Is Heightism the Last Acceptable Prejudice?

[fourthindiana]

Short people, especially short men, are the last group that it is socially acceptable to belittle and be prejudiced against for a physical feature. In July a 5'0" man named Chris Morgan went on a rant about heightism in a fast food restaurant called Bagel Boss in Bayshore, NY. In the video, Chris Morgan complained of how women frequently smirk at him and laugh at him for being short, and he complained of how women said that he should be dead because Morgan is only 5'0". This video went viral on the internet and got millions of views. The comedian Jimmy Kimmel has a comedy show that airs on television called Jimmy Kimmel Live! The Jimmy Kimmel Live! show made a skit of this that is a parody of Chris MOrgan's rant in the Bagel Boss store. The 5'5" actor Jason Alexander (from Seinfeld) portrays Chris Morgan in this skit. Throughout this skit, the character CHris Morgan is constantly mocked for his short stature. The actors who portray other customers in the Bagel Boss stand on stilts and constantly mock the Chris Morgan character for being short saying things like "Do you use a thimble to hold your drink" and "Do you take a bubble bath in the sink?" and "Would you like a happy meal?" (associating shortness in men with childishness). At one point, the Chris Morgan gets close to another character and says "Do you want to take this outside?" and the joke is that Morgan's face is right in front of the other guy's crotch.

We don't know for sure what happened that precipitated Chris Morgan's rant as the video starts in the middle of Morgan's rant. Morgan claims that the female cashiers laughed at him for being short. Perhaps Chris Morgan was out of line. Perhaps it was the female cashiers at Bagel Boss that were out of line. We just cannot know from the video. However, even if Chris Morgan was out of line, the Jimmy Kimmel skit still seems like heightism to me. There appears to be a double standard here. Imagine if there was a video that went viral of a black man going on a rant at the Bagel Boss store, accusing the cashiers of smirking at him and laughing at him because he was black. Would it be racism for Jimmy Kimmel Live! to make a skit of a black man ranting about racism in the Bagel Boss store with the actors portraying the other customers and employees in the store in black face mocking the black man for being black? Why is it okay to mock an obnoxious short man for being short on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, but it is not okay to make a skit of white employees making fun of an obnoxious black man for being black?

Here is a video of the skit on the Jimmy Kimmel Live! show. The Bagel Boss skit starts at 05:35 into the video.



__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

P.S. In the comments section of youtube clips of the Bagel Boss short man rant and on other websites that show Chris Morgan's rant in Bagel Boss, people frequently respond to Chris Morgan's rant by saying that women should be allowed to have whatever physical preferences they want in men and should be allowed to reject short men for being short. This is a straw man. Morgan never condemns women for rejecting short men in the video clip. Morgan condemns women for saying that he should be dead for being 5'0". Big difference.

P.P.S. Part of Chris Morgan's actual rant in the Bagel Boss is shown at 00:22 into the video. If you want to see more, it's available on youtube if you just type "Bagel Boss Angry short guy" you should find the video.

 

[Vanadium 50]

In the U.S. population, about 14.5% of all men are six feet or over. Among CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, that number is 58%.

In the general American population, about 3.9% of all men are 6'2" or over. Among CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, that number is 30%.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_discrimination

 

[BillTre]

Randy Newman made a song (he is a master satirist) called Short People, disparaging short people from the point of view of what he called a crazy person.
According to wikipedia:

Newman interprets the song to be about prejudice, as was widely thought, but added, "The guy in that song is crazy. He was not to be believed."[2] As with many of his songs such as "Rednecks", Newman wrote the song from the point of view of a biased narrator. The song was misunderstood by many listeners who wrongly assumed that it reflected Newman's personal viewpoint.
...
Newman would later grow to dislike the song and its success, eventually calling it a "bad break", a "novelty record like The Chipmunks", and said it caused him to receive several threats regarding its misinterpreted message.[4] He said, "I had no idea that there was any sensitivity, I mean, that anyone could believe that anyone was as crazy as that character. To have that kind of animus against short people, and then to sing it and put it all in song and have a philosophy on it."

The woes of the misunderstood comedian.
I like Randy Newman, but its not always easy for people to get his message.

 

[256bits]

Why is it okay to mock an obnoxious short man for being short on Jimmy Kimmel Live!,

Who says it is?
Late night television ( most of it ) is devoid of any originality, and lacks depth of comedy.
Perhaps the rant was due a one liner opening joke, bu a whole skit - seems like filler over the top.
The comedy crew definitely lacks any form whatsoever of empathy with anyone who is "not like them".
What they are doing is making fun, not of a short person, but of someone who has a difficulty relating to other people, and may suffer from an acute form of mental illness in this instance, and exploded into a rant caught on film.

 

[sysprog]

A lamentable consequence of the confluence of long-honored freedom of the press with the contemporary ubiquity of cameras and microphones is that when someone does something embarrassing in an isolated small, albeit not entirely private, context it may readily become exposed forever to the world at large. This, like so many enablements of technology, is something regarding which our social and legal capabilities are ill-prepared to minimize the potential harm.

Broadcast media are allowed access to the scarce resource of the airwaves, and have historically been required as a condition of licensure to serve to some extent the public good, but the comparatively recent phenomenon of the internet enables anyone to publish anything, and in that way, and in many other ways, technology renders unreliable many traditional expectations of privacy or at least of non-publicity, including many cases in which according privacy would be the decent thing to do.

Unfortunately, there is, I think, little reason for confidence that most of what could be done to dissuade people from callous disregard for, or even worse, taking positive delight in, the negative consequences that their sordid entertainments visit upon others, would not be apt to bring about greater harm than that which such efforts might seek to redress.

 

[fourthindiana]

Who says it is?
…..
What they are doing is making fun, not of a short person, but of someone who has a difficulty relating to other people, and may suffer from an acute form of mental illness in this instance, and exploded into a rant caught on film.

If the Jimmy Kimmel Live! show was not making fun of CHris Morgan for being short during the skit, why were the characters who play the other customers on stilts? Why did the characters who play the other customers explicitly mock the CHris Morgan character's height?

 

[fourthindiana]

A lamentable consequence of the confluence of long-honored freedom of the press with the contemporary ubiquity of cameras and microphones is that when someone does something embarrassing in an isolated small, albeit not entirely private, context it may readily become exposed forever to the world at large. This, like so many enablements of technology, is something regarding which our social and legal capabilities are ill-prepared to minimize the potential harm.

Broadcast media are allowed access to the scarce resource of the airwaves, and have historically been required as a condition of licensure to serve to some extent the public good, but the comparatively recent phenomenon of the internet enables anyone to publish anything, and in that way, and in many other ways, technology renders unreliable many traditional expectations of privacy or at least of non-publicity, including many cases in which according privacy would be the decent thing to do.

Unfortunately, there is, I think, little reason for confidence that most of what could be done to dissuade people from callous disregard for, or even worse, taking positive delight in, the negative consequences that their sordid entertainments visit upon others, would not be apt to bring about greater harm than that which such efforts might seek to redress.

That is a separate thread. What about heightism?

 

[sysprog]

That is a separate thread. What about heightism?

I think that the lower-than-average physical stature of the man was exploited as a basis upon which to lampoon him; however, it was his recorded enraged diatribe that got him singled out for such mockery.

Frequently physical incongruities are depicted in a humorous light, and some people will see them as humorous, as in this highly circulated image of the 7' 2" 380lb. 'Dutch Giant' Olivier Richter at the counter at a McDonald's in the Philippines, which he presented along with a joke on Instagram:

What is wrong with this picture?​

A: Bodybuilding with McDonald’s​

B: McDonald’s having a McSpaghetti​

C: I can’t hear her​

D: …​

​

They have bowls with rice chicken and egg. Just perfect. Bought five for also later that day haha. Wish they have it in Europe.​

I think that Mr. Richter's humor in this instance was inoffensive; however, some might say that as a non-short person (6'), I'm not enfranchised to make such a determination, and of them I might ask whether they thought that the facial expression of the woman in the picture reflected 'sizeism'.

I think that Mr. Kimmel's presentation was offensive; however, I think that it was harmful primarily in that it could reasonably be predicted that it would be injurious to the man who was being ridiculed.

I think the attendant mockery of short people was boorish and in poor taste, to which I think the best response for me is to sigh and shake my head, and focus my attention on something else.

One could deplore, as 'sexist' and as 'heightist', the following image:

I find that image to be amusing, and I think that people, regardless of height or gender, who find it to be somehow offensive, are being too thin-skinned.

 

[pinball1970]

Short people, especially short men, are the last group that it is socially acceptable to belittle and be prejudiced against for a physical feature. In July a 5'0" man named Chris Morgan went on a rant about heightism in a fast food restaurant called Bagel Boss in Bayshore, NY. In the video, Chris Morgan complained of how women frequently smirk at him and laugh at him for being short, and he complained of how women said that he should be dead because Morgan is only 5'0".

Pointing the finger and laughing at someone because they are short is just bullying.
People who take two seconds and their two brain cells to recognize a weakness or feature on the edge of the bell curve and laugh, are the first ringing the headmaster when their kid has been bullied for wearing glasses.
Is it the last ism?
No I don't think it is, I would hate to be that height but there are worst things out there.

 

[Evo]

Pointing the finger and laughing at someone because they are short is just bullying.
People who take two seconds and their two brain cells to recognize a weakness or feature on the edge of the bell curve and laugh, are the first ringing the headmaster when their kid has been bullied for wearing glasses.
Is it the last ism?
No I don't think it is, I would hate to be that height but there are worst things out there.

And I think with this post we have said just about all we can say without going in circles. Thread closed.