安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
Contribute constructively or move on if you have nothing else to do
It's called "sex selection." It's a thing and it's as prevalent in humans as it is in the rest of the animal kingdom.
It's influenced by a number of things, but the strongest or most applicable is going to be "cultural." So, ideal physical specimens or attractiveness for a "relationship" can be judged differently and be dependent on a culture and its values. Sex Selection, in this instance, isn't as evolutionarily reinforced as it is culturally validated.
You've heard of the "physical ideal" for marriage purposes in some cultures being the robust, decidedly overweight, male, right? The interpretation there is that they can afford to eat... or are powerful enough to be able to get the most food, yet rich enough to have others do their labor for them. There ya go. In this way, they're determined to be the best choice for a mate.
Remember lessons about colorful male plumage in birds? That's not because it scares away predators or helps with any other survival-to-sexual-maturity factor. It attracts the females... And, which came first? The colorful plumage or the female interest in them? RNG, 'cause they can't use Tinder.
Surprisingly enough, sex selection is starting to be thought of as more of a factor in the general phenotypical appearance of certain racial stereotypes. Before this sort of trend? It was largely all placed firmly in the realm of Natural Evolution. (Nobody likes discussing some of the specifics, to be honest.) But, that force is not strong enough to have yielded certain results.
Here, though, few are going to want to do more than just quote TikTok vids and screenpics of dating app conversations...
"Relationship" has to be defined for any of this topic to be truly meaningful. I have a relationship with my local librarian, but I probably don't care at all how tall they are.
Repetition legitimizes.
> you hard-wired
> [see them as] naturally more attractive
Yeah, okay. However...
> naturally more protective
Their height might have a direct effect on whether you find them sexually attractive or not but it has no bearing on their character as a person.
I don't use dating apps but I think that it's funnier to mirror their own point back to them.
"Well, you're too short for me. I only date tall women."
If you're going to potentially trigger someone (whether trolling or just being honest) it's always sweetest when you can do so by showing them their own EXACT behavior in a mirror (or something VERY close to it).
...which, the statement also isn't far from the truth, in my case.
I'll "date" [almost] anyone - but if I don't think that it will lead to a serious relationship because something is lacking, I'll be upfront about that.
I'll befriend anyone but it would be a waste of time for me & her if I let someone believe that they'll have a chance in the bedroom when I just don't feel -that way-.
I presume that a woman probably isn't going to want a lustless, non-sexual, relationship (long-term -- maybe for 1 year but humans are sexual creatures... eventually she's going to want that intimacy), even if other romantic aspects are present.
Plenty of people conflate this with people simply expressing interest.
Like, some people need to - get real! Just because someone is asking, it doesn't necessarily mean that they're desperate. I see this most often as a stereotype that both men & women seem to believe, that "all men are desperate" - it seems to mostly be believed by delusional women (which there is no shortage of) and men who are projecting because... they themselves are desperate.
When I was in middle school, I turned a girl down because I didn't feel comfortable with the kind of relationship she was offering, among other things. Buuuuut... "all males are desperate" so everyone then assumed I was gay & bullied me for my "gayneess" / "gay orientation" which... is false but... *shrug*
They just NEEDED to let me know every day that I'm just a horrible closet gay.
There's no shortage of assuming know-it-alls that will tell you what your likes, dislikes, intentions, and sexual orientation are (& whether this is a good or bad thing, despite them literally just assuming it even applies to you) because there couldn't possibly be anyone who is different than themselves.
Oh, by the way guys, "Repetition legitimizes".
In the described situation, yes.
This doesn't account for certain other things that could be generally accepted as being present. For instance, if some person has a "fetish," there's no way to generally account for that in some kind of large-scale population sort of thing. But, and here's the weirdness, if everyone has the same one... Well, what caused that? Certainly not some "unusual" association, but likely one that is culturally promoted and sustained. And, because of that, it's not seen as being detrimental to their daily life, but a generally accepted cultural practice or ideal.
Yes, it's weird. But, humans are weird. :)
One also has to remember that was is true of a group, no matter how common, does not have to be true for an individual. And, cultural values are not all the same, either, or share the same foundation - Few human behaviors have more variances and taboos across cultures than mating/marriage practices.
Keep in mind - What's important here is how everyone is defining "relationships." So far, nobody has really made the attempt. So, most posters are just arguing in circles and jabbing at each other, likely unable to make a legitimate argument.
Is, for instance, someone's view, culturally reinforced or not, fetishized or not, of an ideal "relationship candidate" going to include "they beat me with a chainsaw every day and torture me while denying me food and sleep?" Probably not. So, is their "tall" relationship-mate still ideal because they are "tall?" If so, that person is seriously borked in the head... by any standard.
Yes, this is very important in a long-term, romantic, relationship. Height is also not as subject to variance over time as certain other physical qualities, too. So, those attempting to control for that, long-term, are probably well-served. But, that doesn't mean excluding for it is entirely rational.
It has been so very sensationalized in "meme culture" that it's just too darn silly... The proof to the contrary, that it is not as strong a forcer in a relationship that some are making it out to be, is available to, as the OP put it, anyone who is able to go outside and start counting.
There is also a sort-of fact, too - Men are generally taller than women, anyway. Does that always hold true? No. Generally? Sure. What are many going to see when they start counting enough couples? The general tendency for men to be taller, not that it's as important as they think it is for relationship selection. (Perception bias)
But, that some now believe its some common exclusionary principle is absurd.
No, but only because the chainsaw part was too much for ANYONE!
Yeah, it's weird calling a preference or fetish an "ideal". Like... wut?
I love jesters, but I don't like being inflammatory just for the sake of it - often the posts that get jesters are viewpoints that I don't actually agree with. ...so I'm falling behind in the circus races.
3.6 percent of men are 5'4 or shorter.
So the average woman has 96 out of 100 other men to choose from that are taller than her.
Which means that if we look at it from a purely mathematical perspective, and without bias, the probability is low that she would choose a man shorter than her.
But the reality is that most women do have a preference for taller men. That makes the odds even more stacked against shorter men.
Being as you can't change your height, I would say the logical thing would be to try to improve other things you do have control over.