Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 5:53:51 GMT
The title may be confusing but let me explain. On reddit r/short, there seems to be a huge idea that the more someone "can take a joke" or "is secure about their height", the higher intellect and value they have in society. In other words, confidence and security in height has a positive correlation to the worth of the victim of heightism. Let's make up a scenario to illustrate even deeper. Post: I've simply learned you can't let height get to you, I stopped taking myself so seriously, and now I have a girlfriend! comment: We needed this, [something about how horrible insecure people on r/short are and worshipping of the poster] another comment: Finally, a well written post and someone who is positive in spite of having a negative trait,. Good post OP! These were obviously made up, but it seems to be such a common pattern. A poster shows how much being short doesn't bother him, and he gets his dick sucked and intellect worshipped by other short men in a big circlejerk of comments. The only criteria that a post/poster needs to meet to be considered high quality is security and uplifting, and the truth in the post doesn't seem to matter in the least . Where did this idea that nobody can be insecure come from? I guess insecure people on r/short shouldn't have opinions even if they are more on the money than 99%?  |
|
|
|
Post by HeightismAOS on Aug 25, 2019 11:23:44 GMT
This is a very interesting observation that I haven't seen before. They essentially think the better a short man is at taking sodomy like a good boy, he is somehow more logical and worthwhile.
This all makes sense when you realize a short man's worth to society is essentially being a punching bag. Despite how hard political correctness is being pushed nowadays, even the most politically correct among us often enjoy taking jabs at men based on height. So in a way, /r/short is actually right. The better you are at serving in this role, the more worth you have to everyone else. On the other hand, if you actually question these double standards, you're the equivalent of a pet dog refusing to take orders and therefore have less worth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2019 0:24:17 GMT
I found a great example of this happening in real-time in this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/short/comments/cw2lh0/one_of_the_worst_things_about_being_short/
Redneckgymrat:One of the worst things about being short is being lumped under the same umbrella as these whining, sniveling little twats who think the world is out to get them.
It is not society that gives us a bad name. It is you.
LittleIn: my upvote button seems to be broken... I can't give you more than one upvote no matter how much i spam the button
Redneckgymrat showed how he wasn’t a “victim”, and some garmin replied as if it was the most insightful post ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heightism Report on Sept 1, 2019 0:12:02 GMT
I'm in agreement with HeightismAOS about how astute this observation is. No, it isn't admirable to lack confidence, but why does someone who lacks confidence have to have their opinion completely disregarded, and why can't you discuss the issues behind their lack of confidence?
A substantial portion of the reason why this narrative exists is because people are programmed to protect the status-quo, thus, when they're focusing on the lack of confidence instead of the reasoning behind it, they can take the focus away from any questions that tend to diminish the status-quo. This manifests in the "perfect victim fallacy" where you nitpick the victim as a means to lessen empathy for the victim, instead of focusing on those who are actually perpetrating evil against the victim. You'll see the perfect victim fallacy condemned when it is used against other groups, but it is always used as a weapon against short people and is never challenged.
Let's also discuss the notion that deciding who's confident and who isn't is often based on discriminatory beliefs. What is normally classified as confidence regarding a tall man's actions is regarded as a syndrome, complex, or overcompensation when a short man engages in the same, exact behavior. This gives the status-quo another safeguard against short men becoming perfect victims who deserve empathy and support. The saddest irony in all of this is if a tall man lacks confidence, he'll be regarded as a "gentle giant" who out of the goodness of his heart takes on a humble demeanor, thus, his issues will be taken seriously.
Basically, they just have to find one imperfection(whether real or manufactured) in the armor of a short man, and they then own the narrative.
Another thing that is extremely telling is that people will argue that certain Garmins, fake wannabe badasses, people who speak in memes and give confidence speeches, are confident, yet, not once have those people ever classified one short guy who confronts heightism as confident. Out of all the different personality types, writing styles, and individual narratives that have emerged regarding those who confront heightism, none of the know-it-alls I just mentioned have ever labeled one short guy who has the cajones to confront heightism as being confident. Something's fishy to say the least, and this shows you the level of denial that goes into this whole flim-flam about deciding who is confident and who is and is not a perfect enough victim to be awarded empathy, speaking privileges, and respect.
|
|
