HF02-02 DEPICTIONS OF PENISES IN HISTORICAL PAINTINGS REFLECT CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF THE IDEAL PENIS SIZE

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023HF02-02 DEPICTIONS OF PENISES IN HISTORICAL PAINTINGS REFLECT CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF THE IDEAL PENIS SIZE Murat Gül, Emre Altintaş, Mehmet Serkan Özkent, Annette Fenner, and Ege Serefoglu Murat GülMurat Gül More articles by this author , Emre AltintaşEmre Altintaş More articles by this author , Mehmet Serkan ÖzkentMehmet Serkan Özkent More articles by this author , Annette FennerAnnette Fenner More articles by this author , and Ege SerefogluEge Serefoglu More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003242.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Phallocentric thought has its roots in ancient times. In these civilizations, a large penis was the source of satisfaction and pride, whereas a small or short penis represented inferiority. Thus, the penis has come to symbolize many characteristics, such as fertility, virility, stamina, strength, authority, social power, and mental power in cultures throughout the ages. It seems logical that the alterations in the perception of ideal penis size would be reflected in paintings in which the penis is depicted. In this study, we aimed to investigate alterations in depicted penis size by evaluating nude male paintings from the 15th to 21st centuries. METHODS: Nude-male paintings were identified from various art-history websites and analyzed to determine changes in penis size over time. Two observers organized the paintings according to the century in which they were created and made the calculations. Penile length to ear length (PtEL) or penile length to nose length (PtNL) were calculated to standardize the measurements using a professional image analysis software. PtEL was first attempted for all paintings; if PtEL could not be ascertained, then nose length was used instead of ear, as the nose length is defined as equal to ear length according to the Golden Ratio. Thus, PtNL was ensured and both ratios were then referred to using a common term: penis depiction ratio (PDR). Further analysis was performed by dividing the paintings into three groups according to the historical development of art: Renaissance Period (1400–1599; 15th–16th centuries), Baroque–Rococo and Impressionism Period (1600–1899; 17th–19th centuries) and Contemporary Art Period (1900–2020; 20th and 21st centuries). RESULTS: Of 232 identified paintings, 72 (31.1%) were excluded because they depicted images of adolescents or an erect penis. PDR was found to differ significantly between paintings created in different centuries (ANOVA; p<0.001) (Table 1). Subgroup analysis revealed that paintings from the 21st century demonstrated significantly higher PDR than paintings from previous centuries (p=0.001) (Table 2). CONCLUSIONS: In paintings depicting nude males, the size of the penis has gradually increased throughout the past 6 centuries, and especially after the 20th century. This observation illustrates the changing sociocultural inputs into male body image and emphasizes the need for improved understanding of the socio-cultural factors associated with the perception of penis size in men. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e250 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Murat Gül More articles by this author Emre Altintaş More articles by this author Mehmet Serkan Özkent More articles by this author Annette Fenner More articles by this author Ege Serefoglu More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...