so... does height really matter?
I've always held a pretty firm view that the guy should be over 5'11 as I'm 5'8 in my socks and, like most females like wearing heels. Your legs look longer, which is very definitely an advantage in our stumpy legged family, your bum perter (no comment) and you are forced to walk in a feminine manner. All good so far.
However I am beginning to realise how dramatically this reduces the number of contenders. Specifically, on one of my dating sites (oh yes there are many), there were only 184 men over 5'11 compared to 278 men over 5'9. [No, sorry, I am still not going to consider those under that, like one chap who wrote to me, who was 5'3, but said "I can be 5'6 in shoes". Crikey.] That's 100 guys I am automatically excluding on the basis that they're not tall enough. Does it matter that much? Would I really mind? Surely other things like personality, intelligence, humour, kindness etc matter more?
Logically speaking I'm open to the idea of liking and dating shorter individuals. But the practice is rather different - attraction isn't necessarily a logical thing (if it were, I would have been married years ago). I am attracted to manly men. Men whose clothes would be comically large on me. Men who could carry me (I hasten to add I mean in an "English Patient" style crisis rather than in a "I'm tired, carry me" type situation). Men who can lift stuff I can't. Men who would weigh more than me even if I was nine months pregnant.
I realise this sounds rather pathetic in this modern day - men should be admirable for many other qualities other than just caveman strength - but I think it's just one of those things. Having never been petite (who am I kidding?), I enjoy being next to someone who makes me feel slim/small/attractive/feminine. If my thighs are bigger than theirs then, well, with the best will in the world, I don't think I'll be able to encourage myself to fancy them.
Of course the easiest answer to this would be for me to lose 2 stone and then almost blokes would be larger than me. But I'd be a miserable whiney cow. And therefore even more single.
I can't help wondering about the 100 guys I'm discounting though...
However I am beginning to realise how dramatically this reduces the number of contenders. Specifically, on one of my dating sites (oh yes there are many), there were only 184 men over 5'11 compared to 278 men over 5'9. [No, sorry, I am still not going to consider those under that, like one chap who wrote to me, who was 5'3, but said "I can be 5'6 in shoes". Crikey.] That's 100 guys I am automatically excluding on the basis that they're not tall enough. Does it matter that much? Would I really mind? Surely other things like personality, intelligence, humour, kindness etc matter more?
Logically speaking I'm open to the idea of liking and dating shorter individuals. But the practice is rather different - attraction isn't necessarily a logical thing (if it were, I would have been married years ago). I am attracted to manly men. Men whose clothes would be comically large on me. Men who could carry me (I hasten to add I mean in an "English Patient" style crisis rather than in a "I'm tired, carry me" type situation). Men who can lift stuff I can't. Men who would weigh more than me even if I was nine months pregnant.
I realise this sounds rather pathetic in this modern day - men should be admirable for many other qualities other than just caveman strength - but I think it's just one of those things. Having never been petite (who am I kidding?), I enjoy being next to someone who makes me feel slim/small/attractive/feminine. If my thighs are bigger than theirs then, well, with the best will in the world, I don't think I'll be able to encourage myself to fancy them.
Of course the easiest answer to this would be for me to lose 2 stone and then almost blokes would be larger than me. But I'd be a miserable whiney cow. And therefore even more single.
I can't help wondering about the 100 guys I'm discounting though...
posted by londongirl at Wednesday, July 26, 2006
6 Comments:
I know - when I was single, I hated the fact that my more petite friends could choose from a wider selection than I could!
I'm 5'9", and always moaned that I had to opt for men over 6'. Darling Boyfriend is 6'3" and perfect, so I'm chuffed.
Don't resort to short-arses - your perfect (tall) man will come along, especially if you work your way through the entirety of London ;-)
Why not hedge your bets and set the height limit at your own height? It will leave you with a larger pool of men to choose from overall. I'm sure there have to be at least a few handsome, muscular 5'9" British men who would love to carry you all over town :) You can always drop them later if they don't work out, but I would suggest giving yourself as many options as possible.
Forget about men, London girl, I think you need a gorilla in your life!
So stay in your sox and wewil all be there----whats wrong with a girl in heels being taller than her guy
So you will snog with your head tilted down----no big deal
And once you get past that mandatory second date, they seem taller laying down
You are only worried about how it looks t other people---well fuck them---its you and a guy---and you are missing out on a big percentage of the population---and the ONE could be there---
So wear your heels but once you get them home, socks will be the order of the night
Only porn stars are naked in heels
In principle, I am with you on this one.
My dating criteria are "single, straight, and over 6'"
But I am prepared to compromise on any two of these at any one time.
It's understandable with your height, but I find it super annoying when women who are 5'2 refuse to date any guys under 6 feet tall. In my experience MOST women want or demand a guy who is 6' or taller, which is only like 10-20% of the population, and more than half are under 5'9". Then many have the nerve to rag on guys about being shallow.
I am well over six foot, but I find it a pretty ridiculous requirement, especially when oftentimes the guys will in every other way be great.
Post a Comment
<< Home