5'2" woman @ Match.com wants 5'10" guy
Frustrated Short Guy
"VegasVixen1"
Appearance
height: 5’ 2” (157.5 cms)
About My Date
height: 5’ 10” (177.8 cms) to 6’ 4” (193.0 cms)
body type:Athletic and toned
************
As far as appearances, I am a petite woman and typically love being with a
tall guy (athletic build)... I want to be with someone who I can feel safe
with... (Cuddling and being held in big, strong arms....) :)
************
This woman is also listed at www.truedater.com with a warning (go to the site
and enter her username for Match.com):
*****
On and off Repeat User ...May 14, 2005
By: anonymous
This woman has been using match.com on an off since 2002. Just to let you
know, VegasVixen is no rookie, when it comes to online dating.
Classic Collector
This woman's mind must be so weak, that she associates being "safe" with
being with a much taller man. Is she saying that she's not safe right now,
because she's single? If an intruder enters her house, and she's with a
5'10" man, is she still safe? She must be a very weak person intellectually
and emotionally if she needs another person around to feel safe, especially
one with a certain height.
"Frustrated Short Guy" <shr...@com.net> wrote in message
news:QqPme.10952$M36....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
poophe...@yahoo.com
tough guys, some like intellectuals. <ones that can spell it
especially! I don't know why the concept is so hard to understand .You
are so bitter and self-hating that it brings me down (pardon the pun)
listening to you. Find a damn short chick, not all chicks are obsessed
with height as much as you are. AT 5'6 you are taller or equal height
to what like 75 percent of all women or something like that? I am only
taller or equal to like 43 percent of all women. At 5'8 a guy is taller
or equal to like 94 percent of all women. Not all women care about
height. I don't know why you can't realize that. It is probaly your
confidence that a womans sees that you are lacking before she cares
about your height.
Mxsmanic
than themselves, because it helps to compensate for a feeling of
vulnerability that they may have on an everyday basis on their own. I'm
sure they objectively realize that being tall alone doesn't necessarily
make a man a good protector, but hormones tend to overrule reason in
such matters, so if they like tall guys, they like tall guys.
It should be kept in mind that women don't necessarily have any more
choice in their preferences than men. If a woman likes men who are
tall, or men who are muscular, or men who have dark hair, then that's
just the way it is--she doesn't _choose_ to like such men just to
irritate short, scrawny, or blond men.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Classic Collector
What if that preference rears its head in the business world, say the same
female prefers tall guys, and therefore a short, qualified man is not chosen
for a job.
What if her preference would be "black men" and not "white men." Is that
discrimination, or just a preference. The question is, why is that her
preference? Is it because of media, tv, her friends? Should her preference
of tall men be accepted, or looked down upon?
"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ppqn911lrs1fge78i...@4ax.com...
Classic Collector
that's the only way they can be happy. Tall men are great, short men are
weak. This gets embedded into their mind, and boom, their preference is
born.
If she said she prefers black guys, is that a "good preference?" Or if she
prefers white guys? More often than not, the preference is the result of
misinformation and generalizations/stereotypes. What if she thinks all black
guy are criminals or disrespect women, therefore she likes white guys? Is
that still just a preference?
"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ppqn911lrs1fge78i...@4ax.com...
Mxsmanic
> So, you think it's a preference and not a bias?
What's the difference?
> What if that preference rears its head in the business world, say the same
> female prefers tall guys, and therefore a short, qualified man is not chosen
> for a job.
Then it is inappropriate discrimination, because his height (probably)
has nothing to do with his ability to do the job.
However, in matters of the heart, the only criteria that matter are the
subjective criteria of the person in question. All forms of bias are
acceptable. Nobody has the _right_ to have a relationship with any
other person; all relationships require mutual consent. Therefore,
anyone may avoid a relationship with another for any reason, no matter
how "unfair" the bias may seem.
> What if her preference would be "black men" and not "white men." Is that
> discrimination, or just a preference.
It's both. In the case of a job, it might be unfair discrimination; in
the case of a relationship, she's perfectly entitled to prefer black men
if she wishes to do so, and she does not have to explain or justify her
preference.
> The question is, why is that her preference?
Partially programmed biology, partially conditioning from the
environment.
> Is it because of media, tv, her friends? Should her preference
> of tall men be accepted, or looked down upon?
The preference for tall men seems to be universal. It is not necessary
that others accept or look up to that preference, as it is only her
business and not anyone else's.
Mxsmanic
> I believe they like tall guys because the media, tv, magazines, tell them
> that's the only way they can be happy.
No, the preference is too widepread to be explained by that alone.
> Tall men are great, short men are
> weak. This gets embedded into their mind, and boom, their preference is
> born.
It may be wired in from birth.
> If she said she prefers black guys, is that a "good preference?" Or if she
> prefers white guys?
"Good" or "bad" don't apply here. If that's her preference, that's her
preference, period. She doesn't have to justify it to anyone else.
> More often than not, the preference is the result of
> misinformation and generalizations/stereotypes. What if she thinks all black
> guy are criminals or disrespect women, therefore she likes white guys? Is
> that still just a preference?
Yes. And she's entitled to it.
When it comes to personal preferences in relationships, anyone may hold
any preference that he or she wishes to hold. Nobody need justify
anything. If someone rejects you for a relationship because of her
personal preference, your only option is to find someone else.
Geoffrey Arnold
>that others accept or look up to that preference, as it is only her
>business and not anyone else's.
Good post Mxs. I agree with most of the post. This one line though
needs a qualifier. You're right to say that it's partially biology,
and partially conditioning. But here, you say that the preference for
tall men seems to be universal. I agree with that, but while some
slight preference for tall men is universal, the wholesale rejection of
short men is very social. It varies from culture to culture. While
there is a left over, biological urge for women to choose taller men,
the idea that a woman has a "height cut-off" and all men under that
line have no shot, is a cultural phenomenon.
Women are entitled to that method. But it is cultural.
Geoff A.
Vashti
> When it comes to personal preferences in relationships, anyone may
> hold any preference that he or she wishes to hold. Nobody need
> justify anything. If someone rejects you for a relationship
> because of her personal preference, your only option is to find
> someone else.
Everyone has preferences about what they find attractive but that
doesn't have to preclude a relationship with someone who doesn't fit
those preferences. I dunno, I kind of prefer the brainy look to the
tall brawny look... doesn't mean I'd reject a guy just cause he
works out. Er- unless he was working out obsessively maybe.
Vashti
Mxsmanic
> But here, you say that the preference for
> tall men seems to be universal. I agree with that, but while some
> slight preference for tall men is universal, the wholesale rejection of
> short men is very social.
I'm not aware of any wholesale rejection of short men, any more than
there is a wholesale rejection of small-breasted women.
> It varies from culture to culture. While
> there is a left over, biological urge for women to choose taller men,
> the idea that a woman has a "height cut-off" and all men under that
> line have no shot, is a cultural phenomenon.
It's a myth. Most women have no such cut-off.
Mxsmanic
> Everyone has preferences about what they find attractive but that
> doesn't have to preclude a relationship with someone who doesn't fit
> those preferences. I dunno, I kind of prefer the brainy look to the
> tall brawny look... doesn't mean I'd reject a guy just cause he
> works out. Er- unless he was working out obsessively maybe.
People who spend all their time exercising often have very nice bodies,
but very weak minds. At least that has been my experience. So they are
pretty to look at, but an ordeal to talk to. And they are often
interested only in their obsessive exercise.
Remember: the more time a partner spends working out to make him or
herself look good, the more likely he or she is to be preoccupied with
working out, and the more likely he or she is to expect you to do the
same.
ci+
>
> It's a myth. Most women have no such cut-off.
there seems to be a cutoff of 5'8, 5'9 or 5'10 in the majority of w4m ads. but.... ads aren't good representatoin of women's
'preferences'
you don't find women in satisfactory relatoinships placing personals ads.
Shawn Hearn
poophe...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Some women like rich guys, some women like tall guys, some women like
> tough guys, some like intellectuals.
Exactly. I don't know why some guys get all bent out of shape because a
woman prefers a tall guy. Not all women prefer tall guys. My sister is
only 4'10" and she told me she prefers to not have to crane her neck to
talk with a guy when they are walking or standing.
In fact, just this morning, I saw a truly hot looking hispanic woman
walk into the convenience store where I stop each morning on my way to
work. This woman was probably in her early 20's and as hot as hot gets.
She had on a tight white shirt and tight jeans. She was only around
4'10" and I am sure of that because I saw her walk right by the ruler at
the front entrance of the store. She was with a guy who was obviously
her boyfriend and the guy was only around 5'2" and neither the woman nor
her boyfriend were wearing thick heals. Obviously, this hot young woman
doesn't care about her boyfriend's height and a lot of other women don't
either.
I have one female friend who is extremely good looking. She told me many
times that what's most important about a guy or a woman who's looking to
date is the person's attitude. All other things being equal, attitude is
the key. A positive attitude will take a person far, regardless of his
or her height in the dating world.
Shawn Hearn
"Classic Collector" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
> I believe they like tall guys because the media, tv, magazines, tell them
> that's the only way they can be happy. Tall men are great, short men are
> weak. This gets embedded into their mind, and boom, their preference is
> born.
Perhaps, but I give women more credit than that. If TV was such a
powerful influence, all women would prefer guys like California's
governor, but that's simply not the case.
> If she said she prefers black guys, is that a "good preference?" Or if she
> prefers white guys? More often than not, the preference is the result of
> misinformation and generalizations/stereotypes. What if she thinks all black
> guy are criminals or disrespect women, therefore she likes white guys? Is
> that still just a preference?
People are entitled to their opinions. That's what freedom is about. I
would hate a woman who held that view, but that also is a form of
discrimination too. As long as our preferences in dating do not
translate into hiring decisions or other business or government
policies, we are all entitled to think as we see fit. It is only wrong
to be biased against someone when that bias causes that person economic
harm, such as if that woman in your example was a real estate agent and
allowed her dislike for blacks to influence how she dealt with black
customers, but how she selects the men she dates is entirely her
decision.
Apetr...@excite.com
This is a very narrow definition of prejudice/discrimination; most
biases are manifested in a number of ways outside the job
market/law/policy. I guess the question to me is whether the number of
women who prefer tall men is a simple matter of benign preference --
like whether you prefer , all pretty innocuous thinsg. But when I sit
down and think
While many here do resent the fact that many, many women (particularly
short ones, who seem to be in the same boat as the short guys) reject
-- I haven't seen anyone say that that's not their right. It's a
question of where this bias comes from -- is it right -- should/can
anything be done about it?
There's some
--Becky
Apetr...@excite.com
Shawn Hearn wrote:
> In article <6OGcncyroPB...@ptd.net>,
> "Classic Collector" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > I believe they like tall guys because the media, tv, magazines, tell them
> > that's the only way they can be happy. Tall men are great, short men are
> > weak. This gets embedded into their mind, and boom, their preference is
> > born.
>
> Perhaps, but I give women more credit than that. If TV was such a
> powerful influence, all women would prefer guys like California's
> governor, but that's simply not the case.
There's the ideal, and then there's the reality -- "settling."
> > If she said she prefers black guys, is that a "good preference?" Or if she
> > prefers white guys? More often than not, the preference is the result of
> > misinformation and generalizations/stereotypes. What if she thinks all black
> > guy are criminals or disrespect women, therefore she likes white guys? Is
> > that still just a preference?
>
> People are entitled to their opinions. That's what freedom is about. I
> would hate a woman who held that view, but that also is a form of
> discrimination too. As long as our preferences in dating do not
> translate into hiring decisions or other business or government
> policies, we are all entitled to think as we see fit. It is only wrong
> to be biased against someone when that bias causes that person economic
> harm, such as if that woman in your example was a real estate agent and
> allowed her dislike for blacks to influence how she dealt with black
> customers, but how she selects the men she dates is entirely her
> decision.
I guess to me it's a question of whether the preference for tall guys
is just that, a benign preference -- like whether one goes for blondes
or brunettes, or the like -- or a reflection of some deeper social
prejudice, manifested in this case by the fact that so many women are
willing to reject a whole class of potential mates on the basis of one
meaningless criterion. If it's the former, then I'd say that's the
breaks; if it's the latter (and I tend to think it is), then advances
for short men in society at large -- when, for instance, you see the
pay gap between short/tall men close, short men cease to be the butt of
jokes in commercials, short men win the presidency -- will likely mean
more women willing to date short guys, and a decrease in the importance
of height in mate selection. To me, the problems short guys face in
the dating world are a symptom of a deeper problem.
It's a really fuzzy issue though. I have a hard time figuring out what
the difference is between a preference/bias/prejudice -- and I don't
really buy into the nature/nurture argument, which seems pretty
irrelevant to me. (Just because something has a more biological basis
does not mean it's unchanging and cannot be overridden and is somehow
"better"; similarly, not all that is socialized is bad -- and we can
never, ever escape the influence of culture, to be human is to be under
the influence of others' opinions. So trying to pin down the
biological/social elements of heightism doesn't seem all that important
to me.)
I think I had a point in there, but I'm not sure now what it is. Oops.
--Becky