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

Greentext

4172 readers
1630 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
[–] orangeboats 23 points 17 hours ago (1 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.

[–] Kalladblog 35 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Don't blame evolution for some peoples' short sightedness

[–] [email protected] 13 points 17 hours ago

I see what you did there, despite evolution.

[–] orangeboats 5 points 16 hours 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 15 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] orangeboats 2 points 15 hours 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 11 hours 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?