I’m not a person

@Galaxzee 554217 wrote:

I’m 5’6″…. so… not really short, for a female.
I wish I was taller though… I’ve kinda always wished I had typical “model” measurements but… alas, not to be. (not saying I’m unhappy with myself, I like me, but I just can’t model because of height/the severe thinness of todays models)

That’s because you’ve been brainwashed by the media and fashion industry. There’s nothing attractive about those anorexic, anemic stick thin models. I feel sorry for anyone who believes that is a healthy or attractive look.

Well I’m glad you don’t strive to be like that but the fact that they are the industry’s standards and those standards are largely accepted rather than challenged states how flawed the system is.

@General Lighting 554250 wrote:

In Holland a girl was rejected for modelling. because her hips were 92cm rather the 90cm expected. But Dutch girls usually are quite tall, so the “ideal supermodel” would look like a stick insect TBH. And most blokes would not bother about the extra 20mm (TBH I would prefer a slightly fuller figure girl, as at least she might like food).

There was a survey done where a group of men were divided two equal size half groups and shown pictures of women of varying sizes and asked to decide which were most attractive. One group of men were fed during the experiment, the other were left hungry. The hungry ones were attracted to the bigger girls :laugh_at:

Ouch, my hips are about 92 cms, maybe a little bit smaller. And I’m 5’6″ ….it’s completely ridiculous that 2 centimeters would make such a big difference -_-

It wasn’t too terribly long ago that being fuller figured WAS considered most attractive… idk… I mean, I think you should just be in shape/healthy…. and past that it shouldn’t make so much of a difference…

That’s hilarious about the experiment, lololol…. xD

@p0lski 549462 wrote:

That might be difficult as some people consider there’s different due to different scales. we must go by TMI

The T.M.I scale was implemented long ago to assure that each and every Human could accurately measure their junk.

Straight-forward measurements of a penis size don’t really matter. What does matter is:
(Length x Diameter) + (Weight/Girth) all divided by the angle of the tip squared.

This formula gives you the adjusted penis size or T.M.I

The national average of an adjusted penis size is currently 1.5 inches.

However, there has been much dispute as to the correct formula for calculating adjusted penis size. Doctor of sexuality and behaviour, Rebecca Turnade believes the formula to be:

(Length x Girth / Angle of shaft) / (Mass / Width).

This formula has since been the 100% proven accurate formula.

Recent studies have shown there to be a direct correlation between anger and T.M.I

Anger = (Length x Width / Mass ^2 – Shaft Angle) + YAW
Randy has a penis that is 4.4 inches in length
Its angle is 32 degrees
Its flaccid girth is 1 inch in diameter
His balls are 7cm from the base
Randy notes that the drift of his penis is 4cm to penis right, and its dead weight is 4.5kg
Randy has an adjusted penis size of 6.3 inches. Randy’s length is 4.4 inches but his T.M.I (adjusted length) is 6.3

OK. Now, let’s say there are identical twins living in a tower block, one on the ground floor, one on the top floor.

Which would have the higher rating, due to mass fluctuations by time flowing slower on the ground flower, wheras centripetal force would make the blood flow faster for the twin living on the top floor?

Also, a cock travelling at half light speed would be off the scale compared to a cock at rest… gee, quantum physics and penis size. What a combination for teaching…