Tall privilege isn't a thing because - while it may be scientifically interesting - it's less socially interesting precisely because it's so clearly based in our genetics.
If you look at any behavior and witness that it is: a) darn near universal practice, b) there's evidence of it throughout written history, and c) performed relatively equally between genders - that's a pretty solid place to start arguing it's selected for, and it's not sexually selected. Anything so fundamental is not going to be as rewarding to pursue changing. More so, it doesn't answer the feminist call to criticize the gender dynamic at the choices that are made for no hood reasons at all.
So yeah, it's not going to be as much of a "thing" - which is already a pretty "social" bailiwick
