Almost all top attractive men in the world are between 6'0 and 6'3; why does this forum exaggerate the definition of "tall" so much?

[ReinhardRacist]

Dnrd

 

[syract2]

Dnrd

Dnrd

Daddy

 

[Deleted member 45942]

Henry Cavill: 6'1
Chris Hemsworth: 6'3
Brad Pitt: 5'11
George Clooney: 5'11
Leonardo DiCaprio: 6'0
Zac Efron: 5'8
Harry Styles: 6'0
Justin Bieber: 5'9
Jake Gyllenhaal: 5'11 ¼
Jamie Dornan (Christian Grey himself): 5'10
Ryan Gosling: 6'0
Ryan Reynolds: 6'2
David Beckham: 6'0
Jon Kortajarena: 6'2
Sean O’Pry: 6'1
David Gandy: 6'2
Every James Bond actor except for Craig: 6'1-6'2

And that's not even taking height frauding into account, which virtually every male public figure does, so a lot of these heights might be slightly inflated. So where does this idea that you have to be at least 6'3-6'4 or "it's over", or that 6'0 is "the bare minimum at best", come from? Is it just a meme or do some people legitimately believe it? Why speculate about what height women consider attractive when we have the data right here?
I mean, to a lookism believer (which I am too don't get me wrong) these men are the gold standard right? The end goal, the embodiment of their worldview's idea of success and the definition of what society and women consider attractive. Hell Brad Pitt's name was literally synonymous with "handsome" for an entire generation. Don't these heights give us a pretty clear-cut, unambiguous definition of what "attractive height for men" means?

Cuz that's muh face you only see them in movies height doesn't matter on screen

 

[Alexanderr]

Henry Cavill: 6'1
Chris Hemsworth: 6'3
Brad Pitt: 5'11
George Clooney: 5'11
Leonardo DiCaprio: 6'0
Zac Efron: 5'8
Harry Styles: 6'0
Justin Bieber: 5'9
Jake Gyllenhaal: 5'11 ¼
Jamie Dornan (Christian Grey himself): 5'10
Ryan Gosling: 6'0
Ryan Reynolds: 6'2
David Beckham: 6'0
Jon Kortajarena: 6'2
Sean O’Pry: 6'1
David Gandy: 6'2
Every James Bond actor except for Craig: 6'1-6'2

And that's not even taking height frauding into account, which virtually every male public figure does, so a lot of these heights might be slightly inflated. So where does this idea that you have to be at least 6'3-6'4 or "it's over", or that 6'0 is "the bare minimum at best", come from? Is it just a meme or do some people legitimately believe it? Why speculate about what height women consider attractive when we have the data right here?
I mean, to a lookism believer (which I am too don't get me wrong) these men are the gold standard right? The end goal, the embodiment of their worldview's idea of success and the definition of what society and women consider attractive. Hell Brad Pitt's name was literally synonymous with "handsome" for an entire generation. Don't these heights give us a pretty clear-cut, unambiguous definition of what "attractive height for men" means?

People here like to exaggerate but at the same time, all the guys you mentioned have millions to their names, and millions of followers, and are better looking than most here despite not being ''tall''. Nearly none of these guys is attractive because of their height (except maybe those taller than 6'1) but despite it.

 

[looks>books]

Most users on this site are stupid that's why. If you are a few inches/a foot taller than a girl, she wont get turned off by you.
If you are at the same height it could still work but chances aren't as high. If you are shorter than her don't expect it to work out unless shes not a superficial hoe.