The problem with all these so-called 'mythbusters' is that they ignore the Bell curve distribution inherent in all such things and point to a small, localized sample that would seem to disprove the general Bell curve. Are there lots of big whites, yes. Lots of small Blacks, yes. But where are they are on the curve, the distribution of penis size across the whole race?
The curve for whites peaks around 5" (and dropping due to plummeting testosterone) while the curve for Blacks peaks over 7".
The percentages of whites under their racial average is about the same as the percentage of Blacks exceeding their average.
In rough figures 70% fit the average range, 20% of whites don't meet their average and 10% exceed it whereas only 10% of Blacks under achieve their racial average while 20% of Blacks exceed it, and they exceed it by more than whites exceed theirs. Statistically, whites don't even chart in the top end of the Black curve. In order to even achieve a racial average 2+" bigger than whites, there have to be a lot of really big Black dicks and relatively few small ones. But of course, in raw numbers you could still round up a huge boatload of small-dicked Blacks, you'd just have to cast a very wide net to do it. The same boat would be overflowing with <5" whites without much effort.
Speaking as one with a pretty vast and random experience with Black men, in the low 4 figures, no one can snow me with a small sampling of personal observations purporting to override the population as a whole. Based on my large sampling, I think the stats would show even greater differences if they were resampled with better racial profiling and objective measuring (no self reporting). But my sampling is enough to be statistically significant and was not skewed by advertising for BBC only. In fact, I never advertised for big dick. All that was needed was to advertise to Black Men and size took care of itself 95% of the time. This held rock solid even in unsolicited, random encounters. And this is just length - the girth figures for Black Cock, most directly linked to attraction and pleasure, leave most whites crippled in total volume and unable to compete on the Black playing field.
On the other hand, when advertising to whites, floods of 2"-4"small fry spontaneously appeared. In fact, if I had a cynical 'mythbuster' perspective, I'd be tempted to wonder how whites even averaged 5-5.5". Of course I realize that my white sampling is skewed small by the fact that many whites answered because they were unmarketable and needed the alternate outlet. (Interesting tidbit: once I opened up to them about my former gf, more than a few confessed theirs had gone Black too. The healthy minded were resigned to it but some were clearly struggling. )
Another hard medical stat: Black Men have much higher testosterone levels than whites, all the way from the womb until about 35-40. Testosterone levels in formative years are huge factors, dwarfing everything else. T is very powerful and only a little boost makes a big difference. Blacks are born with bigger dicks out of the gate and even a small advantage at birth multiplies into a very large one through puberty. If your DNA multiplies your ******* length by 3X, starting out with 2" vs 3" makes a whopping difference, But that puberty growth factor for Blacks is a lot higher than whites, thanks to their testosterone levels. For the same reason Black boys also start puberty earlier. It also explains their omnivorous, amped-up sexual drives, superior sexual capacity and unrivaled physical development in all areas. Blacks also have thicker, denser soft tissue growth, as in lips, butt padding and of course the ultimate soft tissue we're so obsessed with. Thicker and longer, driven by high T and time-tested, dominant genetics. Black DNA is the human equivalent of an heirloom plant that has thrived and survived for many thousands of years versus a modern hybrid that can do well in specific, controlled conditions but has inherent weaknesses that limit its robust survival over time.
???
