Heightism, Detachment & Sociopathy – The Rules Revisited

Darwin once stated, it is not the strongest that are most likely to survive, but those most adaptable to change. Height elicits expectation, yet it does not determine personality or social standing. Despite what many men and women believe, being restricted by one’s height or weight presents a valuable challenge that would not exist, if modern society was more accepting of its innate diversity. From a historical perspective, this is far from new behaviour. However, there are countless erroneous presumptions associated with height that limit our understanding of how heightism originally came to be.

One of the earliest, common references is that of the “Napoleon Complex”, which denotes an inferiority complex or deep-rooted hang-up with one’s own height. However, the original purpose of this term is rarely analysed, nor it is considered that history is typically written by the victor. Smear campaigns were nothing new. Since we have learnt to paint on cave-walls, we have used visual and/or linguistic mediums to convey useful and impractically vain information. To twist and turn information, regardless of its accuracy stretches back to the beginning of ancient warfare. This leads us to a simple fact: Napoleon Bon Apart (5.6ft / 1.68m) was taller than Horatio Nelson (5.4ft / 1.64m). One would think that such a basic fact could easily be discerned by the masses, however, Nelson was accustomed to taking measures against “looking short”. That being said, when the height difference is below 2 inches or five centimetres, it is fairly easy to play with appearances, but whereas many people nowadays can purchase flats from nearby stores, Nelson had to devise his own methods of altering his appearance.
Nelson understood that height is as physical as it is psychological. Anyone can seem tall, while they truly aren’t. If you are bold enough, you can make anyone believe anything, but let’s not throw all caution to the wind just yet. There are physiological limits without bone-shattering application traditional Chinese surgery. Limitations that cannot be applied to the art of propaganda. He may not have been taller than his opponent, although you wouldn’t know with how much effort he invested in being referred to as the taller out of the two.
To show the extent of how successful his propaganda campaigns actually were…in honour of Nelson’s victory, the column built in Trafalgar Square was designed to be the tallest landmark in all of London. Some historians suggest that it was Nelson’s explicit wish for the highest monument to be dedicated to him, so he could oversee the entirety of the metropolis of London at the time.

As we are judged by our appearance, prior to our actions…Before we even open up our mouth, it is only logical to give yourself the best chances. In the old days, it was easier to make yourself appear taller, smarter and more capable. Nowadays, it has become much harder for anyone to pretend to be something they are not, but it is never impossible. Not for anyone…However, it appears to be easier for taller men to deceive women than their shorter counterpart. Again, not impossible. The truth is that under the right circumstances, people will turn a blind eye to almost anything, if they are otherwise occupied…They will disregard height differences, personal disagreements and even the most heart-wrenching betrayals, when the appeal to their self-interest is sufficient. Although the interests of one or more people may be temporarily aligned, that does not guarantee any form of loyalty or respect once they are not. In fact, short men and women live longer, when they’re weary of the company they keep. It is one thing to be useful, but to be repeatedly used as a stepping stone is a fate no one should settle for, regardless of their stature.

Height & Intelligence

History is full of examples, where height serves as an indicator of high intelligence or brute force. Whereas some geniuses are born, most forms of intelligence are cultivated and developed over time. In other words, every human being has the potential to enhance their natural abilities or fight against them. Whereas many living beings are driven by instinct, we have the free will to choose. In this, we are given a distinct advantage. Through conscious choice, one can overcome the height-based bias that runs riot in the world. However, we can only free ourselves, we cannot force others into the position to acknowledge the existence or negative impact of heightism.
Being short is not a handy-cap. It does not determine EQ, IQ or intelligence of thought. Here, one has to to bear in mind that the most intelligent of people were never revered throughout history, they were shunned, exiled and often murdered in the most heinous manner. However, where the general cultivation of intelligence is concerned, Jung’s theory on personality development indicates that if you are not athletically- or strength-orientated as a short person, your talent most likely lies elsewhere. Further research into the hidden talents of the “vertically challenged” shows that many excel at communication. Whereas some had to become quick witted by being subjected to abuse, others were born with the gift of the gab. It gives them an irresistible charm that makes them much more successful in the dating game. For those that are still mastering that knack for words, the trick is to say less than necessary.

Needless to mention, there are many different types of intelligence. Although we continue to quantify new forms, quantum physics suggests the avenues of intelligence are infinite. If we can conceive being a genius in a subject in our minds, it is fairly possible to cultivate the knowledge necessary to succeed. That being said, if you weren’t born swimming against the tide, I wouldn’t recommend to start now. Nurture your natural abilities, but keep an open mind. After all, you wouldn’t expect Bach, Tesla or Einstein to abandon their respective fields, for what was expected of them. Truth is not a phenomena of mass-appeal, neither is free will. The most intelligent, remarkable and revered characters throughout history were not recognised for their achievement. They did not need to be. They did what felt right for them, regardless of what society thought of them. That being said, appearance and social standing can easily override intelligence, but it depends very much on the circumstances. In such an occasion, the personality of a person often defines their instinctual reaction. (It should be noted that psychopaths are predominantly prone to react in specific ways, whereas sociopaths often lack a reaction, unless attempting to elicit a specific response.)
As stated before, there is such a thing as too intelligent. However, there are two distinct types of “high intelligence.” As paradoxical as it may seem, the first type of supremely intelligent people, capable of outsmarting the world’s finest, frequently feign ignorance to fit in. Conversely, the second type often lack the social intelligence to not outshine their master (at every turn), unless the right circumstances are in their favour.
For many, high intelligence is frightening. Combined with the lack of height, it is like drawing a bullseye on one’s back. Even if you give someone the right answer or advice, if it’s not you they wanna hear it from, then the entire endeavour is flawed from the outset. At times, we fail to realise just how intelligent those around us are, if our ego prevents us from seeing them for what they are truly capable of.
Tall or not, nothing is as it seems. We can never know anyone by their appearance or glimpses of their personality. Even the type or level intelligence only serves us to a limits degree. Truth is only time reveals the reality of a person and/or situation. Hitler considered to the Jews to be of lower intelligence. Before then, men thought of women as less intelligent. And the time before that, it was African Americans. For someone to be superior, some has to be viewed as inferior. The more superior someone is, the more inferior another becomes. In a way, it is the cycle and sway of power. Without a smidgen of humility or compassion toward their opponent, people rise to inconceivable heights. However, they must invariably fall from their high horse in this life or the next. Regardless of how sly or intelligent, no one can escape the moral consequences of their behaviour toward themselves or others. So, think twice before acting out revenge or ill-will…Think twice before judging yourself based on appearance or intelligence. Beauty and intelligence are both in the eye of the beholder. They are malleable, superficial properties that are easily altered, as is what we gain from them. However, the challenge in problem-solving is to realise that we cannot change certain aspects of ourselves, we can only overcome them by denying them the power to act upon us. If we doomed to be short, the most intelligent coping strategy is to make the best of it. Ironically, this is also one of the most effective ways to annoy and irritate those that gain a level of satisfaction from demeaning others. The lack of a reaction/response or even a simple agreement can startle the most determined bully long enough to diffuse tension, but it can also have the exact opposite effect.

Height & Mental Illness

Many short men are either depict as the arrogant smartass, the sly mediator and the cold-blooded sociopath or psychopath. However, how closely related are height and mental well-being? Although it shouldn’t have such detrimental effects, any form of discrimination takes its toll. As height and well-being are indirectly connected through the self-image that is established through childhood and adulthood. Height can never be a definite indicator of sanity and it is ludicrous that some humour this notion. From a professional standpoint, height affects many facets of life, from dating to work opportunities to socialising, which in turn affects mental and emotional health.
Truth be told, just by being short or fat, the chance of getting employed or earning more is significantly lower. After all, it could be argued that any profession that is restricted by height requirements only perpetuates a narrow-minded, inaccurate view of how height determines available career-choices and progression. However, no argument or clever statement can change the reality of the situation.
Although height discrimination has reached the realms of undeniability, that does not stop people from trying. Hell, I would depressed if interview after interview employers would take one look at me and my CV, make some excuse and hired someone half my age with less qualifications but taller. Equal employment opportunities means that it shouldn’t matter if I’m a 4ft grey alien from Alpha Centauri, every living being should have the same opportunity to prove their skills and put food on the table. To be expected to be mentally stable in such conditions is like fighting an endless tide of unrealistic expectations. It should be noted that those who demand often are not expected to deliver, if put in the same position. On a separate note, I’ve noticed short men that have risen above the negative restrictions and implications of heightism rarely associate with other short men, unless carefully selected. They wish to distance themselves as far as they can from being a target, or being associated with anything that threatens the position they have fought to gain. Those that have made it are not all cut-throat, but the majority have had to learn to function in a world of predators. As a consequence, the prey grows far beyond its former predator(s). Whereas some develop anti-social qualities to survive among psychopaths, others choose to steer their moral compass in the opposite direction. They cultivate an air of non-attachment that almost gives them a monk-like presence. They are at peace with who they are. They do not feel the urge to seek justice or vengeance…They only act when acted upon. And I have the deepest empathy for those that have fallen victim to such a powerful force. Few that I know of make it out alive with their ego intact. Some are so emasculated that it stays with them for the rest of their lives (which is most likely equivalent to what they have done to others for being short, fat or otherwise impaired in their opinion).

The Short Sociopath VS The Tall Psychopath

So far in my career, I’ve encountered short and tall sociopaths. However, I’ve always found that my colleagues would find it easier to cope with the 6ft6in than the 5ft4in service user. While episodes of violence were more common for the taller clientele, short men were far more contained but infinitely more vicious when violent. Despite the inherent danger, I’ve always been more comfortable around short sociopaths in comparison to tall psychopaths or sociopaths. Although not all short sociopaths I’ve met socially or professionally have been high functioning, the majority were highly intelligent in their own way. One that society may not be ready to acknowledge just yet, since it has no need to. As stated before, once there is a need, most will say or do anything to fill it…But what happens afterwards entirely depends on the person and circumstance.

The term psychopath and sociopath are often used to describe the worst fears anyone can have about someone we are associated with. Their true nature is thought to be egocentric, merciless and incapable of remorse. The stuff of your worst nightmares… But contrary to popular belief, you don’t need to look far to find a full-blooded psychopath or sociopath. Just switch on your TV. Whereas psychopaths thrive on attention, sociopaths often keep to the shadows. Nonetheless, both can also create shadows from which to operate. Most of us won’t have to look beyond our community to find a borderline psychopath or sociopath. The difference is tall people remain undetected far more often, unless their actions have been witnessed on a large scale. One that is not or cannot be denied.

To explain, the difference between psychopathy and sociopathy on a fundamental level is on a genetic level. Whereas both can have their hereditary roots, emotional processing is affected differently. Psychopaths, although they may not be able to feel, are often driven by an emotional need. Sociopaths are not. However, both disassociate from their emotions to variant degrees. Both are capable of vicious fits of rage, although they are often underplayed when the individual is short.
The most important difference I’ve found in dating a psychopath and a higher functioning sociopath is the need to prey on emotions. Psychopaths appear to have an inherent need to manipulate and deceive that makes them overconfident. The paranoid tendencies of a short sociopath is the textbook example that counters such the deep-rooted emotional need of the stereotypically tall and good looking psychopath.
Height does not differentiate. Since height discrimination has become an everyday occurrence, whether you’re a psychopath, sociopath or just anti-social makes no difference. If you’re short as a male, you’re doomed to be an outsider, but that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. From personal experience, short-statured people like myself either make an invested effort to follow trends or they create their own. As a psychologist, it is my firm opinion that trend-setters are always outsiders. Whether short or tall, they have the confidence to walk their own path.
However, for sociopaths, the end justifies the means. If that means their imprisonment, torture or death, then so be it. Psychopaths, due to their inherent emotional needs, have an in-build weakness, whereas once the mask of a sociopath drops…There is nothing. A vast, infinite void of emotion that drives shivers down your spine. Beyond false anger, there is dead calm silence.
In simple terms, the circuits in the cortex do not connect and/or process emotions properly…like two wires that don’t fully connect. Since they don’t, there is an accumulation of energy, leading to large bursts of emotion, when the buildup is so substantial that the connection is forced.

It is difficult for anyone to let someone close to us see us in our worst light. For sociopaths and psychopaths, the light is merely more revealing than most people can handle. Not all of us were born or conditioned to be a certain way, but none of us deserve the rejected for that fact.
Predators have their uses in any society. Historically, their talents were put to good use in the military. The more psychotic, psychopathic or sociopathic the opponent, the more insane was the person that actually defeated them. In wartimes, you wouldn’t care about the short guy wielding a battle ax like a mad man, unless he is coming toward you. The military has always been in high demand of controllable soldiers that will follow any command to the death, not uncontrollable cannon balls that wreck their projections. Psychopaths gain their power from knowing their place and when to rise above it…Sociopaths will do so regardless, if they wish to.

Being short makes that endeavour slightly more complex, as there is more to conceal and distract from. Playing with appearances is more complicated, as making oneself taller isn’t an option. Surrounding oneself by tall, but genuine, supporters is a frequently used technique. However, the tall selfless wingman that’ll deliver women on a plate is a sheer fantasy, unless they are blackmailed into doing so or persuaded by someone with a higher level power compared to them. I’ve found that when it comes to territory, many men do not remove women from the equation. That being said, women are no longer subject to arranged marriages or career-restraints, but we are just as vulnerable to social engineering. Particularly, in the case of male heightism.
When we become chronically dissatisfied with ourselves, it becomes hard to hide. People sense, feel and see that one person, which drags the group down. On the other hand, every group also has its leader: the alpha male or female. Whereas tall psychopaths or sociopaths often have the opportunity to cosy up to them by replacing the beta…Their short counterpart often has to strike with fierce momentum to displace or even scatter the group (with less beneficial results). In conclusion, height doesn’t affect the severity of a condition, but at times it forces men in the position to overcompensate merely to be noticed. Unfortunately, by the time they are noticed, their reactions have often been torn so far out of proportion that they distract from the issue at hand.

Advertisements

Heightism – A Social Construct

heightismHeightism is defined as a social phenomenon, however it is an entirely human condition, although one could argue that in the animal kingdom, the strong survive, yet smaller creatures, unless fiercely vicious, usually become the first available source of nutrition. In consequence, adding a greater level of consciousness into the equation often equals similar territorial behaviour in male interaction, especially in the proximity of females.
It is a purely social construct, based upon the history and evolution of mankind. Yet, also it is the final taboo of society, hence it is rejected as a policy on a global scale. Truth be told, further research and case studies have revealed detailed insight into the phenomena and its influence on a primal unconscious level. An archetype almost in it’s own right for it’s symbolic nature. Captain America, the short man rebelling against the tall bully, a stereotype in it’s own right for its daily reoccurrence in society. It has been scientifically proven that height affects intellect, the effects of height discrimination often result in a forced adaption or evolution to the environment on a rather deep mental level.  The radical altering of height through shoes and inlays or surgery is merely one option, which is taken frequently. For instance, numerous eye witness reports confirmed the abrupt change of behaviour of the external world. Whereas individuals that had almost assaulted the subject beforehand for merely crossing the street. They were being offered alcohol and invitations to social gatherings. The profound realization within the eye witnesses, which were males and females of above 5’9-5’10, of the rapid social change left them in shock and horror, it had completely altered their perception, however only as they were open-minded enough to appreciate the truth behind it that which they had just observed and therefore were able to alter their behaviour towards those of a shorter stature. Socially speaking, the phenomena stems from a deep-rooted mating instinct. Primal, yet symbolic. Height equals strength, it represents a seemingly higher level of protection. The survival of the fittest, as it may, however intelligence hardly comes in the equation. In fact, 92.5 percent of males are taller than their significant other. Conclusively, the average height of a male CEO is 183cm in the United States of America.

How do tall women and short men survive the dating world? A 2008 study of 382 undergraduates in the journal Personality and Individual Differences found that both sexes preferred relationships where the woman was shorter than the man. Curiously, the research also showed that women enforced the norm more strongly than men. Twenty-three percent of men but only four percent of women said they were open to a relationship in which the woman was taller.

“Women view taller men as more likely to be physically dominant and potential protectors, which provides a feeling of safety,” Dr. David Frederick, co-author of the study and visiting professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, wrote in an email. “For some women, being with a taller partner makes them feel smaller, and it is not surprising that some women prefer this given the pressure on women to be slender.” Evolutionarily speaking, women may have developed a preference for taller men because of the advantages height provides in male on male competitions, he added.

Back in 2002, ABC News conducted an unscientific experiment to explore how willing women were to date shorter men. They lined up several short men next to tall men, and asked women to choose a date. They gave the short men exceptional résumés, including those for a doctor and millionaire venture capitalist. Despite their glowing qualities, the women always chose the taller men. Some said they would only choose the shortest of the bunch if they learned the taller men were murders or child molesters.

Gender differences in desire for a certain type of mate go beyond height and into other physical arenas. In a 2001 study in Sex Roles, researchers examined 547 personal ads, and classified them in terms of the writer’s preference for a thin partner, a physically fit partner, or no weight preference. They then mailed a figure rating scale to the ad writers and asked them to specify both ideal body size and acceptable body sizes for partners. They found that, despite what preference they expressed, women preferred a physically fit partner, while most men indicated that a number of body sizes would be acceptable.

Approximately 80 percent of height is comprised within the genetic code, yet only 20 percent is influenced by environmental conditions and life experiences. Fear being a factor, which is able to physically inhibit growth, whereas love, particularly parental affection, has been evidenced to promote a higher growth rate in children. In 2003, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of human growth hormone (hGH) for healthy short children in an attempt to make them taller. There was and is nothing medically wrong with these children, as they produce normal levels of growth hormone on their own. They are simply short statured, more often than not due to the genetic influence of their biological parents. Yet, being short is not the concern, the actual difficulties lie in the social bias against short individuals. Is society as a whole willing to treat the victim of a social preconception with unnecessary medical technology that supports and reinforces the before mentioned  prejudice? Are we as a people willing to categorize a healthy child and turn him or her into a patient in requirement of special treatment? It has become distinctly evident that modern society has become culturally preoccupied with the idea of being tall and thin at any cost, whilst almost all pharmaceutical corporations have jumped on the bandwagon. An almost institutionalized bias against those of a shorter figure.

It was estimated that the profits would be continually boosted, as there will always be those that fall into the lower height percentiles. The treatment involves subjecting the child to growth hormone injections at an average of six times per week over a period of five to ten years at an typical cost of $20,000 per annum. The treatment may be physically and emotionally harmful, and at most, the child may gain between 1 and 1½, if any additional height is gained at all. To treat the fourteen to twenty thousand children in the United States that suffer with classic growth hormone deficiency, for whom treatment is based on a medical necessity, the cost would be approximately $182 million annually.  The FDA approved females with a predicted height of 4’11 and males with a estimated height of 5’3,” eligible for hGH treatment. In sum, the number of potential treatment candidates rises to 1.7 million children at an annual cost of $22 billion. Plainly, there is profit to be gained by exacerbation of height predispositions. Truth be told, raising the awareness towards height discrimination would appear to be a more cost efficient process instead of the application of genetic engineering in order for the individual to suit the expectations of society. In fact, research has documented that an individual of 6’0ft will earn, on average, over $5500 more per year than an individual who is 5’5ft. While discrimination against short people may not be one of the more overtly harmful forms of discrimination, the lack of attention invested in it makes it one of the most deviously and subtly harmful acts of discrimination. In frequency, the alterations in behaviour towards those of a shorter height are not consciously recognized, subconsciously they may be perceived as being “less of a real man” (which appeared to be a recurrent statement during the research into height differences, that and “he just needs to grow some balls” or “He just needs to grow up”) as they are less in physical stature. There are several hypothesis that suggest shortness may be subconsciously related to a lack of power and are habitually perceived as weaker without the conscious realization of that judgement.

Thorough investigations into the nature of hand to hand combat and manners of fighting, however, have revealed styles which most refer to as “short man fighting”, as the techniques are more often than not applied against a combatant that is of a larger stature. Certain ones involve the placing of the foot on the kneecap of the opponent to jump up and target the neck, throat, facial features or head whilst using their own size against them. The unspoken rule is often to move as close to the opponent as possible in order to suffer less counterattacks, yet most commonly the first few strikes of the shorter individual already render the combatant into a less mobile state. For instance, one young male around the age of thirty openly admitted to “biting off chucks of skin” as a last option. Since he was not a physically muscular type of man of 5’7ft, he would often be targeted by three or more individuals that did not necessarily display a non-hostile intent. He would simply jump up into their face and bite onto the first solid piece of skin that was available to him. With one, he removed a part of their cheek. With another, he ripped off the tip of their nose. On both occasions, the fairly taller males collapsed, bleeding and screaming, meanwhile their peers were staring in shock and horror as he would spit the piece of skin out, running away as fast as his legs could carry him. Conclusively, this was only one of many interviews, in which short men confessed the fact that they would often find themselves deliberately targeted for a physical assault by those taller than them. Concurrently, many corroborated this very statement separately, and admitted that unless sufficient force was used in a macabre way, as a form of disincentive, the opponent would more often than not return with a larger amount of individuals to finish the task.

Historically speaking, the famous Napoleon Complex has become widely known as the Short Man Complex, yet it is not as widely spread as the knowledge that 5’8ft up to 5’10ft was considered to be average height around the time of 1812. Nonetheless, the conception implies that if a short individual acts in an assertive or overconfident manner, it must be an attributing factor of overcompensation due to their height. It is also implied that if a taller individual were to act in such an arrogant, superior fashion, it would be socially accepted as “typical” behaviour, consequently if a shorter statured male were to imitate or behave similarly, it is automatically perceived as an act of overreaction. In essence, this creates a treacherous set of double standards, in which certain sorts of behaviour are only deemed appropriate, if specific individuals embody them and not others, since they would be in receipt of an entirely different social feedback. Therefore, height becomes a determining element within social interaction. Due to the widely spread awareness towards other forms of discrimination, such as race, sexual preference, gender and social standing, the enquiry whether one is being prejudiced on any of the before mentioned matters befalls any individual more frequently than in the subject of height discrimination. Truth be told, it is often advertised in the media and on social networking sites, as an ingrained, unconscious factor. Throughout my analysis, I have in fact stumbled upon numerous proclamations that were of a rather negative nature. Over 60 percent had been posted by females, which exclaiming that short men did not have a right to live compared to their tall counterparts. In conclusion, the genuine lack of self-awareness resultant from the unconscious origin of height discrimination is further compounded by the utter lack of societal consideration of it. Currently, there is only one state in the entirety of the United States of America that prohibits Heightism, which is the state of Michigan. Subsequently, after the publication of the legislature, Utah had openly rejected the upcoming concept. Although this was not surprising, since the larger number of percentages of corporations, owned by those of a taller stature, dispute the validity of the legislation and its usage capability.

“How tall we are seems to matter a great deal.  There are claims that, for men at least, being taller than average carries advantages in terms of relationships with other workers, earning more and being more likely to be promoted quicker.” stated the Independent, one of the first British newspapers, except for the guardian to tackle the societal height issue. Short men do not fare well in American politics -only five presidents have been shorter than the average. Once, a study distinctively displayed that Americans may be rather aware of height, for in every age category, from the ages of 20 to 84, the subjects claimed to be taller than they actually were. However their reasoning behind overstating their height was seemingly complex.  One presumption may be that in Western culture height is highly sought after, being taller is almost equivalent to being stronger, fitter and more able. This phenomena is more commonly observed in males. There is less information on women, yet it is a common factor that taller men prefer shorter females. The taller female counterpart, I have professionally observed, more often than not rejects the shorter males offered to her, yet struggles to acquire a taller partner that possesses similar traits to the short counterpart.
An interesting phenomenon in relation to height has been published in a recent article in The New Yorker. Our height is determined by the growth of the legs and body. That of the legs is most intimately understood. The leg, from femur to toes, grows out from the body of the embryo as a small structure initially approximately a centimetre long, and continues to develop  until the end of adolescence, which would be an estimate of 16 years later. “The growth characteristics of the limb are specified when it is still very small. There are special growth plates near the ends of the bones and these determine the growth, and muscles are pulled along by the growing bones. In these growth plates, it is cartilage cells that are growing, which are then replaced by bone.”

In the final stages of growth, for the vast majority, the two legs are increasingly similar in length, yet there was, in all those years, no communication at all between them. Growth appears to be more reliable than originally conceived. This amount of equal growth without interacting became a fact that a distinguished physicist refused to acknowledge. In addition, this is also accurate of both arms. “Growth is affected by hormones and environmental influences such as diet, and these affect both limbs equally.”

The records of the heights of soldiers in Northern Europe dating back over a thousand years were reviewed in the matter. And consequently it was revealed that height was a significant element in AD800, and after 200 years of warfare, in the 17th century, a shorter height became the average. It is a common fact that the infantry prefers individuals of a taller height. Short individuals are more often placed in logistics and intelligence.  Charlemagne was over 6ft in height, yet the those troops that stormed the Bastille were 5ft on average. It should be noted that well-bred officers were approximately 3 inches taller. In America, around the 18th century,  white colonists were around 5ft 9in, and even slaves were just 1in shorter. Whilst there was a minor decrease in height at the time of the Civil War, the first actual change can be observed in the First World War, since the standard American soldier was 2in taller than the average German soldier. Yet this would be reversed within  50 years, as male Europeans grew taller while Americans did not.  Within modern society, Northern Europeans are several inches taller than the American citizen, whose average height is 5ft 9.5in. With a high probability the Dutch could be considered the country with the tallest population. The average male being 6ft 1in. Historically, a growth increase occurred in the 19th century, and appears to pertain to the country’s economic prosperity. The gradual decrease in height in the United States may be resultant of the widening gap between the upper and lower classes, including the effects of the fast-food diets. Research discovered the loss of height by Americans in comparison Northern Europeans takes place in infancy and adolescence, thus inadequate postnatal care and faulty eating habits became the causal factor. Although it has been a widely tested outcomes that individuals regularly feasting on Junk food are overall shorter and weightier. The ingredients of most fast food being unclear due to countless lawsuits, the effects may not be effectively measurable. For instance, the Tesco’s beef burger scandal, revealing that the beef burger contained less cow than expected, but more horse. In fact, approximately 75% horse meat. Although one may never be entirely certain of the full contents of “ready meals” and so forth, the healthier options appear to be fresh, organic food without added preservatives etc.
In my professional opinion, however, I am of the view that more than 80% of height is predetermined by genetics, and that attempting to prompt further growth, through hypnotherapy, medication or diet, may only provide an inch or two at most During my own research in the subject, I segregated two groups, those with shorter parents and those with taller parents. All males and females were in between 15-17 years of age. For a two week period, the “short” group would be fed healthily with organic foods without any snack or junk foods. The “tall” group would be fed on junk food only. Surprisingly, within that week, most males and half of the females that feasted on junk food grew approximately 0.5-1.5 inches regardless. With about 15%, there’s seemed to be very little change. Whereas the other group, referring to the shorter statured individuals, grew 0.5-1.0 inches, if at all. 65%, if not 75-80%, of them displayed little alterations in height. Afterwards, the diets were swapped, and the difference eventually was minimal. There were very few males that were affected by the junk food diet in the means of height and growth.

Nonetheless, height discrimination is not merely a phenomenon observed in the male gender, during the surveys conducted, it was noted that a large percentage of short woman do not necessarily feel taken seriously by their tall counterparts and the majority of tall men. It was also observed that there was a distinct lack of promotions in the before nicolas-sarkozy-carla-brunimentioned category of females. Within the modelling and film industry woman underneath 5’7-5’9ft are increasingly rare, truth be told, the actual requirement is 6’0ft and up. In fact, Halley Berry had continually proclaimed that she was being stereotyped into particular film roles, until she was given the part of “Storm” in the X-Men movie series. It should be noted that the character Storm was in actuality a 6’6ft African tribal princess. However, in the dating world, it is quite commonly known that females are more likely to select the taller individual due to societies image of the ideal woman, she appears mostly slender and short as a matter of fact. Tall woman are more likely to be successful in business, yet short ones are more likely to be married. Overall, it was observed that most females generally only reach to the males shoulders and that equally tall couples or equally short pairs have become more of a rarity.

In conclusion, there definitely appears to be a large unspoken issue in regards to height within modern and ancient society, whether it may be an unconscious urge or simple preferences in mating, the phenomena of height discrimination has evidently spread through the core. Although there are females that prefer shorter men or males of equal height, they seem to be few and far in between, yet they are still present. Throughout gaining an understanding of the concept, countless men involved in the survey (which were below the height of 5’8ft) described exceedingly negative partnership experiences that undoubtedly altered their perception of females. Often those interviewed that were engaged in a permanent or long-term partnership stated that their current relationship was the only one, which was not influenced by height. Numerous descriptions of affairs with taller individuals generally followed or being left for a taller male. Nonetheless, the influence of height on a behavioural level is clearly evident in daily life and frequently short individuals of either gender are not necessarily supported through the process of accepting their bodies as they are. Truthfully, accounts of self-mutilation from a young are, even childhood, due to the reinforcement of negative beliefs by parental figures or peers rather common. In my professional opinion, the effects of alterations in height and their behavioural responses require further academic attention in order to adequately minimize the psychological harm obtained by the individual. Currently, the problem is being mostly suppressed by those that are affected by it. It is in the least bit surprising that all industries would undergo a drastic shift, if heightism were to become known as a more widely spread phenomena or true fact. Height discrimination is merely another form of sexism, another form of racism…It is one of the last “–isms” to be tackles and to become aware of. Most tall individuals laugh the matter of and simply change the subject whilst others rigidly deny its existence, yet all the evidence collected strongly supports the theories. In my personal view, it is merely one of the last unchecked discriminations that continues due to the fact that the system is predestined for it to continue. Evidently, the richer half of society is the taller one, therefore the genetic predisposition to birth equally tall children is increasingly more likely, which then perpetuates the cycle further.

References:

Due to the limited research and availability of resources, all evidence has been assimilated from personal research, social forums or few newspaper articles cited above.

Related

– Heightism – The Rules Revisited