Actually, It's an interesting question. Some gliders have very short
sticks and light control forces (almost any current racing glider comes
to mind), while some have long sticks and heavier forces (Blaniks,
Larks, and 2-33s come to mind).

There have been gliders with small sidesticks (original Zuni, HP-18,
Monerai) but sidesticks have not really caught on - probably because
they make it really hard to fly left (or both) handed - which can be
useful during some cockpit chores.

The problem with a real short sidestick is the motion becomes a bit
awkward, especially in pitch, while with a longer stick the arm can be
rested on the pilot's leg and precise control is easy.

I think non-flyers may think aircraft need powered controls just as
cars need power steering and brakes, forgetting that cars used to be
available without either (VW Beetle, anyone?).

And surprisingly large aircraft fly perfectly well with manual controls
(albeit usually with wheels and lots of control motion, and often the
rudder is boosted) - For example, Boeing 707s (I've flown the KC-135
and it is surprisingly easy to maneuver), all WW2 bombers, even the
Spruce Goose, I believe.

Control wheels in small airplanes are abominations, mainly there to
make the spamcan seem either like a car (Arrgh!) or a DC-3. How manly.
Note that the new crop of lightplanes have more sticks in them -
including sidesticks, which open up the cockpit a lot. Also, the trend
in large military (B-1, C-17) and commercial fly-by-wire planes is also
to sticks, since the leverage provided by a wheel is no longer
required. Boeing is an exception in it's commercial designs - the 777
could have used a stick. It will be interesting to see if the 787
keeps a wheel, now that the B-1 and C-17 are Boeing planes.

Lots of neat technology (and some magic) involved in the design of
aircraft flight controls - especially ailerons.

Kirk