You obviously have no idea of where Westerville is, what’s in the town, and what’s around it. Depending upon where in Westerville the OP lives she might very well be five feet from Columbus city limits, or she might be closer to New Albany (where I grew up, once a quiet simple farming community, now, the town has one of the highest concentrations of wealthy people in the state), there’s also at least one university in Westerville (private religious college) in the city. So she’s not searching for someone who couldn’t live there. Frankly, it’s a wonder she’s not stumbling over suitable guys every time she turns around.
Oh please. Having any preferences regarding physical appearance makes you “incredibly shallow”?
Well, specifying that you want your hypothetical date a certain height – especially a minimum of 5’11, which is above the US average – is incredibly shallow, IMO. I may be biased, but to me this would be like specifying that your date has to have a C cup or better and can’t weigh more than 120 pounds.
If jay-c puts on heels she’ll be taller than someone who is 5’11". When you’re in the 95th percentile yourself, there’s nothing unreasonable about expecting your mate to be above average.
What does her height have to do with her date’s height? 
Evidentally this thread also needs a counter for men who are offended by her preferences because they don’t happen to fit.
I’m sure girls that are 5’1", for the most part, don’t prefer men who are 6’6". Why shouldn’t a woman want a man who is taller than she? Why shouldn’t a woman want a guy who is in shape, or educated, or funny?
In fact, she basically is asking for what all girls want-- an intelligent guy, who makes her laugh, and is taller than she. Notice she isn’t complaining that her responses are short men, or ugly, she is complaining that their responses fail to grab her attention.
If you want to take her to task for anything, do it because she is expecting too much from an online dating service…let’s face it, even though online matchmaking isn’t as stigmatized as it used to be, it is still a haven for people (especially men) who don’t have the greatest social skills when dealing with the opposite sex. I would imagine that jay-c isn’t getting as many responses because 1)quite a few men ARE intimidated by her, and 2)most of the ones who DO answer are basically throwing a ‘hailmary’- they think “I’ll send a quick note, I’m sure I have no chance, but I’ll see if she responds”
Of course it isn’t shallow to want someone funny; that’s their personality, so it can’t be shallow. Education and shape are shallow, but to a much lesser degree than height.
Are you just playing dumb? Do I really have to explain to you why I’m not sexually attracted to men who are the same size I was in 4th grade? Or are a foot shorter than any man in my family? Or someone who I could easily take out in a fight?
And what’s this nonsense?
I don’t think a height requirement is tremendously shallow. (The college graduate requirement, OTOH…) A man’s height is a primary attractor, on par with the hourglass figure for women. All men on the planet prefer the hourglass shape, and (virtually?) all women on the planet prefer a man to be taller than herself. Nothing wrong with that, except that it reduces the (ideal) dating pool for tall women.
A TLC show (maybe it’s true, maybe it isn’t) discussing sexual preferences in heterosexual humans hammered home the fact that height is far and away the most important physical attribute when defining a man’s attractiveness to women. A symmetrical face was #2, and then his smell. Something about humans of both genders being able to subconsciously smell the difference between highly compatible genes versus genes that might not blend well in the offspring.
You were 5’10 when you were in 4th grade? :eek:
It means, not dating a guy because he only has an hs education or because he’s fat is shallow, but to a much lesser degree than not dating someone because he’s 5’9.
By the way, unless you’re very fat or a bodybuilder, most guys could “take you in a fight” regardless of their height. HTH
Not that I accept these requirements as shallow (because I don’t think they are at all), how is specifying a particular physical shape of a body less shallow than stating a height preference?
Guy or Girl A: I prefer taller (or shorter) men (or women), but your BMI isn’t important.
Guy or Girl B: Your height is not important, but if you’re a little over weight or under toned, you’re totally beneath my consideration.
The latter sounds far more shallow than the former. Also, I don’t think specifying an educated person is shallow at all. In my experience*, wide educational gaps between couples lead to wide income gaps, wide experiential gaps, and trouble down the line. The trouble always seems to be tenfold if the more educated/salaried one is the woman. I can think of at least five female friends who have dealt with that sort of situation, and it was not pretty.
It’s never easy to be in someone’s shadow. Whether it be the shadow of their looks, education, or net worth. I don’t think jay-c is being shallow at all by heading off what would most likely result in ongoing arguments and simmering resentment down the road.
FaerieBeth
*notice I said “In my experience”. YMMV
FaerieBeth, if jay-c had specified the range of BMI you had to be in, I’d think that’s just as shallow. If she said “I prefer tall guys”, I wouldn’t think it’s that shallow. But to reject some guy because he’s not (gasp) 5’11 or GOD FORBID! 6’9 is shallow.
Okay, but wouldn’t the ten inch range of 5’11" to 6’9" be the tall guys? Average height for men in the US is around 5’9", I think…so to start at 5’11" and go up to 6’9" would be the same as saying I like guys taller than average, but not freakishly NBA tall.
I really think that trying to differentiate between using an adjective versus numbers, when they are referring to the same group, is splitting hairs.
Besides, I’m not familiar with Match.com, but several sites I have seen just have little drop down menus where you choose what goes into the field. Maybe all she could choose were numbers, not text.
FB
But there is a difference between “I prefer tall guys” and “you must be this tall to date me.” Maybe I’m misinterpreting, or maybe you’re right about the dropdown menu thing. Eh, I’ll leave this thread. Sorry.
I don’t know if it’s been said already because I’m too lazy to read this entire thread.
I noticed you discribed yourself as sarcastic but then you listed one of your turn-offs is sarcasm.
What gives?
Other than that, if I didn’t think you were out of my league I’d definately give it a go.
Yeah, I’m destin for a life with bar flies. this is the life I chose
I know people in their early 20’s who are “old” and boring and people in their 70’s and 80’s who are young and fun to be around
She is 28 and puts her age limit at 33??? so she wouldn’t consider a handsome, educated tall guy who is 37 or 38?
And what if some guy 50 miles away (less than an hours drive) from her and was perfect in every way wanted to meet her? Sorry, 20 miles is her limit.
She has control freak written all over her.
And she IS attractive so there is something wrong here.
PS and white boys only…what’s up with that? If Denzel Washington moved to Ohio she wouldn’t date him? Oh yeah, he’s too old.
Dude, match gives you drop-down menus to pick these things from. She’s not necessarily completely excluding people that aren’t in those categories – they’re free to read her profile and message her and all that. She’s just stating her preferences, nobody said those were set-in-stone rules. And even if they were, hell, that’s her prerogative. I know I wouldn’t want to date a guy ten years older than me. (I’m 20, and the top limit I put in my match.com profile is 26, although I actually doubt I could even go for a guy that age, but I’d be willing to give them a chance, I guess). But basically, match gives you drop-down boxes to pick your preferences from – someone’s not a control freak just because they pick a range of preference. I would NOT date a 30-year-old, because we would just not be able to relate to eachother, so I set my upper age limit at 26. And I would feel uncomfortable dating a guy shorter than me, (though I’m 5’4" so that’s not a huge problem) so I set my lower height limit at 5’5". This doesn’t make someone a control freak, and it’s not necessarily a hard and fast exclusionary rule. Just a preference. Chill out.
Hmm…reading through the most recent postings on this thread, I’m still not understanding how setting preferences is shallow. So she likes tall men, so what? I didn’t see anywhere in her profile stating that she would REFUSE to date a man shorter than 5’11", it’s just what she prefers. All dating websites expect you to set physical preferences for the type of person you want to date. It isn’t shallow to show a desire for a certain look in a person that you may eventually sleep with. Jay-C likes tall men most likely because she herself is tall. Nothing wrong with that. She likes men who are in shape because she herself is in shape, and would probably want to do things that are physically active with her dates.
I like shorter men, because I’m 5’3", and I like men to be closer to my own height (my bf now is 5’6", shorter than average). I don’t feel I’m shallow because I’m physically attracted to certain things. I have dated men much taller than me, and am just not as attracted to them. Sorry, that’s just the way it is. No different than preferring blondes over brunettes, or vice versa.
Sure, if she was browsing a website just looking for friends, then it might be shallow to request certain physical traits. However, you must be physically attracted to somebody you date, or else you will end up as just friends. That’s not what jay-c is looking for.
And as another poster mentioned (sorry, I forget who), she was not criticizing the looks of the men who posted, simply the fact that they seem generic, and did not seem to be reading her profile at all, based on their responses.
nd what if some guy 50 miles away (less than an hours drive) from her and was perfect in every way wanted to meet her? Sorry, 20 miles is her limit.
Distance can be a relative thing depending on where you live. Around here in the Washington area, 50 miles away can be a lot further than one hours drive. Factor in the fact that the OP is busy with education as well as work and that may be too long to spend in a car on a regular basis.
As for the rest of the preferences, don’t you generally have a type that you go for? I look back that the various women that I’ve dated and they all had generally similar builds and similar temperaments with a few exceptions. I wasn’t consciuously running down a checklist when I met them evaluating them as to whether they were “dateworthy” material, but you’re attracted to what you’re attracted to.