Well see that’s why I didn’t go by just US statistics. That link I cited states US statistics as well as worldwide. It would be ignorant of me to make a species-wide claim by using a dataset that only includes 5% of the world population, after all. :)
Could also be the UK, to be fair. The inch units may be different, but both nations use the International Foot.
In any case, I don’t really see the region as being relevant; the meme may be limited to a particular region, but I was objecting more to the whole notion of that stereotype. Which is the same regardless of the unit used.
But even the UK is much taller than the global average and you’d be short at 170cm.
In any case, I don’t really see the region as being relevant; the meme may be limited to a particular region, but I was objecting more to the whole notion of that stereotype. Which is the same regardless of the unit used.
How tall or short you’re considered is dependant on that region. People are comparing you to the people around you, not to global average.
People are comparing based on incomplete data. It may be short for one country, but there are humans in other countries too. If those countries population were all shorter than the other, would that make them short? No, it would simply adjust what qualifies as normal.
For a species-wide judgment one needs a species-wide dataset.
Normality is what you have around you. That’s the context people compare things in, usually. Someone short in the UK might be average elsewhere, but when people say “I’m short” or “he’s tall”, it’s with an unsaid for what I typically see around me implied there.
I fully understand that. I’m not saying people don’t do that; I’m merely saying that it is dumb as it’s an inherently incomplete dataset and therefore not a reliable source of measurement. In other words, I’m talking about what’s objectively normal, not what’s subjectively normal.
Do people do that? Of course they do; I’m a dumbass, not an idiot. But I also don’t like it, and this is why.
Well see that’s why I didn’t go by just US statistics. That link I cited states US statistics as well as worldwide. It would be ignorant of me to make a species-wide claim by using a dataset that only includes 5% of the world population, after all. :)
It does use feets and inches as the measure. That narrows it down a lot.
Could also be the UK, to be fair. The inch units may be different, but both nations use the International Foot.
In any case, I don’t really see the region as being relevant; the meme may be limited to a particular region, but I was objecting more to the whole notion of that stereotype. Which is the same regardless of the unit used.
Edit: A word.
But even the UK is much taller than the global average and you’d be short at 170cm.
How tall or short you’re considered is dependant on that region. People are comparing you to the people around you, not to global average.
People are comparing based on incomplete data. It may be short for one country, but there are humans in other countries too. If those countries population were all shorter than the other, would that make them short? No, it would simply adjust what qualifies as normal.
For a species-wide judgment one needs a species-wide dataset.
Normality is what you have around you. That’s the context people compare things in, usually. Someone short in the UK might be average elsewhere, but when people say “I’m short” or “he’s tall”, it’s with an unsaid for what I typically see around me implied there.
I fully understand that. I’m not saying people don’t do that; I’m merely saying that it is dumb as it’s an inherently incomplete dataset and therefore not a reliable source of measurement. In other words, I’m talking about what’s objectively normal, not what’s subjectively normal.
Do people do that? Of course they do; I’m a dumbass, not an idiot. But I also don’t like it, and this is why.