Common Misconceptions About Height

Taller is healthier.
Failing to reach one's maximum height is linked to undernourishment, but short stature itself is not unhealthy when genetic. For example, short people live longer on average[1][2]. Being taller has also been linked to cancer and collapsed lungs. More research on this here.

Height is mostly dietary.
"...about 60 to 80 percent of the difference in height between individuals is determined by genetic factors, whereas 20 to 40 percent can be attributed to environmental effects, mainly nutrition.". One can see this in how certain families, like those of Manute Bol or Steven Adams, are all extremely tall. In Manute's case, he reached a height of 7'7 despite being malnourished (although he may have gotten even taller had he not been). Point is, just because someone is very tall doesn't mean they were fed correctly.

Every younger generation gets taller.
The average American has not gotten taller in the last 50 years. In fact, average height in the medieval ages was only slightly shorter than it is now. If you've been noticing how youth are tall for their age nowadays, it's because kids today hit puberty sooner.

Short men are angrier on average.
This study found that tall men fly off the handle more quickly. Every other study I've seen on this topic either didn't test for aggression, or tested women rather than men, tested wild animals, etc. Examples of these more questionable studies: http://archive.is/cYusN

Every human being innately prefers tall people.
They've done height studies on various tribal cultures, and these people don't care about height the same way modern society does.

Height is viewed no differently than baldness, big noses, etc.
None of these other groups are labeled with a complex or syndrome the moment they display aggression or ambition. Sperm banks ban all men below average height, but they do not ban men based on the Norwood Scale. Height affects the ability to defend oneself during physical altercations, most other superficial traits do not. The differences go on.

Height is a good indicator of IQ.
Most sources say the correlation coefficient between height and IQ is 0.1 or 0.2. This is considered a weak correlation, which makes using height to gauge IQ virtually pointless. Some of these studies are also conducted on children. If a bunch of youth are the same age, but some receive growth spurts sooner, these taller kids will have more developed brains. Yet these researchers ignore that in order to claim tall adults make more money due to higher IQ (even though simply controlling for IQ shows that it's not the reason for the height premium: [1][2]). These IQ/height studies are also intra-racial, which means they fail to address why Asians for example are typically shorter than Westerners, yet they consistently score higher on IQ tests.

Men and women are equally strict about height.

• The average man's ideal height difference is for the woman to be 1 inch shorter. On the other hand, women desire men to be 8 inches taller on average.
• "Nearly half of men in the study indicated that their tallest acceptable date could be taller than them or their height (24 and 23 percent, respectively), while 53 percent required their date to be shorter than them. But a whopping 89 percent of women said the shortest person they would date would still have to be taller than them. Only seven percent would accept someone who was their height, and just four percent would allow for a shorter guy."
• For online dating, it's been found that "women care quite a bit more about the height of their partners than vice-versa."
• Study: "Women want taller men more than men want shorter women."
• According to this study on the top 10 words to include on your dating app bio, "the top word for female users was "love" and the most-swiped right male users had "6'" in their bio". Height is nowhere to be found on men's wish list.
• Google "sperm bank requirements" then "egg donor requirements." Both short and tall women are not excluded from participating, but any male below average height is.

Height has never played an important role in being targeted.

• "At the start of the 20^th century, most of the Rwandan population belonged to the Hutu ethnic group, who were traditionally crop-growers. Over many centuries, Rwanda attracted another group, traditional herdsmen, the Tutsis, from northern Africa... It wasn’t until European colonists arrived during the 1950s, that a divide developed between the two groups. The Europeans saw the Tutsis, who were taller with European ‘aristocratic’ appearances and, as was the practice of the time, selected this group to be both privileged and educated." - Source..."When RTLM (Radio Télévison des Milles Collines) began broadcasting on July 8, 1993... The RTLM called for the Tutsi to "cut down the tall trees," a code phrase which meant for the Hutu to start killing the Tutsi." - Source
• According to one of Kim Jong Il's former tutors, the leader used pamphlets advertising wonder-growth drugs to lure small people into traps, from where they would be deported to "uninhabited islands" to remove their "substandard" stock from the genepool. - Source
• "The one noticeable similarity with almost all serial killer victims is their short height and low weight. "Five Foot Two, Eyes of Blue" should be the serial killer theme song. These small lightweight victims are easy to attack, easy to beat up, easy to carry or drag, easy to put in the trunk of a car, and easy to dispose of. Big victims are far too much work. Smallish men, smallish women, and children are easy for the killer too handle. This is one reason why the top choices for women serial killers are invalids and babies." - Killing for Sport: Inside the Minds of Serial Killers
• More on this topic here.

Apparently, Short Men Are No Longer Judged As a Group

Well ain't this something. Here's a thread (with thousands of upvotes) insinuating that short men are not judged as a group whenever one short guy offends people: https://old.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/comments/b1mbvj/incel_believes_in_backlash_against_short_men/

This is ludicrous of course, because otherwise, stereotypes like "napoleon complex" wouldn't exist.

Here are examples of people circlejerking about alleged cases of "short man syndrome": We have a cop pulling someone over, a guy throwing a fit over a restaurant order, domestic violence, and a common road rage incident.

Now you're telling me mass murder wouldn't garner the same reaction? The only hope here is if the killer isn't actually short, because we've already had a short gunman, and that was portrayed as expected: "Congress shooter was 5'6" rude loner... His lawyer called him an 'angry little man'."

In the past, I've talked about people who censor short men with the message being, "Watch your mouth or else short men will be stereotyped." Yet when others want to downplay heightism, they'll make it seem like short men are suddenly never blamed as a group.

People Will Agree With Anything That Makes Short Men Look Bad

Click to zoom in image.

Notice how she didn't state exactly what these short men did to prove they have a napoleon complex, nor did she provide a sample size of how many short guys and tall guys she's dated. None of that stopped her claims from receiving almost 400 upvotes. We all know how even if a male has a thousand examples of women acting a certain way, if he generalized them, his stereotyping would still be considered untrue. The best part is how any short man calling this out will likely also be labelled with the napoleon complex.

We also have to keep in mind how women admit in surveys that they don't prefer short men, so who do you think women would more likely start a fight with: Jason Momoa or Danny Devito? There's a good chance that (consciously or subconsciously) these women will treat a tall partner with more respect than a short partner, thus leading to more incidents with the latter, then these women will claim relationships are worse with shorter men. I'm sure someone out there will be taken aback by the insinuation that women would treat a tall partner with more respect than a short one. Of course, nobody would bat an eye if I said I'd fight a mouse before an elephant.

Either that or some short boyfriends out there made the mistake of confiding in their partner about how height bias bothers them. If a short guy does that, then you can bet he'll be labeled with a complex. But if a woman talks to her man about bodyshaming, then she has no complex. Whatever the case, people love these stories of gentle giants and little napoleons, because due to the just-world hypothesis, everyone can make it seem like it’s about personality rather than height. If that were the case, sperm banks and dating sites would have personality requirements rather than height requirements.

I actually prefer ugly women, but they all have bad personalities so I never date them.

Common Fallacies When Discussing Height Prejudice

• Relative Privation: "Height discrimination is not that bad because someone else has it worse."
• Just-World: The belief that bad things happen to bad people. "It's not about height, it's your bad personality."
• Survivorship Bias: "Whether it be movie stars, or athletes, or musicians, or CEOs of multibillion-dollar corporations who dropped out of school, popular media often tells the story of the determined individual who pursues their dreams and beats the odds. There is much less focus on the many people that may be similarly skilled and determined but fail to ever find success because of factors beyond their control or other (seemingly) random events. This creates a false public perception that anyone can achieve great things if they have the ability and make the effort. The overwhelming majority of failures are not visible to the public eye, and only those who survive the selective pressures of their competitive environment are seen regularly."
  
• Kafkatrapping: People accuse short men of having short man syndrome or being insecure, then when any short man argues against this, it's used as further confirmation for these claims. However, putting up no resistance results in these claims going unchallenged, and therefore accepted as fact.
• Appeal to Nature/Naturalistic/Biological Determinism: "Height prejudice, and the inequity that stems from it, is just the natural way of things." Plenty of things are natural and instinctive, such as the urge to assault somebody in a fit of rage, indulging in unhealthy but satisfying cravings, or taking a male more seriously than a female because the latter is physically weaker on average. Yet all of those things are discouraged, because something being natural doesn't inherently make it excusable. Unless someone has mental illness, a person's words and actions are their own responsibility.
• Burden of Proof: The burden of proof lies with the person who is making a claim. Society claims many nasty things about short men, yet expects short men to "disprove" these stereotypes - the accused is guilty until proven innocent (I've written a series of posts specifically about this).
• Composition/Division: Inferring that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole. "I have never experienced heightism, therefore nobody experiences heightism.
• False Dilemma: When something is falsely claimed to be an "either/or" situation. "You can either think about heightism, or live a fulfilling life."
• Appeal to the People: Believing something is true because many or most people believe it. "If so many talk about angry short men, it must be a real issue." Could also be done in reverse, "Society as a whole doesn't acknowledge heightism, therefore it doesn't exist."
• Argument by Laziness: A person makes a statement or gives an opinion on an issue without having studied the topic being discussed. Everyone seems to be an expert on height related issues, but how many have done their research?
• Strawman: Substituting a person’s actual position or argument, then attacking that new, false narrative. One person could be talking about height discrimination, but the other will act like the first is mad about dating issues.

There is of course also the fallacy fallacy, which people use to excuse committing any of the above fallacies, but this only works when you still have a point despite being fallacious. Most of the time, a person has no argument aside from their initial fallacy itself.

Is It Still Just a Joke When Most People Actually Believe the Stereotype?

This thread is full of "it's just a prank bro" comments: old.reddit.com/r/short/comments/9opev7/can_someone_explain_this_tweet_that_152k_people/

If we lived in a culture where most people know this is nothing more than a derogatory stereotype, then I'll be the first to agree that it's a laughing matter. Unfortunately, people treat this stereotype like it's factual:

• https://i.imgur.com/lwW6rVT.jpg
• http://archive.is/CpsvF
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqeRv4SSkNM

So while we can view that tweet with 152K likes as a joke, I view it as someone with a large audience spreading a negative stereotype. A negative stereotype which is not yet recognized as such, but rather regarded as folk wisdom. I don't think people realize something is only a joke if society recognizes it as prejudice when played straight.

The other insidious thing about this stereotype is that if any short man has a problem with it, people will kafkatrap him by claiming he's confirming the angry short man stereotype. In fact, there's a 6'5 guy right here trying this, although fortunately he's called out on it by a user saying, "You can’t insult a group of people and then make it a social crime for them to be upset about it".

Here's another case, this time of a shirt depicting supposed instances of short man syndrome. The artist claims it's tongue-in-cheek, but one quick search on twitter of "short man syndrome" will show how most people view this stereotype as a clinical diagnosis rather than a joke. Fact of the matter is that when people see a short bodybuilder with huge muscles, they will say he's compensating. When people see a short authority figure they don't like, they will link it to his height. So again, I'm left scratching my head as to how this is all in jest. Of course, when it comes to height prejudice, critical thinking is often written off as being easily offended.

Like Matt K. Lewis once said, you can't talk about people being fat, there's ageism discrimination, but you can discriminate about height and get away with it. Despite the fact that short men are not statistically more aggressive, most will never know this, because even short people themselves don't want to talk about it.

Different Reactions to Angry People Based On Height

Short guy rages over Tim Hortons:

According to reddit: "If that's not a Napoleon complex, I don't know what is."


Tall guy rages over a mattress:

According to most people in the comments section, just some asshole.

Here's another man losing his cool, this time over a video game: https://old.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/9ygfko/angry_customer_destroys_gamestop_store_over/. At best it's funny, at worst he's a jerk for overreacting. Either way, average height and tall men do not shoulder the blame as a group.

Speaking of video game stores, here's a tall transgender going apeshit in one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb6OpRfyLFo. What complex or syndrome would people (especially the politically correct) say transgenders/crossdressers have?

When a short guy gets fired up the exact same way some average or tall guy does, it suddenly becomes typical of short men:

Many claim "nobody cares about height but you" whenever height bias is being discussed, yet when we look at how thousands of people focus on height in situations where height is irrelevant, prejudices are made clear. Check out the reaction to the rapper Bow Wow's domestic violence incident: http://heightismhub.freeforums.net/thread/344/bow-fiasco-leads-short-bashing

On the other hand, when 6'3 baseball player Danry Vasquez beat his girlfriend, I doubt anyone judged the situation based on his height: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5814458/danry-vasquez-baseball-domestic-violence-assault-cctv-footage/

Or how a tall man who was against the George Floyd riots is judged as an individual based on his actions alone, while a short man doing the exact same thing is judged on his height and labeled with short man syndrome. If so many people nowadays didn't pretend to be egalitarian, then they could keep on with the double standards and I wouldn't care, but unfortunately I hate hypocrisy.

Even mainstream websites get in on the action, claiming a common road rage incident was due to "small man syndrome": https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4381924/Motorist-small-man-syndrome-swung-driver.html

What happens when this prejudice is left alone to spread? People start insinuating that short men are more likely to be mass shooters.


Related reading: "The theory that short men end up as more aggressive than taller ones has been dismissed by a scientific study... Heart monitors revealed it was the taller men who flew off the handle more quickly and hit back."

Negative Stereotypes About Short Men Exist for a Reason, but What’s the Reason?

Broke: Short men are stereotyped negatively because it's all true. Where there's smoke, there's fire.

Woke: Short men are stereotyped negatively because of bias, similar to how an aggressive female is a bitch but an aggressive male isn't. It's also a way for people to antagonize any short man they want, then if one becomes indignant about it, the blame is place on him and his "short man syndrome."

I have to ask, do those who fall into the first school of thought feel the same way about any other physical trait? From what I've seen, most people (at least publicly) are very politically correct nowadays. They will tell you that everyone has an equal chance of being an asshole, regardless of genetic appearance... Except for short men. It's funny how height is currently the only superficial trait where it's widely accepted that someone is a better or worse person because of it.

If you stereotype any other group as being more dastardly due to their looks, others will think you're either joking or you're prejudiced. After all, many have been branded as evil throughout history due to nothing more than skin-deep reasons, but these days we are told that this occurred because of discrimination. Of course, due to the fallacy of relative privation, similar consideration is not shown towards short men (because we all know it's not discrimination until somebody gets lynched).

Whatever the case, this experiment below has already proven that people are biased against short men on sight:

A short male could just be standing there and people will assume worse about him. Could this bias be where these negative stereotypes stem from? The video above is talking about subconscious height bias, but considering the widespread usage of labels like “short man syndrome,” it’s clear that this bias has become a conscious one. Or is it the other way around, and these negative stereotypes have affected how people look at short men?

Either way, the "Napoleon complex" stereotype was coined and spread around over a century ago, back when people were allowed to discriminate more freely. This makes it extra humorous when even the politically correct among us today can't add two and two together, failing to realize these derogatory stereotypes are remnants of worse times. The best part is how the stereotype started as a mere hypothesis, but now it's taken as proven fact.

One of the first who entertained the idea of a "Napoleon complex" was Alfred Adler. Around that same time period, he theorized that homosexuals exist due to their fear of the opposite sex:

"According to Phyllis Bottome, who wrote Adler's Biography (after Adler himself laid upon her that task): "He always treated homosexuality as lack of courage. These were but ways of obtaining a slight release for a physical need while avoiding a greater obligation. A transient partner of your own sex is a better known road and requires less courage than a permanent contact with an "unknown" sex."

"Adler believed that a same-gender sexual orientation was “caused” by a sense of failure or incapability to succeed as compared to other men (Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964). He believed that such a male would develop passive coping techniques to get people to love and worship him. Furthermore, a gay male was viewed as failing in his responsibility to help preserve the human race. Adler argued that all deviations from love based in procreation were stimulated by fear of the other sex and a refusal to make the sacrifices and compromises that intimacy and love often necessitate (A. Adler, 1932, 1938). Not only were gay men seen as failing in love and sex but they were also viewed as failing in friendship. Adler believed that ties to same-gender playmates were easier to establish and maintain than social ties to a member of the opposite gender. If a child had not been taught or nurtured in a manner where he did not learn to cooperate, he would take the path of least resistance yielding to any situation providing him flattery, protection or support. The child would never strive to grow or develop his friendships (A. Adler, 1938). Finally, Adler argued that gay men and lesbians were not even stable in their jobs or occupations. Both gay men and lesbians were hindered in the work place by their inability to cooperate, inordinate ambition and exceeding cowardice. These traits resulted in gay men and lesbians changing jobs more frequently and working schedules that varied from their heterosexual counterparts (Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964)."

This was the same era when the one and only Sigmund Freud, also a colleague of Adler's, thought women have "penis envy" and that men desire to sleep with their own mothers. Note that I'm not trying to discredit these famous guys. I'm just saying many of their ideas are currently considered outdated, yet the Napoleon Complex isn't. Why not? Is it because gender and homosexuality are more historically documented? Because I'm not sure how that stops a theory from being loony or not.

Whatever Adler believed, he has single-handedly done permanent damage to short men, which is ironic because he apparently advocated for equality and mutual respect. Now a short man can rarely display ambition, assertiveness, or aggression without being diagnosed with a complex.

How Height Affects Social Perception During Physical Altercations

Myth:

I don't drink anymore, but when I did, short drunk guys were 90% of the reason I stopped going to bars. Not saying all, obviously. I've met some supremely chill people of less than average height. But when you're tall there's this thing that happens where you become a target for every ounce of resentment within a certain breed of manlet once they get liquored up.

It's very frustrating because you get caught in this situation where you're just trying to chill and someone is provoking you. And you know and they know that if you wanted to, you could just crush them. I'm talking 1 ft height/100lb weight advantage, and they're always way more drunk than you.

But you can't, and they know it. Because there's no 'winning' that fight. You give the guy what he thinks he wants, and you end up in handcuffs and come away from it looking like you would if you hit a woman or a child. So you try to stay calm and listen to this drunk chihuahua man yip and yap at you all night and can't even enjoy yourself because the persistent little shit isn't going to give it up until he's in an ambulance and you're in handcuffs.

Small drunk people fucking suck.

If this is actually true, then why did most of the people in this thread (where ironically the above was posted) not side with the short guy, and how did it get 800 upvotes?

Look at this for another example:
http://archive.is/CpsvF

Reality: If you're a tall guy and you ever get into an altercation with a short man, just tell everyone the shorter guy had a napoleon complex and was trying to prove something. The only way people would wag their finger at you for teaching him a lesson, is if you beat the short guy bloody or dead. If you don't fight him, there's a reason why the saying is called "be the bigger man." If you're taller/bigger than the other guy, people will just think you're letting him live by not fighting. Socially, you cannot lose either way. It's the short guys who are in a conundrum. If the short man walks away, people will think he's afraid of the other guy's size, but if the short guy fights then he'll be labeled with short man syndrome.

The proof of this is how short men are statistically less aggressive on average, yet receive the "angry midget" stereotype while taller men get "gentle giant." Why? The halo effect. Implicit bias tests also show that people are negatively biased against short men. Trying to pretend like society would take the shorter man's side if you beat his ass, is like saying people would favor an ugly person over an attractive one. It might be a cute message in a highschool drama, where you're told by the writers who to root for, but it's divorced from reality when we look at how people actually act on their own. If you have a trait that is considered more attractive, people will impulsively believe you are a better human being. Height is also linked with power, so a short man displaying aggressiveness is automatically perceived as stepping out of line, in a way that tall men do not have to deal with.

I've seen videos where a tall man beats up a short loudmouth, and people say the latter has a complex. But in footage where a short man knocks out a tall loudmouth, viewers claim the former has a complex anyway. I also want to know where this place is that that likens harm against short men with assault towards women and children. Apparently, I missed the memo where the saying has always been, "Women and children and short men first." I doubt videos like this (albeit staged) would be considered humorous if the smaller guy was replaced by a woman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7fBujLLUEQ

Stereotypes and Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

The following is quoted from here: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wsu-sandbox/chapter/prejudice-and-discrimination/

When we hold a stereotype about a person, we have expectations that he or she will fulfill that stereotype. A self-fulfilling prophecy is an expectation held by a person that alters his or her behavior in a way that tends to make it true. When we hold stereotypes about a person, we tend to treat the person according to our expectations. This treatment can influence the person to act according to our stereotypic expectations, thus confirming our stereotypic beliefs. Research by Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) found that disadvantaged students whose teachers expected them to perform well had higher grades than disadvantaged students whose teachers expected them to do poorly.

Consider this example of cause and effect in a self-fulfilling prophecy: If an employer expects an openly gay male job applicant to be incompetent, the potential employer might treat the applicant negatively during the interview by engaging in less conversation, making little eye contact, and generally behaving coldly toward the applicant (Hebl, Foster, Mannix, & Dovidio, 2002). In turn, the job applicant will perceive that the potential employer dislikes him, and he will respond by giving shorter responses to interview questions, making less eye contact, and generally disengaging from the interview. After the interview, the employer will reflect on the applicant’s behavior, which seemed cold and distant, and the employer will conclude, based on the applicant’s poor performance during the interview, that the applicant was in fact incompetent. Thus, the employer’s stereotype—gay men are incompetent and do not make good employees—is reinforced. Do you think this job applicant is likely to be hired? Treating individuals according to stereotypic beliefs can lead to prejudice and discrimination.

Another dynamic that can reinforce stereotypes is confirmation bias. When interacting with the target of our prejudice, we tend to pay attention to information that is consistent with our stereotypic expectations and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. In this process, known as confirmation bias, we seek out information that supports our stereotypes and ignore information that is inconsistent with our stereotypes (Wason & Johnson-Laird, 1972). In the job interview example, the employer may not have noticed that the job applicant was friendly and engaging, and that he provided competent responses to the interview questions in the beginning of the interview. Instead, the employer focused on the job applicant’s performance in the later part of the interview, after the applicant changed his demeanor and behavior to match the interviewer’s negative treatment.

In regards to height prejudice, the self-fulfilling prophecy stems from society's treatment of shortness, such as stereotypical portrayals of short men with a complex (like in Shrek). When any short man becomes indignant over this, people label him with said complex.

As for the confirmation bias aspect, short men are the least likely to be aggressive, but people have the "angry short man" stereotype already in their heads and thus subconsciously look out for this. They could see a hundred angry men of average or tall height and not bat an eye, but the moment one short man rubs people the wrong way, it's "typical short man syndrome."

I've already written some blog posts on how people think it's the behavior itself that reinforces a stereotype, but in reality it is humanity's psychological flaws that cause this. When it comes to height, there is the added fact that humans associate size with power and authority. This is why when someone is important, we say "a man of his stature." This means short men who display assertiveness or aggression are often met with repulsion from the masses. People then subconsciously convince themselves that it's short men who have the problem, and that way any discrimination is justified.

Article Claims Short Men More Likely to Become Mass Shooters

This is what happens when height prejudice goes unchecked.

We now have articles trying to link male shortness to shooting people: ("height is a "visible symbol of masculinity" for men. "So lacking it, maybe shorter men are more likely to turn to other resources to demonstrate masculinity." All too often, those "other resources" men access in order to prove they're real men are violent.").

Part of me isn't too surprised, as I've seen short male height used to strengthen the hatred towards a nazi. When a shooter is 6 foot 2 and 240 pounds, people simply say it makes him imposing. But when a criminal is short, it's lumped in with personality traits like "creepy" and "rude," as seen in this article about a short gunman. Being tall simply makes a man more intimidating, but being short allegedly makes a man more likely to be evil.

I'm just left wondering when it's finally okay to start a discussion about height discrimination. It seems like this zen passivity has been working out real well. When it comes to the topic of height prejudice, instead of educating people, the suggestion is to always close your eyes, cover your ears and shut your mouth. Well, it's gotten us here.

If the Size Difference Were Reversed, This Would Be Labeled as Little Man Syndrome

Before somebody says this is okay because the arrested guy was drunk or whatever (I still think it's excessive), my point is that short cops have been labeled with syndromes for less, nonviolent things like searching people for drugs. In this video, the comments excuse the tall guy due to drunkenness, even when he puts his hand on the shorter man's face at the start and even gives a patronizing little slap.

I find it funny how this society only has a specific syndrome/complex when the one in power is a short man, as lashing out over anything else (ugliness, penis size, breast size, weight, social status, using larger size to bully people, etc.), it's all filed under "insecurity" or whatever else. Only short men are singled out with a unique stereotype.

Most people take this as a sign that short men are so much more evil than everyone else, that the stereotype exists and is deserved. As for me, I find the idea of a group being more evil because of how they're born very prejudiced.

Bigotry Shouldn't Be Encouraged Even Against Other Bigots

It says something when short male stature can be used to enhance the hatred against a Nazi. This has happened more than once. Replace height with some other trait and one can see how strange this is. "This guy is a Nazi, but wait, there's more! He's also... bald!"

The Nazi in the pic above is also actually 5'7, not 5'2. I wonder why they bothered photoshopping his height. Probably because there are fewer 5'2 men so they're an easier target. We also all know the shorter a man is, the more likely he is to be evil, right?

Anyway, let's run through the excuses I've seen for this:

"Bigotry is okay against someone I dislike."

Imagine a film like Shrek where they constantly mock the short antagonist's height, but replace all this with a woman's breast size or weight. I'm sure this society would still be laughing, right? The character was an asshole after all, so who cares about all the other people who also have this trait? Instead, what you would probably hear is, "Think of all the girls with body image issues who never did anything to you, body shaming is wrong!" It's also gotten to the point where short men can be slandered as a group over anything, like a cop simply doing his job.

"Heightism isn't taken seriously, so it's fine."

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/155/Relative-Privation

"People like to pick on certain traits of people they hate."

Well, at least we can admit there's prejudice against shortness, so we're getting somewhere. After all, even the biggest haters of some tall guy like 6'4 Osama Bin Laden never claimed anything bad about tallness.

"Height is about how tall you are on the inside!"

That's like someone praising me by saying I'm white on the inside (I'm not white). Why can't a short person just be a cool short person? Instead it's always something like, "You're only short if I don't like you, otherwise you're tall to me." Guess which trait gets the negative connotation? Like how anger or drunkenness can make the truth slip out, you'll really learn what people think of a certain group in these situations.

"I'm a short guy and I don't mind the discrimination!"

We get it, you're a good boy for not rocking the boat. But if you're not here to discuss the hypocrisy of all this, then you should leave, because there's nothing of value to add. Also have fun essentially being profiled as more likely to be evil and untrustworthy. People are now starting to think short men are more likely to be mass shooters, because this "judge short men as a group" mindset has gotten so out of hand. Claim that with any other physical trait these days and see if you get the go ahead.

One of humanity's follies is confirmation bias. Anytime people see one short man do something they dislike, all short men pay for it socially.

What's also interesting is how strongly some cling onto their prejudice, making excuse after excuse for why their form of discrimination is okay. They'll claim anyone chastising their behavior is too sensitive, yet these people cry like children whose toys are being taken away. "I love reprimanding others when they discriminate, but now that I'm being held accountable too, I don't like it! How will I have my fun now?!"

When we link negative personality traits to physical traits like height, it makes the subconscious bias against that group stronger. Here's an experiment from Harvard showing how people already associate negative traits with short men on sight:

People need to be educated about this sooner than later, because it just keeps getting worse.


Related reading: Check out a clusterfuck conversation between the trans community discussing this issue.

BBC News: Putin Is Compensating For His Height, But Trump Is Macho

I wonder if a major news outlet like BBC would dare insinuate an overweight woman was gluttonous, or a small breasted woman was clearly compensating.

Interesting Thread Where You Can Replace "Bald" With "Height"

"Bald men are assholes."

It reads in such an insane way, that I wonder if it was merely a thought experiment for that subredddit, where the goal is to change the person's view. Either way, if you replace baldness with shortness, that's the way many people legitimately think of short men. Also imagine if someone told bald men to become more docile to avoid being discriminated against. On the other hand, here's what actual logic looks like:

• "using weird anecdotal stories and unrelated connections always create discrimination and problems. This is how sexism, racism, and any other "ism" come into being.
• "do you think your post is enough to justify "black people are assholes"? Like "I was fired by a black guy"

The "Damned If You Do Or Don't" Dilemma of the Napoleon Complex

Here's a succinct comment I found on YouTube about the "Napoleon Complex" Catch-22:

"If a short man attempts to be assertive or stand up for himself, people think he's got a Napoleon Complex and is just overcompensating for his height. If he does not attempt to be assertive and stand up for himself, he's an insecure, George Costanza wimp. What's even "funnier" is that when a short man brings this up, explains the "Damned if you do" dilemma, people will frequently respond by portraying him with the same stereotypes he just finished explaining. "People aren't treating you differently because of your height.", they say, "It's just because you are being too aggressive/not confident enough.". This, to me, is absurd."

"Short Men Shouldn't Compensate By Building Muscle, You'll Also Just Look Shorter"

Here's a common train of thought: "Short men should avoid working out too much, it'll just make the body seem stumpier. Even if lifting is a genuine hobby, be careful about getting too big, we all know how important looking tall is."

Now here's my version: "People in South and East Asia should avoid going in the sun too much, they'll just look darker. Even if you enjoy going to the beach, be careful about getting too dark, we all know how important light skin is."

Seriously though, it's either the "you'll look shorter" line (which is basically just saying "you'll look uglier"), or "built short men are clearly compensating for their height." It's also funny how people act like short men have never heard these lines. I'm sure those professional short bodybuilders are oblivious to how the general populace views them.

The real reason society dislikes stocky men is because these are the ones who stand a better chance at defending themselves. I'm not even talking about merely thinking it's less attractive, I mean people genuinely get angry and bothered when they see a muscled out short man walking down the street. It's the same reason people hate on a short politician, teacher, officer, boss, etc. and harks back to the "Napoleon Complex/Short Man Syndrome" labels. Society simply believes short men are not allowed any semblance of power, whether it's literal (like a muscular physique), or figurative (like an authority position). People talk about how fat short men are ugly, but there's never as much ruckus compared to muscular short ones. Even though the stockiness isn't so different, mere fatness doesn't convey power, so there's less anger from society.

No matter how much other cultures are prejudiced about height, they do not accuse short men of compensating. From what I've seen of India for example, many short actors get buff and they don't receive any heightism about it (these two are 5'5 and 5'7 respectively). They're also allowed to play the role America typically reserves for tall men like Chris Hemsworth, The Rock, Hugh Jackman, etc.

On a personal note, I've had an interest in comic books and wrestling since I was a kid, so naturally I took an interest in powerlifting and combat sports. My recommendation for short men is to do whatever pleases them. If you want to be skinny, ripped, bulky, whatever. The problem isn't one's stature or worrying about "confirming" derogatory stereotypes, the real issue is how much this culture dislikes strong short men. Legends like 5'8 Hepburn or 5'6 Assirati did not worry about "getting too big."

If you would like to read more about the differences in culture and stereotypes about short men, click here.

Check Out This Article About Height Discrimination

Written by Laura Grey: http://www.lauragrey.com/?p=424

Excerpts:

"You’d be shocked if a coworker said she could gauge the intelligence of a member of your company by the color of her skin, wouldn’t you? If your child’s teacher said Muslim kids aren’t trustworthy, you’d notify the principal at once. If your favorite cafe’s owner said he disliked gay people, his blatant bigotry would ensure that you’d never eat his risotto again. You’re careful not to stereotype people in wheelchairs or wheatgrass juice drinkers, lesbians or limo drivers, Estonians or the elderly. You see how ridiculous it is to ascribe personality traits to whole groups, or make generalizations about ability or behavior based on so little information. You expect your friends, family and coworkers to show the same respect to others that you do."

"So, why are so many otherwise sensitive, multiculturally aware folks so willing to put down the little guy? Why does society hold such contempt for short men? Why are smaller-than-average fellows passed over for jobs, relationships and pay raises at higher rates than other men? And why are jokes and snide asides about short men being less confident, virile or capable so pervasive?"

"We’ve all heard that short men are supposed to be prone to the Napoleon Complex, or Little Man Syndrome, an alleged type of inferiority complex said to affect men of short stature who attempt to overcompensate for their height in other aspects of their lives. Yet this supposed syndrome or complex does not appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)... Interestingly, research by Britain’s University of Central Lancashire shows that the supposed Napoleon Complex (described by them in terms of the theory that shorter men are more aggressive and try to dominate those who are taller than they are) was not in evidence in their experiments. In their studies, taller men were more likely to lose their tempers and be aggressive than shorter men. The Wessex Growth Study, a community-based longitudinal study conducted in the UK, monitored the psychological development of children from school entry to adulthood which found that “no significant differences in personality functioning or aspects of daily living were found which could be attributable to height”; this functioning included generalizations associated with the Napoleon Complex, such as risk-taking behaviors."

 Pretty good stuff.

Let's Talk About Labeling Any Short Man Who Doesn't Know His Place As "Insecure"

I'll put this very simply. If I was mocking some girl about her breast size or randomly asked for her bodyfat percentage, then she flipped me off, most people would side with the girl. One doesn't even need to outright insult a girl with small breasts, just imply that they're a flaw. Also keep in mind how if a woman is insecure about her body, society empathizes with her and blames how everyone else is being unrealistic and cruel ("unrealistic beauty standards, body shaming," etc.)

When it comes to height, if a short man has a problem with mistreatment about his stature, people will label him as "insecure" [1][2] in order to ignore him. Either that, or he has a complex/syndrome. It's a blatant silencing tactic that is used on any man who questions these double standards. It's especially funny when the guy turns out to be tall, as seen in the thread below:

http://archive.is/Os2oz

A short white knight attempts to use the "insecure" label to shut down the discussion, and he's initially upvoted. But when it's revealed that the guy he's accusing of insecurity is 6'2, all of a sudden the white knight is downvoted and the original point being made is now legitimate. Had the tall guy not revealed his true height, he would have been branded as a bitter napoleon and cast aside, while the white knight would be hailed as the epitome of what a short male should be: a good boy who doesn't question anything. This tells me that a short man and a tall man could make the exact same point, but that message is dismissed if it's coming from the shorter one. Either way, shedding light on hypocrisy isn't something to be shamed.

Do Other Cultures Have Their Own Versions of Napoleon Complex/Short Man Syndrome?

I believe the British first perpetuated the myth that Napoleon Bonaparte was super short, but the actual label of "Napoleon Complex/Short Man Syndrome" was later coined by Alfred Adler, who ironically couldn't find an actual short villain so he named the label after a guy who was average height. One would think if short men were so diabolical that stereotypes are created about it, a dwarf tyrant could've been easily found as the mascot.

Anyway, while other places outside of the West also discriminate against short men, I'd be curious to know if they came up with their own derogatory short stereotypes. I don't mean a translation of "Napoleon Complex" either, I mean inventing their own version. If these complexes and syndromes are so real like many believe, surely they'd exist everywhere. Yet no matter how much someone worships tall stature in Japan or India or Africa, I don't see them having a term for how evil short men are. Too bad I can't find much more on this. Even the Wikipedia page on the Napoleon Complex only has sources from the West. I tried searching this and did come across a 5'10 guy who wondered if "little man syndrome" was cultural. It's nice to see someone who's not even short thinking outside the box.

I first started pondering this when I came across a clip from a Japanese series I used to follow as a kid (Yu-Gi-Oh), and there was a character literally named Bonaparte. His official bio describes him as, and I quote, "loud-mouthed, hot-headed, vertically-challenged sidekick." This is a blatant example of how a prejudiced stereotype, the angry little Napoleon, came from the West to the East. I wonder if Japan knew of this stereotype before Western contact, and what the official term for it is.

Either way, if clothing, language, architecture, etc. can be imported, I don't see why derogatory stereotypes can't also spread.

Click here to find the rest of my posts regarding stereotypes about short men.

Notice How There's Always a Reason Why Short Men Deserve Mistreatment

Somehow, someway, blame always seems to shift back onto short men during talks of height discrimination. Heightism doesn't exist due to the prejudice of others, but rather because short men deserve it. At least, that's what people tell themselves:

• "Napoleon Complex/Short Man Syndrome" wasn't coined due to confirmation bias, or the belief that short men aren't allowed to be powerful/assertive. No, clearly it's because short men are innately nasty human beings.
• When short men are rejected due to height in dating, people try to claim it's because short guys have poor personalities.
• "Biology/nature" is constantly used as an excuse for height prejudice.
• Apparently, the whole "manlet" thing came about because short men "overcompensate" by lifting weights. Never mind how "hit the gym" is the only advice short men ever get aside from "be confident." Of course, tall guys can lift as much as they want.
• People will often say "I'm only hitting you where it hurts." Too bad that excuse doesn't fly when body shaming women, even though it's hitting women where it hurts. Basically, if a short man reacts to disrespect, then people will make it seem like him reacting in the first place is the problem. But if he doesn't react at all, then this goes unabashed.
• Whenever anyone short calls out height discrimination, it's always met with something along the lines of, "you're just insecure/mad about being short" or "you're only mad because you can't reach the top shelf." People would rather attack those who discuss heightism, instead of confronting actual intolerance.

People will outright admit what I'm talking about as well. For example, in the movie Shrek, the message is about how it's okay to be considered unattractive. However, the films constantly mock a short character. The main excuse I've seen for this is "it's okay because the short character was villainous." Once again, discrimination is fine when the target brings it upon themselves. Here's the catch: this excuse works against anyone we don't like. Aside from straight-up eating babies or something, what makes someone an asshole in the eyes of society is subjective. A short officer could be doing their job, but if someone doesn't like it, they'll label the cop with a syndrome/complex. It's clearly okay, because all the cop had to do was not be an "asshole." Throw in things like the halo effect and one can see how this works more often than not against short men.

We also all know this great moral message wouldn't work using flat women or something. I can't start a hatefest against small breasted girls because one was an asshole. WWE used to make fat jokes towards a villainous female character, yet people got mad anyway. I actually don't blame anyone who has a problem with this, only because products marketed towards children (like Shrek or WWE) are extremely influential on young minds. If somebody wants to be offensive in an adult product then I don't care, I simply dislike the double standards of this society. This culture is more careful nowadays about making young girls self-conscious about their bodies, but ignore the negative effects on males.

Here's another example of "let's use one person we don't like to unleash our bigotry," this time from what I believe to be people who consider themselves tolerant liberals. They even have "against hate" in the side of the page which is extra funny. Here's a quote:

"Pro tip: those racial supremacist ideas are what makes someone a "manlet". You can be 6'3" (you're not though) but if you are a neonazi like that Nathan guy you are a small man."

If they dislike a tall guy, he's a short man on the inside. A tall guy could beat someone up, and still society would use shortness/smallness as the insult. All the negativity will always get linked back to the idea of being short. This further stigmatizes the trait itself, causing people to subconsciously hate short men even more. The real “protip” here is that the “manlet asshole” doesn’t even need to exist for society to hate against short men. Take Napoleon who was average height for example. For a more modern example, look here.

Also note how this mentality does not work with most other traits. I don't see those who are against "fat shaming" insulting others by claiming they're "landwhales on the inside." You don't mock a redheaded person, then have them respond back by saying your ideas make you ginger. Imagine mocking someone with a full head of hair by claiming they're bald. Only two traits have this "logic" applied to them: height and beauty. Just like how someone can be ugly or beautiful on the inside, you can be tall but a "mental midget," or a little person but with a "towering intellect." My theory is that society cares so much about stature and attractiveness, that when they see a tall or beautiful person they abhor, subconsciously people must convince themselves that it's all a shell and underneath are the traits they dislike.

Either way, this all reminds of when I came across this message from South Park about using homophobic slurs. It was essentially, "using faggot as an insult isn't about homophobia, it's an insult towards assholes." Sure, South Park itself is just some dumb show, but it's pretty obvious many people subscribe to this mentality. I think it's some attempt to rebrand the slur as a general insult. What people always leave out is how nobody insults a person by using "straight" instead of "faggot." Relative Privation aside, it's much the same with height. These days, I've seen tall men insulted by claiming they have "Short Man Syndrome" because they're short on the inside. Need I say more? Associating these phrases with more negative connotations is not good. When people think of an asshole, it'll be linked with physical size more than it already is ("be the bigger man, you nasty little man, etc". Who thinks that's a good idea?

It doesn't take a genius to see how bigots always have a reason why their targets deserve hatred. It's either "the natural way of things," or the group being discriminated against is clearly misbehaving and therefore worthy of reprimanding. Part of this is due to just-world thinking, the other half is because people don't want to consider themselves as intolerant (even though they partake in height discrimination). This is apparent in those who mock short men but get mad about things like body shaming. No, it's the short ones who are wrong.

Here's a thread with a comment straight up saying, "The reason many people discriminate against short people is because most of them have shitty attitudes and dwelll on others' pity."

So if the average 5'0 guy has the same attitude as the average 7'0 guy, they'd be viewed the same way? What about other groups, are they discriminated against due to their own fault?

If people spent half as much time chastising actual height discrimination, we'd be getting somewhere. Everyone's a real tough guy when lecturing short men, yet nobody wants to make a peep against actual bigots.