It's time to move away from arbitrary (6 foot) ideas about height

I've been 5 foot, 10½ inches for decades. I was that height when I married, when I turned 30, when I got gray hair, when the 49ers won their last Super Bowl and when the Giants won their last World Series (events that were 19 years apart). 

About 15 years ago, I went in for an annual physical and they measured me as . . . 5-11.

I was growing! The dream of being 6 feet tall was still alive! Maybe I'd reach that magical landmark by the time I was 50 or 60 or 70. Things were really going to start happening for me!

The next year, I measured 5-10½ and the dream was done.

Except the "dream" is the result of a strange allegiance to round numbers and the imperial measurement system.

Think about it: Even if we've decided that a whole number is better than a fraction (that 6 feet even is superior to 5 feet and a fraction of a foot), who made the decision that we'd ignore the logical decimal system and instead go with the imperial system of inches, feet, gallons and pounds?

Other than all of America in the 1970s, I mean. Because when I was in elementary school, we were told that by the time we were adults, we'd be measuring things by the decimal system. Alas, that was over by the time I was in high school as we determined the decimal system, like disco music, sucked.

Back to the point: Think of the pain caused by the ridiculous belief in the superiority of 6-foot men  (apparently, many women in dating apps say they want their man to be at least 6 feet tall).

We all apply arbitrary standards. We like baseball batters who hit .300, not .299. We recognize the world record in the 100-yard dash, not the 95-yard dash. We talk about a 10-gallon cowboy hat, not an 8-gallon hat. Denver is the Mile-High City for a reason. 

I'm not suggesting we stop having ideals. After all, if we did that, what would happen to iconic things like "My 600-Pound Life" or "The Hundred Years War" (other than reducing voyeurism or celebrating long-ago wars)?

Here's my suggestion: Follow the European model.

Generally, I'm an America-first person. They shouldn't call soccer "football." We should drive on the right side of the road. We shouldn't endorse official naps during the workday.

However, there's one European model with which I agree: The standard for male height shouldn't be 6 feet tall. It should be 180 centimeters.

Who disagrees with that? Of course! One hundred eighty centimeters makes sense!

(First, I Googled, "convert 180 cm to feet" and found that it's between 5-10½ and 5-11. In other words, if I stand up really tall and don't get a haircut for a few months before a doctor's appointment, I might reach 180 cm. Wonderful!)

Of course, it would be simpler if we weren't hung up on multiples of 10. For instance, I think it's reasonable that 179 centimeters were considered the ideal, since it's slightly shorter than 5-10½. At least that seems ideal until I start shrinking. Maybe 178 centimeters or even 175 centimeters.

Wouldn't the world be better if we didn't set arbitrary numbers for ideal heights, weights, IQs and income? Especially since all of my figures – except weight – are gradually declining.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.