Tall and Short Make a Match

skysayl

@miss-lillipants said in Tall and Short Make a Match:

For Canada: the preferred height for women was 165.6cm (5’5") for short-term relationships and 167.2cm (5’5.8" or just say 5’6").

Am I the only one who finds it odd there are different preferences for short and long term partners?? I feel like it’s suggesting shorter women are preferable for flings.

For my part at least, I haven’t found myself with a preference either way because most people are taller than me period end of story. My last ex-partner (who was also into size kink, funnily,) was 5’5" but again, even if that’s below average for a man he was still taller than me lol

Olo

@skysayl said:

Am I the only one who finds it odd there are different preferences for short and long term partners??

I, too, find it an overcomplicated thing to get hung up on. But then, I have never set out in search of specifically a short- or long-term partner. I have absolutely zero confidence in my ability to judge anyone’s suitability in that respect.

OTOH, I wouldn’t expect a potential partner under three feet to last very long under most circumstances.

foreverlurk

@skysayl said in Tall and Short Make a Match:

I feel like it’s suggesting shorter women are preferable for flings.

Yeah, that’s a rather weird conclusion to draw from the data.

Also, specific to Canada but being short/taller than average height can vary by provinces, as those of British descent are usually taller than those of French ancestry (ie. Quebec has shorter men and women, by about an inch on average)

I wonder if they cross-referenced that with the average number of partners. To answer meaningfully a question like “do you have a preference for height” and “how long was your relationship”, you need to have had multiple relationships / data points. Otherwise it’s not statistically significant.

For instance I’ve only ever had three, maybe four “serious” relationships in my life, and while I can empirically say I have a preference for shorter women, but it’s not a dealbreaker. I wouldn’t turn down someone based on that alone.

SmolChlo

@skysayl picked up on that too Hookup with the shorties and wife the tall one? Made me wonder if their insinuating that some people bury and ignore their genuine preferences for whatever looks good or is deemed acceptable by society. Idk maybe I’m reaching but I’ve seen and have had this discussion a few times

foreverlurk

@SmolChlo said in Tall and Short Make a Match:

Made me wonder if their insinuating that some people bury and ignore their genuine preferences for whatever looks good or is deemed acceptable by society.

This behaviour sounds adjacent to the Halo effect, which associates traits like being fat means you’re lazy, being tall means you’re powerful, being beautiful means you’re a good person.

Consequences of that unconscious tendency? There’s the height wage gap, where tall people make more money on average. There’s the beauty card that let you get away with almost everything. That sort of things might explain why some people prefer to have a taller mate (and, consequently, offspring).

littlest-lily

I do wonder how the data was collected (maybe the link discussed it, I didn’t dig into it). Someone might not have thought to themselves that they’d want different heights for short and long term relationships. But if someone is filling out a questionnaire that asks for a partner’s ideal height and then it went “but what if it was short term?” I could see the person go “eh, what the heck, might as well go nuts” and not put all that much thought into it. I could be wrong though!

Olo

I think dating apps have dramatically affected the way we view “preferences.”

miss-lillipants

@littlest-lily said:

But if someone is filling out a questionnaire that asks for a partner’s ideal height and then it went “but what if it was short term?”

Yes, I am curious about how the question(s) was posed/worded and how they’re interpreted by both responders and the researchers.

Here are the results from an Australian 2019 survey with over 1000 respondents (I’m guessing all male because it was on male beauty). Of those who responded with an opinion, most found 5’5-5’9" as attractive. But the question was “When thinking of beauty, which height do you consider ideal for women?” Which doesn’t mention or overtly suggest the dating or preferential aspect, i.e. you can find features attractive but you wouldn’t necessarily prefer or date a person with those features. Maybe it prefaces in the overarching survey, I don’t know. In saying that, I think it’s a relatively safe assumption to make for most, but can still make for fraught interpretations.