Thursday, September 17, 2009

At 8ft 1 - world's tallest man wants a girlfriend

According to the BBC (which has video of him), they are usually scared of him. He's Turkish and 27. He grew so tall due to a pituitary tumour which has since been removed.

He has a specially made 3 metre long bed. Heaven help him flying, he'd never fit in economy class, business class would still mean folding legs, and so first class it is, at a crush.

"He said: "The good thing about being so tall is that I can see people from a long distance. The other thing is at home they use my height to change the light bulbs and hang the curtains, things like that.""

Which of course must drive him nuts, though in the USA I suspect many will think him suitable for basketball.

Of course he's not just tall, he has hands 10.8 inches long and feet 14.3 inches long as well. I suspect many women will be wondering about another dimension as well. Whether that is something that scares them is something else.

Good luck to him, I suspect he will want to be known for a bit more than his height, but sadly the article says nothing about what else he does.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

"I suspect many women will be wondering about another dimension as well. Whether that is something that scares them is something else."

Sounds like you wanna suck that man-pipe yourself, or indeed get it shoved up your own arse !

libertyscott said...

Of course, I'm hiding my deeply suppressed homosexual urges. Given how gay men are unknown and indeed discouraged from joining the libertarian movement in New Zealand, I'd have every reason to do so.

Go off and have a pint and contemplate why you had the urge to type such doggerell.

Anonymous said...

I just wonder why you hedonists of the Right are so obsessed with sex.

You even list it on your blog profile ?!?

WTF?

libertyscott said...

I just wonder why anyone can be so uptight about it. Why are some people obsessed with food, literature, music, travel? It is one of the joys of life - or do you subscribe to the "life is about sacrifice and suffering" philosophy. Which of course you are welcome to. There are millions of followers, I just get upset when they start wanting to use force to stop others who have a happier outlook.

Anonymous said...

"or do you subscribe to the "life is about sacrifice and suffering" philosophy."

Dear oh dear , the "you're a bible basher accusation" get's directed at me? Shit that's a first.

Fuck you right-wing hedonists are so weak and easy to deflect.

libertyscott said...

Troll, it's easy to ignore substantive points and to go on a little tangent. The question was asked whether, given you despise a man who enjoyed life in several different ways, whether you think life is about living according to what others want you to do? It isn't only supernatural religions that believe that, Marxist Leninists and all fascists, and many radical environmentalists don't believe the primary goal of your life should be living it. You don't need to be a Bible Basher to be a committed altruist.

However, since name calling (the simplistic left-right spectrum says much of the depth of thought here) is your currency, rather than actually making a philosophical point, this is all probably futile.

Anonymous said...

"It isn't only supernatural religions that believe that, Marxist Leninists and all fascists, and many radical environmentalists don't believe the primary goal of your life should be living it."

WTF? Say that again in English.

I didn't realize I was dealing with a libertarian evangelist here [I don't worship any type of god]


"whether you think life is about living according to what others want you to do?"

Rightist crap: such is the peculiar notion that other people ought not to be able to regulate your behaviour. Much as we would like to be free of such regulation, most people also want to be able to regulate the behaviour of others for practical reasons . . .

[I know that will go WAY over your head]. . .

You libertarians claim that you want the first so much, but you'll be willing to forgo the second. Most other people feel that both are necessary (and that it would be hypocritical or stupid to want just one.)

libertyscott said...

My point was that there are many philosophies, non-religious, that believe that the primary point of human beings is to sacrifice them for a "greater cause" or the "public good".

Define "rightist", I always thought the right in the simplistic political spectrum were either conservative or liberal, depending on who was talking. Are people on the left rabidly in favour of censorship and drug prohibition and people on the right anti-censorship and want to legalise drugs? Hmmm.

Nonsense, you didn't read the point. My behaviour is nobody else's business unless it infringes on the bodies or property of others, or is a breach of contract or tort. Beyond that, why is one adult superior to another in deciding what they can and can't do with their body or property?

Beyond individual rights (including property) and contracts and torts, I am free to use persuasion to change behaviour. Beyond that, if rights are not infringed then why should force be used. Call it "regulate" as your euphemism, but it is initiating force, as much a statists like to pretend it isn't about violence, it is.