Online dating: he seriously exaggerated his height, how to let him down politely?

[smackie9]

1 hour ago, MeganDoll said:

But when you meet people sometimes your preferences go out the window.. With old you can’t see facial expressions or personality or charisma..

Sure theres some people who draw a hard line in the sand with physical attributes but most people are flexible when it comes to certain traits they prefer when they meet somebody they really connect with which is not easy to find..

 

I haven’t met many women who say they met a great guy last night felt a connection  but he’s 5’7 or 5’8 and 5’9 is their  cut off.. Or a man who met a women he talked hours with and found attractive but she only had B cups and he likes at least C’s.

Most people are somewhat flexible when they meet the right person..

with old people are reduced to nothing but stats.

 

 

 

That's why going out and meeting people irl scores more benefit than old.

[Shining One]

9 hours ago, Cookiesandough said:

Oh okay I don’t use match. I use OkCupid. I don’t think there’s an income filter. 

There may not be a filter option, but there must be a data field for it. They collected this data years ago.

9 hours ago, Cookiesandough said:

Not convinced it’s the biggest indicator of success on Match, even if it’s one of the most used filters on there

I'd concur that it's not the biggest indicator unless I saw some recent data showing that it was. However, as the OKCupid data above shows, it certainly has a strong effect.

[Shining One]

Back on the topic of height, OKCupid gathered some data on that too. Apparently, both men and women commonly exaggerate their height. 

Almost universally guys like to add a couple inches to their height. You can also see a more subtle vanity at work: starting at roughly 5' 8", the top of the dotted curve tilts even further rightward. This means that guys as they get closer to six feet round up a bit more than usual, stretching for that coveted psychological benchmark.

When we looked into the data for women, the height exaggeration was just as widespread, though without the lurch towards a benchmark height.

I find the women's height exaggeration puzzling, as shorter women get more attention while taller men get more attention

[nospam99]

@shining one. I 'joined' OKC in late '17. Their is no income filter today. I never provided information on my income. I just checked and I did not find any way to specify my income. Match.com used to have a field where users could enter AND filter on SALARY (not income) but that field was removed months ago.

[Shining One]

3 minutes ago, nospam99 said:

Their is no income filter today. I never provided information on my income. I just checked and I did not find any way to specify my income. Match.com used to have a field where users could enter AND filter on SALARY (not income) but that field was removed months ago.

Interesting. That would explain why there is no recent data on income and how it relates to messages. The OKCupid data I referenced above was from 2010.

[sothereiwas]

4 minutes ago, Shining One said:

That would explain why there is no recent data on income and how it relates to messages. The OKCupid data I referenced above was from 2010.

Simply removing an explicit data field isn't going to reverse human nature in a decade. The data is still data. Just saying. 

[Hopeful30]

On 2/10/2020 at 11:11 PM, chillii said:

 

Exactly , matter of fact l don't make that much these days , made no difference and lf l was to meet someone and she actually asked that , l'd kiss her arse goodbye right there. And when l use to make very good money that made no difference either anyway , but if it was to make a difference with some woman l'd kiss her arse goodbye too. l actually met far far better quality girls broke and driving old cars before that period anyway. lf l did start going for better money again though l'd happily spend in on my woman , because not only is she a very special person but she's had a fairly hard life and deserves it but what means more than anything to her is me and our relationship, that's the kind of woman l'll happily spend money on.

l mean these guys that talk like that must have about the worst taste in the offest of women l ever saw

 

 A woman who wants to start a family will consider a man's income and overall money-making abilities. This ties into how the relationship dynamic would shift during pregnancy and early child-rearing, so having moral and financial support is important during these times. Disqualifying a woman based on these inquiries is premature. She is considering how stable and secure you would be as a father, similar to how men consider a woman's nurturing ability if he wants his children to be raised by a caring mother. Nothing wrong about considering these qualities.

On 2/12/2020 at 1:51 AM, Shining One said:

Have you seen any studies documenting this? I'd imagine the ethnicity and height filters being used more often than the income filter.

The thing is, ethnicity and height are permanent traits. Income fluctuates. Therefore it makes more sense to be selective about non-changeable traits than qualities that are temporary. 

Edited February 13, 2020 by Hopeful30

[Els]

On 2/11/2020 at 11:47 AM, Shining One said:

Match has a data field for income brackets with the largest being $150,000+ (at the last time I checked). People can filter matches by income bracket if they so choose.

To be honest, if I saw someone reveal their income publicly on a dating site, I'd guess that they either aren't very smart or don't mind being used for money. Prime target for Nigerian prince scams.

[sothereiwas]

22 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

The thing is, ethnicity and height are permanent traits. Income fluctuates. Therefore it makes more sense to be selective about non-changeable traits than qualities that are temporary. 

Income does fluctuate but a high earner now is more likely to be a high earner later, or more to the point, someone with drive who is on a promising career track now is likely to continue on that trajectory. The race isn't always to the swift, but that's where the smart money bets, to torture a proverb. 

[Hopeful30]

17 minutes ago, sothereiwas said:

Income does fluctuate but a high earner now is more likely to be a high earner later, or more to the point, someone with drive who is on a promising career track now is likely to continue on that trajectory. The race isn't always to the swift, but that's where the smart money bets, to torture a proverb. 

Men in their 20's are often learning how to build their income, so while income may be in the early stages, I think character is a stronger indicator of financial success during this period (work ethic, opportunistic, mindset, etc). A man in his 40's who isn't already on his feet, I believe will likely continue on the same trajectory. Then again, I've seen may exceptions when people's financial success skyrockets later in life *shrugs*

[sothereiwas]

4 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

Men in their 20's are often learning how to build their income

I would say more accurately that any man who is going to earn well will spend his 20's learning how; often men in their 20's learn how to drink and fool around, which is why most of them won't ever be high earners. 

[Hopeful30]

21 minutes ago, sothereiwas said:

I would say more accurately that any man who is going to earn well will spend his 20's learning how; often men in their 20's learn how to drink and fool around, which is why most of them won't ever be high earners. 

Therefore character is a stronger indicator of financial success

[sothereiwas]

8 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

Therefore character is a stronger indicator of financial success

I'll have to disagree. I know plenty of decent fellows who will never be high earners. Lack of ability, interest in areas that don't pay well, a long list of things that don't reflect poorly on character will prevent them from making it. The winners will have strong character traits but this is one of those fish and salmon deals IME. 

[Hopeful30]

2 hours ago, sothereiwas said:

I'll have to disagree. I know plenty of decent fellows who will never be high earners. Lack of ability, interest in areas that don't pay well, a long list of things that don't reflect poorly on character will prevent them from making it. The winners will have strong character traits but this is one of those fish and salmon deals IME. 

I have a relative who is a welder. He started out doing basic welding work, then moved onto creating military grade equipment, and now he's a millionaire because he patented new ways of welding materials that are used by motor-vehicle manufacturers worldwide. Welding often falls into the category of 'doesn't pay well' and 'reflects poorly on character' yet this guy made it a success.

As long as you're doing what you love, there is always room for growth and prosperity. Heck, there are millionaires who rose to their success by making a unique type of pie. It's all about character. If you have a lack of ability, then you're in the wrong profession. 

[sothereiwas]

3 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

Welding often falls into the category of 'doesn't pay well' and 'reflects poorly on character' yet this guy made it a success.

First there will always be exceptions - we call them exceptions because they are exceptional. Second, I wouldn't call an entrepreneur who has a good trade a person with bad character or in the doesn't pay well category. One brother is an electrician and another brother is a general contractor. They're both doing well. The BA holders who serve them coffee or try to sell them hot tubs, not so much. 

[Els]

Everyone is completely within their rights to want whatever they want in a partner, be it a certain income or appearance, height, weigjt, whatever. That said, I don't think that a good character is necessarily correlated with income, and based on some of the extremely high income people I know, I think that there is actually an inverse correlation at some point. The majority of people I know who make >$400k a year are kinda... well... let's just say I'd never want to be their partner, lol.

I do think that being gainfully employed and earning enough to support himself without having to depend on anyone else is an indicator of good character.

[norealusername]

I used match long before smartphones and dating apps existed. That was when I discovered I was revolting to women because I was 5'8".

The women listed their height requirement on match. More than 50% had minimum height requirement of 6'. Some would grudgingly accept 5'10". Only 20% would accept shorter than that. So you were basically invisible if you were a male of average height. 

Of course, in real life, most of these women would date an average height male but on the Internet, forget it. 

That said, it's not cool to lie about your height and the OP should tell the guy this bluntly. If he fibbed just one inch, maybe, but more than that isn't cool. 

[central]

11 minutes ago, norealusername said:

I used match long before smartphones and dating apps existed. That was when I discovered I was revolting to women because I was 5'8". 

That was the time when I did most of my online dating, too. However, I was 5'9" at best, and put that on my profile. I had more dates than I could handle, so I had to screen heavily to choose whom I'd meet. I really don't think height is as significant as you think - perhaps there were other factors that were more important than you wanted to acknowledge?

[norealusername]

12 minutes ago, central said:

That was the time when I did most of my online dating, too. However, I was 5'9" at best, and put that on my profile. I had more dates than I could handle, so I had to screen heavily to choose whom I'd meet. I really don't think height is as significant as you think - perhaps there were other factors that were more important than you wanted to acknowledge?

No, that was the biggest factor. I'm glad you worked around it. I hardly messaged anyone on there because I didn't meet the height requirements. I quit after a month, didn't use Internet dating again until the smartphone. Had better luck and at least it's free now. 

[dramafreezone]

You don't have to let him down politely.  You can be as curt as you'd like.  This guy misrepresented himself and is lacking integrity.  Tell him that and move on.

[simpycurious]

On 2/27/2020 at 7:46 PM, central said:

That was the time when I did most of my online dating, too. However, I was 5'9" at best, and put that on my profile. I had more dates than I could handle, so I had to screen heavily to choose whom I'd meet. I really don't think height is as significant as you think - perhaps there were other factors that were more important than you wanted to acknowledge?

I am not even sure what is considered tall or short anymore. I am 6'1 and don't feel tall at all.

I would doubt MOST women would eliminate someone (from dating) simply based on their height.

[salparadise]

2 minutes ago, simpycurious said:

I would doubt MOST women would eliminate someone (from dating) simply based on their height.

The reason you don't see it is that you're over six feet––it's like being white and saying you don't think racism is a thing. If you pay attention to dating profiles you'll see quite a few stating a minimum height. Many of these women are above average height themselves. Women typically want the man to be at least a few inches taller, but there are many who prefer six feet plus even if they're average themselves. Who knows how many have this preference and don't want to admit it or put it in their profile. I don't think it's any revelation that being shorter is a handicap for men. It's not much different than men preferring a pretty face or a nice figure. People have preferences, and many are gender specific. The main difference here is that men are more adaptable.

[Ellener]

46 minutes ago, salparadise said:

The reason you don't see it is that you're over six feet––it's like being white and saying you don't think racism is a thing. If you pay attention to dating profiles you'll see quite a few stating a minimum height. Many of these women are above average height themselves. Women typically want the man to be at least a few inches taller, but there are many who prefer six feet plus even if they're average themselves. Who knows how many have this preference and don't want to admit it or put it in their profile. I don't think it's any revelation that being shorter is a handicap for men. It's not much different than men preferring a pretty face or a nice figure. People have preferences, and many are gender specific. The main difference here is that men are more adaptable.

It's all a bit weird to me, height obsession, or any other superficial obsession for that matter. I have a disability in my feet which I don't put on my match.com profile but it will come up if someone wants to go running or something, I have no embarrassment about it and frankly anyone who would have a problem with it isn't a serious contender for a relationship!

I'm way more interested in someone's personality, character, attractive attributes than critiquing them- there will be something to find fault with about everyone if I go looking for it. 

I have read loads about people finding someone they thought was perfect for them, only to find subsequenty they are mean or self-obsessed or angry or something negative: maybe looking at those aspects of a potential mate first instead of physical appearance would be more fruitful.

[salparadise]

10 minutes ago, Ellener said:

It's all a bit weird to me, height obsession, or any other superficial obsession for that matter.

Yea, that's all good in theory, but there aren't many (of either gender) who aren't attracted to physical characteristics in the realm of mate selection. How often do you see really good looking people paired up with decidedly unattractive people? Occasionally you may see an attractive woman with with a less attractive man if the man is wealthy, but even in such cases you don't often see a huge disparity.

People have to work with what they've got––there is no other choice. Most are adaptable to the degree they need to be. It's when a perceived shortcoming results in serious esteem issues that it causes trouble. 

[Ellener]

8 minutes ago, salparadise said:

How often do you see really good looking people paired up with decidedly unattractive people? Occasionally you may see an attractive woman with with a less attractive man if the man is wealthy, but even in such cases you don't often see a huge disparity.

People have to work with what they've got––there is no other choice. Most are adaptable to the degree they need to be. It's when a perceived shortcoming results in serious esteem issues that it causes trouble. 

It's all very subjective, what is 'attractive' or not.

Look at the current unattractive US President and his very attractive wife! When John Major was UK PM he had an affair with a woman called Edwina Curry...both unlikely love-objects on many levels!