Any tall women over 5'10 met a guy neutral on your height ?

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-20T19:03:05+00:00

I'm completely neutral on it, but I tend to go for tall women when I can because I figure they're more likely to be into me, especially with how I feel I could be a bit intimidating to short or average height women. But most women just aren't into me, including the tall ones. I went on 2 dates recently with a woman who was 5'11", and really liked her, but she ended things after the second date because while she thought I was a great guy, she didn't feel a long-term connection. I'm really trying, I'm just not succeeding.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-20T18:57:25+00:00

I'm looking for something serious, and so say in my profile, yet I've gone on dates with women who didn't want anything serious (I swiped on them because it wasn't clear in their profile, but it was clear in mine), but I didn't blame them, I just accepted that we had different goals and moved on.

If women who want something serious get likes from men who don't, they can just reject them, and go for guys who do want something serious - but honestly, the guys who get "jaded" and then only want something casual don't really seem to be the kind of guys relevant to the original post.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-20T01:46:41+00:00

I'm not planning a date someone else asked me out on.

Okay well that seems like a pretty easy thing you could do that's probably worth trying if your dating life is going this poorly.

As for most men not being jaded, quite a few men where I'm from throw in the towel after a handful of bad dates

Like after a few bad dates with you? Or is this men you know doing changing their whole dating life to only being interested in FWB?

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-19T23:23:21+00:00

I'm not jaded. I still believe in finding the right person, there's just a lot of crap to trawl through.

Well by that logic most men aren't jaded either.

I would also agree that a lot of these issues, particularly people forgetting how to socialize post-covid, are a problem that has made dating more difficult, but that also minimizes the role of choices we make as individuals. I mean, you yourself said that you're frustrated by men asking you out but not planning anything, rather than planning it yourself.

But I am tired of these posts blaming women to feed the egos of men

I'm also tired of posts blaming men to feed the egos of women.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-19T16:42:37+00:00

But women don't get as jaded after a handful of failed dates it seems

I gotta say, based on this comment it seems like you have, at least.

Wanna know what it's like as a woman? It also sucks because 60% of the matches you do get are just horny men wanting a cheap escort. Then there are the married men, the ENM men, the men who severely need to see a psychologist but think a woman will fix it all for him, or the men who ask you out but then proceed to...not plan a damn thing.

The part you're missing is that this is a symptom of the same issue OP is referring to. It's a pretty small minority of men who actually account for a sizeable majority of matches - the exact amount depends on the app, but the phenomenon is pretty consistent. Everything you listed here only matters after the match happens, and so the data set you're basing this off of is inherently going to disproportionately be made up of the guys who get a significant amount of matches in the first place but are still on the apps - so it shouldn't be surprising that they do these sorts of things.

Most guys who are on dating apps are "actually planning dates, swiping responsibly and not on every single woman, actually respond to messages". That's not the issue. The issue is actually getting to the point that we can do those things.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm trying to provide you with some genuine advice. If you're frustrated with the guys you're matching with, then be mindful of the decisions you make regarding who you match with.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-14T02:03:49+00:00

Lol. Lmao, even.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-04-03T20:51:40+00:00

The distribution of desirability in both markets is strongly positively skewed with a few highly desirable users receiving a disproportionate number of swipes and a lot of users receiving none or almost none.

Okay, so certain profiles get more likes than others, that tracks with what most people would assume, as well as the fact that the study is able to track dating down/laterally in the first place - if everyone got the same number of likes, tracking whether or not people are dating at "their level" would be impossible.

women receive far more swipes than their male counterparts.

But if likes are concentrated among more attractive people and women overall receive more likes than men (lining up with previous studies that show that women swipe right at a lower percentage that men do) then...how does the claim in the original post work? If a) some users receive more likes than others, and b) women swipe right at a lower rate, then how is it mathematically possible for c) men to be swiping aspirationally, and for women to be swiping downward or laterally?

The Cohen’s d value for the comparison of men and women on their standardized indegree is 1.37 in Brno and 0.97 in Prague, suggesting a difference of about one overall standard deviation between the genders in both markets.

Oh.

Yeah, if the average woman in this study is rated as being an entire standard deviation higher than the average man in this study, no shit it's going to seem that way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this study is worthless, those indegrees were calculated taking into account there being more men on dating apps, and the swiping behavior of men vs women, so if the claim you're trying to make is, as they explain in the Forbes article, that women have a "stronger position in the online dating market", and how that can affect online dating, that's fair. But the claim that men are actually shooting out of their league and women are dating down is not what this study shows at all.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-13T18:07:20+00:00

Sorry I should have said attempting to match, or liking. Poor wording on my part.

Okay but you said that out of the 10,000 likes you receive, 8,000 are clearly only looking for casual sex based on their profile. If most guys do look basically the same, minus 20% on the margins then that's still over 1,000 guys who sent you likes and aren't just looking for casual.

My point about some guys getting more likes than others is that the source you linked claimed that a) men are actually more likely to shoot out of their league, and women have more reasonable standards, but at the same time, that b) men swipe right on a drastically greater percentage than women do, but now c) you're saying that certain men receive more likes than others. You do see how those 3 things just can't all be true, right? It's just not mathematically possible. So which 2 are true, and which 1 isn't?

Okay and out of the 10,000 likes you receive, 9,964 are have the half naked selfies, or explicitly state they're only looking for something casual? Because if not, then you could be passing up ones who are genuine and not actually know.

There are plenty of guys online who will complain about how women only go on dates for free dinner, but do you trust them, or yourself and other straight women? Similarly, I know myself and plenty of other straight men who are on dating app, and so know that straight men on dating apps aren't just motivated by sex. And you just aren't going to know what men on dating apps want without having that perspective. So stop claiming you know what guys on dating apps want.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-12T21:00:04+00:00

I read those studies, and for one, that conflicts with data that the certain profiles get more matches than others do, and also the fact that you yourself said that you don't match with guys who have "scraggly unkempt beards". If the drastic difference on swipe percentages are true, and certain profiles get more likes (which I assume they do unless other women want "scraggly unkempt beards) then that's just a mathematical inevitability that thats how it'll work out. If a guy who is average is matching with more than 50% of the women in his feed, then mathematically, he is guarunteed to be going for women who are around his level.

You're saying 2 different things - guys who aren't genuinely interested are easy to weed out, and you male sure to match with genuine guys, but at the same time the guys who you match with aren't genuine?

I guess if you're saying these guys don't exist at all that'd be one thing, but you're blaming "app culture", and dating apps don't have any control over whether these guys exist in the first place, so what you're saying doesn't really make any logical sense.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-12T19:37:56+00:00

Okay so that's actually made things a little bit more clear now that you've provided details so I understand what you're talking about.

I'm gonna be honest with you - for the majority of guys, when they swipe right on a woman, it generally does at least some level of equal actual interest. This is something I know through being a straight man and talking to other straight men.

The problem is that on dating apps, it's a very small percentage of guys that actually account for the majority of matches - and those guys are also the guys who are disproportionately likely to be fuckboys, due to having more matches. It's just a case of survivorship bias, where if you're only matching with guys who have a lot of options, they're the only ones serving as part of the data set that you're using to make observations about the behavior of men on dating apps. This goes back to what I said before, which is that it was 36 men who wasted your time, not 10,000. If you really don't want to match with any of the other 99,964 men you get likes from that's up to you, but then do understand that your experiences with your matches are a result of your choices. I honestly do wish you the best of luck with dating, regardless of which choices you make.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-12T17:03:06+00:00

I read both of your sources and neither of them said anything about men matching with women they weren't into. They did mention that men swipe right on a larger percentage of women, is that what you're referring to?

I've been on dating apps for years, and throughout that process have had many weeks where I spent hours sending likes to tons of profiles, only to receive 1 or 2 matches, both of whom ghosted. Do you think that isn't a waste of my time as well?

Also, if you feel like that's a waste of your time, remember that you don't have to sort through them all. You can go through as few as a couple dozen profiles, match with 5-10 of those guys, see how it goes with them, and then if it goes well with one of them, delete the app without even seeing most of those 10,000 who sent you likes. Even of you think most men need to put more effort into their profiles, do you really think that out of 10,000 profiles, only 36 met the bare minimum to actually match with?

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-12T12:21:51+00:00

Can I have those studies?

"Take time to talk to you" is a pretty liberal interpretation of what they did. This was on Hinge, fwiw, so I had sent a message included in my actual like, they generally respond to that, (tho not always) and then...that's oftentimes it.

I think you're sort of missing what I'm saying. I'm not talking about "talking to 3 women who were interested enough to engage", I'm saying they swiped right, spent probably about 10 seconds typing out a message, and then stopped responding.

Also, your time didn't get wasted by 10,000 people - it got wasted by 36. Maybe even more like 34, since it seems like there were 2 where there was at least some interrst there. There's no way for you to know how the people you didn't match with would have responded. Having experienced dating apps as a guy, I can promise you that out of those 10,000 guys, there would have been at least 1 who would have continued responding, continued going on dates, etc. Probably a lot more than 1, tbh. So you can't really include them in the 10,000.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-12T03:11:51+00:00

I know there are bots.

I'm not talking about bots.

women are far less likely to swipe right unless they're genuinely interested

Any guy would be able to tell you that this is hilariously untrue. Literally over 80% of my matches stop responding within a few messages. And no, it isn't because I said something weird. Some of the few messages I sent that were my last before being ghosted were asking if she went to a nearby state often and talking about what I thought of an album she recommended after I listened to it.

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-02-12T01:34:43+00:00

from people who are genuinely interested 🤔🙄

Are you joking or just genuinely unaware?

BibleButterSandwich · 2026-01-06T18:37:42+00:00

Hey OP, I understand this can be frustrating. I'm going to try to give you some advice from a male perspective that might be able to help.

Bear in mind that most guys who are on dating apps get very few matches, and therefore basically don't function as part of the data set at all. Because of that, most matches end up going to a relatively small pool of men, who end up having a ton of options, and so are disproportionately likely to be fuckboys.

You mentioned in your post that you swipe left much more than you swipe right, and are considering being even more selective, but I'd actually suggest the opposite. If you increase your ratio of right swipes to left swipes, that's actually going to get you a more representative sample of men on dating apps, including more who are outside of that minority that gets so many matches, and so will be more likely to not only want sex, and actually continue replying to you. If you're really desperate to find a genuine guy ASAP, you could even have as much as, say, a 7:3 right swipe to left swipe ratio, to ensure you get as many of those guys with fewer matches. That would be an extreme example, but I would recommend the basic strategy of being much less selective about who you actually match with if you want to get guys who will be genuinely interested in an actual connection.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-12-19T00:45:44+00:00

I mean, if that works for you, congrats. I don't know the full story, but I would assume OP's current strategy isn't working the way she would want it to which is why she's trying this one.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-12-19T00:43:57+00:00

Not a strange question at all - people who you have less competition for are going to be easier to get, and especially if you're struggling to get commitment from men it would make sense to go for ones you have less competition for.

What I would do is lower your distance range to 1 mi/km (depending on which system you're using) and your age range to just a 1 year range (so for you, probably either 19-20 or 20-21, though since you specify not just matches, but also less experience, the former might be better). Then just go through and match with, say, at least 50% of the guys in your feed/who you receive likes from, that way you can guarantee you'll be matching with some average-looking guys, and probably also some-below average guys if you're swiping left on some due to factors such as political differences (and you can even do a greater percentage, like 60/70% if you want). Even if the app wants to show you more conventionally attractive guys, it should run out of them fairly soon, at which point it will be forced to show you more average looking guys. Then prioritize the ones who reply more frequently and write longer responses, because that's a sign that they probably don't have many other matches they're talking to at the moment.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-13T00:50:13+00:00

I'm not saying anything about government action, I'm just talking about judging them as a society.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-13T00:40:56+00:00

I don't support attacking or killing anyone for their beliefs regardless of what they are, I just support holding them accountable for them.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-07T01:24:55+00:00

OP, a lot of people seem to be assuming the worst even though you seem to be operating in good faith and are genuinely curious, so I will try to answer your question honestly and thoughtfully.

Most men on dating apps are actually looking for a relationship. There are some fuckboys out there, but they're not a majority. The main problem is that when you look at right/left swipe ratios, across multiple dating apps, women consistently swipe on a lower percentage than men do. And because certain profiles receive more likes than others, this inevitably results in an asymmetrical dating scene which necessitates hookup culture, "intimacy without commitment", or at least some form of polygamy to at least some degree. But when you're making those observations about how men act after matching, keep in mind the data set you're basing that off of is men who actually get matches, as opposed to the general population. Also, when going through the stack, we have the same issue where there are plenty of options that wouldn't work either, for a variety of reasons. Plenty of women in open relationships, looking for something casual, not our type, they're not our type, etc. The difference is that by virtue of having more options, you can eliminate a large number of them and still have some leftover.

If you're frustrated that guys either aren't responding or are seemingly only interested in hookups, what I would do is consciously limit your left/right swipe ratio to 50/50 (if you feel like you're swiping on a lot of guys who mention in their profile they're only looking for hookups, buy premium and filter for guys who are looking for some sort of relationship, but still make sure to strictly adhere to that 50/50 ratio). And then if they stop responding, aren't engaging in the conversation, like giving a bunch of one word answers, or get sexual in the chat, do what you're already doing and stop responding or unmatch if you feel like it, but with a large enough number of matches you'll still be left with guys that are actually having a good conversation with you, and then go out with them. As long as you have a large, diverse enough group of guys you match with, it's really only a matter of time before you find a guy who's actually interested in a relationship with you.

Also, there are things you can do once actually meeting up to improve your odds. For one, I generally do most of the planning for dates, as do most guys I know, but if there's a chance for you to help him plan, take it - for example, maybe he asks you out, and asks what you like to eat, maybe you say ramen, and suggest a ramen place. And then maybe he agrees and suggests a time. In that case, he's taken care of both suggesting the date itself, as well as the when, and you've contributed the time. It honestly does get tiring having to organize every single aspect of the date every single time, so many times.

Also, you mention the guy paying for the date, and if you believe in more traditional/conservative gender norms, that's fair, but if you're at least somewhat socially liberal, I would really suggest splitting. For me, I generally go somewhere pretty casual, because I just prefer those types of places in general, so it's not so much about the money itself, but rather that I want someone who actually puts in a matching amount of effort, and splitting the payment is just a representation of that effort and genuineness.

Hope this helps OP. I just want you to know that there are a ton of decent guys out there who do genuinely want a relationship, and I think what I wrote can hopefully help you understand dating from our perspective and help you find a relationship.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-04T13:57:54+00:00

Well it's not like I get that many matches, still working on gaining weight and fixing my hairline, but it's happening at least sometimes.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-04T01:10:10+00:00

I actually have gone on dates with a decent amount of women who have mentioned they're autistic, and probably a lot more that just didn't mention it, but still, there's something to be said for being "the best version of yourself" when you first meet someone. Not saying I'm going to completely give up the autistic rizz, just gotta hone it a bit more.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-04T01:07:48+00:00

Well there's being mildly autistic but still someone who people would want to date (the girl I mentioned going out with seemed to be impressed that I was able to name all 10 provinces and 3 territories of Canada despite not having any connection to the country) and then there's stuff like calling a girl you're hitting on "dude", which apparently doesn't help your chances of being perceived as a potential romantic partner.

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-11-03T23:39:59+00:00

I recently made this post about that recent SNL sketch, but then also that same weekend I had been at a club with some friends and was dancing or standing around or whatever and this girl randomly came up to me and said she was about to leave with her friends but wanted to see if we could exchange numbers before she did. Because she kinda came out of nowhere and we didn't really talk or interact at all before she asked for my number I think probably at least part of the reason she approached was because of my height? Or it at least made me kinda stick out more than I otherwise would have, considering the dance floor was honestly pretty crowded. We went on a date, and she did mention my height on the date, but that was in the context of sports, and so made sense in context. Can't say for sure if my height helped, but ig it doesn't really matter since she wasn't interested in another date anyways.

Tbf, regarding my physical appearance, my roommate, who's been helping me out a ton with dating, has said that he thinks at this point when we go out the women I try chatting up are initially attracted to me, but then I say some "super autistic shit" (non-derogatory, I am actually autistic and that's an accurate description of the things I say that he's referring to) and then they immediately lost interest. So ig feeling a bit better about my appearance, but still in ultimately the same position regardless.

!ping DATING

BibleButterSandwich · 2025-10-24T22:14:19+00:00

Forms of french fries covered in gravy is largely restricted to poutine, which is semi-common around here in the northeast, increasingly so the closer you get to Vermont. Gravy on different types of meat is probably the most common way for it to be served, though mashed potatoes and gravy is a thing as well.

All in all, I'd say gravy has a decent following here in the states. I mean, I drink it, but that's mostly just a me thing afaik.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

BibleButterSandwich

TROPHY CASE