TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

81

Women literally disqualify hundreds and thousands of men because their legs aren't long enough.

If a guy says he only dates girls with big tits, he's labelled shallow. It's worth mentioning that most guys don't even do this and would date a flat girl if she was pretty and nice.

Honestly, it seems like women are more shallow to me.

Just go on any social dating app and you will see loads of women ( many who are short) filter out short guys.

It's a bit frustrating for me because I always hear how men are so shallow, women are not visual, confidence and personality is more important to women. That's all BS.

If you disqualify a man because he's 5'7 instead of 6'2, you are shallow.


[–]shonenhikada16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well in a UK study when they were looking at the dating patterns and preference of men and women, they found that women were in fact putting more priority over physical attribute than personality. While men placed more emphasis on personality over physical attribute.

[–]TyroneTheDriverRed Pill Man5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think the study also said that most women group most men into being below average.

Draw your conclusions as you will.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband62 points63 points  (98 children) | Copy Link

All you've done is demonstrate that women are shallow. You haven't given any evidence that they are more shallow than except to say that men will fuck women they are unattracted to. Which laaaadeee-fucking-da... Plenty of women will go out for a free dinner with a man they aren't attracted to, same deal.

[–]CanadianAsshole110 points11 points  (80 children) | Copy Link

In the former situation, at least the woman is desired by someone. Being taken advantage of for a free dinner makes you feel like shit.

[–]Orange_PaisleyOrange pill is best pill7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

She isn’t being desired. She is being used as a masturbatory aid by some thirsty guy who doesn’t care about her. She could literally be anybody.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband34 points35 points  (77 children) | Copy Link

In the former situation, at least the woman is desired by someone. Being taken advantage of for a free dinner makes you feel like shit.

The man is desired for his company and entertainment. A woman being taken advantage of for a sex hole makes her feel like shit.

[–]HalfysRedditIndependent thinker6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Can't you two just agree that being taken advantage of feels shitty? Why does everything have to be a gendered issue?

Yea, some people go on dates with a ulterior motive in mind - having sex, eating a free meal, occupying a boring Saturday afternoon - whatever. When people are dishonest about their motives it sets up the other person for disappointment.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why does everything have to be a gendered issue?

It's PPD, m8, what were you expecting?

[–]CanadianAsshole118 points19 points  (58 children) | Copy Link

company and entertainment

free dinner

lol

a woman being taken advantage if for a sex hole

It's not ideal, but someone wanting to have sex with you means that they see some degree of value in you. If someone only wants you for your material possessions, those possessions aren't part of you, so you yourself are completely worthless in their eyes.

[–]CatchPhrazeRed is For Rudolph29 points30 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Nah, for MEN being seen as worthy of sex is a show of value, for a woman it just means you exist. Men legitimately stick there dicks in almost anything. It's not a complement.

[–]Moldy_GeckoPurple Pill Man1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I know it feels that way, but I've probably turned down more woman than I've slept with.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well done - you are an outlier.

[–]Moldy_GeckoPurple Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd think so if I didn't see it so commonly. Especially if you followed TRP (or similar self-help type thing) for any amount of time then you'll transform whereby giving women your time shows value to them. I'm sorry, but I'm not going out with some sloppy, shitty chick, I don't care if you're dtf. But if you're worth my time, you should get value out of that.

[–]mwait2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have too... But trust me, that is not the norm

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband22 points23 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

company and entertainment

free dinner

lol

Yes those things aren't mutually exclusive.

It's not ideal, but someone wanting to have sex with you means that they see some degree of value in you. If someone only wants you for your material possessions, those possessions aren't part of you, so you yourself are completely worthless in their eyes.

No, someone wanting to dump a load of cum in you and treat you literally like possession doesn't mean he values you as person. Women don't derive any worth from being a breathing Kleenex.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No, someone wanting to dump a load of cum in you and treat you literally like possession doesn't mean he values you as person.

I have to go with this:

Women are the ones interpreting it that way.

This is just your interpretation of the act.

Women don't derive any worth from being a breathing Kleenex.

I would have guessed that women derive something from sex as otherwise I'd have a hard time figuring out what their incentive is to have sex. But fair enough - I'll believe you that women don't derive anything from having sex for the scope of this post.

Yet, even if women don't derive anything from sex (not fun, not ..., nothing) then this still wouldn't imply that men don't value you as a person. That just screams premature assumption.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

someone wanting to dump a load of cum in you and treat you literally like possession doesn't mean he values you as person. Women don't derive any worth from being a breathing Kleenex.

Women are the ones interpreting it that way.

Men are the ones busting their asses trying to get laid. They're out approaching women, even trying to learn how to be more appealing just to get women to give them some damn intimacy. They're doing most of the work just to get a woman to say yes.

To men, sex is awesome. Men love having sex so much, they'd even share the sex they desire with unattractive women.

Women are the ones that think it's bad. Women are the ones who call having commitment-free sex being used. And if casual sex is such an issue, you'd think women would stop fucking guys without commitment...but they just keep going back for more.

Women are the ones calling sex cheap it they're not scoring more than sex out the deal. Women are the ones who call sex the way you're describing it being treated like a 'possession'. Last time I checked, people took care of their possessions.

Men enjoy women's bodies. They dedicate hours of their lives to enjoying seeing, touching and experiencing women's physiques. They even train their dicks to last longer, just to be able to be better lovers for women. Men desire women as they are if they want to have sex with them. Women are the ones who, for some reason, consider men desiring sex with them disgusting.

You know what is fucked up? Agreeing to a date not because you're interested in the person but because they'll buy you something. At least with sex, both parties get sex. With a date, she isn't promising anything. And he still has to do all the legwork, from approaches to entertaining her, to try to maintain her interest.

In the scenario you're discussing, she won't pay for anything so she's getting most of the benefits with only a time investment. He has to put energy into approaching, then invest time and money to gain her favour. If he's lucky, she'll actually give her attention and not just stare at her phone until the bill arrives before leaving.

The comparisons also skew to women's favour. If a woman doesn't want to be used for sex, she can insist on getting to know each other first. But no guy can ask a woman to get to know her for free before agreeing to spend money on a date.

And how is sex degrading for her if she agreed to it and women here on PPD swear that N count doesn't matter? Where is she losing out?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well you have to acknowledge sex is often much better for men than women. Most women I know would rather rub one out than have sex just to have sex, unless it was their SO or a man they were attracted to.

[–]TheReformist942 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They don't realise how good they've got it. Entitled and ungrateful. They need to experience just a year of being a 6 or 7 out of 10 male and realise true loneliness and worthlessness

[–]SavingsTraffic1110 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you. Very well put. I believe, the primary reason for all this disgusting shit is that female sex drive is so much lower than male.

[–]CamoWoobie107 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Women don't derive any worth from being a breathing Kleenex.

Unless it's for Chad.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Unless it's for Chad.

😒

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women think that that guy will suddenly change and commit to them and turn into husband material.

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (41 children) | Copy Link

It's not ideal, but someone wanting to have sex with you means that they see some degree of value in you.

Men literally fuck goats. If a man wants to fuck you, it means you are at least on par with a goat, which is not particularly high praise.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh wow, so your opinions are really wrong.

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man8 points9 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

So what some women literally fuck dogs. Sexual deviants gonna sexual deviant. They are abnormal people whose actions are hard to extrapolate to the general population.

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (20 children) | Copy Link

The point in that hyperbole is that men's sex drives lead them to have indiscriminate sex with basically anything female and willing. A man wanting to fuck you essentially means you have a pulse.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The point in that hyperbole is that men's sex drives lead them to have indiscriminate sex with basically anything female and willing. A man wanting to fuck you essentially means you have a pulse.

Let me guess: You'll also think that such sex is pleasurable for the man? And as long as he has an erection it means the sex is pleasurable to him? You think a man fucking a woman who he'd have no interest in fucking if he had another choice is something pleasurable rather than let's say a necessary but unwanted act to gain some sexual experience or other secondary gain?

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes, I do think that men have sex with women for the purpose of sexual pleasure. Next question.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This answer has nothing to do with my comment.

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man3 points4 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

If they're abnormal... let me guess, men who fuck goats are "normal" and representative while women who fuck donkeys/dogs are not? Men with indiscriminate sex drives are abnormal just like women with abnormal sex drives. The common feature is abnormality, not being men.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

If a girl is vaguely cute, young, and willing?

Hell she can be far worse than the former two, so long as the latter one, and so long as nobody ever will know

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man-2 points-1 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

This is only true for abnormal men with no other options.

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you a blue piller that thinks men and women are the same? Because if so, I think we're not necessarily going to see eye to eye.

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No. But what is your explanation for women fucking animals too other than shared human sexual deviance? If they didn't exist, I'd think you had a point.

[–]CanadianAsshole15 points6 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Let's use the actions of a tiny percentage of men to judge all of them!

Feminists in a nutshell.

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (13 children) | Copy Link

I'm pretty sure all men would fuck goats if you left them alone with the goat for long enough and if they were guaranteed no one would ever know about it.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm pretty sure most men would fuck goats if you left them alone with the goat for long enough

Just because you'd do it doesn't mean you get to project that onto others.

Do you seriously believe that's how men are?

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm allergic to animals.

Do you seriously believe that's how men are?

"Men" in aggregate, yes. Do I think that every single individual man will fuck a goat if given the opportunity? No. It's a heuristic like AWALT.

I think more men than I'd assume would fuck a goat if they were promised no one would find out and if you locked them in a room with only a goat for like, 4 weeks. Most men are not lining up to fuck goats because they can fuck women instead^1, and men will choose ugly women over literal farm animals. But men will fuck ugly women, and that was my actual point here. Men are not very discriminating in their sex partners because the male sex drive is the way it is.


1. Also, most men wouldn't know where to even find a goat. Could you find a goat right now? Probably not.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think more men than I'd assume would fuck a goat if they were promised no one would find out and if you locked them in a room with only a goat for like, 4 weeks.

..........................

This is the same kind of argument like saying "humans want to drink pee" because "when left with no other choice they'll drink it". Just because somebody would do something in an extreme situation doesn't mean that this is their core defining common trait.

Your education system has failed you. They should've taught you reasoning, critical thinking and at least predicate logic.

[–]KarmangerI am being polite1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why haven't Incels converted to beastiality then? With their numbers surely one of them would have suggested how to fuck goats.

[–]CanadianAsshole12 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Pure conjecture

[–]passepar2t4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think she's joking or exaggerating on purpose. Agree and amplify.

[–]Young_Oryx 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

Yes, welcome to PPD where we make sweeping generalizations about the opposite sex. Take a seat, get comfortable.

[–]CanadianAsshole12 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

we make sweeping generalizations

I don't

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Just because other people are being stupid doesn't mean you have to be stupid. Unless you're actually stupid enough to do what other stupid people do but then the issue is that you're stupid.

[–]decoy88Black Male in London0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unless you’ve fucked a goat before, can you really speak on it enough to say that it isn’t?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Men literally fuck goats.

Could you please stop using a VERY extreme end of the spectrum to make an argument about the whole width of the spectrum? It's stupid. There are also known cases of women deriving pleasure from being fucked by animals or even trees. Based on that women are goats and men are donkeys. Great. How is this view useful or even just correct?

If a man wants to fuck you, it means you are at least on par with a goat, which is not particularly high praise.

Why would you even think that? You go online and see an article about a guy fucking a goat and then suddenly you jump to the conclusion that a man wanting to have sex with a woman means she's a goat? What kind of reasoning is that?

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

those possessions aren't part of you

But they do represent who you are. A hard worker? Intelligent? Committed with a powerful will? You'll have stuff.

Debt messes this up but real earnings are a part of you.

[–]Jackpot807 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

The hamstering is real

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So are double standards

[–]TheReformist94-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You're not being taken advantage tho. You're having someone appreciate your body. When men cuddle and do bf shit after casual sex we get called clingy

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're painting a very rosy photo of it. It's highly possible sex will be him jackrabbitting into her, no foreplay, and he may or may not care if she gets her orgasm or not. It's not something that makes women typically feel appreciated.

[–]Moldy_GeckoPurple Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The woman made the choice (because she has the sexual advantage) and she chose wrongly. When going out on a date, both people know that the potential is sex. However, when the girl goes in knowing full well that she is only there to get a free dinner, it's much more manipulative. That being said, that's why I don't pay for dinner, I make the choice, like girls should, not to be taken advantage of.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere-1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

But her sex hole gets pleasured, while the man can give his company and entertainment to anyone assuming no sex is coming out of it.

[–]Nodoxxintoxin7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I’ll repost my comment from another recent thread

“According to a report by Public Health England, based on a poll of 7,367 women aged 16 to 64, 49 per cent of millennial women said they lacked sexual enjoyment.” From your clip....”30% of women experienced pain the last time they had sexual intercourse” Does that sound like an incentivized group to you?“

So there are a lot of young women not getting their sex hole pleasured

[–]Orange_PaisleyOrange pill is best pill6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What makes you think it’s always pleasurable? Most men don’t even know what a clitoris is.

[–]bumblebeeee06 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women are gambling with a new partner. We don’t know what your sex is going to be like. It is not always good or pleasurable like it is for men.

[–]decoy88Black Male in London11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You’re assuming the sex is guaranteed to be pleasurable. When the opposite it more likely to be the case.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband12 points13 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

But her sex hole gets pleasured, while the man can give his company and entertainment to anyone assuming no sex is coming out of it.

He has the pleasure of her company and not eating dinner alone like some loser.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You may as well be some loser if you're not bangin her.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You may as well be some loser if you're not bangin her.

Yeah but at least you'll be the only one to know your a loser...

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So does she, and she's the one who took advantage.

[–]circlingldn0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

well thats because youre a social simp

[–]unkle_Rico11 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

What idiots are buying dinner for women on the first date in 2019?

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Blue pillers and male feminists

[–]bonusfruit0 points1 point  (14 children) | Copy Link

How is receiving a free meal in any way comparable to sex, which is mutually beneficial to both participants

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband6 points7 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Spending dinner in good company is mutually beneficial.

[–]bonusfruit1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

If that were true women would pay their half by default. After all it's about the good company... bs

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

If that were true women would pay their half by default. After all it's about the good company... bs

There's a million other reasons she wouldn't be obliged to pay.

[–]bonusfruit0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Irrelevant. The point is a free dinner date is a one sided treat while sex is for both

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Irrelevant. The point is a free dinner date is a one sided treat while sex is for both

I'm saying sex is as much of a one sided treat for women as men believe paying for a dinner date is a one sided treat.

[–]bonusfruit2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe if women always initiated sex, planned it out, took the lead, bought the condoms, got him off, then pleasured herself after.. yeah then it's just as one sided

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not comparable

[–]Orange_PaisleyOrange pill is best pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Many of us do.

[–]bumblebeeee05 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Women take a gamble every time with a new partner. Good, pleasurable sex from a guy is not guaranteed lol.

[–]bonusfruit2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

A good date is not guaranteed. But he still paid. Its still one sided compared to sex

[–]bumblebeeee05 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It’s not a good feeling when you give up your body, the sex was bad, and that person didn’t care about pleasing you. Women are more likely to experience bad sex vs a man having a bad date. If it’s a bad date you technically have the choice of not paying. How terrible is a woman going to act if she’s getting a free meal? I can’t take back being a cum bucket for a user. Women have to at least be somewhat emotionally turned on too for us to “enjoy” sex. And if there’s no emotional connection the sex better be a1

[–]bonusfruit2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

This is classic women worsting: rationalizing that whatever the situation, women suffer more. Theres no way to know how many bad lays vs bad dates occur. Bad sex is not somehow worse for women. That's just a callus disregard for what men experience, in addition to a casual devaluing of Male sexuality. After sex women feel like cum buckets? Used? Because men are by default so filthy and corrupt that they soil a womans innate purity? You are practically defying yourself. You are not brought low by swapping fluids with mere mortal men. Sex is something both sexes want. It can be good or bad for either sex. The myth of the necessity for emotional connection is long gone. Everyone knows women fuck hot guys for being hot and no other reason. Female sexuality is not more spiritual or wonderful than males. It's not deeper in any way. Sometimes it's just straight up animal lust. Women are far more open about it now so theres no point pretending otherwise

[–]bumblebeeee03 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I’m not speaking on ALL men, I’m only talking about the user men. The assholes. If your body is being used, no regard to your pleasure, and you don’t get a call back, what part don’t you get about how that can be damaging to someone’s self esteem? Sex with a guy who is NOT a user is just sex. Bad sex is not worse for women but it is more common. I’m just thinking of my own experiences and the experiences of girls that I’ve known over the years. When you stick your dick in a vagina, you’re usually GOING to cum. There’s so many different factors that can ruin sex for a girl. If he cums fast. Tiny dick. Bad strokes. Does he care if you orgasm? Will he try? Is he passionate? Can he read your body language? Does he “care”? It literally is a gamble. Men will more often fuck ugly girls, girls that annoy them, etc. THAT is animal lust. That is less common with women. Our brains just don’t work that way. More often than not you have to be somewhat charming, funny, confident, make a girl feel sexy, etc to really turn a girl on. Many value that over looks. The hot guy they end up fucking usually is charming and confident also.

[–]markd315Moderate feminist man2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“Bad sex is not somehow worse for women”

Ok buddy. I hate this sub because people will make overall okay points that hinge on some bullshit like this.

Let me spell it out for you: bad sex is way worse for women. They have a hole that is penetrated that need to be wet. They are usually on the bottom and have less control over the encounter. Bad sex hurts for women.

As far as a negative physical experience for men it’s almost always stuff like: “oh no, I didn’t get hard fast enough, or finished too early, or couldn’t finish and now I have blue balls.”

[–][deleted] 40 points41 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

Women literally disqualify hundreds and thousands of men because their legs aren't long enough.

If a guy says he only dates girls with big tits, he's labelled shallow. It's a bit frustrating for me because I always hear how men are so shallow, women are not visual, confidence and personality is more important to women. That's all BS.

I don't think women are more shallow. I think women's shallowness is more socially acceptable ("it's just a preference"), whereas men's shallowness is identified more frequently as shallowness or even misogyny ("you monster!")

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have never in my life been shamed for my dating preference of only dating very thin women. Rather when a girl has really wanted to date me and been asking me out and me saying no eventually she'll ask why and when I say it's your weight they then get all obsessed with losing a ton of weight. Nobody has ever shamed me for it. The worst that has happened is girls I wouldn't date, but aren't in the running anyway, make bizarre claims about how they are really a size 2 or whatever.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

There are probably good evolutionary reasons why women would prefer a taller guy...

[–]whatyoucallaflip 1 points [recovered]  (10 children) | Copy Link

Well sure, but men's preferences are also evolutionarily sound. So it's a wash.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

Not true, big breasts and big butts are a socially constructed sexual preference, not an evolutionary one. Wide hips would be an example of an evolutionary sound preference.

[–]__Some_person__2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Big butts with low fat imply exercising. Being able to exercise implies higher status (she has time) and also that her bones, ligaments, joints, heart can handle exercise.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

Low fat alone implies exercising, the big butt is just a plus, it's not useful in any way

[–]__Some_person__0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I know that, but the appearance is what's naturally attractive because it at least mimics a healthier body as opposed to a high fat one, that's not even the argument here. You haven't indicated an evolutionary benefit to having a big butt.

[–]__Some_person__0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Evolutionary benefits of liking girls with big butts with lean muscles:

Big butts with low fat imply exercising. Being able to exercise implies higher status (she has time) and also that her bones, ligaments, joints, heart can handle exercise.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

A big butt and a muscular butt are 2 different things, a big butt without muscle implies low exercise even with a leaner waist.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

I think height is unfortunately a primal thing for most women and the brain sees it as one of the most important indicators for whether or not the guy can protect them.

[–]OfSpock4 points5 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

It's also correlated with IQ, health and success.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Better health causes height. When controlling for childhood upbringing the advantages associated with height disappear and height becomes a negative for long term health. When controlling for childhood height the success aspect disappears as well (late bloomers were as successful as shorter men who were as short as them in high school) regardless of whether it is associated with those things I don't understand why those things can't be directly selected for. Height also seems largely cultural as tribes are less selective about height than westerners.

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Men on average are taller and have a higher IQ than women, probably as a result of the height-intelligence correlation (if height is controlled for, women have a higher average IQ).[27] The Trivers–Willard hypothesis suggests that female mammals are able to adjust offspring sex ratio in response to their maternal condition; a suggested generalization is that bigger and taller human parents are likely to have more sons than the average.[27][28] As those traits are considered desirable in mates of those respective genders, they confer an evolutionary advantage to offspring.[28] Height and intelligence may be genetically correlated as a result of this, because men tend to choose beautiful women as mates, and women tend to choose men who are either tall, intelligent, or both as mates.[27] Over time this might lead to an increased average height and intelligence of the population that is primarily inherited by men.

Height and intelligence may be correlated, but there is not significant proof of it being caused by genetics. There are many genes associated with genetic transmission of intelligence, but current theories of intelligence point to inheritance of intelligence from parents to be due to both genetic and environmental factors, especially as there is no concrete proof of the relationship between certain genes and intelligence.[29]

From Wiki. Interesting... I do wonder why height and intelligence correlation is only studied in men. Doesn't the average height difference between the genders have some effect? Shouldn't taller women be smarter too?

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Not totally sure but one study I saw showed that men are affected by height and women by weight, so perhaps the correlation isn't strong in women.

[–]worldnewsie0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hmm, we may have looked at a similar one, because the only one that I saw along those lines compared men and women at ages 16 and 18, and the reason for the lack of correlation for women was because women had a higher correlation of height at 16 to 18 than men did (women stopped growing at age 16 more often than men, which is commonly known). The correlation difference was something like .99 vs .92. They compared IQ differences between 16 and 18 to see the difference in IQ after growth in height.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

This was restricted to a country where height only increased reproductive success and one race (for most places, the effect is curvilinear). Pretty bullshit study imo. Do these studies exclude people with developmental disabilities?

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's controlling variables. It's comparing identical and fraternal twins and their intelligence.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but their explanation is that height and intelligence are both selected for, but in most places, average height guys have the most reproductive success rather than the tallest guys.

[–]EpikYummehLurker6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I believe taller people are actually more at risk for some health issues than shorter people, though?

[–]OfSpock4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Six foot seems to be the turn around. Much over that and you start getting health problems. Before that, no.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Everything is magically at 6 ft right? Arguably never going through a growth spurt pretty much eliminates the risk of getting any form of cancer ever.

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

A quick google show me that cancer is higher for tall people but heart disease and diabetes are lower. As the for the 'six foot' part, a lot of studies I've seen compare sic foot people with 5'5 as their groups.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The studies I've read talk about it on a per cm basis. Also studies that control for nutrition see only negative afaik. Regardless heart disease should increase with height because the heart works harder with height.

[–]circlingldn0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol looks like your right, compare ned ppp to japan/sk ppp

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Literally nothing is less shallow than looks. Thats the genes youll be passing along to you children

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I was going to say heh who wants ugly kids then I thought about all of the horrific royal family portraits out there.

[–]killallthenarcs2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty much. And a height preference is even less shallow than a preference for blue eyes, seeing as height has more functional significance.

[–]Moldy_GeckoPurple Pill Man16 points17 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I have a Mexican friend that's significantly shorter than me. The dude is jacked though. Near perfect body, because he dedicates himself to it. While sure, I don't have to dedicate as much to get the same amount of sex that he does, he's consistently banging hot girls. Stop making excuses for yourself and claim this is a CMV when really it's just a rant. Girls are more shallow, I believe that, but that's because they can afford to be, it's 101 of the sidebar. Fat and ugly chicks have all the power with social apps and shit nowadays. However, apps like that are also more helpful to shorter guys, as long as they have good bodies. So, work on yourself and you too can bang loads of hot chicks.

[–]squat_til_u_puke1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You're basicly saying that short men have to get great bodies to be on the same playing field as taller guys. This would mean that short guys are at a disadvantage by default since taller men dont need to get great bodies.

[–]Moldy_GeckoPurple Pill Man1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm saying everyone has their disadvantages. I'm personally not so well-endowed (almost absolutely average), and this has severely affected my confidence for most my life. I make up for it by being incredible in bed. Due to that lack of confidence, I also made a strong effort to up my game. I'm great at building social circles nowadays due to that. Everyone has a disadvantage, just gotta do what you can to overcome those.

[–]squat_til_u_puke0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I get it but lets say the short guy and the tall guy both workout and have similiar physiques, the tall guy will attract the opposite sex more by default.

[–]Moldy_GeckoPurple Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

At that point their both banging enough hot chicks, what's it matter? There is a law of diminishing returns or marginal utility. You can put in more effort, but if you can get a new chick on your rotation every week, does it really matter if one guy can get 1.5 per week? You still got a harem and are getting laid more than 80% of the schmucks that make excuses for why they can't get laid.

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course it seems like women are more shallow to the OP if somebody does not have an attribute that somebody else voices a preference for they get called shallow that is just ego protectant. People are shallow always have been, always will be. Because I am short myself, I would date another short dude but I do not like beards or gingers or some other stuff.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (33 children) | Copy Link

If you disqualify a man because he's 5'7 instead of 6'2, you are shallow.

But if you're not attracted to guys that are shorter, what can you do? Saying it's shallow doesn't really achieve anything but make them feel guilty for having a preference.

If it's not attractive then it's not attractive.

Same goes for fat girls. It's not attractive when compared to girls who are slimmer, no amount of shaming would change that.

Also, "nowadays" suggests it has been different before which I highly doubt. Tall suggests strength, it seems likely to be an in built attractive quality.

What might be different now is choices are expanded. I'll give.you that this has its downsides and is making people more shallow. But again, noticing that neednt make people feel guilty as it's at a fundamental level.

[–]EpikYummehLurker5 points6 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

The age old rebuttal there is that a fat woman can in theory lose weight and adopt a slimmer physique. A short man cannot realistically increase his height without serious medical intervention (which is incredibly slow, painful, and expensive for almost trivial vertical gains).

[–]whichbladeNA Paler Shade of Purple10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but no dude will date a girl because she has the potential to lose weight.

[–]ashbae0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Some dudes definitely will.

[–]EpikYummehLurker-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely true, but a fat woman retains the ability to improve the physical trait that most men find unattractive, while a short man can do nothing about his height. I'm not suggesting every man will date a girl because he thinks she'd look super hot if she lost 100 pounds.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Point

Your head

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.3 points4 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

That’s true but it doesn’t effect the fact that if it’s not attractive to you it’s not attractive. None of us are in control of that, even if we’d like to be.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah this isn't going to change, people just need to accept it. It isn't fair at all and sucks ass, but it is what it is

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Right what are you gonna do

[–]EpikYummehLurker0 points1 point  (14 children) | Copy Link

The point is that a woman being undesirable due to obesity can lose weight and improve her appearance.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.4 points5 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

I understand that, it doesn’t negate my point, we are talking about other people being attracted or not. Whether you can physically change whatever it is that makes you unattractive is irrelevant to whether someone else finds you attractive or not because of it.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Yes it does because some attributes are a function of your decisions and others are a function of your genetics. It turns out that a lot of the latter is ornamental and completely useless.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

That’s not the point. It’s not about the person’s ability to control whatever it is that makes them unattractive to someone else, it’s about that someone else’s inability to control whether or not they are attracted. You cannot force yourself to be attracted to someone, even if they can make themselves more attractive generally by losing weight or whatever.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

You cannot force yourself to be attracted to someone, even if they can make themselves more attractive generally by losing weight or whatever.

??? You just contradicted yourself. You can't literally force someone to be more attracted to you but you can greatly improve the odds by losing weight for example. You may not be able to change their standards, but that does not really matter as you can change yourself to fit those standards. Effectively it's not over for you.

Your point is pretty much false anyways and it implies people are a lot more individual than they really are in their tastes. A large component of attractiveness is familiarity and the rest is genetic. The familiarity part can be changed by changing the portrayal of attractiveness in the media.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

No I didn’t, I’ve been saying that the whole time. That’s the point. Reread if you want. That another person might possibly be able to fix whatever unattractive flaw they have does not make you as a potential dating partner somehow attracted to them with that flaw.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

But the flaw isn't inherent to you. It isn't intrinsically a part of your identity so it can't really be considered "you" rather a function of your choices. Also read my edit, sorry I edited that part in.

[–]reluctantly_red2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Same goes for fat girls. It's not attractive when compared to girls who are slimmer,

Not really -- if its distributed right the fat girl's hotter.

[–]stedtler2[S] -1 points0 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Fat girls are like that because of their behaviour.

Tall suggests strength, it seems likely to be an in built attractive quality.

Unlikely. Tall gangly guys are still more attractive than strong short guys.

Maybe, you're right and it's hi-wired. I don't feel that's the case because there are tribes where we don't see this behaviour and the women don't care.

Western society has certainly contributed to the problem by portraying short men as weak, wimpy, undesirable, not manly.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Fat girls are like that because of their behaviour.

That might well be true but it still seems shallow to some point. When I see a fat girl I'm not particularly thinking about her personal habits (cos I'm a bit of a slob myself to be honest) but just that she isn't attractive. Another example could be women who have had babies and taken a big hit with that.

. I don't feel that's the case because there are tribes where we don't see this behaviour and the women don't care.

What tribes?

Western society has certainly contributed to the problem by portraying short men as weak, wimpy, undesirable, not manly.

Yeah that could have an influence too. Still doesn't change much.

[–]stedtler2[S] -2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I can't find the link but it was a hunter-gatherer like tribe where taller man was not the norm.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You have societies where fat women are revered too though right?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

They actually have done studies on this and perceived physical strength plays a greater factor in attraction than height alone.

[–]stedtler2[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Ya but theres only so big you can get as a smaller guy with a smaller frame.

I'd have to take steroids to get much bigger than this.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unless you're an extreme manlet, you can quite easily get to a point where you look stronger than your average 6' tall guy

[–]stedtler2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I just looked at those studies and there's a giant flaw.

You can't tell the height of the man just by looking at his body.

They are not standing next to another man.

Therefore, the women don't know how tall the men really are.

But if they lined the men up side by side, my guess is they would prefer weak 6 foot guy over strong 5 ft 6 guy.

[–]TheReformist94-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The bar is set much lower for women. Period. Stop overlooking the Pareto principle.

[–]Ultramegasaurus10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They are. They judge men very harshly for things outside their control like height, balding, penis size, bone structure and even voice tone. And there is significantly less variation for the male ideal than for the female one. Also, women are more likely to demand men to surpass them in both looks- and status-related aspects.

[–]wracky272RPG's are fun3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Any sort of "standards" or shallowness a guy has are completely outweighed by his desperation. He's still a shallow individual, he's just willing to stuff that down to get his dick wet. Something that women, understandably, are less willing to do. They run the risk of having to abort this loser's baby, and/or develop a whore's reputation. What is a guy risking? An STD? Jokes about sport-hunting with the boys? There's not an equivalence here.

[–]killallthenarcs2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women literally disqualify hundreds and thousands of men because their legs aren't long enough.

If an attractive young woman is to be monogamous, she'd going to have to disqualify millions of men in the world who lack egregious faults and would gladly have her. I mean quite literally she does not have time to sensible screen them all at the rate they present themselves to her... much less screen them all and occasionally take a bit of time off and just enjoy being single. Would it be less shallow to use a random number generator to work out who of the available millions to disqualify? Or would it be less shallow to fuck a hundred million men?

[–]Pope_LuciousSeparating the wheat from the hoes2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nah dude. Ugly women can’t get shit.

[–]MoldyGymSocks1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Have you seen the Okcupid (I think that was the site) experiment where the dude made a profile with a hideously ugly picture of a woman who bordered on not even looking human, and still got hundreds of messages in his inbox? Fuck off lol

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac10 points11 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Why does everything uncomfortable about women have to be framed almost like a personal grievance?

Yes women are primally attracted to taller men. This is not good news for them. Even worse, it's not something they can consciously change.

Think of it this way: in the US men taller than 6' is around 20% of the population. About half of them are ugly/weird looking, that leaves a majority of women who like tall men vying hard for 10% of men. Of those 10%, assuming they're all available, a good number of them are losers, a good number of them are drowning in so much pussy that they will drive the women mad trying to lock them down and a fraction of them will succeed. It's like winning the lottery! Forget about yourself for a second, and realize how much this would suck! To me it sounds almost as bad as being a guy.

When you give up the naive wish that women were different, you can laugh at the mindfuck of reality! Suffering is a shared human experience, but also a relative one, and given the huge differences between men and women makes it difficult for anyone to empathize with anyone else. It's like one big magic trick, we're having the wool pulled over our eyes!

I'm not really a theist, but it's really something that makes me think. There's something about the overall human condition that seems to interlock just perfectly -- almost as if by design.

[–]CamoWoobie1013 points14 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

The other 90-95% of women, they also have to come to terms with disappointment of not being enough and setting their sights lower, just like you do. Forget about yourself for a second, and realize how much this would suck! To me it sounds almost as bad as being a guy.

Wow, you are so out of touch with regards to the average Male experience. I wish my biggest problem was just not having access to the top 10% of women.

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I am an average male, and my experience up until now has been little else than average male experience. But you're making my point. If women thought like men, they would be happy as fuck with their awesome situation. We would have good reason to resent how easy they have it.

The fact that their situation doesn't make them happy, is amazing to me. It's almost like they're also supposed to be dissatisfied no matter how good it gets for them. Is it really not that mindblowing?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Is it really not that mindblowing?

I hear you, it really is when you put it like that. How do you think it became like that? Is suffering an evolutionarily adaptive trait?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have a theory about why suffering is almost inevitable. Think of it like this. Our emotions from an evolutionary point of view are a way to guide our actions. If I'm hungry, it means I need to get food. If I'm horny, I need to find someone to have sex with. If I'm sad, I need to find a way to be happy. All the negative emotions are calls to action. All the positive emotions are calls to keep doing what you're doing.

So I think it's inevitable that you're going to have more negative emotions than positive, because from an evolutionary point of view, it's beneficial to always be seeking to improve in some way or gain something. Thats how you move up, improve and become more likely to pass on high quality genes.

You're only going to seek to make drastic changes to improve some aspect of life if you're unhappy. So unhappiness is a benefit from an evolutionary point of view. This kind of relates to wanting what you know you can't have. It's a way to make you better.

[–]MoldyGymSocks0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol this is just ridiculous mental gymnastics. Women have it so good in the dating market, but they want it even better! Wow! Poor babies.

[–]Kittennoodle0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I won the lottery!

[–]DXBrigade5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Plenty of short men date.

[–]Santaclause372 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man10 points11 points  (31 children) | Copy Link

women who discriminate against short men aren't shallow because short men are objectively inferior.

as you admit, women are less attracted to short men. if a woman has sex with a manlet, she runs the risk of having short sons, who will also be generally unattractive to women and won't be as reproductively successful as taller men. see the "sexy sons" hypothesis. it's simply a more efficient reproductive strategy for women to avoid short men and only have sex with tall, attractive men. it's not shallow at all for women to avoid having sex with short men, it's actually a very wise reproductive strategy.

this does NOT apply for flat chested women in the same way. like you admit, men will happily have sex with flat chested women. men who prefer large breasted women are focused on a meaningless superficial trait, which is why they are shallow.

[–]oftheinfinite 1 points [recovered]  (26 children) | Copy Link

So long as short women continue to reproduce, short sons are going to exist.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband9 points10 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

So long as short women continue to reproduce, short males are going to exist.

Not necessarily, average human height has mostly been increasing due to better nutrition and living conditions. Height is poly genetic and isn't simply the average of mom and dad.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Ok but fools aren’t gonna be like 10 feet tall someday there are limits

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure. But those limits aren't there because Mom is short.

[–]lefactorybebe0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Possibly? This is a bit of a reach, considering it concerns another species, but ima go into anyway.

Horses aren't supposed to be super tall. Generally, it's believed horses aren't supposed to be taller than 15.2 hands (60.8 inches) at the withers (top of shoulder). However, we regularly breed horses that are 17 hands (68 inches), even ones as tall as 18.3 hands (73.2 inches). We've bred them for their height, and nutrition has improved as well.

There's a disease some foals get now, where their growth plates don't form normally and become super inflamed. Foals who have a higher muscle mass and get calorie dense foods are at a higher risk for it. Sometimes it's so severe that the foal cannot stand, and sometimes they have to be put down. The cause is unknown, but some people think it's cause we've bred horses to be too damn big.

Also, it's well known that ponies (14.2 hands and shorter) live longer than horses, usually by 10 years.

So we've certainly been able to breed animals to be taller than they should be, perhaps to their detriment. So maybe the same thing could happen with us? Obviously the way we reproduce is nothing like the way we breed horses, but it could be a possibility. Sorry for the essay, your comment just got me thinking about it!

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I was just watching some tv show talking about this exact thing with horses lol. I guess it started with war horses

[–]lefactorybebe1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh wow, how funny!!

And yeah, that would make sense. We had a foal at my barn who ended up being euthanized because of it. The vet said it was more common in warmbloods. Warmbloods are large horses, used mainly in the English disciples (they're the ones you'll see in the Olympics), they're descended from war horses.

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

He's correct. If the variability is wide, the average human height has little to do with it. When the average male height becomes 7 feet tall, the 6 foot tall guys will be sad about being short.

Short males will exist as long as there are visibly noticeable height differences in men, which means probably forever.

[–]shonenhikada1 point2 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Ah no. If you look up pediatric there is actual a formula to predict a child's maximum height potential and it's base on both the mother and father's height.

The formula for men was:

Son's potential height= ((father's height in inches +mom height in inches + 5 inches)/2) +/- 4 inches

If a man marries a short woman he can potential get a short son, which is why i lol at all these 6'3+ going for womenlet (5'3 and under women). They are potentially risking their sons getting screwed over in dating.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Acouple of two tall people could be screwing their daughter over though. Not many guys want a 6' tall girl

[–]shonenhikada2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Actually that is false projection by women. Many guys aren't that hung up on height when it comes to women. The problem is a lot of tall women also have a height preference for men taller than them and tend to reject shorter guys approaching them; however it should be noted many tall girls tend to abandon the girl rule of wanting a guy taller than her in heels due to that shrinking her mate potential even more. So a lot of guys shorter than tall girls don't bother approaching tall girls due to known generalized preference of women liking men taller than them.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

No it isn't, taller men who have the option of dating tall or short women more often choose shorter women.

[–]shonenhikada0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Well duh they'll date shorter women because there are more shorter women than taller women. Also, shorter women tend to crush hard and be more receptive to tall men, so of course given option of picking a short woman who is open from the get go to want to be with you and a tall girl who is not going to go gaga immediately for your height, the guy will pick the shorter girl/

For example- Look in bodybuilding forum response to dating a girl who is 6'6"

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=172898511&page=1

Most men in the thread, including tall men (6'2+) were fine with having children, marrying and sex with this 6'6" woman.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

They will disproportionately choose shorter girls. That's the point.

As if you just quoted bodybuilding forum as a citation LMFAO

[–]shonenhikada0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm just giving an example of male dominated forum in which male's (many of whom are tall) had no problem being with and having children with a tall woman.

Also, again you seem to have overlook the reasoning behind why tall guys tend to end up more with short girls. It's because short girls tend to chase, be more aggressive, receptive and crush on guys ridiculously taller than them. While taller women still keep on passive female role of wanting the guy to come to her.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Can you show me a legitimate source for this?

[–]shonenhikada0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

for what?

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

The formula for height.

[–]shonenhikada0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Board Review series pediatrics pg 148

https://i.imgur.com/leEWypp.jpg

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Another made up calculation

[–]Kittennoodle0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Okay....

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Sure, but nutrition reaches a point where it can't get any better. People are eating too much food nowadays so it's clearly not the limiting factor

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Polygenetic means there are multiple limiting factors.

[–]Kittennoodle1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

True that.

[–]circlingldn0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

that makes no sense, a immigrant from china could be 5ft5 and his genetic potential could be 6ft but has had poor nutrition, main reason is the short guy is less dominant looking

a 6ft3 230 pound guy will beat the shite out of a 5f10 190 pound guy, at the same bf and untrained

[–]Redkg0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Are you saying a woman's larger breast size doesn't offer reproductive benefits?

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It doesn't. Larger breasts don't provide more milk despite the popular myth.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

men are attracted to large breasts, but they will still happily fuck flat chested women if that's what is in front of them.

large breasts don't provide any direct reproductive advantage. large breasts aren't better at producing milk or anything like that, it's just more fat in that area and entirely for visually stimulating males. female non-human primates don't have enlarged breasts when they aren't pregnant.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]CamoWoobie104 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I agree with your title but you did a very poor job of making your point

[–]stedtler2[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I definitely rushed it.

What do you think I missed?

[–]shoup88Report me bitch6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

How are women more shallow than men, and why is it different now a days vs before.

[–]_Neon_Shadow_ 1 points [recovered]  (8 children) | Copy Link

Women have always been shallow. This is nothing new.

[–]weag5lmy mom says I'm special3 points4 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Women have always been shallow children. This is nothing new.

FTFY

[–]_Neon_Shadow_ 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

Men too.

[–]weag5lmy mom says I'm special1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

LOL no.

Smaller, weaker, hairless, higher voices, more neurotic, fewer responsibilities, more choices, unable to control emotions, consume more than they produce, use more in services than they pay in taxes, ...

Women have never pulled their own weight. Still don't. Men are the adults.

[–]_Neon_Shadow_ 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Chill. Women aren't bad.

[–]weag5lmy mom says I'm special1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Neither are children.

[–]Hungry_AFYour friendly neighborhood misandrist0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry mommy didn't love you.

[–]weag5lmy mom says I'm special0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You fight like a girl.

[–]Hungry_AFYour friendly neighborhood misandrist1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks :)

[–]SabirahNova1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean I think its hard wired for most women. Are they expected to date men they aren’t enthusiastically attracted too just because they’re nice or successful? I think that’s how you end up with one sided relationships where the man is nagged to death and has to beg for duty sex.

[–]Nu_Guy1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would argue women are equally as shallow as men.

On average:

A girl would choose a wealthy tall man who has cheated on partners before, and gives the impression that she is disposable, over a guy she knows will be there for her and has proven he is genuine, but is less exciting. Even if he is handsome.

A guy would choose a hot dumb girl with minimal potential if she is available drama free over a girl with good people skills, career potential and compatibility if she is ugly.

[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

have you tried growing up?

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

😂

[–]HawanjaAncient Deadly Ninja Baby1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You know, if being short was really your problem, then do something about it. Save up, and get the surgery to extend your limbs a few inches.

If you were to do this, somehow I don't think it'll solve your problem. Because the reason you can't get laid isn't because of your height. It's your attitude. You know what turns women off? Whiners and complainers.

[–]circlingldn0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

actually psychiatrists agree that height dysphoria is one of the few psychiatric disorders than can be treated by surgery

[–]p3n3lop3 1 points [recovered]  (9 children) | Copy Link

You're shallow for not wanting your future sons to suffer from shortness??

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

Being below 6 foot 3 doesn't automatically make you short ya know

[–]p3n3lop3 1 points [recovered]  (7 children) | Copy Link

No one said anything about 6 foot 3. But if you're five foot....something, I'm instantly turned off. Go away.

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Very funny. Average height for men is like 5'8 or 5'9 so you must be turned off by 99% of men lol.

[–]p3n3lop3Black Pill& Waiting on the Singularity1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I am five foot ten, so yes

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

height doesn't matter when you're on your knees

[–]p3n3lop3 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

nope, not for a manlet ;)

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

5'10 is not a manlet...nice trolling.

[–]p3n3lop3 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

If I ask your height and you start by saying "five...." you're a fucking manlet

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You sound like an incel. Good luck. I won't let silly childish things like what Wal-Mart shelf I can reach dictate my success with women, and never have.

So if you wanna say I am a manlet at 5 foot 10, good for you, but I'll continue fucking women who aren't still in middle school.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!7 points8 points  (38 children) | Copy Link

It's not just the length of their legs. Taller guys are more successful, taller guys are smarter, they have bigger IQs, they can pack on more weight and remain healthy and fit, they can reach the top shelf at the grocery store, and they spend way less time feeling sorry for themeselves and complaining about women.

[–]ReniboySlightly Red Leaning3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I’ve always wondered. If tall gays are smarter, more successful and have bigger IQs. Does the same apply for taller women? Why haven’t men evolved to see height as attractive? Plenty of tall men marry short women all the time. Aren’t they disadvantaging their offspring by doing this as height isn’t sex linked?

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not good enough.

Sorry this leary question isn't good enough. Try again

[–]ImsomnilandNo Pills thnx11 points12 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Taller men also also die younger! Bonus!

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You get his retirement sooner!

[–]Kittennoodle2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What is it with you people??

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

you people??

You people? Us people? That's some racist shit right here

[–]Kittennoodle-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe I'm a racist. Maybe I'm a classist, or maybe, I'm just judgmental of words.

[–]Kittennoodle3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Why would you say that? I'm already having to attempt to demand my husband see doctors here and there. Would you really want your love to die?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This sub is a cesspool chock full of cynical assholes. Don't look for genuine love from these folks.

[–]Kittennoodle2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think I found genuine love from one of them, but thank you. The negativity should go though.

[–]spejsr 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

What? Only last one top shelf of the grocery store has any connection to reality

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Smarter, richer, more successful doesn't matter in reality now?

[–]spejsr 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

It's not reality that height has anything to do with any of those things

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It is correlated

[–]spejsr 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Sure it is buddy

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

👍

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

How come few of the top ten richest men (apex men) are tall? There are two, one is 6'1'' (4th) and the other is 6'3'' (10th) - and this is considering reported heights are often taller than reality. A couple of short men show up before the first tall man.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

How come the tallest NBA player came from China when the average of the Tallest is a white Danish?

The studies are clear sorry bro.

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

The tallest NBA player came from China because they literally breed their athletes (planned breeding as done for Yao). Do we literally breed men to be rich/successful?

You didn't answer the question, probably because you can't.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/basketball/yao-ming-the-basketball-giant-made-in-china-by-order-of-the-state-20060119-gdmsz0.html

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Wow that's a terribly uninformative piece of "news" filled with guesses and make believe to create a narrative with almost no facts. Oh and it's written by (((Brook Larmer))) as well!

Next time a girl turns you down you should definitely think it has nothing to do with your personality and send her that article!

[–]throwinoutex-Red Pill, now Purple Man2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Ha, I knew you had no adequate response. You have a clear lack of understanding of Communist style athletic programs and the level of control the CCP has in China. Making a great case for the smart tall man there chief!

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

🙄

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

taller men are smarter and have bigger IQs

citation needed

[–]beachredwhine 1 points [recovered]  (11 children) | Copy Link

Not again. Not again!

Really?

And from you? Can't you reply that again and go pretend to be some half wit who barely realized things are happening?

Not again

I would say you could just Google it. But you probably couldn't anymore. The internet, where truth goes to die.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas2 points3 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Lol wut

[–]beachredwhine 1 points [recovered]  (9 children) | Copy Link

You went this far and never spent a million more nights looking up the truth?

Before most of it was hidden?

Oh you didn't? Oh whut?

Height has a very very strong correlation with both IQ and success? Oh no. Oh no!!! Must be heightism! Must mean that shorter guys can't ever even succeed! Must mean whining forever, but only just in case.

Just in case I do not succeed, I know who to blame!

The real red pill right here. I'll blame the man truly to blame. Girls prefer taller guys, cause they have teh longer legs. Evil bad girls.

Come on

[–]isweartoofuckingmuch 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

What the Fuck? Are you okay

[–]Duskmelt5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

He must be one of those smart tall men lmfao

[–]beachredwhine 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

You are so out of the loop it's ridiculous. Go play some Oblivion, or wait I mean skyrim.

How could I even speak to you? Your retarded.

[–]isweartoofuckingmuch 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

😂😂😂

Rambles like a lunatic in multiple comments. Doesn't know how to use your/you're. But I'm the retarded one. Look at yourself

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Just got out of the shower. Damn I look good.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol wut

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Chill out you autist, they just want a citation

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

they just want a citation

Again?

You just want another citation?

And you want one now? Now? In curated no citation left land?

You just want someone else to tell you what you see?

🤔😕😢

Well goy, you go do you. I'll go do me.

Let's see how it works out

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You are possibly the most autistic person I've encountered on reddit

[–]MeetTheShadow1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nonsense. Men do things like that all the time. So do women. Stop feeling sorry for yourself.

[–]LUClENSociology of Sex &Courtship0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Idk fam. I just did my regular r/tinder scroll through and girls still like witty, funny dudes.

I mean rules 1 and 2 are real, but uggos with good jokes still get dates

[–]lbspredh0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

x can't be more subjective value than y, it doesn't work like that

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If we’re talking casual sex 100% yeah. But if we’re talking relationships it can depend.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think only because they're socially allowed to be with zero repercussion.

[–]Zippo-Cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Shallow

Yeah, can we not use dumbshit feminist buzzwords, thanks.

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Women like to appear more shallow than they actually are. Tinder is the worst of it. At 5'10, I am not complaining. If being slightly below 6 foot was ever an issue, I would ignore it and treat it as a shit test and move on. I banged a chick a couple months ago from Hinge who thought I would be taller. I held frame, explained that I am normal height for a guy, and proceeded to fuck her 2 or 3 times.

Women shit test. They care more about your confidence than anything else.

[–]p3n3lop3 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

thought I would be taller. I held frame, explained that I am normal height

LOL she wanted you to be taller, regardless of whatever stat you read on the internet. That's like fat/chubby women quoting stats on the average size of a woman in the US (12) etc etc. It's just rationalizing. I feel sorry, I mean you can't change your height but obviously you lied to this person or you omit or lie online.

[–]SavingMasculinitySAVINGMASCULINITY.COM0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm pretty tall, never thought of myself as short. I get the impression so many men say they are 6 foot when they really aren't, making ACTUAL 5'10 guys seem shorter by comparison.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Something people need to understand is that all women are gold diggers. Every last one of them.

Contrary to what these insane incel types think women are not attracted to men based on their appearance. Women do not judge the opposite sex based on aesthetics. "Chad" does not exist. Most women find the male body ugly and find penises to be revolting and disgusting. They would rather look at a female body any day of the week. Going along with this is the fact that women don't really any true sexual desire for men. They only use sex either as a tool to acquire what they want from men ($$$) or something they begrudgingly accept to maintain a relationship with a man.

Women have no sexual or physical desire for men. Sex is simply their way of either using or thanking a man for providing something in return. Nothing is more attractive or beautiful to a woman than $. Men need to understand this and realize women have no love or lust for them.

All women are prostitutes. If all men were wiped off the face of the Earth women who be more than happy so long as they had resources. Simply for their bodies they have men worshipping the ground they walk on and willing to do almost everything for them all because of the allure that nature cursed the male sex with. Meanwhile a women desires nothing from a man save $, status and utility. It is purely a business transaction on her part devoid of anything men would consider lust.

If women were not getting paid they would never have sex with men. This is why they get so mad when men give them one night stands because they give up their vagina, the holiest thing they have and the source of male worship, and grudge through an act they largely despise only to fail to acquire the true object of their "lust," (the man's wallet.) It is rank blasphemy to the female to have to suffer through sex with an ugly disgusting man and get nothing in return.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Wow.

I don't even know where I would start with this one...

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I know most women would deny this but it is true. Why is that men pay women for sex and not the other way around? Why is prostitution the "oldest profession in the world?"

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Because men have a higher sex drive? In what world does this mean that women find penises And sex itself disgusting? They do not at all.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. Regardless I do think most women find male body's to be gross and penises to be revolting. At the best there are some women who are physically attracted to men but it is very rare. The majority of women are either asexual or lesbian and only attracted to men by the prospect of of $.

[–]beachredwhineCongratulations!3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Almost all women are attracted to the male body and to a big hard dick. Women are just a bit more complex, a wee bit less simple, than a desperate virgin trying to hide his erection cause a big tittied mom walked by

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter