would you rather date a chick that was 5'6 170lb, or 6'3 170lb

[canadianhitman]

Five-seven and 170 is most likely a fatty...so I'll go with six-three. That'd make her taller than me, but I'd be okay with that.

 

[calveless wonder]

i love tall girls, so 6'3. even though that means she'd have about a half a foot on me.

my tallest conquest was 6'2 in high school.

man she was hot

 

[wootoom]

6 3 would be really tight

 

[stosstruppe]

5ft 6in - heck, 170lb is only about 12stone, hardly a fatty.

 

[Tatyana]

That pretty much covers every women on earth

*coughs*

 

[xrsist]

6'3 got my vote

 

[beefcake28]

the 6'3 chick. We'd be the same height, 5'6 170 is a little chubby for my tastes. Spread that 170 over a girl whose 6'3 and it could look damn good.

Exactly.

 

[musclemom]

You guys who think a 5'6" 170 lb. woman has to be fat have NO idea what you're talking about. Habitual health posts here occasionally, and those are about her stats (she said in her photo shoot she was 5'7" and 169)

http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/members/habitualhealth.html

A 6'3" 170 pound woman is skinny fat territory, you're talking supermodel proportions. She can't possibly have any muscle on her, though, just not possible.

Stop judging what's potentially hotness by a scale, will you please. Go by what pleases the eye, hell, go by frigging calliper and BF measurements if you must, but stop placing value based on scale numbers. Most women, particularly those in the entertainment or fashion industry, either lie like shit about what they weigh, or they are at an extremely unhealthfully low bodyweight for their height, maintained by starvation and nothing else. Looks good on camera, after makeup, wardrobe and photoshopping, but in reality, ick.

 

[heatherrae]

dates that require spending money? Or could we just go grab a burger and fuck?

Where do you get free burgers? I wanna know.

 

[Dial_tone]

You guys who think a 5'6" 170 lb. woman has to be fat have NO idea what you're talking about. Habitual health posts here occasionally, and those are about her stats (she said in her photo shoot she was 5'7" and 169)

http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/members/habitualhealth.html

A 6'3" 170 pound woman is skinny fat territory, you're talking supermodel proportions. She can't possibly have any muscle on her, though, just not possible.

Stop judging what's potentially hotness by a scale, will you please. Go by what pleases the eye, hell, go by frigging calliper and BF measurements if you must, but stop placing value based on scale numbers. Most women, particularly those in the entertainment or fashion industry, either lie like shit about what they weigh, or they are at an extremely unhealthfully low bodyweight for their height, maintained by starvation and nothing else. Looks good on camera, after makeup, wardrobe and photoshopping, but in reality, ick.

+1. I'm not even sweating 5'6, 170. I would hit that body on live tv and give the musclehead thumbs up while I do.