THB: That on balance it is preferable to have a small penis.

RESOLUTION Look, Mikal screwed up. He accepted the debate and he thought I'd argue a small penis is preferable to a large one for sexual reasons. We all screw up and I know he has to stick to his guns and try to define the resolution in a way that suits his argument. He's doing this because he can't win on my turf. The resolution Mikal thinks the debate is about. THB that on balance it is preferable to have a small penis for sexual acts The resolution is actually THB that on balance it is preferable to have a small penis My opponent's false analogies aside, this resolution is simply about whether the overall benefits that come along with having a small penis outweigh the benefits of having a large penis. He can try to narrow it down beyond that to sexually related things, but it's incorrect to do so and outlandish in my opinion. Big penis's and small penis's both come with a whole bunch of other things such as certain hang ups and certain personality traits and tendencies caused by the same hormone imbalances that created the big dick or small dick to start with. FALLACIES The funny thing about this debate is the number of times my opponent has questioned the logic behind my conclusions while making a number of logical fallacies. The main logical fallacy that I want to draw attention to is called "The False Analogy" logical fallacy http://www.fallacyfiles.org... His analogies don't come anywhere near what I'm discussing and actually are intended to misrepresent my argument. My opponent also attempts to fit my arguments into a Barbara Syllogism. I guess in some attempt to imply that Barbara Syllogisms are the only valid forms of logic. I'm about to show you another logical form that isn't a Barbara syllogism, yet is still valid and in my opinion sound. P1- Excess testosterone has the effects of causing larger penis's. P2- people having excess testosterone are more inclined to violence. c1- People with larger penises are more inclined towards violence. P3- People more inclined towards violence are more likely to end up in prison. P4- Being free is preferable to being in prison. C2- It is preferable to have a small penis. This form of logic is similar to a Barbara syllogism, but different. The conclusions follow from the premises and the premises haven't been challenged very well. The validity of the logic has been challenged, but it's a valid argument so it stands. Mikal did challenge the soundness of the argument on a few accounts, but I believe the challenges are too weak to harm the argument. WOMEN I'm going too deep into addressing all Mikal's arguments. This is more of a fun debate and we've both been keeping our rounds short, so that we can keep it fun and easy to read. You guys know my responses. I've pulled up studies to back what I've been saying and none of them contradict really what he's been saying. He just interprets the significance of these findings differently. All things being equal a large penis is more pleasurable to a woman. This isn't all things being equal though. Guys with small penises have more insecurities and I argue that even though their penis doesn't give as much pleasure as a larger one, that their insecurities and short (pun intended) comings (this time pun not intended) force them to be better lovers. I think when you look at my studies showing women married to men with short penises are happier and more committed than women married to guys with large penises. I'm sure that women love the novelty of a huge penis, but when you've been in a monogamous relationship with the guy, the novelty wears off and your left with a guy who's used to women so impressed with his dik size that all he needs to do is hump, and unfortunately that's all he knows how to do. Guys with smaller penises make better lovers. FINAL REMARKS I appreciate Mikal debating me on this topic. I had fun. I hope he did as well. After the debate is long in the past I'll probably ask him if he believed his own BS about the interpretation of the resolution. I usually don't talk to people for about a week after The voting period is done. I typically just don't like being anything more than civil towards my opponent for a while. It's my competitive nature. I hope the voters and non voting readers enjoyed the debate and I look forward to seeing everyone's thoughts. Thanks Mikal for doing this debate and thanks for taking my round 1 comments in good humor. You're one of the few people around here who doesn't get butt hurt by things like that.