This is why I always played a Nord
(i.redd.it)
Comments (85)
sorted by:
This is extremely not to scale.
The scale is right there on the side wym?
This scale is hilarious. I love it.
Head and shoulders above any other possible scale
The denisovans and floresiensis live on! Haha
It’s one of the worst scales I’ve ever seen. It looks like it starts at about 4’8
I mean the silhouettes.
All this chart says is "asians short, whites tall." Which literally everyone with a brain could tell you if they didn't mindkill themselves.
The UK is filled with Indians and their nearby ethnic group the Arabs, so there drops their average. And the US has a shit ton of Hispanics doing the same to ours.
but then there are the steppe guys who are like giants.
They are an exception to a lot of Asian generalizations. But their extreme differences only highlight how otherwise similar all the rest are.
So what's the average white guy height?
It can't be more than like 5'9". I think people massively overestimate how tall the average person is. If we were Norwegian, yeah, we'd be 6'0". But even for whites, that's not most of US heritage. There aren't even that many Nords period.
Issue with that question is that Europe itself has a much larger variation in height in a small geographical area than it seems most of the world does, but all of those fall under "white." A solid 2-3 inch difference from just a few hundred miles.
I'd wager that 5'9 to 5'11 just depending on area is a safe bet for anyone.
Either way, most white guys are taller by a head than most white girls, and any non-Scandanavian girl period, which is what the majority of the height care matters. And women are so bad at judging numbers you can just say 6'2 at 5'9 and they believe it, which is probably where the overestimation gets born.
lol true
Something is off about this graphic but I can't quite put my finger on it. :)
Neither are a problem. Women are hardwired on the height preference for the most part. A lot of things are their own damn fault but that's not one of them.
The existence of "Haves" and "have nots" are only a problem if you subscribe to Marxism or any other anti reality worldview.
Your lot in life is your lot in life, that's just how it works. Especially with regards to genetics.
But then you complain about a global elite that controls the world, which is actually the case, a nation less global elite controls the world, the only reason they deem themselves the elite is because they are the richest and you're just a peasant for them. They even own your government by the balls through DEBT.
Is that anti-reality worldview? No.
Said "elites" aren't. They're a persistent demonic cult that infiltrates and destroys precisely because they can't govern effectively.
They're evil because they can't accept their lot, and rebel against the rules of God in search of unnatural gain.
There's no inconsistency in my point here.
They're not. They're hardwired for status. It just so happens that tall men stick out from a crowd which makes them more memorable. Notoriety is then confused with importance, therefore status, therefore attractiveness.
It works like advertising works.
It's not some ephemeral meaningless coincidence as that.
Height and strength are correlated. Manlets are looked down on by men for the same reason, that weakness is a negative survival trait. Thus shortness is indicative of an undesirable trait.
For men, to be particularly short is essentially a disability.
Good counterpoint.
I dunno about particularly short, but I think in certain environments, you survive more if you're squat. I think that's why everyone isn't 6 ft tall on average. There's a mating preference toward taller males, but there's a survivorship bias towards shorter ones. Maybe just cuz people shoot the tall ones first, IDK.
AFAIK larger people are less efficient, although I don't know exactly why.
Because after a certain point on the bell curve for height the risks of vascular, musculature, and skeletal problems begin to skyrocket. Ask a hundred guys in their 30s who range from 5' 5" to 6' 5" and see which ones already have sore knees and sore backs simply through existing. Modern medicine helps offset things a lot so outliers persist longer than they did historically, but the end result is always the same: early onset heart disease, circulatory problems, and chronic joint pains for the rest of their lives. Lives which modern medicine and culture continue to prolong.
I figured people trended toward exactly the right height for their environment. Some people just get a big head about their tall head. I'm not embarrassed to say I'm 5'9" and everything fits me, and I fit into everything. We're tool users. Sucks for anyone who thought they were going to skate by by being big.
You know what tall people don't get to do that much? Go on amusement park rides due to upper height limits.
There isn't a survivorship bias towards shorter men.
There's a race nutrition gap. Most of the world are manlets because for three or four thousand years their race ate little besides rice and vegetables.
Same reason why so many of them are lactose intolerant. Three or four thousand years without such a thing as cheese or milk.
Heck there's a fair argument to be made for a hygiene gap contributing to that too. Far east Asians and Whites know and understand hygiene but everyone else is only a couple generations removed from shitting into their own hands.
The 21st century is an anomaly.
I just figured that for every climate there is an ideal size, and people trend towards it. There must be some reason not to get bigger and bigger all the time.
WTF drugs are you on? White males who are not nutritionally deprived (aka they actually have red meat in their diet growing up) very much average 5'10'' today.
Anyone claiming that the average men are less than 5'10" are including non-whites and thus their opinion is invalid.
I always felt like (white) Texans were taller than average, but maybe that's just the boots.
5'9" is average. Half (roughly) of the population is taller than that. Saying that it's unrealistic for women to want an above-average man is like saying that it's unrealistic for men to want a B cup or better.
I would say it is reasonable for everyone to want more than average. I would not say it is realistic.
They're not using logic in your other examples either. Nor do they actually want what they claim, some of them are lying and some don't know how to express themselves, but either way actually taking things women say at face value is foolish.
They don't actually care about how much you make, although it helps. Most women care about the tingle and very little else. The women who don't, the ones who actually care solely about wealth are the predators.
Tall contributes to the tingle. And 5"9' isn't "tall", let's be honest. It's above or about average depending on your race. Is it tallER than most women, sure.
r*dditors (the absolute faggots) are pissing and shidding themselves over this graph but all I can think is how much I want to kick indonesians like soccer balls after seeing it
Ask them why being a manlet would be a bad thing 🤔
LoL, the 5'9" guy doesn't even come up to the shoulder of the 6' tall guy when there's only a 3 inch difference.
No, that's accurate. If anything, there's not a big enough gap between 5'11" and 6'.
(/joke just to be clear.)
It almost portrays how women see height. (except everyone after 6' guy would be the Indonesian guy)
This is why I suggest everyone over 6 feet lists their height as 5' 13"+ to filter the vain and stupid.
There might be some science there. The difference of one inch might be several degrees higher of looking upwards to people averaging five foot four.
There might be a casual link between craning their neck and arousal.
It actually is “to scale” but hilarity ensues when you swap the bars for body silhouettes and truncate the data to 5ft. You normally will truncate data like this when you’re looking to “zoom in” on the differences.
Uninformed pRedditors like to complain about data truncation (and other things, like correlation/causation dynamics) which is I guess why this graph showed up on r/mildlyinfuriating, when I personally would have classified it on r/fuckinghilarious if I still had an account
Here’s a blog post on data truncation:
https://digitalblog.ons.gov.uk/2016/06/27/does-the-axis-have-to-start-at-zero-part-1-line-charts/
It makes me picture those tiny dinosaurs from the later jurassic parks which hunt in packs to overwhelm, which I guess is what Indonesians are like
"Zoom in" is a funny way to say "intentionally mislead most viewers about how extreme the differences are." Because that's what it is used for much of the time, and the graphic demonstrates that quite clearly. (Heck, your own linked article says "you’re making an editorial decision to focus on the data in a different way, so take care not to mislead the reader." at the very beginning.)
At 5'2'' vs 6', that means the average Indonesian guy is about 86% of the average Dutch guy's height. Noticeably shorter, yes, but even if it was done with bars it would still make it look like the Dutch are twice as tall or something than the Indonesians. And the ridiculously absurd silhouettes just make it even worse.
I think everyone here understands that you're right and why you're right, but I think OP is just having some height-based fun.
Lmfao imagine downvoting someone obviously making a joke in addition to providing specialist insight. Lmoa even.
Is the graph to scale or not to scale? Do you acknowledge that graphs can start at numbers other than zero? Here’s a sock for you to cry into
It’s not to scale at all
The scale is there on the side of the screen tf are you idiots talking about “not to scale”
There is a “scale” and it’s HIGHLY inaccurate. It measures the tip of the head to the base of the shoulders on the tallest man at 3 inches.
It also measures the tip of the head to the waist of the second shortest man at 3 inches.
It shows that men of Indonesia will, on average, be up to the knee of the average man from the Netherlands.
So, no, it’s not to scale.
You fucking retards not knowing what “to scale” means isn’t my problem.
This graph is to scale (hence the fucking scale on the side). The scale has been truncated (that’s not illegal, reading a fucking book sometime)
As someone well above 6' tall, I assure you this feels to scale.
All these references to manlet psychology had me scratching my head
Is this what the little people mean by “tall privilege”?
Could be on to something. I sense defensiveness in some of the comments here, but this graphic certainly didn't get under my skin.
Huh, UK on average taller than US, maybe that has something to do with food? We may meme on them for bland food but has less chemicals in it than US.
That was only surprising thing, I know South East Asians are smaller on average and India, take what I said about food and apply that to hygiene...
It has to do with hispanics. They are universally short, and they make up 30%+ of the population now.
It’s probably artificially lowered because of the sheer number of squatemalans that have invaded
Food and conditions in general are measurably worse in the UK. Here's two twins who separated at birth, one raised in California, the other in the UK https://i.imgur.com/LpOUZUm.jpeg You can tell which is which just by looking at them. Bonus points for the tranny doctor collecting your tax dollars to study them.
That's wild. Does the research describe why exactly? I wonder if levels of sunlight are part of it.
Sunlight has a pretty significant effect on appearance. Truckers who would always catch the sun on their left when going west show this after years and years of hauling.
What is the US' height breakdown by race?
Last time I checked it was something like:
56% nord, 20% redguard, 13% dark elf, 4% wood elf, and the rest a mishmash of argonians and the other furry races
Oh wait sorry I misread your question, the TES wiki might have what you’re looking for
It's a hilariously bad representation of the data, making it look like Indonesia a country full of homunculi.
They should have started the scale at 4'6, cropped Indonesian bodies at the shoulder and scaled images accordingly.
>implying the goal was to accurately convey information about relative heights across countries as opposed to being a JOKE
thanks for making me cackle like a maniac
This is what 99% of women believe.
US avg male height is anchored down by 20 million Jose's
I am about 5ft 11 and when I go to see live music I'm like a fucking giant in most cases. Maybe 2 people there my height or taller.
This scale is so hilariously bad.
Now someone add the NBA race.
USA would be taller if we didn’t let in all the beaners.