Needs more pictures.

The "6-ft tall men" bit threw me off for the whole article. I kept waiting to find where that mattered enough to warrant being in the headline, and never found it. Did I miss it somehow?

Also, did it seem to anyone else like the author took a very long time to actually start saying something useful? Seems the first 5 to 10 paragraphs could have been condensed to an intro.

Architects use special literature containing standard values for things like door widths, ceiling heights, steps, door handles and the like, that usually mirror current human proportions (and usually men). It was Corbusier who pioneered that standardization idea.

The exhibition is about a female collective highlighting problems with this biased approach and some alternative concepts. As mechanical contrivance rightly pointed out, there is little material to view online. [edit] That's a bit annoying, given that the author refers to several exhibits in the text.

I get that height will affect a lot of architectural decisions, but I didn't see them discussing anything clearly related to that. For example, the placement of the kid's area is not height related. That was a key phrase in the caption and one of the reasons I wanted to read the article. Having lived in Japan for several years, I'm familiar with the impact of architecture designed around shorter people.

Did I miss something, or did they just not actually speak to that at all?

Not that I have kept up on it, but i remember back in the day when the EU was being formed and the Masstrich Treaty was all the rage and standardization was a thing.there was a big kerfuffle about condom size. If they made them to fit the Scandinavians they would slip off the Italians. Kind of silly, but it was a big deal at the time.