Choose your Daddy

[ey****]

1 minute ago, devilsdreams said:

Yes there are some women and subs that are not height supremacists but again they are the exception to the rule……which all rules have right?

Prove it.

Find proof that the majority of women are "height supremacists". 

[de****]

15 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

Prove it.

Find proof that the majority of women are "height supremacists". 

1 this is common knowledge that the overwhelming majority of women prefer taller men. 2 if they didn’t, if women chose shorter or same height men via natural selection, then the ratio of taller men would’ve much lower after 100,000+ years of humanity. But anyone with a rational mind can see that on average that’s not true, that generally men are taller than women. 3 there’s a decade of okcupid, plenty of fish data and other dating apps that proves it (can’t post links here). 4 it makes physical and logical sense that her partner is taller and stronger to protect her and her *** from predators and produce successful offspring. 5 it makes sense that a dom is taller and stronger because if a sun can overpower him it kinda ruins the authenticity of the dynamic. 6 have you ever heard of a woman saying “I like shorter men”?

Is that enough for you or do you need more? As I see it, your responses seem to be that you are upset over the truth. That you are fighting for equal outcome of all shapes and sizes. That’s the heart of the point that I think YOU lamented. Tgat people don’t choose who they are attracted to, yet still have preferences.

[ey****]

your 'common knowledge' is still an unproven variable

the breeding choice of women has nothing to do with the changes in mens height over time

however, it is true that men are, on average, taller than women - this doesn't, however, prove that women prefer taller men - or, specifically, would automatically reject someone because they were shorter.

But also

the way you presented was that women would only even accept taller men, that women who weren't "height supremacists" were an exception to the rule.  

Of course, statistically, most women would have a taller partner because men are, on average, taller than women - but statistical averages doesn't tie in with not only preferences, but what they would outright reject.

 

I'm not upset by any truth. I'm just disappointed you choose to misrepresent things as being facts or truth.  

That, also, you came under a guise of "learning" yet had already made your mind up and have argued with anyone who disagrees with you, this does not mean the post was in good faith.

[De****]

1 hour ago, eyemblacksheep said:

I also wasn't going to go there, but... 2+2 doesn't always equal 4.

Some of this isn't basic maths, but, not always how we're taught.  An easier to explain example isn't using 2+2 but, for example

8+7=3

10+6=1

6+6=1.5

in those cases, 8am plus 7 hours is 3pm

10 ounces plus 6 ounces = 1 pound

6 pints plus 6 pints = 1.5 gallons

We accept 2+2=4 actually, for most people, it's taught without question.  That it's taught as matter-of-fact that 2 and 2 is 4, when it's not always - and it's only if you've proved it via advance calculus that you have evidence that in the most traditional sense 2+2=4 

I guess another one is we're taught the square root of 4 is 2, because 2x2 is 4 - but -2x-2 is also 4, so the square root of 4 is actually +/- 2 

I appreciate that this seems off topic but to wind it back in - it's a good example of how we can't state we know everything.   

There's a lot of facts presented on this thread (looks is most important, sub girls always want taller stronger Dominants etc.) which are simply assumptions and not truth.  Even if, they can be true.  

I enjoy the way your mind works 🥰

[Deleted Member]

2 hours ago, devilsdreams said:

How would your partner feel if you admitted to them that you are not with them “because of their looks”. 2+2=4 aside from learning g what the characters mean and how that equation works there nothing more that needs to be learned about it. My point is, there are instances where it’s possible to know everything about a thing. But in a broader context, experts in their field can be “pro efficient” in their vocation. That’s not limited to working, people can most certainly become experts on their partners. Which brings me back to my original post, you can make assumptions and act impulsively towards choosing your daddy, or you can do all the research you can about them and the act you want to do with them.

“proficient”
Pro effecient isnt anything. A business name perhaps…… 🤣 you talk allot and say little.

[De****]

22 minutes ago, UnicornFury said:

“proficient”
Pro effecient isnt anything. A business name perhaps…… 🤣 you talk allot and say little.

Case and point. Why I love you, master. You crack me up with your wit.

[Deleted Member]

Pseudo intelligence at work. Each person individually chooses weather they care about looks or personality more for each person and relationship type. When I’m adding a third looks matter more because they matter to my partner. When I’m looking for myself they almost don’t matter because I’m looking at sexual compatibility first and if they do cool vanilla activities. A lot of people don’t actually care about height they care about the attitude that comes with it imo taller men are less insecure and better behaved because society and other men treat them better than short men. Hence terms like napoleon syndrome and the newer 5”5’ attitude.

[ey****]

35 minutes ago, denver725 said:

I enjoy the way your mind works 🥰

ah thank you

there's a lot used to interest me in maths (a lot still does) but for example - there's a lot of the maths quizes do the rounds which are designed to get people to argue in the comments because they all come down to a a+b*c equation and of course some people work left to right, some multiply b&c first - a lot depends on how they were taught.

But for me, the context is important.  To say 2+2=4 depends on what each things means.  Certainly adding 2 quarts to 2 quarts - no one would say 4 quarts.   

And sometimes this is important in clarifying points and on the context.   

But still. Two plus two is usually four. It's generally accepted despite the exceptions.

And there is a lot in kink I think is generally accepted despite the exceptions - but a lot which people present as fact which is anecdotal, which has happened here

We wouldn't go round presenting 2+2=1 because 4 quarts is a gallon

Like. I did find a study about preferences and yes, women - according to these studies prefer to date men taller than them.  Fittingly, same study has men preferring to date women shorter than them - so win/win, ha

But... we got that 48.9% prefer to date only men taller than them.  And some of those words are meaningless.  Some less so. There's incomplete data.  For example do the other 51.1% prefer to date men shorter than them? Or, simply not care as a big issue.

And of these 48.9% who prefer to date men taller than them, while this is a preference how many of those would rule out someone shorter?  It's incomplete and this is part the problem with a lot of studies.

But regardless, it certainly doesn't bring data suggesting that dating men who are shorter is in any way an anomality.   Obviously some of this may change slightly in a D/s setting - and firstly - there's a couple of female subs I can think of who are over six foot so if they can find a taller Dominant then good luck to them, ha.  But certainly as someone who has been active on my kink community for quite some time, this is pretty anecdotal but the guys not getting play or relationships aren't the short guys - it's certainly hinging on attitude.  But, that's also anecdotal and doesn't match with stats.

And there's bits I'm not sure where things are going - but - yeah, a lot of people have a preference and that's cool.  But there's no group which is totally outside of every preference.  I know men sometimes like to try to justify their own poor results ("I'm too short", "not handsome enough", "no rich enough", etc) and while there are some stuff which may seemingly make things easier - nothing accounts for a personality and a good attitude.  

Because, hey, trust me. I'm 41, a few extra pounds (weight, not in my bank account), balding, not conventionally anything - but... I do OK. Either I'm the exception to every norm or women aren't as shallow as some like to imply.  

 

[de****]

Friday at 04:06 PM, eyemblacksheep said:

ah thank you

there's a lot used to interest me in maths (a lot still does) but for example - there's a lot of the maths quizes do the rounds which are designed to get people to argue in the comments because they all come down to a a+b*c equation and of course some people work left to right, some multiply b&c first - a lot depends on how they were taught.

But for me, the context is important.  To say 2+2=4 depends on what each things means.  Certainly adding 2 quarts to 2 quarts - no one would say 4 quarts.   

And sometimes this is important in clarifying points and on the context.   

But still. Two plus two is usually four. It's generally accepted despite the exceptions.

And there is a lot in kink I think is generally accepted despite the exceptions - but a lot which people present as fact which is anecdotal, which has happened here

We wouldn't go round presenting 2+2=1 because 4 quarts is a gallon

Like. I did find a study about preferences and yes, women - according to these studies prefer to date men taller than them.  Fittingly, same study has men preferring to date women shorter than them - so win/win, ha

But... we got that 48.9% prefer to date only men taller than them.  And some of those words are meaningless.  Some less so. There's incomplete data.  For example do the other 51.1% prefer to date men shorter than them? Or, simply not care as a big issue.

And of these 48.9% who prefer to date men taller than them, while this is a preference how many of those would rule out someone shorter?  It's incomplete and this is part the problem with a lot of studies.

But regardless, it certainly doesn't bring data suggesting that dating men who are shorter is in any way an anomality.   Obviously some of this may change slightly in a D/s setting - and firstly - there's a couple of female subs I can think of who are over six foot so if they can find a taller Dominant then good luck to them, ha.  But certainly as someone who has been active on my kink community for quite some time, this is pretty anecdotal but the guys not getting play or relationships aren't the short guys - it's certainly hinging on attitude.  But, that's also anecdotal and doesn't match with stats.

And there's bits I'm not sure where things are going - but - yeah, a lot of people have a preference and that's cool.  But there's no group which is totally outside of every preference.  I know men sometimes like to try to justify their own poor results ("I'm too short", "not handsome enough", "no rich enough", etc) and while there are some stuff which may seemingly make things easier - nothing accounts for a personality and a good attitude.  

Because, hey, trust me. I'm 41, a few extra pounds (weight, not in my bank account), balding, not conventionally anything - but... I do OK. Either I'm the exception to every norm or women aren't as shallow as some like to imply.  

 

267+5410=5677 blows a hole through your theory. It doesn’t allow you to be dishonest by manipulating context. “There’s no group which is totally outside of every preference”, this is the same sweeping generalization that I’m being accused of. To which both of us can argue, it’s not my rule, because humans can’t control evolution in the long run. Though, just as a humans can make reasonable assumptions (like the sun will come up tomorrow), humans can make reasonable generalizations (like the overwhelming majority of humans wouldn’t knowingly pick a partner that intends to kill them) towards “preference”. Where I think your argument fails is you haven’t made a solid case of chosen preference vs involuntary attraction in which takes priority and when, particularly when it comes to choosing a partner, a dom, a master, etc. perhaps that confusion of yours is why you are doing just “ok” and not doing extremely well……that is if you are correct in that there are no generalized preferences among sexes and dynamics.

[de****]

Friday at 03:02 PM, UnicornFury said:

“proficient”
Pro effecient isnt anything. A business name perhaps…… 🤣 you talk allot and say little.

“A lot” two words. You could do to take your own advice.

[ey****]

5 hours ago, devilsdreams said:

perhaps that confusion of yours is why you are doing just “ok” and not doing extremely well…

on one hand, I was being modest.   

But on another - how well someone is doing would depend on their objectives.

For example - if someone goes out to, say, a local fetish club every month and has some form of play/scene with one person or another most months - then some people would be very happy with that.   But if someone was like, "OK, they're happy for casual play, but I want a partner I live with and we're in an ongoing relationship" they're not getting what they want.

I am very happily married for almost 7 years with someone I started dating 14 years ago.  We have a non-mono set up and during this time we've both had additional relationships.  Alongside different levels of casual play.  I have not had a shortage of opportunities.

Obviously there are things I can offer and things I cannot - there's been some damn good people on this site who I cannot be what they were looking for (mono / live near them / etc) as there are many for who I can. As I've proven time and time again.

Do I get turned down sometimes because people don't find me physically attractive? I mean.  Probably.  But enough people either do not care about my physical appearance because there is enough else they get, or happen to find me attractive enough despite me not deemed conventionally attractive.

When I was younger, there were times I struggled a bit and in my head yeah I got angry and blamed people for being shallow, frustrated I wasn't this or wasn't that - but actually, my own attitude there was something that was really letting me down.  And of course, everyone has dealbreakers, but "ugh, he's not attractive" or "he's too short" or whatever are not universal deal breakers. They're not even an anomality. 

[de****]

I opt to avoid the anecdotal because personal situations don’t help the community at large. But I will go there despite highly questionable moderator activity. We also collectively know from dating apps (including this one) that 100 percent of women “prefer” the top 7-10 percent of men and will actually only agree to go out with 3-5 percent of the top men (on dating apps). Cupid and POF publishes this data. This means that top men are shared, which works for poly men. There’s also the “forbidden fruit” aspect to attraction which doesn’t work for poly men because they aren’t forbidden. That said, people go after the love they think they deserve or the manipulative people go after people they think they can take advantage of. Knowing this is extremely important in bdsm. Someone who thinks they are “damaged goods” will go after someone else that at least on the surface looks like they could be damaged goods, because they don’t think they can do better. But, you seem to be upset at what you think my message is that “all women are shallow”. Which is not my sentiment at all, never said that. I said that the overwhelming Mano of women choose taller men for attraction AND protection AND success of relationship reasons. That subs choose taller and stronger doms because it fits the dynamic properly. Those are not my rules, just like this apps are not my rules (however unjust they are), it’s the way it is. You want to battle those unjust rules, women being height supremacists, I’m right there with you. And for sure there certainly are anomalies, I get flagged for “off topic” and you don’t eleven though we are both discussed math, but again we don’t rule the world based on anomalies.

[Rena-5651]

? My eyebrow lifted up seeing the op responses to his question, the way I see it is why debate basically about something you believe is strongly a fact in your pov. Not taking in others opinions? I think we should just leave this post alone 😅 if the op is just going back in forth Abt it.

[ey****]

24 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

100 percent of women “prefer” the top 7-10 percent of men and will actually only agree to go out with 3-5 percent of the top men (on dating apps). Cupid and POF publishes this data.

Actually the study which was based on the data suggested that 80% of women were matching with the top 20% of men - it was also an old study and flawed in many ways.  It's been wildly debunked.

26 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

I said that the overwhelming Mano of women choose taller men for attraction AND protection AND success of relationship reasons. That subs choose taller and stronger doms because it fits the dynamic properly

you keep saying this but have been unable to give anything to back it up aside from your own prejudice.

26 minutes ago, devilsdreams said:

I get flagged for “off topic” and you don’t eleven though we are both discussed math, but again we don’t rule the world based on anomalies.

I know you got flagged because you said it.   You would have no way of knowing what I had or had not been flagged for.  

Given your constant snide remarks about the moderators it's no wonder you run into problems.  I'm surprised more of your stuff hasn't been flagged.

[ey****]

17 minutes ago, Rena-5651 said:

? My eyebrow lifted up seeing the op responses to his question, the way I see it is why debate basically about something you believe is strongly a fact in your pov. Not taking in others opinions? I think we should just leave this post alone 😅 if the op is just going back in forth Abt it.

this is the problem. he doesn't want to learn. he doesn't want to discuss new ideas.  He just wants to be right.

I'd suspect the reason women don't want to go out with him isn't cos his looks or height but because of his attitude.

[MasterDarcy1979]

For me it's not complex.

I need to know everything about a potential submissive. It's a requisite. No getting past it, nor Is there any bypassing it.

I begin with a simple interview phase, which is informal.

I have great instincts when it comes to people. Plus, being a writer, I can ascertain a lot from which words that a person uses, or doesn't use.

If she passes the interview phase then just will expect her to send me a lengthy and detailed email.

Instant messaging is fine for banter, etc, but in order to convey detail and information, emails are a modern incarnation of letters.

I'm a demisexual, so, I need to form an emotional bond with a person before I can feel any type of attraction towards them.

I'm also a psychological Dominant who puts stock in the power of the mind. In order to able to control and affect a mind, you must first know how it works.

Is it ALL about looks? No. I've known plenty of absolutely gorgeous women who have been horrible people. That presses the kill switch as far as I'm concerned.

If a woman has spectacular looks but she's a humourless, morally corrupt shell of a human being, she will look like a contender for Miss Hunchback 2023.

There's no doubt, though, there must be a mutual attraction.

Looks aren't more or less important than character and personality.

[de****]

47 minutes ago, Rena-5651 said:

? My eyebrow lifted up seeing the op responses to his question, the way I see it is why debate basically about something you believe is strongly a fact in your pov. Not taking in others opinions? I think we should just leave this post alone 😅 if the op is just going back in forth Abt it.

Because I want to hear all sides of the story so as to NOT be biased. However, if you did indeed read my posts you would have already read “I obviously started from nothing and gained my knowledge, which means it is possible for my mind to change, but your not going to do it by merely stating “I’m right, you’re wrong because I said so”, i require a much more convincing argument than the arguments I’ve already heard to change my mind”. Paraphrasing my own words somewhat, but same gist.

[de****]

34 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

this is the problem. he doesn't want to learn. he doesn't want to discuss new ideas.  He just wants to be right.

I'd suspect the reason women don't want to go out with him isn't cos his looks or height but because of his attitude.

I’ve posted 6 threads in the past week or so. I think you can go to my page and verify such. Meaning yoyr assertion that I am not into discussion and not into new ideas are both false facts, verifiably. You should consider doing your research before you discuss topics and ask questions for verification because assumptions are relevant quickest route to bigotry.

[FETMOD-KF]

After consideration

while the last comments are allowed to stand, this is a thread that has been going nowhere for a while and isn't getting much better.

So, I think to stop this never ending circle - we'll call it here.