Star Gazer Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 I stopped reading when I saw that the stats being used are 9 years old.
USMCHokie Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Gah, I hate all this talk about average...let's just keep this often forgotten factor in mind for this discussion... The term "average" is extremely skewed whenever we discuss it on LS...when LS users discuss average, it is a significantly higher quality than the true average of humankind...because a fair majority of people in the world do not have access to computers and the internet, much less this website... So keep in mind the "average" LS user...probably educated with some sort of career or consistent employment...probably able to put food on the table...probably more dateable than not, since it is a relationship forum...etc... After two road trips across the United States in the past month, I have a much greater appreciation of the term "average"...
Author misssmartypants Posted January 19, 2012 Author Posted January 19, 2012 I stopped reading when I saw that the stats being used are 9 years old. I used what I could find. The point was that people have been using the term average to describe what they want in a date and what they want isn't average by any means.
Star Gazer Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 I used what I could find. The point was that people have been using the term average to describe what they want in a date and what they want isn't average by any means. You have described what was technically average in 2003, but you have not explained how that is different from what people want. Are you saying men won't date women who are 5'4'' and 145 pounds? Because I assure you, they do.
Star Gazer Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 So keep in mind the "average" LS user...probably educated with some sort of career or consistent employment...probably able to put food on the table...probably more dateable than not, since it is a relationship forum...etc... In my experience on LS, this is typically more true for the women, but not the men. *shrug*
Author misssmartypants Posted January 19, 2012 Author Posted January 19, 2012 You have described what was technically average in 2003, but you have not explained how that is different from what people want. Are you saying men won't date women who are 5'4'' and 145 pounds? Because I assure you, they do. I know they do. But there are a few users here who like to claim 110 to 115 pounds is normal and average and then get all pissy when that particular sub population isn't interested. My clumsy attempt to try to get people to view themselves and others in a more positive light has degenerated into a few making excuses about why they aren't successful. For the record: lots of people are handy with Sheetrock. Putting in the effort to be lisenced and bonded is what tells. The same with credentials. They indicate you were willing to put in the work. If you don't care about the credential then don't whine about not getting the props. ( that's not at stargazer, the guys who sound a lot like my bro when he starts griping about how awful and unfair his life is)
aj22one Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 In my experience on LS, this is typically more true for the women, but not the men. *shrug* It's about even. The only differences is the types of issues that hold each back. The men gripe and whine about all kinds of nonsense, but a lot of the women are just horrible at making good decisions.
Star Gazer Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 I know they do. But there are a few users here who like to claim 110 to 115 pounds is normal and average and then get all pissy when that particular sub population isn't interested. Well, they're also probably the same guys who think I weigh 120-125 because they really have no real understanding of weight and body composition. For the record: lots of people are handy with Sheetrock. Putting in the effort to be lisenced and bonded is what tells. The same with credentials. They indicate you were willing to put in the work. If you don't care about the credential then don't whine about not getting the props. ( that's not at stargazer, the guys who sound a lot like my bro when he starts griping about how awful and unfair his life is) I know you said it's not at me, but I have no idea what you're talking about here.
Author misssmartypants Posted January 19, 2012 Author Posted January 19, 2012 Oh. You think the kissups and suckups are bad in school. Wait till you get to working. It's really gonna make you Not bad. Sociology was what I would have majored in if I weren't coerced into a more practical major. Definitely. The rat race itself is despicable and incredibly corrupt (who you know/are related to > merit), judging other people by its rules is unbelievable. All of this is worthless these days without some piece of paper saying you went to school for it. I'm good and pretty handy at sheetrock stuff, but don't have a billion certificates of OSHA (which the union would train you in many years ago) etc needed to get into a union so it's got no value in the job market. What kind of job did you get with your Sociology degree btw, out of curiosity? It's someone else's fault.
kaylan Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Check this out: http://research.similarminds.com/romantic-height-preferences-in-men-and-women/227 Women and Men appear to have the same height preferences.
kaylan Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) "According to an American Demographics journal article in July 2003: The average woman is 5'4" tall, weighs 145 lbs. with a dress size of 11 to 14, has a 36-37" bust, is about 29" around the waist and close to 40" around the hips." "U.S. 1.776*m (5*ft 10*in) 1.632*m (5*ft 4 1⁄2*in) All Americans, 20–29 Measured 2003–2006 [73]" - average heights fos men And women from Wikipedia. "Meanwhile, the average weight for men aged 20-74 years rose dramatically from 166.3 pounds in 1960 to 191 pounds in 2002, while the average weight for women the same age increased from 140.2 pounds in 1960 to 164.3 pounds in 2002."- about.com Taking into account some I for I saw on the census website I can tell you that the average woman in America is 38, she is 5'4" and weights 166 pounds. Her dress size is a 12. She earns $23000 a year and is probably a medical technician or works in education. The average man in the united states is 35, he is 5'10" and weighs 199 pounds. He earns $29000 a year at various jobs. So when a man or woman says they want " just an average" person to date, this is what they are sayin they want. I am not average. My income, education level, and age versus household size are all above average. I've been married and divorced, been homeless, a teen mom, and earned two masters degrees. I've worked four jobs at a time and walked to work for two years when I didn't own a car. I grew up with crazy, alcoholic parents and my brothers are drug- addicted thrives. I am not. I am not bragging. These are things about me that are beyond average. Both good and bad points are ticks away from normal. And I'm Ok with not being average. I'm also comfortable saying I don't want just an average man. I'm tough smart educated and stubborn. I don't want a enrage I want my match. So let's tackle this tendency to downplay our expectations in potential mates. Is it self justification or what? Im 25 and I plan to have my M.B.A before age 28. Im 5'9, weigh about 180 lbs but in pretty good shape with a slender frame. I would call my height and weight average according to the presented stats, but not my physique when compared to most guys I see. Once I land a job in my field I will prolly start at a salary of 35k, which is the average for what I want to do. So that is above average for American income. After some work experience and a Masters degree, that will def double easily. However I think "average" gets skewed so low in those stats because they include many part time workers and many people do live under the poverty line as well. I think if you controlled for "full time workers" it would be higher. Also, OP, you should marry me. I love a tough educated cookie This is a meaningless stat. This is a large age group that shouldn't be grouped together. While it's worth noting that men's weight rose, I don't think this has an impact on people comparing averages within their own age group. How so? The stat is reflective of how sluggish, lazy, and unhealthy America has become. Edited January 19, 2012 by kaylan
aj22one Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 How so? The stat is reflective of how sluggish, lazy, and unhealthy America has become. Perhaps. But telling me the heights and weights of men and women aged 20-74 and saying that's what's "average" when people say they want an average person, is a meaningless stat. Having such a wide age range skews the numbers.
EnigmaticClarity Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 I stopped reading when I saw that the stats being used are 9 years old. More recent salary stats are available, but height and weight studies aren't. Not sure they're needed more often than once a decade or so, average height barely changes at all and weight doesn't change year to year much either.
EnigmaticClarity Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Perhaps. But telling me the heights and weights of men and women aged 20-74 and saying that's what's "average" when people say they want an average person, is a meaningless stat. Having such a wide age range skews the numbers. It would've taken you less time to find the stats you're bitching about than to write your post bitching about them, so here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad347.pdf
aj22one Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 It would've taken you less time to find the stats you're bitching about than to write your post bitching about them, so here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad347.pdf I work with statistics for a living so I know where to find stats I need. Doesn't change what I said about the statistics the OP offered. Thanks anyway though.
bean1 Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Normal and average are not the same thing, at least in the US. 5'4 and 145lbs? That's pushing overweight (and if that's from 2003, I'm sure it's more than that by now). That is certainly not average where I live (Quebec). It is not "normal" for the human body to be almost overweight.
xxoo Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad347.pdfe Wow, look at the difference in the 20-29 age groups! Also interesting, the women have always shown a gap between younger and older women, but the gap seems to be closing (with weights of younger women still increasing in 1999-2002, and weights of older women stabilizing). Men, however, showed more stability in weight across age range then, and increasing weight with age now.
somedude81 Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Check this out: http://research.similarminds.com/romantic-height-preferences-in-men-and-women/227 Women and Men appear to have the same height preferences. Short women avg height 5ft 1.6in prefer a range of 5ft 7in to 6ft 1in mean preference of the group 5ft 10in Average height women avg height 5ft 5in prefer a range of 5ft 9in to 6ft 2in mean preference of the group 5ft 11.5in Thanks for the ego buster Short men avg height 5ft 6.6in prefer a range of 5ft 2in to 5ft 8in mean preference of the group 5ft 5in Hey that's me, and my exact preferences. Funny how the mean preference of my category women 5'5, has a mean preference of 5'11. Man, I really need to stop learning about the world cause all I does it make me hate myself more and more.
ScreamingTrees Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 shocking thing about the stats is the average person of both sexes earns below 30k a year. so what 'above average' characteristics are you after? me personally, i am above average in intelligence/ambition and my income/personality reflect that. so i demand that, i don't go for the stupid ones. i'm about 30 past average weight but on the flip side am somewhat flexible in what i find attractive in women, assuming they have other exceptional traits. This is probably late, but.. Poverty does not connote stupidity - and wealth does not connote genius. Is that what you're trying to say? A tad bit ignorant and condescending to people who truly are intelligent but choose to follow a different path, don't you think? & in most cases I'd say a truly "intelligent" person wouldn't HAVE to announce it. It would just be apparent for people of a similar level. I usually believe that a person is the opposite of what they claim to be, and I generally haven't been wrong.
Star Gazer Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 More recent salary stats are available, but height and weight studies aren't. Not sure they're needed more often than once a decade or so, average height barely changes at all and weight doesn't change year to year much either. According to the OP, average weights increased 20 pounds over 40 years, so a decade would change the stats presented. Normal and average are not the same thing, at least in the US. 5'4 and 145lbs? That's pushing overweight (and if that's from 2003, I'm sure it's more than that by now). That is certainly not average where I live (Quebec). It is not "normal" for the human body to be almost overweight. Thanks for calling me overweight! :laugh:
Lonely Ronin Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Man, I really need to stop learning about the world cause all I does it make me hate myself more and more. Dude, some time I want to reach through the monitor and give you a good bit** slap. The word used was preference, not requirement. I prefer brunettes, but I have dated more blondes than brunettes over the years. No women is going to want you, until you get over this self-loathing thing.
Star Gazer Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 I'm not good with numbers, but the OP says the average weight for a woman is 145 pounds? My age group average is actually 163.0 (which makes me lighter than average - yay?), and based on the stat that the average of all women 20 or older is 162.9, I'm having difficulty understanding where the 145 average comes from.
ScreamingTrees Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Is 130 lbs. considered underweight for someone with a very healthy, low bodyfat % and mostly muscle? I'm around 5'7, but I'm still in my late teen. My mother (who happens to be fairly overweight) has recently expressed her concern about me being a bit too skinny. I basically look like this from the neck down with similar (or slightly greater) definition. Anyone think I sound unhealthy? I don't completely trust my mother's judgement on this particular issue.
somedude81 Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Dude, some time I want to reach through the monitor and give you a good bit** slap. The word used was preference, not requirement. I prefer brunettes, but I have dated more blondes than brunettes over the years. No women is going to want you, until you get over this self-loathing thing. Preference 1.the act of preferring. (to set or hold before or above other persons or things in estimation; like better; choose rather than: to prefer beef to chicken. ) 2.the state of being preferred. 3.that which is preferred; choice: His preference is vanilla, not chocolate. 4.a practical advantage given to one over others. 5.a prior right or claim, as to payment of dividends or to assets upon dissolution. Sounds like a nice thing to be does it not? Especially when one has options, which the vast majority of women do. Also, I really doubt that if women were asked their requirements, the numbers would be much different. Edited January 19, 2012 by somedude81
Lonely Ronin Posted January 20, 2012 Posted January 20, 2012 First off, any women who would strait up reject a guy based purely on his height, is shallow and not worth bothering with (at-least as far as I'm concerned). People have tons of preferences, and they probably aren't consciously aware of 90% of them. Just like in a relationship, compromises must be made because you don't always get what you want. Your view of women and dating is horrendous, and that's a big problem, because in general well adjusted people are not very forgiving when it comes to personality. Sounds like a nice thing to be does it not? Especially when one has options, which the vast majority of women do. Also, I really doubt that if women were asked their requirements, the numbers would be much different.
Recommended Posts