| U guys crack me up!!!! har har har
nooooooooooooo of course your height has NOTHING to do with success with women, if we believed that, then we might not believe well get lots of women lollll
Look guys some facts are inescapable. women like taller men, end of story. it's actually wooven in their DNA.
A tall man represents strength and security, thus ensuring survival of a womans offspring. A tall man is a good protector and generally a leader of other men.
This is why, I scoff at PUA, they tell u whatever u want to hear...u dont need to be good looking, u dont need to be tall, u can be fat and be bald and still pick up women,,,lol
When two presidential candidates run against each other Americans usually pick the tallest candidate, for much of the same evolutionary reasons.
but read this and educate yourself
Heightism is prejudice or discrimination based on height. In principle it can refer to SPAM of either unusually tall or short people.
Contents
[hide]
1 Origin of the term
2 In business
3 Dating and marriage
4 In the media
5 Legislation
6 See also
7 References
8 External links
[edit] Origin of the term
The term heightism was coined by sociologist Saul Feldman in a paper titled "The presentation of shortness in everyday life—height and heightism in American society: Toward a sociology of stature", presented at the meeting of the American Sociological Association in 1971.[1][2] Heightism was included in the Second Barnhart Dictionary of New English (1971)[3] and popularized by Time magazine in a 1971 article on Feldman's paper.[4]
The word is an example of Time magazine's habit of supplying new words through "unusual use of affixes",[5] although Time itself objected to the term's inclusion in the 1991 Random Webster's College Dictionary, citing it as an example of the dictionary "straining ... to avoid giving offense, except to good usage" and "[lending] authority to scores of questionable usages, many of them tinged with politically correct views."[6]
Heightism is one of a proliferation of neologisms relating to prejudice and discrimination that are lexically patterned after sexism.[7]
[edit] In business
Some jobs do require or at least favor tall people, including some manual labor jobs, law enforcement, most professional sports, and fashion modeling. Military pilots have to be 64 to 77 inches (160 to 200 cm) tall with a sitting height of 34 to 40 inches (86 to 100 cm).[8] Conversely certain professions have upper height limits, such as female ballet dancers who are usually required to be under 5 feet 7 inches (1.70 m).[citation needed] These exceptions noted, in the great majority of cases a person’s height would not seem to have an effect on how well they are able to perform their job. Nevertheless, studies have shown that short people are paid less than taller people, with disparities similar in magnitude to the race and gender gaps.[9][10]
A survey of Fortune 500 CEO height in 2005 revealed that they were on average 6 ft 0 in (1.83 m) tall, which is approximately 2.5 inches (6.4 cm) taller than the average American man. 30% were 6 ft 2 in (1.88 m) tall or more; in comparison only 3.9% of the overall United States population is of this height.[11] Similar surveys have uncovered that less than 3% of CEOs were below 5 ft 7 in (1.70 m) in height. Ninety percent of CEOs are of above average height.[12]
[edit] Dating and marriage
Heightism is also a factor in dating preferences. For some people, height is a noteworthy factor in sexual attractiveness.
The greater reproductive success of taller men is attested to by studies indicating that taller men are more likely to be married and to have more children, except in societies with severe gender imbalances caused by war.[13][14] However, more recent research has drawn this theory into question, finding no correlation between height and offspring count.[15] Moreover, research on leg length and leg-to-body ratio conflict with the notion that there is a distinct preference for taller mates. A 2008 study found that both extremes, tall and short, reduced attractiveness, and a 2006 study found that a lower leg-to-body ratio in men and higher leg-to-body ratio in women increased aesthetic appeal .[16][17] Biologically, from an evolutionary perspective, these findings are consistent with data relating height to human health. Therefore, a biological or, more specifically, an evolutionary argument for the preference of a taller mate is questionable, lacking definitive evidence.
Nonetheless, on a cultural level in Post-industrial society, a sociological relationship between height and perceived attractiveness exists. This cultural characteristic, while applicable to the modernized world, is not a transcendental human quality.[18] Quantitative studies of woman-for-men personal advertisements have shown strong preference for tall men, with a large percentage indicating that a man significantly below average height was unacceptable.[19] A study produced by the Universities of Groningen and Valencia, has found that men, who felt most anxious about attractive, physically dominant, and socially powerful rivals, were less jealous, the taller they were themselves.[20] The study also found that women were most jealous of others' physical attractiveness, but women of medium height were the least jealous.[21] The report, produced by Dutch and Spanish researchers, stated that because average height women tend to be the most fertile and healthy, they would be less likely to feel threatened by women with those similar features.[22]
Paradoxically, a study has shown that in Britain, short women were the most likely to be married and have children. Some reasons which have been suggested for this situation include the fact that short women start puberty earlier than taller women who experience delayed fertility since they spend more energy growing, and that shorter women have a larger pool of men to choose from if they wish for a taller mate.[22] Dr. Adam Eyre-Walker from the Centre for the Study of Evolution at the University of Sussex, argues that the study was done on British people, and so the choices may actually be a result of the influence of culture.[22]
It is unclear and debated as to the extent to which such preferences are innate or are the function of a society in which height discrimination impacts on socio-economic status. Certainly, much is always made in newspapers and magazines of celebrity couples with a notable height difference, especially where a man is shorter than his wife (for example, Jamie Cullum, 7 inches (18 cm) shorter at 5 ft 4 in (1.63 m) than Sophie Dahl, though the difference is often exaggerated).
|
CHAT
