The title is a bit provocative, of course, but I'm completely serious about the general idea. Killing anyone (including humans) is not something I approve of except for extreme circumstances (some would argue the climate change is already this bad, but the issue I'm discussing isn't the absolute first line of helping the planet humans, because life will keep going on Earth even if humans majorly fuck-up, it just won't be humans), but if we consider polluting criminal/unethical, then spreading tallfag genes should also be looked down upon if not illegal (again, I generally don't advocate eugenics, though I admit that I didn't put much/any thought into it, but if any should be applied, it should be the complete opposite of what females practice).
Earth's resources are finite, even the greenest forms of farming require creating pollution with equipment, a lot of work (often underpaid which causes suffering) etc. and as far as I know, employing these crazy green techniques is a fun scenario to show in pop-sci programs, but we'll likely need to rely on intensive large-scale farming to sustain human population and in this case you have soil depletion, massive pollution, transport etc. It's a mess in general.
Moreplanethuman-friendly solutions and changing the quality (i. e. the types of foods humans eat) of consumption can help a lot, but ultimately we'll also need to cut down on quantity. No one gets angry when people say you should buy less new clothes, upcycle old things etc. but for some reason people get angry when you suggest they should eat less by reducing their calorie requirements. I remember having a very nice discussion about bodybuilding and obesity being unethical for this exact reason: you need (or rather choose to) eat more and that ultimately harms animals through pollution and such. Maybe it's a little extreme, but maybe not. I think that not becoming fat or swole is way easier for most people than going zero-waste, but people will lose shit over plastic packaging when they consoom 5k calories daily.
So yeah, to get to the point: healthy weight for a tall person is higher than for a short person, obviously. Maintaining this elevated weight requires obviously more calories and that requires producing more food which isn't the best for the climate. Not even counting extra fabric for clothes or cosmetics. The environmental impact of being tall is likely much worse. I think that simply avoiding breeding with tall people, selecting for short people instead is the ethical choice (which is the exact opposite of what foids do). Other alternatives are just not caring about the environment or forcing tall people to be underweight which I'd consider animal cruelty.
To illustrate with an example. Let's take two people: a 5'7 (170) manlet for whom it's over and a 6'0 (183) tallfag who won't have dating issues due to his height (tho nowadays even that height is pretty much a minimum, not an advantage). Let's assume they both want to be in the sweet spot in the middle of healthy BMI, so 21.
According to this table (you can check with other calculators you trust) the perfect weight for the manlet would be 61 kg (135 lbs) and for the tallfag 73 kg (160 lbs). Now lets check the basal metabolic rate (calories burned by these people for merely existing, unless they're in a coma, it's not enough calories, but it's good for comparison) for these people, assuming they're both 25.
www.calculator.net
Manlet: 1 553 kcal
Tallfag: 1 754 kcal
That means that the tallfag burns 201 kcal more every day by merely existing. If the tallfag was a manlet instead, we could save enough calories to feed another manlet for a day every 8 days. And that's not counting extra medication tallfag needs to take for the cancer he'll more likely get, spine issues, exponentially rising calorie requirements if he does any activity, clothes, cosmetics etc.
I know the response is likely to be: people are allowed to breed with whomever they want, yikes, incels you can't control that, it's literally worse than Hitler.
But this libertine worldview is basically what evil Drumpf-supporting climate-change-denying boomers believe. 
Young educated women should know better and have some empathy for the rest of the world instead of killing the planet just because her tall boyfriend makes her pussy wetter.
Now when I see a foid with a tallfag bf, I'll think:
Earth's resources are finite, even the greenest forms of farming require creating pollution with equipment, a lot of work (often underpaid which causes suffering) etc. and as far as I know, employing these crazy green techniques is a fun scenario to show in pop-sci programs, but we'll likely need to rely on intensive large-scale farming to sustain human population and in this case you have soil depletion, massive pollution, transport etc. It's a mess in general.
More
So yeah, to get to the point: healthy weight for a tall person is higher than for a short person, obviously. Maintaining this elevated weight requires obviously more calories and that requires producing more food which isn't the best for the climate. Not even counting extra fabric for clothes or cosmetics. The environmental impact of being tall is likely much worse. I think that simply avoiding breeding with tall people, selecting for short people instead is the ethical choice (which is the exact opposite of what foids do). Other alternatives are just not caring about the environment or forcing tall people to be underweight which I'd consider animal cruelty.
To illustrate with an example. Let's take two people: a 5'7 (170) manlet for whom it's over and a 6'0 (183) tallfag who won't have dating issues due to his height (tho nowadays even that height is pretty much a minimum, not an advantage). Let's assume they both want to be in the sweet spot in the middle of healthy BMI, so 21.
According to this table (you can check with other calculators you trust) the perfect weight for the manlet would be 61 kg (135 lbs) and for the tallfag 73 kg (160 lbs). Now lets check the basal metabolic rate (calories burned by these people for merely existing, unless they're in a coma, it's not enough calories, but it's good for comparison) for these people, assuming they're both 25.
BMR Calculator
This free BMR calculator estimates basal metabolic rate based on well-known formulas. Also, learn more about variables that affect BMR.
www.calculator.net
Manlet: 1 553 kcal
Tallfag: 1 754 kcal
That means that the tallfag burns 201 kcal more every day by merely existing. If the tallfag was a manlet instead, we could save enough calories to feed another manlet for a day every 8 days. And that's not counting extra medication tallfag needs to take for the cancer he'll more likely get, spine issues, exponentially rising calorie requirements if he does any activity, clothes, cosmetics etc.
I know the response is likely to be: people are allowed to breed with whomever they want, yikes, incels you can't control that, it's literally worse than Hitler.
But this libertine worldview is basically what evil Drumpf-supporting climate-change-denying boomers believe. Young educated women should know better and have some empathy for the rest of the world instead of killing the planet just because her tall boyfriend makes her pussy wetter.Now when I see a foid with a tallfag bf, I'll think:
