Due to the Automod, I had to break some of the archived sources. Just copy the link and add the "r" before the subreddit yourself and change FDS to the full name.

Do men get discriminated against for a small penis?

I would say so, but let's dive a bit into this. If you find anything inaccurate or got any suggestions and are able to communicate them without insults, I am open to improve and edit the text.

Looking at this story, they might even get denied any treatment in cases of acute suicidiality just for being bullied for allegedly having a small penis, which is most of the time irrespective of the actual facts (which {meaning the facts on average dick sizes within the population} almost nobody knows, nor wants to accept - even the ones who may read studies but actually ignore the influence of recruitment methods and exclusion criteria).

Thomas Kemp was constantly bullied for, allegedly, having a small penis.[e] He was suicidal and as he made the decision to kill himself, his wife called the police, which then brought Thomas and his wife to the Ipswich hospital for him to be sectioned.[a]

As soon as the mental health crisis team heard that Thomas had developed severe anxiety and depression from being bullied for his penis size, the team apparently stopped taking him serious, telling the triage nurse (according to her), who said she assessed Thomas as high risk, that his actual problem wouldn't even be the suicidiality he was brought in for, rather than his "manhood".[a]

The fact that his wife, who called the police earlier, seemed to be the only person caring about his survival[n], probably verified his aparent observation that the world does not care about men with (whatever they deem to be) smaller genitalia and therefore, in my opinion, might have strengthened the reason he was suicidal in the first place.[a,b]

Despite the fact that they were coming in at 3am and the (mental) health services generally knowing about his suicidiality (due to past incidents)[e], he was denied any treatment without ever undertaking a face-to-face assesment[a,k], which, in my opinion, would have been of questionable benefit, considering the nurse in charge described the team as being "brazen" and "in a jokey manner" as they called her[n] to send them away[k] and were seen making jokes about Thomas' manhood - after sending the acutely suicidal man away without any help - by the triage nurse, who was found to be a “credible, hard-working and sympathetic professional” by the coroner.[m,b]

The mental breakdown of his wife after seeing how her husband was just let go in an acutely suicidal state for no known reason[n] did not make the nurse in charge question the decision.[b,k]

Keep in mind that these are not random people - this is a mental health crisis team. These are the ones calling him paranoid, delusional and body dysmorphic[a] for thinking anybody would joke or otherwise care about his dick, before then denying him potentially lifesaving treatment over his dick and being caught making jokes throughout his lethal suffering by multiple colleagues.[b,m,n]. I guess he might have been right about getting treated differently (and not just paranoid or delusional).

After learning that he probably killed himself due to a psychotic episode, the workers even admited to discharging him over this, saying that it was a "misunderstanding" and that they only denied him because they didn't know about the psychosis and thougt his dick was the reason he would commit suicide.[b]

Quote:"The inquest also heard Mr Kemp had been turned away by the mental health crisis team because they believed the episode was related to his anxiety about the size of his penis."[c]

This "explanation" was not called out as highly discriminatory by anyone. In my opinion, it has to be completely unacceptable to send an acutely suicidal patient away because you think their reasons for commiting suicide are invalid - regardless of what the actual reason is. As I mentioned above, the team implicitly admitted to sending away anyone who becomes suicidal over their dick size[c] and anyone who becomes suicidal over anything else and has expressed concerns about their dick size at some point in the past, because, as this story has shown, there won't even be a face-to-face assesment, regardless of how distressed the ones are who witnessed and interrupted his intention of suicide earlier.[k]

In conclusion, they appear to deny anyone who has shown any signs that he might have a small dick the potentially life-saving treatment.

It doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman, because both parties participate heavily in this discrimination: this could be your son/father/brother/friend/partner/etc. one day. If you claim that this discrimination is not real, you enable these practices to go on and deny men with (anxiety over) a small penis to finally enjoy equal rights to mental health-care and treatment.

Men who are bullied into suicidiality should not have to be either lucky or prepared to only receive support if the reason for the bullying was/is not penis size and are otherwise sent away to their (in this case even deadly) fate after potentially getting triggered further (by, as they hear or read {in his history} about the penis issue, even mental health professionals apparently not caring enough about the patients life anymore to even undertake face-to-face assessment[k] or challenge a decision to discharge a crying and distressed wife and a suicidal man, who were brought in by the police to the door of the building - supporting the man's safety[k,n]). Thomas and his wife did not survive the night.

Quote: "Recording a narrative conclusion Ms Devonish said Mr Kemp stabbed his wife during a psychotic episode when she tried to prevent him from harming himself.

He then cut himself, fell from a window and bled to death.

She said Mr Kemp’s “non-compliance with prescribed medication” and the “failure of the crisis response team to see [Mrs Kemp] and her husband and undertake an assessment” contributed to the deaths." [c]

All in all, I'd definitely call the actions of the mental health team a discriminatory practice.

Even on r-SuicideWatch, these men are being turned away by the community.[f]

Research projects are actively canceled by the public (which again proves how unreliable self-reports are).[o]

Still, Michelle Wolf can say "men with small dicks should just kill themselves" and will be met with laughter and cheering.[d] Look at that sentence after reading what I've just told you. It's horrendous, crazy and outrageous. The following paragraph exists because some tried to justify it by saying she would create a contrast or whatever, but I disagree with that. If you are going to justify it, then at least stand by the fact that unexpected, extreme statements can be funny and that you do not care enough (about the fact that this is not the same as such a statement towards a bigger demographic that receives (mental-health, public and political) support - though, as I outline later on, the way it was done here , I'd call it simply an insult.) to make it less funny to you. I get that these types of "completely over the top and unrealistic" offensive statements can be funny, but I personally think there should be a differentiation within them. You can target bigger demographics (like men or women), target at least supported demographics whose problems are just as valid, but at least talked about on a regular basis, you can include worplays, use rethorical tools, not necessarily advocate for someone to die or suffer to death (suicide) based on how they were born or display such a statement as your (the character you play on stage) own opinion without putting it into an appropriate context (I cannot think of one for that statement, to be honest)...

Not all of this has to be included, it simply goes to show that one can do a ton of things to convey dark humor as a joke. That is what is so wrong to me with these "jokes" - to me they are simply statements telling the most suicide-prone (men)[s,t] and support-less (esp. in terms of suicide: men with small dicks as outlined in the beginning) demographic to kill themselves. Here's a good example of what a joke with shock factor could look like:

What does not fit in? Meat, Eggs, Husband/Wife, Blowjob. The blowjob. You can beat your meat, eggs and husband/wife, but you can't beat a blowjob.

Within this we find - next to the unexpected offensive statement about domestic violence - the two biggest demographics (for women also fortunately with a lot of public, political and mental-health influence and support, which we would love to also see for men in the future!), we do not find a call for murder or suicide based on genes, we find multiple wordplays and rethorical tools on multiple occasions and we find a proper setup that introduces an innocent expectation via a common structure: "What does not fit in?". Additionally, it's not a direct call-to-action (X should do Y) and it does not imitate the actual opinion of the narrator (In my opinion, X should just do Y). It simply compares the possibility of four rethorical statements to conclude in: "you can't beat a blowjob". This joke might be offensive, but I'd argue that it is actually a joke, and I hope you may see the difference between that and:

Honestly, If you were born with a small dick you should just kill yourself.

Now that we got that sorted out and maybe even agreed that one might laugh at such an extreme statement, whether I like it or not, simply because it is so ridiculously wrong that we believe it can't be taken serious and would never be expected to be just dropped like that (even though this case is probably as extreme as you can get and it was a Netflix Stand-Up segment, not an extreme dark-humor niche-meme in the deep-web) we can address the folks who do not agree on that and claim it would be written as a twist:

Let me explain why I believe the statement is not a twist or contradiction to what she said before, even though I could see her trying to use that "explanation" if she was called out. She says that big is not always the best as all are different, similar to shoes, but from the start on she does mention that small is not included in that - for example in the "I'm a two"-segment. At the end she clearly says that "small is still not on the table". She therefore directly references her past statements to add information to, and not to retract them. If it was planned to lead the listener in the wrong direction, why would you drop and spoil the "twist" multiple times throughout the segment without it adding any value to the story? The listener already knew that she (the character) was not trying to comfort men with small dicks here. I'd say this is called a clarification, not a twist. If it is easier to understand, the long version would be something like: "I might have questioned the importance of size and how much women actually care compared to men, but just so we're on the same page and nobody falsely gets their hopes up: small is still not on the table - we are talking about big vs. medium here". This is absolutely not incompatible with not wanting to get impaled (as in: "bigger is not always better, but below medium is worthless nonetheless"). It is therefore not a contrast to her prior statements and by referencing her past statements she implicitly said that it's not.

I do not claim that the statements within her comedy program are her actual beliefs, that would be ridiculous. I do, however, believe that writing a program, going on a stage and making these statements for a real audience to laugh and cheer at (an audience that might include victims) does prove a lack of empathy and respect for this group.

In addition to all the aspects I already mentioned above, which stay untouched by this: I would probably think differently if there were less people who actually inherit discriminatory ideology towards that group. To get back to the domestic violence example: I'd argue the vast majority does not glorify and/or take part in extreme bullying and sexual assault of domestic violence victims. Whoever has ever visited a school, seen an expensive car on the street or watched a few movies including a naked man (esp. teenagers) knows that the same can not necessarily be said about men with small dicks.

Oh right, and if I didn't miss something we don't deny them all mental health treatment in cases of acute suicidiality because we "believe their episode is actually about" the consequences of being domestic violence victims. We would most likely actually even help them regardless of what we believe the reason is (well, if it is not a small dick, I guess) - even if any of the consequences of being a victim would push them into suicidiality. What a crazy concept, isn't it? And if we heard it did push them into acute suicidiality and we were the mental health team they turned to to save them... we would not make fun of that persons issue, would we? Well, if it was a man I could see that happening - but now imagine making fun of someone whose very reason for not wanting to live anymore is people making fun of them and we tell them they are paranoid, delusional, body dysmorphic and obsessed for thinking anybody would actually care enough to do that...}.

Back to the "Joke": I'm sorry, but in my opinon, the funny (to the audience) part in that statement is the insult and the reactions are mostly the same when insults like this are made in isolation. In fact, I assume she could've left out all the rest and just started with something along the lines of: "Maybe some of you like big dicks, that's fine... I like more a... kinda strong medium... and small dicks... well... honestly, they should just kill themselves." and got the same reaction if her delivery was on point.

Another example: Ali Wong can "joke" that women should be careful of men not wanting to have sex on the first date and literally called it "trapping" to try and build up feelings first to show that it would be worth to make it work.[g] She warned women to not fall for men with small penises trapping them (as in: letting them develop feelings towards the men, even though he has a small dick, which is apparently more important than feelings - at least within the "joke").

It should be noted, however, that FDS showes that a subset of women who do inherit concerns like this does exist.[p] This is not just completely made up.

She calls a "micropenis" a "tiny mess of a thing that wouldn't get past your molars". (Actually though, Micropenis is a meaningless term outside of scientific literature, really; micropenis could mean anything when uneducated people use it).

Afterwards, she says that he was black, which is seen as a joke in itself due to the stereotype of only white men being small, while black men are expected to be big. This is especially harmful towards black men with small dicks[i], who do not fulfill these expectations and might be held to even higher standards by girls seeking sex with black men primarily for dick size.

Quote, even by a black man who does fit the stereotype: "Honestly sometimes I don't even feel like a human being anymore and more like meat that gets used to satisfy a one time fetish. I had so many hookups where I have been told "I just wanted to see how IT feels"/"glad I got that over with" I can't even count them anymore."[j]

Regardless of that, however, we see BLM protesters holding up "racism is small dick energy" signs[q] and hipocrites like (at)kristenanniebell with 15 million followers adding it to their story the exact day they posted the promise to educate themselves and stand up against any form of discrimination, all whilst featuring "empathy is sexy" in her bio, targeting (via the term "SDE") men who show severe symptoms of the daily discriminatory abuse and bullying like: insecurities, feelings of inadequacy and worthlessness and the desperate attempt to compensate in hopes of stopping others treating them as sexually inept sub-humans and, as outlined before, stop themselves from being made fun of and apparently denied potentially life-saving treatment by a brazen mental health team if they become suicidal over it.

Some go as far ad semi-seriously alluding to racism actually being, in part, based on jealousy of (bigger) black dicks.[h]

Ali Wong proceeds to say how she told other black men about her date's "micropenis", who in return are now going to assasinate the man with the small dick for damaging their reputation of being big.

Small dick hate is mostly not called out and if it is, it (the act of calling it out or even just arguing that this discrimination does in fact exist) is seen as the very reason why small dick energy is used as an insult (because of that person being perceived as over-sensitive and insecure and stopping others from having fun because of it), as in society's eyes people clearly have to have a small dick to care. You don't have to be black to fight for black people, you don't have to be a woman to fight for women, you don't have to be an animal to fight for animals - I'm actually pretty sure that if I was to randomly pet a vegan girl on the street and tell her to "sit" whilst waving a dog treat in front of her face, it would get me into more trouble than the mental health team got into by contributing to Thomas' death. I am a vegan myself though - glad I got that one in here. But if you stand up for small dicks, you have to have one? And in being rethorically "so sure" about that and using it as ways to attack the person speaking up, don't we actually verify that we know and even expect nobody to care about them?

The thing is: whenever we see stuff like this, we just forget about it shortly after. It doesn't really affect us and seems so common and normal, that it doesn't stand out to us. There is no emotional anchor to us.

For someone who suffers from the bullying, though, he does remember every time he heard someone making jokes and laughing about how inadequate he apparently is in the eyes of society for being born the way he was. At some point, maybe during a comedy show, a movie or on a car ride - his mother did it. His father did it. His sister did it. His brother did it. His friends did it. His friend's parents did it. His friends siblings did it. His celebrity idols did it. his favorite rapper did it in his track. The singer on the radio did it in her song. The radio host did it. His crush did it. His teachers did it. His therapist did it. His favorite movie or video game character did it. The mental health crisis team - that should have saved and cared about men like him - allegedly did it, after sending someone away over it who then committed suicide.

This list simply does not end. It seems like everybody does or did it whithout even thinking about it anymore and the ones affected are expected to just take it.

As the policeman arrested the girl for using dick size as an insult, right?[r] For most people, it was just one stupid comment and to them he completely overreacted because he has insecurities (which actually would be caused by the lifelong exposure to how society views and treats men with small dicks - as if that would be his fault). Who cares about one comment, right? The issue is: until we take action, people like her might do the same tomorrow, and to her and the general public, it will be "just one comment" again.

It adds up extremely fast and gets amplified by the overwhelming support and positive feedback the ones who make these insults/jokes get overall - even by the ones closest to the victims (most parents etc. will laugh about it at some point and surely won't call the person "joking" out).

It looks like insults and hate are called jokes, as long as they are targeted at small penises[d,g], and being affected by that makes one a paranoid, delusional, obsessed and body dysmorphic mental-health patient, who is expressing "small dick energy" and not even worthy of being looked in the face or personally spoken to by a brazen mental health crisis team before it contributes to his death over it "in a jokey manner".[a,k,n]

Edit: In the comments, someone makes claims about me apparently believing in magic overnight healings if one does not get rejected by a mental health facility, because... well I haven't really understood where all these claims are coming from, either. Would be really interested what sparked that fairy tale.
I assume that person is also convinced that, by saying Thomas wouldn't have killed his wife if he would have been in the hospital and the team would've taken them absolutely serious (and they would therefore also be physically seperated and supervised the night it happened), I also have to be convinced that at no point in the future there would have been any way this murder could have taken place... You know, like everyone who says "you are the best" also believes in supernatural mind-to-mind communication leading to us unconsciously gaining information about every person on this planet, as we otherwise couldn't make that statement...
And it should also be obvious that there is a huge difference between "not killing anyone" and not suffering from mental health issues anymore.
Therefore, I really do not know why someone would make up all of that stuff about me... If I understood correctly, most of the claims in the comment the person made here reference two parts of a comment on a different post. One being introduced with "But hey, here's my uninformed and therefore useless opinion:" and ended with "Still just useless assumptions though, so whatever." which was a spiteful assumption-based answer to the persons claims - which were equally based on assumptions and appeared to me as making assumptions regarding my opinion and intentions, which I therefore stated to be the exact opposite of that of the other person. I thought it would be obvious, but I guess not obvious enough. It is beyond my imagination how anyone could seriously try and critisize statements of me that I literally called out as useless and baseless in the same comment - I can just assume that it came across as though I was intending it to be read like "I am absolutely convinced of all of this but you claim this to be just assumptions anyway", even though that was not the case. Right after that, in the same comment, I introduced the second set of spiteful assumptions with: "If we want to throw around baseless assumptions:" and ended with "The point is, we do not and will never know."
I try to learn from this and will try and stay away from stuff like sarcasm and exaggerations more often as well as stop answering to destructive, toxic and eventually abusive comments. I did rework the post though, as I did feel that the phrasing had room for improvement. May have missed some stuff though.

Links:

a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,m,n,o,p,q,r,s,t.