As a woman, if you must pick one shorter than you or taller but skinny, who would you choose?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Taller. I’ve never been in a relationship with someone shorter than me- just not my thing.

+ 1

[Anonymous]

Talk and skinny is my favorite. Not sure why that would be a bad thing? Maybe you mean skinny fat with no muscle on a man?

I’m 5’0 so a man shorter than me would be a Little Person…

[Anonymous]

Tall and skinny like my husband. My husband is very skinny but healthy otherwise. He has had the same body weight for 20 years. He was skinny when I met him and still skinny today. He doesn't drink, works out regularly and easy very healthy. He introduced me to fitness and we regularly go to the gym together. We are both 48. He is 6'0 and 140. Since he is so athletic most people think he is 20 lbs heavier than the really is.

Anyways I married him for his qualities. He is kind, funny, smart, amazing dad and husband, I truly love him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignore what women say and look at who women are with in public, and it goes something like this:
- 6'5" handsome rich guy has his pick of the litter
- 6'3" bad boy dominates superficial / casual relationships
- 5'10" UMC guy typically does well in LTRs with women who have had their fun and are ready to "settle"
- 5'6" guy with a great personality, terrific physique, and well-off financially stays single

tl;dr men require a bare minimum of height, looks, and finances to be successful in LTRs, and if they're lacking just enough in one of those areas, then no matter how much they improve the other two, they're f***ed.

Disagree. The 5’6” guy as you described will be snapped up. Money plus looks and great personality trump height.

You'd think so, but that's not what all the short men online are saying. They are frequently perceived as try-hards for working out, "compensating" with high income / luxury goods, and at best, will be told that it's a shame they're short, because otherwise they'd be a great catch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a woman, if you must pick one shorter than you or taller but skinny, who would you choose?

I don't screen people by measuring their weight and height.

[Anonymous]

IME, the guys with guys personalities and money get taken at any height. There’s a guy in my street who’s about 5’, but he’s loaded enough to have a 3,000 sq ft house, a stay-at-home wife, and a child in full-time daycare. Wife is about 5’6”. OP, if you’re not meeting women, look to things other than your height.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IME, the guys with great personalities and money get taken at any height. There’s a guy in my street who’s about 5’, but he’s loaded enough to have a 3,000 sq ft house, a stay-at-home wife, and a child in full-time daycare. Wife is about 5’6”. OP, if you’re not meeting women, look to things other than your height.

[Anonymous]

All type of men and women find partners. If historically only aesthetically 10 people were marrying other aesthetically 10 people, we would've eliminated 0-9.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignore what women say and look at who women are with in public, and it goes something like this:
- 6'5" handsome rich guy has his pick of the litter
- 6'3" bad boy dominates superficial / casual relationships
- 5'10" UMC guy typically does well in LTRs with women who have had their fun and are ready to "settle"
- 5'6" guy with a great personality, terrific physique, and well-off financially stays single

tl;dr men require a bare minimum of height, looks, and finances to be successful in LTRs, and if they're lacking just enough in one of those areas, then no matter how much they improve the other two, they're f***ed.

This is my DH. He's not single, lol. He's married to me -- a former model with multiple grad degrees and her own professional career and money. And there are plenty who would gladly get in line behind me at any given time, too.

So you must be some kind of bitter incel or something to be projecting like this?

Why do people on this forum always draw attention to women with grad degrees. I don't get it. What makes them special?

Nothing, actually.

"former model" = no longer competitive on the sexual marketplace
"multiple grad degrees" = six-figure debt she dumped on her husband
"her own professional career and money" = spends 40 hrs./wk. making a corporation rich and doesn't share the spoils with her husband

Every time I read "grad degree", my subconscious says "liability".

I don't want to insult lawyers and other with social sciences degrees but they are the ones who put so much premium on a grad degree. Some of never went to graduate school because we didn't need to. I have a bachelor's degree in pure mathematics from Berkeley. I am not kidding you I went on a date once and the woman kept asking me why I only have a bachelor's degree and she looked down on me because of it. She had a doctorate in some social field but somehow in her mind me with a math degree was beneath her in terms of intellects. I am sure she is still single and I am happily married to a teacher.

I believe it. My half-brother has an associate's in computer science and earns six figures, has his own business, etc. Largely self-taught and self-made, but many women in the social sciences would look down on that. Some of the richest men in the world have little to no college education, and even shun it as "too easy" or "unnecessary".

The heavy emphasis on college credentials just clout-chasing without any self-awareness. Smoke and mirrors to divert from the lack of character, substance, and virtue in those individuals. Ultimately, the teachers, secretaries, baristas, and other entry-level women are the ones succeeding in their work lives, marriages, child-rearing, and overall fulfillment.

When I was in the dating market the worst dates I have had were with women obsessed with their educational credentials. Some are even obsessed with the college they went to. Thankfully for a lot of women they don't make it an obsession. And I want to remind people that in many field a graduate degree is not needed for career progression as far responsibility and salary. I can only speak for my field electrical engineering. A masters degree in EE is not going to set you apart. If you are thinking about getting one don't waste your money. When your resume lands on my desk you are not going to have a distinct advantage. In fact most likely I won't even see your resume because our internal system probably excluded you already.

If you are in law/medicine that's a different story. I am sure female doctors and lawyers are amazing but I think they are better of with fellow lawyers and doctors because they are at the same level in terms of income.

My experience with dating and career has been the same, and I agree with your post in general. Once I learn that a woman has an advanced degree, I frankly opt out of dating her... I'm not interested in paying off her student loans and I don't care for the patronizing head games. The men at their own education level can have them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignore what women say and look at who women are with in public, and it goes something like this:
- 6'5" handsome rich guy has his pick of the litter
- 6'3" bad boy dominates superficial / casual relationships
- 5'10" UMC guy typically does well in LTRs with women who have had their fun and are ready to "settle"
- 5'6" guy with a great personality, terrific physique, and well-off financially stays single

tl;dr men require a bare minimum of height, looks, and finances to be successful in LTRs, and if they're lacking just enough in one of those areas, then no matter how much they improve the other two, they're f***ed.

Disagree. The 5’6” guy as you described will be snapped up. Money plus looks and great personality trump height.

You'd think so, but that's not what all the short men online are saying. They are frequently perceived as try-hards for working out, "compensating" with high income / luxury goods, and at best, will be told that it's a shame they're short, because otherwise they'd be a great catch.

Every shorter man I know that is good looking, wealthy, and charismatic is married is a beautiful wife by any standard and living great lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignore what women say and look at who women are with in public, and it goes something like this:
- 6'5" handsome rich guy has his pick of the litter
- 6'3" bad boy dominates superficial / casual relationships
- 5'10" UMC guy typically does well in LTRs with women who have had their fun and are ready to "settle"
- 5'6" guy with a great personality, terrific physique, and well-off financially stays single

tl;dr men require a bare minimum of height, looks, and finances to be successful in LTRs, and if they're lacking just enough in one of those areas, then no matter how much they improve the other two, they're f***ed.

Disagree. The 5’6” guy as you described will be snapped up. Money plus looks and great personality trump height.

You'd think so, but that's not what all the short men online are saying. They are frequently perceived as try-hards for working out, "compensating" with high income / luxury goods, and at best, will be told that it's a shame they're short, because otherwise they'd be a great catch.

Every shorter man I know that is good looking, wealthy, and charismatic is married is a beautiful wife by any standard and living great lives.

"Shorter", but not short? List their heights, please.

[Anonymous]

I really feel like these questions are coming from men, because the amount of time women spend thinking about men's height is far far lower than would be predicted by how often it comes up on this site.

I'm quite short, so a man shorter than me would be exceptionally short by any metric. But if his lid fit my pot, then great!

[Anonymous]

Huh? Why would a woman prefer shorter and fatter over tall and skinny?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Huh? Why would a woman prefer shorter and fatter over tall and skinny?

They'd be an opposite from me. I've never like anyone looking like my brother. I would have fun with them, but wouldn't have kids. Got to be taller if fat. We could work on the weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignore what women say and look at who women are with in public, and it goes something like this:
- 6'5" handsome rich guy has his pick of the litter
- 6'3" bad boy dominates superficial / casual relationships
- 5'10" UMC guy typically does well in LTRs with women who have had their fun and are ready to "settle"
- 5'6" guy with a great personality, terrific physique, and well-off financially stays single

tl;dr men require a bare minimum of height, looks, and finances to be successful in LTRs, and if they're lacking just enough in one of those areas, then no matter how much they improve the other two, they're f***ed.

Disagree. The 5’6” guy as you described will be snapped up. Money plus looks and great personality trump height.

You'd think so, but that's not what all the short men online are saying. They are frequently perceived as try-hards for working out, "compensating" with high income / luxury goods, and at best, will be told that it's a shame they're short, because otherwise they'd be a great catch.

If they are being perceived as “compensating” then they’re not just going to the gym and taking care of themselves or having luxury goods because they’re successful— they *are* trying to compensate, which means by definition they don’t have a great personality.