[ SECRET POST #2769 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2769 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #396.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

That is because the amount of really old people who are still pre-decent nutrition era are dragging the average down. I'm talking under 40s, and especially the under 25s. Women's heights are shooting up but there are still a lot of old people, who tend to be not just short, but very short, dragging the whole-adult life average down.

[(Anonymous)]

I just looked at the data from the CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_11/sr11_252.pdf

Among women in their 20s in the period 2007-2010 (the most recent data), the average height is 64.2 inches (5'4"). For teenage girls, it's around the same (64.2-64.3 inches).

Heights may have shot up since then, but I doubt to the point where 5'8" is average-to-short.

[(Anonymous)]

Remember that includes in its data, midgets and dwarfs. It doesn't take very many extreme short people to drag down an average. There are more women who are above that average than below, but the people who are below that are exceptionally short. You don't girls much who are foot taller than that, but you do get a non-negligible amount who are two foot or more below it. That really skews things.

If you don't believe me, just go down to your nearest highschool, and before the cops haul you away for being a pedo you'll notice that the majority are much taller than previous generations.

[(Anonymous)]

Still doubtful. The fifth percentile is 59.9 inches, which means that < 5% of the population is below that height. Even if we assume everyone under that point is 0 inches high, then the average only goes up to 67.5 (5'7"). And I doubt 5% of the population is 0 inches high.

[(Anonymous)]

That theory might work if, y'know there weren't ridiculously tall people on the other end skewing it in the other direction. Please take a statistics class.

[(Anonymous)]

Man, you really ruined it with the pedo remark. You could have had a good, if baffling, thing going anon, but now it's all gone to shit. 1/10.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, for goodness' sake, you ignorant child. Decent nutrition is not an invention of the 70s - in fact it could be argued that the advent of fast food and ultra processing *reduced* good nutrition. The West has had nutritionally adequate diets for most people since at least the 40s/early 50s. 5'8" is well above average for a woman.