We often speak of the male body as a ‘grower’ or a ‘shower’, that is, the male organ in terms of its dimensions and appearance. These might sound like witty parlance but, in fact, they have some very real impact, sometimes quite drastic, on how a person perceives herself and her sexual self-esteem. In this essay, we’ll examine where these names came from, what they mean, and most importantly, what it really means to be a ‘grower’ or a ‘shower’.
Defining ‘Growers’ and ‘Showers’
The words ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ refer, more than anything else, to physical forms, particularly body parts that may change shape and size. The most familiar use of these terms involves the male organs, where the flaccid state can differ markedly from the erect one. A ‘grower’ is someone whose penis looks small in its sprained form but grows enormously when held straight. A ‘shower’, by contrast, is someone whose penis is bigger in its flaccid form but which grows minimally when raised. Obviously, these diagnoses are not one-sided, but rather based on a continuum, wherein individuals show various levels of growth and display.
Implications for Self-Perception
Being considered a ‘grower’ or ‘shower’ has an effect on how someone feels about herself and their body. A ‘grower’ is someone whose penis is much smaller when flaccid than when upright, whereas a ‘shower’ is someone whose flaccid penis is larger. ‘Growers’ might find that swollenness gratifying, because it disrupts a social construct and expectations of what a penis should look like. That joy might in turn lead to a healthier sense of body and self.
In contrast, ‘showers’ might feel pressured to live up the usually grandiose dictum of their flaccid size. This pressure causes anxiety, poor self-image and unhappiness with their bodies. Furthermore, the idea that a larger flaccid penis equals a larger erect penis leads ‘showers’ to feel under or overextended sexually, which in turn can create sexual dysfunction.
Implications for Social Interactions
The ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ designations also have deeper social implications, especially in romantic and sexual relationships. For ‘growers’, the novelty of their biggerness can work to their advantage by interrupting their partner’s inflated expectations about how big their penis is and might even open up more honest conversations about bodies and needs.
But ‘showers’ are often pressured to fit in with their partner by virtue of their coiled size, thereby causing a sense of failure or panic. Furthermore, the perception that the larger the flaccid penis, the better your sexual performance is can set unrealistic expectations and lead to performance anxiety.
Both scenarios cause the adoption of these terms to focus unnecessarily on penis size rather than allow for open dialogue about wants, limits and preferences. This attention to detail can interfere with sexual experience quality and intimacy.
Critiques and Limitations
Although ‘growers’ and ‘showers’ provide a conceptual framework for explaining individual differences in male genital shape, they are not entirely without limitations and criticisms.
Discourses on the ‘Grower’ and ‘Shower’ Constructs
1. Essentialism and reductionism: The terms ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ are essentialist and reductionist in that they define and assess persons on the basis of a single feature of personality or physical appearance. Such essentialism misses the subtleties and intricacies of human identity and turns individuals into stereotypes causing prejudice and discrimination (Haslanger, 2000).
2. Objectification and sexualisation: The ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ are inherently objectifying and sexualising, in that they focus on individuals’ physical characteristics and perceived sexual performance. This objectification dehumanises individuals, perpetuates harmful gender codes and fuels rape culture (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997).
3. Ageism and ableism: ‘grower’ is often used to mean someone is more attractive the older they get, which is problematic in a culture that values youth and diminishes ageing. Moreover, the ‘grower’ approach could unknowingly exclude physically disabled people or people who don’t measure up to beauty norms, further marginalising such groups (Harris, 1997; Cantor, 2019).
4. The overblown and the quest for outside approval: The ‘grower’ and the ‘shower’ designations reinforce the superficiality of the beauty code in that they emphasise appearance over substance. This focus on external recognition contributes to low self-esteem, body image, and mental health problems (Fredrickson et al, 2006).
5. Heteronormativity and cisnormativity: The ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ assumptions rest heavily on heteronormative and cisnormative presuppositions because they centre primarily on the attraction of cis men to cis women. This heteronormativity and cisnormativity casts gay people out and leads to their experiences being repressed (Connell, 2005).
Commitments of the ‘Grower’ and ‘Shower’ Constructs.
1. Subjectivity and inconsistency: The ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ are highly subjective, based on personal estimates of beauty that can vary widely from one person to another across cultures. This subjectivity constrains how generalised these ideas can be, and thereby emphasises their vulnerability to misinterpretation and harm.
2. Falsity and misinformation: The ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ monikers are based on misinformation because the urban myth that gave rise to their invention has been debunked. This misrepresentation renders these ideas untrustworthy and calls into question their credibility as a way of measuring people.
3. Too much emphasis on appearance: The ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ paradigms overfocus on appearance to the detriment of other aspects of self-development. This overemphasis on the physical may also serve to enforce destructive beauty norms, and demotivate people from caring about their mental, emotional and spiritual well-being.
Conclusion:
In short, the words ‘grower’ and ‘shower’ may sound like ordinary jargon, but they mean something more, and their effects are dramatic on the self-perception and sexual competence of an individual. These words come from a culture obsessed with the size of a penis and it’s important that a person never continues to engage in such destructive thinking. Every human body is an individual, and there is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ way to live. The thing is that you have to learn how to love yourself in a way that transcends social expectations.
