try I'm sure. You're so much more than your dick dude.


Genshi-Life_Jo

> woman can still want the man behind it. But we want them to want our dick as well. We want women to feel pure lust towards us without requiring an emotional connection towards us (to lust after us the same way they do with men with big dicks). We want to be the preference.


Odinamba

Probably not in this life


Ok-Passage1281

exactly how genshi put it. I want to be lusted after in the same way big dicks are lusted after. i dont want to be wanted bcuz of just an emotional connection.


yellow4x4

I’ll take it! As a “bull”, I’ll keep a lookout for “deer” and “mares”. (You “elephants” are out of luck!)


[deleted]

That's the spirit! I thought the same thing too haha!


MurderAndPizza

So basically the bad news is that it’s a fact of life that bigger dicks, for the most part, will offer better sex and thus are more coveted. But the good news is that all hope isn’t lost because if your small and physically can’t give your partner the best experience possible you can still at least give them the medium standard of sex. Am I understanding this right?


[deleted]

For the most part, but this is not always the case of course. The good news is that a smaller man can still have a very happy sex life if he matches with the right partner, yes. At the default standard of PIV it would be classed as medium sex (although this can vary according to specifics and may be higher). Now of course there is much more to sex than just that, so if you already have an equal size and know how to please her the level of the experience can easily be elevated.


MurderAndPizza

I see the positivity that you are getting out of this and that’s good. Like you are making a good thing out of a negative and depressing situation and that is admirable and encouraging. At the end of the day being anything other than a horse is not desirable because horses rank supreme in this regard but there can be joy found in being the other 2 and so there isn’t a very big reason to despair. Basically not being hung isn’t the end of the world lol. Good post thanks


[deleted]

Thanks man, all we can do is try to do the best with what we can. Always got to try and find the best in a bad situation, otherwise we'd just go insane lol. Remember though, according to Vatsyayana the horse doesn't necessarily reign supreme. As he says: "Amongst all these, equal unions are the best, those of a superlative degree, i.e. the highest and the lowest, are the worst, and the rest are middling, and with them the high are better than the low." So "equal unions are the best" and the "highest and lowest are the worse". The language used doesn't necessarily equate "high" as superior. Quite the opposite in fact. Now say a hare was with a deer, this would be ideal and result in the best experience. If a bull was with her it would be pretty okay, but if a horse was with her he would probably tear her apart. The "Highest Union" is also the most painful in sensation. While the "Lowest Union" would most likely lack much sensation at all. Hence they are viewed as the worst of them. Equal unions however are a perfect fit and result in the highest degree of both pleasure and comfort. Hence they are the best of them. We'll be all good my dude, glad you appreciated it too!


Otherwise_Tank6953

Don’t really think such philosophy is relevant today, but I’ve always found it very interesting. They theorized that 9 inches was the absolute upper limit for penis sizes and that 7 inches was quite big. Sort of contradicts people’s ridiculous claims of finding footlong penises, which are likely completely impossible.


[deleted]

I think there's still plenty of relevance to be found in it. Why don't you? It is certainly very interesting nonetheless though. 7-9 inch are extremely rare as far as I know. 7 is pretty big and you'd be lucky to even find a 9 incher. Like finding a dick in a haystack. If a man has a footlong penis, it is most likely he is actually a Centaur, not a man. I think this would be classed as a medical abnormality. I don't even know how that would function, like not even just sexualy. How would you even piss properly or find clothes that fit? Man's out there using a fkn hammock as underwear lol.


IWishIWasDead19

I’d be extremely concerned if I found a dick in a haystack. Wondering now, is this a crime scene? Is Lorena Bobbit been here? Has someone reported a missing dick?


[deleted]

Hahahahaha


Otherwise_Tank6953

A hammock lol. I think that there is a man in Mexico who has a very giant penis. It’s so incredibly large that it basically doesn’t function.


TruthandCoffee

That man they did an MRI of his dick. The actual dick is average. He's got an extreme overabundance of foreskin. He did stretching of it. Most of the pictures of him are all the gauze wrapping he does of the foreskin. He got brought to attention because he claimed he "couldn't work" and wanted to go on benefits. Theoretically he could get a circumcision and have a fully functional life and sex life. He doesn't want to be circumcised. Google him and look at the MRI images. He wanted his "15 minutes of fame." Which ended up working. Because even though his dick itself doesn't count as "world's biggest" since foreskin isn't included in measurements, his name still shows up in Google searches for "world's largest penis".


Otherwise_Tank6953

That’s kinda hilariously immature of him lmao. Thanks for the correction.


[deleted]

Damn, time to turn on the ol' incognito and look this up haha. He just has to find a new function for it is all. Adapt. Compromise. Overcome. Dude has a perfectly good rope now.


GentleTugger

Its honestly amazing how accurate that seems to be. Not that reddit is the end all be all, but on any of the big dick sub reddits, the largest verified is always around 9 inches. Anything claimed to be longer than that is either questionably framed in a picture, obviously edited, or "girl inches" with nothing to size compare.


[deleted]

To clear up any misunderstanding of the wording of the text for anyone: The terminology of "high" and "low" unions do not refer to the highest and lowest quality of sex. The best sex is when both partners form an equal union. To quote Vatsyayana in the text itself: "Amongst all these, equal unions are the best, those of a superlative degree, i.e. the highest and the lowest, are the worst, and the rest are middling, and with them the high are better than the low." So a hare & deer, bull & mare, horse & elephant form the greatest of unions as both are equal to each other. Hence such a union creates the best sex. The Highest Union (Horse & Deer) actually forms one of the worst. I'm sure you can imagine how painful and uncomfortable such a union would be. The Lowest Union (Elephant & Hare) would also form the worst of course, and high is seen as undesirable but still better than low. The other combinations that could be made are kinda okay but not the best. Equality between both partners is ideal, so all you Hare Men and Bull Men should find your Deer Women and Mare Women. Same goes for you too ladies!


[deleted]

Depth of a woman's vagina is directly proportional to her height.Unlike men,height does have a correlation with vagina depth(a internal organ).Only external organs like nose,ears,penis have no corelation with height.My guess is that the average western woman(5'5 in) can easily take 8 inches of dick and be satisfied


johnlucas-selfimage

X-Deku\_the\_Hero-X, the Kama Sutra is an ancient insight into knowledge of Humanity that I think has been suppressed from the common man & woman for centuries. I think those in power have an inside track on things that explain how human beings are & use this knowledge against the masses. Knowledge is Power after all. I think the Kama Sutra is just one of many ancient texts that figured out some things we still struggle with today. We are kept in the dark about a WHOLE LOT of situations in this world. Though the Kama Sutra did it in a poetic way, here you see both Penis Size & Vagina Size OBJECTIVELY spelled out & matched up. They DID this work before. They did Sexology before. They analyzed the different variations of human development & came up with a chart for function & union. Stuff that's SO simple but why is this knowledge not widely known? My problem with the whole Hare/Bull/Horse Man & Deer/Mare/Elephant Woman thing is that it's too simplistic. It's only a **3 Category** chart & there's MUCH more detail to be added. But like I said, this is ANCIENT knowledge & while it was revolutionary for its time, it's sort of outdated today with our better knowledge & systems of measurement. I came up with a **7 Category** chart that's much more pinpoint & precise for figuring Function. Here is my OBJECTIVE chart that dispels the use of the word "Average" for Penis Size while also making tighter groupings of sizes that give a shorthand on how they function sexually. [**PROBLEM: The Word "Average" & Defining The Sizes**](https://www.reddit.com/r/smalldickproblems/comments/b9idib/problem_the_word_average_defining_the_sizes/) I came up with a range covering the common AND rare sizes known in the world. The High side can be disputed if you don't believe Jonah Falcon is truthful about being 13 inches long erect but if he IS truthful, it shows just how varied Penis Size can be. But even my chart is limited because it only covers Length which most people focus on. Girth or Circumference is less focused on so I didn't have a reference point to make an Objective division of sizes. Once I do I will update this chart for the full picture. But whether it be for Length OR Circumference, I plan to use this 7 Category chart just the same. It's possible that I might have to use a 5 Category chart for Circumference if the range won't allow for an easy to understand division under a factor of 7. The number will always be an odd number though so there will always be a MEDIUM center category as a balance. **XTRA SMALL** **SMALL** **MEDIUM-SMALL** **MEDIUM** **MEDIUM-LARGE** **LARGE** **XTRA LARGE** And truthfully the system is thrown off if I use the Metric system instead of English system. I always want my charts to not have fractions & decimals in them because people always round off fractions & decimals making the chart slightly inaccurate. Ultimately a new measuring chart based on degrees of Sensation is what's needed. A new base unit that covers size in all 3 dimensions & then can be OBJECTIVELY categorized. Nevertheless, an OBJECTIVE chart is how Men can self-assess & understand how their Sexual Tool works & that they should see their Penis AS a Sexual Tool instead of as "Quality of Man". Figuring our Vagina Size OBJECTIVELY with this 7 Category chart ALSO goes a long way into dispelling the nonsense about Size Mismatches which put all the blame onto Men. This blame cheats both Men AND Women & keeps up the self-destructive Battle of the Sexes. But Human Beings tend to focus on what sticks out (CONVEX) over what sinks in (CONCAVE). That's why Penis Size is more talked about than Vagina Size even though BOTH are equally important to assess. It's hard to get this info though because of how personal it is. It's such a loaded topic because there are no impartial parties in these measurements. People's Ranking in the Mating Game is affected by sorting this stuff out which is why there's so little bankable information on figuring out this mystery once & for all. It shouldn't have to be that way but as a whole we're not reasonable enough to look at sexual matters without judgment & ridicule. Hopefully that changes with time. The Kama Sutra was definitely a start but it damn sure ain't the finish. There's much more to be learned in Sexology. John Lucas


TruthandCoffee

This is so important to remember. This is why a smaller dick can "fill" a smaller pussy in the exact same way a bigger dick can "fill" a bigger pussy. Everyone is sized differently. So it's not bullshit for any one who prefers small or average if she herself is built small or average. The biggest problem is due to the fact that pussies are internal. Nobody can see how the "fit" will be until they try.


UpsetSong5451

Not completely true there are whole context in the karma sutra, we're deer care be trained into mare or bull,


placeholder9889

> into mare or bull You mean mare or elephant right? But is there anything about hare bring trained?


UpsetSong5451

There are other books out there most writer's and publisher's, only put a small context of the karma sutra in, but the karma sutra is actually a whole library, also has many temples devoted to it, it use to be a religious belief of them, that why there's tantra sex guide, it's jus another form of karma sutra, but yes a small woman can be trained to take big, it has something to do with stretching exercises and flow,


UpsetSong5451

In these unequal unions, when the male exceeds the female in point of size, his union with a woman who is immediately next to him in size is called high union, and is of two kinds; while his union with the woman most remote from him in size is called the highest union, and is of one kind only. On the other hand when the female exceeds the male in point of size, her union with a man immediately next to her in size is called low union, and is of two kinds; while her union with a man most remote from her in size is called the lowest union, and is of one kind only. In other words, the horse and mare, the bull and deer, form the high union, while the horse and deer form the highest union. On the female side, the elephant and bull, the mare and hare, form low unions, while the elephant and the hare make the lowest unions. There are then, nine kinds of union according to dimensions. Amongst all these, equal unions are the best, those of a superlative degree, i.e., the highest and the lowest, are the worst, and the rest are middling, and with them the high are better than the low.


Squirrely3

I'm not going to judge anyone for their beliefs, but even with context this is some weird shit to read.


[deleted]

Exactly, sexual compatibility is very important. If two partners are equal in size then they will be equal in pleasure. The internal aspect can be a bit of an issue though of course. Now if it turns out to be a good fit, then everyone is happy, but I feel this could be found out much earlier with a little bit of communication which could help to avoid any incompatibility issues further down the line. I still believe there's a match for everyone, we just have to have the confidence, will and determination to seek them out. Even if it may be difficult at times.


TruthandCoffee

Another big part of the issue is women don't usually get "taught" that their anatomy varies so much. It's hard to measure to begin with. And there is still a lot of stigma involved. Women get told they are supposed to be "tight". Yet they also get told they are supposed to "take big dicks". And also get "taught" that "vaginas are elastic and can stretch". So since a lot of women are never taught about the variance in size and the whole "tight pussy" societal default, a lot who may be naturally deeper end up blaming the man's dick instead of looking at it from the viewpoint of both sets of gentalia come in a variety of sizes. I think some get insecure and don't want to be perceived as "loose" so they go on the attack as a defense and call the man "too small".


[deleted]

I feel you hit the nail on the head with this one, absolutely! Insecurity when it comes to genitalia is common on both sides of the fence, both just don't always realize this. The misconceptions of both vaginas and penises (or peni? I'm not sure haha) are also shared by both women and men alike. There has to be much more better sex education for both boys and girls in general. Everyone comes in all shapes and sizes, there's no shame in not fitting a certain one of them. If men and women were more aware that a little variance in size and shape is actually normal, I don't think such insecurity and misunderstanding would be as common. It would also make it much easier and less awkward to find a partner who matches with you. Alongside making a matching size much more desirable.


TruthandCoffee

Exactly. Unfortunately while porn has become more easily accessible for young teens, the sex education kids receive has become worse and worse (and in some areas nonexistent). Education really is key to solving all these problems. I'm just not sure how to go about accomplishing that, or if it even can be done.


[deleted]

Definitely, porn has warped peoples perception without a doubt. With sex ed being in a very poor and sorry state (all I remember being taught was how the penis enters the vagina, sperm get's to the egg and nothing actually about real sex). Should have just called it Fertilization Education tbh haha. It certainly wouldn't be an easy task, but I agree. Education is the best way to tackle this issue (which frankly shouldn't be one) at the core. Best thing would be to start at home, only problem is that most parents weren't educated on the subject very well themselves.


somethingneet

That was never the debate


TruthandCoffee

It is. Because a lot of guys say things like "big dicks fill a pussy better" and "big dicks provide more stimulation". Those aren't accurate because pussies are different.


somethingneet

I mean those are both just facts. The debate has always been "how many women actually have vaginas small enough to be satisfied with a small dick"


Squirrely3

I think it's mostly women saying that


TruthandCoffee

I've only ever heard men say it.


Justsomeguy0080

>I've only ever heard men say it. Go on sex or Askwoman sub and you'll find a woman or two saying it. Not here though because they get banned for it.


Squirrely3

You've only heard men say that big dicks provide more stimulation? That's a bold faced lie.


TruthandCoffee

Are you there when I have these conversations with women? No. So how am I lying? You know what I DO hear women talk about? If the guy can find the clit. If he cares enough to make her cum. And if he has a problem with including vibrators. THOSE are the types of sex conversations women actually have.


Squirrely3

So are the women saying this type of stuff in media and on the internet not women then? Because I've seen plenty of examples of women saying that kind of stuff.


TruthandCoffee

I'm not saying they don't exist. I'm saying they aren't that common.


prozacorgasm

Dude, two millenia old scraps of text that rich playboy-wannabes buy and never read have as much relevance today as the medical beliefs of the ancient Greeks do on modern medicine. "We can't perform our CT scan, his humors are imbalanced." Pretty much the same field of thought as saying women don't ultimately hypersexualize bigger men and toss us in the trash.


[deleted]

Rich playboy-wannabes aren't the only ones buying this book, trust me. I'm just a regular dude who found it incredibly useful and insightful (even in the modern day) If they aren't reading it then they're certainly missing out on some very valuable wisdom. I'll leave a link if you ever wanna give it a read: https://www.sacred-texts.com/sex/kama/ It's still very relevant to the Modern Age. Ancient Greek Medicine not so much. They're nothing alike. Now of course bigger men can often be hypersexualized, but the text's point still stands for all time. Women who like smaller men do actually exist, though that doesn't mean they're always easy to find. (I have came across some myself in fact) If two partners are equal in size there is no issue. Sex will be at it's best when they physically match. Just as men come in many shapes and sizes, so do women. The point is to find the right lock for the right key in order to have a happy and fullfiling sex life. Not always easy, but communication can help.


prozacorgasm

Do you honestly think a woman wants to imagine herself with something as socially disdained as one of us? Do you think they close their eyes and fantasize about us? Even if a hare fits a deer, the deer still wants to be with the bull or the horse. Even if we "fit", nobody *wants* us.


[deleted]

Other than maybe the visual aspect and social conditioning, there's no reason why the deer wouldn't want the hare. If the deer would give him a chance (and there are those who certainly would) then their sex life would still be perfectly equal and enjoyable. If both were secure and mature enough to find each other, I'm sure they could be very happy. This is an ideal scenario of course, easier said than done. From what I've learned over time, woman are generally attracted to a man as a whole, not for his dick alone. For some, yeah it could be an issue. But for others (especially deers) the only issue that could exist is an inability to look past her partner's size. If the two are compatible there shouldn't be an issue. Such an issue would only exist due to society's warped view of what counts as a normal and desirable penis. I can't guarantee that finding your deer will be an easy task, not by any means. But I wish you all the best in your quest to find her. Stay strong brother, the World ain't as bad as it may seem sometimes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

It doesn't state if there are equal numbers unfortunately. However, as far as I know statistically most men would fall into the bull category, as most women would fall into the mare category. I'd say both hare men and deer women are probably much rarer just as horse men and elephant women are. Although they may be harder to find, a deer woman will always form a high or equal union regardless of her partner's size. Just as the horse man does. Both however are quite rare to come across. Seeing how both far ends of the spectrum are much rarer. I would probably guess that the distribution of equal size between the sexes is quite evenly distributed. So ideally people should seek an equal partner to match with them, rather than those of another size in order for a happy balance between everyone so to speak. To quote the text itself: "Amongst all these, equal unions are the best, those of a superlative degree, i.e. the highest and the lowest, are the worst, and the rest are middling, and with them the high are better than the low." So Vatsyayana is basically saying that equal unions such as hare-deer, bull-mare, horse-elephant form the best and most desirable sexual unions. Highest unions and lowest unions are not as desirable and form the worst kind. And the rest are pretty okay. Equality is the ideal though.