I Like Huge Breasts in the Same Way You Like Tall Guys
I suppose in the classical sense of the word I am “short” guy. At 5'5" that puts me well below the average Canadian male who stands 5’10” (although I feel that sample was based on the models in the L.L. Bean catalogue). To be frank, being “short” is something that I’ve never really thought about — which is saying a lot considering I’m so neurotic that I make Woody Allen look like the most well-adjusted person on the planet (Read: I have a sneaking suspicion that my barber is using a no.2.5 guard on his electric razor instead of no.2 so that I have to come back for haircuts more frequently).
However, my latest foray into online dating (my third in the last seven years, but that’s a topic for another post) has proven especially challenging. The reason? An epidemic of women who prefer “men over 6’0” or who “have a thing for tall guys” or who explicitly ask you to “swipe left if you’re shorter than me” and who flatly answer “No” in response to the OkCupid question “Would you date someone shorter than you?” Granted I’m not Don Juan DeMarco, but I’m not so dense that I don’t realize that male height is desirable trait among the fairer sex. What makes it different this time is the extent that this preference is so pronounced, literally. And the extent to which is seems “ok” to be so overtly height biased (an immutable trait, like you know, race, gender, culture, sexual orientation, et al…and I thought women were the less superficial gender).
In general, I think I hold up pretty well to female screening criteria: I am gainfully employed and pursuing my MBA; I play an instrument (on some days two, and oh yes, I have a masters in jazz for good measure); I can read and write; I can belt out the lyrics to West Side Story (I feel pretty, oh so pretty….) and I can squat my own body weight; I have above average personal hygiene (in all fairness, the bar is pretty low at the men’s locker room in the YMCA — I’m looking at you guy who uses the hand dryer for everything but his hands); and on a scale from Elephant Man to Jason Schwartzman I tend far more towards the latter. And yet, I can’t seem to make it beyond this last hurdle (pun only partially intended as I have a pretty sick high jump).
My issue is not so much with presumed rejection for being vertically challenged, but the fact that it has become somehow socially acceptable for women to publicly express physical preferences in a mate whereas if a man were to do it would been seen as superficial, chauvinistic, and yet another example of the continued objectification of women (alas, such suffrage). Seriously, imagine if a guy wrote in his profile (and for all I know they actually do) that he only dates girls with tiny waists and C cups or above. What a schmuck! Right?! So, I can only wonder why women get a free pass? Is it somehow more acceptable to express physical preference in terms of height rather than width and depth (figuratively, obv)?
I can hear all you Frida Shallow wannabees now (mad props to my girl Cheryl Blossom for that one): this is a prime of example of female empowerment; modern feminism in action; an inversion of the male gaze where women are now the ones who get to objectify males. Maybe. But again, I’ve got to ask if making the world twice as shallow is really that much of an achievement. Eat your heart out Gloria Steinham.
Full disclosure: I’m more of an ass man.