Because, let’s face it …
Posted by CM under Romancery on Thu 11 Jan 2007
o Jacqueline wants to know why we’re obsessed with talking about large members.
I have a confession to make. Whatever you want to call it–penmanship or the motion of the ocean–matters most.
But size does matter. And I don’t just mean on the extremes–too small and too large are both uncomfortable. But there’s a difference between average and large. And, if both men are equally good lovers (and, if he cares enough and you’re willing to tell him what you like, and he’s sufficiently creative to surprise you, there’s no reason he can’t be), large is better than average.
It just is.
That being said, penmanship is far more important. And penmanship–well, let’s put it this way. If you have fingers and a tongue, you can exert yourself enough to do fine.









January 11th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
I don’t think I’ve dated enough to be able to make any comparisons regarding size! However, I’ll agree that a man’s “penmenship” IS my most important criteria.
January 12th, 2007 at 11:05 am
LOL, Courtney!
I think I could tentatively agree that larger is better up to a point, all other factors being equal. But other factors are rarely equal. And I’ll confess to a significant enough appreciation for fingers and tongues (especially tongues) that skilled application of them beats out almost any other criteria.
Was that TMI?
January 12th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
It’s a good thing my grandmother is dead, or she’d kill ME. Have you all noticed so many romance heroes bring their heroines to completion manually or lingually (is that a word?) lately, particularly early in the book? I’ve noticed a big shift from going all the way to foreplay. If only guys read romance novels…
January 12th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
They don’t need to read romance novels. All you need to say is, “keep doing that.” (Or “do that” in the first place.)
January 13th, 2007 at 12:17 am
I want both, penmanship and size. Endurance is nice too.
Alice