Anyway, to respond to the OP’s post about “sexual affirmative action:”
I’m not sure if I understand him correctly, but what he’s proposing ***is ***a form of affirmative action - if he’s proposing that short men and fat women should be considered as attractive as tall men or thin women.
Secondly, relationships and dating are perhaps ***the ***arena of human interaction where there is the ***least ***affirmative action, ever. There is or can be affirmative action almost anywhere else - sports, jobs, politics, promotions at work, Hollywood, media, etc. - but when it comes to dating and marriage, people tend to be ruthlessly, mercilessly, socially Darwinistic. If they don’t like someone, they don’t like someone. That’s just how it is. There is virtually no affirmative action in this arena of society. Is it fair? No, but that’s just how it is.
Oh, I think I get it. The OP wants women, who don’t want to date short guys, to be mocked and ridiculed like racists. But it’s different because white women who don’t want to date black men feel that way because they don’t think black men are quite human. Things like heightism are just not in the same league as racism.
What he’s proposing is that it’s unfair of Society to suggest that short men who want lots of sex should lower their standards while simultaneously encouraging fat women in the idea that they are entitled to sex with tall men; fat women should understand that it is an honor to be approached by a short man, some of whom are quite fit.
Everywhere I have every lived and among everyone I knew that came from a dating culture both are equally social acceptable excuses for not dating someone because dating isn’t the same as hiring, firing, applying the law or even common courtesy. toward someone. People that practice dating culture recognize it as a very personalized, intimate activity where many different emotions are going to come into play and personal judgments and preferences rule.
This would make sense if people were actually denying that short people (or fat people) are at a disadvantage. No one has done that. Just about everyone accepts that the romance arena is not a meritocracy or a game of chance. There is absolutely no reason to point out all the disadvantages, because everyone who has gone through high school knows that some groups are favored and others aren’t.
This is stupid, sorry. You can’t compare romantic attraction to economic discrimination. The former, almost by definition, is governed by subjective criteria. There are no set hurdles an individual must jump over to prove their suitability as a romantic partner. But job hiring at least pays lip service to objective qualifications.
But you know what? If a person told me they were having difficulty getting a job because of their race, I’d both acknowledge how much this sucks and remind them that they can optimize their chances. Are they only applying at companies not known for workplace diversity? Are their qualifications only average? If so, maybe they can get another certification or skill set to set themselves apart. Everyone who is disadvantaged knows they have to work harder than everyone else. Hell yes, it is unfair. But such is life.
Thing is, it’s a societal travesty when people are discriminated in the workplace/college admissions/housing based on the color of their skin. And thus, it is in society’s best interest to stop these practices.
Is it a societal travesty that not every gets to have a girlfriend/boyfriend all the time? Is this a problem that involves societal-level interventions and remedies? Or it is more of an individual problem that calls for more individual solutions?
When people talk about the unfairness of the dating game, I don’t know what they want me or others to do besides give them advice. We can offer sympathy, of course. But I always get the feeling that the person doing the venting doesn’t think that’s enough.
Someone needs to tell them that while not too many women name “bald” as their favorite kind of hair on men, women DO NOT MAKE FUN OF BALDNESS. However, women have lots of unkind and cutting things to say about combovers, plugs, and toups.
The reason that analogy fails is that short people have never had to use separate restrooms, or go to separate, substandard schools, and there have never been laws stating that men can marry only women shorter than they are.
If short people had been systematically oppressed, we’d be talking about something entirely different.
Growing up in a society where people were pretty much all the same color, “I’d never date a black person” didn’t come up. We did make fun of heightists for sounding as if they’d gotten the notion out of a magazine, specially when the speaker happened to be on either extreme: “dude must be taller than me” isn’t much of a limit if you’re 4’8", and complicated if you’re over the male average.
Meh, I didn’t really read this thread too carefully because I think the basic premise in the OP is bullshit.
To wit. I am 5’ 2" and not even a tiny bit overweight. I have a height limit and will not date anyone over 6’ and prefer men under 5’ 9" or so. I am more comfortable with men that are closer to my size.
I’m just one outlier, but I am quite sure that I am not the only woman who doesn’t have a preference toward tall men. What I do have a preference toward is short men who treat me like I’m a goddamned human being instead of some conquest to be obtained. I don’t know if anyone addressed the idea that there is some middle ground here and it can’t possibly be some Law of the Universe. People are different and are attracted to different physical body types. This all says far more about the OP and his dehumanizing, objectifying thinking toward women.
I used to get into arguments with my ex about this sort of thing. He was short (barely 5’0) and I’m overweight. He constantly was stressing over doing whatever he could to appear taller as he was convinced people looked down on him because of his height and that I just didn’t understand where he was coming to. I pointed out that when someone sees a short man they may think ‘wow he’s short’ and leave it at that. Because people have no control over their height. But when people see an overweight person, they often think (as the OP so eloquently put it) ‘Wow, she’s lazy as fuck and can’t be bothered to put her fork down. What a slob’. Short person might get comments about their actual height but overweight people get comments about their personality, morality, intelligence, etc.
While the OP clearly shouldn’t be the standard bearer on the topic, I’m sort of struck by the casual way that short men are being ridiculed in this thread, on a supposedly progressive thinking message board, in a way that I can’t imagine other physical attributes of a human being would be. I guess something just for me to keep in mind in future threads when the same people pop up with their oh so very important messages about inclusion and awareness.
Hahahahahaha… wow, who says old rightwingers don’t have a sense of humor?
Even when it totally doesn’t fit the topic, and makes fun of something not even a straw man has said… it’s still a knee-slapper!
And how 'bout them pickaninnies and their crazy trousers?
Next, let’s make fun of fat girls who wear flannel shirts if-ya-know-what-ah-mean…
This isn’t 100% related to the thread topic, but this thread works for it well enough, I suppose…I’ve noticed this trend often when the issue of dating and attractiveness is brought up, which is that people will insist - in a well-meaning way, mind you - that a bright, sunny personality can overcome any physical-attractiveness handicap.
This sort of of “pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps” advice is just not true, though. Sometimes it will not suffice. Someone who is hideously scarred from 3rd-degree burns over their entire face , might, for instance, never be considered attractive enough for anyone to want to marry them. That’s just the way it is. A disabled quadriplegic in a wheelchair may never be able to find someone who will love him and want to marry him, however good his personality may be.
And ugly/disabled people ***know ***this. Telling them that “Oh, people aren’t repelled by you because of your looks; they’re repelled by your unhappy personality; all you need to do is change your personality and you’ll be attractive in no time” is not helpful to them in the least, and it’s very harmful. They know they’re unattractive because of their physical condition, you can’t fool them into into believing it’s not the case.
If someone is hideously disfigured, sometimes no amount of confidence, optimism or the usual personality attributes that people try to encourage in them is going to make them attractive. It’s just not.
I am not referring to the OP himself, btw, but speaking of an observation about society in general.
FWIW, I think the OP makes a valid point; short men are indeed considered less attractive than tall men, generally speaking. It’s just that he communicates it in such a way that antagonizes his audience. If he had said, “Being short is not the fault of the short person, and it is a disadvantage in many ways, and it is wrong to ridicule short people,” I think he would have had a more receptive audience.
And it’s interesting that dating and relationships, more than almost anything else, makes people throw their political viewpoints out the window.
The same liberals who argue passionately for “equal opportunity” and “non-discrimination” are quick to argue passionately* in favor of *discrimination and *against *equal opportunity in relationships (why should they have to give all suitors and prospects equal opportunity?); and the same conservatives who preach the virtues of meritocracy may be dismayed if it turns out that, in dating and relationships, *they *themselves are not considered particularly attractive .
Dating makes hypocrites of us all, I guess…
