After copulation, the female eats the male to gain energy for her offspring.
Please🥺
Down bad
Vore-lleyball
Or, you know, just sits on my face. Like, anytime she wants…
Yeah I’d sniff her farts too.
I do not envy the headache you will have when you awake. In the meantime, rest well and dream of large women.
Does sniffing large lady farts cause headaches?
Username checks out i guess, tho have to dissapoint that a cumfart is just air trapped usually mixed with, of course, cum
Death by snu-snu
She can eat me
There’s also this picture
and this one
Nice how the metric system of the images says its either 206cm or 207cm and the imperial system is like maybe 6’9’’ maybe 6’11’'.
Holy cow. I thought this comment section would be filled with light hearted jokes. Some of yall need get your chronically online asses outside.
The is the most reddit esque comment section I’ve seen on lemmy and it’s gross
Lemmy is pretty great compared to reddit so long as the topics stay away from anything to do with feminism or women’s rights. Otherwise it starts to feel like the reddit cesspit is leaking, and it’s depressing. Anyone remember the few days when “the bear” discussion took over the fediverse? Those were dark times. Or any time someone even mentions the word “mansplaining”, even if it’s satirical.
She should be using Linux instead.
There are plenty of reasonable comments. Most have more upvotes than the sexualizing ones. That said, look closely at what she is wearing in the pic. If she put shorts on, the sides of that thing would still be above the shorts. The image was designed to have sexual appeal. She is showing more skin than most people have. So of course some people are going to go in that direction. Men in general haven’t evolved enough not to.
With an image designed to have sexual appeal, is it wrong to see the sexual appeal?
Nope, never said it was. I was saying that with such an image, one should expect sexualized comments.
I am sorry if I misunderstood you. Would you mind explaining the line about evolving? It seemed to imply to me that there is a possible (better?) future state of things?
ah yes. Seeing it is fine. Saying what your thinking… not so much. But I wasn’t trying to imply that I am more evolved… I am litterally saying that man (and women really) haven’t evolved enough to not think about sex and screwing when we see an image like that. And anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. Some have been trained or learned not to say what they are thinking, but most are thinking it all the same. I am sure there are exceptions of course.
I said nothing about sex appeal. She’s hot, and he’s hot but that’s not what im talking about
Not sure I said you said anything about sexual appeal.
Nah, this is about what I expected… why else would it get 600 upvotes?
Lemmy is full of the worst reddit bullshit. I was genuinely surprised at first, primarily because I thought it was going to be a bit of a refuge from bottom of the barrel idiocy. Instead, it’s the worst of it.
The unbelievably pathetic trash is why I am still looking for a good reddit alternative. Seeing all of the problems we solved on reddit years ago is honestly kind of sad.
That’s a light-hearted take. Why do some people like to work themselves into a froth with their imaginary scenarios?
how dare people react normally!!
I’m not disagreeing with you but try using a period now and again they don’t cost any money
Irony.
.
G.o.f.u.c.k.y.o.u.r.s.e.l.f. I use proper punctuation in my work emails and thats about it. This is the best youll get
i welcome death by snu snu
For Americans who have the height mode of their brain stuck in “Freedom Units”:
Anna Smrek is roughly 6’ 9"
‘Short King’ is roughly 5’ 3"
…
For data nerds:
Going by total data for the whole globe, all people:
https://www.gigacalculator.com/calculators/height-percentile-calculator.php
Anna is … off the charts, one of if not the actual tallest adult women in the world, literally breaks the calculator.
Anna would be at… the 99.9(8/9)% percentile of men by height, which means that if you use 8.2 billion as a world population, there are at most approximately 1.6 million men as tall or taller than her.
EDIT: I forgor to divide by two, women vs men, so uh, 800k.
===
‘Short King’ is under the 1st percentile of men (0.77), he is shorter than 99.3%+ of adult men.
‘Short King’ would be at about the 25th percentile of women by height, which means he is actually still as tall or taller than 25% of women, approximately 2 billion.
EDIT: I did the same forgor /2, so, 1 billion, thanks to FundMECFSResearch for catching my error!
===
Average global male height ~= 178 cm / 5’ 10"
Average global female height ~= 165 cm / 5’ 5"
…
Possibly also relevant:
https://www.gotquestions.org/how-tall-was-Goliath.html
If you use a more reasonable and realistic measurement of cubits and spans, and go with the Septuagint version of the Old Testament/Torah…
Goliath, the mythical warrior felled by David and his sling, whose name is now just a common euphemism for ‘giant’…
Yeah he was only about 6’ 6", or about 198 cm.
So…Anna could probably roughly rest her nose on the top of Goliath’s head, without bending her neck (or at least not much).
…
Another fun addendum, for I guess dating data nerds?:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886913000020
(If someone can find a more recent study that specifically looks into this, I’d appreciate it!)
Broadly speaking, women prefer taller men more strongly than men prefer shorter women, by a factor of roughly 2.625x.
Women prefer, on average, a larger height difference between themselves and their partner (i.e. males being much taller than themselves) than men do. This effect is even more pronounced when examining satisfaction with actual partner height: women are most satisfied when their partner was 21 cm taller, whereas men are most satisfied when they were 8 cm taller than their partner.
In Freedom Units, thats roughly women being most satisfied with a man 8 inches taller than them, men being most satisfied with a woman about 3 inches shorter than them.
This means a 5’ 10" average guy will tend to be well satisfied with a 5’ 7" woman’s height, but she will tend to not be well satisfied with the man’s height, herself on average, ideally, looking for a 6’ 3" man.
Even if it was a 5’ 10" man and an [EDIT: Whoops, too many numbers, too fast, this would actually be a somewhat shorter than] average 5’ 3" woman, she’d still tend to ideally prefer a 5’ 11" man, on average.
So, to more accurately assess 'Short King’s realistic dating pool, we actually need to find women who are 8 inches shorter than him.
And that works out to women 4’ 7" or shorter.
Which is the 0.02 percentile… meaning that 'Short King’s realistic dating pool is at worst, just as small as the number of men who are as tall or taller than Anna.
Or, perhaps both Anna and Short King need to find partners who simply accept them and are satisfied by them via being uncommonly partner-height indifferent.
Good luck to both of them!
You’re doing gods work. I googled the tallest woman alive, and she is 7 foot tall almost exactly. So this girl really is close.
Autism is my superpower rofl.
Also good lord, 7 foot tall woman, sheesh.
I can only hope she doesn’t have some kind of debilitating form of gigantism, I know a lot the all time world record holders for height had all kinds of horrendous health problems and died fairly young.
She does have issues, I’m afraid. Here she is meeting the worlds shortest woman.
Damn, that’s too bad =[
I, for one, admire your superpower and an thankful to absorb your data dump in my short term memory!
Ahem.
Would you like to know more?
=P
Too bad! My brain hurts now, I am tired, lol.
Man I enjoyed every bit of your info dump. Thank you.
Thank you, kind human, for all the effort.
Thanks for all that. Kind of misleading picture tbh, because i thought that guy was a normal male height. 6’9 is obviously tall as shit, but when compared to someone whose like 5"2’ it’s gonna look way more ridiculous.
If he was the average male height of 5’ 10"… she would be uh…
about 7’ 6".
Which would make her the tallest woman in the world, by half a foot, as per uh, ColeSloth elsewhere in this thread showing that the tallest currently alive woman being 7’ tall.
there is no way in fuck the global average height for men is 178cm.
This effect is even more pronounced when examining satisfaction with actual partner height: women are most satisfied when their partner was 21 cm taller, whereas men are most satisfied when they were 8 cm taller than their partner.
I don’t have access to the full article, but it sounds like they didn’t examine the sliding scale of height preferences, by one’s own height.
The article says that taller people have a taller ideal height for their partners. And it also says that on average women’s preference is a partner 21cm taller than themselves, and men had a preference for 8cm shorter. But from the publicly available text, it doesn’t seem to report on whether that preferred delta between one’s own height and the ideal partner height changed with the absolute height of themselves.
So I’m curious: does the data support the conclusion that a 5’ (1.52m) woman would prefer a 5’8" (1.73m) partner, and that a 5’8" (1.73m) woman would also still prefer that 21cm/8 inch difference, looking for a 6’4" (1.94) partner? Or is there a sliding scale where already tall people aren’t exactly looking for excessively unusual outliers, and that the preference of tall women is something smaller than 21cm, such that the overall average might be that very short women prefer a big height difference but very tall women prefer a small height difference?
I am a 5’9" woman and prefer guys around my height, anecdotally all the women I know who want tall guys are themselves short.
It’s a weak preference but yeah I think since I go through life being around the same height as most guys I meet I don’t have such a strong association with height as a sex difference, if that makes sense.
That puts your ideal partner height roughly 1.8 SDs from the mean of acceptable male partner heights for all women your height…
Which works out to something like at least 70% of women your height disagreeing with your preference, or not having anything close to that preference range themselves.
Uh, ok, dropping out of math brain:
Yeah I totally get that as an explanation, and that it… just isn’t really something that important to you.
But!
This is less odd for me because I am a dude, and as the study shows, being ok with a roughly close height match, guy a little on the taller side, is the widespread ideal for guys, whereas women generally tend to hate this kind of setup, or uh, prefer it the least out if all possible partner height matchups.
So uh, all that being said:
So, if you’re single… well I uh, happen to be just an inch taller than you, I’ve uh, mentioned my uh, ideals, you’ve mentioned yours… would you happen to be into data-dumping autists as well?
=P
Ha! I am probably old enough to be your mom and unfortunately for you my two straight daughters have partners. But worry not, medium height man of numbers. The benefit of being able to kiss without throwing my neck out, never having to move the seat in the car, I’m sure you can sell the benefits of same-height relationships to someone.
I don’t have access to the full article, but it sounds like they didn’t examine the sliding scale of height preferences, by one’s own height.
The 21cm vs 8cm is the mean, and their sample size was large enough to be statistically valid.
I did specifically quote the part that includes ‘best satisfied’.
Ie, the ‘ideal’ partner height.
Many people often choose partners that are … close enough to many ideal traits, weighting them in different and complex ways, often not even entirely fully concsious of the nature of how they weight or order their preferences, but thats all way outside of the scope of this paper.
Yep, its possible the uh preference differential changes as you approach extreme ends of height, but the problem is that, being a statistically representative sample, it doesn’t include many people who are very short, or very tall.
Anyway:
https://annas-archive.org/md5/50413a744e4887cff238a542b59b19b2
Here’s the whole paper!
But from the publicly available text, it doesn’t seem to report on whether that preferred delta between one’s own height and the ideal partner height changed with the absolute height of themselves.
Yeah, that seems to be my take away as well, they don’t go into precisely that in the paper.
Or is there a sliding scale where already tall people aren’t exactly looking for excessively unusual outliers, and that the preference of tall women is something smaller than 21cm, such that the overall average might be that very short women prefer a big height difference but very tall women prefer a small height difference?
Apologies for shit tier resolution, I am on mobile:
‘Female’ meaning, the male-preferred height of a female partner, ‘Male’ meaning the female-prefered height of a male partner, so that… may be backwards depending on your inution for reading graphs.
Also these are 2 SD bounds, 95% CI, I kinda cropped out half the text that explains that, whoops.
So, yes, this effect you mention does exist… but they do not seem to focus on it in the paper.
Unfortunately, I am not seeing a visualization that or equation that more specifically and precisely answers your question of whether or not very tall or short men or women are less uh, height-choosy.
Perhaps I am missing it?
…
Here’s another way they visualize their data:
Now, here, ‘Men’ means men, ‘Women’ means women, and the x axis is [male height - female height].
So, very broadly, yeah you see that the sort of mutual sweet spot of both partners being decently satisfied with the height difference is roughly a man being 13ish cm, roughly 5 inches taller than a woman.
So, from that, maybe ‘Short King’ has a realistic shot with 4’10" women, not 4’ 7"?
???
…
We can also see that women’s satisfaction with a male partner’s height uh, nose dives as a women is asked about a man who is going from 13 cm taller than them, to the same height as them… but then does rebound once the heights are just inverted.
This is also the only situation where the man is less satisfied with the pairing than the woman, on average, (untill you get to men being about 18cm taller than the woman, then its roughly the same gap as the height difference increases) but the men have huge CI intervals in this instance, indicating many men actually don’t mind this much, and some men mind it extremely.
Meanwhile, women generally dislike being taller than their man, with a yes, expanded CI range, but far less than that of the man, indicating that this is a less variable and more common … anti-preference for most women, in general, than it is for men.
…
Somewhat oddly, to me at least, we also have this pattern:
The maximum gap in partner height satisfaction between men and women seems to be around a man being just about 3cm, or about 1 inch, taller than the woman.
For women broadly, this is the least desirable possible pairing, while for men, it would basically be nice if they were about 2 inches or about 5cm taller…, but its not that big a deal to them, they are not that far from their maximum satisfaction.
Meanwhile, this situation is the lowest scoring situation for women.
It is actually worse than the woman being taller than the man.
In case you have not guesed, I am a guy, and I find this … fairly confusing/interesting.
Basically this means there is a huge mismatch where guys are generally pretty ok with being just a bit taller than their gal, but women find this to be the worst, the lowest possible score they would broadly assign to a partner height difference situation, to such an extent that they’d actually be on average happier if her man was just actually shorter than her.
…
But anyway, yeah, unless I am missing something, it doesn’t look like this paper actually answers your question precisely.
What you mention, the uh, height-choosyness tapering off for tall women and very short men does occur to some extent, but we… don’t really seem to have that detailed to us, I am not seeing a way to mathematically compare the magnitude.
Also again worth noting, my ‘Short King’ scenario was kind of a worst case scenario, as it assumes all women would only go for their ideal partner scenario.
Some women do do this, but obviously not all, and some men also do this, but obviously not all… and numbers on the absolute or relative prevalence of that do not seem to be in this paper.
My question (do taller women have a preference for less height difference compared to shorter women) was actually answered by the graph, because the slope of the line is less than 1.
A 1.6m woman seems to most prefer a 1.78m partner (18cm taller), whereas a 1.8m woman seems to prefer a 1.89m partner (9cm taller). I other words, it’s not that they’re less choosy, it’s just that they expect a smaller delta when they themselves are tall.
Of course, the thick line in that graph doesn’t correspond with the headline numbers mentioned (21cm), but I also notice that the thick line isn’t the center of the acceptable range. That is, women seem to be more forgiving of people who are taller than their ideal than they are of people who are shorter than their ideal. That’s an interesting finding, too.
My question (do taller women have a preference for less height difference compared to shorter women) was actually answered by the graph, because the slope of the line is less than 1.
Wot.If the slope of the line was less than one, it would point downward, descend, as it moves to the right.None of the lines in graph 1 do this.???I am dumb, I described a slope of 0, not 1.
Derp.
That being said… every line on graph 1 has a slope less than 1, so this is not a meaningful evaluation to determine anything, in and of itself.
A 1.6m woman seems to most prefer a 1.78m partner (18cm taller), whereas a 1.8m woman seems to prefer a 1.89m partner (9cm taller). I other words, it’s not that they’re less choosy, it’s just that they expect a smaller delta when they themselves are tall.
Its not a delta, its a variance range. Delta typically refers to change over time.
Also, I am using ‘height-choosy’ as a colloquial way of saying that that variance range expands or contracts.
If the variance narrows, this is more height-choosy, if it expands, this is less height-choosy.
Also also, graph 1 shows the mean of the acceptable height range of a partner.
Not the ideal.
That’s graph 2.
More on that later.
…
Anyway, from graph 1, we can see that women actually get more height-choosy the shorter they are, as graph 1 shows the variance range for acceptable male heights contracting as the woman is shorter.
It also seems to contract more sharply for women than men, ie, the CI lines for preferred male height would intersect closer to the average height of women, than the CI lines for the preffered height of females intersect as compared to average male height.
…
But, there are not exact figures on that kind of math, this is what I meant by the paper not specifically going into detail about this, such thst we could get another single number that could be used as a ratio.
…
Basically, women get more height-choosy as they are themselves shorter, than men get height-choosy as they themselves are taller.
Shorter women height discriminate more than taller men do… is another way you could say that.
This bodes poorly for our Short King.
Of course, the thick line in that graph doesn’t correspond with the headline numbers mentioned (21cm), but I also notice that the thick line isn’t the center of the acceptable range.
The 21 cm vs 8 cm thing comes from the ideal height difference for each sex/gender, ie, the highest score on the second graph, graph 2 in my post.
Men, black dot, get their highest score at being 8cm taller, women, white dot, get their highest score at being 21cm shorter.
Ideal != mean of acceptable height ranges.
If you read the paper, you can find more explanation and a more detailed version of the 8 vs 21 ideal metric, with its own CI and SD and such.
I use 8 and 21 as rounded figures, so I don’t have to make things potentially even more overcomplicated, and also the authors themselves did this in their abstract.
That is, women seem to be more forgiving of people who are taller than their ideal than they are of people who are shorter than their ideal. That’s an interesting finding, too.
You’re still mixing up ‘ideal’ with ‘mean of acceptable range’.
But, if you make that replacement, then yes this is correct, this is a good point to make, unfrotunately this also bodes poorly for our Short King.
Not only does the mean of the acceptable male height drop more quickly as a woman is shorter, than the same for men as they get taller…
Yeah, the upper bound is further from the mean than the lower bound, ie, womens preferences generally skew toward accepting taller men, more than accepting shorter men.
The burger people never go the extra mile to translate their freedom units to something reasonable, so neither should we.
I mean, when I am talking to a non burgeroid on lemmy who makes it clear, or at least seems likely that they don’t know Freedom Units, I try to go out of my way to do the conversions, present both measurement systems.
But uh yeah, the vast majority of us don’t, and I do think that is rude of us.
He is a cutie, eh?
GOOD thing she isn’t Trans! OTHERWISE she would have an Unfair Advantage! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!
HER DAD’S TALLER. HOLY SHIT.
genetics, right? at least one of her parents had to be similarly tall.
I once knew a married couple with the husband at 6’8" and the wife at 4’10". For years, we all joked about them having kids, and either would quip “logistics”. I was part of the family gathering during the birth of their first child, and a caesarian was essential. 🙃
You might be surprised! My uncle is 170 cm tall, his wife about 165, and two of their sons are about 170. Their third son is nearly 195 cm. Yes, he’s their biological child - we’ve checked!
Both my aunt and uncle had tall fathers and very short mothers. Height is polygenic (multiple genes are responsible), so my cousin won the height allele lottery and inherited a higher proportion of the height increasing traits both parents carried, making him a height outlier.
I’m 201 cm both my parents are both over 6ft
My cousin is 211cm, both his parents are under 6ft.
That cousin isn’t even related to the taller side of my family. He’s sort of a freak outlier.
I am 197 cm and taller than both my parents or really anyone in my family
Same boat. I’m 20cm taller than my dad. Do grandparents come into play? I’m really bad at biology
Height is about 80% genetics, 20% environment (nutrition and general health). Grandparent’s genetics are a factor since that is where the parents inherited their genes.
A child inherits two copies of every gene from their parents, one copy from each. Your family could be like mine, where my grandfather was quite tall and my grandmother was unusually short, suggesting my grandfather had double pairs of genes for height and my grandmother had double pairs of genes for… not height. Their children, my mother and her siblings, then had an even assortment of tall and short genes.
Her brother married a woman whose parents followed the same tall father/short mother pattern and they had three sons: two of about the same height as the parents (even tall/short gene mix) and one who is about 20 cm taller than the rest (few or no short genes).
Thank you for the detailed explanation. And yep, that’s the situation. One of my grandparents was tall, the other grandparent was short.
He played 7 seasons in the NBA, was kinda a journeyman playing backup center for a bunch of different teams.
That’s cool but I feel like it would be a nightmare being that tall.
I have one nephew at 6’10” and another that is 7’1”. They both cope well enough even when challenged with size obstacles. They are young and generally positively motivated which helps.
The back problems will kick in early.
Knees go quicker, especially for athletes
Why? Height doesn’t automatically equate to back problems. Uneven weight distribution (belly, boobs, etc.), poor stretching habits, lack of excerise, bad posture/form/lifting, or injury equate to back problems at ANY height.
Its mostly because we gotta use the kitchen sink, bath sink, toilet chairs, bed, couch etc for mini people. So having to crouch all the time would do your back in quick.
Being much closer to her height than his I can confidently say that’s just not true, short of your feet literally hanging off the end of a bed. You just have bad posture, bad form, and don’t stretch.
How old are you?
Old enough to know what the Internet sounds like and to have actually made mixtapes on tape.
I have a friend that is 5’7.5" and that really is the threshold. Because after that, you’re taller than a standard door frame and have to duck to go in or out of anywhere.
What tiny standards for doorframes do you have???
The Shire
Is your friend 5’7.5 or 6’7.5? 6’8" doors are really common, so I’m guessing the latter.
I actually know someone who is that tall and he has a daughter who is tiny. It’s really awkward talking to both of them at the same time because he stands at a normal distance which really feels far too close because of how tall he is, but if you step back you feel like you’re about half a mile away from his daughter.
shes an amazon.
female hercules: her stats show that she’s 100 kgs of pure muscle.
female hercules
I believe the correct term for that is Xena
Damn, she has long legs
Poor girl. I’ve never met a super tall girl that liked being tall. In my teens I worked Nordstrom women’s shoes. That is one of the only places with a stock of very large sizes.
Super tall women are an involuntary circus act everywhere they go. I don’t envy that. All I have met have a certain sadness in their eyes. I’m sure there are exceptions, but I see sad eyes here.
Can confirm. Wife is 6 feet tall and wishes she was half a foot shorter (in height before any comedians jump in) but we visited Bergen in Norway recently and she was so delighted that she could buy clothes off the rack and pretty shoes.
My aunt is fairly tall (about 1.9 meters) and she told me she was so thankful for men in drag becoming a thing in the zeitgeist, as she could finally find shoes and clothes her size with ease.
Wasn’t there a king of the hill episode with this premise? Peggy finally finds shoes that fit her because she has big feet, and it turns out it’s a specialist drag store.
There was. It was a pretty good one.
Because you met us while we were buying shoes.
Which is depressing, yes. But other than shoes being sad, my depression and thousand yard stare are unrelated to my height.
Deleted by author
I feel you, am short dude (taller than this guy but still), also sucks. Tall dudes humble bragging about reaching those things is our inverse of yours lol.
FWIW, the first girl I dated was taller than me and was the best relationship I had by far. I did not care about her height, and she literally had to stoop a little to kiss me lmao. Tall girls are cute too!
yeah, every smol girl talks about how they wish they were tall, but they have no idea how embarrassing it is, the way it invalidates your femininity and so on
Deleted by author
Some of do wish we were tall. Not all of us care what a potential mate finds “cute”. We want to be able to be safe wearing seatbelts instead of higher chances of decapitation. We want to be responded to like adults, especially in our 40’s, instead of treated like children. We want to be independent while working on and around our homes without fear of falling of stools and ladders to put dishes away or calling a man for help. Being told a job your interested in wouldn’t be a good fit, because of your size…
I even have pairs of “shit stompers”, as my friends call them, platform boots that give me about 2 1/2 inches more height so I can be self-reliant. Sold as “clubbing boots” but I wear them regularly for mundane shit.
Getting literally looked down on, by everyone, everyday, gets really tiring, especially after decades of it. I am 5"3 (so not even THAT short) and can’t see shit in large crowds besides asses and backs. Have been actually stepped on by tall folks (even people just at 5’6"… like, come the fuck on) who don’t realize there are people shorter than their eyes and don’t care to look down. My head gets hit by average and tall people’s elbows (hard) in club or crowd environments because again, they have no idea someone can exist below their eyeline, or just don’t care. Can’t go to bars or clubs alone because we are easy “marks” so we need an adult or a man to accompany us, to dissuade sexual preditors.
Anyone remember vehicles with bench seats? How degrading is it to not be able to reach the pedals because the seat only has 3 notches, and the closest one is still for people taller than you? Getting told “you should get yourself a booster seat” like I’m a kid in a restaurant.
Not every girl wants to be “cute”. Some of just want to “be”, and be safe. Self defense classes really drilled into my head the dangers of “looking like an easy mark” it’s assumed short women won’t put up as much of a fight and are easier prey. Learned to carry a “big” presence, and found a lot less sketchy characters would try to approach me. Staying that alert is fucking exhausting and makes going out, at night, in cities, to large parking lots, to bars and clubs, to concerts, a lot less enjoyable.
Sorry for the rant. But just because some folks might see short as cute, does NOT mean we short folks concur, or see that “cute” makes up for the rest of the shit and dangers we have to deal with. Or, even want to be “cute”.
The most notable person in my life that is like this might genuinely wish she were tall, but she also wishes to be strong and muscular and so on. I always wonder how she would actually feel if she had that body though.
All the actually short girls (5’3" or less) I know complain as well. Feet too small for shops to have, boobs not accounted for in clothing, etc. Your perspective probably counts average and just below average girls as short.
But her height is actually useful. She’s a starter in a sport in which height is a useful physical trait, which helped her with university admissions with a scholarship. She’s apparently a professional who has been on the roster of some overseas teams, and plays for her national team (Canada).
Plus growing up in a family with tall people might make it easier to deal with. Her dad is former NBA player Mike Smrek and presumably has a social circle of very tall people and maybe even their very tall children.
So I don’t doubt that a lot of tall women actively dislike their own height. But this particular woman probably has reason to like being tall.
She’ll probably make tons of money as a professional athlete, so she’s probably ok with it.
Volleyball does not pay well at all.
Most athletes make next to nothing. Like I worked with a 3 time Olympic track rider. At that level, the sport consumes your whole life just to complete at Olympics level. No one at the Olympics is making money at it. Everyone is broke and barely skating by. I worked with pro cycling teams and it was the same story for all, even many recognizable names are just poor people that love it in many cases. There are very very few big name celebrity types that actually make good money.
Death by snusnu
I’m scaroused.
Please don’t give me new fetishes
do you know how hard it is to have a fetish for women being bigger and taller than you, when you are over 6 and a half feet tall?
😭
Very hard?
not as hard as he is right now.
Don’t know and don’t need to.
… and long…
Thats as much a fantasy as finding a 9 foot tall woman to pat me on the head and say she is proud of me.
Yeah. Good luck finding a woman that is proud of you
There is a lot to unpack in that sentence.
I am an entire warehouse, filled with pods, which themselves are full of issues, trauma, and baggage.
and I have had 2 therapists be completely dumbfounded and shocked at how well adjusted I am for all of it, lol.
its rarely a good thing when you shock a therapist.
We all are, to varying degrees. Some are just more aware of it than others.
But I didn’t approach your last remark by the harsher side. All the images coming to mind as I read it were censorable out of being plain stupid and childish.
Therapists can easily suffer of professional bias. I’ve done therapy as well and it came to a point when I felt my therapists were overly concerned and trying to victimize me. It is their role to help us be aware of things that may be lacking or holding us back but their trainning can make them view things as so damaging that a person being to cope and manage trauma by themselves and lead a somewhat balanced life is an impossible concept.
Yeah dont tell me im six foot which is the average where i live but women are just so much shorter… for me it actually helps that im 100kg with a pretty muscular build because I only care abou the height and from my experience taller women tend to like wider men. Idk. Still its hard out here lol
That’s a funny comment, but yeah - I’m the average height of men in my area, and like to be outmassed. I do like guys to be bigger than me in some dimension, and it hasn’t ever been height (tall guys here all seem to date short women). I have been about the same height as the guys of all my 3 serious relationships (not unusual since that’s the most common guy height) but have been the more slender of us always.
I wonder if we will ever evolve to the point where we can talk about women online without some mad lad needing to sexualise them.
Oh noes! They’re talking about s-e-x? Gross! We’re not supposed to talk about that! That’s naughty - we should be reading our bibles instead!
That’s awfully presumptuous of you, perhaps the comment was made by a woman who is sexualizing short men
I’d be satisfied if women got to openly sexualize men and talk about it. That would level out the playing field and, hopefully, reduce the unnecessary sexualizing of trivial things.
As a man, I’d be all about this
She would have to put pants on, at least.
So when you go to the beach, you are purving on every woman in a swimsuit or bikini?
Yes
Also yes.
You are telling me that a woman practically naked from waist below is not sexual? You might be gay.
Do you have sisters? Do you ever go to the beach? No, it’s really not normal to find yourself reduced to base sexual impulses, and type them out on your computer just because you can see someone’s body.
Yes, I am sane enough to not have sexual urges about relatives. Everyone else is fair game.
It’s athletic long legs. Chill, person, it’s absolutely partnof human nature and not disrespectful in any way to appreciate that that is sexy.
That is literally the opposite of evolution, we evolve to procreate that means more sex and sexualizing.
TLDR: if you don’t sexualize women on the Internet you are an affront to evolution and a sin against nature.
Unfortunately for your genes, attitudes like these will mean they don’t have much chance of spreading.
Technically evolution is an emergent phenomenon from the reproduction of organisms. If you were to clone yourself with slight mutations it would still allow evolution to happen with zero inherent need for sex or sexuality whatsoever
Regardless of that, sexualizing women typically leads one to be an incel not a successfully mating male which means it would be the opposite of evolution by your reasoning.
It’s also interesting that your premise is generic but your conclusion is specific. “Sex is to be encouraged for evolution; that’s why we should sexualize women specifically” If you aren’t a misogynist, you might want to switch your TL;DR to “sexualize people” not specifically “women”
The secret lies in the balance - if i don’t sexualize women at least a little bit, i would probably don’t have a sexual preference for women.
The important thing is being able to keep it in check - I can talk with every woman without hitting on them, even if i might have sexual thoughts about them in secret, just like women will probably sexualize their preferred gender and still be able to behave decently towards men.
There’s a time and place for everything. If it were any other way, humanity would have probably died out by now - either by being primarily asexual or by being disgusted by the opposite sex and their inappropriate behavior.
P.S.: My hypothesis is that since most people are alone while posting, they are mentally in a space where such thoughts are not suppressed as much, which leads to a higher occurrence of horny remarks than in real life. A minuscule amount of people of those who can’t stop themselves from expressing their adoration of those legs would be like that when meeting her. And yes, those legs are sexy as hell, and i’m pretty sure she knows it, or this photo would not exist.
Sexualizing women does not “typically lead to being an incel”, that’s just crazy. Blaming women for failure to succeed in finding a sexual partner is what leads to that.
It’s not inherently bad to see people in a sexual light, what matters is when and how you act on those feelings, and respecting that people are also more than sexual objects.
It’s amazing how many hoops you’ll jump through to make a literal scientific fact sound bad but in any case I was obviously speaking in hyperbole to piss people off.
Too late
