Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Infact, Tall girls are kinda sexy

I imagine it would be shorter guys that would display more concern about a woman taller than them.

However, generally speaking, that would be outnumbered several times over by guys who would think, "5'10" - that's like the height of a model like Kate Upton, therefore, very attractive indeed."

 Ashiraya wrote:

I am 5'9"-10" ish outside of high heels, but I rarely wear any.

Thanks for your answers, guys. It seems I had been misled into believing it was more important than I thought. The average Swedish woman is 5'5"-6" ish, so while I am not a behemoth I do stand a couple of inches above most other women.

Personally, I prefer women about that height, as it's close to mine. That being said, it's not always a dealbreaker so long as, uh... proportions are... within tolerances.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, one of the guys I work with is just under 5 feet tall. His ex-wife was about 5'8" or so.

Obviously, they're divorced now. I can't said it was the height, but that's a single anecdote, so that's pretty much data, right?

Proportions?

 Ashiraya wrote:
How important is height, btw? I am 5'9"-10" ish.

And I am 18 since a few weeks back, so I know I am a bit above average for my age.

Personally, I like short girls... and tall girls... and everything in between, including girls taller than myself (I'm 6'0, so not like theres very many of them out there, not that it matters since most taller girls don't like dating shorter guys anyway). Really its different strokes for different folks, some guys like girls shorter than they are and refuse to date girls taller, some guys like them taller, some guys like them the same height, some guys like them exclusively short, etc. At the end it doesn't matter (unless you're a dude it seems, one of the things women tend to compliment me on the most is my height (and my eyes and shoes/clothes) and I've had discussions with many a lady about how much they love guys that are taller than them).

The important thing, really, is to take care of your physical appearance, and that doesn't mean "don't be fat" (quite the contrary, a heavier lady who knows how to carry her weight properly can be sexy as feth), although if you ARE heavy, you should consider diet and exercise for health reasons more than anything else. Really what matters is presentation, dress well/appropriately, keep your hair and makeup in order, etc. This is true of both men and women, you can be extremely attractive but if you always go out into public appearing as a total slob you're not going to have a good time.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:


Well as Ashiraya is a woman i'd imagine she was meaning if it mattered to men if she was fairly tall. I'm just a smidge over 6', I wouldn't be bothered about height as a man. In fact if I found somebody taller than me that I wanted to date I'd go for it. I guess it's really down to her if she wants to date somebody shorter. Might depend on the height of heels she wares, if any.

Yes, it was indeed what I meant. Thank you.

I am 5'9"-10" ish outside of high heels, but I rarely wear any.

Thanks for your answers, guys. It seems I had been misled into believing it was more important than I thought. The average Swedish woman is 5'5"-6" ish, so while I am not a behemoth I do stand a couple of inches above most other women.

I learned something... in the US the perception is that Scandinavian women are all extremely tall, blonde, and beautiful.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Proportions?

He's trying to be polite in saying "no fat chicks".

Oh wow, your question went over my head originally then or I missed it a few pages back.

No, I honestly wouldn't worry about it. As I said, I am roughly 5'5-5'6 while my girlfriend is 5'8-5'10 I would believe. (I don't know it exactly as the only time I've seen her written height it has been in metric or whatever but, she's is a full head taller than me. It's been a subject to joke about so far but, it hasn't affected the relationship a bit and has never been a problem.

As far as actual height goes, in the past any woman taller than that might intimidate me though, and I think the same applies to other guys if it was outlandish proportions ie: more than a head or so taller. (IE: Years ago I once saw a guy in my high school date a girl who was like 4'11 and he was 6'4. I don't know how they made that relationship work aside from love, obviously though this is an extreme example.)

So to sum it up, the only time height is an issue for me is with high heels involved.

chaos0xomega wrote:


I learned something... in the US the perception is that Scandinavian women are all extremely tall, blonde, and beautiful.

Blame pinups from older generations back. Honestly, this made me laugh. I guess It's hard to dispel a stereotype and I remember when my friends heard I was dating a swede, freaked out like I was a champ or something. Honestly, while it's all fun and games to say they are blonde haired viking descended models who happen to idolize a certain famous tennis player, swedes are just people too.

chaos0xomega wrote:

He's trying to be polite in saying "no fat chicks".

Yeah, we'll keep with this one.

Really though, I don't mean "no fat chicks", at least, not to an extreme. If a woman is cool enough, I don't care that she's overweight. I'm a little chubby myself.

I'm just saying that if I'd wear a belt to wear their pants, they need not apply.

 daedalus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

He's trying to be polite in saying "no fat chicks".

Yeah, we'll keep with this one.

I saw you edit that, hey now! You were fine with what you had said, I think.

 Stormwall wrote:

I saw you edit that, hey now! You were fine with what you had said, I think.

Well, this is the internet, and he said it better than me.

 Stormwall wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:


I learned something... in the US the perception is that Scandinavian women are all extremely tall, blonde, and beautiful.

Blame pinups from older generations back lol. It's hard to dispel a stereotype and I remember when my friends heard I was dating a swede, freaked out like I was a champ or something. Honestly, while it's all fun and games to say they are blonde haired viking descended models, swedes are just people too like anyone else and come in all sorts of fun shapes and sizes.

My only exposure to Scandinavian women has been a group of Danish girls (one of which I went on a few dates with in college), they all were extremely blonde and beautiful, only one of them was taller than myself, one of them was on the short side, but the other 3 were all only a couple inches shorter than myself (5'9"-5-11" roughly).

There was also this one chick I dated for a few months who said she was Finnish... and 19... she turned out to be neither of those things.... but she was blonde, and beautiful, but otherwise only average height lol

chaos0xomega wrote:
I learned something... in the US the perception is that Scandinavian women are all extremely tall, blonde, and beautiful.

Oh. Well, I've heard that much. Tall, perhaps. Blonde, nope! I am brown-haired. Beautiful... Eh. I am not quite content with my appearance but I do feel it could have been much worse. Seeing others in despair over their own supposed hideousness makes me a bit sad though.

daedalus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

He's trying to be polite in saying "no fat chicks".

Yeah, we'll keep with this one.

...Right. Well... I tend to look decently slim at least when clothed.

Oh god, parts of this thread are killing my sides.

Regardless, I guess it's a good thing that it can be said that people prefer different things.

 Ashiraya wrote:

...Right. Well... I tend to look decently slim at least when clothed.

You're European and not British. You're probably on the slim side of what passes for slim around the Midwest.

 Avatar 720 wrote:
My anecdotal experiences on Tinder and suchlike agree that it's definitely a factor, and one that some women seem to base entire relationships on. Whilst bios that stated things like "swipe left if you're under 6 foot"--usually in varying degrees of politeness ranging from a relatively innocuous request to stuff like 'don't bother swiping right if you're not 6'+'--weren't exactly common, they were hardly rare, either.

Yeah, but that's Tinder, the definition of "shallow hookups". If you're talking about long-term relationships then I really doubt there are many people who would reject an otherwise-good match just because of their height.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Proportions?

Everything else about body shape. Whether family-friendly or not.

 Ashiraya wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I learned something... in the US the perception is that Scandinavian women are all extremely tall, blonde, and beautiful.

Oh. Well, I've heard that much. Tall, perhaps. Blonde, nope! I am brown-haired. Beautiful... Eh. I am not quite content with my appearance but I do feel it could have been much worse. Seeing others in despair over their own supposed hideousness makes me a bit sad though.

I'm sure you're a harsher critic of yourself than most guys, in any case, women don't have it nearly as bad as men do in this department, proper use and application of makeup can go a long way to making even a decidedly average looking girl appear to be a supermodel (whereas if a man tried to use makeup to the same effect it would be met with harsh criticism by most men and probably most women as well). Seriously, makeup can do serious wonders (as can tattoos and/or jewelry lol) in things like hiding blemishes and marks, enhancing certain features like cheekbones or eyes, making asepects of your face appear larger/smaller or more/less symmetrical.

You think I don't know my makeup, son?

Well, given that you're being so down on yourself and I have literally never ever ever seen what you look like.... yes

Now I feel bad for being short. and just slightly overweight but being short i look bigger.

 daedalus wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

...Right. Well... I tend to look decently slim at least when clothed.

You're European and not British. You're probably on the slim side of what passes for slim around the Midwest.

Yo, what is that supposed to mean?

I think hes saying that British women are fat...

or the opposite? that Swedish women are usually bigger?

From what I have gathered, Swedish women are curvy and in perfectly healthy weight but, by no means near fat.

 the shrouded lord wrote:
or the opposite? that Swedish women are usually bigger?

If he follows up "not British" by saying youre on the slim side of being slim, thats probably not the case.

I usually date women on the taller side 5' 7+ but fit. I don't know why I just like the long lean look. That being said I've had some real good shags with smaller girls. There is something really hot about totally dominating the smaller ones. Oh and re Swedish women:

 Stormwall wrote:
Yeah... don't wait for it. […]
Anyways, as far as... dating. Just wait and be yourself.

Do not wait for sex but wait for dating? I guess you do not mean I should hire a prostitute, just that if I do get a girlfriend, I should not wait, right?

 Stormwall wrote:
Don't get tight lipped and if you do feth up, there will be another.

Tight lipped?
There will be another… occasion to feth up.

 Ashiraya wrote:
How important is height, btw?

On a scale from 0 to 10, I rate this as not important .

 Peregrine wrote:
I should clarify a bit that a very small number of people are just asexual or near-asexual, and genuinely don't care about sex no matter how much they've tried it. It's possible you're one of them, but more likely (based on probability) that you're just inexperienced and will understand once you get into a successful relationship. But if you're very confident that you're not interested, instead of merely wondering why you should be, then you shouldn't feel obligated to do something that doesn't appeal to you or disappointed that you don't.

I do not think I am asexual or anything like this. It is just when sex is portrayed as a need rather than as a want that I find it quite hard to understand. And you should have written “if you get into a relationship” rather when “when” .

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Do not wait for sex but wait for dating? I guess you do not mean I should hire a prostitute, just that if I do get a girlfriend, I should not wait, right?

Yeah, what they (presumably) meant was be patient and wait for an opportunity without acting desperate, but don't hesitate to take it when one happens. Don't fall for "saving it until marriage" nonsense or whatever once you find someone.

Tight lipped?

Get so nervous or determined to let them talk that you say nothing but the bare minimum yourself. First/early dates are about getting to know someone, and to do that they have to see who you are. Talking at an almost-silent statue doesn't help with that.

There will be another… occasion to feth up.
...
And you should have written “if you get into a relationship” rather when “when” .

This kind of defeatist attitude doesn't help. If people can tell you're thinking that way it turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy (after all, if you think there's something wrong with you that I want to avoid then why shouldn't I believe you?), and it invites you to sabotage your own efforts. Dating sucks sometimes, but it's something that most people figure out eventually.

It is just when sex is portrayed as a need rather than as a want that I find it quite hard to understand.

Think about it this way: is food a "need" or a "want"? You obviously need some amount of food to survive (a clear "need"), but you can be hungry and very unhappy without being in immediate danger of dying from starvation (gray area?). Then there the mental aspects: if you're getting nothing but hypothetical flavorless nutrient pills your physical needs will be met but you are probably going to feel like something very important is missing (gray area?), and you can also have things like the immediate impulse to eat that slice of cake where you would prefer to have it but you won't be too sad if you don't get it (a clear "want").

Conclusion: "needs" and "wants" are useful approximations at best, not black and white categories. Don't spend too much time worrying about which category something goes into.

 Peregrine wrote:
Don't fall for "saving it until marriage" nonsense or whatever once you find someone.

I will not fall for “saving it until marriage”, I will fall for “Wait until I feel ready, and I have build enough trust into my partner, so I can get an enjoyable rather than traumatizing first experience” though, I think. I likely still have quite some time before any opportunity arise anyway…

 Peregrine wrote:
If people can tell you're thinking that way

I do not know if they can tell that. I do not think so. I am not sure. Hell, I have no idea what they think about me.

 Peregrine wrote:
Think about it this way: is food a "need" or a "want"?

Some food is need, good, tasteful food is a want. Of course, it is not completely binary, there is some interlap and gray area, so I am going to rephrase my original claim: some people tend to position sex much more toward need than where I would place it.

So, I think I get 'what' I was trying to say, just not why I thought it was right or why I was even saying it. I was 3/4ths through a bottle of Jager at that point. Probably best if you just ignore that. Sorry.

 daedalus wrote:
So, I think I get 'what' I was trying to say, just not why I thought it was right or why I was even saying it. I was 3/4ths through a bottle of Jager at that point. Probably best if you just ignore that. Sorry.

I say crazier gak than that--along with not remembering why exactly I said it or thought it was the proper thing to say--and I don't even drink. At least you've got an excuse.

My first time wasn't traumatizing, mildly awkward but otherwise it was pretty good. Far better then the tv had me believe it would be!

But I'm not a person you should take sexual advice from (I mean you're, I assume straight and I'm bisexual so that puts a big variation in even how we may view it).