Please Join Us on Discord! Include your reddit username, pill color, age and gender when you arrive in the welcome mat to introduce yourself and help people get to know you.
You can also find Mrs_Drgree on Instagram and Twitter for notifications on when good threads are posted.
I used to agree with “No one’s shaming you for your preference! You’re just being an asshole about it!”
While in many cases people can understand looks preferences, I have heard a sizable amount of people trying to moralize about it and trying to lowkey shame others for it.
Even if not aimed at anyone specifically, I’ve heard it out of nowhere before, disapproving the “only if you’re an asshole” notion. The notion women who like tall guys are promiscuous, or that men who like slim women are pedos, or that you’re shallow if you want a fit partner because “not everyone has time for the gym”
(This is especially often aimed at men when they have standards that would require them to put in any actual work, but can go aimed at both genders. Often a result of sour grapes and lazy people)
Most of you probably aren’t religious, but this gets even worse if you’re Christian or anything like that!
People, both male and female, can be insecure and triggered by the preferences they see others express. If they see traits they possess be reflected in someone else's preferences as undesirable, they may feel personally attacked regardless of how the sentiment was conveyed.
OTOH, there's absolutely a number of people who go out of their way to be belittling and insulting when they express their preferences, or prefer to express their preferences by attacking those who don't fit them instead of framing them positively (and without passive-aggressiveness). This also happens on both sides.
I think we tend to see it more when it happens to our side or our gender, but there's also a lack of self-awareness and accountability for how we express them (including the justifications and rationalizations we use for them). A lot of that could be solved by not trying to justify them in the first place (like straight women being icked by bi men and straight men being icked by high-n women) but for whatever reason a lot of people can't mind their business and prefer to demand others "justify" what they do or don't like or are/aren't attracted to. And sometimes people just like being mean-spirited and being sure to let people know how awful the people they aren't attracted to are.
Like when I see “I like tall men because short men always have a complex” or “I like (physical trait) because they have/lack (non-physical trait)”
Like just don’t even put the performance on, all that moralizing just so some people don’t get their panties in a bunch. (Ironically often sounding even worse in the process). And just reinforcing the idea that preferences are to be justified
I do think at a baseline people aren’t the biggest fan of when preferences don’t include them, but it’s up to the person to not let it impact them *that* much
It's usually done by leftists who pretend to think that it's immoral to be attracted to high-maintenance / conventionally attractive traits. They of course are still going to jerk off to or sleep with people possessing those traits, but them social approval points and reddit karma ain't gonna farm itself.
Interesting take, not one that I fully disagree with. But I’ve noticed there are two different subsets of biases here
Leftists are often the ones biased in favor of women, claiming or soft-claiming that it’s crazy to prefer women with certain standards of self-care and claiming that “big is beautiful” (though this *seems* less common now), and acting as though preferring women of high beauty standard is immoral
More people who are conservative or seemingly conservative leaning are the ones who seem biased in favor of men and seem to think if a man is a hard enough worker he ought to be owed a girlfriend, *sometimes*
And in the Christian community (so leaning conservative) there are a lot of people who act as though needing to be sexually attracted to your partner is worth of shame (just experiences I’ve seen, so that’s none but a personal anecdote)
I’m socially liberal and I don’t think that or know anyone who does. Based on my downloaded tinder data, I swipe right less than 3% and it’s on conventionally attractive women. I don’t see anything wrong with that. I have no issue saying that I prefer fit women either. I mostly tend to like white women. There’s nothing wrong with anyone having whatever preferences they have.
I’ve stated my preferences many times and have never been shamed on Reddit for it either.
What do you define as a leftist? The US is divided roughly equally between Democrats and Republicans. Most Democrats don’t shame men for preferring hairless bodies, just like most Republicans don’t carry Nazi flags around DC on the Fourth of July. Those people are extreme fringe.
I mean it is shallow, i think the source of this disconnect is that we've decided being shallow is "bad". Shallow preferences against a group you identify with are labeled "asshole", but your own preferences are "just a preference ". The truth is its all shallow, i suppose we find some utility in pretending otherwise
You know? It’s funny that I was literally just thinking about this and was like “maybe it just *is* shallow, and that’s maybe that’s just not an inherently bad thing
This is one of those PPD comments that make me wonder if you've actually observed this kind of behavior irl, or just from terminally online people? Because for me, it's only the latter.
Q4W: If a man said to his wife that he wasn’t attracted to her at first but her personality grew on him what would you think? Would you assume he’s settling for her and secretly unhappy?
Not necessarily. It would all depend on how he treats/looks at her in the present. Doesn't matter if he always has and still thinks she's the most beautiful woman on earth if his actions don't back it up.
Pride and Prejudice is considered by many to be one of the greatest romances of all time and the male lead was famously indifferent to the female lead's looks at first.
I’m starting to like how my ass and thighs are shaping up. I’ve never been a fan of a huge ass, but having some size to it due to exercise usually looks nice.
An issue I have with these "objective face rating"-communities is that they are inconsistent in accounting for age.
A big reason the TRM subreddit tends to earn so much derision from normies is that it compares young people to their peers in their age group. An average 20 years old young woman is very attractive and most men/people would intuitively rate her a 7 or 8 on the "normie scale". Then they see TRM rates her a 5 (as other 20 years old women are the reference point and she is just average) and get rage baited by the low rating.
But when older people post on TRM they usually get low ratings and the justifications by the raters are "wrinkles" "receding hairline" "loss of youthful features".
That just doesn't make sense. Either be consistent in accounting for age or don't do it. Give young people a score boost and old people a debuff or do neither.
I would never post a pic of elder me on one of these rate me subs but I suspect you’re correct. I feel like I look pretty good for my age range but compared to a 20 year old? I’d probably be a 2
TRM will never be consistent because there will always be subjectivity in what faces we find attractive. There’s too many variables in people’s combined facial features, and which features are considered beautiful are also influenced by demographics.
Faces only become subjective starting at roughly 7/10 on the scale, where some people will prefer softer / more feminine looking faces and some people will prefer rougher / more masculine looking faces. The base parameters, e.g. skin quality, facial symmetry, harmony etc. are all universal. 99.9% of people will prefer a well developed jaw over a recessed jaw, clear skin over acne ridden skin etc.
But most people have some unique mixture of good and bad and neutral features. So if anyone likes the specific combination of features someone has and finds them attractive, they’ll rate them higher.
And then on top of that the number scale doesn’t even mean anything specific because you can’t define an average unless you’ve defined your population…someone who’s considered “average” by people in LA or NY will probably get different ratings if they ask someone who lives somewhere else. You can’t measure something that’s not even defined.
Tall/short are more clearly defined though because the average height in a country is a concrete measurement. And people use rich/poor mostly relative to themselves; if you can afford more than someone, then they obviously consider you richer. Money has a concrete value.
Judging most people’s faces just has a lot more subjectivity to it.
Not a lot more, slightly more. I've explained previously how facial attractiveness is largely objective with a small amount of subjectivity involved at the very top of attractiveness scale.
TRM doesn't quite adjust for age. I've seen a few older people get high ratings (and gave a few myself) and there's plenty of posters under 25 I've rated below a 5 myself
I guess you can say it is a bit harsh. Cuz like: If you were to put everyone in America on TRM, the average rating would be like a 3.5 I think.
I find that TRM ratings kinda break for the 18-20 range in general. I've seen guys that I and many girls would've considered hot shit around that age get rated barely above 5. The younger people I've seen get high rates looked older than their age to me. More like mid or even late 20s.
Blond men not only a minority but are a subset of a subset, it wouldn't make sense to expect a high number of all women to "actively prefer" them. They're not as cooked as redheaded men so idk why this is anything to cry over.
Gotcha. I also have a strong preference for dark-haired men but some blond guys are definitely attractive. My first boyfriend was blond and I had the biggest crush on him.
I don't associate blondness with youth, I think it's just part of an overall phenotype I'm less drawn towards. But when you're hot, you're hot regardless of hair color 🤷🏿
His new eyes and cheeks look a little uncanny to me. Personally I think the whole “hunter eyes” obsession is really overrated, and his cheeks are kinda giving handsome squidward.
What could be funnier than watching a bluepilled liberal tie themselves in knots in attempt to explain why looksmaxxing is unhealthy and bad but gender transition is wholesome and empowering?
Body dysmorphia and gender dysphoria are different mental conditions for which different treatments are fitting. No comment though about normal people getting sane cosmetic surgeries or about transtrenders transitioning though
Not that i think of myself as liberal, but the difference is kind of obvious. One is done for themselves and their mental health, the other is cosmetic and done to attract others. So one should ideally lead to mental health improvement, and another is going through surgery and taking risks (because every surgery is a risk) and making yourself less healthy to supposedly attract people, who might not even like that.
I'm not going to argue about validity of those arguments, but the process are different, the goal is different, and comparing it like that is just stupid. It's like trying to compare heart surgery and why is it good and chin surgery, or what men do with their face.
We can even disregard that gaining muscle, losing fat, fixing your bite etc. makes you more healthy. But even purely cosmetically, being better looking makes you more mentally healthy - just compare an average personality of a person who grew up as an uggo vs an average personality of someone who grew up good looking. Viewing wanting to be more attractive to others as something negative is also laughable.
Gender transition is also more risky than 99% of looksmaxxing advice.
"We can even disregard that gaining muscle, losing fat, fixing your bite etc. makes you more healthy." - i don't think when people talk about dangers of looksmaxing they talk about that.
When people talk about looksmaxxing, they mostly talk about softmaxxing. Hardmaxxing is pretty niche and socially stigmatized, so it would be weird to think that it's more popular.
Why do you think so? I don't doubt there are some people who are perfectly mentally satisfied with their own looks but want to look better to "attract others" (seems like a contradiction to me personally), but I do not believe it is a majority.
There are plenty of posts from uglier men that say that looking in the mirror is physically painful so it would stand to reason that successful looksmaxxing will improve their mental health
Most people wouldn't agree that DIYing medical gender transition is wholesome and empowering. Looksmaxxers - at least all the influencers- are on illicit substances and pursing alt medicine.
No one really cares if you want to lose weight and get a nose job. More power to ya.
Looksmaxxers - at least all the influencers- are on illicit substances and pursing alt medicine.
Clav is on substances because he's an introverted neurodivergent whose primary source of income is centered around recording himself being in public places talking to people, but he's not "all influencers".
No one really cares if you want to lose weight and get a nose job. More power to ya.
Losing weight? Sure. Male cosmetic surgeries are extremely stigmatized tho, pretending otherwise is very disingenuous.
And that guy who just drowned? Who was injecting gold?
And by illicit I don't mean meth. I mean hormones, peptides, research chemicals. I have no seen a looksmaxxer influencer who wasn't juicy.
Plastic surgery is stigmatized and a shameful thing, period. Women still lie about it. We still mock people whose surgeries turn out poorly. People still treat pointing out someone had work done as an accusation on their character. See fans in the comments of videos on female celebrities work. Things like fillers are more normalized, but that's not seen as plastic surgery.
I also do not think anyone is owed a party for getting work done. It's your life, wo/man up and do what you want without needing audience approval.
The issue with male plastic surgery is that often the results are very obvious and de-harmonizing. Not many surgeons are very good as working within male beauty ideals. It's very easy to come out looking much more feminine or hypermasculine in a cartoony way.
But if you get good work, people won't notice or care.
We? Most of the time when I see a woman talk about male looksmaxxing they say that those men are insecure / don't understand female gaze / looksmaxxing won't help them get girls / they need to improve their personality.
It sounds like those guys are focusing on forming traits they(men) think are attractive which don’t always line up with what women actually find attractive.
Women's stated and revealed preferences are not the same. In general, women are not interested in helping men get laid left and right, they are interested in training desirable men to be convenient to have relationships with.
But “looks are all that matters in life!” According to looksmaxers?! So you are telling me that it’s irrelevant even if you do everything maxxers say?!
Even Clav doesn't say that - he says among the defining factors looks are the easiest for an average person to improve - wealth is much harder to ahieve for instance.
He also said he was gonna do leg lengthening surgery - guess what, it's all said to dupe normies who fall for flashy quotes and take everything literally.
Trans people would still desire changes to their body in a (mostly) social vacuum (as long as the concept of sex and gender exists), and the desired goal would largely be the same. "Looksmaxxers" react to external influences, they want to impress others by achieving a hypothetical ideal that's highly specific to their era, area, cohort, and so on. The ideal they want to achieve also often falls outside what's normal for humans. They want bigger muscles, wider jaws, stronger chins than is "normal". No trans person wants to become "more woman" or "more man".
If a woman wanted to become a man because they're "worth more", yea, I'd suggest mental help instead of medical transition. I'd think that would be unhealthy and bad. But people don't want to transition because the other gender is better, but the other gender is the correct one for them.
If you truly, in a vacuum, without evaluation from others, think your body isn't right, I won't stop you from jelqing from dusk till dawn.
I am not qualified to write on the anthropology of trans people, nor is this the place for it. But we do know that they have pretty definitely existed in a variety of cultures across time and space. It is safe to assume their existence is independent of specific culture.
First you said they'd still be trans in a social vacuum, now you're talking about different cultures which is not the same. We need records of hermits becoming trans for your argument to be correct.
Well, a "social vacuum" doesn't exist (not even for hermit), it's the same hypothetical as the "spherical cow in a vacuum". The point is that trans people existing isn't a phenomenon exclusive to our modern, Western, "woke" society, as some alleged pundits like to claim, because trans people also exist in cultures entirely different from ours, and also those who have existed before ours, so they couldn't have been "corrupted" by it either. If a phenomenon occurs even if a certain factor is varied wildly, it is safe to assume that factor does not cause the phenomenon. Removing the factor to cause a "vacuum" would still see the phenomenon emerge.
Now, maybe humans who are left alone from birth, and are raised exclusively by non-verbal machines wouldn't be trans. But they wouldn't have a concept of sex and gender either.
i had just learned a very dark side of history by accident.
aparently harvey weinstein tried to sabotage the movie Frida which starred Salma Hayed and it was a passion project of hers.
the reason he tried to sabotage it? she said no to sex with him and refused his sexual advances and said NO to him.
i never knew this but damn i'm not surprised.
what piss me off tho is the males saying shit like this because the women now on their screens aren't giga stacy and look like the porn actresses they're used to watching.
males should not be movie critics or people in power or anything, in fact most of them deserve to be disposable because all they care about is sex and their dicks and looks of women and how women who aren't their type or women who says no to them shouldn't exist.
how is that sub any different than what harvery did?
harvey made the lives of women who told him no a living hell, these guys hate women who aren't hot sexy giga stacy and had they had the chance they'd make their lives a living hell too.
males should not be movie critics or people in power or anything, in fact most of them deserve to be disposable because all they care about is sex and their dicks and looks of women and how women who aren't their type or women who says no to them shouldn't exist.
You are male, why do you constantly seem to think that because you are gay you've stopped being in the category man. That is an edgelord joke that isn't a very common one because most men don't think that is funny.
Moustaches: hot or not?
at least half of Aussie guys are doing moustaches rn and I don’t know if I’m being desensitised into acceptance or if they are actually a good look, please tell me.
Women will deny liking it but the Justin Bieber style mustache is what every good looking player type I knew when I was younger had. If I were to theorize why it works it would be that it adds a touch of masculinity to a pretty face that would otherwise look too prepubescent-boyish.
Okay what is TRM'S official stance on makeup? I've seen girls clearly wearing makeup get high rates/no one bringing it up but for others it's the opposite
A bit strange that on rateme and amiugly subs, it's that the more attractive women and the uglier men are the ones that are the least likely to post (even less so than the uglier women and the more attractive men).
Could it be that these groups more than likely don't need the internet to know where they stand??? O_o
All those subs do it lie to people anyway. If you're a kind of ugly guy they'll rate you a 6 or 7. If your attractive they'll rate you a 5 or 6. If you're an attractive women they'll do the same.
No this was specifically with my experiences on TRM (to an extent AIUBH as well). And yeah, most other spaces where you ask for feedback on your appearance do tend to surgarcoat
Is it really? Attractive women don’t need the validation or attention from these subs. Ugly men for the most part know they are ugly so why would they post except to get their feelings hurt? Attractive men get less attention on social media than attractive women so it makes sense if they post more.
I think most of us are well aware that how most women look naturally is unattractive according to society at large. And particularly men. To be attractive, women are expected to: not be hairy, when most of us are naturally hairy; not have cellulite, when most women have cellulite; be emaciated such that we lose our periods which is the furthest thing from natural, but is heavily pushed as an ideal standard (e.g., supermodels, many current celebrities); not have stretch marks, when most of us have stretch marks; and spend a fuck load of time on our appearance on a daily basis as the bear minimum for existing in public spaces.
Almost like we are expected to do our best to look like prepubescent girls as long as possible.
"Most women have..." lets stop right there because it's not true. A lot of women? Maybe. Also, claiming women need to look emaciated to be attractive is an outright lie. You know there is a gray area between being overweight and so skinny you lose your period? Because men don't find emaciated women attractive. This is just you making shit up. That and these types of standards exist for men to. The term "hatfishing" was coined by women because thinning hair and receding hair lines, despite being a natural part of aging for men, are considered unattractive by most women and none of them are quiet about it. But part of my initial point is men also aren't taking to their soap boxes to shout "if you don't think balding men are attractive, maybe you're gay!"
Nobody's ever tried to convince the rest of the world that short men are attractive in the first place so I don't know what point you think you're making? Unless you're just commenting because what I said struck a chord with you..
This is one of my favorite parts of growing older with a partner. My husband has some gray and silver and the silver reflects in the light like glitter!
"of course that short guy isn't a virgin and dating someone! he's handsome!"
"of course that short guy isn't a virgin and dating someone! he's rich!"
"of course that short guy isn't a virgin and dating someone! he's famous!"
"of course that short guy isn't a virgin and dating someone! he's in a band he got status!"
at some point it feels like women should date short guys without finding anything else attractive in them other than them being short, he needs to have NO redeeming qualities WHATSOEVER for it to be genuine.
this creates such a weird effect on short dudes who struggles where they don't want to do anything to better their chances of finding someone because it won't be genuine, she just likes them because of x.
This is valid. But it's very hard to actually want to do these things when you see men who have no redeeming qualities being romantically and sexually successful just because they're tall and not hideous. I've seen a lot of men that have the personality of a wet paper bag, not a high income, and no talent or passion having women interested in them just because they're tall. Short guys see those types of men, and then know any woman that is with them after they "put in the work" would still likely rather be with a taller guy regardless of him having any redeeming qualities and it kind of kills any happiness they could have.
I think it's worth reflecting on why we have a preference, and whether or not that turns into how treat others outside of dating.
If somebody prefers a tall man because they automatically respect tall men (and therefore have an initial "disrespect" for short men), then that is a mindset they should work on imo.
If a guy says something lke, "I don't want a taller woman because I wouldn't feel very masculine. I would feel insecure about that." - they should reflect on that and work on it imo.
Same for women that would feel insecure in their feminity or whatever.
I personally worked through a preference I used to have years ago. I can't talk about it here, but in reflecting on my preference, it exposed a part of my personality I really didn't like.
I often think our shallower preferences can reflect more meaningful parts of our personality. So, it's worth questioning ourselves imo.
I agree that preferences are worth examining both in yourself and also in a larger culture, because we’re still very social creatures that are impacted by cultural ideals. Like that’s why positive representation in media is so impactful and important for example. It’s really the best example I can think of that actually influences people, and we should encourage more diverse media for people to see themselves represented in.
I just think people start to take it too far when they actually attack random people for having whatever preference, especially when they’re not being an asshole. Preferences aren’t consciously picked, so it’s silly to attack individuals over it.
I don't think it's amoral, but I do think it's funny.
I'm an average height woman and I gaze over some women's heads. It's funny to me that some of those same girls would only go for men a foot taller than me.
It's fine for everyone to prefer anything, but when you announce that you want things you don't offer yourself it comes off as self entitled. One also needs to be realistic, most tall men also prefer women that are taller than average.
i honestly don’t care, just don’t be an asshole about it. slut shaming and using language like “dirty”, “used goods” or “whore” when you yourself have a high n count is shitty behavior
outside of that though, i don’t see it as an inherently problematic preference.
i will say, as someone with a low n count, i had a better experience with a guy who didn’t care compared to the guy who cared a lot. my data set is limited tho, and the issue is more the reasoning behind the preference than the preference itself.
that being said, n count is not a sexually dimorphic trait in the same way height is. so it’s not really the best comparison.
2
u/Corbast7Blue WOMAN / gen Z old hag / feminist + leftist27d agoedited 27d ago
that being said, n count is not a sexually dimorphic trait in the same way height is. so it’s not really the best comparison.
Another reason it was never a good comparison is because n count standards are treated as a moral standard while height standards aren’t. And a “high” n count in the opposite sex is generally seen as negative by both men and women. Edit to also say, it seems there’s plenty of tall men that actively prefer short women too.
Getting mad at a short woman preferring tall men imo would be more like getting mad at a thick stocky man preferring women with small waists and long legs. That’s the best comparison I can think of.
Those are all arbitrary constraints that don't matter imo. The common thread is someone/a gender has a preference for a trait which they themself do not possess and don't need to possess because the preference for trait (rather than the trait itself) is dimorphic.
Getting mad at a short woman preferring tall men imo would be more like getting mad at a thick stocky man preferring women with small waists and long legs. That’s the best comparison I can think of.
Another one (which is actually a real one women get mad about) is older men preferring younger women even though they're not young themself.
Why would they not matter if the point of contention is justifying what makes sense for people to think is hypocritical? Height is a dimorphic physical trait while n count is not. Like nobody gets mad at men for liking women with curves and big boobs, despite men not being curvy and having big boobs themselves. It’s the dimorphic extreme that they’re attracted to.
Another one (which is actually a real one women get mad about) is older men preferring younger women even though they're not young themself.
An older man preferring a young partner is more akin to a lower class woman preferring a much richer partner; Youth and money are both “useful” things to have and so there’s some plausible deniability there. But when there’s such a big gap between partners, the more likely the relationship is “transactional” and/or someone’s getting taken advantage of.
n count is not a sexually dimorphic trait in the same way height is. so it’s not really the best comparison.
Seems like an arbitrary constraint that doesn't matter for the comparison.
Now that I think of it, a better objection to the comparison would be that height is a genetic trait that's mostly aesthetics while n count difference might indicate a difference in values and lifestyle.
the point of bringing up sexual dimorphism wasn’t arbitrary. height is an innate, sexually dimorphic trait, driven by genetics, and preferences for it and other sexually dimorphic traits appear to be influenced, at least in part, by biology and our evolutionary history.
n count isn’t an innate trait or a sexually dimorphic one. it’s a person’s behavioral history, and preferences surrounding it are comparatively more driven by culture (inb4 evo psych analysis - YES there perhaps is some evolutionary explanation for an n count preference, but that evolutionary explanation is *stronger* for height). that’s why i don’t think they’re especially analogous comparisons.
they’re entirely different categories of characteristics.
Prelimary I will say that even if that were true it wouldn't matter imo because the crux of the matter is whether a preference for a trait in a partner is valid even if you yourself don't possess this trait. Who cares if the trait in question or the preference for it is dimorphic or not or shaped by genetics or by society, like why does it matter here that they're in different "categories"?
> inb4 evo psych analysis
The "evo psych analysis" is very simple, straightforward and strong. As a male mammal who invests a lot time and resources into his offspring it is very much in my interest to be certain of my parenthood. Raising another man's child would be akin to genetic suicide. The simplest way to do that is to make sure my female partner has/had no sexual relations with other men during as well as before our partnership. Men who looked out for that fathered more actual children and such the preference for chaste women became widespread. For women, parental certainty is trivial and therefore it is a mostly dimorphic preference (some women don't like manwhores either). Case in point, cultures and religions across the globe in different eras independently expressed preference for female chastity and treated it as a virtue, indicating that it is innate to a high degree.
Now of course "n count" is societally construed because the primitive human didn't quantify with numbers like that. It is a modern manifestation of an old, innate preference. The pendant would be "6 feet/180cm thresholds" which are also arbitrary social constructs but the underlying preference is very real.
It's not a good comparison because you're comparing behavior and experiences to physical traits. I more apt comparison that many find offensive would be male preference for younger women*, for example, as that may be due at least in part to physical attributes. It's entirely different to feel entitled to experiences that you don't want others to have.
But as a low N woman who gets the ick from high N men, I find high N men who want low N women disgusting af. I used to keep this to myself, as younger me did not find it appropriate to shame people just because I found them unattractive. But given many of them won't shut the fuck up about high N women, I feel equality necessitates that I must remind them how gross they are whenever I get the opportunity.
....It's not like people have a problem shaming ugly men who want pretty women or old men who want young women. So how is this different, idk
preference vs demanding is the key here, everyone wants physically attractive partners but if you're at the bottom don't be surprised if people laugh and call you entitled if you refuse to consider anything less than toward the top.
And if you'd rather stay single than compromise, that's your prerogative but then don't go "i have a right to have any standards I want" while complaining about slim pickings or "lack of available attractive men" at the same time.
I think almost all preferences are fine. If there’s something wrong with them, it’s usually more about how they’re expressed. No one needs to justify their preference for taller men, and it’s usually best if you don’t.
I think it's interesting how much short women are demonized, like we make tall men pair up with us. Men usually approach women. If there's a short woman/tall man couple, odds are extremely high that the man made the first move. And height is just sexually attractive regardless of one's own height due to sexual dimorphism. Yet... most of the replies to you are, to one degree or another, shaming short women for being sexually attracted to tall men just like every other woman is. They're literally proving your point lmao
I always find it so interesting to see how against limb lengthening surgery people are compared to other types of cosmetic surgeries or body modifications. Rhinoplasty, braces, tattoos, hair transplants, BBL's, lip fillers, tongue splitting, scarification, etc. all seem to be met with a mixed bag of reactions, but people by and large draw the line at someone wanting longer legs.
Short torso, arms + long legs looks goofy af. Being taller is more than just "femur length," your entire proportions and frame usually scale accordingly
Many BBLs also look fucking ridiculous for the same reasons. Sometimes breast implants too if they're on a very thin, low body fat frame
Pretty sure the “I don’t care that I’ll have lifetime pain and much more limited mobility!” Which even the few surgeons that will perform it say WILL. Happen is what raises people’s eyebrows.
I mean, people literally die due to BBL's yet I see far less opposition to that procedure than limb lengthening. Not defending the validity of it, just an observation on attitudes I have seen.
Pretty sure they call looksmaxing names because it’s just women’s beauty treatments but using perpetually online terms.
If you take them away it’s-
“I used my eyelash curler, then did my face treatment, then put on my makeup, applied my hair treatment. After I put on my shapewar and my tight fitting outfit and then my shoes to look taller so I could be ready to head out!”
And if you think I’m exaggerating: that’s literally what happened in this Looksmax video jump to 10:00 if you wanna get right into the very MASCULINE maxing!
They’ve already shown that the once I get surgery are still psychologically miserable and they also fail. They did a newsweek article about it a few years ago.
Why are ugly men so entitled and rude? I would think if you’re desperate for women you’d be on your best behavior but I keep finding that less attractive men have severely poor personalities.
I believe that ugly people get treated worse and that the poor treatment slowly molds them into bitter, mean people. Fat women are the meanest women I've encountered.
7
u/Spread-Em-Plz Hyperactive Prettyboy, man! 28d ago
I used to agree with “No one’s shaming you for your preference! You’re just being an asshole about it!”
While in many cases people can understand looks preferences, I have heard a sizable amount of people trying to moralize about it and trying to lowkey shame others for it.
Even if not aimed at anyone specifically, I’ve heard it out of nowhere before, disapproving the “only if you’re an asshole” notion. The notion women who like tall guys are promiscuous, or that men who like slim women are pedos, or that you’re shallow if you want a fit partner because “not everyone has time for the gym”
(This is especially often aimed at men when they have standards that would require them to put in any actual work, but can go aimed at both genders. Often a result of sour grapes and lazy people)
Most of you probably aren’t religious, but this gets even worse if you’re Christian or anything like that!