So I took the Kama Sutra's table of the ideal sexual unions, and I did some refinement of them for exploration and fun. The Kama Sutra believes there is a lock for every key, but it is better to be too large than too mall. I will explain the weighting math at the bottom:

Man's Size	Woman's Size	Union Type	Rank (1-5)	Weighted Male Advantage
Small	Small	Equal	5	+1.16
Small	Average	Low	3	-1.52
Small	Large	Lowest	1	-2.00
Average	Small	High	4	+0.16
Average	Average	Equal	5	+0.48
Average	Large	Low	3	0.00
Large	Small	Highest	2	-1.84
Large	Average	High	4	-0.52
Large	Large	Equal	5	+2.00

Category	% of Men/Women	Weighted^(2) Male advantage
Average	68%	+0.35
Large	16%	-0.33
Small	16%	-1.17

Now I will return the same analysis, but with an expanded table of 5 levels of men/women, 9 ranks, -1 penalty for a high union, -2 penalty for a low union. Which roughly aligns with the Kama Sutra

Man's Size	Woman's Size	Rank (1-9)	Weighted Male Advantage
Smallest	Smallest	9	+2.00
Smallest	Small	7	-0.94
Smallest	Average	5	-3.46
Smallest	Large	3	-3.94
Smallest	Largest	1	-4.00
Small	Smallest	8	+1.00
Small	Small	9	+1.06
Small	Average	7	-1.46
Small	Large	5	-1.94
Small	Largest	3	-2.00
Average	Smallest	7	0.00
Average	Small	8	+0.06
Average	Average	9	+0.54
Average	Large	7	+0.06
Average	Largest	5	0.00
Large	Smallest	6	-1.00
Large	Small	7	-0.94
Large	Average	8	-0.46
Large	Large	9	+2.06
Large	Largest	7	+2.00
Largest	Smallest	5	-2.00
Largest	Small	6	-1.94
Largest	Average	7	-1.46
Largest	Large	8	+1.06
Largest	Largest	9	+4.00

Category	% of Men	Weighted^(2) Male advantage
Average	68%	+0.38
Large	14%	-0.14
Largest	2%	-1.08
Small	14%	-1.14
Smallest	2%	-3.08

Basically, what I take away from analyzing this theory, and extending it a little, is we see something pretty reflective of current popular opinion.

Average to large is the "goldicock", the largest men are "too big", small men are "too small", and the smallest -2.5sd men have their penis size treated as a literal medical issue called micropenis but the largest +2.5sd men do not have an equivalent medical designation.

Yet, this theory is also fairly egalitarian, because it presumes there is really somebody out there for somebody.

Yet, at the same time, it can explain things like cuckoling and big dick porn being things. Regardless of what a woman's preferences are, she will tend to prefer too large to too small. A woman who prefers the largest dicks is more dissatisfied by smaller dicks, than the woman who prefers the smallest dicks is dissatisfied by larger dicks.

It can even surprisingly explain why average preferences skew large, let's say a woman has limited sexual experience and REALLY prefers an average man but has only had sex with a small man and a large man. Well, since the large man was closer to her preferences than the small man, but she knew he was too big, she might assume what she really wants is an above-average man when in reality an average man would be perfect.

It can also alternatively explain why women put an importance on girth, and seem to complain more about girth being too small than too large, but say their average preference for girth is average girth.

I think this whole idea is under-discussed, what if it isn't penis size preference that skews large, but instead this is partially or wholly an illusion caused by the effect of women preferring too large to too small? Take this all with a grain of salt, as this is not in any way empirically based, but it is surprising how well it aligns with empirical data and anecdotal evidence.

P.S. The Math: How "Weighted Advantage" is Calculated

The model treats the dating pool as a probability distribution (16% Small, 68% Average, 16% Large). Here is the plain-text breakdown of the weighting:

1. Calculating the "Field Mean"

For each category of woman (Small, Average, Large), we calculate the average mechanical rank she can expect based on the total pool of men available to her.

• Formula: (0.16 * Small Rank) + (0.68 * Average Rank) + (0.16 * Large Rank) = Field Mean
• Example (Average Woman): (0.16 * 3) + (0.68 * 5) + (0.16 * 4) = 4.52. Her "average" experience is a 4.52.

2. Weighted Male Advantage

Weighted Male Advantage is simply the gap between his rank and that category's Field Mean.

• Formula: Man's Rank - Field Mean = Weighted Advantage
• Example: A Small man has a rank of 3 with an Average woman. 3 - 4.52 = -1.52.

3. Weighted Advantage2

To find a man's total "Weighted Male Advantage^(2)" we take his weighed advantage in each category, multiply it by the frequency of that woman type (16%, 68%, or 16%), and add them all together.

• Formula: Sum of (Advantage * % frequency of woman category) = Net Score