Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

I am not saying it isn't possible somewhere somehow... I am saying it is not reflective of normal reality. I was in the military for more than 15 years and we had to do height, weight, and body fat measurements every 6 months when doing our physical fitness evaluations. I have been around thousands of guys being measured. Never once in that time did I see a single individual that would come close to being described as muscular and ripped at that height and weight. If I see a height of 6' or greater and a weight of 190 lbs, my mind visualizes a thin guy with a wiry physique or a normal looking guy (ie no defined muscles). Over 6'2" and 190 lbs and I am visualizing the guy heading towards gaunt. If I see 6'4" and 190lbs, I am visualizing skeletal.

A single inch in height can mean 10-20 lbs difference in weight for the same physique in adult males.

I didn't start looking healthy (ie lost the almost anorexic look) until after I left the military and added 25 lbs. I had previously had defined muscles and let them go by reducing my exercise and workload. However my defined muscles did not make me look "muscular and ripped" because I didn't have much muscle mass. I would be better described as "wiry" or "whipcord lean"...with a heavy emphasis on lean. And this MC in my post was supposed to be 2 inched taller?!

*SMH* I don't know... Like I said, beside my personal physique, I have witnessed thousands of fit males doing height, weight, and body fat measurements over my time in the military. I just can't match what you say or the MC's description with what I have experienced.

Maybe I am wrong on this specific point... but this specific point was the example of the overall problem I was trying to demonstrate. That reading a description in a story that shatters "realism" as far as the reader is concerned can be jarring to the reader. In those cases IMO it would be better to be a bit more vague ie instead of giving exact height/weight numbers, just give the height and the physique description. It was the combination of the height, weight, and physique that threw me for a loop... if it was just height and physique, I would have had no problems whatsoever.
I have had the "realism" jarring effect with other stories and with descriptions of other people/items,... that one was just the easiest one for me to write about because it is in the current story I am reading.

Take a look at Terquavion Smith, an NBA player who's 6'4" and about 160. Does he look anorexic?

TBH, I had never heard of him before... and I have trouble believing he is only 160 lbs with that physique and height.

That is 3" taller and 30 lbs lighter than I was... which should make him look skeletal. But he looks more muscular and solid than I did. And yes I was eating healthy (except for my sodas) and exercising daily. I could lift twice my weight, yet I would look like a toothpick next to that guy.

What you don't consider:
- he has had professional training specific to the needs of his sport,
- he has had professional nutrition guidance specific to his sport,
- training is different for different sports resulting in different body types,
- different genetic inheritance results in different body types even with training and nutrition.
There are actually NFL amd NBA players at your height and weight. They aren't skinny. Your height and weight is in the range of light heavyweight boxers and MMA fighters who aren't skinny.
This description is more realistic than the bust size descriptions of most women in stories or the seemingly minimum 8 onch penises.

minimum 8 onch penises

I know it's a typo, but I like to think you have coined a new word, here: "onch" The expression of pain evidenced by a woman seeing an 8" penis for the first time.

We really need a thumbs up 👍 button here

Yes, but he is/was 30 lbs less than the op

Maybe the problem is that we have different idea if the term "ripped." It seems to me that you are using it to mean bulked up like a body builder.To me it means toned, defined and visible muscle groups with low body fat.

Then our definitions are different.
With a couple of exceptions with larger guys, I would consider these guys muscular and "ripped."
https://www.muscleprodigy.com/top-50-most-jacked-nba-players/4/
They are not bulked up like gym rats who care only about size not strength. For that matter, to play in the NBA you needed to be very strong, both upper and lower body - probably more than any other sport.

Actually most of those are, IMO. But then you chose the most ripped, not necessarily the best players. (Not that I'd have a clue who the best players are.)

Obviously Terquavion Smith isn't in that list.

I will also note that the two lightest guys on that list of ripped NBA players are 180, not 160, pounds. Most of them are over 200.

No. Actually that list is from a few years ago before he was in the league, but he wouldn't make it anyway.
The point of posting that is that multiple players on the list have height and weight that is about the same as the OP and are very toned and have visible, defined muscles.

IMO it would be better to be a bit more vague ie instead of giving exact height/weight numbers, just give the height and the physique description.

A pet peeve of mine as well. Excess detail implies that somewhere in the story these precise details will be important (I think this is referred to as Chekhov's gun). And it's complicated by conversion issues: I have to convert weights in pounds to kilos - or stones and pounds - to get an appreciation of them. And is 6 foot tall for the society in question, or is it head and shoulders above others? Descriptive terms rather than measurements are more easily absorbed and don't break the narrative flow.

exactly! Thank You for summarizing for me... I am a rambler apparently... Concise summaries are usually beyond my skills.
lol

And is 6 foot tall for the society in question, or is it head and shoulders above others?

Or where I live, it's the average height for girls.

, that the male (human) penis is not a circulatory system. It's a valve controlled one directional short ended pipe.

What this means in layperson's terms, is that unli

I assume that's a joke (on various sites it's either 5'7" to 5'9") but really all "average height" stats are essentially anecdotal rather than based on actual data.

Yeah, it's not quite technically correct statement. The genesis of my "error", it's three part:
1) the not-quite-defendable claim of Latvia as the country of tallest women in the world;
2) personal observation that could be biased by at least two factors (selection and perception);
3) crude rounding error in assuming 6 feet = 180cm while it's almost 183cm and that's a huge difference, especially when talking about averages.

In addition, Russians and most other immigrant or non-native people tend to be shorter. I was also going to claim there's been a perceivable increase of height -- and especially for girls --, in the past thirty years since the independence, but it seems the dataset doing the rounds is a 2019 survey of 19 year old, so that should
be covered.

And then, add the heels to that 5'8" girl and our average 6' guy won't feel tall at all, even if still not looking up in most cases.

That should have been "accurate," not "actual."
There is a lot of unreliable data.
Even is the height of everyone is regularly measured.
As to the NHS, its height and weight data is based on self-reported information which it adjusts to, possibly, make more accurate.
https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2021/part-4-trends#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20mean%20heights,cm%20and%20162.4cm%2C%20respectively.

They were self-reported in 2021. From 1993 to 2019 they were interviewer measured by the nurse.
None of the reported heights/weights are based on actual data from NHS physician visits. They were based on a survey of about 5000 households, not all of which participated.
What you describe is not an accurate measurement method.

There is a standard NHS prescribed method to measuring height, although I can't figure out how anyone can administer it unless they are the same height or taller than the one being measured.

in which the lead female is described as 5' tall with very long legs. I'm having a hard time trying to imagine what that might look like.

I'm 5'5" and my legs are disproportionately short.
I had to be fitted with an immobilizer (to immobilize the knee joint) once (I was in my 40s at the time.). They had to set me up with a teen immobilizer and even then, the thigh portion of the immobilizer was too long, putting the opening for the knee an inch or two below my knee.

If I stand next to my brother, he is slightly taller. If we sit next to each other, I am slightly taller. If my legs were proportional to my torso, I would probably be close to 5'7" or 5'8"

I would read "described as 5' tall with very long legs"
as describing a short woman with disproportionately long legs. I don't see that as unrealistic, unusual, but not unrealistic.

Visualize a woman who is 4'10" or 4'8" from the pelvis up.

Then visualize a woman who is 5'2 to 5'4" from the pelvis down.

Now put the first woman's torso on the second woman's legs.

A horny, studly teen male is confronted by a gorgeous, willing teen female. And he asks her to suck his cock to get him hard. WTF!

Obviously, I don't know which particular story You are referring to. However, many well written and realistic stories here, a virile young man may be intimidated by a beautiful woman. While many teen boys may have their dicks get hard "when the wind blows" they can easily lose that erection if their confidence is shaken.

Even if a guy is acting "cocky" it is possible that he doesn't feel as confident as he is trying to appear. I don't know how good the author of the particular story is, or IF they intent to portray a lack of confidence, or whatever. However, I could find it very realistic that a teenager, no matter how horny, or "studly" might have a flaccid cock in the presence of a "Gorgeous" female!

Yeah... I agree. But I still can't shake the feeling that most of these stories are written by people who are either WAY older than the MCs they write, and can't even remember anymore how easily they got hard as teens, or by people who use porn as reference material.

I just can't help it. Every time I read a plot like that, I completely lose the plot and feel like I'm reading the fantasy of someone who has little to no experience to call upon.

I think you'll find that it is. Otherwise the flesh would die and the penis would drop off, just like a puppy dog's tail that's been tied off.

Some castrations in large domestic animals are done that way. A strong rubber band is put around the base of the scrotum until the scrotum an testicles die from lack of blood flow and fall off.

From what I've read, excessively long lasting erections are potentially dangerous for that reason. Yes, it's engorged with blood, but that blood isn't circulating and eventually it runs out of oxygen and nutrients carried by the blood.

This is why ED drugs all come with the warning: "Seek immediate medical help if you experience an erection lasting more than 4 hours."

What happens is that the arteries in the penis swell and start to constrict the veins and filling the corpora cavernosa. That further constricts the veins.
All that almost cuts off blood circulation in the penis. Keep it up for too long a time and necrosis can start.

Let's not forget Pixy Saint 9 .... or Pixy STIX for short...lol

Pen names? I thought they were personalities. There's rational Pixy that posts on the forum and lovecraft Pixy that writes stories.