 |
|
|
03-23-2010, 02:22 PM
|
|
|
|
62 posts, read 58,341 times
Reputation: 58
|
|
|
This may be a bit off-topic but this has been making me wonder.
I find it interesting that 5'8, 5'9 is considered short for a male, but tall for a woman.
As a matter a fact it seems that any woman over 5'4/5'5 is considered tall, but a man that height is considered short.
Why is that?
|
|
03-23-2010, 02:41 PM
|
|
|
|
332 posts, read 264,199 times
Reputation: 166
|
|
Quote:
I find it interesting that 5'8, 5'9 is considered short for a male, but tall for a woman.
|
A 5'9" man is for example "short" by Scandinavian standards, which is the land of the tall Nordic blonds. But if you are a man who is 5'9" and you live in Mexico the land of the short Aztecs and Mestizos, than 5'9" is not considered short at all. |
|
03-23-2010, 03:08 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Austin, TX
1,898 posts, read 1,427,311 times
Reputation: 2205
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Classy Sis
This may be a bit off-topic but this has been making me wonder.
I find it interesting that 5'8, 5'9 is considered short for a male, but tall for a woman.
As a matter a fact it seems that any woman over 5'4/5'5 is considered tall, but a man that height is considered short.
Why is that?
|
Because on average, men are genetically taller than women. |
|
03-23-2010, 04:03 PM
|
|
|
|
332 posts, read 264,199 times
Reputation: 166
|
|
Quote:
|
Because on average, men are genetically taller than women.
|
That is true, but it still does not change the fact that most men in the world are not 6'6" or anywhere close to that. SO A 6'6" WOMAN WOULD TOWER OVER MOST MEN, AND NOT JUST TOWER OVER MOST WOMEN. SHE WOULD TOWER OVER MOST HUMAN BEINGS PERIOD. |
|
03-23-2010, 05:42 PM
|
|
|
|
437 posts, read 311,674 times
Reputation: 343
|
|
|
From an aesthetic point of view, I can appreciate the grace of a tall woman. Just look at Gabrielle Reece in her athletic glory.
On a more personal note though, I've always liked petite women. I've dated as short at 4'11" and right now one of my girls is 5'1". It's just nice to be able to pick her up and carry her upstairs to the bedroom.
On another note, since most women tend to like men taller than they are, that's probably another reason why I wouldn't approach a tall woman except for practice- I'd just assume that she would want someone taller than my 5'9" self even though such an assumption might be in error.
|
|
03-23-2010, 06:09 PM
|
|
|
|
62 posts, read 58,341 times
Reputation: 58
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by passionatearts
Because on average, men are genetically taller than women.
|
But that has NOTHING to do with the fact that if a woman is over 5'4/5'5, she's considered tall, but a man the EXACT same height is considered short. |
|
03-23-2010, 06:13 PM
|
|
|
|
62 posts, read 58,341 times
Reputation: 58
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ameiko
From an aesthetic point of view, I can appreciate the grace of a tall woman. Just look at Gabrielle Reece in her athletic glory.
On a more personal note though, I've always liked petite women. I've dated as short at 4'11" and right now one of my girls is 5'1". It's just nice to be able to pick her up and carry her upstairs to the bedroom.
On another note, since most women tend to like men taller than they are, that's probably another reason why I wouldn't approach a tall woman except for practice- I'd just assume that she would want someone taller than my 5'9" self even though such an assumption might be in error.
|
That's interesting. What would you cosider tall for a woman? |
|
03-23-2010, 06:15 PM
|
|
|
|
62 posts, read 58,341 times
Reputation: 58
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golem1979
A 5'9" man is for example "short" by Scandinavian standards, which is the land of the tall Nordic blonds. But if you are a man who is 5'9" and you live in Mexico the land of the short Aztecs and Mestizos, than 5'9" is not considered short at all.
|
I'm talking from AMERICAN standards, which are pretty screwed up, IMO. |
|
03-23-2010, 06:15 PM
|
|
|
|
332 posts, read 264,199 times
Reputation: 166
|
|
Quote:
|
But that has NOTHING to do with the fact that if a woman is over 5'4/5'5, she's considered tall, but a man the EXACT same height is considered short.
|
A woman who is that height would be considered short by supermodel standards. |
|
03-23-2010, 06:21 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: The Hall of Justice
17,912 posts, read 11,895,382 times
Reputation: 23305
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Classy Sis
But that has NOTHING to do with the fact that if a woman is over 5'4/5'5, she's considered tall, but a man the EXACT same height is considered short.
|
It makes sense to me. A tall woman (BTW, 5'5" is still short for a woman, in my book) is generally considered a woman who is taller than the average woman, not the average man or even the average person.
It's not like tall can mean anything over X feet high. A tall tree or tall building is measured differently, for instance. |
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
|
