actually
the connotations of it in that context could be construed as negative since the time and place that generalisation sprung from meant it negatively- large genitals were linked in popular imagination to uncontrollable sexuality (raping white women, animal-like, savagery etc.)

It's different now obviously, but the point stands that generalisations even if superficially positive are not necessarily so.

//takes history hat off//
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 2 Apr 2010, 0:34, 1 reply)

I was not aware of that connection
Weird for people to associate large genitals with sexual assault.

It's like saying that if someone's good at maths, it means they're likely to be a tax fraudster! Or if someone's a fast runner, it means they put that skill to use as a mugger.
(EuroSong I love horse meat: best of all the animals, Fri 2 Apr 2010, 20:09, closed)

Well it's the past
people weren't rational, but certainly that particular belief that black men were wildly oversexed resulting in sexual violence was around until the 1950s. It's weird but true
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 2 Apr 2010, 22:43, closed)