Apparently film stars are shorter because they are more 'touchy-feely'

First off, sorry for the extended absence. Life gets in the way!

Apparently it's a slow news day as the Daily Mail have kindly brought us this gem.

"Why ARE today's stars so short?" Emphasis on the 'are' is theirs.

Subheading 'Actors were once strapping hunks and muscular specimens. Now the modern leading man is more likely to be required to burst into tears, says Quentin Letts.'

LINK

The article starts with the line 'Actors were once strapping hunks, thick thighed he-men who only had to arrive at a film premier to make everyone's eyes bulge. 

To illustrate this point the article includes an infographic of actors who came in at over 6 foot tall.

It conveniently leaves out famous actors who didn't fit in with this image including possibly the most famous actor ever Laurence Olivier (reportedly 5 foot 6) , famous heartthrob Rudolph Valentino (reportedly 5 foot 10), Richard Burton famously sexy actor married to screen siren Elisabeth (reportedly 5 foot 10), James Dean famously sexy rebel without a cause (reportedly 5 foot 8) and Steve McQueen once known as the King of Cool who was reportedly 5 foot 9.

The article is then full of charming comments such as this one discussing the actor Eddie Redmayne, describing his appearance in the audience at the 2015 Oscar ceremony.

'The actress Cate Blanchett loomed over him - she look so much bigger then him, he could have been her lunch'

At least we now know the real reason there are not many shorter actors in Hollywood. Cate Blanchett eats them all.

Other highlights include . . .

Generally, films these days are less likely to contain the sort of bar brawls, tough-guy scraps and derring-do scenes requiring brawn. The modern leading man is more likely to be required to burst into tears and go shopping. 

By the way does any one remember that Yul Brynner, reportedly 5 foot 8, played a gun fighter in the Magnificent Seven?

The hunks of old Hollywood were gorgeously suited, big as nightclub bouncers and radiated reliability. But today such men have given way to fluttering, scrawny types in torn denims, who perhaps - like Eddie Redmayne - model Burberry machintoshes in their spare time. 

The article blames Feminism and Hollywood directors for this apparent change between shorter actors and taller actors. It claims that directors want to show men as emotionally responsive and suggests that shorter actors are therefore more desirable. It also contradicts itself by pointing out that famously shorter actor Tom Cruise takes steps to make himself appear taller and that Arnold Schwarzenegger felt the need to conceal his true height.

What annoys me about this, is that I know that somewhere there will be a shorter man or perhaps young boy who will be reading this and taking in all of the negativity that is being spewed his way. He will be internalising the message that if he is a shorter man he isn't  truly masculine but that he is a 'fluttering scrawny type' who will look ridiculous if he even stands next to a women who is taller then him.

To me the tone of the article seems to suggest that real masculinity has been whittled away by Hollywood. I think that the problem is our heightist society's failure to accept that masculinity comes in men of lots of shapes and sizes, some of the taller and shorter.