Well, do bear in mind that the models are representing giver and receiver - not necessarily male and female ^.^ There is a body orifice down there that both sexes share and depth alone is, strictly speaking, less of a problem for it (though girth still is, obviously).
That said, you're not wrong that smaller vagina-owning partners are naturally going to have less leeway in terms of what they can realistically handle with that particular orifice than their larger counterparts, but do remember also that we squeeze babies out of those things too - with sufficient preparedness and warm up, you might be surprised what is workable. There are women out there who can barely feel comfortable with even three inches and relative girth, no matter how ready they are... and there are others who are ever chasing that deeper stretch and aren't truly happy unless the depth counter is in the double digits... and everything in between. The same will naturally be true for smaller-sized females too - so while your average halfling or gnome woman might only prefer a few inches of depth, there will be extremes on both directions for them too. This isn't FATAL, and we can't book-keep that or even really go into it... but I do agree that generally, smaller females will probably want their larger partners to be gentle with them, and careful of their limits.
To that end... you may have noticed if you look carefully, that the majority of the poses I examined here, where they involve a small receiver, that receiver is generally posed and positioned in such a way that they have a clear and direct line of contact communication with the larger partner to directly push, guide or otherwise give immediate feedback on their limits for penetration - the hand pressed back and down against the midsection close to the point of connection, and similar little things. It's also part of why I took pains at times to talk about where and how a smaller receiver could interact to control or guide the scene, with direct contact communication... and stress the poses where this wasn't as easy, and the need for caution with them - it wasn't just for giggles - it's because that kind of mid-intimacy communication matters, and is important - at a practical level as well as adding to the connection between the partners and the intimacy of the scene. If I didn't make the point well enough that this is an important consideration when writing with smaller receivers, then perhaps I could have been more emphatic about it - I felt I had been, but it's done now, I guess.
If I was to redo, how large would you prefer me to make the human-sized male anatomy? 4 inches? 6? 8? 12? (I'm speaking in jest and good humour, I promise)
