My two cents-
Men who are not vertically challenged have a competitive advantage. Men who are vertically challenged can still compete, but they have to work harder or they have to have something else going for themselves.
Years ago I saw a piece on TV, I think the show was 20/20, or a show like that. The experiment was, how much value do women put on a man's height? The short answer turned out to be lots. The setup was that the experimenters would show a picture and partial description of several decent looking and presentable men to a group of of single women. The women would look through the stack and then say if they would be willing to go on a date with any of the men. However, the info about the men was manipulated. The men who were described with a short stature were usually passed over. However, after each round of 'judging' by the women in the experiment, more details were added to each man's profile that made the man more desirable. ie: In the first round the women were told this man is 5'2" and has a degree. In the second round the description would add that the man also has a job with a professional designation. In the third round they'd be told he was a surgeon. Then, that he was head of surgery at a large hospital, etc....
After each round of disclosure the women would be asked again if they'd like to go on a date with this man.
The results were not encouraging for the short men. The shorter the man, the less likely the women would say yes to a date, even if the guy was eventually described to be practically perfect. A number of the women shamefully acknowledged their shallowness but still couldn't bring themselves to be with someone more vertically challenged than themselves.
I guess this is like the female version of the joke that tells of the guy who can't decide which of three women he should marry. He gives each one $5,000 and and tells them to use it any way they want. After one month, the women who makes the best use of the money will win his heart.
The first women said "I used the money to make a down payment on house where we can begin our lives together."
The second one said "I used the money to get cosmetic surgery to make myself more beautiful for you."
The third on said "I invested the money and tripled it in one month for us to start our nest egg."
And in the end, he married the one with the biggest tits.
The moral of the story is, some things, once they've been imprinted, will always pull us in a certain direction, whether or not it's right, fair, or even good for us. Overcoming such a bias would be difficult, at best.
But don't despair. There are plenty of women out there who value other things more than a man's random physical attributes.
Men who are not vertically challenged have a competitive advantage. Men who are vertically challenged can still compete, but they have to work harder or they have to have something else going for themselves.
Years ago I saw a piece on TV, I think the show was 20/20, or a show like that. The experiment was, how much value do women put on a man's height? The short answer turned out to be lots. The setup was that the experimenters would show a picture and partial description of several decent looking and presentable men to a group of of single women. The women would look through the stack and then say if they would be willing to go on a date with any of the men. However, the info about the men was manipulated. The men who were described with a short stature were usually passed over. However, after each round of 'judging' by the women in the experiment, more details were added to each man's profile that made the man more desirable. ie: In the first round the women were told this man is 5'2" and has a degree. In the second round the description would add that the man also has a job with a professional designation. In the third round they'd be told he was a surgeon. Then, that he was head of surgery at a large hospital, etc....
After each round of disclosure the women would be asked again if they'd like to go on a date with this man.
The results were not encouraging for the short men. The shorter the man, the less likely the women would say yes to a date, even if the guy was eventually described to be practically perfect. A number of the women shamefully acknowledged their shallowness but still couldn't bring themselves to be with someone more vertically challenged than themselves.
I guess this is like the female version of the joke that tells of the guy who can't decide which of three women he should marry. He gives each one $5,000 and and tells them to use it any way they want. After one month, the women who makes the best use of the money will win his heart.
The first women said "I used the money to make a down payment on house where we can begin our lives together."
The second one said "I used the money to get cosmetic surgery to make myself more beautiful for you."
The third on said "I invested the money and tripled it in one month for us to start our nest egg."
And in the end, he married the one with the biggest tits.
The moral of the story is, some things, once they've been imprinted, will always pull us in a certain direction, whether or not it's right, fair, or even good for us. Overcoming such a bias would be difficult, at best.
But don't despair. There are plenty of women out there who value other things more than a man's random physical attributes.
