Why is heightism given vastly less attention than feminism in the developed world?

Bottle_of_Smoke

HivemindXX wrote: »

I've never heard anyone say they couldn't work for someone short, I've heard people say they couldn't work for a woman.

I've heard people make that remark, though I've never seen someone walk out of a job because the new manager was a woman. Its a stupid flippant remark idiots make.

I've never heard anyone say that anyone under 6' just isn't physically capable of doing the job, I've heard people say a woman just isn't physically capable of doing the job.

Again, idiotic flippant remark, though I would argue the people who say it mean "most women" and if they actually came across a physically strong woman they'd have no issue working with/hiring them.

And also the shorter you are the less seriously you'd be taken for jobs in security/police

I've never worked anywhere where there were email groups set up to organise nights out that excluded short people but I have worked places where women were excluded in this way.

That's disengenuous. Gender themed nights out are an exception. Like Stag/Hen nights. Both genders would get excluded in this way. Wouldn't count it as real sexism

Scanlas The 2nd

Count Duckula wrote: »

Not at all, because I never suggested we screen for those talents. I'm merely saying that tall people tend to be more intelligent. This means they do better in exams and get better jobs. They're not being chosen for those jobs because they're tall; they're being chosen because they're more intelligent. That just happens to coincide with their height - does that make society heightist, or is it simply allowing more intelligent people (who might happen to be taller) to do better?

There is no such disparity with gender, and yet women are held back. You can't point to secondary characteristics such as intelligence or management skill and use that as the basis for the discrimination. Women aren't held back by coincidence just because they happen to be less able in a skill that employers hire for. Thus we must draw the conclusion that, unlike heightism, women are being discriminated against simply for being women.

There is such a disparity with gender. Men are roughtly 5 IQ points more intelligent on average than women. Exams don't prove intelligence as there are other factors which play a huge part such as motivation, dedication and enjoyment of the subject to name a few. Per unit height women appear to be more intelligent than men.

I'm not too bothered about heightism or feminism in the developed world. I started this thread as inconsistency annoys me.

Scanlas The 2nd

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Is it? I don't see any correlation whatsoever. One is a social movement that promotes and campaigns for women's rights. The other is discrimination against someone on the basis of their height. Perhaps you got confused and meant to say discrimination against women

Yea should have said discrimination against women.

Byron85

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

There is such a disparity with gender. Men are roughtly 5 IQ points more intelligent on average than women. Exams don't prove intelligence as there are other factors which play a huge part such as motivation, dedication and enjoyment of the subject to name a few. Per unit height women appear to be more intelligent than men.

Studies i've read point to the opposite. Women on average, have higher IQs but they underestimate their IQ whereas men overestimate theirs; it's the Downing Effect or something similar.

I don't have my text book with me at the moment though so I can't follow up on it and i'm not using wikipedia as a source for information about something like this.

diddlybit

Count Duckula wrote: »

If it was suggested that a woman should try to overcome gender discrimination by being more masculine and concealing her femininity, the person who suggested it would be torn apart.

And yet it's alright to suggest that short people disguise themselves as tall people rather than be honest about their height?

A little off-topic here but have to reply to something.

Femininity in women is a privileged gender performance in society, as is masculinity in men. It is obvious when examining the different terms utilised to describe women and men in postions of power. For example, he is an "authority figure" whereas she is a "ballbreaker". The representation of women in politics is highly critical of women that show any masculine traits. The American media destroyed Clinton's campaign as she was percieved as being too hard and cold i.e she was not in touch with her emotional side which was a trait that the general population thought was necassary in women. When she, cried, she was faking it.

Individuals that display gender performances that are as seen not to match to their biological sex, masculine women or feminine men are marginilsed both socially and culturally. They are objects of ridicule in the media and language as they threaten the polarised positions of masculine and feminine. A woman that "butched" herself up to circumnavigate gender discrimination, I believe and unfortuantely so, would find herself further outside the circles of privilage.

HivemindXX

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

That's disengenuous. Gender themed nights out are an exception. Like Stag/Hen nights. Both genders would get excluded in this way. Wouldn't count it as real sexism

I accept this and such gender specific events can certainly be justified under some circumstance in my opinion. However I think it is still relevant that there are no height specific social events that I am aware of.

Skerries

trying to change peoples perceptions is a tall order

WesternNight

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

There is such a disparity with gender. Men are roughtly 5 IQ points more intelligent on average than women. Exams don't prove intelligence as there are other factors which play a huge part such as motivation, dedication and enjoyment of the subject to name a few. Per unit height women appear to be more intelligent than men.

You're making these assertions, but have you any actual reference for them? Have you read Hyde's Gender Similarities Hypothesis? Have a look at that, preferably from an objective stand-point, and you may be surprised by what the findings are.

Alternatively, tl;dr: men and women are vastly more similar than they are different on almost all scores, and this 'on average men are more intelligent than women' business is nonsense.

Bottle_of_Smoke

HivemindXX wrote: »

I accept this and such gender specific events can certainly be justified under some circumstance in my opinion. However I think it is still relevant that there are no height specific social events that I am aware of.

Then I have to wonder why you used it as a point when you consider it to be acceptable

I honestly don't see social events as relevent to this discussion. There are jobs that will exclude short people though. No matter how good looking a guy/girl is they won't be a catwalk model unless they're tall enough.

Just to make it clear I'm not trying to argue there should be height quotas for jobs or anything, I just agree with the OP that short people do suffer in similar ways from inequality as women(as well as other things like ugly people/black people in America particularly/low socioeconomical class people: biggest one) yet there's nowhere near as much attention given to it

goose2005

Count Duckula wrote: »

Not at all, because I never suggested we screen for those talents. I'm merely saying that tall people tend to be more intelligent. This means they do better in exams and get better jobs. They're not being chosen for those jobs because they're tall; they're being chosen because they're more intelligent. That just happens to coincide with their height - does that make society heightist, or is it simply allowing more intelligent people (who might happen to be taller) to do better?

There is no such disparity with gender, and yet women are held back. You can't point to secondary characteristics such as intelligence or management skill and use that as the basis for the discrimination. Women aren't held back by coincidence just because they happen to be less able in a skill that employers hire for. Thus we must draw the conclusion that, unlike heightism, women are being discriminated against simply for being women.

But why is it that any statistic that makes men look inferior - they commit the vast majority of violent crime, make up almost all prisoners and homeless, most alcoholics and drug addicts, do worse in school, live many years fewer, do all of the dangerous work - is put down to natural inferiority, but any statistic that makes women look inferior is put down to a vast conspiracy?

southsiderosie

goose2005 wrote: »

But why is it that any statistic that makes men look inferior - they commit the vast majority of violent crime, make up almost all prisoners and homeless, most alcoholics and drug addicts, do worse in school, live many years fewer, do all of the dangerous work - is put down to natural inferiority, but any statistic that makes women look inferior is put down to a vast conspiracy?

Is it?

This seems like a gross oversimplification to me.

Scanlas The 2nd

southsiderosie wrote: »

Is it?

This seems like a gross oversimplification to me.

Really, care to elaborate how it is an oversimplication.

I think men get the top jobs for a variety of reasons. I don't reject the idea that sexism is a factor but I'd say it's small, certainly smaller than other factors. I think men get the top jobs mainly due to higher levels of testosterone and then I'd say intelligence comes into it too. The level of male geniuses vastly outnumbers female geniuses. I

Sleepy

I'd put it down to short people being less inclined to whinge about statistical differences than women.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Sleepy wrote: »

I'd put it down to short people being less inclined to whinge about statistical differences than women.

I honestly think that's true and it begs the question, should they whinge about it or should feminists stfu about it?

Boskowski

This is the silliest thing I heard in a long time and I wonder is the article a pisstake in order to ridicule the idea of gender discrimination.
I think you could also ask the question what it is about stupidism since stupid people statistically earn less money than clever people. Or positive discrimination - what about highly skilled soccerism? These people are making an awful lot of money.

Height I think has a direct correlation with how well you were raised (ding, ding). I mean how healthy your food was, when you were sent to bed, how stable your environment etc. It's not too far fetched to build a bridge between poorer and less educated households and their opposites when it comes to raising their kids (statistically) and how well these kids then do in their professional lifes.

HivemindXX

One of those pop-economics books (think Freakonomics but not that one) had a bit about children who went to the library earning less in later life than those who didn't visit the library.

Weird eh? Reading is a negative factor for your job prospects? Turns out it's a classic causation versus corelation issue. Children who go to the library are from poorer families on average. Children of wealthy families have books bought for them.

Children of wealthy families have better diet, better education possibilities, better networking opportunities and all that leads to better employment prospects...or maybe it's just wealthism.

HazDanz

Byron85 wrote: »

Studies i've read point to the opposite. Women on average, have higher IQs but they underestimate their IQ whereas men overestimate theirs; it's the Downing Effect or something similar.

Well from the research I was reading yes woman have higher IQ in the general population. Woman out perform men consistently on memory and verbal tasks for example. But research shows that in terms of the highest IQ (Outliers basically) men have always been more prominent, these cases of exceptionally high IQ is not common place however. In the general population woman are shown to be higher on IQ tests. But what I find funny is that men and woman are much more similar in terms of intelligence than different. In fact tests comparing men/men and men/woman found more of a difference in the same sex grouping than the opposite sex grouping so.... Whats the point in debating... In the general population woman tend to be smarter, but only minimally. Its not significant.

Anyways... The height bias is there in terms of job opportunities, managers are generally taller for example. But thats not the same as the sexism argument. You could suggest why do good looking people get special treatment also. Its all too subjective to be "oh you heightist pig you didn't pick me because i'm not six foot!". It could be for a host of different things.

Scanlas The 2nd

From most studies I've seen men have a higher IQ than women.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2006/sep/08iq.htm


It's interesting on this thread that numerous times the argument of "correlation doesn't imply causation" against heightism has come up yet I am struggling to remember one single time someone has brought up that argument against sexism.

I think people don't bring it up because they fear being labelled sexist or that they have been so brainwashed that they think women couldn't possibly have an inferior ability to men in any area.

28064212

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's interesting on this thread that numerous times the argument of "correlation doesn't imply causation" against heightism has come up

And despite that, you still haven't understood the reason it has been brought up. The evidence for heightism so far consists of one factor, the pay differential. The evidence for sexism consists of huge numbers of studies and testimonies (both from victims and perpetrators).

Sexism demonstrably exists. There are arguments over the extent of it, but it's certainly a lot higher than the incredibly rare cases of heightism

Scanlas The 2nd

28064212 wrote: »

And despite that, you still haven't understood the reason it has been brought up. The evidence for heightism so far consists of one factor, the pay differential. The evidence for sexism consists of huge numbers of studies and testimonies (both from victims and perpetrators).

Sexism demonstrably exists. There are arguments over the extent of it, but it's certainly a lot higher than the incredibly rare cases of heightism

I'm not saying sexism doesn't exist. I just don't see why sexism in the developed world gets so much more attention than heightism. Look at pay differential, women getting paid less is always in the media and short people getting paid less is never in the media.

Also short people get less respect than tall people and treated less seriously. There are fewer studies and testimonies because no one cares about it because it isn't ego relevant to most people the way sexism is.

Look at the evidence from this thread, numerous times people have countered (deservedly) with the "correlation isn't causation" argument yet when do you ever hear someone even proposing that argument against sexism. They don't dare say women get paid less because they are on avearage less intelligent or have less testosterone.

Ambersky

Scanlas The 2nd it seems to me you have put in a lot of energy opposing the story women are giving of their experience of inequality and the pain and suffering it causes.

From what you say

“Remember this isn't Sauid Arabia”

It seems you wish to discount the stories of women who say they experience gender inequality in the west.
You do not wish to listen to the stories of women, or at least you dismiss the stories of any pain or injustice as not deserving of individual attention.
This is not Kindness Scanlas.

When your argument on how height discrimination is on a par with feminism, was dismissed in one area, you did not drop it, but took it elsewhere as had been suggested.
This as I see it, seems to be a pretty strong attachment to your own idea, and attachment or grasping onto ideas is the very thing you seem to be opposing.

You say those who wish to focus on gender discrimination are focusing on their own egos, I suppose this is because they are telling the story of their own pain.

“Many of these people I believe will proclaim the importance of equality when in fact it is their ego that is important to them.”

You seem to think that what attention women and men give to themselves and their own issues means there will be less for others.

If equality were so important to these people surely heightism would be on their radar.

Feeling ones own pain and attending to it doesnt mean you will loose any consideration for the pain of others.
Far from it, feeling your own feelings and dealing with your own issues connects you to others.
It is the suppression and denial of these feelings that leads to the desire to suppress them in others.
http://www.snowcrest.net/ksnow/kindness.htm

Before you know Kindness as the deepest thing inside,
you must know sorrow as the other deepest thing.
You must wake up with sorrow.
You must speak to it till your voice
catches the thread of all sorrows
and you see the size of the cloth

From Kindness by Naomi Shilab Nye who writes so eloquently about the interconnection of suffering and the nature of compassion.

The issue of height discrimination does not seem to be something you yourself actually care about but rather something you can use to prove your own theory of the irrelevance of gender discrimination.
You seem to see women as misguided and you wish to educate us with your more enlightened perception.

Why this struggle to tell others they are not suffering, that what they complain about is actually their own ego.
Perhaps it is your own ego which is wounded.
Maybe that is where your struggle is coming from.

iguana

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

From most studies I've seen men have a higher IQ than women.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2006/sep/08iq.htm

IQ tests. Really? IQ tests in isolation aren't reliable indicators of intelligence. Any study which only uses IQ as a determination of intelligence is of limited benefit. (I say this as someone with an IQ of 170+.)

B_Fanatic

Because with gender you either are, or you aren't. That way to insult someone insults half the people on the earth. Height is more of an individual characteristic.

Scanlas The 2nd

iguana wrote: »

IQ tests. Really? IQ tests in isolation aren't reliable indicators of intelligence. Any study which only uses IQ as a determination of intelligence is of limited benefit. (I say this as someone with an IQ of 170+.)

I'd say it's the best indicator of intelligence I've come across. It's good at measuring the raw processing power someone has.

Scanlas The 2nd

Ambersky wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd it seems to me you have put in a lot of energy opposing the story women are giving of their experience of inequality and the pain and suffering it causes.

From what you say

It seems you wish to discount the stories of women who say they experience gender inequality in the west.
You do not wish to listen to the stories of women, or at least you dismiss the stories of any pain or injustice as not deserving of individual attention.
This is not Kindness Scanlas.

When your argument on how height discrimination is on a par with feminism, was dismissed in one area, you did not drop it, but took it elsewhere as had been suggested.
This as I see it, seems to be a pretty strong attachment to your own idea, and attachment or grasping onto ideas is the very thing you seem to be opposing.

You say those who wish to focus on gender discrimination are focusing on their own egos, I suppose this is because they are telling the story of their own pain.


You seem to think that what attention women and men give to themselves and their own issues means there will be less for others.


Feeling ones own pain and attending to it doesnt mean you will loose any consideration for the pain of others.
Far from it, feeling your own feelings and dealing with your own issues connects you to others.
It is the suppression and denial of these feelings that leads to the desire to suppress them in others.
http://www.snowcrest.net/ksnow/kindness.htm
From Kindness by Naomi Shilab Nye who writes so eloquently about the interconnection of suffering and the nature of compassion.

The issue of height discrimination does not seem to be something you yourself actually care about but rather something you can use to prove your own theory of the irrelevance of gender discrimination.
You seem to see women as misguided and you wish to educate us with your more enlightened perception.

Why this struggle to tell others they are not suffering, that what they complain about is actually their own ego.
Perhaps it is your own ego which is wounded.
Maybe that is where your struggle is coming from.

I'm not trying to say people aren't suffering. The ego can cause immense suffering out of things that aren't really a big deal. This can be healed through meditation. When Roger Federer lost to Rafael Nadal in the 2009 Australian open Final he suffered badly as a result of his ego. His identity was that he was the best, but that loss smashed his identity so he suffered. That is his personal problem to deal with.

Many feminists in my eyes are suffering because of their egos and not fundamental problems. I think some people, not just feminists, need to feel like the victim as it is part of their identity. They get a kick out of being the victim as it validates their identity.

later12

OP is it not slightly ironic that, in a thread promoting the examination of heightism (which I actually thought was an interesting idea), and questioning why it received less attention than feminism...you have subsequently, through your engagement and your rhetoric, effectively made this a thread about feminism, and distracted everyone from the issue of heightism?

B_Fanatic

That's because the majority of people aren't on the extremes of Heightism and don't care : / I'm not, and I don't really care. Should I be expected to go from nothing to sh!tloads of compassion instantly? I don't think so...

later12

B_Fanatic wrote: »

That's because the majority of people aren't on the extremes of Heightism and don't care : / I'm not, and I don't really care. Should I be expected to go from nothing to sh!tloads of compassion instantly? I don't think so...

Many people aren't on the extremes of skin pigmentation and physical agility either, yet we have compassion for those who are on the extremes of the scale and find themselves struggling against discrimination. You don't actually have to be suffering from discrimination to sympathise with those who do, reject that discrimination, or feel very strongly about it.

B_Fanatic

later10 wrote: »

Many people aren't on the extremes of skin pigmentation and physical agility either, yet we have compassion for those who are on the extremes of the scale and find themselves struggling against discrimination. You don't actually have to be suffering from discrimination to sympathise with those who do, reject that discrimination, or feel very strongly about it.

Racial differences are well known and underscored constantly in the media. Society doesn't treat heightism seriously and what I'm saying is, after a lifetime of not feeling anything towards this, having it suddenly brought to my attention isn't going to change that.

But that's the purpose of the thread, isn't it? To find out why exactly this is?

Scanlas The 2nd

later10 wrote: »

OP is it not slightly ironic that, in a thread promoting the examination of heightism (which I actually thought was an interesting idea), and questioning why it received less attention than feminism...you have subsequently, through your engagement and your rhetoric, effectively made this a thread about feminism, and distracted everyone from the issue of heightism?

The thread isn't about promoting heightism, it's about examining the inconsistency in the attention of heightism and feminism. I'm not too bothered either way about heightism or feminism in the developed world as I don't think they are relatively speaking that harmful now in the developed world. What I find interesting is how one gets treated so much differently than the other. IMO it comes down to people being more strongly identified with their gender than they are there height. So they become paranoid about anything that can be viewed as sexist. I think many feminists are addicted to finding something to complain about.