I am a tall woman just a hair under 5' 10". I can only speak for me and 3 other tall female friends. All of us have dated men who happen to be shorter than we are. We are okay with it since all of us are over 5'8" we are taller than many men. To widen the dating pool of course we dated men who are shorter than we are.

That said, while we never say anything about our date's height or lack of it. Our height has always been fair game for jokes, derogatory comments, and for the men to try to dictate the shoes we wear. Just so you know, every athletic tall woman has heard she is an amazon at least once a week since puberty.

So basically I don't care if you wear elevator shoes or not, I do not care if you are 5" shorter than I am. What I care about is if you actually have the courage to ask me out. What I care about is how you treat me and talk to me. If my height is a problem for you, your problem will keep me from going out with you again. If you lead with my height and the difference between us, I will think you will have a problem and will not accept one date with you.

Some women will not date a man who is shorter than most men. That says volumes about them not about you. If the shoes make you feel better wear them. But it is your attitude that women will like or dislike.

Instead of elevator shoes, you might consider cowboy boots. A really nice pair costs quite a bit, but they can be worn with most anything -- even with a suit. This would take care of the fear of the woman feeling "duped" while adding a good two inches.

"cowboy boots are kinda outta style"

I have to disagree with this one. Every person has his or her own individual style. If this guy wants to adopt cowboy boots as part of his style, he can - as long as he is consistent and makes it work.

What is currently "fashionable" is pretty irrelevant. In fact, having a personal style that conflicts with fashion is a statement of self-confidence.

Our hostess should know this! The kinds of dresses that she likes are not exactly mainstream fashion.

Aaaaah! The height question again! I like the analogy to padded bras - I wear padded push-up bras (I find them more comfortable than regular bras, for whatever reason) but I tried on the Victoria Secret's bombshell bra and thought this is not padding. This is false advertising. There's padding, and then there's wearing a pair of fake strap-on boobs.

But that's okay! I don't want to date a boob man, anyway, since we're both going to end up disappointed. If the lifts make you feel better and more confident, I guess wear them, although I personally think that having confidence at whatever height you are is going to be more attractive.

I find that confidence is a lot more attractive than whether or not you're going to make a big deal out of being shorter than me. I've dated some pretty tall assholes; if you're shorter than me but you're not an asshole, I'll hang with you.

What if he's a confident asshole? Most are.

"Sorry, but cowboy boots are kinda outta style..."

That's probably true in many parts of the country, but in the Southwest your still almost strange for not wearing them. I'll agree that it is region dependent. Depending on where this guy lives, it might be a great solution. I thought I'd throw it out there.

John Rich, is that you? I thought you were supposed to be gay!

If you have an all-black wardrobe and a fondness for synthesizers, there's always the goth/industrial option! I'm currently dating someone who's 6'6". In his big stompy New Rock boots he's probably close to 7 feet. It's a look. My ex was the classic insecure short man (nothing against sort guys, just ones who approach the world with an attitude about it). He always wore big industrial motorcycle boots, even to the beach. Talk about stylish!

>> But it is your attitude that women will like or dislike.

Well yes and no. This guy is 5'5, which is pretty short by western standards. He's going to need one hell of an attitude to compensate for that.

>> Some women will not date a man who is shorter than most men.

Let's be honest. Most women won't date a man who isn't taller than 80-90% of other men.

I'm 5'11 so my height isn't a deficit, but it's not an advantage either. I'm not the magical 6' guy. But I have friends who are less than 5'10 and have seen how they're treated by women. It's not their confidence or attitude that's a problem, it's the fact that they're too short. You'll notice that guys that height almost always end up with women who are either very short or women who are unattractive.

Height for men isn't like breast size for women because the proportion of men who fixate on breast size isn't comparable to the proportion of women who fixate on height and the preference isn't so pronounced and consistent. A better comparison is weight. A comparable proportion of men will reject a women who isn't thin, and often their standard is well outside of the normal range for women's weight. So most women find themselves in the same position weight-wise that men do height-wise. The advantage that women have here is that they can lose weight.

I like the cowboy boots idea if you can pull off the look. It's not going to do anything for the women who insist on a 6' guy, but it may give you an edge with a woman who is 5'4 or so (the average height for women) and just wants someone taller than her. And that way you're just the guy who likes cowboy boots (hey, women love cowboys!) as opposed to the vain and insecure dude with special shoes.

I also think that the majority of women really just want a guy that is bigger than them--ie that won't make them feel fat standing together, so what you're lacking in height you might be able to make up for by hitting the gym to add some bulk.

And personally at 5'8 I don't think it's unreasonable for me to prefer someone over 6 feet, but it drives me crazy when girls who are 5'2 or 5'3 insist on someone who hits that magical number. If I can be happy with someone 4-5 inches taller than me then you should be too! On the other hand, there are plenty of 6'4 muscle-bound guys who prefer women who barely weigh 100 pounds. You can't control what you're attracted to, and everyone is entitled to their preferences.

And personally at 5'8 I don't think it's unreasonable for me to prefer someone over 6 feet

LOL. That's cute.

I don't think that it has anything to do with reason - obviously. I just wish that women were more honest about it rather than trying to put their lack of attraction on the short guys, claiming that it's their bad attitude or something.

Women are objectively much more 'shallow' than men, but they won't face it. So rather than just admit that they're shallow they try to blame their preferences on men. At least men have the decency to admit when we're being shallow.

Women are objectively much more 'shallow' than men, but they won't face it. So rather than just admit that they're shallow they try to blame their preferences on men. At least men have the decency to admit when we're being shallow.

I don't see how women are more shallow. Men like what they like, and women like what they like. As Amy has said a bunch of times now, a guy is unlikely to be into a woman because she looks like the type to feed the homeless. We are all attracted to people we would like to have sex with. And a lot of us try to play it off as something deeper to spare people's feelings. I once had a guy tell me he didn't think we would hit it off because I wasn't into ham radio like he was. I bet if he'd wanted to have sex with me, that wouldn't have mattered.

I think LW should focus on short women. I'm 5'3", and my standard was someone taller than I am, which isn't too hard.

Cowboy boots for men are exempt from style trends. They are always appropriate for the right man.

Personally, I'll date a man who is 5'5, but I will NOT date a man wearing cowboy boots.

> Personally, I'll date a man who is 5'5, but I
> will NOT date a man wearing cowboy boots.

What if the wealthiest, best looking, most fun single guy in the world came up to you in cowboy boots and asked you out?

I don't see how women are more shallow. Men like what they like, and women like what they like. Posted by: MonicaP

I think his point is that women are less likely to be honest about their shallowness

@Pete: My point was that I think there's a difference between preferring someone tall because you're tall yourself versus preferring someone tall because it's an arbitrary box that needs to be checked off. If every woman had my preferences there wouldn't be an issue because American men as a whole are 6 inches taller on average. Even the LW at 5'5 will be taller than 50% of the women he encounters. It's the 5'2 women who insist on 6'2 guys that are throwing things off.

And I don't think it's shallow to have a particular height preference, nor is it shallow to prefer someone who is thin and in shape for instance. Shallow is whipping out the tape measurer to see if he's 6ft or 5'11.5, or bringing along a scale to make sure she's 115 and not 120. Having a general preference is normal.

I agree with Pete. How many of the women here who say "I'd date a short guy" ARE actually in a relationship with someone shorter then them? Not dated for a bit. Not 'he was sort of funny so we hung in a semi platonic way until he kissed me and then I pulled back'. I mean a multiple year, sexual relationship with a guy you could look straight in the eye or look down on.

Now, that all said: I'm the 'magic 6+' and frankly, I didn't find my added height to be any kind of bonus. But then again, I was clueless enough and enough of an ass back in my dating days to make up for it.

My friends and I basically just went for guys that are taller than we are (most of my friends are pretty short though so that's not saying much).
I'm pretty tall (1.75m= about 5'9"?) and living in a country where people as a whole are quite short. I have one ex who was pretty much my same height (maybe a bit less), but was really confident, he loved for me to wear heels. My husband is really tall (1.95m = 6'5" thank goodness for conversion calculators).
Personally I think couples that are very different height wise (or weight wise, or looks wise) look a bit strange.

And I don't think it's shallow to have a particular height preference

That's why I'd put 'shallow' in quotes. Because you're right, it's really just someone's preference. But I do think that women tend to be more 'shallow' than men when it comes to what they're attracted to. Physical appearance plays a bigger role for men, but things like money, material possessions, social standing, where you live, where you work, your car, who your friends are etc.. play a much bigger role for women. I've learned to stop asking girlfriends why they were attracted to me because the answers inevitably freak me out a little.

I don't think women have "more shallow" preferences than men, Pete. Both sexes are just wired to seek out traits that will more likely result in biological success. For men it's physical attributes, and for women it's signs that a man can take care of himself and his offspring.

LW, just don't be like the guys in these stories:
Calling It Short
Short People Have No Reason

For a lot of people (both men and women), fudging a bit on physical attributes is forgivable, deceiving them is not. If you decide to go with elevator shoes, I'd recommend being honest about it and mentioning it at some point.

Jina,

I'm not sure if the story listed under your "calling it short" link is credible. On the one hand the author of that comment wrote the following:

"He pulled a phone book out from where he had been sitting, opened his suitcase, put it inside, then pulled out two smaller but still thick phone books, each of them tied shut with brown ribbon. He then tied one each to his shoes, then closed his suitcase and stood up, standing at roughly 5'10"."

Alright, so we are to believe that this fellow took out two "smaller but still thick" phone books and tied them to his shoes so he was standing at around 5'10". That is all fine and good until the author says this:

"Without the phone books on his feet, he must have been about 5'4" or 5'5"."

This means that the phone books were each around 6 inches thick and that they fit into a suitcase.

Have you or anyone else here ever seen a phone book that was half a foot thick? I know that I certainly haven't. Standard phone books are on the order of 2 inches thick.

So the likely scenarios are that this guy was really about 5'8" and used phone books to achieve 5'10", the guy was really about 5'4" and used the phone books to achieve 5'6", or this persons story is false.

It simply does not pass the sniff test that someone had in their possession a set of 6 inch phone books that they strapped onto their shoes.

Meloni, I agree with what you said above, that "both sexes are wired to seek out traits that will more likely result in biological success", but I'd amend what you wrote after that to say: "For men it's physical attributes, and for women it's signs that a man can take care of himself and his offspring plus physical attributes."

So, the spin I'd put on what Pete is saying is that men are, overall, more accepting of women than women are of men.

Also, I agree with Pete that men are more honest about being into looks than women are. I think women tend to downplay how important a man's physical appearance is to them because they want to portray themselves as less "shallow" than men.

As far as the "shallow" pejorative goes, I've always felt that caring about how someone looks isn't shallow as long as you also care about what they're like as a person. You're interested in what's below the surface as well as what's on the surface. It's when you only care about how they look (or, if you're a woman, only care about how much money he has) that I see it as deserving of the term shallow.

I'd say that most guys probably wouldn't feel comfortable with a woman who's a lot taller than they are but I don't think most guys would have a problem with a woman who's slightly taller or their same height. Most women, on the other hand, seem to need a man who's much taller than they are. They simply can't get turned on by a man who's their height and definitely not by a man's who's even slightly shorter. Perfect example of this was the last women I was with. She was my height, 5'10", and that didn't bother me at all. I thought she was very sexy (in addition to being wickedly sharp, funny and having common interests) but she told me she needed a guy taller than her.

I'm 5'11 so my height isn't a deficit, but it's not an advantage either. I'm not the magical 6' guy. But I have friends who are less than 5'10 and have seen how they're treated by women. It's not their confidence or attitude that's a problem, it's the fact that they're too short.

Pete, one of my best friends is about 6'4" and, as I mentioned above, I'm 5'10" (like you, shy of that 6' mark that, as you noted, seems magical for women.) He's a nice guy but, due mainly to kind of economically floundering around his entire life, barely scraping by, he's also probably one of the least confident guys I know. Yet whenever we go anywhere he always gets far more attention from women.

"For men it's physical attributes, and for women it's signs that a man can take care of himself and his offspring plus physical attributes."

Disagree here. Men are much more into appearances than women are, although appearances do matter to women, too. An ugly man can get a lot of tail if he has a great job. I don't know any ugly women who attracted a mate by being super employable. And in the end, neither is particularly shallow. We're mammals.

Most of my friends will readily admit to this stuff in my company. The conversations they have with men are something different, kind of like my husband likely has more honest conversations with his friends on some topics than he does with me.

I object to translating "this is my experience of women" into "this is how women are."

Disagree here. Men are much more into appearances than women are, although appearances do matter to women, too.

We actually aren't disagreeing, Monica. I didn't say that women are into appearance just as much as men are. I merely said, in my response to Meloni, that women are into appearances in addition to "signs that a man can take care of himself and his offspring."

I agree with you that men are, in general, more into looks than women are (although I suspect we probably differ in how much more; I'm sure you feel the difference is greater than I do.)

I object to translating "this is my experience of women" into "this is how women are."

Women are into height, into guys who are taller than they are. Why it's so important to women, I don't know, but it is. I merely gave a personal example of this.

If you count up all of the little superficial things that people want in a mate and compare these numbers between the sexes, then yes on average women are definitely more "shallow" than men.

There was an interesting interview that I'd read once by a woman who had posed as a man in New York and dated women. She came to the same conclusion and it surprised her because she is a lesbian and had never seen that side of women. Maybe the fact that she was dating in New York gave her a distorted picture, but she basically came to the conclusion that women are a lot harder on men about superficial things than men are on women.

AMy I don't disagree with you. What I'm saying is that if you total up those superficial preferences and compare them that women have a lot more. You're probably right that there is an evolutionary reason.

I just want to interject an additional point here that seems relevant.

Simply saying that men have a certain set of preferences is an oversimplification because men more so than women have two sets of criteria for romantic entanglements.

These set of criteria apply to short term relationships versus long term relationships. The notion that men are visual in their preferences is a reasonable portrayal of their short term relationship criteria, however men get much more stringent and picky in their qualifications when one considers long term committed relationships.

This differential preference scheme also makes sense from an evolutionary perspective because if a man is going to commit his life long ability to obtain and provide resources to one woman he is going to care about many factors beyond how good she looks. Qualities like loyalty, ability to nurture, good character, and sexual fidelity are going to become more and more important to a man as he exists the short term relationship strategy regime.

Amy,

It isn't actually silliness.

There is a much wider gulf between the standards a man has for a short term relationship versus a long term one than the difference in standards that exist for women.

This has been shown in many scientific studies.

Again it boils down to the "sperm are cheap" and "eggs are expensive" biological argument.

A man can stand to have really "low" standards for a casual fling. In the savanna any sexual relationship for a woman was potentially a 9 month investment therefore she had to be more picky in those short term flings.

As such I stand by my assertion that men have a greater difference in their standards between short and long term relationships than women do.

Women have high heels, make up, all kinds of hair and skin products, push up bras, shape wear, once called girdles to hold the jiggly stuff firm, and all kinds of spa treatments to look good and feel good about themselves.

Elevator shoes to help this guy be more confident? Why not? He knows at some point the object of his affection is going to know the truth. He is after initial attraction so he can charm a woman and hope she will not care.

jesska: There was an interesting interview that I'd read once by a woman who had posed as a man in New York and dated women. She came to the same conclusion and it surprised her because she is a lesbian and had never seen that side of women.

That sounds like Norah Vincent, who became "Ned Vincent" for 18 months. In this ABC News piece it says...

Vincent even dabbled in the art of picking up women and agreed to wear a hidden camera for "20/20" during her exploits.

She was quickly reminded that in this arena, it's women who have the power, she said.

"In fact, we sit there and we just with one word, 'no,' will crush someone," she said. "We don't have to do the part where you cross the room and you go up to a stranger that you've never met in the middle of a room full of people and say the first words. And those first words are so hard to say without sounding like a cheeseball or sounding like a jerk."

Vincent encountered some pretty cold shoulders in her attempts at the bar, but she did manage to go on about 30 dates with women as "Ned," mostly arranging them on the Internet.

Vincent said the dates were rarely fun and that the pressure of "Ned" having to prove himself was grueling. She was surprised that many women had no interest in a soft, vulnerable man.

"My prejudice was that the ideal man is a woman in a man's body. And I learned, no, that's really not. There are a lot of women out there who really want a manly man, and they want his stoicism," she said.

There are a lot of women out there who really want a manly man, and they want his stoicism," she said.

Translation: willing to put up with their sh*t.

I read most of her book and she was frankly appalled at how self indulgent, emotionally maladroit and needy most of the women she dated were. (Granted, at her age, most of the womeh GOOD with a relationship were already IN one...)

I'm sure there are men like that, but her insights were so at odds with 'conventional wisdom' that they stuck with me.

Amy, I hear this a lot about evolutionary preferences, but how can this be true since in most cultures women had little to no choice in choosing their mates for thousand of years? Where's the evolution?

And if taller means better protection for her and her offspring, shouldn't this imply the bigger the better (for even greater protection yada yada)? Why do studies show women prefer the magic 6 and loose interest for taller? I'd love to read a study on how women only want a certain level of protection but definitely no more or less.

This height issue is solely a product of social media and the "evolutionary" excuse is crap. It's a poor excuse with no scientific proof to make women feel justified and less selfish. God forbid women would admit they are prejudice.

"...and if she got pregnant by the wrong man, she'd have no provider to help her feed it. Apparently, I can't write this enough. Apparently, I can't write this enough. Apparently...you get the idea."

Apparently, you can write it as long as you'd like but it doesn't make it entirely true. If it were so, women would rather date a short guy who'd stick around than take a long shot with a tall ladies man who has many other options.

PS- Please don't take my comment sexist, I love women from the bottom of my heart. But it is what it is.

By weird Internet-coincidence, the lovely Sofi at Sexy Typewriter just did a column about online dating while short:
http://lifewise.canoe.ca/SexRomance/SexFiles/2011/09/14/18684891.html

Cave women syndrome. That's what I like to call it and I think it's a pretty good description. Reverse the genders and switch height to weight and this is exactly what a lot of woman say:

"I can't date a girl who weighs more than me because I wouldn't feel like a masculine man. I need to be bigger than her so I can feel like the man that is supposed to protect her."

Face it ladies. If a guy ever said this you would be steaming mad and throw out all sorts of accusations that he's an insecure jerk, chip on his shoulder, inflated ego, etc. But it's universally accepted that it's perfectly ok to have this exact same attitude when choosing to only date men who are 6 foot or taller.

Amy, being a science person myself I actually believe that all of the dynamics between the sexes always boil down to the simple logistics of one gamete per month versus millions per day. Women are the limiting factor in reproduction so have always been, and will always be, considered the more valuable gender. However, comparing who is "more shallow" is not silliness given the perception in society that women are always victims of unfair advertising, body image issues, etc., but while practicing the same "shallow" attitudes that men practice. That's called hypocrisy, plain and simple. They need to just admit they don't like short men, period. No matter how confident he is a short guy lost the chance to date 98% of all women at the moment of conception or by a medical condition that limited his growth. Instead of complaining they are victims all the time women should be thankful that they can lose weight, especially when it comes with the fringe benefit of being good for your health. A man who is less than average height is sentenced for life and powerless to do anything about it. I think women hate to hear this because they don't want to believe that a male, who is stereotyped has having it easy, can actually have it worse than a overweight women when it comes to dating, the workplace, and overall success in life.

Don't expect any 'gratitude' Satirev. Because while they may be able to lose weight, a good many don't and need to shoulder the onus of that. And that goes beyond weight or height. I'm not bad looking and I'm tall and reasonably thin. It's this damnable personality...;)

But I think you paint with too dark a brush the plight of a short guy. Short guys get dates. Short guys get laid.

What short guys need to do, like girls on the right side of the weight bell curve, is be realistic at what they can get. If by 'can't get a date' you mean Cameron Diaz, yeah. They can't...unless they are Tom Cruise (Who probably isn't interested anyway...)

Everyone wants to pair off (even Amy, though she doesn't want to be formal about it). Obtainable and compatible should be their watchwords.

Meh. I'm 5'8" on a good day and have absolutely no problem meeting attractive women, getting dates, and getting laid. I do gravitate toward shorter women, preferring those in the 5'0" - 5'4" range, but there are plenty of women in that height range out there. Guys who blame a lack of success with women purely on their height generally aren't looking hard enough for other issues - maybe lack of confidence, low status, whatever. Hell, my boss is maybe 5'6" and is literally married to a beauty queen (seriously, she was a Miss Texas or something similar).

I did go on a couple dates with a pretty hot blonde who was probably 5'11", and ended up in bed with her. Hard for me to dance with a woman that tall, though, and I didn't find her height especially sexy or anything. I moved on to a very cute young thing who is 5'1".

Oh, and I only wear cowboy boots (ropers, actually) when I go country dancing. Lots of guys in Phoenix wear cowboy boots regularly, even if they're unfashionable in a liberal coastal megalopolis.

flydye,

Expect gratitude? I'm not expecting anything. In fact, I know the exact opposite is inevitable on this topic, which in turn only helps to bear the truth even further.

Men, including myself, are far more willing to "date down" than women. And the reason for this is exactly as Amy pointed out. A smaller number of men are needed to keep the species going so their part in reproduction is less valuable than a women's. This carries over to modern society and results in exactly what you see. Men have to live up to much higher standard to attract even an average woman. And by average I mean by all aspects, not just physical qualities. This is the very essence of what we all know, women are pickier than men, because they can afford to be.

"Because while they may be able to lose weight, a good many don't and need to shoulder the onus of that."

You're pandering to women like many men do. If any person, male or female, is being held back in any way by being over weight and they are not losing it, they have themselves to blame. It's not genetic. If eating a diet of maggots and cockroaches while running marathons would increase my height, I would do it.

"But I think you paint with too dark a brush the plight of a short guy. Short guys get dates. Short guys get laid."

Just words. That are, in fact, misleading at best. Statistics work and there is a reason you don't ever practice any science without using statistics.

"Obtainable and compatible should be their watchwords."

You have made the assumption, without even knowing me, that I am creating my problem by setting my standards too high. Sorry, far from the truth. If you think I paint too bleak a picture of the negative effects of less than average height for a male, then prove it to yourself. Set up a free dating profile on Cupid or POF, or even a paid site if you dare and spend a few weeks or a month seeing what kind of success you have while listing your height as average or taller. Then change ONLY your height to my height of 5'5" and see how much success you have. And if you dare even further after that, try and pretend for just one minute how it really feels to be that person. (Besides, we are always being asked to think how bad the overweight women feel. You even implied it.) When a 5'2" girl who weighs close to 200 pounds turns down a 5'5" guy that weighs 140 pounds and tells him he is too short, do you really think they can just "brush it off" without any negative effects on their psyche? When you are willing to date down, as you suggest, and are still constantly turned down because of a single genetic quality you cannot change, it weighs on your mental well being.

Lastly, I'm guessing you think, as most do, that I'm blaming women for not being attracted to short men. I'm not. It's in their brains from birth at no fault of their own. But it's the same for men not finding obese women attractive. I'm only pointing out that equal is equal and asking why. When it comes to women and their weight issues the explanation is always some form of: They are victims of society and we need to spend money and educate everyone to change it. But when it comes to explaining why women don't like short men the answer is: It's just evolution, accept it. Why is that? Anyone?

It isn't rational at all. I'm 40, in great shape, ripped body/6pack abs. I've been told I'm handsome, and I get shut down because I'm 5'7" tall. This is before they find out I'm a physician, my income is in the top 1%, I'm able to commit as evidenced by a 10 yaear marriage that ended amicably, I'm still friends with my ex. I'm a gentleman, and I believe in honor, chivalry, and all the things women say they want.

But I get blown off because I'm not tall enough. Any woman who is so superficial as to give one single physical characteristic so much importance that she ignores all the good stuff a guy has to offer has no right to complain about problems finding a good man.

There's plenty of BS being flung in here. There are fewer boys born than girls. There are more male deaths at all ages compared to females. There are always more women than men around.

Preferring taller men is societal, not just female. All those studies that show taller men make more money, get more promotions and have more respect are not just values by women. Men prefer to deal with taller men, too.

Being tall (relatively) is a sign of good health, and good genes, but there are other indicators of male value.

Reminds me of an encounter I had at the Fliegerhorst Kasserne snack bar, Germany, in 1981 or 82.

I was standing in line with my husband. He is about 5'5 and a half. I am about an inch taller.
This enlisted guy turned around, and noticed that we had the same name on our uniforms. He asked if we were married and I replied that we were.
He then blurted out "but you are taller then he is" like we had violated some sort of social taboo.
I said nothing, but what I should have said was,
"Well yes, but my husband is not only an officer in the US Army, he is a West Point graduate who is the all time leading scorer on the West Point swim team. He is incredibly handsome, polite, kind, is a skilled lover with a large attractive cock, and his father is a two star general."

Funny how we only think about what we should have said after the fact.

Also, our son, is 6'2"

LauraGr,

"There's plenty of BS being flung in here. There are fewer boys born than girls."

That's funny for you to post that BS being flung around then immediately follow with a statement that is flat out wrong. Do yourself a favor and use that google search bar for even just a minute before flinging your own BS. The average male to female birth worldwide has usually been about 106 males to 100 females. It has changed in the past ten years or so to about 104 males to females.

You are correct that men die more often than women of all causes. Yet another reason women should be thankful, yet we're led to believe they have it so hard and so discriminated against by all the research focused on their plights and issues. And to boot, you also prove the point of how short men are extremely disadvantaged from birth as you are exactly correct. They are viewed as inferior by both men and women.

On the other hand I actually applaud you for being honest and not spouting off any patronizing advice or ridiculous accusations that all the dislike people have for short men is their own fault because they somehow actually choose to have mental problems, otherwise known as short man's disease.

That's funny for you to post that BS being flung around then immediately follow with a statement that is flat out wrong. Do yourself a favor and use that google search bar for even just a minute before flinging your own BS. The average male to female birth worldwide has usually been about 106 males to 100 females. It has changed in the past ten years or so to about 104 males to females

Oops. My blood to caffeine ratios were out of whack. Still are, for that matter.

Flydye writes "How many of the women here who say "I'd date a short guy" ARE actually in a relationship with someone shorter then them? Not dated for a bit. Not 'he was sort of funny so we hung in a semi platonic way until he kissed me and then I pulled back'. I mean a multiple year, sexual relationship with a guy you could look straight in the eye or look down on."

Well, I say that. I'm 5'6" or 5'7" and my man, with whom I have been for nearly 7 years, is the same height as me, maybe an inch taller. I'm fairly tall for my gender, he's fairly short for his...who cares?

As others have said, it wasn't his height or lack thereof that influenced me. I liked his sense of humour, his self-confidence, his self sufficiency and even temper (so unlike my 5'11" ex). Plus he's dark haired and green eyed and cute as - just my type. Mind you - we are both past procreating age, but at least 3 of my long-term boyfriends weren't that tall, so maybe it's me? And a friend of mine is nearly 6' and her husband is about 5'5" - and they have 2 gorgeous boys and a great relationship.

I get that there is evolutionary stuff at play generally, but it doesn't always hold true for everyone - there is so much more happening physically and pyschologically when you get that thing for someone, it's probably better to not try and over-analyse it or reduce it to one attribute or another. I'll bet there's someone (or quite a few someones) out there who will like LW for who and what he is - even if he does wear cowboy boots!

This has gotten very off track. The man wants to know if he should wear lifts. I'm 5'3", I admit that I tend to be attracted to taller men but my overriding consideration is competence and personality. To consider his question I have searched my memories. One similar man I knew about a decade ago was about 5'2" tall. He told me that his girlfriend and he had been dating since elementary school and in the process she had grown significantly taller than him. When I ask myself would I, if I was considering dating this man, be offended if I found he wore shoes that made him appear taller the answer would have to be no, I would not be offended. This particular man was one of the smartest, and also one of the most decent man I'd ever met. If this man chose to wear lifts, and I was lucky enough to be dating him I would not feel offended at all and in fact would probably assume the added height had something to do with the respect of other men. Your personality has much more to do with your suitability as a mate than your height so throw your shoulders back, slip on those shoes if they make you feel better and go into the world and be outstanding.