I made several changes to section on dating and marriage. The changes made were purely additions to existing text. The reason for these changes was to present the subject matter in a more neutral and non-bias manner. This article on height discrimination begins by stating that heightism is both prejudicial and discriminatory. These two terms carry a negative connotation. Nonetheless, the section on heightism in dating failed to convey why the practice of choosing a mate based on stature could be construed as something that is discriminatory or prejudicial. A greater exploration of the biological factors was necessitated to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.
The article had presented the content in a subjective manner citing, primarily, articles related to western polling of public opinion. The need for additional content expressing objective research on the relationship between height and perceptive attractiveness was needed. Conflicts between biological and sociocultural viewpoints were emphasized in an unbiased manner. Previously, the article gave preeminence to arguments that, seemingly, supported height discrimination (reproductive success, opinions based on personal ads, anxiety, and jealousy), downplaying conflicting viewpoints and relegating them to the end of the section. My additions were made to show the confliction of viewpoints and research in this area. Moreover, discussion of height discrimination did not qualify the cultures being discussed. I added this qualification, which was necessary. Perceiving attractiveness as a function of height is not a universal cultural norm for all cultures.
Additionally, the following introduction to the section was in great need of change: "for some people, height is the major factor in sexual attractiveness." The only reference provided was a link to the article on physical attractiveness (which has been maintained). There was no reference to support the argument that height alone can be the singular major factor in sexual attractiveness. The information provided in the article on physical attractiveness suggests that height is a contributing factor, but nowhere is there evidence to suggest that height alone can be the determinant in overall attractiveness. Therefore, the language was toned down for the sake of consistency with other articles and due to the lack of supporting references.
My revisions are not perfect, but they were a start in presenting a more fair view on this subject. Aspects stated at the end of the section still need to better incorporated into the content of the first two paragraphs to create a better flow for the reader. Furthermore, I am a biologist, not a sociologist, and thus my ability to give full justice to sociocultural issues is limited. Therefore I welcome any changes in this regard, but biological considerations should maintain their fair emphasis.
I made several changes to section on dating and marriage. The changes made were purely additions to existing text. The reason for these changes was to present the subject matter in a more neutral and non-bias manner. This article on height discrimination begins by stating that heightism is both prejudicial and discriminatory. These two terms carry a negative connotation. Nonetheless, the section on heightism in dating failed to convey why the practice of choosing a mate based on stature could be construed as something that is discriminatory or prejudicial. A greater exploration of the biological factors was necessitated to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.
The article had presented the content in a subjective manner citing, primarily, articles related to western polling of public opinion. The need for additional content expressing objective research on the relationship between height and perceptive attractiveness was needed. Conflicts between biological and sociocultural viewpoints were emphasized in an unbiased manner. Previously, the article gave preeminence to arguments that, seemingly, supported height discrimination (reproductive success, opinions based on personal ads, anxiety, and jealousy), downplaying conflicting viewpoints and relegating them to the end of the section. My additions were made to show the confliction of viewpoints and research in this area. Moreover, discussion of height discrimination did not qualify the cultures being discussed. I added this qualification, which was necessary. Perceiving attractiveness as a function of height is not a universal cultural norm for all cultures.
Additionally, the following introduction to the section was in great need of change: "for some people, height is the major factor in sexual attractiveness." The only reference provided was a link to the article on physical attractiveness (which has been maintained). There was no reference to support the argument that height alone can be the singular major factor in sexual attractiveness. The information provided in the article on physical attractiveness suggests that height is a contributing factor, but nowhere is there evidence to suggest that height alone can be the determinant in overall attractiveness. Therefore, the language was toned down for the sake of consistency with other articles and due to the lack of supporting references.
My revisions are not perfect, but they were a start in presenting a more fair view on this subject. Aspects stated at the end of the section still need to better incorporated into the content of the first two paragraphs to create a better flow for the reader. Furthermore, I am a biologist, not a sociologist, and thus my ability to give full justice to sociocultural issues is limited. Therefore I welcome any changes in this regard, but biological considerations should maintain their fair emphasis.