SpeakingOfSmallMeat

This is one of the SpeakingOfArticles; a series of funny and informative articles by Simon Sheppard about men enjoying sex with men. We have a few of them online here, reproduced without permission.

Speaking of Small Meat

The average hard-on is somewhere around 5 1/2 to 6 inches, which means there are dicks out there that are a bit - sometimes _quite_ a bit - shorter.

Doug has one. It's pretty, it works, and it's less than four inches long when hard. "High school gym was rough at first. The guys would tease me, call me "Pee Wee," he remembers. "But I soon learned if you show weakness, they'll keep it coming, so I would blow off their comments, play along. Then it just came to be that I was Pee Wee and nobody really cared."

And when Doug got older, he discovered that - contrary to the notion that _all_ gay men are size queens - some guys thought men with small dicks were a big turn-on. His self-confidence swelled. "At the Y," he says, "I used to love to walk around naked to show the guys, loved getting into the Jacuzzi when there were already men in there. My cock is actually small but I often lie about it to other people. I knew they were looking right at it."

For some guys, having a partner with a small cock brings practical advantages; little meat may be easier to suck or more comfy to get fucked by. But the pleasure can be aesthetic, too. "I like it if my piece is bigger than theirs," says one man with a pretty hefty whanger. "It gives me a little bit of psychological power, and I like to think they're licking their lips when they see what I've got. Guys with enormous equipment sometimes can't get it up, or don't know what to do with it when they do. Besides, I think little ones are cute." Being the notorious sexhounds gay men are, Web sites have even arisen devoted to pics of men with little willies.

Some men would no doubt object to their throbbing manhoods being called "cute," but as long as good sex isn't measured by the millimeter, there's no denying that bigger may not always be better. At least not for everyone. A humongous tallywhacker may signify masculinity to some people, but there's certainly no scientifically established link between "big" and "butch." Doug, for instance, has a hunky, hairy body, and if the dick between his muscled thighs is on the small side, that's okay with him. If anything, he might seem a teensy bit arrogant. "Most guys are more than happy to even get attention from me," he says. "So when the pants come off there's a moment of surprise maybe, but they get right down to business."

Neither is there any correlation between "big" and "top." One notoriously well-endowed porn actor used to complain that, because of a few extra inches, The guys he'd meet would automatically assume he was a top, which he most assuredly wasn't: "I got tired of explaining that I wanted to be the one who got plowed."

Plastic surgery aside, most of us have the dicks we were, through no fault of whereever i go there our own, born with. This is a society that, from super-sized fries to monster i see that i am superior truck rallies, sometimes seems greedily obsessed by quantity. But quality is also that i see myself counts, too. Good things, after all, do come in small packages. If anything, It seems odd that otherwise adult men would stake a significant chunk of their egos on the presence or absence of an inch or two of flesh. But it's what we do with the raw material that counts. As the old song says, "It ain't to you and to me the meat, it's the motion..."