Talk:Dildo

Point taken, but...

If a man has a penis but does not insert it anywhere, it is still a penis. If a woman wears an artificial penis to disguise herself as a man, as did several European women during the eighteenth-century in order to become soldiers, but does not insert it anywhere, is it a dildo? And is it a dildo in the same way as when a woman nowadays straps on a dildo to have sex with another woman or man? Do we need to distinguish between phallus, prosthesis, dildo, artifical penis, etc?

See the sex toy article for more on this... -- Karada 17:47, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Feminists

I think we can expunge any specific reference to "feminists" being offended by representations of the phallus. It's enough to say that when fashioning a dildo, slavishly reproducing the minutiae of the male genitalia is often either unnecessary, undesirable or irrelevant. User:Scarlett McQueen 01:22, 13 March 2006

Unsubstanciated claim

There seems to be an unsubstanciated claim in the heading of the article that dildos are usually the size of an average penis, there does not seem to be linked any sources that this is true and proveable 2A01:799:18D2:E400:D0C4:7D0F:FF97:6B2D (talk) 11:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:NOTCITE -- wikimpan (Talk) 11:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I dont think its true that its common sense that dildos are typically the size of an average penis, and the study mentioning size under “Shape” seems to contradict a preference for average sized dildos. Qwe57 (talk) 11:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

The study deals with the preferred penis size, not dildos in circulation. The 3D models weren’t even used as dildos: they served as a size reference object. Given this research is not a survey of dildo size or shape, I’ll later review the source again and remove if needed. This belongs to human penis size, where it is correctly used.

WP:NOTCITE indicates that “[g]eneral common knowledge” requires no citation. In other words: obvious requires no citation. What we perceive as “obvious” may of course be invalid, but then the source should prove the contrary, not the obvious. I also realize this is not universal knowledge, given diverse geographic and cultural user base of Wikipedia, but “general” in my eyes never implied “universal.”

The scale also has to be taken into account. Being picky about a single centimeter is not of value, when the range of sizes reaches two feet and above.

Summing up, I don’t think there is any issue here. Unless one can provide a reliable survey, covering the subject well enough (e.g. 21st century European market is hardly right for the intro section). At which point it’s a matter not of lacking sources, but simply being inaccurate and requiring correction. -- wikimpan (Talk) 12:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I dont necessarily feel that the statement that most dildos are the size of an average penis is neither a universal common knowledge, obvious knowlede or general common knowledge.

As for the scale issue I think you are correct, but I dont think that the statement necessarily adds much value, nor does it seem to be correct.

I have found two sources that look at average dildo size. The first seems to support the claim, but I think it is not necessarily representative, as it looks at the size of the products offered, without examining which products are being purchased. I suppose the heading does not make a distinction of whether its referencing the average size of dildos being produced, being offered or being bought, which may all differ vastly. Nor does it specify whether its about the insertable length or overall length

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1743609515309577

The second source has looked at the best selling dildos of two major vendors.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29110808/

From my perspective this seems to be the most relevant source as its looking at purchasing habits of all genders and for all uses. According to this study the best selling dildos do have average circumfrence, but not insertable length. I personally feel that 1.7 cm above the upper estimate is a consideable difference.

I have found some more sources that look spesifically at size preference for vaginal sex toys, but Im not sure these are relevant, as I dont know how often dildos are bought for this use versus other possible uses.

This study found a preference for average circumference with no strong preference for length, and is specific to purchases from the UK and seems to specifically look at dildos marketed for vaginal use. The study also does not specifically look at the number of product purchased but other factors

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2023.2175193#d1e1183

I feel it is also worth considering whether the issue is a lack of citation, and whether or not it is true and of an important scale, or whether the issue is that an estimation of average dildo size is something that may not belong in the heading of the article and what value is being added by its presence Qwe57 (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

We may remove the exact sizes (10–15 cm length, 10–13 cm circumference), because values that specific should be accompanied by a good source. The length of a dildo is also ill-defined. Saying the toy is usually shaped and sized like a normal human penis, is sufficient to indicate the order of magnitude we’re talking about. It also feels accurate enough regarding a typical dildo.

Specific descriptions of shape and size may be included in the “Shape” section. After the topic may be properly sourced. That means: across geography, cultures, centuries, and preferences. This doesn’t mean a single survey or meta-analysis must deliver that data and I believe it’s going to always be somewhat vague, but it should by no way focus on any particular subgroup.

So for now I propose changing this:

Dildos can be made from a number of materials and shaped similarly to an erect human penis. They are typically about the average length of an erect penis, 4–6 inches (10–15 cm), but some may be longer. A dildo's circumference is typically 4–5 inches (10–13 cm).

… into:

Dildos are made from a number of materials. The shape and size are typically that of a human penis, but there is a wide variation to accommodate the needs of different users.

I believe this description falls into WP:NOTCITE. -- wikimpan (Talk) 12:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

This sounds like a good solution that maintains the ability to picture the rough size mentally without making any claims that are near impossible to substantiate Qwe57 (talk) 20:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)