Size designation:
This is a fundamental question. How to identify without gendering, without stigmatising according to a virilist idea based on the size of the genitals? Any kind of categorisation is indeed restrictive, and yes, there will be different sizes with different diameters. The same goes for condoms, and it doesn’t usually hinder its use, but can in some instances limit it for stigmatisation reasons. Social representations are very concrete and restrictive.
If anyone orders an inadequate size, they may get back to me, we’ll exchange it and offer a telephone consultation in some cases to improve the practice.
The moulds we currently use cannot be modified. I invite those who wish to sustain the evolution of size categorisation to e-mail me with suggestions. In the meantime, here is a categorisation based on illustrations.
I hope we will be able to lift this obstacle in the near future and please know, dear gentlemen, that it is your XL-size presence, affection and empathy that will determine the quality of your relationship, and not the size of your organ.
I invite you to browse through the Thomas Bouloù brochure on gender reflexion (in French), as well as the following article: “Am I normal? A systematic review and construction of nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to 15,521 men.” David Veale, Sarah Miles, Sally Bramley, Gordon Muir, and John Hodsoll. BJU International; Published Online: March 3, 2015 (DOI: 10.1111/bju.13010).
