Asian American Attitudes toward Height | Asian American Poll

AA ATTITUDE TOWARD HEIGHT
(Updated Saturday, Jun 6, 2026, 12:07:54 AM to reflect the 100 most recent valid responses.)

Assuming you are an Asian American, how important is height in your assessment of a person's attractiveness?
It's a key element of attractiveness. | 20%
It's one of many factors I consider. | 44%
It's less important than other personal qualities. | 28%
I am not attracted to tall people. | 8%

Assuming you are an Asian American, which best matches your feelings toward your own height?
I'd like to be 3 inches taller. | 43%
I'd like to be an inch taller. | 27%
I'm happy with my height. | 26%
I'd like to be an inch shorter. | 4%

HOME | PERSONALITIES | FEATURES | NEWS

© 1996-2025 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.

sohoh,

I have visited Lhasa Tibet in China and the yak herders there are immensely tall. Probably because they drinks lots of this rancid yak milk and cheese.
No, they do not look Malayan. They actually look closer to Mongols than Han Chinese facially. But they are more tall and straight compared to nomadic Mongols.

I have visited Xinjiang too. In Turfan, the Han Chinese and Hui (Han Muslims) cannot be distinguished from the Uygurs. All peoples in Xinjiang have some amounts of Caucasoid mixing despite their religion, language and ethnicity. Even a little further west in Dunhuang, Xian, Lanzhou and Ningxia, the Han and Hui people have some feint traces of this physical traits although not as Caucasoid and Iranoid looking as those in Xinjiang. It diminishes as you go into central China (Henan, Hubei) and alters a bit more in the south (Hunan, Guangdong, Guangxi, Jiangxi, etc.).

The northeastern Han Chinese people facially look like a cross between the Shanghai regions with Manchu, Koreans.

Some Han in Yunnan look no different from those in Sichuan, Xian, and Gansu. Most of them trace recent descent to Han migrants from those regions. The same applies to Hunan. The current Chinese Premier Zhu Rongzi and his family is from Hunan and he looks northern Han. Actually, his ancestors were the Ming imperial line.
Qiren Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 23:50:54 (PST)

Qiren:
1. Why would "Northern" Han be any different from non-northern Han? Aren't they supposed to be of the same ethnicity? Apparently, the so-called "Han" are a varied people.
2. The northern chinese are on average 4" taller than Koreans and Manchus?? Then that would make northern Chinese one of the tallest people in the world, rivaling even the Nordics.
3. Kija did not found ancient Choson, even according to Chinese legend. A "Choson" state was already in existence when he went east and settled.
4. Assuming that the legend of Kija is true, his ethnicity remains unclear. In fact it is not clear what "Chinese" was at the time. "Chinese" is a conglomeration of local cultures, both steppe and settled.
5. Wiman's ethnicity is unclear. He was a "Chinese" general, yes, but he wore his hair in a top-knott like a Korean, making his ethnicity ambiguous. He may have been a korean serving in a "Chinese" army. But again, the term is ambiguous, and we're talking about areas where steppe/settled, tungusic/Han/other people's came together.
6. The Manchus did not lump Koreans and Chinese together. They understood clearly that Koreans were more closely related to them than the Chinese.
6. Koreans have always considered themselves a separate and distinct people from the Chinese. They do not, nor have they ever believed, that they are descendent of Chinese ancestors, notwithstanding Sinic influences. It was not until the later Choson Yi dynasty (15th c.)that Korea became very highly sinicized, and came to consider China its "elder brother" under the strong influence of Neo-Confucianism.
7. There has been Chinese settlers into Korea (how could there have been not? just look at the geography.), but Koreans<>Han Chinese, racially/ethnically speaking. But neither have Koreans been found to be exactly the same as Manchus or Mongols either. They are broadly speaking, tungusic, but still different.
8. The so-called "Han" Chinese are varied and disparate. The glue that keeps the Chinese people together is not race, but culture. The "Han" are not homogeneous, as the Koreans might be considered homogeneous. Again, China is more like an empire, than a nation-state.
MK Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 17:19:53 (PST)

Sohoh:

1. 7ft??.. c'mon.. China never used "feet" for measurement. Moreover, the phrase is, surely, just an expression.
2. The old generation was 5'9, but the new generation tower over you?.. you being 6ft tall?.. Surely, you jest..
3. Yes, the "Chinese" are not all "one people". China is more an empire than a nation-state.
4. Which is more nutritious: a "meat and potatos" diet, or a traditional asian meal with rice and vegetables? Which do you think will make you bigger? Which do you think is healthier? Which kind of diet are modern asians moving towards, which may or may not be coincidental with their increasing height? Do you think White Americans have a healthy diet? How healthy is a hamburger and fries, or a slab of steak, a side dish of baked potatos with butter, and a piece of parsely on the side for decoration?
5. Ne Mongol and Manchuria: You must be kidding about their evolution and whatnot..

MK Tuesday, January 29, 2002 at 17:19:01 (PST)

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS