I understand that a women may only want a guy of a certain height for whatever reason they may have. That’s fine. You are attracted to who you are attracted to and there is nothing wrong with that.
Maybe she just wants to warn a guy before wasting their time with meeting up somewhere, or stop them from getting their hopes up. I get that too.
However, if a man were to say “Sorry, no (blank) women”, they would get accused of body shaming and everyone would lose their shit.
It’s a double standard, and its absolute bullshit. Whereas someone would say of the woman “Oh, she’s just very selective and knows what she wants”, they would say of the man “What a pig! How dare he!”. No one would ever say “He’s just very selective and wants to find the perfect soul mate”.
[–]Lethn 190 points191 points192 points (11 children) | Copy Link
lol I love how on the very same thread you have people in total denial about this even being an issue and then when you scroll down just a little bit you see these very women posting in the comments page about how awful it is to judge for these characteristics.
[–]mymarkis666 57 points58 points59 points (8 children) | Copy Link
This is a concept that's very hard for collectivists of any stripe to understand, but the women saying how awful judging for these characteristics is and the women judging men for being short are entirely different individuals.
[–]InformalCriticism 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Solipsism.
[–]Lethn 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
In my opinion it depends, more often than not we've caught these hypocrites doing the very things they're accusing men of doing.
[–]Ghlhr4444 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Omg so you're saying hypocrites are a myth? Incredible
[–]mymarkis666 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
No Kathy, you're saying that.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Well said, I hate when people do that shit and paint an entire group with one brush as hipocritical.
[–]xNOM 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Your evidence for this is.... what exactly? What is the correlation factor?
[–]Me_ADC_Me_SMASH 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
you dont have to give these women credit. Flat chested women's opinion doesn't matter for that person, and only flat chested women will complain about it.
[–]Vigilante17 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Could you just put “I prefer tall men”, “I prefer slim women”, “I prefer a man who is hung like a horse” or “I love me some huge Tatas?” Instead of alienating a group you’re just stating what you like as an individual.
[–]MidWestMind 242 points243 points244 points (14 children) | Copy Link
This reminds me back about 10 years ago when I was on a dating site, I got tired of women showing off their clevage and in the bio being all prudish. So I uploaded a pic (not as my main) of me with a foot on a chair showing off my package. Which I stuffed a maglite in my pants. I thought I laid the satire pretty damn thick as the bulge ran down my thigh to damn near my knee.
It was reported and deleted within an hour or two.
[–]GrinninGremlin 76 points77 points78 points (0 children) | Copy Link
LOL but whoever reported it looked!
[+]dontforgetthispw1 points [recovered] (10 children) | Copy Link
I think that was a good call from the "mods." I don't want satire in my dating app. And for what it's worth, I'm surprised your inbox wasn't full.
Fact is: women can show and say whatever the fuck they want in dating profiles. They can be racist and all the other kinds of "ists." Not so with men in the slightest (you will get removed/reported).
[–]AKnightAlone 14 points15 points16 points (9 children) | Copy Link
Whoa... I hadn't actually thought of that one. I've seen a lot of girls saying "no black guys" and even "no white guys" rarely. Can't imagine a guy saying either of those discriminative statements without it making every chick hate him.
Hmph... I like blaming women for men's problems and men for women's problems every chance I get, though, so I'll blame this on us men for not being more offended and apprehensive about openly being horrible people.
If a thousand thirsty dudes weren't messaging them, they'd figure out they're doing something wrong. But we'll always be messaging them.
[–]Moneyshot7319 8 points9 points10 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Black guy here. I see the “No black guys” more often than I can count, and at times I do feel some kind of way about it, but I can usually shrug it off. It’s when I see literally 5-6 profiles in a row ranging from polite rejection, all the way down to purely rude and racist that make me delete the app. So I decided to try a little exercise, and stated in my profile that I was only looking for Mexican/Hispanic women and let me tell you it was a donkey show. Some of the messages I received were: • You’re ugly anyway • Ewww, you’re one of those • You shouldn’t be picky And a few other choice insults. Fun part was it was mostly white women giving me all the negativity.
[–]batking4 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
dude. you can't mess with latina chicks for better or worse. I don't care about the scarcity problem. They will bite your fucking dick off.
[–]Moneyshot7319 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I’ve never had that issue with them, and I’ve been with quite a few. I have seen some examples in my circle of friends, but my experience has never gone to those extremes lol
[–]batking4 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
My comment was a generalization. By no means representative of the population at whole. I am actually not attracted to them at all (and that is a confirmed true observation), so I might have some confirmation bias working with me. Maybe I should have labeled it as such?
[–]Moneyshot7319 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
No harm, no foul. I apologize for possibly misreading your comment. But in the general sense, I can agree with you. Apparently they can remember things that haven’t happened yet and will kill you in your sleep and make you watch.
[–]Arthuyo -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I wonder if girls who put "No black guys" get comments as well? That said I've participated in other forums on the web, and they almost "casual" misandry displayed by women (and often men) in these forums is breath taking, so I doubt it is nearly as common.
[–]AKnightAlone 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, I was thinking this. I bet they get a lot of responses like that. Difference being, they get dozens/hundreds of more messages than the average guy. A few judgmental ones would be wedged among hundreds of "what's up"s and "hey"s, and other nonsense chatter.
[–]degustibus 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Well usually you just used a combination of code words likely to eliminate certain groups. Insist on a bachelor's degree, you've just skewed your results Asian and White. Then say you like to look up as you dance (you can get specific), and you've skewed it back white. Now throw in some hobbies or music genres to make it almost 99% that you've got your desired group responding.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Lost count how many times I’ve seen “no black guys”
[–]lonewolfhistory 154 points155 points156 points (19 children) | Copy Link
The difference is that, for the most part, you can lose weight, you can’t grow taller. So it would make more sense to say “sorry no women with less than a D cup “ or something to that extent
[–]functionalsociopathy 32 points33 points34 points (17 children) | Copy Link
It should also be pointed that there's not a fetish for BBM
[–]denyjunctionfunction 29 points30 points31 points (5 children) | Copy Link
There is, just isn’t as advertised as bbw.
[+]BitsAndBobs3041 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ghlhr4444 23 points24 points25 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Female chubby chasers are rare because there isn't a woman on earth who couldn't get a fat guy without chasing
[–]chobbo 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Nobody has to chase chubbies if you think about it.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Haha, insightful comment of the day
[–]Whoami31588 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
There is for BM though
[+]bloodthorn19901 points [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link
i've seen it more described as BHM (big handsome men) but it does exist.
[–]functionalsociopathy 7 points8 points9 points (6 children) | Copy Link
I just looked it up and... welp, it looks like I was wrong. It's a smaller fetish, but it definitely exists. I think I'm going to go wash my eyes out and evaluate my life choices now
[–]batking4 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
Hey dude. It's a thing for sure but it's very much not advertised. Women don't want to be known as the girls who go for BBC. I've seen faaar faaaaaaar more women with a black dude than I've seen men with a black chick.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Yes, OkCupid's data from a several (almost 10?) years ago before they went full SJW, shows that black women are the least messaged combination of race and sex. If that's not a wake-up call to change their behavior then nothing will be.
[–]batking4 -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
I live with one now. She's an insufferable (and maybe external factors make her an) antisocial bitch. I know this must seem like highly circumstantial evidence, and that's fine. What I said is true, I swear to god.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I believe you. Just check out the videos on YouTube from black men and women discussing why this is generally the case.
Note: you will have a very hard time doing that because far-Left YouTube actively suppresses videos like that. Don't believe me? Try searching it for a video called Why Black Women Are Undateable. First off, unlike other SJW-approved videos it will never show in the autosuggest box. Second, once you hit 'Enter,' unlike other SJW-approved videos it won't even be at the top of the search results. Even though you put exactly the correct title
The whole idea of calling videos like that 'objectionable' or 'racist' (it's not racist. It's CULTURALIST) is completely backward because the people making those videos aren't saying "Black women are generally horrible to date because of genetics." They're saying "Black women are generally horrible to date because of how they BEHAVE."
[–]functionalsociopathy -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
BBC has nothing to do with body fat tho. BHM is apparently the equivalent of BBW
[–]batking4 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I didn't realise it wasn't a race thing. I stand corrected.
[–]GfFoundOtherAccount 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
What is bbm?
[–]functionalsociopathy 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Big Beautiful Men as opposed to Big Beautiful Women
[–]nanan00 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Woman must be 39/27/39 with DD cup!
[–]AutisticCyborg 22 points23 points24 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I did this a while ago it's well worth the hassle just for the outrage mail lol
[–]theAnalepticAlzabo 24 points25 points26 points (8 children) | Copy Link
Or even 'No Borderline Personality chicks, please'.
[–]Iamdanno 16 points17 points18 points (3 children) | Copy Link
That only works if they realize they are like that. Sadly, most don't seem to realize.
[–]DaSaw 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
If "lack of self-awareness" isn't on the symptom list, it should be.
Heck, someone who is properly diagnosed and actually working on it could possibly work out, with some patience.
[–]revenueseven 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It’s a common problem with virtually all mental illness. “Lack of insight into illness” is the lingo often used.
[–]TrueGrey 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Another surviver?
You're not alone, and congrats on making it out.
[–]theAnalepticAlzabo 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Thanks man. Its pretty much put me off relationships altogether. Hope you are doing well, ✌️
[–]TrueGrey 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yep. After a very pessimistic break, I learned that while no relationship is perfect, no SANE relationship is anywhere near a BPD relationship. Anyone else reading, don't even try it, unless you have BPD in which case please don't breed.
[–]Razorbladekandyfan 52 points53 points54 points (10 children) | Copy Link
That is an interesting one. I would say yes it is acceptable, i wouldn't want to date someone for whom height is such an issue. The interesting thing for me - its one thing when you are a tall woman, and short guys dont do it for you. But women be 5'5" shitting on men who are 5'9" just because they are technically not 6 feet tall. Bitch is you dumb?
[–]Razorbladekandyfan 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Hm, i meant to say "its not a problem to want tall guys". But it came out wrong. Edited.
[–]tinkerzpy 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Cool, you could put up a profile you don't date women with height issues.
(wonder what results that would give...)
[–]Jowsie 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
well 5'9 isn't close to 6ft. you're thinking of 5'11 hah
[–]Razorbladekandyfan 6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
Its not close. But its a good height for a man. (or at least imo)
[–]hectorduenas86 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I’m 5’5” and in Miami, FL it doesn’t makes me a man according to a huge amount of women I have interacted online and personally. They actually do me a favor by blatantly stating that I don’t deserve a chance because of my height even when the reason we interacted is because they felt attracted to my looks. And at the very core and it most cases is about an insecurity to be silently judged by a stranger or acquaintance for being next to your shorter SO. I dated a woman who constantly felt insecure going out with me and sad that she “couldn’t wear heels” while at the same time pointing out that: “you look short today”... she is only 2” taller.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Sorry to hear how crappy those women are to you. Those are the same women who will complain "Where did all the good men go?" later. Good job, dummies!
Exactly. It's so hard to find a compatible partner that it's really tragic when someone lets insecurity ruin a good relationship.
Anyone who says they "can't" wear heels (of course she could) is denying her own accountability. What she means is "I feel uncomfortable wearing heels because I'll be taller than you," but she won't admit that because she doesn't want to look bad.
I'd tell her she looks EXACTLY like someone who is no longer my girlfriend. Bye!
[–]hectorduenas86 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
She has a lot of issues and indeed isn’t my GF since 6 years ago, and on top of that she’s a horrible person... the fact that she said/acted like that didn’t bothered me too much at that time, I don’t have that low self steem as to worry about those things or let it be heckled by my appearance. Now upon moving to a bigger metropolis I learned that there are more of “those” women; in the past 3 years only 1 of many stated maturely that she didn’t feel attracted to me because of my height... the rest just ghost (Tinder matches/dates mostly) you. It can really struck a nerve sometimes, like it’s so stupid and shallow that there’s no way to avoid feeling upset... then I realize they don’t deserve me or my attention and I move on. Luckily there are plenty of available women that don’t need a “just be tall” man to be happy, but seems that with time there are fewer of those. I actually work with one that complains of being single despite having good looks, being groped and approach by creeps on bars and places she goes out to but haven’t considered filtering her standards and reevaluating her habits, and did I mention she exclusively dates 5’11” and above? She’s 5’7”.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Gotta love the ones who have options but complain that they have no options.
[–]DaSaw 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Depends on what group you're talking about, but for white dudes, 5'9" is solidly average.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
She's not dumb. Her height has nothing to do with her height preference. If you think tall guys dislike short chicks you don't know what you're talking about.
[–]Merit_based_only 55 points56 points57 points (37 children) | Copy Link
Its not socially acceptable, but it does weed out the people who you don't want to date.... in a number of different ways.
First, you automatically get rid of the fatties or whatever you aren't into because you made a firm declaration that they should choose an easier target. Second, you eliminate the outraged freaks who are angered by you having standards.
Yes, you are going to get some hate mail, but have fun with it.
Example: "you are a terrible person for saying that you won't date a REAL women. REAL women have curves."
"Curves, yes, but not prodigious front-butts like you have."
[–]Zexks 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Prodigious is such an underused word.
[–]Merit_based_only 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree.
Comes off as a bit pretentious sometimes, but in this regard I think it is exactly appropriate.
[–]majortom22 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Dumbledore used it that one time...
[–]nanan00 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Curves, like hour glass shape, not curve like round.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 0 points1 point2 points (31 children) | Copy Link
No, all that does is take a person who was wrongly accusing you of being an asshole, and suddenly proving to them that you are one after all.
A better strategy is to point out the double standard. If you can change even one person's mind you have done something good, rather than just insult someone as you say.
[+]Merit_based_only1 points [recovered] (30 children) | Copy Link
Change your tampon, Nancy.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB -1 points0 points1 point (29 children) | Copy Link
Translation: “Youbigdumbsob showed what a shitty, petty person I like to be and now I’m proving her right with a misogynistic slur.” LOL
[–]Merit_based_only 0 points1 point2 points (28 children) | Copy Link
Ironic that you attempt to virtue signal via the whole "you can change people's minds" drivel, yet when challenged you slip right into the behavior you just looked down your warty nose at.
Thanks for proving me right. LOL
[–]YoubigdumbSOB -1 points0 points1 point (27 children) | Copy Link
I didn't attempt to virtue signal at all, but it's forever amusing that your ego interpreted what I said as that. LOL
Even funnier, you stooped to insulting me rather than actually proving even one single part of my argument wrong. HAHA, you failed miserably!
[–]Merit_based_only 0 points1 point2 points (26 children) | Copy Link
Nope. You keep proving my point exactly.
Thanks for the validation, princess!
[–]YoubigdumbSOB -1 points0 points1 point (25 children) | Copy Link
Notice that all you do is insist (not prove) and insult. Those are the twin hallmarks of a loser with no argument but a big insecurity complex. LMAO
See, if you actually were right, you would annihilate my argument, rightly so. But you can't, because you're wrong, and keep insisting so desperately because you are trying to save your pathetic ego. I'm so sorry. (Not really, LOL)
[–]Merit_based_only 0 points1 point2 points (24 children) | Copy Link
More proof.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB -2 points-1 points0 points (23 children) | Copy Link
Says the guy who is so wrapped up in NOT being wrong, that he is STILL desperately insisting a week later.
You fail to recognize that I have been doing this for years under various accounts; ridiculing people like you for making dumb assertions and then watching them (read: YOU) get so triggered that they can't stop. One after another their ego humiliates them over a period of days.
Of course, if they were RIGHT they could easily prove it, but they never are of course, which is the entire reason they (read: YOU) keep doubling down and insisting while insulting me. If they had ANYthing else, they (read: YOU) would use it.
I find it as hilarious as it is pathetic. Some stop fairly soon. The insecure ones keep going and going. I love the fact that right from the start, when I made my comment, I knew I would probably make you into my bitch, and as usual, your ego made you agree to it. HAHA
[–]LooCid36 101 points102 points103 points (9 children) | Copy Link
I just like to remind them that our choices most of the time are Single mother, or LandWhale.
[–]TheBookOfSeil 37 points38 points39 points (8 children) | Copy Link
Aren’t they usually the same?
[+]NibblyPig1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
I'll have you know that I have 5 kids and another one the way, daddy isn't in my life anymore and you better be just fine with that or walk on
[–]Toomuchgamin 20 points21 points22 points (0 children) | Copy Link
All 4 daddies.
[–]TheBookOfSeil 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Don’t you mean waddle?
[–]Arthuyo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Actually I would be grateful for the information. (Because I would be walking on, well actually I wouldn't even be looking since I'm married).
[–]denyjunctionfunction 19 points20 points21 points (3 children) | Copy Link
From what I’ve seen on dating apps, the single moms are mostly fairly attractive and skinny (21-29 year olds).
[–]GrinninGremlin 19 points20 points21 points (1 child) | Copy Link
They never have time for dating anyway since they are all in Med school. /s
[–]NotARealAtty 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I mean technically working on your GED at 25 could be considered a first step toward med school....
[–]TheBookOfSeil 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Probably looking for baby/child support check #2. The landwhales don’t have that luxury.
[–]vwolf800 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This is one of many things that I could never understand about society, even when I was little. I see women laughing at men for their appearance, or their physical attributes and we're supposed to go along with it like if it's perfectly fine, but nobody can ever say anything "rude" to a woman. Well, I fucking hate small-breasted women and I don't care if it's rude or not. You want me to respect you, start respecting me in return.
[–]hixidom 24 points25 points26 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You're allowed to put whatever you want. Please do actually. Society is putting up with their waling less and less. Might as well accelerate things at this point.
[–]Electroverted 25 points26 points27 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I agree, but it's all about who controls the market. Women control the dating market. They're the job post, while men are the applicants, and dates are an interview. Therefore they get to call the shots of what they want. It is what it is.
[–]LeBouffonRoi 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
See, it'd be fine if you were just limiting yourself, it's the outrage that isn't right. Very few women would even consider talking to you because you wrote this on your profile, and yet they go on putting similar shit on their very own profiles.
It's hypocrisy, and it might and probably will even get to the point of hate mail from women who this doesn't even affect at all.
I'm guessing that men don't necessarily get enough mail to need weeding it out though, as good looking women can use a little weeding out.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
That's one way to look at it. Or you can choose to see yourself as having so much value that you are the one interviewing them. I would never try to connect with anyone I hoped picked me. I prefer to screen them to see whether they meet my standards. If they aren't interested then so be it, but I have choice and I'm very picky.
Try it. It will change your results for the better.
[–]kal_el_diablo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly. Double standard or no, it doesn't really matter what a man puts on his online profile since no one is searching it. He doesn't need to repel flat-chested or overweight applicants. He just needs a placeholder while he goes out searching and responding to female profiles.
[–]sphinx2626 35 points36 points37 points (1 child) | Copy Link
It isn't socially acceptable. Thess people who are often not part of Society, they're part of their own Echo chambers. (At least online). I wouldn't care if my daughter preferred taller men. But there are ways to be classy about that type of thing and not a jackass. Just like I'm sure a father would be fine if his son did have a preference in female body type, we do have preferences after all. A person can choose to be a dick and post that on a public dating venue. Overall I feel there's nothing wrong with liking what you like, females in high volume not having tact simply shows their character and allows you to swipe the proper direction. It's a free red flag, that shows the attuned Observer very obvious undesirable characteristics. Many of these types who lack such social awareness are cult feminists anyways so absolutely nothing wasted.
[–]Felarhin 18 points19 points20 points (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm 6'1 and still don't have any luck on dating websites. If they list "no short men", then there are usually many other deal breakers too that they don't list. I feel like these sorts of folks usually don't actually date much and just want to feel validated.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, and sometimes people put requirements as a way to tell themselves "This is the reason I'm not getting many messages."
[–]MagicTire 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
"But...but...but...that's difffffferennnnntttt!!" /s
[–]I_Love_BB8 18 points19 points20 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Sorry, chicks with dicks only.
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
As a fat woman I have no issue with this. I'd rather know in advance that I'm not someones type. And my profile stipulates no kids, must have job, must not be over 30 and live with mom and dad. Men and women who don't meet those requirements message me to bitch and moan about how unfair I am, so you just have to be prepared for people who think they are entitled to you.
[–]YoubigdumbSOB 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Why do you want them to live with their mom and dad?
Is it ok if they live with just mom?
What if they live with just dad?
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
yea, the left and feminists wanna eliminate every "gender role" except the one where a man MUST be taller than a woman. As a short man, this is a big reason I oppose feminism in its current form.
It's also horseshit that some compare being a short man to a fat woman. Weight is controllable and thus reflects willpower and personality traits; height is uncontrollable and reflects no personality traits. But since feminism has allowed women to be more selective on looks, guys like me get fucked.
[–]-Alfa- 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Sure.
I think anyone can have any preference without it being an issue, don't want a black partner? Ok. Don't want a white one? Neat. Don't want a fat partner? Makes sense. No short people? Go for it.
Anyone who complains about this shit is fucking stupid.
[–]SuperSulf 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Those people are just limiting themselves. Everyone is allowed to have preferences. I'm not physically attracted to people with visible fat rolls. You might be an awesome person, I'm just interested in people who can take care of themselves physically, and someone who I can go do fun physical activities with.
People also get the most worked up about the things they can change. That's why "no fat men" is taken more as an insult than "no short men". You can get more fit, so people get more defensive about that since they know they can change but haven't. You can't change your height, so it's easier to just think "ok, I literally cannot get taller so thanks".
[–]BarefootUnicorn 11 points12 points13 points (10 children) | Copy Link
Women have politicized "obesity". (And so have many on the "Left" in general). I am not attracted to fat people. I have a right to an "affectional preference" just as a gay man, or a furry, or a Anime porn-addict does. For some reason many Progressive people don't think having an affectional preference for fit, healthy people is morally correct.
No fatty-fats for me!
And if someone doesn't like shorties, so be it. That's fine, too.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (5 children) | Copy Link
I met one of my best friends on okcupid when I missed his no fat chicks stipulation. He ended up responding anyways and pointed it out to me but also pointed out we have a ton in common so we are good friends and when we go out I am his wing woman for the fit ladies lol. Would have gone much worse if I threw a fit because he doesnt like my body type.
[–]Merit_based_only 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
You. I like you.
In college I had a few 'fat chick' friends. Hilarious drinking buddies and good people all the way around. I would hang with you anytime.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Im in MA/NH if you ever need a drinking buddy and/or wing woman haha! Always down for new friends. I'm a non threat to the hot girls so I always have the chance to chat with them about my male friends.
[–]Merit_based_only 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Across the country.... figures.
I'm in the Portland Oregon area. Don't get out your way, but you are clearly the type of person I'd love to hang with. Stay groovy, lady. You gotta a fan on the West Coast.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Haha good to know. I'm doing a trip to Vegas in March but idk what the proximity is to Portland. Just know there are some good fat girls out there who prefer male friends!
[–]SuperSulf 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Portland and Vegas are a full days drive away
[–]WhatMixedFeelings 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I'd rather be single than with a landwhale. Obesity is gross.
[+]isperfectlycromulent -9 points-8 points-7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
So is your toxic personality, but they can lose the weight.
[–]Ricotta_Elmar 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
doubt.jpg
[–]HierEncore 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Could not agree more.
[–]Texas_Rangers 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Or no women over 28.
[–]NoNewStories 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
Staying within your age range seems fairly normal to me, but everytime I see an age cutoff all I can think of is that chick who plays Lagertha on Vikings. She's FORTY, and sexy as hell. I know that's rare, but still.
[–]Texas_Rangers 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
It’s not necessarily nice. But the point is that if women say they won’t date short guys, why is it wrong for men to have an age cutoff?
[–]SuperSulf 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
I feel like at that point you're just arbitrarily picking a range to fight against a perceived inequality, rather than actually choosing what you want.
It's not wrong. I don't think it's wrong to have search parameters. Just that the more narrow those parameters are, the less likely you are to find matches.
[–]Texas_Rangers 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I do admit there's some women age really well. But the 28 y/o rule is pretty reliable.
But on that same point, aren't you cutting off met by saying "no short men?"
[–]SuperSulf 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh absolutely. I think women who put "must be X tall" are shallow and limiting their opportunities, but I also concede that it's possible that tall men are as attractive to some women as big breasts are to some men (as an example). People like what they like; might as well get that out of the way immediately. I just hope that's really an attraction for them, and not some view banged into their head from their family or something (like the no or only white guys thing; I can see how that could be pure racism).
[–]Texas_Rangers 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
So I agree 100%. Height is a big factor for women. So I guess I’m more in the camp that it’s ok for guys to have an age limit and ok for women to only want 6’3”.
[–]Ricotta_Elmar 9 points10 points11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Flat is justice.
[–]DaSaw 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm tempted to update my long neglected profile simply to say "I dig flat chests. If that's been your deal-breaker with other guys, give me a try.
[–]Key_Lime 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I came here to say this.
[–]KalebMW99 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
No, it shouldn't. Being short is not equivalent to being flat chested or overweight. Why should being short have anything to do with your attractiveness?
[–]Merit_based_only 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
I'm not sure it does, actually. I think it has more to do with compatibility, if that makes sense.
Example, I was totally into this vegan girl many years ago. But her lifestyle choice absolutely put her into the 'no deal' category (I cure and smoke my own bacon, if that helps clarify my position on vegans). Had nothing to do with her level of attractiveness. Had everything to do with the fact that we would never work out.
[–]KalebMW99 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Height shouldn't be a compatibility issue...it's not a lifestyle choice
[–]Merit_based_only 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Sure it is. I’m not spending my nights reaching for shit on the top shelf for your short ass. ;-)
[–]KalebMW99 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Lmaoooo I'm short not disabled
[–]Merit_based_only -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
We can debate that, if you like. j/k
[–]SuperSulf 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Only one of those things is a choice, the other 2 are genetic, so I'm not sure if you want to group them. People don't choose to have a specific height or breast size.
[–]Gilgamesh107 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Flat is justice
[–]GuyWithTheStalker 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
On a lighter and more universally relevant note...
It should be the norm for men AND women to present themselves on those sites like they just rolled out of bed, left work, arrived at the gym, or picked out a shopping cart.
Who the fuck do people (men and women) think they are? Let's be real here...
[–]chambertlo 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Only feminists have a problem with this. “Rules for thee, none for me”.
[–]in_the_no_know 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Nothing wrong with having preferences...
No fatties
[–]SilverGryphon 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah I agree with the op. I am also glad that this "mens rights" sub is slowly becomming red pilled.
[–]ShadowBanThisCucks 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Eh. You could put it in your dating profile. Maybe you'd get less dates, but maybe you'd get more. Chicks dig ass holes.
[–]GrinninGremlin 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Awesome user name btw!
[–]PacoBedejo 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
As a fat guy, I'll say that you should absolutely discriminate against overweight dates. There are a host of genetic, character, and financial reasons to do so.
I'd leave weight out of the height and tits argument to keep it closer to apples:apples.
[–]WolfShaman 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
It's still not necessarily the same, there are surgeries to make the breasts larger. Not so much with height.
[–]PacoBedejo 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Of course. My point is that obesity is a valuable differentiation between likely-responsible and likely-irresponsible people while height and breast size are almost entirely superficial characteristics.
That's not to say one's personal preferences shouldn't be considered. Rather, I'm saying that lumping an important characteristic in with superficial traits is a bad way to make an argument.
[–]WolfShaman 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Please don't get me wrong, I agree with you. I was just pointing out that it's not a 100% comparison. It is a really close one, though.
[–]ThatOneJack[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Just want to say thanks to everyone showing support to the topic and my crosspost. I didnt think it would get top of the front page of r/mensrights but it did so thank you all.
[–]michaelmalak 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You mean it's not?
It has been many, many years since I was dating. Back in those days, the newspaper ones, HWP was a common requirement.
[–]teamwaterwings 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Honestly it's not socially acceptable for a woman to do that either, and besides it's an instant left swipe if they do. Instantly shows you what kind of person they are
Moral of the story, it's socially acceptable to be shallow, but not to SAY that you're shallow I guess?
[–]Abiogeneralization 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This is sort of a non-argument. Women can put that in their profile without limiting their dating pool. Very, very attractive men could probably put the other part in their dating profile without limiting their dating pool.
Men and women are different.
[–]isperfectlycromulent 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
This screed isn't about mens rights, it's more about bitching because you can't say "no fatties" without getting shit upon.
[–]Chocolat3City 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's online dating. People are shallow. Why post about it here?
[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Sort by controversial...
[–]thrway_1000 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Archive -- https://archive.is/hiyL8
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
There are so many double standards it's not worth talking about.
[–]Beltox2pointO 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's clearly not acceptable, as whenever you see it. The very first comment is always, always bringing up the double standard.
[–]bhavv 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
'No overused loose roastie Arby's meaty flippy floppy flap flaps'.
[–]Sweetest_Jesus 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
“No fat bitches”
[–]skellious 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It is acceptable, isn't it? I mean, personally I find a wide variety of women attractive so such a notice would be superfluous but if you want to do that, you certainly can. some people will take offence to it, sure, but some people take offence to the ones about men too.
Of course, since women tend to contact men far less than the other way around, it may have limited impact as you simply wont contact women you don't find attractive.
[–]sumfacilispuella 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
lol when this post from r/badwomensanatomy https://imgur.com/XvDrQFO was right before this one
[–]NoxHexaDraconis 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
All depends on your appearance, the better looking you are, the more you can get away with. Even then, women tend to have an edge over men
[–]Reverserer 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
girl here - you're right. I don't feel there is a difference - it's preference. Perhaps it is seen as more acceptable due to the fact that breasts are sexualized and it is maybe being seen as appreciating women only for her sexual attribute - but if we are going to say that then wouldn't we say that the man's height is being sexualized as well?
I would say, all things being equal, that there are probably more women who would not date a man due to his height than men that would not date a woman based on her breast size - this is complete 100% conjecture, but a woman might reject a man outright for his height whereas a man would probably not on breast size? am I completely off on that?
[–]muchachomalo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Men don't need to do that on dating sites because we are usually the pursuers. But we still place the same restrictions. Yes it is politically incorrect for both parties to say it.
[–]degustibus 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Rights vs. customs. Your 1st Amendment rights protect you, but if you're on someone else's website then they have a right to dictate terms. Customs, good luck changing those. Life is not fair. Never was, never will be. My advice, try to find a woman you can love who shares enough values. Trying to change the entire dating discourse, wow, that's going to flame out and you'll be bitter and alone.
What might be profitable is putting together a dating site from the perspective of this site's values. Instead of changing match.com or whatever, just go your own way.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Women can be judgmental against men, have preferences and bias. But if a man does it suddenly it’s a problem. He’s an asshole, a pig and ever other slanderous name. How dare he say that about women!
[–]Neko404 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I avoid women who put that kind of shit in their profile. I am not even short, I am just not attracted to judgmental women.
[–]Wafflebot17 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Honestly I have 0 issues with people putting what they like on their profile, it let's me know not to message if I'm not what you want. It's also 100% ok to not like a particular type, I don't date white or Asian women and I don't see why that should be a problem.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Those who have the power can set the rules.
What can men do?
Fuck them! Fuc the powerful!
That didn't come out right. :P
[–]DrewFlan 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's not socially acceptable for women to do that though?
They do it and some men and women give them shit for it. Similarly, if men put "no flat chested women" some men and women would give us shit for it.
[–]Me_ADC_Me_SMASH -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
it is acceptable.
You don't have to accept people's bitching.
[+]jmkiii -7 points-6 points-5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Make a dating app with this feature and the users will be drowning in dick...
Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with men's rights
[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm sorry, but this crap about everything needing to be about rights on here is stupid. Are you autistic or something? Should we call it, men's rights and other issues that men deal with in society that we'd like addressed? Seems a bit long...
This sub, for the people without severe autism, is about issues in general, that have to do with being male in our society. It is perfectly fine to discuss double standards like this post, because it is a legitimate issue men have to deal with.
You understand that language can have this thing called nuance? Concern troll is concerned...
[+]holader1 points [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link
remember when this sub was about mens rights rather than a bunch of incel virgins bitching about women
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
shut up soyboy
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't...
[+]isperfectlycromulent -9 points-8 points-7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I do, all the incels got pushed out and are shitting up the other subs with their misogyny. I prefer r/menslib but it doesn't get as much traffic and this one was full of frustrated men ... now it's toxic frustrated men who are ugly inside and outside.
[–]l3v1athaN_ 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
You prefer menslib. Yep that's all I need to know to determine whether you self-loathe or not.
[–]Free_kittens2468 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Pfft yeah go there to the male feminist lapdogs flogging themselves in the slim hope of maybe just mabye getting some cunt.
[+]road_warrior_1 -28 points-27 points-26 points (18 children) | Copy Link
Women (generally speaking) have intrinsic value. From a biological perspective this makes sense simply because the cost of reproduction for women is much longer and more difficult. Thus a woman must be more selective when choosing mates.
Men are expendable to society. This is why men are evaluated based on their accomplishments moreso than women. So it makes perfect sense, when you think about it, that a society would frown moreso on a man limiting his potential dating pool than a woman trying to select for better mate.
[–]functionalsociopathy 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Women's intrinsic value of gestation is amplified when you have a scarcity of people. Men also have an intrinsic value since their bodies develop into more useful tools for developing society, which is amplified when you have many people working together. From a societal standpoint women are more valuable than men until you get about 10,000 people in your society, after that the balance of usefulness shifts in men's favor.
What we have now are giant ass nations with hundreds of millions of people each, making women's usefulness negligible compared to men's usefulness. The problem is that we have is an outright denial of reality, men haven't really needed women in centuries while women have become progressively more dependent on men. The result has been the "abuse them to make them think they need you" behavior on women's part. It basically boils down to the dependent party desperate to prevent the host party from leaving, so they attack the host's sense of self worth until the host is convinced that they are the dependent party.
It's painfully obvious what you're looking at when you take the blinders off and look at it like any other psychological phenomenon in nature.
[–]Veortox 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I have intrinsic value from a biological perspective for women to have massive tits for reproductive purposes or else I can't bust a nut inside of them
[–]Clemicus 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Your implication is every women, in this situation, both wants a child and is capable. Which isn't true. If that was the case then women who couldn't bare children would be more disposable than men.
It comes down to how women should be treated and seen as. At least something to that affect.
[–]GrinninGremlin 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
I heard one man describe their "intrinsic worth" as a warm recepticle for semen.
[–]road_warrior_1 -3 points-2 points-1 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Well that's not very nice.
[–]GrinninGremlin 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm pretty sure that wasn't his concern. I only mentioned it because it demonstrates what happens when you start justifying INequality...there is always backlash. To say "Women have intrinsic value..." requires you to follow that with a statement that says "Men have intrinsic value..." or if you value efficient speech...just shorten it to one statement..."All people have intrinsic value regardless of gender."
[–]Free_kittens2468 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's not about value you need men just as much as women to mak da babys. Women are way more selective, because of how sex affects them being pregnant for 8 ish months, rather than men with umm bot much impact. So it's not as much an investment of your life with men rather than women. If your gonna die in childbirth it should at least be a baby with good genes. Don't try and use evolution that way. Women need men, just like men need women, no one's inherently more "valuable" we just play different roles.
[+]lonewolfhistory -6 points-5 points-4 points (8 children) | Copy Link
Plus you have the basic gynocentric system that came into place with the 4 waves of feminism.
Also, WTF IS WITH YOUR POST GETTING DOWNVOTED? Your right!
[–]functionalsociopathy 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
I downvoted it because it was a half truth that used common gynocentric pitfalls to rationalize what is happening.
[+]lonewolfhistory -10 points-9 points-8 points (6 children) | Copy Link
Not really. He’s saying that,biologicaly speaking, men are less valuable. Which is true. It’s a numbers game biologically
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
Women can't breed without men though? Theoretically if there was one man he could impregnate 1000 women at once so you don't need that many men, however the offspring would all be fucking their half siblings which is problematic.
Men are valuable in society for more reasons than breeding anyway.
[+]lonewolfhistory -7 points-6 points-5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
Yes but biologically men are less valuable. They are more valuable in most other ways
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
How so? They're often brighter, more inventive, stronger, faster. All the greatest minds in history have been men, pretty much everything that you use daily has been invented by a man, everything built is mainly by men.
[–]lonewolfhistory -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
By biologically I am talking reproduction. So poor wording on my part. Yes men are more important in every way outside reproduction. Reproduction is weighted in favor of the woman until she hits the wall after around 30-35 years of age
[–]functionalsociopathy 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
on an individual scale men who prioritize looks would be more valuable than women who prioritize looks. Women who prioritize attractiveness over how good a parent potential mates would be are less valuable than men who prioritize good genetics over other factors. Also from this perspective, women who don't want kids would be biologically less valuable than men who do want kids.
the initial post was about societal value and women are only more useful than men until you get to about 10,000 people.
Ex. A city of 10,000 people can afford to lose 500 of it's 5,000 women as much as they can afford to lose 500 of their 5,000. A tribe of 100 people would be better off losing 5 men than 5 women as gestation will bottleneck their recovery from the loss. A nation of 1,000,000 people would be better off losing 50,000 women than men since there are enough women to counteract the bottleneck of gestation and men are able to contribute more directly to the nation through labor.
[+]DeadliftRx -6 points-5 points-4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
We down voted this guy?
Women DO have intrinsic value. They have WOMBS. In ancient times, at the very least, women were kept alive after a village was pillaged because they were, at the very least, BREEDING STOCK. Young, weak, or old men were slaughtered, and the strong were enslaved until they were no longer worth feeding, and then killed.
You're all upset by the truth? Get bent. Nothing has changed. Wombs are still in high demand.
[+]anillop -7 points-6 points-5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
How about we just say you're an asshole for saying any of those kind of things and leave it at that. It's like people around here can't wait to stoop to the shitty level and sometimes go even further like one groups bad behavior will excuse their own bad behavior.
[–]ShellBeTheDeathOfMe 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's as if you don't recognize that different people have difference preferences, and those preferences are perfectly fine to have.
Oh, and then there's the hypocrisy in your comment.
You don't like OP saying 'mean' things to people, and then you go and call him an "asshole".
[+]tomowudi -9 points-8 points-7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
*sigh*
I disagree with the framing of this post - not the reality of the circumstances being discussed.
I don't think it's socially acceptable for women to post "no short men" any more than it is for men to post "no flat chested women". I think both of those actions are fairly anti-social and indicative of the maturity of the poster.
The difference is that while men tend to orient themselves differently regarding their appearance (for a wide variety of reasons), than women - and so there's a bigger REACTION because there is a bigger IMPACT on that specific population.
But, if you think it's more positive than negative to use language which makes something like height or chest size a high enough priority that you can't frame it more compassionately/less abrasively (e.g. I tend to be attracted to these traits vs No X traits, so don't ask), you're kind of an asshole, because the definition of an asshole is someone who is self-centered enough to justify their anti-social/abrasive engagement with the world around them.
So, no, I don't think it's a double-standard. I think it's normal for people with different experiences to have different expectations around what qualifies as "anti-social" or not, and some folks on both sides are assholes - so each side sees the assholes on the other side more easily than the ones on their side because, in general... we don't fuck the people on our side of the aisle.
Which, incidentally, is one of the reasons that homosexual experiences are so incredibly valuable, because the remind us that whomever you prefer to fuck... some of those people are going to be assholes.
[–]Murakami8000 -5 points-4 points-3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Honestly, the women who post that are shitty, jut as the men who posted what OP is suggesting are their equals.