this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
536 points (97.7% liked)

Greentext

4412 readers
1710 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 132 points 1 month ago (31 children)

That weird American obsession over men's height.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Unfortunately not just America. Heightism is also prevalent in a big part of Asia.

This is most likely one of the quirks brought to you by Survival of the Fittest rule. Thanks, evolution.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Don't blame evolution for some peoples' short sightedness

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

I see what you did there, despite evolution.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, tallness surely would be a preferable criteria back then! To a certain extent, it is a proxy parameter for fitness.

I just think we can actually use evolution to explain a lot of things that we do, it doesn't mean we should do it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In an evolutionary context, what does "should" mean?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In the past, fitness (and hence its proxy parameters like height and other beauty standards) correlated to the survivability of your bloodline. So it makes sense that people are programmed, to a certain degree, to admire things like tallness.

Nowadays because of technology the correlation no longer exists, or at the very least it is much diminished. But the programming is still there right in our DNA, so as a people we should artificially override this natural instinct because it no longer serves a purpose.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Sexual selection is still a thing, and not to push eugenics or anything, but shouldn't people be somewhat discerning regarding the genetic health of their partner? I mean, we're still a ways out from using CRISPR to fix inheritable weaknesses, but until then, keep slamming shorties but save your baby-making for a tall Amazonian, right?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)