I have never seen a tall couple … tall men really like short woman huh

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pedophilia

You're really stupid

IMO people like ^^ are insecure about themselves or are bitter that some short woman stole a tall man from her.

I mean.. I could say that tall women appear manly. Take off the makeup, cut the hair, and you could be a man. Maybe men who like tall women are secretly in the closet?

See how that works?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a tallish woman at 5' 9". I know lots of tall women and all of them are married to men taller than them. OP is only 5' 2". She is a munchkin. EVERYBODY is tall compared to her.

Except that OP is barely shorter than average. But okay. 🙄

I'm 5'10" and married to a man who is 5'6". Men my height or taller just weren't interested, but I'm not a slim willowy tall, I'm an athletic tall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

The depicted women all have same proportions as the modern “models”. Long legs are more typical for taller women - they were likely also taller than average for their time. I can’t find it now but there was a research that proved that beauty standard didn’t change that much for centuries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

ok, so? Someone or you mentioned "Renaissance art" as the epitome of femininity -- narrow, slim fingers, thin ankles. Short women can have those qualities just as easily as tall women. And women in the Renaissance period were not tall; they were short. So, by your logic, short women are the epitome of femininity.

And, again, this isn't about fat, but about height.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

ok, so? Someone or you mentioned "Renaissance art" as the epitome of femininity -- narrow, slim fingers, thin ankles. Short women can have those qualities just as easily as tall women. And women in the Renaissance period were not tall; they were short. So, by your logic, short women are the epitome of femininity.

And, again, this isn't about fat, but about height.

No, actually, elongated legs, slim ankles, neck (Nefertiti ) are more typical for taller women. Shorter people are more “boxy” as it’s harder not to gain weight and burn calories with modern huge portions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

The depicted women all have same proportions as the modern “models”. Long legs are more typical for taller women - they were likely also taller than average for their time. I can’t find it now but there was a research that proved that beauty standard didn’t change that much for centuries

So, the beauty standard is shorter women.. because women in that time period were short.

It's about proportion. A short woman can have long legs for her height. A tall woman can have short legs for her height. So, the beauty standards is about proportion, not about height.

DH is tall and finds women who are proportionate more attractive -- so not a big butt or big boogs like Kim K, but balanced. He also finds some tall women attractive as well as some short women and average height women.

The people being nasty about tall or short women are some bitter women. If you don't have a good man maybe it's because of your attitude rather than your height.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

ok, so? Someone or you mentioned "Renaissance art" as the epitome of femininity -- narrow, slim fingers, thin ankles. Short women can have those qualities just as easily as tall women. And women in the Renaissance period were not tall; they were short. So, by your logic, short women are the epitome of femininity.

And, again, this isn't about fat, but about height.

No, actually, elongated legs, slim ankles, neck (Nefertiti ) are more typical for taller women. Shorter people are more “boxy” as it’s harder not to gain weight and burn calories with modern huge portions.

Taller women appear more manly because, well, they are just big. You must only know some short fat women to make such comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a classic example of internal mysogeny lol. If you anonymously ask women whether they would rather be short or tall you know the answer. They have bought into the idea that men should be the taller ones stronger ones. I am 6'3 and my wife is 6'1. Personally I don't see any difference as far as attractiveness between a short and tall woman. And women are already considered tall when they are 5'8 sometimes even 5'7. Crazy

And what is the 'universal' answer? I an short woman and if I could be taller I would want that.

Most women would rather be short than tall. Of course now they will say the opposite lol.

I think they’d rather be 5’ than 6’ if those were the only two choices. But most of the women I know under 5’6” or so wish they were a little taller, myself included. I’m 5’3” and would love a few more inches. But if I had to choose between really tall or really short, I’d probably have to go with the latter.

Really? How old are the women you are asking this question? Maybe 16 year olds would choose 5 feet. A woman that short really struggles with weight and looking dumpy and if it doesn't come for them by their 20s, it gets them the rest of their adult life.

No thanks I'd be 6 feet every day. I am 50.

My 49 year old friend is 6 feet tall and girls/women have screamed when they’ve seen her in the bathroom. She’s actually had security called on her twice this year, because of the whole trans panic nonsense. It really hurts her feelings. She’s also 220 pounds, which is not that much more overweight than I am at 5’3” and 155 pounds but people aren’t staring and pointing at me like they do to her. I’m struggling with my weight right now and definitely feeling dumpy, but she’s been struggling a lot more. It’s true that taller women can pull of weight gain better, but only to a point, and I think in general it’s also harder for really tall women pull off being less than beautiful.

Wow!!

I am 6 feet tall at 51 years old and I'm 150lbs. Not a single day in my life has anyone screamed in horror when they've seen me. But I'll keep looking forward to it. However, 220lbs is a lot for a person who is 6 feet tall.

If you’re 6’ and 150 lbs you have the body of a former model. You’re unlikely to be mistaken for a man.

[Anonymous]

So, a tall big woman can be mistaken for a man, and a short skinny woman can be mistaken for a child. I guess average sized people are lucky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

ok, so? Someone or you mentioned "Renaissance art" as the epitome of femininity -- narrow, slim fingers, thin ankles. Short women can have those qualities just as easily as tall women. And women in the Renaissance period were not tall; they were short. So, by your logic, short women are the epitome of femininity.

And, again, this isn't about fat, but about height.

No, actually, elongated legs, slim ankles, neck (Nefertiti ) are more typical for taller women. Shorter people are more “boxy” as it’s harder not to gain weight and burn calories with modern huge portions.

Tell that to Natalie Portman, SJP and pretty much every famous woman who isn’t a model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, a tall big woman can be mistaken for a man, and a short skinny woman can be mistaken for a child. I guess average sized people are lucky.

lol
At 5’3.5”, am I safely in the “can look like an adult woman” zone? 😬

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

ok, so? Someone or you mentioned "Renaissance art" as the epitome of femininity -- narrow, slim fingers, thin ankles. Short women can have those qualities just as easily as tall women. And women in the Renaissance period were not tall; they were short. So, by your logic, short women are the epitome of femininity.

And, again, this isn't about fat, but about height.

No, actually, elongated legs, slim ankles, neck (Nefertiti ) are more typical for taller women. Shorter people are more “boxy” as it’s harder not to gain weight and burn calories with modern huge portions.

Tell that to Natalie Portman, SJP and pretty much every famous woman who isn’t a model.

She’s a Hollywood actress who has access to best nutrition and exercise. But go to West Virginia and you’ll see most women are short and wide.
I agree that it’s all about proportions: Portman is very proportionate. But many shorter women (JLo) don’t have this grace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a 5’8 woman I dated men from 5’9 to 6’4. While most of my dates were over 6’, I feel most comfortable when he’s 5’11-6’. I don’t know what you are talking about sex: it’s great when we can do it standing in the shower with me just wrapping my leg around him, being about same level. My legs are long and mens legs shorter so my P is right at the level of his D. I also don’t like to stretch my neck too much to kiss, better if we are about same level. Also men like to f..k with my legs on his shoulders. Some munch on my toes in the process….
I’m thin and very feminine, round butt and large tits but looking narrower than most shorter women, and way smaller than most men.
OP has weird agenda against tall women

To add, I also look very petite when sitting next to shorter women and have thin ankles, tiny hands with longer thin fingers and size 8 shoe with narrow feminine feet. Men tell me I’m the most proportional woman they’ve ever seen when I get undressed, and a sex bomb. Shorter women who are wider than me look more masculine and “square”, but that’s just my opinion

I think the issue is that so many women and men are overweight in the US. If I was not in the “thin” category, I would have looked totally different

What is feminine feet?

Narrow, slim fingers, high hill, thin ankle. Look at Renaissance art

Renaissance art depict "full figured" women, though.

Except that these full figured athletic women are actually “slim” BMI by modern standards. They all have long necks and legs, not short/fat.

https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/venus-of-urbino/bQGS8pnP5vr2Jg?utm_source=google&utm_medium=kp&hl=en&avm=2

Women in the Renaissance period were short.

One can be tall and fat, as they can be short and fat. We aren't talking about fat; we are talking about height.

Taller people burn more calories just existing and in general just carry extra weight better. 5lbs on a very short person will make your clothes stop fitting and 15lbs on a taller woman won't do that. #facts

ok, so? Someone or you mentioned "Renaissance art" as the epitome of femininity -- narrow, slim fingers, thin ankles. Short women can have those qualities just as easily as tall women. And women in the Renaissance period were not tall; they were short. So, by your logic, short women are the epitome of femininity.

And, again, this isn't about fat, but about height.

No, actually, elongated legs, slim ankles, neck (Nefertiti ) are more typical for taller women. Shorter people are more “boxy” as it’s harder not to gain weight and burn calories with modern huge portions.

Tell that to Natalie Portman, SJP and pretty much every famous woman who isn’t a model.

She’s a Hollywood actress who has access to best nutrition and exercise. But go to West Virginia and you’ll see most women are short and wide.
I agree that it’s all about proportions: Portman is very proportionate. But many shorter women (JLo) don’t have this grace.

JLo is stunning though, so who cares?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a classic example of internal mysogeny lol. If you anonymously ask women whether they would rather be short or tall you know the answer. They have bought into the idea that men should be the taller ones stronger ones. I am 6'3 and my wife is 6'1. Personally I don't see any difference as far as attractiveness between a short and tall woman. And women are already considered tall when they are 5'8 sometimes even 5'7. Crazy

And what is the 'universal' answer? I an short woman and if I could be taller I would want that.

Most women would rather be short than tall. Of course now they will say the opposite lol.

I think they’d rather be 5’ than 6’ if those were the only two choices. But most of the women I know under 5’6” or so wish they were a little taller, myself included. I’m 5’3” and would love a few more inches. But if I had to choose between really tall or really short, I’d probably have to go with the latter.

Really? How old are the women you are asking this question? Maybe 16 year olds would choose 5 feet. A woman that short really struggles with weight and looking dumpy and if it doesn't come for them by their 20s, it gets them the rest of their adult life.

No thanks I'd be 6 feet every day. I am 50.

My 49 year old friend is 6 feet tall and girls/women have screamed when they’ve seen her in the bathroom. She’s actually had security called on her twice this year, because of the whole trans panic nonsense. It really hurts her feelings. She’s also 220 pounds, which is not that much more overweight than I am at 5’3” and 155 pounds but people aren’t staring and pointing at me like they do to her. I’m struggling with my weight right now and definitely feeling dumpy, but she’s been struggling a lot more. It’s true that taller women can pull of weight gain better, but only to a point, and I think in general it’s also harder for really tall women pull off being less than beautiful.

Wow!!

I am 6 feet tall at 51 years old and I'm 150lbs. Not a single day in my life has anyone screamed in horror when they've seen me. But I'll keep looking forward to it. However, 220lbs is a lot for a person who is 6 feet tall.

If you’re 6’ and 150 lbs you have the body of a former model. You’re unlikely to be mistaken for a man.

Uhhh...not quite. The average height and weight for top models is 5'10" and 118 for women. For men it's 6'1" and 180.

The 6 ft models are around 125.