Height requirements in dating

purifol0

SusieBlue wrote: »

Do you not think men also have their own criteria of superficial dealbreakers too? Do you have any idea how many men have ‘no fatties need apply’ in their bios?

It works both ways.

Statiscally you dead wrong about the match rates and mens dealbreakers, its also a very obvious false equivalance about being fat - its not genetic. Height is.


And I very much doubt men write anything derogatory about women in their bios if they want to match anyone, at all.

purifol0

purifol0 wrote: »

Yeah great, now go make a tinder account and list your height at five four for a week, then change it to six four for another week. I dont think I need to elaborate on the expected outcome.

I have no idea what the outcome would be. For me things like Tinder are not the real world. I am only speaking of my own personal experience - and in the read world. Tinder is alien to me - I can not even begin to guess what would or would not happen there. Speaking only for myself - if my current relationship broke down and ended - I would rather stay single forever than turn to dating apps to meet someone new.

But the two experiences are entirely unique. Meeting someone in a pub for example where you are 1 out of maybe 30 or 40 people in their radius on that night - is not the same as someone picking up an app and having instant access to the profile of 1000s of people. I would very much expect that filtering down arbitrary attributes like Height to get the sheer volume of results down would be quite common.

I wonder - have apps like Tinder ever released statistics on this? It would be interesting to know.Which filter do people tend to set first? Which ones are used most and least often? Which ones once set do people then tend to expand more often to increase the result set? Be an interesting set of stats to read through. At least if you're like me and find stats interesting

purifol0 wrote: »

Why is it so hard for people to admit this?

You would have to take it up with them. Not me - as I am not sure what it is you would feel I have not "admitted"? My post was mostly just about me - with one small reference to a behaviour I see often in the OP. Nothing else.

Many things hindered me in my attempts to start relationships with girls/women over my life. Many other things helped me. All I can say is that _for me_ I have had literally no impression that my height was ever either one them. YMMV. Right now one of my GFs is shorter than me. The other is taller. Neither seem bothered by this and I do not recall it ever even being mentioned in any context.

I do think however that a subsection of the bitter or angry people - not happy with their lot in life - yet not really all that motivated to do the hard slog to better their lot in life - do have a tendency to seek out factors over which they have no control - and merely blame those for everything. I get the feeling over time the OP is one of those people. This is the second thread on height he has done I think.

Making sweeping generalised statements about "what women like/want" tends to figure often in that list in my "n of 1" experience. YMMV. But I tend to switch off and stop listening when people start treating one entire gender as some homogenous group who all think and act the same. Like David Attenborough telling us the mating habits of a tree frog.

For _some_ people it can be easier to quit before trying. And some of those do so by seeking reasons to expect failure up front - so they can justify to themselves not even trying.

Figel Narage

purifol0 wrote: »

Statiscally you dead wrong about the match rates and mens dealbreakers, its also a very obvious false equivalance about being fat - its not genetic. Height is.


And I very much doubt men write anything derogatory about women in their bios if they want to match anyone, at all.

Yeah 100%, not only can you not be fat if you really want, lads will ignore it if it's not morbid obesity so to have this equivalence is just not the same

bitofabind

Figel Narage wrote: »

Yeah 100%, not only can you not be fat if you really want, lads will ignore it if it's not morbid obesity so to have this equivalence is just not the same

How do you know? Are you a woman interested in men and hanging out on dating apps?

Always amuses me that the strongest opinions on these things always comes from heterosexual men that have fcuk all experience dating men themselves. Who know diddly squat about the experiences of women on dating apps besides something they saw on reddit or 'I know this female who X, Y and Z" statements.

Men discriminate too. We all discriminate in dating. The difference is their dealbreakers tend to be things like weight and age, though height can come into it too. Try being a 6 foot something woman online. Or 5 '1 and 12 stone. Or 40+ in age. People cherry pick, often on things that wouldn't be "dealbreakers" in real life, because how else are you meant to narrow things down amid a sea of endless faces. It's online shopping, it's not real to most people.

Figel Narage

bitofabind wrote: »

How do you know? Are you a woman interested in men and hanging out on dating apps?

Always amuses me that the strongest opinions on these things always comes from heterosexual men that have fcuk all experience dating men themselves. Who know diddly squat about the experiences of women on dating apps besides something they saw on reddit or 'I know this female who X, Y and Z" statements.

Men discriminate too. We all discriminate in dating. The difference is their dealbreakers tend to be things like weight and age, though height can come into it too. Try being a 6 foot something woman online. Or 5 '1 and 12 stone. Or 40+ in age. People cherry pick, often on things that wouldn't be "dealbreakers" in real life, because how else are you meant to narrow things down amid a sea of endless faces. It's online shopping, it's not real to most people.

I don't have a strong opinion I just agree with the commenter above. I don't think women base everything on height or it's a deal breaker as such but it is a preference. I have a girlfriend (Same height as me and I'm tall BTW) but have dated and know a fair few women and any women I've ever spoken to is a fan of height. I never said men don't discriminate but any woman I've spoken to are fans of height while myself and any lad I know don't have as many strong preferences like that. That's my experience, so don't say I know diddly squat or that I read reddit. I'm not saying that women only look for that because obviously we all have differing things we are attracted to but it's a common theme as a preference I have seen in MY experience.

Feisar

purifol0 wrote: »

Statiscally you dead wrong about the match rates and mens dealbreakers, its also a very obvious false equivalance about being fat - its not genetic. Height is.


And I very much doubt men write anything derogatory about women in their bios if they want to match anyone, at all.

I used to have “anything less than DD’s need not apply” just as a dig at the height thing you see so much.
Being 6’3” it didn’t matter to me I was being tongue in cheek

purifol0

Feisar wrote: »

I used to have “anything less than DD’s need not apply” just as a dig at the height thing you see so much.
Being 6’3” it didn’t matter to me I was being tongue in cheek

Sure it wont matter if its in jest and the girl gets the joke, but youll find plenty of non native english speakers (tonnes of brazillians) on tinder in Dublin and if you have jokes in your bio theres a good chance they wont understand it. They do however understand what 6' 3" means.

kowloon

bitofabind wrote: »

People cherry pick, often on things that wouldn't be "dealbreakers" in real life, because how else are you meant to narrow things down amid a sea of endless faces. It's online shopping, it's not real to most people.

I reckon women are much more selective in general, it's human nature. How this translates to dating online I have no idea, but I expect men cast a much wider net. Then the waters are muddied further by men generally being the ones expected to make the first move and women being expected to be passive and merely filter out the men she has no interest in.
When I was younger I thought it was much more difficult for guys having to do all the work and getting all the rejection but I've come to appreciate how awful it must be for a girl having to try and get a guy she likes to even notice her. The roles reversed and the guy can just straight up go for it and if he's shot down he can deal with it and move on.

Figel Narage

kowloon wrote: »

I reckon women are much more selective in general, it's human nature. How this translates to dating online I have no idea, but I expect men cast a much wider net. Then the waters are muddied further by men generally being the ones expected to make the first move and women being expected to be passive and merely filter out the men she has no interest in.
When I was younger I thought it was much more difficult for guys having to do all the work and getting all the rejection but I've come to appreciate how awful it must be for a girl having to try and get a guy she likes to even notice her. The roles reversed and the guy can just straight up go for it and if he's shot down he can deal with it and move on.

That's very true, we as guys are so used to rejection that it is something we just accept while if women have to approach a guy and are turned down it hurts them a lot purely down to the fact they don't have as much experience as we have. Again this is similar to the experiences I have seen and had growing up

Warbeastrior

Mad_maxx wrote:

the " how is the weather up there " jokes dont bother me at all , i joke about my own height to other people but you do get tired of it being brought up all of the time , given the chance id much prefer be 5 ft 11 , there is no advantage to being very tall no matter what anyone outside the NBA tells you and countless disadvantages . add to that , i never found tall girls anymore attractive in the first place

I'm 6ft and would love to be 6'5".
I'm happy with my height but would like to be taller if I could choose.
Funny.

partyguinness

Ah Jesus...more narcissistic musings from the OP.

Stop feeding the attention seeking pitiful ego.

purifol0

sugarman wrote: »

I cant get my head around anyone that would have a height restriction as a criteria for dating.

Especially those "No under 6ft" types when the average Irish male is 5'10".

Its just so trivial and theyre porbably missing out on genuine lads that tick all the other boxes.

Just looking at someone I probably couldnt tell you their actual height. I certainly wouldnt be able to tell the difference between someone of 5'8" and 6ft.

Woman go for the top dog. Its fundamentally biological and not a personal preference as many here falsely ascribe. Otherwise its amazing co-incidence all these women having the exact same "personal preference".



Interestingly as I left my height off my bio, its often the first question I'm asked.

kowloon

Figel Narage wrote: »

That's very true, we as guys are so used to rejection that it is something we just accept while if women have to approach a guy and are turned down it hurts them a lot purely down to the fact they don't have as much experience as we have. Again this is similar to the experiences I have seen and had growing up

I have an awful memory of a girl I knew from school calling my home phone about a year after we had all finished. Awkward conversation follows and it goes nowhere. Being as oblivious as I am it never even occurred to me that she had to put in effort to get hold of my number and then call me. Felt quite bad about it afterwards.

mr_fegelien

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I wouldn't go out with a woman that is taller than me and I guess ladies are the same. Some ladies would only go out with a guy if they are at least 3-4 inches taller. That's just a preference. I don't get the hullabaloo about it.

I'm 5'6 so I'm obviously ruled out of a lot of ladies automatically, fair enough. I rule out ladies for lots of reasons too. That's the game. You win some, you lose some.

Can I ask why you wouldn't date a taller woman? Is it the fear of feeling emasculated?

Esel

purifol0 wrote: »

Sure it wont matter if its in jest and the girl gets the joke, but youll find plenty of non native english speakers (tonnes of brazillians) on tinder in Dublin and if you have jokes in your bio theres a good chance they wont understand it. They do however understand what 6' 3" means .

Yeah, they 'instinctively' know it means 190.5 cm.

kowloon

Esel wrote: »

Yeah, they 'instinctively' know it means 190.5 cm.

I run entirely on metric with the exception of the weight and height of people. strange that we still cling on to older measurements for very specific purposes.

mr_fegelien

I can see why Elliot Rodger went on his rampage...The guy never stood a chance.


Anyway better to learn life is unfair earlier than later.

jimgoose

mr_fegelien wrote: »

I can see why Elliot Rodger went on his rampage...The guy never stood a chance.


Anyway better to learn life is unfair earlier than later.

Rodger was a deeply, profoundly disturbed young man. This "rampage" of his and rage against women was hardly a reasonable reaction to his difficulties, to put it mildly.

Better Than Christ

mr_fegelien wrote: »

I can see why Elliot Rodger went on his rampage...The guy never stood a chance.


Anyway better to learn life is unfair earlier than later.

Maybe Boards should hand your I.P. address over to the Gardai, just in case.

bitofabind

If you're at a stage of justifying the mass shootings of psychopaths because "women don't like short men" it's probably time to take a long hard look at yourself and think about how women and people in general are perceiving you. Coz being a short-arse is the least of your problems there.

NSAman

Lyan wrote: »

Women don't date men shorter then them unless you are Danny Devito.

Or have a SUPER HUGE...



Bank Balance

purifol0

Jesus you guys need to google the meaning of the word troll. And then look at the ceiling because someone wrote gullible on it.


Is this your first time on the internet lads? Or can you just not handle flippant comments & gallows humour.

event

Redneck Reject1971 wrote: »

Look if they are more focused on your physical appearance and not on your intelligence.They are not worth the effort,so don't sell yourself short.There are people out there for you,so don't rush it.

No need to rub it in

kowloon

If the overwhelming majority of people don't feel the need to go on a killing spree it seems pretty reasonable to me that the killers' perception is totally out of sync with reality. I think empathising with their issues and sympathising with their course of action are very different.

Fegelein, I mean this in the nicest possible way: You need to seek help with the way you're thinking. The brain is an organ like any other and when it's not well it'll screw with your thoughts and generally make life more difficult than it needs to be. The longer you leave it the harder it'll be to recover. Your GP will set you on the right path, but you have to make the first step and actually get an appointment.

TuringBot47

Better Than Christ wrote: »

Maybe Boards should hand your I.P. address over to the Gardai, just in case.

I already suggested that.
You should watch the Netflix documentary "Don't **** with cats", where a group of internet users track down a weirdo who posted videos torturing cats. Ended up, he progressed to killing humans.

TuringBot47

purifol0 wrote: »

Woman go for the top dog. Its fundamentally biological and not a personal preference as many here falsely ascribe.

Yes, they have that "preference", but are limited by their own status, attractiveness etc. So they go for/settle for "the best they can get" in general.

purifol0

TuringBot47 wrote: »

Yes, they have that "preference", but are limited by their own status, attractiveness etc. So they go for/settle for "the best they can get" in general.

Commets thus far mostly referred to dating apps and tinder specifically, which were the primary method of flirting over the lockdown period.


But even in real life, women select for taller men. A few deluded commenters here have sarcastically asked to see that study. None of them seemingly typed a few words into google, if they did theyd get plenty of hits from studies done through decades of research that says as much. If they want to keep their blinkered view thats fine, Im not here to spoonfeed them.

Baggly

mr_fegelien wrote: »

I can see why Elliot Rodger went on his rampage...The guy never stood a chance.


Anyway better to learn life is unfair earlier than later.

Mod

That post is a disgrace. Don't come back to this thread when your posting privileges are back.

Mad_maxx

Warbeastrior wrote: »

I'm 6ft and would love to be 6'5".
I'm happy with my height but would like to be taller if I could choose.
Funny.

Why ?

MrMiata

Alright, back on track.

I'm 170cm, so I'm scraping in at 5'7.
I also weigh less than 10st and I'm bald, so I look a little like my childhood hero Cailou.
I've never had an issue with women (that wasn't caused by my stupid mouth).

Some women care, they either get over it or they don't, but you can't change that.

Most don't.

While at college I had lads come up to me asking for advice, because they're self conscious about their heights.. most of them were taller than me.
It's down to confidence in my opinion..

At 5'5 you're grand, I feel bad for the guys who are tiptoeing above 5ft..

TuringBot47

MrMiata wrote: »

I feel bad for the guys who are tiptoeing above 5ft..

Sexual selection is more important than natural selection in a left wing bleeding heart social welfare state.

Works both ways... breast size has been increasing over time too.

Mad_maxx

sugarman wrote: »

I cant get my head around anyone that would have a height restriction as a criteria for dating.

Especially those "No under 6ft" types when the average Irish male is 5'10".

Its just so trivial and theyre porbably missing out on genuine lads that tick all the other boxes.

Just looking at someone I probably couldnt tell you their actual height. I certainly wouldnt be able to tell the difference between someone of 5'8" and 6ft.

It's incredibly shallow

Warbeastrior

Mad_maxx wrote:

Why ?

A part of it is down to attracting women. I've seen plenty of women who are height obsessed. (Not all of course or even the majority)
I've not had the best luck with the women I've really liked over the years which was moreso to do with shyness/not putting myself out there etc (All my own fault) However, I do think if I were 6'5" or so it would have definitely attracted more women just from a looks perspective. Like it would give me a better starting point.
I've heard women say if a guy is over 6ft, they automatically become a maybe etc no matter what they are like as a person. I know at 6ft, height isn't an issue for me but to be noticeably tall, it would help even more.

Also, how I want to look would benefit from extra height but thats just personal preference.

TuringBot47

Mad_maxx wrote: »

It's incredibly shallow

I disagree.
We're all programmed to select partners for fertility and social status.


If you look at any nature documentary, the largest/strongest/tallest tend to be the leaders in the group and thus the "alpha males".


So short men have to make up for their biological disadvantage with clearly better intelligence/success/money etc.

purifol0

TuringBot47 wrote: »

Sexual selection is more important than natural selection in a left wing bleeding heart social welfare state.

Works both ways... breast size has been increasing over time too.

Things like breast size and height increasing are actually down to the fact that food is cheap and plentiful. Girls hit pubery years earlier than their grandparents, again due to abundance. Penis size however - humans (well men) have much bigger ones than other primates by far and thats down to sexual selection by women over very long periods of time.

MrMiata

purifol0 wrote: »

Things like breast size and height increasing are actually down to the fact that food is cheap and plentiful. Girls hit pubery years earlier than their grandparents, again due to abundance. Penis size however - humans (well men) have much bigger ones than other primates by far and thats down to sexual selection by women over very long periods of time.

Can't discount the 'Make Your Dong Bigger in 3 Easy Steps!!!' Ads.

Minime2.5

I have it in my head that when it comes to dating as a guy in your late 30s early 40s your ****ed unless you have sizeable financial assets . Is this true ?

Granadino

It’s the small jockey has the big whip.

Baggly

MrMiata wrote:

Can't discount the 'Make Your Dong Bigger in 3 Easy Steps!!!' Ads.

Darwin didn't take those into account did he.

Minime2.5

Topdolla wrote: »

Go to Thailand and buy a wife?

Better value in the rental market in that part of the world :pac:

Church on Tuesday

Honestly Fegbot should be site banned on that comment alone.

Some very bitter men on here.

People like what they like. Attraction isn't a choice; if a women is attracted to you she is, if not, she's simply not. It's not rocket science gents. And that goes both ways.

I blame online dating. It has totally skewered how men think they are perceived. If you are rating your attractiveness/value by how many matches you get on Tinder then I feel sorry for you and you will be disappointed.

Baggly

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Honestly Fegbot should be site banned on that comment alone.

Some very bitter men on here.

Mod

Best to not talk about people who can't respond back.

SusieBlue

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Honestly Fegbot should be site banned on that comment alone.

Some very bitter men on here.

People like what they like. Attraction isn't a choice; if a women is attracted to you she is, if not, she's simply not. It's not rocket science gents. And that goes both ways.

I blame online dating. It has totally skewered how men think they are perceived. If you are rating your attractiveness/value by how many matches you get on Tinder then I feel sorry for you and you will be disappointed.

I wonder if the people complaining about women having too much choice in the dating world would themselves go for a 3/10 if they could have their pick of the 10/10’s. I highly doubt they would.

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

I wonder if the people complaining about women having too much choice in the dating world would themselves go for a 3/10 if they could have their pick of the 10/10’s. I highly doubt they would.

Could it be me who's wrong?
no, it's the women who are wrong

Earthhorse

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder - have apps like Tinder ever released statistics on this? It would be interesting to know.Which filter do people tend to set first? Which ones are used most and least often? Which ones once set do people then tend to expand more often to increase the result set? Be an interesting set of stats to read through. At least if you're like me and find stats interesting

OKCupid did or used to years ago. Google OkCupid blog or OkCupid stats and you will see. I think they even wrote a book about it.

Here's an article specifically relating to height (from a different author):
https://medium.com/@SethUlinski/why-the-guys-who-own-the-internet-would-strike-out-on-okcupid-a3d9564b4516

Research on online dating sites by Duke University professor Dan Ariely has shown that for every inch below 5'10,’’ a man has to earn $40,000 more to be seen as equally appealing to a woman.

But I’m sure there will be posters on this thread who still think it's all in people's heads.

saabsaab

Minime2.5 wrote: »

I have it in my head that when it comes to dating as a guy in your late 30s early 40s your ****ed unless you have sizeable financial assets . Is this true ?

Not at all. Best time for men. All age groups after ya.

Warbeastrior

SusieBlue wrote:

I wonder if the people complaining about women having too much choice in the dating world would themselves go for a 3/10 if they could have their pick of the 10/10’s. I highly doubt they would.

I can't stand when people rate peoples attractiveness.
Attraction is subjective imo. You cud be a 10/10 to someone and be a 3/10 to someone else.
I was in college and I really fancied a woman. I thought she was very cute. I showed her to a friend and they rated her as a 5/10 as you could say her gums were more visible than most when she smiled.
I thought she was gorgeous.

SusieBlue

Warbeastrior wrote: »

I can't stand when people rate peoples attractiveness.
Attraction is subjective imo. You cud be a 10/10 to someone and be a 3/10 to someone else.
I was in college and I really fancied a woman. I thought she was very cute. I showed her to a friend and they rated her as a 5/10 as you could say her gums were more visible than most when she smiled.
I thought she was gorgeous.

You completely missed the point I was making. Of course attraction is subjective.

All I was saying was that those here bemoaning all the choice women have would do the exact same thing if they had the choice too, so they’re total hypocrites.
They wouldn’t go for someone they deemed to be mildly attractive if they could have someone who ticked every box instead.

Warbeastrior

SusieBlue wrote:

All I was saying was that those here bemoaning all the choice women have would do the exact same thing if they had the choice too, so they’re total hypocrites. They wouldn’t go for someone they deemed to be mildly attractive if they could have someone who ticked every box instead.

I get ya, I just dislike the whole rating thing.
Well of course you'd go for the person who you find ticks all of your boxes over someone who only ticks a few.
I cudnt care less if a woman thought I was too small. It's her choice. I'd never criticise her for it.
Same way, I don't like a woman who smokes. It's preference.

Something that I find is a bit unfair is that I've seen a lot of women make a joke of guys being small. They laugh and joke about it and almost take much pleasure in turning them down.
It's totally ok if they don't find them attractive but it costs nothing to be kind.

TuringBot47

purifol0 wrote: »

. Penis size however - humans (well men) have much bigger ones than other primates by far and thats down to sexual selection by women over very long periods of time.

Penis size isn't on display, at least nowadays, the only way women can "select" it is generally indirectly by height and hand/feet size which tend to the be related to height which goes back to strength/status in a group.

Breast size, is a secondary sexual characteristic like hip width and a way men positively select women as it indicates they passed puberty and are fertile.