Height Matters: true or false

[MrFantasyMan]

Height as an issue...I had to think about that. I suppose it can/does have it's challenges but at least for me, and I am 6' 2", it matters not. I am not attracted by height nor by those vertically chalenged. Attraction is so much more than physical appearance...the sparkle in her eyes, the way she carries herself, her intellect, her sense of humor and her smile...to name but a few. Your height or lack thereof may get you noticed but is only the package you are wrapped in...and we all know about the cover on the book...

 

[EndCredits]

Generally speaking, women prefer taller men because they see them as better protectors/providers, it's one of them evolutionary things.

I've always had a thing for taller women, myself. It's all about the legs.

 

[DLL]

i never really dated a man shorter than me..but i dont think height matters...its about chemistry..tall or short doesnt matter if you just dont click....you need that attraction ...

 

[babydoll2u]

Generally speaking, women prefer taller men because they see them as better protectors/providers, it's one of them evolutionary things.

Not true in all cases. I like tall men, because I love to tuck my head under his chin when we're hugging

Truthfully, height really doesn't matter at all, if the connection, attraction, is there.

 

[BeachGurl2]

I've been watching this thread from the beginning, having posted early, and I think it's interesting how it has evolved, IM. And I think the people who have posted here have basically backed up your original premise - that the girl in question (who no longer even matters, I'm sure) was full of it when she said she didn't want to date you because of your height. We all like what we like. We look twice at someone because of the exterior. But unless we just have no brain in our head, we don't stay with someone or leave someone because of the exterior package. It's what's inside that counts. Do I like my guys tall? Absolutely. Will that keep me from dating some terrific guy who happens to be short? Of course not. And I think everyone who has posted here pretty much has agreed with that.

 

[it_matters]

What I find interesting here is that most of us are talking on two levels: there is the level where -- as we all know -- it really does not matter in the least, chemistry being chemistry, personality being personality. And after that initial physical/emotional dance, as we get to know a new person, whatever light they are shining our way is all that illuminates us, not the superficial.

BUT! On the other hand, I hear everyone mentioning height... Busty and Indigo are a bit taller, and I have to agree Monsieur EndCredits, long legs, wow. Superficially speaking, of course

But really, these gross physical attributes DO make a difference. They are always there, after all... even if we get comfortable with their graces or complexities. BabyDoll loves to scoot under that chin. BeachGurl "likes her guys tall". None of that is exclusive to real chemistry, of course... but you know, even if the chemistry works perfectly, the physical knowledge is there.

How about that evolutionary theory, politically incorrect as it may seem: taller/stronger/protective male does mean something. In my marriage, from the very beginning, we were the equalest of equals, in intelligence, in drive, in rights... But when the first child was coming along, she began having dreams: the baby in front of her between her arms and legs, and me behind her surrounding them both.

That's not bullshit at all, that's real visceral stuff. Beautiful visceral stuff. On a much tamer level, I really believe height does "matter"... not in the way I meant it when this thread began, when I was a little tripped out by disappointment and rejection, but in much more subtle terms.

Very intriguing. So you people who are visiting this thread -- if you had a chinese restaurant menu to choose from, to assemble a fantasy partner: if you are dominant/male, how would you feel with a partner who is just slightly shorter than you? With a partner slightly taller?

And if you are receptive/female (please keep all of those categories as open as possible, ok?): how would you feel to be slightly shorter, or to be a bit taller?

In a way it repeats what has been said often in this thread, but here I am asking that you dump the mind as much as possible, and just stay in the body, and try to respond to the the feelings.

Myself, I love the dimensions of a taller woman (recent fantasy example is SylphOne's thread... ). But imagining a partner like that is very different than imagining someone who is modestly or significantly shorter than I am. It feels quite different, whatever the thinking about it might be. If physically I am stronger, larger? That surely feels different in bed, though not judging one better or worse necessarily!

 

[babydoll2u]

LOL... you're cute. While I may like tucking my head under that chin, my second hubby was 5'6, and I'm 5'4. He wasn't tall at all... just the right height for easy kissing, and I DO love to kiss

 

[it_matters]

LOL... you're cute. While I may like tucking my head under that chin, my second hubby was 5'6, and I'm 5'4. He wasn't tall at all... just the right height for easy kissing, and I DO love to kiss

See, this absolutely proves my point. ANY height works, as long as we keep our eyes open... But EVERY height makes a difference!

(so what, she says)

Well, so, some of us are busy passing time here on Literotica, indulging in words, and philosophy that ONLY matters because we are not currently hearing someone in the bedroom, and that non-someone in the bedroom is not-saying "I just slipped off my clothes, and... hmmm. No, I don't think I am going to put anything on tonight... maybe I'll just slide my hands down my [long/short/average] body... maybe I'll stop right here..."

 

[krazeekat]

See, the best thing about being an even 5' is ....

everyone's taller than you are!

 

[it_matters]

See, the best thing about being an even 5' is ....

everyone's taller than you are!

There you go! I hadn't puzzled outside of my own skin very well... so for you everything is "shades of taller"?

Man, isn't the world a cool and fascinating place? Because of this thread I already have to set up a research center for music to make love by (submitted songs must be tested and rated according to their support of the right mood)... NOW I am going to have to set up a Lover's Length Research Center! I admit the test results will be rather subjective... Qualitative Research, that's the ticket!

Um, Lover's Length refers to the total length of the body. To avoid confusion.

 

[BeachGurl2]

What I find interesting here is that most of us are talking on two levels: there is the level where -- as we all know -- it really does not matter in the least, chemistry being chemistry, personality being personality. And after that initial physical/emotional dance, as we get to know a new person, whatever light they are shining our way is all that illuminates us, not the superficial.

BUT! On the other hand, I hear everyone mentioning height... Busty and Indigo are a bit taller, and I have to agree Monsieur EndCredits, long legs, wow. Superficially speaking, of course

But really, these gross physical attributes DO make a difference. They are always there, after all... even if we get comfortable with their graces or complexities. BabyDoll loves to scoot under that chin. BeachGurl "likes her guys tall". None of that is exclusive to real chemistry, of course... but you know, even if the chemistry works perfectly, the physical knowledge is there.

How about that evolutionary theory, politically incorrect as it may seem: taller/stronger/protective male does mean something. In my marriage, from the very beginning, we were the equalest of equals, in intelligence, in drive, in rights... But when the first child was coming along, she began having dreams: the baby in front of her between her arms and legs, and me behind her surrounding them both.

That's not bullshit at all, that's real visceral stuff. Beautiful visceral stuff. On a much tamer level, I really believe height does "matter"... not in the way I meant it when this thread began, when I was a little tripped out by disappointment and rejection, but in much more subtle terms.

Very intriguing. So you people who are visiting this thread -- if you had a chinese restaurant menu to choose from, to assemble a fantasy partner: if you are dominant/male, how would you feel with a partner who is just slightly shorter than you? With a partner slightly taller?

And if you are receptive/female (please keep all of those categories as open as possible, ok?): how would you feel to be slightly shorter, or to be a bit taller?

In a way it repeats what has been said often in this thread, but here I am asking that you dump the mind as much as possible, and just stay in the body, and try to respond to the the feelings.

Myself, I love the dimensions of a taller woman (recent fantasy example is SylphOne's thread... ). But imagining a partner like that is very different than imagining someone who is modestly or significantly shorter than I am. It feels quite different, whatever the thinking about it might be. If physically I am stronger, larger? That surely feels different in bed, though not judging one better or worse necessarily!

For those people who are in that "average" range (5'5" to 6', I'm guessing), that might be easy to do. But for those of us on either extreme end of the height spectrum, that might be a bit more difficult. Like I said in my first post here, I'm 5'2", barely, and pretty petite. I can't really imagine myself with someone shorter than I am. I'm not sure I've ever really met a man as short as or shorter than I am. I would imagine that's going to be the same for a man who is well over 6' tall not being able to imagine a woman taller than he is.

If I could drum up my fantasy man, he would be tall enough so that I don't reach his chin - I agree with BabyDoll on that one. And frankly, I think I'm naturally drawn to a man who is physically stronger and larger not just than I am, but stronger and larger than other men as well. I don't do this consciously. In fact, I hadn't spent much time thinking about it until this thread. Is it that whole evolution thing or is it the fact that I'm submissive? [Interesting aside, I'm not submissive in my everyday life. Very alpha in business. Nurturing Earth mother with my kids. Submissive in the bedroom. Go figure.]

And to expound a bit on your "long legs" fantasy. It's interesting to me the words we choose to describe people. Whenever we (that's collective we, women do it as well as men) talk about women who are short, we say they're cute or adorable, words that we also use to describe small children. When we talk about taller women, they're beautiful or sexy.

Just my 2 cents, IM.

 

[lonelyinsnowlan]

intrigued

I've just finished reading this thread from the beginning and I'm compelled to reply.

Height does matter. But, as has been stated, only as far as we let it. I have dated men who were 6', 5' 7" (my height), 6' 4", and 6' 2". My sister is married to a man who is two inches shorter than her and she's mighty okay with that. The visceral difference... I always felt like I was too big for the guy with whom I was the same height. I felt awkwardly big. The other guys made me feel smaller and more protected (all those things previously discussed)- to a point. Whoever said personality adds a few inches is absolutely correct. The guy who was 6' dropped about 12 inches when I found out he was cheating after 4 years. Then it felt good to feel "bigger" than he was.

I have a desire to feel smaller than my partner. I want to feel vulnerable with him and the physical difference plays into that. But a man can "grow" if he demonstrates those qualities that make me feel like I could be vulnerable with him.

Incidentally, the average height of men (I believe globally, at least nationally) is 5' 9". The average height of women is 5' 4". This may have changed a little- I think these numbers are a few years old. Don't ask why I know. It's a thing- I'm REAL good at Trivial Pursuit.

 

[it_matters]

For those people who are in that "average" range (5'5" to 6', I'm guessing), that might be easy to do. But for those of us on either extreme end of the height spectrum, that might be a bit more difficult. Like I said in my first post here, I'm 5'2", barely, and pretty petite. I can't really imagine myself with someone shorter than I am. I'm not sure I've ever really met a man as short as or shorter than I am. I would imagine that's going to be the same for a man who is well over 6' tall not being able to imagine a woman taller than he is.

If I could drum up my fantasy man, he would be tall enough so that I don't reach his chin - I agree with BabyDoll on that one. And frankly, I think I'm naturally drawn to a man who is physically stronger and larger not just than I am, but stronger and larger than other men as well. I don't do this consciously. In fact, I hadn't spent much time thinking about it until this thread. Is it that whole evolution thing or is it the fact that I'm submissive? [Interesting aside, I'm not submissive in my everyday life. Very alpha in business. Nurturing Earth mother with my kids. Submissive in the bedroom. Go figure.]

And to expound a bit on your "long legs" fantasy. It's interesting to me the words we choose to describe people. Whenever we (that's collective we, women do it as well as men) talk about women who are short, we say they're cute or adorable, words that we also use to describe small children. When we talk about taller women, they're beautiful or sexy.

Just my 2 cents, IM.

Well, that was worth plenty more than two cents.

The whole idea of openness and vulnerability that Lonely just brought up, and the whole AlphaHuman thing... Whoa. That power and protection stuff is really deep, and not easy to get hold of.

And then again, you mention the outward Alpha -- out where you have to be tough, fight in business, fight for your kids -- and the inner sanctum, your really safe place, where you can let all that go... submissive doesn't equal surrendering, so I'm not sure if you meant being dominated, or merely letting go...

Anyway. I have my "cute/adorable" fantasy as well... . No, cute/adorable aren;t the words. But the feeling I have when I consider this -- without ANYTHING except fantasy to work on, right? no chemistry, personality, etc etc: in a vacuum -- the feeling is very different than the tall partner fantasy. Somewhere down there it has an effect. I wonder how deep and strong it really is? And what it means?

Just have to get my second research center going and find out...

 

[babydoll2u]

See, this absolutely proves my point. ANY height works, as long as we keep our eyes open... But EVERY height makes a difference!

(so what, she says)

Well, so, some of us are busy passing time here on Literotica, indulging in words, and philosophy that ONLY matters because we are not currently hearing someone in the bedroom, and that non-someone in the bedroom is not-saying "I just slipped off my clothes, and... hmmm. No, I don't think I am going to put anything on tonight... maybe I'll just slide my hands down my [long/short/average] body... maybe I'll stop right here..."

LOL... good sense of humor...

 

[it_matters]

LOL... good sense of humor...

It's laugh or cry, Baby, laugh or cry

 

[babydoll2u]

It's laugh or cry, Baby, laugh or cry

how well I know darlin'...

 

[BeachGurl2]

Well, that was worth plenty more than two cents.

The whole idea of openness and vulnerability that Lonely just brought up, and the whole AlphaHuman thing... Whoa. That power and protection stuff is really deep, and not easy to get hold of.

And then again, you mention the outward Alpha -- out where you have to be tough, fight in business, fight for your kids -- and the inner sanctum, your really safe place, where you can let all that go... submissive doesn't equal surrendering, so I'm not sure if you meant being dominated, or merely letting go...

Anyway. I have my "cute/adorable" fantasy as well... . No, cute/adorable aren;t the words. But the feeling I have when I consider this -- without ANYTHING except fantasy to work on, right? no chemistry, personality, etc etc: in a vacuum -- the feeling is very different than the tall partner fantasy. Somewhere down there it has an effect. I wonder how deep and strong it really is? And what it means?

Just have to get my second research center going and find out...

Submissive CAN, in fact, equal surrendering - although it can also include that "letting it go" that you mention. Allowing someone else to be in charge of a part of you for awhile, so trust and confidence and respect have to be there. That feeling of protectiveness is important. For me, I have to admit that size and physical strength have a lot to do with it.

As far as your fantasies go - stop justifying them - of course your fantasies will differ when you look at size. Men will instinctively feel protective over smaller women. I know that's not a PC viewpoint, I don't care. It's fact. It just is. Just like women will feel protected with a taller, stronger man. (Of course, I'm not including situations where women feel threatened by men. I'm talking pleasurable situations only here.)

The fact that you can physically carry someone around with ease changes that fantasy playing field, so to speak. Don't apologize for it. You're probably not going to fantasize about carrying a woman who is 5'9" into the bedroom. But you probably will fantasize about carrying a woman who is 5'2" into the bedroom. Or maybe you'll fantasize about both. If you're very large and physically strong, then the fantasy can become reality with both of those situations. Does the fact that you can or cannot do something in reality change the way you fantasize about it? Hmmm. Another question for your research center.

There's also a difference in the physical sensations that occur. Like for a woman fantasizing about being wrapped up in a man's arms. That feeling for me, as a small woman, is very different than it is for a taller/larger woman. Spooning for me is a very different experience than for someone else. So those physical sensations add to both the fantasy and the experience. The thought of being engulfed in him is another protective sensation that works for me. That works for men, too, right?. Spooning a much smaller woman gives you a difference sensation/emtion/feeling than spooning a taller woman.

So, more of my ramblings. I should probably shut up now and let someone else talk. Sorry.

 

[lonelyinsnowlan]

Does the fact that you can or cannot do something in reality change the way you fantasize about it? Hmmm. Another question for your research center.
...
There's also a difference in the physical sensations that occur. Like for a woman fantasizing about being wrapped up in a man's arms. That feeling for me, as a small woman, is very different than it is for a taller/larger woman. Spooning for me is a very different experience than for someone else. So those physical sensations add to both the fantasy and the experience. The thought of being engulfed in him is another protective sensation that works for me. That works for men, too, right?. Spooning a much smaller woman gives you a difference sensation/emtion/feeling than spooning a taller woman.

I think the fact that you can or cannot do something you fantasize about absolutely changes it. If you know you can never have sex while flying on the back of gigantic butterfly, you won't hunger for it. But if I know I want to have sex in an airplane, I'm going to try to make it happen. One remains in fuzzy dreamland, the other becomes a pursuit.

I really like this discussion of protection/submission. I had an argument with my brother once about men feeling the need to protect/take care of- he said they don't, and I heartily disagreed. I have had several men tell me they want to have someone they can take care of, etc. and I think this is an evolutionary/genetic/fundamental difference in men and women.

 

[it_matters]

Submissive CAN, in fact, equal surrendering - although it can also include that "letting it go" that you mention. Allowing someone else to be in charge of a part of you for awhile, so trust and confidence and respect have to be there. That feeling of protectiveness is important. For me, I have to admit that size and physical strength have a lot to do with it.

As far as your fantasies go - stop justifying them - of course your fantasies will differ when you look at size. Men will instinctively feel protective over smaller women. I know that's not a PC viewpoint, I don't care. It's fact. It just is. Just like women will feel protected with a taller, stronger man. (Of course, I'm not including situations where women feel threatened by men. I'm talking pleasurable situations only here.)

The fact that you can physically carry someone around with ease changes that fantasy playing field, so to speak. Don't apologize for it. You're probably not going to fantasize about carrying a woman who is 5'9" into the bedroom. But you probably will fantasize about carrying a woman who is 5'2" into the bedroom. Or maybe you'll fantasize about both. If you're very large and physically strong, then the fantasy can become reality with both of those situations. Does the fact that you can or cannot do something in reality change the way you fantasize about it? Hmmm. Another question for your research center.

There's also a difference in the physical sensations that occur. Like for a woman fantasizing about being wrapped up in a man's arms. That feeling for me, as a small woman, is very different than it is for a taller/larger woman. Spooning for me is a very different experience than for someone else. So those physical sensations add to both the fantasy and the experience. The thought of being engulfed in him is another protective sensation that works for me. That works for men, too, right?. Spooning a much smaller woman gives you a difference sensation/emtion/feeling than spooning a taller woman.

So, more of my ramblings. I should probably shut up now and let someone else talk. Sorry.

I'm sorry, I have it on higher Literotican authority that you are not allowed to "just shut up". Hey, baby, all we've got here is words! If you are going to be generous with them, all the more for us to play with... so thanks

I hear what you say about sbumission/surrender. I make a distinction here.. .or I should say, I follow up on a distinction made by Margo Anand, author of The Art of Sexual Ecstasy: surrender is loosing your protective layers, within a protected situation, where you can let yourself go deeper and deeper into the connection, whether that be a physical moment or emotional (and we all know they are bound up together so tightly...). By surrendering we open more, and offer more of our real selves... allow ourselves to be broken open into real feelings, feelings for the partner, for what they are offering. You can surrender, and allow your partner to take over, but you are immensely present, drawing in his or her light, and feeding yours right back to them -- the generosity and love granted by surrendering this deeply is overwhelming. In surrender, your partner lifts you up, honors you, and you grow incredibly strong and beautiful, a perfect partner in the dance.

Submission is different, and not to be confused with submissive behavior, where you are giving an honoring partner the right to decide. Submission in the dictionary sense of the word is giving up all power, even the receptive power of surrender. In this sense, submission is to give up your self, to disappear, to even give up your response. There are a lot of Power-trips who will diminish or wound someone to aggrandize their own damaged ego... but there is no contact then, no opening, in fact it is a denial of real connection. The heart vanishes into a physical play, and while there is an intense bond formed between the two, there is no letting go. In this sense, submission really is the opposite of surrender: it is the flip side of power, a passive aggression against an active aggression. In submission, your partner is diminished... and whenever ANY partner in the dance is made smaller, both partners are made smaller.

So -- my line is drawn where real communion vanishes. (Words words words!)

 

[BeachGurl2]

I'm sorry, I have it on higher Literotican authority that you are not allowed to "just shut up". Hey, baby, all we've got here is words! If you are going to be generous with them, all the more for us to play with... so thanks

I hear what you say about sbumission/surrender. I make a distinction here.. .or I should say, I follow up on a distinction made by Margo Anand, author of The Art of Sexual Ecstasy: surrender is loosing your protective layers, within a protected situation, where you can let yourself go deeper and deeper into the connection, whether that be a physical moment or emotional (and we all know they are bound up together so tightly...). By surrendering we open more, and offer more of our real selves... allow ourselves to be broken open into real feelings, feelings for the partner, for what they are offering. You can surrender, and allow your partner to take over, but you are immensely present, drawing in his or her light, and feeding yours right back to them -- the generosity and love granted by surrendering this deeply is overwhelming. In surrender, your partner lifts you up, honors you, and you grow incredibly strong and beautiful, a perfect partner in the dance.

Submission is different, and not to be confused with submissive behavior, where you are giving an honoring partner the right to decide. Submission in the dictionary sense of the word is giving up all power, even the receptive power of surrender. In this sense, submission is to give up your self, to disappear, to even give up your response. There are a lot of Power-trips who will diminish or wound someone to aggrandize their own damaged ego... but there is no contact then, no opening, in fact it is a denial of real connection. The heart vanishes into a physical play, and while there is an intense bond formed between the two, there is no letting go. In this sense, submission really is the opposite of surrender: it is the flip side of power, a passive aggression against an active aggression. In submission, your partner is diminished... and whenever ANY partner in the dance is made smaller, both partners are made smaller.

So -- my line is drawn where real communion vanishes. (Words words words!)

Okay, okay. I'll bite yet again. I think that most "submissives" would opt to accept the definition of "surrender" to describe what they do and feel. However, you are absolutely right. There are those who would also accept the given definition of "submission". I think that may be a really great way to distinguish between those who consider themselves to be "slaves" and those who consider themselves to be "submissives". Interestingly enough, in true D/s relationships, it is accepted that the submissive holds the true power - because they hold the ability to choose to submit or not. It is when that is not the case that you find abuse. That is why COMMUNICATION is of utmost importance. Not just in D/s relationships, but in all relationships. And when there is no communication, then as far as I believe, there is no true relationship.

I have to say, IM, that I enjoy bantering with you. You always have something intelligent to say and you make me think. Would love to sit and have a beer with you.

 

[OceanGoddess]

I really like this discussion of protection/submission. I had an argument with my brother once about men feeling the need to protect/take care of- he said they don't, and I heartily disagreed. I have had several men tell me they want to have someone they can take care of, etc. and I think this is an evolutionary/genetic/fundamental difference in men and women.

I am enjoying this discussion quite a lot, also, when I'm not trying to read through wet eyes . . .but be that as it may . . .does anyone think this is why assertive, strong, smart women often end up alone? Because men don't find them to need "taking care of/protecting?" Or they end up with unassertive, quiet men? Hmmmm.

 

[it_matters]

Okay, okay. I'll bite yet again. I think that most "submissives" would opt to accept the definition of "surrender" to describe what they do and feel. However, you are absolutely right. There are those who would also accept the given definition of "submission". I think that may be a really great way to distinguish between those who consider themselves to be "slaves" and those who consider themselves to be "submissives". Interestingly enough, in true D/s relationships, it is accepted that the submissive holds the true power - because they hold the ability to choose to submit or not. It is when that is not the case that you find abuse. That is why COMMUNICATION is of utmost importance. Not just in D/s relationships, but in all relationships. And when there is no communication, then as far as I believe, there is no true relationship.

I have to say, IM, that I enjoy bantering with you. You always have something intelligent to say and you make me think. Would love to sit and have a beer with you.

Hm, see, that is why I visit the Lit forums... "submissives hold the true power: to submit or not to submit."

But you are talking about the real Dance here... which is exactly what I am talking about as well, even if the words (we only have two of them, after all!) are not very useful to tune the nuances. If the submissive is choosing to submit, and the partner is respecting it, then the one who has been given control is almost (figuratively) kneeling before the other, and holding them up as the goddess (or god). If it is the true Dance, then there is no other response to that size of a gift, to be given a self and honored with that much opening, than to bow down -- you become the tinder, and your submissive partner the match, they pour to you so that you fill to overflowing, then rise up over, around, into the partner to fill them up...

Delicious. I had a friend who was willing... once... but I wasn't strong enough in myself to accept the role of receiver. Interesting, beautiful Dance. (Think I would be able to now, tho, hmmmm).

Dunno, these words are too charged to be useful. "Submission" is this activity with ground rules we keep getting caught in, while I want the word to refer to the act of negation of self -- a FAR FAR cry from the submissiveness I think you were talking about, and which I described lovingly above.

I think I have to go at this idea with some indirection. Or just just get out of the words... need a silent meditation: two hours without speaking, without clothing, and you know you have to pace yourselves, not end up just sitting there like lumps or sleeping it off... imagine playing with those taking/receiving energies without resorting to these impoverished sounds and scratches...

I think a beer would be good, but without the philosophy would be better. A view of the sun dying over the mountains, and some wailing Paul Winter on the radio.

 

[DLL]

whats the differance we all match up laying down

 

[Calibetsy]

I know a women who is 4'8 and her partner is 6'6 and believe me she is in control in that house I've seen her make him get on his knees. Submissive issue there. Anyway when your alone with your partner and happy why would it matter what your height was. I prefer tall men but I also perfer them thin and blonde but for me its the guy that matters.

 

[it_matters]

whats the differance we all match up laying down

Oh, absolutely DLL. But this whole thing got started when a women my body and heart were drawn to got scared of something, and started saying things that didn't have anything to do with anything. Still, when you body is stuck there wilting, you go with face value -- and it seemd that, to her, it was height that mattered.

So for that one, brief moment, it made a hell of a huge difference. (to me).

Since then the verbal masturbation has been satisfying, if not exactly sustaining... Just, you know, some of us were composition majors in college, so... well...

Hey, BeachGurl -- maybe we ARE being told to shut up!

OK, OK, DLL I take the hint, and will go find a hot date.