Citation required? Women might say this, but in my experience it's simply not true. Like the whole 'love yourself so others can love you' line. Which is just B.S. in my experience.
Having said that, I agree confidence makes a huge difference. However, the kind of confidence women like is in my opinion an unpleasant cocky kind. And should I attempt to completely change who I am, become somebody I dislike just to fulfil that? Would that lead to a relationship that would work? I don't even think it's feasible to be honest.
If you're sure that women will not like you on a sexual way, they won't. As sure as if you don't belive your startup to succeed, it won't. You've made a bad image of yourself that think he can't attract women and you find lame excuses in order to not try to change. Because trying to change and to be a better version of yourself is admitting that until now you were wrong and it is exposing yourself to failure. Do you realy think that your true self is the one that believe he can't atract woman ? If true, that's fine, but I don't think it's really your true self.
Sure, and the fact that many, MANY people have experienced this height-bias, and women openly admit to preferring it is entirely my imagination.
I think this 'think positively and it will be' stuff is more than a little wishful thinking.
It reminds me of the 'love yourself and then they will love you' bullshit. I know somebody who has a great job, is good looking and tall, but utterly depressed so clearly doesn't love himself, yet he constantly pulls a stream of model-quality beautiful women. Shall we neglect that case?
I am happy to admit I'm wrong. But are you? I especially recommend this video:-
Nobody has denied the height bias. We all admit it exists. The difference is that we treat it as a handicap, and not even a particularly game-ending one. You're the one falling upon absolutes.
In reality being short is like having 9 fingers. You will never out-type a 10-fingered person, but you can type plenty fast.
I read the grandparent as suggesting that it was attitude rather than a real factor. I suggest that he was denying the bias, or at least the severity of it.
My experience has been that it's a huge factor. What frustrates me about this kind of response is that I have worked very hard, lost > 55lb in weight, asked women out in real life, ~150 online, etc. with a positive attitude and got nothing in return, and yet suggestions like that suggest it's all my fault and I'm simply afraid of admitting failure.
I wish I could believe there were things I could do to overcome this, but I don't. I have friends who are short yet a little bit taller than me who are perfectly positive yet experience exactly the same thing. It doesn't bode well - at what point do you think 'this handicap is just too much'?
I work for a startup by the way, so this is not an attitude I take to everything in life :-) however, if all evidence points one way, wouldn't it be mad to somehow have faith that the fact isn't so?
But the fact is that it really is not as severe as you seem to think.
Let me put it this way: I'm willing to bet that, whatever deficiencies you have, I have worse. I'm an overweight, short-ish, East Asian, culturally western, engineer, dating in NYC. The only way to get it worse than me is to be all of the above, except Black or Latino. According to popular perception of my demographic I am a creepy, misogynistic, effeminate loser whose redeeming quality is mathematics.
My demographic is among the least replied-to on OKCupid, according to OKTrends.
But yet I do ok for myself. I've gone on dates with about a dozen people in the last year, all of which originated online.
This isn't about which one of us has it worse. It's about the fact that all handicaps in the dating arena are correctable to a large degree. You may never be a Brad Pitt, but you sure as hell can have a good time.
No doubt you've tried to improve your situation. If you aren't having luck with it, may I suggest that it's because you're not doing the right things, rather than you being a hopelessly lost cause? It is after all not about working hard, and all about working smart.
BTW, if you are in a place where you have serious self esteem problems re:dating, dont't go online. Online dating is an extremely low yield, spammy game where everyone (both female and male) are 10x pickier than they are IRL. Until you're in a place where you can take hundreds of rejections in a row without hitting your ego, keep it IRL.
I lived in SF until a few months ago. My dating performance there was only marginally worse than NYC.
NYC has more females than males, but I'm also not in finance, nor do I ascribe to the young professional set. The typical NYC "scene" does me no favors.
But yes, a severely handicapped person would probably have it much worse.
I remember seeing this thing on TV where people with disabilities attempted to find dates, and a ~ 3' woman who featured on it said she preferred men >= 6'. QED.
You're all partialy wrong. The author wants to test if there is an incrase of mass murders, so he wants to test if the large number of mass murders that occured in 2012 is likely to be due by chance or not. he wants to know if 2012 is an exceptional year or not regarding the average. We dont care what the average is, we want to know if this observed number of mass murder is not likely to be observed regarding the average. His pvalue is small but not small enough to conclude that the distribution of observed mass murders does not fit the model.
See, this I'm not getting about tablets. What am I missing out on? Basically just when Laptops had hit a critical milestone of being thinner than ever, light(weight)er than ever -- MBA and Ultrabooks and so on -- at that crucial point tablets "happen" (iPads first, sure) and everybody is totally into them.
It's been a few years and their value proposition is the same as as a few years back: yay, vastly less power/performance, lower resolution, crappier sound, no keyboard, and just about equally painless in terms of weight or form-factor. Sure they're a bit smaller and lighter but just at a point in time where the weight and size of current-gen netbooks/ultrabooks/notebooks simply isn't an issue anymore anyway.
Smartphones, I get them. Neat to have a Maps app with a phone attached in your pocket. And commuters can play Sudoku on them, fine.
But tablets? What's the big appeal about them? Why have they become such a popular gadget for all their shortcomings compared to same-generation net/ultrabooks? I don't think I'll ever get it...
But since we're on Hacker News... what exactly is a Hacker Newser missing out on by forgoing a tablet?
The people I've seen using a tablet most expansively are some combination of:
A. people never fully comfortable with a full laptop (meaning they effectively aren't losing much functionality by switching), in fact are gaining from the simplification of features they never really got
B. People doing field work, where a tablet's weight and form factor is strongly superior to a laptop (lighter, can operate standing up easily, etc.)
C. People who like to surf the web in bad, but find using the form factor of a laptop too awkward and a smartphone screen too small
Not so. The only laptop with more pixels than a Nexus 10 is Apple's 15" Retina Macbook Pro. The 13" has the same WQXGA resolution as the Nexus, and every other laptop on the market is lower. For a short time, the iPad 3 was actually the highest resolution portable computer on the market, though a few obsolete mobile workstations matched its resolution.
Laptop makers ought to get off their collective asses and do something about this.
The social approach is biased because one not necessarily likes what his friends like. People tend to be friend with people who have different hobbies/interests.
