This also absolves the person doing the stereotyping of self-control, the same self-control short men are expected to exert 24/7. All someone has to do is find a single short guy who offended them, then just like that, this someone can confirm their prejudices about short men. If this isn't excusable, then why do short men have to worry about it at all? The one doing the stereotyping would never be in the right. A short guy could gather countless examples of people hating on short men, then use that as fuel to hate everyone back, but this mindset is met with zero tolerance. On the other hand, all it takes is one short man to "confirm stereotypes." It begs the question why anyone would even refrain from stereotyping short men, if it means losing the social advantage of being able to disrespect a short guy, but he can't return in kind. It literally rewards prejudice, essentially saying, "The more likely someone is to stereotype you, the more considerate of their feelings you should be." Now if only people showed the same consideration before stereotyping short men.
Apparently it's realistic to preach the following to short men: "No matter what happens, always behave yourself." Yet rarely do I see anyone say, "No matter how many short guys offend you, don't discriminate based on height." People expect perfect behavior out of short men, but not those who stereotype short men. The only things being proven here are double standards, not stereotypes. No matter how much some tall man is despised (like Donald Trump), tall guys are never judged negatively as a group. If a woman is bodyshamed and flips off her bully, many people nowadays cheer her on. If a short man remotely gets upset by height discrimination, he's insecure, he has short man syndrome, etc.
If someone wants to judge a group negatively as a whole, based off an immutable physical trait, is that not prejudice? Is that not what needs fixing, rather than short men's behavior? The moment a person begins thinking this way, they are no longer even in the realm of rationality, so why appease people like this by telling short men to be extra polite around them? A tall guy could beat somebody to a pulp and he's judged as an individual. Meanwhile, a short man has to never even look at someone the wrong way, or else short men are blamed as a group. Why not just discourage height prejudice outright, rather than rely on how many gold stars a short guy has? It costs zero time or money to judge people as individuals, yet it seems like short men must fellate all of society in order to drag them kicking and screaming towards this goal.
Is there even a quota of good behavior short men must meet before society erases the Napoleon Complex/Short Man Syndrome from everyday use? Is there some kind of formal agreement that by a certain year, if every short man were more docile than any pet or child, society will finally frown upon this wanton labeling? Until then, what's the endgame in the bigger picture? These are actually trick questions. The real answer is "it doesn't matter." Someone shouldn't need to do this in the first place, simply for being born a certain way. I've seen short men who were polite and ready to patiently discuss heightism, but they got accused of "perpetuating the angry midget stereotype" simply because they discuss heightism. This is called kafkatrapping: using the denial of guilt as proof of guilt. If a short man denies that short men are inherently worse, then he's an angry midget, but if he doesn't then it's just accepted that short men are worse because nobody questions it. One could say, "Well, people only go there because of past experiences with nasty short men," but why is the one doing the stereotyping getting the benefit of the doubt? Don't people think the angry short guy has a reason why he's mad too?
The whole idea of the accused having to prove their innocence is a bum deal anyway:
"Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side... For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution)."People claim a man is more likely to be a bad person the shorter he is, then expect short men to spend their whole lives proving society wrong. That's not how logic works, especially when the thing that supposedly makes it worse, is a short man acting the exact same way others do, which means being fed up once in a while... Or in this case, even daring to disagree with or defy someone will apparently "confirm stereotypes" (even when that someone could be outright discriminating). When the burden of proof is placed on others, it turns out, and I quote, "The theory that short men end up as more aggressive than taller ones has been dismissed by a scientific study... Heart monitors revealed it was the taller men who flew off the handle more quickly and hit back." So what more is needed for short men to be let off this hook? No, anecdotes are not enough ("I saw a short man start a bar fight once. Proof of short man syndrome right there!"). People with this illogical mentality are the ones who need reprimanding, not those being stereotyped.
The study above is salt in the wound, because it proves that short men already hold back more on average, as recommended by the "thou shall not confirm stereotype" advocates. What has been achieved from this? Less hatred of short men? To me, it seems like as everything else becomes politically incorrect, people only discriminate against short men more. Besides, the cat's out of the bag at this point. Even if every short man from now on got castrated, someone could just use a short villain from the past (like Charles Manson) as their excuse to hate all short men (but ignore the fact that boogeyman Osama Bin Laden was tall). Once a stereotype has been created, it can be brought up at any time as an insult. Height stereotypes are especially ridiculous, as it's gotten to the point now where a short man can be slapped with these for doing almost anything:
Simply seeing a short man dating a tall woman confirms short man syndrome.
I've seen short guys who were popular with women diagnosed with the Napoleon Complex, as in "He has a new lady every week to prove his masculinity." A short man who lifts more than 5 lb dumbbells or makes above average wage is often viewed as compensating. A short pro wrestler simply blocking someone on Twitter gets called “an angry little troll.” Point is, if you're a short man who fears these stereotypes, you might as well strap yourself into a straitjacket and never do anything.
Let's also not forget the human follies of confirmation bias and the halo effect. If there was one short man who rubbed people the wrong way, and two tall men doing the same, people would focus on slandering short men. When there are a few short males people like, short men still aren't tolerated as a whole, those few good short guys are just regarded as isolated cases. It's not until the prejudice itself is stigmatized that the entire group will be viewed in a less negative light. Until then, even if people think you're a good boy, you'll always be held to stricter standards and be less trusted due to profiling. There are those who think height prejudice can be lessened through sheer goodwill rather than direct conversation. These people don't understand that prejudice is irrational. Prejudice does not reward good behavior, it only rears its head to capitalize on the bad. There's a reason why society tells us to not bodyshame women, rather than suggest women be good girls in order to avoid bodyshaming. Every time a short man does something unsavory, it's added to the list of bad things short men have done. No item from that list is ever removed however. When a short guy does something grand, it's not "short men are great" but rather "he's 10 feet tall on the inside" or something similar[1][2][3]. Martin Luther King was 5'6 but height prejudice has not lessened, instead people just view him as an honorary tall man when they find out his height. Yet some cherrypicked short meanie gets his sin carved into the monolith? Convenient how this "judge short men as a group" mentality only works one way: negatively. In fact, it seems like society brings up short male height only when they want to elicit hatred. Everyone somehow knows Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un are short, but people tend to be surprised when they find out the heights of MLK or Bruce Lee. If this isn't a rigged game then tell me what is.
Part of me thinks people are almost grateful that things like racism or sexism have the histories they do. Now those who have never even lived in those times can use said history as an excuse to treat others worse."Yeah, we hate when women are told to behave more than men, but we have no qualms about expecting that from a man." Aside from being an outright fallacy, it just sounds scummy at face value. "Somebody stole 500 from me, so now I can steal 50 from you." I also don't think people realize political correctness doesn't stop a stereotype from being statistically accurate. I point this out because even if I had a thousand examples of bad apples from some politically protected group, everyone would still disbelieve my generalizing. Is that how this works? Stereotypes are believed based on how many people they offend, rather than if they're true or not? Whatever the case... People think they're being benevolent when telling short men to behave in order to avoid inequity, but the very fact that someone has to behave more than everyone else simply due to benign DNA, that is inequity in itself.
In a hippie rainbows-and-sunshine fantasy land, it'd be great if nobody was rude ever, but currently I cannot think of any other type of bigot that's immune from repercussion. Society's consensus is "If you don't want to be mocked and ostracized, don't have narrow-minded viewpoints... Unless you're prejudiced about height, then short men have to watch their mouths around you." Simply put, short men are born guilty until proven innocent. That's what needs to be fixed, not short men's behavior. You know how children aren't allowed to swear as much as adults? The very idea that short men have to behave more than other regular adults is infantilizing and dehumanizing, like short men are kids or pets that need to watch it or face punishment. Insert "short men = children" joke here (but no hate against short girls please). The real power of these stereotypes is that they're like scolding a dog by saying "bad doggy!" Shuts up most short men like mutts. Then you have all the short people who threaten other shorties with these stereotypes. They're like those who police and snitch on their neighbors. Good thing everyone is always so vigilant, making sure short men know their place. I think in their quest to prove they're "one of the good ones," many short people turn into the opposite of the overly negative short ones. Instead of blaming everybody, many short people literally hold no one accountable but themselves. People stereotype short men? That's short men's fault for not being passive enough. A short guy is being targeted? Clearly he didn't have enough confidence or do enough bicep curls.
Ultimately, the most ironic thing about all this, is how those who use these stereotypes are actually the ones perpetuating them (and yes, trying to censor a short man with these stereotypes counts as utilizing them). Imagine if someone didn’t even know short men had stereotypes. Maybe they're from a different culture, or perhaps we're simply talking about children. How do they learn this terminology in the first place? Is it because they saw some mean short guy and suddenly the words appeared in their head? Of course not. They learn about these stereotypes from those who use them on short men. This particular blog post wouldn't exist if it weren't for people like this, and I myself wouldn't even know what "Napoleon Complex" or "Short Man Syndrome" were if I didn't hear it from others. At least if someone learns this from me, I paint it as a bad thing to label someone with, which is not how these stereotypes are usually regarded.
Short men shouldn't have to beware confirming stereotypes, because the original premise is ridiculous on its face. It's literally saying, "If you're born this way, society considers you more likely to be evil. Now behave more than I have to for the rest of your life, just for the privilege of not being discriminated against." Claim this with any other trait, word for word, then see whether or not most people nod their heads. A short man could be a damn serial killer, but judging all short men based off that one person should never be an acceptable line of reasoning. Otherwise, it sends the impression that it's almost understandable and sympathetic to think this way:
"I hate all short men now, because this one short man confirmed all the negative stereotypes society taught me. He made me do it!"
"Oh, okay. You better watch yourselves now short men."
It's like short men are on a form of probation, except probation actually has an agreed upon end point, and the initial crime here is that a short guy's head isn't high enough off the ground. Most people nowadays would instinctively say "yes" when asked if they support equal treatment. Yet these same people would disagree with me when I state how a short man shouldn't have to behave any more or less than those around him. Put the two together and show me how they fit. The phrase "blame shifting" is thrown around a lot these days, but everyone ignores how they do exactly this when it comes to height. This topic really shows the difference between someone who doesn't understand treating people equally, versus somebody who does. The former will look at stereotypes about short men and think, "Clearly this means short men need to be more docile than everyone else." The latter thinks, "Short men are the only ones nowadays who have to deal with this baggage due to a genetic physical trait, that doesn't seem right."
Maybe people should stop antagonizing based on height, because many times a short guy "perpetuates" a stereotype, it's because someone provoked him. It's like if I poke an animal with a stick, then I huff and puff when it retaliates. After that I say, "If it wasn't so mad, I wouldn't poke it in the first place." On this note, you know what pisses off many short guys? Stereotyping short men. It's telling how people never take their own medicine by thinking, "Perhaps judging short men as a group will only create more angry short men." What short men think doesn't matter, but everybody else is entitled to respect from short men. This is all made worse when we remember how a short man is often mad due to people's actions, but height bias starts off solely due to appearance. Of course, throughout history, people who discriminate based on genetics always have their excuses for why the group deserved it.
Unless short men are all given lobotomies, some short guy is going to get pissed off eventually. Instead of expecting saintliness from short men, people need to be educated about confirmation bias, and how society expects more docility out of someone the shorter they are. If it’s realistic to expect short men to be well-behaved 24/7 in spite of heightism, then why not cut out the middle man, and tell everyone to not stereotype short men despite angry short dudes? Just because these stereotypes exist doesn't mean everyone has to use them. The way things are does not mean the way things should be.
TL;DR: Instead of simply judging people on an individual basis, or saying “let’s both not be rude," people would rather threaten short men into submission by claiming “you're confirming stereotypes.” The latter is objectively biased behavior, because other people cannot be instantly censored in this way. This shouldn’t be complicated, and yet even the most politically correct among us fail to comprehend it.
Click here to read Part 2
