GardenDiva Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I'm not insecure about it, but whenever it happens, I admit that I feel a pang of discomfort and a little bit of "oh my". It's really hard being taller than most guys. Imagine needing a man of about 6'2...now add all of my high standards to that.... this combination eliminates about 90% of the world's men. Tall supermodels feed off of their fame. I used to model, and believe me being in that industry doesn't make you accept yourself more, it makes you more conscious about your looks and it makes you more insecure. Besides, supermodels have access to all the hotness and richness in the world, so unlike myself, they wouldn't have as much trouble finding men. You say you're not insecure but everything you say here tells me that you are. I'm not judging you, just saying what I'm seeing here. Many of us are insecure for one reason or another. And why do you "need" a man of 6'2? Can't you have more realistic expectations...say 5'11? LOL I mean really. You've already decided there are no good matches for you? That's kind of sad. Ever hear of a self-fulfilling prophecy? By the way, I'm well acquainted with the modeling world. Not all models are insecure. I also don't think they have any great advantages as far as finding men...most are too intimidated to even approach them. Your demeanor and attitude count for WAY more than your height or beauty. It's true.
LittlePrince Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 You say you're not insecure but everything you say here tells me that you are. I'm not judging you, just saying what I'm seeing here. Many of us are insecure for one reason or another. And why do you "need" a man of 6'2? Can't you have more realistic expectations...say 5'11? LOL I mean really. You've already decided there are no good matches for you? That's kind of sad. Ever hear of a self-fulfilling prophecy? By the way, I'm well acquainted with the modeling world. Not all models are insecure. I also don't think they have any great advantages as far as finding men...most are too intimidated to even approach them. Your demeanor and attitude count for WAY more than your height or beauty. It's true. Years ago I heard the average height difference between a man and a woman in a relationship was 6 or 7 inches. How tall is she?
FrustratedStandards Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I have dated men my height and shorter, but it's not worth it for me. The moment we go to a gala or an event, I put on my heels and now I'm not with my man, i'm with my son or little brother. I have dated one man taller than me. He was 6'5. I have never felt so good standing next to a man. That's why I need a man that's much taller. Nothing can replace how good it feels to be a tall woman standing next to a tall man (and in heels!). And you're right, most men are too intimidated. Yet here you tell me I should settle for a shorter man when you admittedly say they are too intimidated anyways.
GardenDiva Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I have dated men my height and shorter, but it's not worth it for me. The moment we go to a gala or an event, I put on my heels and now I'm not with my man, i'm with my son or little brother. I have dated one man taller than me. He was 6'5. I have never felt so good standing next to a man. That's why I need a man that's much taller. Nothing can replace how good it feels to be a tall woman standing next to a tall man (and in heels!). And you're right, most men are too intimidated. Yet here you tell me I should settle for a shorter man when you admittedly say they are too intimidated anyways. Ok, first of all if it's not worth it to date a man shorter than 6'2", then don't. I'm not saying you should. I just thought you could be open to it. I mean what if you met a fantastic guy and he happened to be a little less than 6'2? Maybe the reason you felt like you were with your little brother or son, as you say is because he/they just weren't the right man for you and maybe that had nothing to do wit their height. No, I didn't say to settle..nowhere in my post did I say that. Nor did I say that they'd be intimidated with you anyway...grrrr...you completely missed my message I believe. Anyway, good luck!
Els Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I made it because one thing people kept telling me, is that I have trouble with women because I'm shallow. Not that the conclusion makes any sense. Either way, after all the posts, the general consensus is that I'm not shallow. Which I pretty much knew all along. I'm also going to ignore any further posts in other threads calling me shallow, because it's obviously not the case. Because I'm looking for answers or at least trying to cross things off of the "Why I can't get a girlfriend" list. Somebody said a while ago that it's because I made an easy target, because I'm honest and good natured. I also say thing every now and then that hit the right buttons on certain people and then they have a crusade against me. And I fully believe that neither applies to me. I have felt that it's why some people women have really gotten on my case. It's as if they are taking my preferences personally. It's alright, I won't bother anymore. I've learnt that some people don't ask questions because they genuinely want to hear and listen to a variety of answers, but rather because they only want to validate the opinions they have, that have already been set in stone and buried under literally miles of rock. This sort of baffles me, because I don't see the point in it - it is one thing to ignore obvious trolls and flame baiters, but clearly even well-thought-out posts mean nothing to you if they don't reaffirm what you had already decided before starting out. Again, your general attitude (I'm not talking about your superficiality, again, btw) is no skin off my back - you're just an ignore button away, and I'm not the one who has to deal with you on a daily basis. You have to, though, and any girl who chooses to be with you will have to. You don't want to open yourself up to introspection, well, you live with the consequences, and you'll eventually wear people out with your endless complaining about them. This applies to women like FrustratedStandards as well, of course, but this is your thread, not hers. Good luck with everything. I've wasted far too much valuable time on a lost cause here, so even though I genuinely think you have a lot of good in you and I don't personally dislike you, I'll have to use that ignore button for my own sake, for the time being at least. I don't want to turn into another well-meaning Teknoe. 1
Emilia Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Either way, after all the posts, the general consensus is that I'm not shallow. Which I pretty much knew all along. No you are not shallow. The issue is that you don't have the type of intelligence that would help you with the nuances of relationships and mate-seeking. You are simply unable to comprehend other people's point of view and you are not capable of introspection. I don't know whether it's emotional intelligence you are lacking, but there is definitely something. Reading your posts is like reading some blurb from another species. I don't mean it as an insult, it's just there is this huge gap between yourself and your targets. 2
Andy_K Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 It's really hard being taller than most guys. Imagine needing a man of about 6'2...now add all of my high standards to that.... this combination eliminates about 90% of the world's men. Not to pick holes, but 6'2" alone eliminates more than 90% of the men in the world. Add basics like age & looks and you're probably over 99% *before* even adding the rest of your standards 1
Els Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Not to pick holes, but 6'2" alone eliminates more than 90% of the men in the world. Add basics like age & looks and you're probably over 99% *before* even adding the rest of your standards Hahahah, well, her username says a lot about the results of her 'standards'. People make their own choices, they just have to live with them.
Teknoe Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 It's alright, I won't bother anymore. I've learnt that some people don't ask questions because they genuinely want to hear and listen to a variety of answers, but rather because they only want to validate the opinions they have, that have already been set in stone and buried under literally miles of rock. This sort of baffles me, because I don't see the point in it - it is one thing to ignore obvious trolls and flame baiters, but clearly even well-thought-out posts mean nothing to you if they don't reaffirm what you had already decided before starting out. Again, your general attitude (I'm not talking about your superficiality, again, btw) is no skin off my back - you're just an ignore button away, and I'm not the one who has to deal with you on a daily basis. You have to, though, and any girl who chooses to be with you will have to. You don't want to open yourself up to introspection, well, you live with the consequences, and you'll eventually wear people out with your endless complaining about them. This applies to women like FrustratedStandards as well, of course, but this is your thread, not hers. Good luck with everything. I've wasted far too much valuable time on a lost cause here, so even though I genuinely think you have a lot of good in you and I don't personally dislike you, I'll have to use that ignore button for my own sake, for the time being at least. I don't want to turn into another well-meaning Teknoe. SD loves these mega-gigantic threads he creates. People on LS love responding to him. He loves reading the latest. It's clear as day. I dunno why it's so hard for people to quit posting in his threads. It'd be so much easier for us to just sit back, grab some popcorn and watch him repeat the same mistakes he's made for the last 18 months (that I've been able to witness). People keep replying to him trying to help though, with the same advice spelled out 250 different ways. Look at this thread. It's a cry for attention on his part. And it's getting the job done. He does this every week to 10 days... start a new thread that will garner 200+ likes (rarely on HIS OWN posts though, isn't that interesting...), 200+ replies and 10,000+ views. I think he lives off these LS threads that he creates. Gives him something to look forward to, rather than living out life in the real world. The fact that SD is looking for strangers to tell him he's not shallow says a lot. And as soon as a few do, he then believes "Yup, that settles it. I'm not shallow." Emilia (a couple posts above this one) is right. There is something missing. A gap in SD's thinking that prevents him from engaging in honest introspection. 4
zengirl Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I said I lost some attraction. Let me put it this way. Say your H has a hair style that you really like and think it looks good on him. Then he comes home one day with a hair style that you don't like at all. I'm talking about that feeling. And please don't tell me that you would like every possible hairstyle in the world. In a theoretical sense, I don't like every hairstyle in the world. I will use the facial hair example, though, because honestly, that's something that is more of a natural "turnoff" for me than hairstyle. I prefer men clean-shaven. However, I do not lose attraction or have a negative feeling when hubby has stubble or a beard, despite having a fairly strong theoretical preference against it. Honestly. I don't get that feeling you're speaking of. When I'm attracted to someone, it's cumulative - physical & mental - and what they actually look like falls aside. Many people experience this, many do not. I would say that is partially a barometer of how shallow you are or aren't, which is both a scale (not a simple yes/no question) and a moving target, as one can develop, or even lose, depth. When the topic initially came up, long ago, the label 'shallow' was in your thread. You considered women who wanted men of a certain height shallow. I would say a woman who has a requirement --- not a preference --- for a man of a certain height is shallow, yes, but certainly not more shallow than you for simply that. Less, if that's her only requirement and she has some non-superficial requirements, as you have many requirements, most of them superficial. Other common requirements among females who have more 'superficial requirements' are things like wealth, a built body, and stylish clothes/things, none of which I recall you having. This likely means such women will not be a good target for you. What Elswyth and I (and perhaps one other person? I can't recall) said was that if you are finding women having such preferences is a problem for you, then you are clearly missing out on the less shallow women in the world. That makes sense to me, based on your mindset. Most of the women I know without those superficial preferences would not date someone with your mindset, partially because of its superficiality/shallowness. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying you're a bad person for having physical preferences (we all do) or even having them so stringently (not everyone does) --- I'm saying it's clearly impacting your effectiveness to have that attitude and not have developed any of the superficial requirements a similar woman might have. You can't develop height, but you could theoretically develop a 6 pack or wealth. Or some other superficial hook. You could also develop greater depth, examine your belief system, work on your social skills and character, and have a better chance at attracting less superficial women. That's because I believe my looks are the primary thing holding me back. I know that if a girl took the time to get to know me and give me a chance to date her, she'd be pleasantly surprised. Would you take the time to get to know someone who was overweight? Or had a pixie cut? Or was relatively flat-chested? Or was 5'10''? If someone has a physical preference that excludes you, it is no different than the many you have that exclude others. Read over what I said in post #6. Saying, "of course non physical things matter" but not listing them and making a thread focusing on the physical suggests you weight the physical and superficial requirements higher and (this is the major problem) fixate on them more. Additionally, here are some questions: Would you date a girl who met all your physical requirements to but to whom you felt attraction but no deeper connection? Besides 'shared hobbies,' what deeper qualities have you considered? What do you think you have to offer, on a deeper level, to a partner? Who said anything about redefining? I asked you what are the physical characteristics. "A woman who looks like a woman" attempts to redefine "woman" as you see fit. I don't think any physical characteristics, beyond the biological ones that define a man genetically, define a man. And that's because people can read my thought patterns, and know that I'm shallow because I have preferences. You assume everyone else has similar thought patterns. I'd say that's where you're wrong. Many people do, don't get me wrong, but those people are the ones most likely to look at you and automatically exclude you for your height or for the fact that you're still a college student at 31 or whatever. And how the hell can I do that? That's like trying to learn how to ride a bike by reading it in a book. If you had more connections in the world to other people, you could do it. The list would get refined by each R you had, of course, but even before I'd ever dated one, I had an idea what a good R was to me. Sure, it changed through time, but just because you haven't had one doesn't mean you can't ruminate on those deeper qualities. That's part of developing depth. Second, I would identify popular female LS posters who basically post just that, but I'd probably get an infraction. Rarely are those women LSers called shallow. Instead, they're called unrealistic, or hypocrites. Finally, SD may be a hypocrite, but I'm not seeing how he's shallow. I don't really think 'shallow' is such a bad word. Everyone is shallow/superficial to some degree and many posters on LS are VERY shallow. SD is not the most shallow person on this site, by far, but he may be the one who is most hindered by his non-acknowledgement of his own superficial preferences and his lack of any qualities a similarly superficial woman would prefer. The hypocrisy is really the problem, not the superficiality/shallowness. The reason it came up in the first place, many threads ago, is because SD often complains he's a victim of people's superficial preferences. I have not seen many of the more superficial posters do that, so there would be no need to say, "You're superficial for wanting to date a model" or something. I assume they know such a preference is superficial --- my issue with SD is he doesn't seem to know his superficial preferences are superficial. Thus it has to be repeated. No you are not shallow. The issue is that you don't have the type of intelligence that would help you with the nuances of relationships and mate-seeking. You are simply unable to comprehend other people's point of view and you are not capable of introspection. I don't know whether it's emotional intelligence you are lacking, but there is definitely something. Reading your posts is like reading some blurb from another species. I don't mean it as an insult, it's just there is this huge gap between yourself and your targets. This is probably more true than anything else, but I'd still say that's a lack of depth and includes a fixation on the superficial. I'd say that's a good explanation for why SD is the way he is.
Author somedude81 Posted May 8, 2012 Author Posted May 8, 2012 I would switch in a heartbeat. Being a tall woman sucks most of the time. Especially since I always wear heels. The worst part is when a man says to you "Excuse me miss? I'm sorry but could you reach that for me?" Try feeling lady like then! I'm gonna call you TopShelfStandards from now on Yeah I know what you mean. It's not really part of your role to be doing that. Personally I hate asking for help to get the high things and I'll climb the damn shelf if I have to. Have you considered moving to Europe? People of Scandinavian decent are the tallest in the world. I guess I could move to Mexico and take up drug running.
serial muse Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 (edited) Yes, I blame my height solely on the fact that I'm half Cuban. Everybody on my dad's side of the family, except for my dad, is 5'6 or shorter. All the men on my mom's side are 5'9 or taller. If my mom had me with a white guy, instead of trying to spite her father by marrying a man not like him, I'd be full white and at least 5'10. And if I were at least 5'10, I'm betting there is a 99% chance would have had a GF by now. Most likely married. I have no problem dating Hispanic women. Where did you get that though from? Heck, the second most recent girl I asked out is Mexican. Just because I prefer white doesn't mean I'm not open to anything else. So far I've been rejected by: White, Black, Mexican, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean girls. All that's really left is to get turned down by a middle Easter girl. Actually, I wanted to ask out a girl who was born in Jordan, but she was Muslim and not allowed to date. She was really cool. I haven't seen her in forever, I wonder how she's doing. OK, I believe you; I didn't want to do a massive search of all your old threads on the subject. What I was remembering was this sort of thing: My biggest issue is that I prefer "white" girls, but they have no interest in me, thanks to the Cuban DNA I have. All it does is make me less attractive. Which sounds to me like being Cuban = less attractive, in your mind. And since you've said many times you'd rather date a white girl (which I assume has to do with thinking they're more physically ideal, since that's what you think of yourself), I assumed that you weren't trying to date nonwhite girls. Sorry for that. Anyway, about being shallow...I don't know what to tell you. Sometimes the things you say are quite shallow, sure...but then we all have that problem, and I don't think that bit is in any way unique to you. But blaming your attractiveness on how much Cuban DNA you have...ugh, what is that? If not shallow, then I'd at least call it a gigantic red herring. I think you just pick on certain things about yourself that it's easier to hate because you have no control over them. You've been encouraged many times to seek individual therapy, and always have a reason why not to do it, basically amounting to "if I only had a girlfriend, I wouldn't need therapy at all." Since you've offered all of us here on LS the chance to weigh in on this, I will only say that I disagree. And I say this with empathy - you seem really really troubled about yourself, and yet you resist our (admittedly primarily amateur) attempts to get you to look deeper on those things. You're stuck on what you're stuck on. If one thing is clear, it is that your issues and self-hate, at least, are not shallow. They run deep. And having a GF isn't going to magically erase them. Edited May 8, 2012 by serial muse
Eclypse Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Are you shallow? Well... Short answer: yes with an if. Long answer: no... with a but. Basically you have listed a lot of physical attributes but not all that many personality based ones. Which is fine if that's your thing. For me however, while the physical attraction is very important, I also wouldn't be able to get along with someone who was boring or uncharismatic even if they were hot. Would you date and be in a relationship and possibly marry a girl who absolutely fit your ideal and was the hottest girl in the world HOWEVER she was a major psycho b*tch who caused you a lot of emotional suffering and was just a complete bore to talk to and be with? However she is the hottest chick in the world and she wants you baaaad baby. She doesn't care about your heigh, in fact, she loves it! I am curious to see your reply to this. So no, you're not shallow, everyone has their preferences. However those may exclude you from girls who might otherwise be good relationship candidates (and that's cool too... no point being with someone you're not attracted to).
LittlePrince Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I think TopShelfStandards is shallow. There are people who aren't? If they aren't then I can guarantee they aren't human. Perhaps they are some sort of anthropomorphic bear masquerading around as a human.
Els Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 SD loves these mega-gigantic threads he creates. People on LS love responding to him. He loves reading the latest. It's clear as day. I dunno why it's so hard for people to quit posting in his threads. It'd be so much easier for us to just sit back, grab some popcorn and watch him repeat the same mistakes he's made for the last 18 months (that I've been able to witness). People keep replying to him trying to help though, with the same advice spelled out 250 different ways. Look at this thread. It's a cry for attention on his part. And it's getting the job done. He does this every week to 10 days... start a new thread that will garner 200+ likes (rarely on HIS OWN posts though, isn't that interesting...), 200+ replies and 10,000+ views. I think he lives off these LS threads that he creates. Gives him something to look forward to, rather than living out life in the real world. The fact that SD is looking for strangers to tell him he's not shallow says a lot. And as soon as a few do, he then believes "Yup, that settles it. I'm not shallow." Emilia (a couple posts above this one) is right. There is something missing. A gap in SD's thinking that prevents him from engaging in honest introspection. Yup, pretty much on the money there. I'm done feeding the attention and validation spree, though. I love helping people, but not when they turn on the very people who are spending time writing well-thought-out posts to try and help them. I can see someone responding negatively to posts like, "Yes, you're very shallow, and you'll never get a girlfriend because of that", but calling zengirl insecure after all her detailed posts that were written in hope of helping him see things from another perspective? When someone's only responses to posts that do not validate his opinion are: 1) ignoring them and going on as if they never existed, or 2) arguing defensively and petulantly against them, regardless of quality or intent of the post... there really is no point in trying to help them. I would recommend that you and the others who have put so much of themselves into that, to try and detach yourself and come to the realization I did. Nothing on LS worked for SD for 2 years... and nothing is ever going to. Hopefully he'll reach his epiphanies some other way. 1
Mme. Chaucer Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 If I were 5'10, I'd have no problem with women preferring average height men. And of course there would be no issue with me wanting an average woman. But unfortunately, I'm a short guy and feel excluded because of it. And then since I still want an average woman, that makes me a hypocrite by default. No, it doesn't. Calling a woman "stupid" for having a preference that doesn't include you makes you a hypocrite, when you are accepting of your own preferences. What is so freaking difficult to understand about that?? 1
LittlePrince Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 No, it doesn't. Calling a woman "stupid" for having a preference that doesn't include you makes you a hypocrite, when you are accepting of your own preferences. What is so freaking difficult to understand about that?? But when your own preferences include many to most and other's preferences never include you then it isn't so hypocritical to critique another's many times warped criteria.
zengirl Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 But when your own preferences include many to most and other's preferences never include you then it isn't so hypocritical to critique another's many times warped criteria. I don't even agree with your general point, but I definitely wouldn't say SD's preferences include "many to most" women. Statistical averages show that. 2
LittlePrince Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I don't even agree with your general point, but I definitely wouldn't say SD's preferences include "many to most" women. Statistical averages show that. Oh I was talking about myself. I don't know SD's preferences.
lino Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 everyone is shallow to some extent. Few admit it. Be as shallow as you like, so long as you deal with your choices & preferences.
zengirl Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 No, it doesn't. Calling a woman "stupid" for having a preference that doesn't include you makes you a hypocrite, when you are accepting of your own preferences. What is so freaking difficult to understand about that?? Right, being a hypocrite has nothing to do with what you want, SD, and everything to do with your attempting to invalidate what other people want and quantify what superficial qualities you want in relation to what superficial qualities you deserve. 1
ThaWholigan Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Right, being a hypocrite has nothing to do with what you want, SD, and everything to do with your attempting to invalidate what other people want and quantify what superficial qualities you want in relation to what superficial qualities you deserve. I also believe he has denied doing this in this very thread. I'm sure a look into the post history would provide evidence of either one being right.....
zengirl Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 I also believe he has denied doing this in this very thread. I'm sure a look into the post history would provide evidence of either one being right..... He just called people with a height preference 'stupid' so if he denied doing it, he also just did it. And he's done it before as well, for sure. 1
Recommended Posts