As a lot of you may know many users such as @LastGerman @Spooky_Heejin and myself never shut the fuck up about the dickpill, and rightfully so as it is probably the most brutal along with height. But why does this problem even exist, why are human penises so small?
Well the easy cop-out answer is that evolution is not a perfect process, and that there is naturally a variance in phenotypes such that at least a subset of a species can survive in the event of a significant change to the environment. This explains many things such as short height, which people have as it is useful if there is a sudden decrease in food availability, narrow clavicles allow for better center of gravity and spear throwing, prey eyes give better FOV, and lower iq because high iq is generally bad for socialisation which is critical for survival in pre-agricultural times. But what is the advantage of a smaller penis? It would take marginal extra resources to grow a bigger penis, unlike greater height, and it has no practical aspects outside of direct reproduction unlike eyes or clavicles, so why?
Well I have a few hypotheses, and of course they all boil down to foids being whores. Surprise, surprise.
First it needs to be outlined why bigger penises are an evolutionary beneficial trait in the modern day....... foid's pleasure. Literally just that. Which leads into the first reason that for most of human history, pleasure just didn't matter, while the majority of foids had sex most people that did would only do it a few times in their lives so relative increases in pleasure would be insignificant as opposed to the modern day where Chad and Stacy fuck like disgusting rabbits all day. This reason further explains why penises were small in the first place as we evolved from monkeys who have generally quite small penises and obviously sexual pleasure has no significance in other animals.
This evolution from monkeys leads into a second reason; high dimorphism, the following applies to the monkeys we evolved from and humans: high dimorphism is the trait of large differences both psychologically, but primarily physiologically between the males and females of a species. Most species of primapes are quite dimorophic, with males often much larger than females. Now allow me to get to my point, there is an extremely strong positive correlation between dimorphism and polygeny, polygeny being the practice of one male having a harem of many females (polygeny is synonomous with hypergamy.)
However, highly dimorphic species have males with very small penises, which is a non-dimorphic trait. This may seem like a paradox but it makes sense: High dimorphism -> harems -> females mating with one dominant male, mating with one male means a lack of sperm competition. One of the primary reasons males evolve big penises in the animal kingdom is high sperm competition, longer penises allow for delivery of sperm closer to the ovaries of the female, and thickness pulls sperm of competing males backwards, out of the female. This explains why gorillas despite being extremely dimorphic have tiny 1-inch penises; they don't need large ones because female gorillas are so hypergamous that there is no sperm competition. The problem with humans is that our females are so degenerate they hare both hypergamous and polyamorous, they fuck all the different Chads they can find, human men originally have smaller penises from foid hypergamy, but now it is a problem because foids are now hypergamous and whores, they are the worst possible thing imaginable.
My third point goes back to the exposition of this post, when I stated that larger penis size has no practical aspects outside of the actual vile act of reproduction. For basically the entire history of life on Earth, natural selection reigned supreme of sexual selection, females just mated with whichever males actually managed to survive, and penis size had no impact on survivability, thus having very little impact on evolutionary outcomes. Of course there are examples sexual selection dominating in the wild such as in peacocks, where rampant peacock foid runaway sexual selection led to peacocks loosing the ability to fly in favour of more frivolous plumage.
Now this isn't the only example of dysgenic sexual selection, effectively all examples of runaway sexual selection in the wild leads to unfavourable evolutionary outcomes, it is even theorised that this is how the dodo bird went extinct. However, there is no known instance of sexual selection being so disgustingly, horrifically dysgenic, that it combats the actual ability for a species to carry out the act of sex. Except, of course, in human foids. I understand most of my points until now have been pretty mundane and 'muh evolution' and blah, blah, blah. However, what follows is the primary reason I attribute to the brutality of the dickpill.
Simply put, a larger penis make it harder to reproduce, it is well observed that foid's main obsession is with penis girth, as this supposedly provides high pressure and stretch on the vaginal nerves, but it is also well-known that it often takes foids an hour+ to be aroused enough to have sex with these penises. In the wild as I previously discussed, pleasure is not that important, and if it takes well over an hour to actually have sex you are likely in real trouble (predators etc.) Especially with the loud and annoying moaning that foids do with large penises that would alert predators. Basically, foids desire for large penises is directly contradictory to their actual ability to have sex, foids whoredom creates a catch-22 that makes them impossible to please. This goes even further as some may argue that their desire for the feeling for a large penis is still somehow outweighed by their desire of the mere thought of it. I am sure you are all aware of foid's vile booktok fantasies where they imagined being assaulted and raped by werewolves and whatnot with 15 inch dicks, which would obviously be impossible to actually have sex with (although there are plenty of foids that are such whores they have trained themselves to take dildos of this size, it still takes them a long time to build up to this in one go, similarly to what I previously discussed.)
Now even if you got some normie to admit to this problem, they would say how men have hypersexualized porn as well of female bodies. While obviously it is true, excessively large breasts or hips or even height in men as another example foids are notorious for, or whatever, none of this actually stops the act of sex. But this foid obsession is purely contradictory and makes no sense, they are such big whores that they have created an evolutionarily paradox. Thus truecels and fakecels, I have presented to you with my 2000th post (and one), my magnum opus: tldr foids are such sluts they are attempting to cancel out the human race.
Well the easy cop-out answer is that evolution is not a perfect process, and that there is naturally a variance in phenotypes such that at least a subset of a species can survive in the event of a significant change to the environment. This explains many things such as short height, which people have as it is useful if there is a sudden decrease in food availability, narrow clavicles allow for better center of gravity and spear throwing, prey eyes give better FOV, and lower iq because high iq is generally bad for socialisation which is critical for survival in pre-agricultural times. But what is the advantage of a smaller penis? It would take marginal extra resources to grow a bigger penis, unlike greater height, and it has no practical aspects outside of direct reproduction unlike eyes or clavicles, so why?
Well I have a few hypotheses, and of course they all boil down to foids being whores. Surprise, surprise.
First it needs to be outlined why bigger penises are an evolutionary beneficial trait in the modern day....... foid's pleasure. Literally just that. Which leads into the first reason that for most of human history, pleasure just didn't matter, while the majority of foids had sex most people that did would only do it a few times in their lives so relative increases in pleasure would be insignificant as opposed to the modern day where Chad and Stacy fuck like disgusting rabbits all day. This reason further explains why penises were small in the first place as we evolved from monkeys who have generally quite small penises and obviously sexual pleasure has no significance in other animals.
This evolution from monkeys leads into a second reason; high dimorphism, the following applies to the monkeys we evolved from and humans: high dimorphism is the trait of large differences both psychologically, but primarily physiologically between the males and females of a species. Most species of primapes are quite dimorophic, with males often much larger than females. Now allow me to get to my point, there is an extremely strong positive correlation between dimorphism and polygeny, polygeny being the practice of one male having a harem of many females (polygeny is synonomous with hypergamy.)
However, highly dimorphic species have males with very small penises, which is a non-dimorphic trait. This may seem like a paradox but it makes sense: High dimorphism -> harems -> females mating with one dominant male, mating with one male means a lack of sperm competition. One of the primary reasons males evolve big penises in the animal kingdom is high sperm competition, longer penises allow for delivery of sperm closer to the ovaries of the female, and thickness pulls sperm of competing males backwards, out of the female. This explains why gorillas despite being extremely dimorphic have tiny 1-inch penises; they don't need large ones because female gorillas are so hypergamous that there is no sperm competition. The problem with humans is that our females are so degenerate they hare both hypergamous and polyamorous, they fuck all the different Chads they can find, human men originally have smaller penises from foid hypergamy, but now it is a problem because foids are now hypergamous and whores, they are the worst possible thing imaginable.
My third point goes back to the exposition of this post, when I stated that larger penis size has no practical aspects outside of the actual vile act of reproduction. For basically the entire history of life on Earth, natural selection reigned supreme of sexual selection, females just mated with whichever males actually managed to survive, and penis size had no impact on survivability, thus having very little impact on evolutionary outcomes. Of course there are examples sexual selection dominating in the wild such as in peacocks, where rampant peacock foid runaway sexual selection led to peacocks loosing the ability to fly in favour of more frivolous plumage.
Now this isn't the only example of dysgenic sexual selection, effectively all examples of runaway sexual selection in the wild leads to unfavourable evolutionary outcomes, it is even theorised that this is how the dodo bird went extinct. However, there is no known instance of sexual selection being so disgustingly, horrifically dysgenic, that it combats the actual ability for a species to carry out the act of sex. Except, of course, in human foids. I understand most of my points until now have been pretty mundane and 'muh evolution' and blah, blah, blah. However, what follows is the primary reason I attribute to the brutality of the dickpill.
Simply put, a larger penis make it harder to reproduce, it is well observed that foid's main obsession is with penis girth, as this supposedly provides high pressure and stretch on the vaginal nerves, but it is also well-known that it often takes foids an hour+ to be aroused enough to have sex with these penises. In the wild as I previously discussed, pleasure is not that important, and if it takes well over an hour to actually have sex you are likely in real trouble (predators etc.) Especially with the loud and annoying moaning that foids do with large penises that would alert predators. Basically, foids desire for large penises is directly contradictory to their actual ability to have sex, foids whoredom creates a catch-22 that makes them impossible to please. This goes even further as some may argue that their desire for the feeling for a large penis is still somehow outweighed by their desire of the mere thought of it. I am sure you are all aware of foid's vile booktok fantasies where they imagined being assaulted and raped by werewolves and whatnot with 15 inch dicks, which would obviously be impossible to actually have sex with (although there are plenty of foids that are such whores they have trained themselves to take dildos of this size, it still takes them a long time to build up to this in one go, similarly to what I previously discussed.)
Now even if you got some normie to admit to this problem, they would say how men have hypersexualized porn as well of female bodies. While obviously it is true, excessively large breasts or hips or even height in men as another example foids are notorious for, or whatever, none of this actually stops the act of sex. But this foid obsession is purely contradictory and makes no sense, they are such big whores that they have created an evolutionarily paradox. Thus truecels and fakecels, I have presented to you with my 2000th post (and one), my magnum opus: tldr foids are such sluts they are attempting to cancel out the human race.
Last edited:
