Abstract
Height preferences when choosing a partner might reflect adaptive mating strategies, whereby tall men are deemed attractive to potential partners due to links with health and resource acquisition. However, height preferences are highly variable across populations and could reflect socially constructed gender norms. We examined the relationship between ideal partner height, the importance placed on partner height and endorsement of traditional gender norms. Participants (n = 242; 18-39yrs; UK-based, heterosexual) completed (i) five height-related questions (including own height, ideal partner height, maximum/minimum acceptable height), (ii) three gender norm questionnaires (sexist attitudes, feminist attitudes and alignment with masculine/feminine gender roles), and (iii) two open-ended questions about why height is important. Although ideal height ratio did not correlate with any gender role endorsement measures in either women or men, women who placed greater importance on height scored higher on sexism, lower on feminism and were less likely to find a short partner acceptable than women who placed less importance on partner height. Men who placed greater importance on height, and men who described themselves as more traditionally masculine, were less willing to accept a tall partner than men who scored lower on these measures. Women who rated height as important wanted to feel 'feminine/protected', whereas men wanted to feel 'masculine/dominant'. In this study, the 'male-taller' preference was exhibited, with women's preferences for tall partners being stronger than men's preferences for short partners. Height preferences were related to gender norm endorsement, suggesting that gene-culture co-evolutionary processes could potentially influence human height dimorphism.