Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihlpl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihlpl!paveleck
From: paveleck@ihlpl.UUCP (Bob Paveleck)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Short Men
Message-ID: <246@ihlpl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Jul-85 14:22:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihlpl.246
Posted: Wed Jul 24 14:22:54 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jul-85 00:08:33 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 27

There's been a lot of discussion here lately about height differences
in SOs and how people deal with them.  This has reminded me of another
observation I've made on height attitudes (particularly, attitudes
women have toward shorter men).

I have found that quite a few women, even those who aren't exceptionally
tall, will reject shorter men right off the bat.  Although I can see
why a great height disparity would be uncomfortable for both parties,
I don't understand why, for example, a 5'4" woman would refuse to date
a 5'5" man.  I can speak from experience on this, as I'm only 5'5" and
I've had it happen to me.

I'm not saying that people should change their concept of what's
attractive in members of the appropriate sex, but I'm surprised that
the "tall, dark and handsome" man is still the only one considered
by many women (even those who would be considered petite).  What's
the problem if the two people are fairly close together in height?
Are shorter men considered less masculine (however you choose to define
that term) than the "tall, dark and handsome" group?  What else can
a shorter guy do to make up for his lack of height (assuming that he
is just as clean, pleasant, intelligent, polite, etc. as a 6-footer)?

Maybe you folks can come up with some thoughts on this observation
of mine for future discussion here.

Bob Paveleck
ihlpl!paveleck