How much height could a man possibly stunt with the worst diet and lifestyle?

Edit Post

Quote from: CaptainAmerica on February 12, 2018, 01:40:34 AMSo literally starving, living under dictator, high stress lifestyle and fearing execution of your entire family up to 2 relatives removed can at maximum stunt height by 1.5 inches? Lol.

This is also ignoring the fact that in more modern societies women are the keepers of marriage and children, and become choosier causing reproductive rates to go down.

I wouldn’t be surprised if 0.5 inch of that height difference could be attributed to independent South Korean women choosing to marry taller men than they would’ve been able to bargain for without their own financial freedom.

I mean take note of the fact that women now openly want to only date and fk 6ft+ men. That obviously has some influence on the gene pool. Also couple the fact with how likely suicide is for short men, especially men under 5’5.

I don’t think human height is done increasing, and I genuinely believe it’s greatly influenced by sxxual selection.

You're right too, but let's call it "significantly increasing in a couple of generations".

It'll probably keep increasing in societies like the Netherlands where people have selected, and still select for height, for ages.

Still, it's weird to think that in the distant enough future, men could average over 2 meters tall in certain societies. I wonder how our biology would handle that. Tall men already live less than shorter men.

Edit Post

Also, on the topic of starvation and nutrition stunting growth, one of the poorest nations in Europe, Montenegro, actually has some of the tallest men in Europe, averaging 6ft for males. They grow to this height with a 22% unemployment rate and a GDP per capita of like $7,000 lol. But genetically the people from that Balkan-mountain area are just very tall.

Edit Post

The height difference in cases like North Korea vs. South Korea doesn't come to exist within only one stunted generation, with epigenetics, height can decrease over several generations in a timespan where famine and bad living conditions take place. So if there is a 4 inch difference between those two countries, it doesn't translate to one individual person being stunted of 4 inches of potential growth (as far as I understood it).

Quote from: CaptainAmerica on February 12, 2018, 01:40:34 AMThis is also ignoring the fact that in more modern societies women are the keepers of marriage and children, and become choosier causing reproductive rates to go down.

I wouldn’t be surprised if 0.5 inch of that height difference could be attributed to independent South Korean women choosing to marry taller men than they would’ve been able to bargain for without their own financial freedom. In North Korea, women must marry whoever they can just to be provided for and survive.

It's true that women are not forced to marry or mate with any guy simply for provider qualities. But is that really what a guy would want, being chosen only because of his potential to provide money and resources? This principle also goes both ways, since men are not forced to have a wife and children, they can equally choose to keep or not keep up a marriage, so ugly or unattractive women should also have it harder to find a satisfied relationship. Western men can also go to a poor country like Thailand and get a pretty young woman to commit to them, which, to my knowledge, was not as easy 200-300 years ago.

In reality, I'm not sure it becomes harder for short(er) men in modern countries. Since it's no longer necessary to marry and get children at a young age, people are free to experiment what they really want and find their niche, and a place where they are accepted for what they are by a partner. That's my theory at least.

Edit Post

Be suspicious about official average height. Because officially south korean average is 173-4 cm while North Korean average is about 166 (but I'm not sure it's official, North Korean authorities have no interest to put this official so it could be american studies).

Edit Post

Yes, I'd rather see a comparison between heights of Western vs Eastern Germans and Civil-War Finns vs Post-WW2 Finns.

SK vs NK isn't very reliable.

Edit Post

Or you can make a comparison between Romania / Moldova / Transnistria, but there is some ethnic groups like Gagauz

Edit Post

Answer to title: Less than 3cm. If you eat normal, you gain or lose no life changing heights.

Edit Post

Quote from: IwannaBeTaller on February 12, 2018, 10:03:28 AMThe height difference in cases like North Korea vs. South Korea doesn't come to exist within only one stunted generation, with epigenetics, height can decrease over several generations in a timespan where famine and bad living conditions take place. So if there is a 4 inch difference between those two countries, it doesn't translate to one individual person being stunted of 4 inches of potential growth (as far as I understood it).

It's true that women are not forced to marry or mate with any guy simply for provider qualities. But is that really what a guy would want, being chosen only because of his potential to provide money and resources? This principle also goes both ways, since men are not forced to have a wife and children, they can equally choose to keep or not keep up a marriage, so ugly or unattractive women should also have it harder to find a satisfied relationship. Western men can also go to a poor country like Thailand and get a pretty young woman to commit to them, which, to my knowledge, was not as easy 200-300 years ago.

In reality, I'm not sure it becomes harder for short(er) men in modern countries. Since it's no longer necessary to marry and get children at a young age, people are free to experiment what they really want and find their niche, and a place where they are accepted for what they are by a partner. That's my theory at least.

It is definitely harder for shorter men in modern countries. Why? It's simple, back in the olden days where women were relegated to the house for the most part and didn't/couldn't work, they placed a higher emphasis on picking a mate who can provide for them resource wise because they couldn't do it themselves. Nowadays in these countries where women work and no longer rely on men for resources, they can afford to pick the mates with better genes (heightwise) to pass onto their offspring.

Edit Post

Quote from: ShortLivesMatter on February 13, 2018, 02:52:28 AMIt is definitely harder for shorter men in modern countries. Why? It's simple, back in the olden days where women were relegated to the house for the most part and didn't/couldn't work, they placed a higher emphasis on picking a mate who can provide for them resource wise because they couldn't do it themselves. Nowadays in these countries where women work and no longer rely on men for resources, they can afford to pick the mates with better genes (heightwise) to pass onto their offspring.

Yep, I’m guessing a lot of the younger members here had more rural, maybe religious, parents who married young. If my parents would’ve went to college and my mother turned into a uppity sorority chick I can almost 100% guarantee that she wouldn’t have given my father the time of day.

When my parents got divorced my 5’5 father had absolutely 0 luck dating while my mom had no problems. In a bittersweet way he got lucky that they married young.

Edit Post

Quote from: ShortLivesMatter on February 13, 2018, 02:52:28 AMIt is definitely harder for shorter men in modern countries. Why? It's simple, back in the olden days where women were relegated to the house for the most part and didn't/couldn't work, they placed a higher emphasis on picking a mate who can provide for them resource wise because they couldn't do it themselves. Nowadays in these countries where women work and no longer rely on men for resources, they can afford to pick the mates with better genes (heightwise) to pass onto their offspring.

It's like you didn't read my post at all, or didn't understand any of it.