2.06 meters tall volleyball player Anna Smrek (1.60m man next to her for scale)

i welcome death by snu snu

I have only wholesome thought seeing that picture.

What's funny is they seem to have the same size feet.

Prerty sure one of her legs weighs more than me.

I’m not tall for a man, only 190 but I wish I could meet girls taller me just to know what they see

I'm 5'7" and briefly dated a woman who was 6'2". She liked that I was confident and funny despite my shortcomings. We ended things amicably as she requested a tall order from me and I didn't want to budge from my personal beliefs to accommodate (religion). Yes, multiple deaths by Snoo Snoo was amazing and even though it's been more than 10 years, I still think about her legs and ass.
I'm happily married, but damn do I miss an Amazonian.

He is a cutie, eh?

That’s cool but I feel like it would be a nightmare being that tall.

The back problems will kick in early.
- Knees go quicker, especially for athletes
- Why? Height doesn't automatically equate to back problems. Uneven weight distribution (belly, boobs, etc.), poor stretching habits, lack of excerise, bad posture/form/lifting, or injury equate to back problems at ANY height.
I have one nephew at 6’10” and another that is 7’1”. They both cope well enough even when challenged with size obstacles. They are young and generally positively motivated which helps.
- Oh yeah, being young would be great. I’d dunk on everyone.
  I will clarify that being in my forties there’s no way that would be a good time.

Holy cow. I thought this comment section would be filled with light hearted jokes. Some of yall need get your chronically online asses outside.

The is the most reddit esque comment section I've seen on lemmy and it's gross

That's a light-hearted take. Why do some people like to work themselves into a froth with their imaginary scenarios?
There are plenty of reasonable comments. Most have more upvotes than the sexualizing ones. That said, look closely at what she is wearing in the pic. If she put shorts on, the sides of that thing would still be above the shorts. The image was designed to have sexual appeal. She is showing more skin than most people have. So of course some people are going to go in that direction. Men in general haven't evolved enough not to.
- I said nothing about sex appeal. She's hot, and he's hot but that's not what im talking about
- With an image designed to have sexual appeal, is it wrong to see the sexual appeal?
Lemmy is full of the worst reddit bullshit. I was genuinely surprised at first, primarily because I thought it was going to be a bit of a refuge from bottom of the barrel idiocy. Instead, it’s the worst of it.
The unbelievably pathetic trash is why I am still looking for a good reddit alternative. Seeing all of the problems we solved on reddit years ago is honestly kind of sad.
- Lemmy is designed to solve only one of Reddit's problems, and by solve, I mean make it so it does not require complete abandonment of the platform when things go bad. The things you're complaining about exists because Lemmy works very similar to Reddit in a lot of things, so the discourse will also go down the same path eventually.
  The same thing will happen if you look for other Reddit alternatives unless it is not only specifically designed to avoid them but also succeed in doing so.
- Seeing all of the problems we solved on reddit years ago is honestly kind of sad.
  How were they solved?
Lemmy is pretty great compared to reddit so long as the topics stay away from anything to do with feminism or women's rights. Otherwise it starts to feel like the reddit cesspit is leaking, and it's depressing. Anyone remember the few days when "the bear" discussion took over the fediverse? Those were dark times. Or any time someone even mentions the word "mansplaining", even if it's satirical.
I'm not disagreeing with you but try using a period now and again they don't cost any money
- Can’t tell if sarcasm or dumbfuck.
- .
- G.o.f.u.c.k.y.o.u.r.s.e.l.f. I use proper punctuation in my work emails and thats about it. This is the best youll get
- Irony.
Nah, this is about what I expected... why else would it get 600 upvotes?

He has the best hair.

GOOD thing she isn't Trans! OTHERWISE she would have an Unfair Advantage! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!

shes an amazon.

female hercules: her stats show that she's 100 kgs of pure muscle.
- female hercules
  I believe the correct term for that is Xena

I mean usually a person has to stand beside for comparison but I guess men really can’t handle a woman standing over them in height but totally ok to sexualize her even then.

Oh would you look at that, the misogyny has risen. What kind of garbage site do you have to become to make Reddit look like the woke one.

But it's paramount that we ban the 5'5" trans girl who has testosterone lower than cis girls from playing volleyball because....reasons.

You clearly don't know much about the sport. Women's net is far lower because there's a significant physical power difference between men and women. It's not just about average height.
- Sure. There are differences in musculature and such. But after a period of hormone therapy, those muscular differences disappear. When this is pointed out, transphobes inevitably move the goalposts and start talking about larger bone/frame size. Or they'll spread lies about how trans women must have larger frames and thus be a danger to their cis peers. Well here's this cis woman, with a massive frame size, who could utterly stomp all over the vast majority of trans female athletes. And she's allowed to play.
  But people just make ignorant assumptions and assume that the athletic performance of trans women is anything remotely like the athletic performance of cis men. They start with that conclusion and work backwards from there.
Can I just ogle the nice lady in peace?
- I mean the trans girls just want to play volleyball in peace.

Death by snusnu

Wtf is a meter?

It's what the civilized world uses.
The measurement system NASA used to land on the moon, that's what.
- It’s the same measurement system NASA used to land MCO on Mars. It is, however, unfortunate that Lockheed Martin did not.
Half of the wingspan of a bald eagle, or about five and a half bananas
- Thank u fellow American
A superior unit to a foot, or yard.
Almost 630 sixteenths of an inch.
It's one point something kliks.
- .001 of a Klik, to be accurate.
One tenth of a decameter

😳👉👈

Death by SNU SNU?

Would!

Please don’t give me new fetishes

do you know how hard it is to have a fetish for women being bigger and taller than you, when you are over 6 and a half feet tall?
😭
- Very hard?
- Yeah dont tell me im six foot which is the average where i live but women are just so much shorter... for me it actually helps that im 100kg with a pretty muscular build because I only care abou the height and from my experience taller women tend to like wider men. Idk. Still its hard out here lol
I wonder if we will ever evolve to the point where we can talk about women online without some mad lad needing to sexualise them.
- That’s awfully presumptuous of you, perhaps the comment was made by a woman who is sexualizing short men
- You are telling me that a woman practically naked from waist below is not sexual? You might be gay.
- I'd be satisfied if women got to openly sexualize men and talk about it. That would level out the playing field and, hopefully, reduce the unnecessary sexualizing of trivial things.
- Nope.
Too late

Damn, she has long legs

For Americans who have the height mode of their brain stuck in "Freedom Units":

Anna Smrek is roughly 6' 9"

'Short King' is roughly 5' 3"

...

For data nerds:

Going by total data for the whole globe, all people:

https://www.gigacalculator.com/calculators/height-percentile-calculator.php

Anna is ... off the charts, one of if not the actual tallest adult women in the world, literally breaks the calculator.

Anna would be at... the 99.9(8/9)% percentile of men by height, which means that if you use 8.2 billion as a world population, there are at most approximately 1.6 million men as tall or taller than her.

EDIT: I forgor to divide by two, women vs men, so uh, 800k.

===

'Short King' is under the 1st percentile of men (0.77), he is shorter than 99.3%+ of adult men.

'Short King' would be at about the 25th percentile of women by height, which means he is actually still as tall or taller than 25% of women, approximately 2 billion.

EDIT: I did the same forgor /2, so, 1 billion, thanks to FundMECFSResearch for catching my error!

===

Average global male height ~= 178 cm / 5' 10"

Average global female height ~= 165 cm / 5' 5"

...

Possibly also relevant:

https://www.gotquestions.org/how-tall-was-Goliath.html

If you use a more reasonable and realistic measurement of cubits and spans, and go with the Septuagint version of the Old Testament/Torah...

Goliath, the mythical warrior felled by David and his sling, whose name is now just a common euphemism for 'giant'...

Yeah he was only about 6' 6", or about 198 cm.

So...Anna could probably roughly rest her nose on the top of Goliath's head, without bending her neck (or at least not much).

...

Another fun addendum, for I guess dating data nerds?:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886913000020

(If someone can find a more recent study that specifically looks into this, I'd appreciate it!)

Broadly speaking, women prefer taller men more strongly than men prefer shorter women, by a factor of roughly 2.625x.

Women prefer, on average, a larger height difference between themselves and their partner (i.e. males being much taller than themselves) than men do. This effect is even more pronounced when examining satisfaction with actual partner height: women are most satisfied when their partner was 21 cm taller, whereas men are most satisfied when they were 8 cm taller than their partner.

In Freedom Units, thats roughly women being most satisfied with a man 8 inches taller than them, men being most satisfied with a woman about 3 inches shorter than them.

This means a 5' 10" average guy will tend to be well satisfied with a 5' 7" woman's height, but she will tend to not be well satisfied with the man's height, herself on average, ideally, looking for a 6' 3" man.

Even if it was a 5' 10" man and an [EDIT: Whoops, too many numbers, too fast, this actually be a somewhat shorter than] average 5' 3" woman, she'd still tend to ideally prefer a 5' 11" man, on average.

So, to more accurately assess 'Short King's realistic dating pool, we actually need to find women who are 8 inches shorter than him.

And that works out to women 4' 7" or shorter.

Which is the 0.02 percentile... meaning that 'Short King's realistic dating pool is at worst, just as small as the number of men who are as tall or taller than Anna.

Or, perhaps both Anna and Short King need to find partners who simply accept them and are satisfied by them via being uncommonly partner-height indifferent.

Good luck to both of them!

there is no way in fuck the global average height for men is 178cm.
- ~= means approximately equal.
  https://www.gigacalculator.com/calculators/height-percentile-calculator.php
  Going by this, and using 25 as the age, which is my guesstimate for the ages in the OP image, it seems to more precisely be ... 178.4cm.
  Do you have an alternate dataset you find to be more accurate?
Man I enjoyed every bit of your info dump. Thank you.
This effect is even more pronounced when examining satisfaction with actual partner height: women are most satisfied when their partner was 21 cm taller, whereas men are most satisfied when they were 8 cm taller than their partner.
I don't have access to the full article, but it sounds like they didn't examine the sliding scale of height preferences, by one's own height.
The article says that taller people have a taller ideal height for their partners. And it also says that on average women's preference is a partner 21cm taller than themselves, and men had a preference for 8cm shorter. But from the publicly available text, it doesn't seem to report on whether that preferred delta between one's own height and the ideal partner height changed with the absolute height of themselves.
So I'm curious: does the data support the conclusion that a 5' (1.52m) woman would prefer a 5'8" (1.73m) partner, and that a 5'8" (1.73m) woman would also still prefer that 21cm/8 inch difference, looking for a 6'4" (1.94) partner? Or is there a sliding scale where already tall people aren't exactly looking for excessively unusual outliers, and that the preference of tall women is something smaller than 21cm, such that the overall average might be that very short women prefer a big height difference but very tall women prefer a small height difference?
- I am a 5'9" woman and prefer guys around my height, anecdotally all the women I know who want tall guys are themselves short.
  It's a weak preference but yeah I think since I go through life being around the same height as most guys I meet I don't have such a strong association with height as a sex difference, if that makes sense.
- I don't have access to the full article, but it sounds like they didn't examine the sliding scale of height preferences, by one's own height.
  The 21cm vs 8cm is the mean, and their sample size was large enough to be statistically valid.
  I did specifically quote the part that includes 'best satisfied'.
  Ie, the 'ideal' partner height.
  Many people often choose partners that are ... close enough to many ideal traits, weighting them in different and complex ways, often not even entirely fully concsious of the nature of how they weight or order their preferences, but thats all way outside of the scope of this paper.
  Yep, its possible the uh preference differential changes as you approach extreme ends of height, but the problem is that, being a statistically representative sample, it doesn't include many people who are very short, or very tall.
  Anyway:
  https://annas-archive.org/md5/50413a744e4887cff238a542b59b19b2
  Here's the whole paper!
  But from the publicly available text, it doesn't seem to report on whether that preferred delta between one's own height and the ideal partner height changed with the absolute height of themselves.
  Yeah, that seems to be my take away as well, they don't go into precisely that in the paper.
  Or is there a sliding scale where already tall people aren't exactly looking for excessively unusual outliers, and that the preference of tall women is something smaller than 21cm, such that the overall average might be that very short women prefer a big height difference but very tall women prefer a small height difference?
  Apologies for shit tier resolution, I am on mobile:
  'Female' meaning, the male-preferred height of a female partner, 'Male' meaning the female-prefered height of a male partner, so that... may be backwards depending on your inution for reading graphs.
  Also these are 2 SD bounds, 95% CI, I kinda cropped out half the text that explains that, whoops.
  So, yes, this effect you mention does exist... but they do not seem to focus on it in the paper.
  Unfortunately, I am not seeing a visualization that or equation that more specifically and precisely answers your question of whether or not very tall or short men or women are less uh, height-choosy.
  Perhaps I am missing it?
  ....
  Here's another way they visualize their data:
  Now, here, 'Men' means men, 'Women' means women, and the x axis is [male height - female height].
  So, very broadly, yeah you see that the sort of mutual sweet spot of both partners being decently satisfied with the height difference is roughly a man being 13ish cm, roughly 5 inches taller than a woman.
  So, from that, maybe 'Short King' has a realistic shot with 4'10" women, not 4' 7"?
  ???
  ...
  We can also see that women's satisfaction with a male partner's height uh, nose dives as a women is asked about a man who is going from 13 cm taller than them, to the same height as them... but then does rebound once the heights are just inverted.
  This is also the only situation where the man is less satisfied with the pairing than the woman, on average, (untill you get to men being about 18cm taller than the woman, then its roughly the same gap as the height difference increases) but the men have huge CI intervals in this instance, indicating many men actually don't mind this much, and some men mind it extremely.
  Meanwhile, women generally dislike being taller than their man, with a yes, expanded CI range, but far less than that of the man, indicating that this is a less variable and more common ... anti-preference for most women, in general, than it is for men.
  ...
  Somewhat oddly, to me at least, we also have this pattern:
  The maximum gap in partner height satisfaction between men and women seems to be around a man being just about 3cm, or about 1 inch, taller than the woman.
  For women broadly, this is the least desirable possible pairing, while for men, it would basically be nice if they were about 2 inches or about 5cm taller..., but its not that big a deal to them, they are not that far from their maximum satisfaction.
  Meanwhile, this situation is the lowest scoring situation for women.
  It is actually worse than the woman being taller than the man.
  In case you have not guesed, I am a guy, and I find this ... fairly confusing/interesting.
  Basically this means there is a huge mismatch where guys are generally pretty ok with being just a bit taller than their gal, but women find this to be the worst, the lowest possible score they would broadly assign to a partner height difference situation, to such an extent that they'd actually be on average happier if her man was just actually shorter than her.
  ...
  But anyway, yeah, unless I am missing something, it doesn't look like this paper actually answers your question precisely.
  What you mention, the uh, height-choosyness tapering off for tall women and very short men does occur to some extent, but we... don't really seem to have that detailed to us, I am not seeing a way to mathematically compare the magnitude.
  Also again worth noting, my 'Short King' scenario was kind of a worst case scenario, as it assumes all women would only go for their ideal partner scenario.
  Some women do do this, but obviously not all, and some men also do this, but obviously not all... and numbers on the absolute or relative prevalence of that do not seem to be in this paper.
than 25% of women, approximately 2 billion.
I think you mean 1 billion there aren’t 8 billion women on earth.
- You forgot to factor in the hollow earth Mole Women. Or are they not considered 'people' now?
- Derp!
  Yep, whoops, take those figures and divide by two, I forgot to, damnit.
- thats what they want you to think
Thank you, kind human, for all the effort.
The burger people never go the extra mile to translate their freedom units to something reasonable, so neither should we.
- I mean, when I am talking to a non burgeroid on lemmy who makes it clear, or at least seems likely that they don't know Freedom Units, I try to go out of my way to do the conversions, present both measurement systems.
  But uh yeah, the vast majority of us don't, and I do think that is rude of us.
Or even better, they defy expectations and pair up.

After copulation, the female eats the male to gain energy for her offspring.

Vore-lleyball
Death by snu-snu
Please🥺
- Down bad
Or, you know, just sits on my face. Like, anytime she wants...
- I don't know you, but she'd kill me if that happens. She's over 100kg in weight.
She can eat me

HER DAD'S TALLER. HOLY SHIT.

genetics, right? at least one of her parents had to be similarly tall.
- You might be surprised! My uncle is 170 cm tall, his wife about 165, and two of their sons are about 170. Their third son is nearly 195 cm. Yes, he's their biological child - we've checked!
  Both my aunt and uncle had tall fathers and very short mothers. Height is polygenic (multiple genes are responsible), so my cousin won the height allele lottery and inherited a higher proportion of the height increasing traits both parents carried, making him a height outlier.
- I mean not neccesarily. Both my parents are at least 15cm shorter than me. My mum is quite tall (looking at averages she falls in the 20th percentile but still is around 175cm) but my dad is average height at 48th percentile. And yet I fall in the 1st to 2nd percentile.
  Both my brothers are about as tall as my dad and the only one even close to my height is one of my mother's cousins.
He played 7 seasons in the NBA, was kinda a journeyman playing backup center for a bunch of different teams.

I would have guessed shes from the balkans because of the height and the name but apparently shes from canada. Id still say that her family probably came from somewhere arround there.

Poor girl. I've never met a super tall girl that liked being tall. In my teens I worked Nordstrom women's shoes. That is one of the only places with a stock of very large sizes.

Super tall women are an involuntary circus act everywhere they go. I don't envy that. All I have met have a certain sadness in their eyes. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I see sad eyes here.

As a tall girl, yes it sucks. I'm not even 6' but I'm tall for a woman. Short girls love to humble brag about being smol and needing to get on stools to reach things etc... They know it's cute.
- All the actually short girls (5'3" or less) I know complain as well. Feet too small for shops to have, boobs not accounted for in clothing, etc. Your perspective probably counts average and just below average girls as short.
- yeah, every smol girl talks about how they wish they were tall, but they have no idea how embarrassing it is, the way it invalidates your femininity and so on
Can confirm. Wife is 6 feet tall and wishes she was half a foot shorter (in height before any comedians jump in) but we visited Bergen in Norway recently and she was so delighted that she could buy clothes off the rack and pretty shoes.
- My aunt is fairly tall (about 1.9 meters) and she told me she was so thankful for men in drag becoming a thing in the zeitgeist, as she could finally find shoes and clothes her size with ease.
But her height is actually useful. She's a starter in a sport in which height is a useful physical trait, which helped her with university admissions with a scholarship. She's apparently a professional who has been on the roster of some overseas teams, and plays for her national team (Canada).
Plus growing up in a family with tall people might make it easier to deal with. Her dad is former NBA player Mike Smrek and presumably has a social circle of very tall people and maybe even their very tall children.
So I don't doubt that a lot of tall women actively dislike their own height. But this particular woman probably has reason to like being tall.
- Useful until she needs to access anything mass-manufactured where height effects experience: cars, planes, cloths, beds, chairs, countertops, rakes, rollercoasters, etc.
  Having sports where height is an advantage does not change that the world was designed at about 4/5th the scale of what would be comfortable. It can be tiresome after a few decades.
Because you met us while we were buying shoes.
Which is depressing, yes. But other than shoes being sad, my depression and thousand yard stare are unrelated to my height.
She'll probably make tons of money as a professional athlete, so she's probably ok with it.
- Volleyball does not pay well at all.
- Most athletes make next to nothing. Like I worked with a 3 time Olympic track rider. At that level, the sport consumes your whole life just to complete at Olympics level. No one at the Olympics is making money at it. Everyone is broke and barely skating by. I worked with pro cycling teams and it was the same story for all, even many recognizable names are just poor people that love it in many cases. There are very very few big name celebrity types that actually make good money.
I also know one. I like her a lot - maybe because of that slight sadness or rather the life experience that led to it.

Look, i'm not trying to stare at your boob all the time, it just your boob is at my eye level all the time.

(am saying this as someone exactly the same height as the dude)

Oh come on now, Quentin would certainly appreciate her feet and be more excited than that.
Actually, this OP image is interesting in another way:
Despite their massive height difference... I think 'short king's feet are still larger.

Ok but who’s that guy? Hot af

Ok, I won’t make a callous sexual joke, but honestly as a midsize man (not short or tall) we would have literal Viking warriors for sons and daughters

You'd have rapists and looters for sons and daughters?
edit: Oh yeah downvote the vikings weren't actually good people angle, but stan the 'imagine if procreate with woman in photo' content.
- I mean being a rapist and a looter is really on trend for 2025 in America, maybe they could be president
- Lol. Great retort. Have an updoot - I thought it was funny.

Damn, for someone 80 times taller he looks so small.. he must be very far away

fixed :)
1.60 meters now.
no she's just 80 times smaller bc she's a woman

Y the dude pointed at the wrong direction?

Well, 2m height is common in southern Europe. My dad is 2.1 and his cousin (also male) is 2.5, I am 1.96 - 28 or something.

Edit: Well, if noone wants to bellive that, then don't. And 2.5 isn't an exact measurement (maybe he's 2.3 - 2.4, but probably more) I know, he had to undergo some sort of medical treatment to stunt growth and he has some health issues (both knee replacements) because of his weight (and probably his physically intensive job).

Blatant lie. 2m is super unconnom like a tiny fraction of a percent. And your dads cousin is not 2.5m the tallest living man is 2.51m
People in north europe are taller, come on you guys live of white baguettes and meat.

Oh dang.