Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[deletedaccount]

Discounting height neurosis. As in a tangible difference to your attractiveness and social perception. I believe below 5'7"-5'8" LL is a good idea, above that isn't necessary although still can yield positive outcome, say 5'9" to 6'0".

[..]

I believe LL should be banned for anyone above 5'8" until the surgery becomes non-invasive one day.

[precice strider]

Below 6'0" only, look at Alfonso. However, if I was 5'11" I wouldn't even consider it.

Regardless, to me I think LL is not logical if you're already taller than most people you see.

[deletedaccount]

Below 6'0" only, look at Alfonso. However, if I was 5'11" I wouldn't even consider it.

Regardless, to me I think LL is not logical if you're already taller than most people you see.

Exactly
LL at 5'11 is beyond me but to each their own I guess

[deletedaccount]

I believe LL should be banned for anyone above 5'8" until the surgery becomes non-invasive one day.

If it becomes non invasive it should still be restrictive because then everyone would get it and the short people would be short again

[ghkid2019]

Definition of logical:  a tangible difference to your attractiveness and social perception

 For someone without height neurosis?  Any height.

For someone with height neurosis? Any height.

And no dude, it shouldn't be fúcking restricted to anyone. "Everyone will get it." So they don't have a right to? Anyone should be able to get it. And it doesn't matter anyways, you're worrying about everyone getting it when it should really be your son's son worrying about technology getting to this point in the year 2100.

The same way you gatekeep people from getting CLL is the same way Paley used to gatekeep anyone above 5'5 from getting CLL. Then he realized someone 5'6 could also have height neurosis (shocker), and so can 5'7, 5'8, 5'11, doesn't even matter.

[deletedaccount]

Definition of logical:  a tangible difference to your attractiveness and social perception

 For someone without height neurosis?  Any height.

For someone with height neurosis? Any height.

And no dude, it shouldn't be fúcking restricted to anyone. "Everyone will get it." So they don't have a right to? Anyone should be able to get it. And it doesn't matter anyways, you're worrying about everyone getting it when it should really be your son's son worrying about technology getting to this point in the year 2100.

The same way you gatekeep people from getting CLL is the same way Paley used to gatekeep anyone above 5'5 from getting CLL. Then he realized someone 5'6 could also have height neurosis (shocker), and so can 5'7, 5'8, 5'11, doesn't even matter.

If LL became as easy as a keratin treatment everyone would do it and it wouldn't solve the problem of shortness and heightism, no solution for that

There is no reason for a 6'4 guy to want to get to 6'7 apart from bball, just pointless so there is a point where LL isn't a rational choice
which is what I asked

Factoring in neurosis you could justify your argument

[deletedaccount]

Definition of logical:  a tangible difference to your attractiveness and social perception

 For someone without height neurosis?  Any height.

For someone with height neurosis? Any height.

And no dude, it shouldn't be fúcking restricted to anyone. "Everyone will get it." So they don't have a right to? Anyone should be able to get it. And it doesn't matter anyways, you're worrying about everyone getting it when it should really be your son's son worrying about technology getting to this point in the year 2100.

The same way you gatekeep people from getting CLL is the same way Paley used to gatekeep anyone above 5'5 from getting CLL. Then he realized someone 5'6 could also have height neurosis (shocker), and so can 5'7, 5'8, 5'11, doesn't even matter.

I'm not gatekeeping anyone, people can do whatever they want. The everyone will get it is the point just for the sake of discussion.

[Iron_Man]

I think this is individual, but it seems to me that men 178-179 and taller in most cases don’t have a height neurosis and wouldn’t go for this surgery

[..]

If it becomes non invasive it should still be restrictive because then everyone would get it and the short people would be short again

Not necessarily. After 6'4" or so, height starts to become a disadvantage. So worst case scenario, everyone would be tall and height no longer matters.

[deletedaccount]

Not everyone can be tall if a limit still exists on how much gain

[..]

Not everyone can be tall if a limit still exists on how much gain

Ok, in that case, problems will still exist. But things will definitely be a lot better.

I don't believe many women 5'7" and above want to be taller even if they could. While men 5'4-5'6" do and will catch up with the women's heights.

And also how easy and cheap would it be? Gym is easy and cheap, but many people don't do it. Teeth braces are the same.

[ZUCC420]

Only reason tall height is considered attractive for a man is simply because of sēxual dimorphism rather than purely aesthetic sensibility, any other reason are corollaries i.e (big d!ck, fighting capacity, impression of being a leader, etc).

Humans aren't forgiving when it comes to men because of basic evolutionary principles such as sperm being cheap while eggs expensive thus men are treated as disposable in a non-scarce demographic environment (50-50 male to female), so anything out of the ordinary such as height is appraised rather critically.

There are chiefly two categories namely ordinary and extraordinary, the former grants nothing special while latter can either confer great benefits or doleful misery.

Since LL is an invasive debilitating surgery that haunts you for the rest of your life given that you lengthen beyond 2.5 cm, the rational choice is obviously if you're below the average height of your relative proximity which could be your country, peer groups, etc while suffering from heightism as result on a daily basis.

But to make an absolute judgement with regards to which point you would've to be an imbecile to consider it cannot be so easily determined since as we progress to post modernity the world will continue to gradually devolve to more superficiality as a consequence of technology and its vast ramifications on our social landscape.

In short currently the standard is already screwed which I refer to as the "hyper real" but as time goes on it'll get even more screwier than it already is. ]

Since it's all relative as time goes on we should always aim for what's currently in vogue such as six feet or 183 cm and not anything beyond because of the diminishing returns and mostly harmful nature of LL.

[Bane]

Although the average male height in the US is 5'9.5", the more practical average is 5'10" for several reasons.
* 5'9.5" includes the old and elderly (age 60+), which brings down the average height. If you exclude them, that will bring the average closer to 5'10".
* Average height of white and black males (the tallest average heights by race) are 5'10", who combined make up the large majority of the US.
* Employers tend to hire taller candidates, so the workplace average height for males is closer to 5'10".

So 5'10" is the practical average. Then the average range for males in the US is between 5'9" to 5'11", so I can see how someone who is 5'11" (while not recommended) would want to get leg lengthening surgery to get out of the average range and break the 6 foot barrier into the tall range. Here are my takes on the benefits of LL by height range.

Below 5'6" - This is short, so it is most beneficial.
5'6" to 5'8" - Not quite short stature, but quite a bit away from the mean. Very beneficial.
5'8+ to under 5'10" - A little below average. Benefits start fading, but still fairly beneficial and helps get you over the mean and enjoy life being taller.
5'10" to 5'11" (maybe up to 5'11.5") - Average range. Not really recommended and only mildly beneficial in most cases, but if the person wants to do it to get past the average range and enjoy their life in the tall range, then that's their decision.
6'0" or taller - Not recommended or necessary at all, and no benefits with LL. If you can't get that dream job, command respect, or find a date, your height is not the issue. There is something else wrong with you, so find it and fix it.

[Body Builder]

Doing LL if you are more than 5.11 is insane, unless you live in a very few countries in the world where average is almost 6ft. Still I don't find any reason.

At 5.9-10 doing LL has some benefits on dating but nothing else. Still dating is important though.

At 5.7-5.8 LL has some strong benefits on dating and how tall people perceive you generally.

At 5.5-5.6 LL is important for all life's aspects to live normally without major drawbacks.

At less than 5.5 LL is NECESSARY to live relatively normal. I say relatively because if you are 5.3 lets say, even 1 surgery won't guarantee you not having drawbacks in a lot of instances. But still you will be much better.

In a few words, in 5.7 and under LL is crucial.
From 5.7 to 5.11 LL has some things to offer (the shorter you are the more it has of course, 5.7 has  a lit of differences to 5.10 but still is somehow normal).
From 5.11 and over LL is a no.

[Astronomy]

Diff. countries have diff. height standards.
For example,for China,I think it's logical for one below 168cm to do LL.

[Astronomy]

Below 8ft

[Ronman]

You'd be a fool to to consider it if you are 5'11 or above

Even at 5'8 I am starting to think the time and risks are not worth it just to get to 5'10.5

If I want to feel 'bigger', far better to eventually get on TRT and take bodybuilding more seriously

[HateLAPELoveSTEM]

Doing LL if you are more than 5.11 is insane, unless you live in a very few countries in the world where average is almost 6ft. Still I don't find any reason.

At 5.9-10 doing LL has some benefits on dating but nothing else. Still dating is important though.

At 5.7-5.8 LL has some strong benefits on dating and how tall people perceive you generally.

At 5.5-5.6 LL is important for all life's aspects to live normally without major drawbacks.

At less than 5.5 LL is NECESSARY to live relatively normal. I say relatively because if you are 5.3 lets say, even 1 surgery won't guarantee you not having drawbacks in a lot of instances. But still you will be much better.

In a few words, in 5.7 and under LL is crucial.
From 5.7 to 5.11 LL has some things to offer (the shorter you are the more it has of course, 5.7 has  a lit of differences to 5.10 but still is somehow normal).
From 5.11 and over LL is a no.

I think over 172cm LL is not important at all. The merits will not be significant, but yeah I agree that at less than 5.5 LL is really necessary, since at that height you can't even live a normal life.

[palm_trees]

Check out the chart on this study:
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=573743071&hl=en&sxsrf=AM9HkKkO2J9g5yOiloFVotrHAkkioxR1XA:1697450179589&q=womens+acceptance+of+potential+male+partners+based+on+male+height&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwicuunXpvqBAxVJm4kEHUblCQQQ0pQJegQIDBAB&biw=1120&bih=628&dpr=3#imgrc=ownS8Rgg6rWCbM

Further analysis of their data demonstrates the importance of every inch of height for men, as two inches of height gain for a man can be found to have the following results:

- A man in the 5'4-5'6" range will have more than double the potential number of female partners with 2" height gain.
- A 5'4" man will have 2.3 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- A 5'7" man will have 1.86 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- Benefits become insignificant past 5'10".
- Below 5'1" a 2" height gain also makes an insignificant difference, as even after 2" gain, a man at this height is still "too short" for most women to consider.

Because the few women who are willing to date a shorter men are also generally willing to date a taller man as well, the competition for women willing to date shorter men becomes extremely high. This means:

- A 5' man must "beat" over 12 men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- A 5'4" man will have to "beat" over 7 other men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- 5'10 to 6'4" men have the least competition as the demand for these men outpaces their supply, and statistically overall women must compete for these men rather than vice versa.

These studies may also be self reported (meaning men often lie about their height giving them an extra inch), meaning 5’10 could very well be 5’9 (or rounded to 5’10 with shoes)

[Dirona]

Check out the chart on this study:
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=573743071&hl=en&sxsrf=AM9HkKkO2J9g5yOiloFVotrHAkkioxR1XA:1697450179589&q=womens+acceptance+of+potential+male+partners+based+on+male+height&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwicuunXpvqBAxVJm4kEHUblCQQQ0pQJegQIDBAB&biw=1120&bih=628&dpr=3#imgrc=ownS8Rgg6rWCbM

Further analysis of their data demonstrates the importance of every inch of height for men, as two inches of height gain for a man can be found to have the following results:

- A man in the 5'4-5'6" range will have more than double the potential number of female partners with 2" height gain.
- A 5'4" man will have 2.3 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- A 5'7" man will have 1.86 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- Benefits become insignificant past 5'10".
- Below 5'1" a 2" height gain also makes an insignificant difference, as even after 2" gain, a man at this height is still "too short" for most women to consider.

Because the few women who are willing to date a shorter men are also generally willing to date a taller man as well, the competition for women willing to date shorter men becomes extremely high. This means:

- A 5' man must "beat" over 12 men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- A 5'4" man will have to "beat" over 7 other men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- 5'10 to 6'4" men have the least competition as the demand for these men outpaces their supply, and statistically overall women must compete for these men rather than vice versa.

These studies may also be self reported (meaning men often lie about their height giving them an extra inch), meaning 5’10 could very well be 5’9 (or rounded to 5’10 with shoes)

I agree. If I were to be below 5 ft 6, I would not be on this forum. Either I would be dead or be done with LL(even with the old method). No debate whatsoever regarding risks, proportions money or whatever.

[palm_trees]

I agree. If I were to be below 5 ft 6, I would not be on this forum. Either I would be dead or be done with LL(even with the old method). No debate whatsoever regarding risks, proportions money or whatever.

For dudes in the 5'4 - 5'6 range LL will absolutely change their lives and I believe give them the biggest benefit in terms of dating, respect from peers, general happiness w/ life, etc. all the challenges of being a man will have a huge boost. Guys above this range of course will benefit as well, but the taller / closer you are to average height really have to ask yourself if the cost to beneift in terms of financial, mental, and general difficulty of going through LL is really worth it. (may not be advisable unless all other aspects of life are dialed in such as facial attractivness, emotional health, financial stability, etc are in order to ensure that those aren't actually the real culprits) Of course everyone here has a form of body dysmorphia and we should not gatekeep in the sense that others are more deserving of LL than others. Everyone is equally deserving, but you have to really ask yourself if it is worth it due to the huge costs incurred and whether it is truly other aspects of your life that need to be improved first. A guy within and under 5'4 and 5'6, no matter how handsome, rich, socially adept, etc. he is, he will always face discrimination of his height and be seen as compensating for wanting to improve any aspect of his life (such as lifting weights and getting shredded, or showcasing a great fashion style) as we have seen ruthlessly online people take on short men. For those other features such as a great face, great style, great body to really shine I believe a man has to be taller than that range. This is all my personal opinion of course and should not be taken as fact

[NailedLegs]

Very great posts in this thread. A good read for anyone considering LL.

I agree with palm_trees. Palm_trees, where is that image from? I'm trying to find the source but it's showing me google images, then some website girls ask guys, I've never heard of it.

This also correlates with the financial aspect. There is a huge benefit going up to 5 10, less benefit going up to 6'0", and hardly any benefit/no correlation after. HJ made a great video on this, everyone should watch it.

The inverse, wherein there's no benefit between going from 5'1" to 5'3" also makes sense. You're still comically short. Yes, comically short as harsh as that sounds because thats what society sees. I don't agree with how society treats short men, I'm short myself, but thats what it is. I won't sugarcoat the truth.

[Kintaeryos]

LL haunts you for the rest of your life

3-year-old post so it might be a long shot, but what do you mean by this?

[Metaphyglv]

The inverse, wherein there's no benefit between going from 5'1" to 5'3" also makes sense. You're still comically short. Yes, comically short as harsh as that sounds because thats what society sees. I don't agree with how society treats short men, I'm short myself, but thats what it is. I won't sugarcoat the truth.

Nah, the shorter you are the better the boost in your confidence, always you are not already, and sorry for this, a midget. Being 4'2 to 4'8 ft?that doesn't make any difference at all, but starting at 5 ft a couple cm would mean you are no longer shorter than every girl you see, but at least taller than a couple of them. Thats a huge impact in dudes who are in the shorter side of the spectrum, life saving for those whose shortness has caused a huge social anxiety. Of course if we talk about living the most "normal life" you can have, and not freaking out about LL and doing 12 cm at an absolute max, or 6 cm if is one segment, 5 ft its the minimum, under that you still in the midget spectrum i think

[Temoc]

Very great posts in this thread. A good read for anyone considering LL.

I agree with palm_trees. Palm_trees, where is that image from? I'm trying to find the source but it's showing me google images, then some website girls ask guys, I've never heard of it.

This also correlates with the financial aspect. There is a huge benefit going up to 5 10, less benefit going up to 6'0", and hardly any benefit/no correlation after. HJ made a great video on this, everyone should watch it.

The inverse, wherein there's no benefit between going from 5'1" to 5'3" also makes sense. You're still comically short. Yes, comically short as harsh as that sounds because thats what society sees. I don't agree with how society treats short men, I'm short myself, but thats what it is. I won't sugarcoat the truth.

Different benefits I guess. 5'5" to 5'8" or so would see the most benefits around dating and all around respect. Being 5'7" is already much better than 5'5" because you're now taller than some many girls. At 5'10" you're the average in most Western countries, you're taller than virtually every girl, you can now even claim you're 6' because most people are clueless.
At 5'1" or even shorter it's more about functionality. It will be easier to find clothes, to drive a car, to reach taller shelves. Also with double LL you can reach maybe 5'5" or so.
At 5'10" or above it's more about height neurosis. If you live in Northern Europe at 5'10" you will feel a bit short, although it isn't terrible. Still, it's undeniable that guys who are tall, around 6'2", get a lot of attention.

I'd say I don't see any reason somebody taller than 6'1" doing LL. At 6'4" or something you are insane if you're doing LL.

[finertoga]

Check out the chart on this study:
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=573743071&hl=en&sxsrf=AM9HkKkO2J9g5yOiloFVotrHAkkioxR1XA:1697450179589&q=womens+acceptance+of+potential+male+partners+based+on+male+height&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwicuunXpvqBAxVJm4kEHUblCQQQ0pQJegQIDBAB&biw=1120&bih=628&dpr=3#imgrc=ownS8Rgg6rWCbM

Further analysis of their data demonstrates the importance of every inch of height for men, as two inches of height gain for a man can be found to have the following results:

- A man in the 5'4-5'6" range will have more than double the potential number of female partners with 2" height gain.
- A 5'4" man will have 2.3 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- A 5'7" man will have 1.86 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- Benefits become insignificant past 5'10".
- Below 5'1" a 2" height gain also makes an insignificant difference, as even after 2" gain, a man at this height is still "too short" for most women to consider.

Because the few women who are willing to date a shorter men are also generally willing to date a taller man as well, the competition for women willing to date shorter men becomes extremely high. This means:

- A 5' man must "beat" over 12 men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- A 5'4" man will have to "beat" over 7 other men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- 5'10 to 6'4" men have the least competition as the demand for these men outpaces their supply, and statistically overall women must compete for these men rather than vice versa.

These studies may also be self reported (meaning men often lie about their height giving them an extra inch), meaning 5’10 could very well be 5’9 (or rounded to 5’10 with shoes)

This is an interesting study. At 5’5.5”, wearing 1.5 inch lifts to put me at 5’7” made a huge difference in the way I was treated by women. They were much more receptive, i got more looks from women in bars and clubs, and I even got invited back to a table with multiple girls (never happened without the lifts). I think the jump from 5’5.5” to 5’7” is more than 2 times, I’d say it’s at least 3x more. Women in conversation were just much warmer towards me, like I can’t explain it exactly but I felt like I didn’t have to carry the conversation as much as when I was 5’5.5”, they would actually put in more effort to conversate.

[Kintaeryos]

If you live in a tall country, max 6'0 imo, maybe 6'1 if you really wanna be tall even in tall countries and want to stop worrying about height completely. From 6'2 it's completely unnecessary, you're in the ideal height range.

[HateLAPELoveSTEM]

Check out the chart on this study:
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=573743071&hl=en&sxsrf=AM9HkKkO2J9g5yOiloFVotrHAkkioxR1XA:1697450179589&q=womens+acceptance+of+potential+male+partners+based+on+male+height&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwicuunXpvqBAxVJm4kEHUblCQQQ0pQJegQIDBAB&biw=1120&bih=628&dpr=3#imgrc=ownS8Rgg6rWCbM

Further analysis of their data demonstrates the importance of every inch of height for men, as two inches of height gain for a man can be found to have the following results:

- A man in the 5'4-5'6" range will have more than double the potential number of female partners with 2" height gain.
- A 5'4" man will have 2.3 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- A 5'7" man will have 1.86 times as many potential female partners by gaining 2" height.
- Benefits become insignificant past 5'10".
- Below 5'1" a 2" height gain also makes an insignificant difference, as even after 2" gain, a man at this height is still "too short" for most women to consider.

Because the few women who are willing to date a shorter men are also generally willing to date a taller man as well, the competition for women willing to date shorter men becomes extremely high. This means:

- A 5' man must "beat" over 12 men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- A 5'4" man will have to "beat" over 7 other men (most of whom will be taller) to get a girl accepting of his height.
- 5'10 to 6'4" men have the least competition as the demand for these men outpaces their supply, and statistically overall women must compete for these men rather than vice versa.

These studies may also be self reported (meaning men often lie about their height giving them an extra inch), meaning 5’10 could very well be 5’9 (or rounded to 5’10 with shoes)

How much of a hodgepodge of various retarded thinking does this chart gotta be to tout being 6' you will have 100% acceptance from women lmfao? This chart for sure can't be taken seriously and tell me where do these data come from? A random guy's ass?

We all know being tall is advantageous but we need reasonable truth-telling instead of being deceived into distortions of reality and then believe muh tenfold acceptance being 6' or other bs.

If you have ever touched the grass being tall can't enable you to escape inceldom if u r also poor ugly fat etc., but yeah being tall can magnify the chances but it can never magnify them to be 100% as many socially retarded forumers here believe.

[AllinStryde]

You have Chad looks, full hair, in shape.  Go for 5 inches and you'll be ready for anything.  Just know, that 2 LL procedures will mess with athletic capabilities, even just 1 will.  You will need to keep that in mind.  Have someone here do a mockup.  stay within wingspan proportions.  If you go above it, just don't overdo it...but most people won't notice.