Argument over genital size leaves three killed

A group of gentlemen patronizing a bar in South Africa got into a heated debate about race and penis size. When words failed to persuade either side into conceding to their opponents' view, guns were used, leaving three dead and two injured.
A worker at the bar, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal, said a customer of Indian origin had remarked to a white customer while they were both at the urinal in the bar that his penis was bigger than that of the white customer.

"After both men returned to their friends, the two groups began swearing at each other before the group of five Indian men left the scene and all returned with firearms. They opened fire and three guys died on the spot. The other two were rushed to St. Augustine's Hospital, where I am told they are critical."

Indian-White argument over genitals leaves three killed (via Arbroath)


  1. A quick trip out behind the alley and some quick unzipping would have been much better. With an appropriate bet, one of the guys might have even had to buy drinks for the night. Much better than ending up dead.

  2. Excellent. Now if we can get the rest of the d*ckheads to do the same to each other, and leave the rest of us alone, it will be good.

  3. I’m impressed. Most people are much less honest about this and argue over something symbolic like their counterstrike skill, favorite sports team, or political leanings.

  4. How mean you have to be to first mock a man’s privates and then get your friends shoot him and his friends.

    That’s just not cricket.

  5. …This sounds like a scene perfect for an episode of “In Sickness And In Health”(*).

    “Mr. Garnet. I am seeing your penis is not being bigger than mine!”

    “Oi! Shaddap, y’bleedin’ raghead! It’s a white man’s penis! It’s big enough!”

    “Oh, but *none* of you are bigger than this poor black gay man. Tsk!”

    “SHADDAP, Marigold y’bleedin’ poof wanker!”

    …The only problem is that it wouldn’t have necessarily degenerated into a bar fight.

    (*) The problem is that after watching this show, “All In The Family” seems like KidVid by comparison…

  6. Yeah, there’s clearly a missing middle step here. I understand (but do not condone) this fight:

    1. Representative of Group X points out that Group Y have smaller penises
    2. Representative of Group Y feels slighted
    3. RoGY compensates for small penis by shooting RoGX and associates

    But what we have here is:

    1. RoGX points out that Group Y have smaller penises
    2. ???
    3. RoGX adds injury to insult by shooting RoGY and associates

    What do you want to bet step two involved racial slurs?

  7. Well, the guys that came back with gun’s sure had some balls. . .

    Although I think maybe they were really arguing over who was the biggest assh*le.

  8. smellybug@8: “How is this a ‘wonderful thing’?”

    Because it evokes my sense of wonder. I wonder about it. I shake my head in wonder.

  9. Mocking another man’s penis size in the urinal. That alone should be criminalized. I’m thinking 10 years minimum.

  10. looks like size does matter…

    ohhhhh snap.

    but seriously, the whole ‘this is not wonderful’ argument is getting very old. Wonderful is a subjective term. Things that are horrible to one are wonderful to others, and vice versa.

  11. If a guy at the next urinal tells me his dick is bigger than mine, my reaction would be to get out of there as fast as possible, not to argue. Just saying.

  12. I don’t see what the big fuss is about…whoever is on the receiving end of those penises should be the only ones allowed to voice problems about their size.

  13. I have to side with #22. I can’t say as I’ve ever taken a good look at the man next to me at a urinal.

    Also, isn’t it kind of hard to compare unless both have erections? I think it is more important to get the science right so that we have an accurate comparison next time rather than focus on the whole shooting thing.

  14. What is REALLY missing here is actual quality comparison, something that none of these men had any right to vote on. I mean, isn’t the size argument REAALLY about which tallywhacker gives the greatest quality experience to their partner (and thus, attracts more interested partners?).
    How about a new bar policy that requires any size disputes be settled by calling in the disputants partners, giving them a quiet room with ample beer (and maybe chocolate) and letting them discuss their partners’ prowess and work it out from a consumer viewpoint (so to speak).
    Once a consensus is achieved as to which man is ACTUALLY the better lover, the partners will announce the verdict, and the victor will receive a free round accordingly (and perhaps, be commanded to teach a few master classes by the panel!).
    I now leave you to debate the possible scoring method in true geek fashion. (exeunt left).

  15. I think the Indian was definately at fault here; rule #1 of urinal ettiquite is “thou shalt not speak to ANYONE in the bathroom.” It doesn’t matter if your best friend or the messiah turns up, you don’t make eye contact and you sure as hell don’t speak.
    I’m surprised there was a conversation at all, surely the white gent was within his rights to forcibly flush the other.

  16. …rule #1 of urinal ettiquite is “thou shalt not speak to ANYONE in the bathroom

    Yes. I used to work with a guy who was not only a bathroom talker, but, infinitely worse, a stall-talker. Dude, WTF? That’s alone time!

  17. “The other two were rushed to St. Augustine’s Hospital, where I am told they are critical.”

    Critical??? I’d be freaking LIVID!

  18. Am I the only one who figured it out?

    The Indian guy thought his penis was larger because looking at another man in the urinal gave him an erection.

  19. @Zootboing #27:

    I mean, isn’t the size argument REAALLY about which tallywhacker gives the greatest quality experience to their partner (and thus, attracts more interested partners?).

    Not sure I agree with that. I mean, that’s one consideration, but there’s also the question of men relating strictly to other men, for the purpose of establishing a hierarchy. I’m one up, you’re one down, I’m on top, you’re not, I’m better than you, nyah nyah.

    Frame wars.

    It’s in our genes. Woe to us.

  20. Using a urinal is like playing golf: Eyes down, concentrate on the grip, and try not to veer off to the side.
    /red dwarf

    As sad as this story is, it is yet remarkably honest. I’m think disputes about penis size is one of the things which separates us from the apes.

  21. We should just ship them an ass-load of condoms, all 9 inches long, and prominently marked:

    That’ll shut ’em up.

  22. When I saw the headline in my RSS feed, I automatically thought “somewhere in Africa”, probably because of all of the hubbub with witch doctors “stealing” penii over there. Here in America we just sort it out by buying larger and less practical vehicles.

  23. #33 Jaan, saying that is exactly how the white guy got shot. That’s why nobody said it here. I hope you don’t live in Durban. When they get out of jail, they’ll be at your house …

  24. What kind of plant has “genital size leaves”? Doesn’t sound that impressive, or prone to argument.. unless they were botanists. They can be a pretty hoary bunch.

  25. In the olden days they wouldn’t have been allowed to piss in the same urinals. Look on the bright side. This is progress.

  26. Penis size vs. nation is pretty easy to resolve:

    – ask the condom manufacturers.

    In SE Asia (at least) the Japanese companies are the largest makers and exporters of condoms (probably because condoms are pretty much the only form of contraception in Japan – the pill was illegal until quite recently, and Japanese women still don’t use it much).

    Don’t have a reference but I do have (ahem) personal experience of this:- condom sizes vary from country to country (with Japan being on the small side, don’t know about India).

    Apparently, the Japanese companies supply the majority of the world’s condoms and export a different size mix to different regions. They even publish this data (or at least, they’ll give it to you if you ask).

    Should settle the matter pretty objectively I’d think.

    Just my 2c worth.

  27. #14: I’d say that was a safe bet.

    In my experience, having come from around there, young, macho, aggressive Indian males are reasonably likely to:

    1. Have weapons on them or near at hand
    2. Be just dumb (or nihilistic) enough to use them in the presence of witnesses
    3. Go out of their minds with rage when at the receiving end of a racial slur.

    Meanwhile, young, macho, aggressive white males are reasonably likely to:

    1. Hand out racial slurs
    2. Use only their fists when resorting to violence
    3. Assume that (2) applies to everyone else

    Taking all this into account, it’s not too hard to reconstruct the most likely sequence of events.

    That said, I think a lot of South Africans’ readiness to resort to deadly violence comes from the history of violence under apartheid, especially in KwaZulu-Natal, where Durban is.

    e.g. A few years back, there was an article in the local paper about a hot-dog stand owner operating outside a shebeen (kind-of a speakeasy/pub). Drunk people kept swiping hot dogs off the grill when he wasn’t looking, so one day he got so pissed off that he caught a guy doing this and stabbed him to death with the knife he used to cut the sausages.

Comments are closed.