Should 'height' be accepted, as real, at all?

Esau

88AppleFan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jul 23, 2022
Back thousands of years ago, we had a term called "hehthu", which meant the top of something. Now it has been completely transexualized and just means how lengthwise-large something is.

So should we be still judged by our height, when dirty homosexual franks changed our language to suit their needs?
 
"I swear, I'm totally tall if you use a concept and unit of measurement that no longer exists!"
 
Even if you were only to measure the top of something, some things will inevitably have higher tops than others. To ignore that is to disregard that some things are indeed tall, and others are indeed short by comparison.
 
Sorry sweaty, but height is a strong correlate for evolutionary fitness.
 
If you are short then the best way to "hide" it is to not have a complex. The more salt you have in your shoe lifts the more people laugh. So what if you're a manlet? Don't get a Napoleon complex or sperg about how only tall guys get dates. That's what makes you look bad. You can find someone who doesn't care that you can't reach the cupboards without a chair. But she won't want you if you never shut up about how you can't get the Froot Loops down on your own. No one wants to put up with that.
 
33c0pd.png
 
I am five foot and thirteen inches, I am not a manlet. I just wanted to parody the gender post, ok
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Catler
I just wanted to parody the gender post, ok
You kinda missed the point that post was going for, unfortunately. Height is a long since well-established term which hasn't really ever been corrupted. Gender is some bullshit term invented less than a century ago which is continually undergoing alteration.
 
Back