TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

AidsVictim Archive

View 0 posts and 6,519 comments by AidsVictim on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 6,519 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

Incredible
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 06:30 PM
9

I wonder how the average modern slave would feel about this viewpoint
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:42 PM
20

Those types often have their own community that looks out for each other
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:39 PM
4

Thought police ride again
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:35 PM
2

The more society becomes socially dysfunctional the more reactionary or extremist sentiment grows. I don't know if people expect for everyone to just walk into the end of modern society as birth rates crash or what. That said you could always find this sort of sentiment by going to certain Internet niches, it's nothing new and hoemath is statistically irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:17 PM
1

Attractive people are treated better on average period. This woman was making money and receiving gifts for being beautiful. It doesn't mean you're never treated badly or won't be attacked by psychos.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 04:36 PM
2

Afghanistan is one of the only places outside Africa with substantial population growth
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 04:06 PM
4

Found the pit daddy
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/25 10:23 PM
1

Career and income are just qualifiers for certain classes of women. They get you into the "club", they do nothing in actually attracting women unless you're a multimillionaire or something. Getting more fit, better grooming, and any other looks maxing options are what actually increase your attractiveness and give you success with women, combined with having the "right" personality and social status. A career is just a supplement to this by giving you the resources to improve your looks or possi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/25 10:11 PM
1

I'm sure it happens but it's greatly over estimated here. If you go by the women that post on reddit it's every other woman that's kicking a guy out for being over 7 inches or whatever. In reality plenty of women can have sex with well endowed men without too much of an issue. If you ask guys with bigger dicks then mostly they don't have trouble with actually being rejected, most women will just need to go slower and shallower or whatever. Guys with 8 inch dicks are not being rejected by every o…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/25 10:39 PM
3

Conservatives are really gay lol...not that there's anything wrong with that... it's just that they're f*gs thinking about dicks haha...which I'm cool with but I'm straight... unlike those fruits obsessed with dick size...that are conservative btw
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/25 02:09 PM
2

If you see a man and woman walking down the street it makes sense to be more scared of the man for the reasons you stated, they offend at a much higher rate. The same logic applies to a white and black man walking down the street.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/25 01:57 AM
1

Hierarchal groupings don't change anything about crime stats. Bullets don't magically change their trajectory because they're being shot by or shot at "oppressed groups". Any judgement after the fact contextualizing what happened in some oppressors/oppressed framework is up to you, but there's an obvious contradiction in logic in passing judgement based on group crime stats and then choosing to say some "don't count" or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 10:54 PM
3

Both race and gender are just groupings that let you make predictions, in this case about violence. Race is actually a stronger predictor of violence than gender in some cases - black women actually have higher homicide offender rates in some years than white or Asian men. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJnb_7VXoAA1CZu?format=jpg&name=medium For example the delta between white men and white womens homicide rate is about ~6x, while the delta between white men and black men is about ~18x.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 10:48 PM
2

No. I'm saying people that are best equipped to do that (i.e. educated, stable, competent people) tend to have fewer kids than other groups out of choice. It's not because of material or circumstantial constraints.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 10:23 PM
0

You haven't presented anything showing that these people are in fact worse off than average children, you just don't like their politics/behvaiour, nor are these people necessarily representative of the general wealthy population.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 10:21 PM
3

I'm not saying women are incorrect to be more fearful of men than women based on the far higher offending rates of men. However you could take the same logic and apply it racially as well - black men have far higher offending rates than Asian men for instance, so by that logic it makes sense to be more wary of one group than another.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:16 PM
3

It's not a "problem" for them practically, it's that they choose to not have kids at relatively high rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:12 PM
0

Ideological nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:11 PM
15

Upper middle class, i.e. the people in the top 10 or 5% as opposed to the rich (top <1%). Multimillionaires tend to have above replacement fertility while UMC tends to have the lowest fertility of any groups.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:08 PM
1

Eugenics/dysgenics is not just an idea, it's the reality of biological life. The effects of genetic population shifts will impact you and society whether you choose to "believe" in them or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:05 PM
11

Women that hate men will often practice discrimination or abuse of whatever kind towards men if in positions to do so. Saying they "just want to be left alone" is an excuse you could use for any biased group.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:02 PM
7

Specifically narrowing it down to both race and sex instead of just sex will make it unjustly racially motivated, because men of all races attack women. Specifically narrowing it down to gender instead of species makes it unjustly gender motivated, because humans of all genders attack women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 05:00 PM
9

White men have only slightly higher racial outmarriage rates than white women. White women actually have more non white children however, they just aren't marrying them at the same rate (mostly explained by disproportionate ratios in outgroup preferences between Asians and African Americans which have different marriage rates). Per capita black/Latino/Asian men marry out at a much higher rate than white men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 04:57 PM
25

Rich people actually do have higher fertility rates. It's the UMC that has low fertility.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 04:45 PM
1

Well mostly Reagan didn't really stop the growth of those things much less kill them from defunding. The number of public libraries for instance went from 8500 in 1980 to ~9000 in 1990. As far as I can tell parks, community centers, rec centers etc also increased or at least didn't significantly decline. "third spaces" mostly disappear when people stop going to them. If it's something that a significant amount of people utilize usually some funding source is found. More importantly however the l…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/25 07:35 AM
1

Russian wage growth beat inflation by ~10% last year and it has the lowest unemployment rate in post USSR history.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 10:57 AM
2

More Russians died in larger individual battles in WW1 and WW2 than in the entire war, they'll be fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 07:53 AM
1

Russians are doing better economically now than before the war.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 07:34 AM
3

People have tried that before. It leads to very low rates of pairing and fertility. People raised in Israeli Kibbutz for example mostly just left and didn't perpetuate the system because it wasn't conducive to family formation.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 07:28 AM
14

You weren't. That perspective is from a patronizing viewpoint that removes agency from women. Whether casual sex leads to healthy lifestyles is another question but a lot of men (and women) conflate the two; they believe casual sex leads to bad results so anyone participating it must be being misled or used.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 07:17 AM
1

It’s something I’m passionate about and try to work on actively, but I’ve been told by many that there’s only so much women can do. It’s a multifaceted, ultimately very difficult problem to solve, but redpill and blackpill movements are making it worse faster than almost anything I could imagine. If you chart social metrics RP and BP are basically irrelevant to something like modern cell phones or internet access. They don't matter it's just a convenient scape goat. We need more budget for schoo…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 07:04 AM
4

I'm extremely skeptical this has anything to do with Reagan or tax cuts in any substantial way. What are some concrete examples of third places that were dependent on taxes that majorly impacted socialization when shut down?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 06:59 AM
2

It's relatively easy to find public or semi public places to hang out and even if not free it's still affordable for most people to just hang at bars, cafes, gyms etc. "Third spaces" didn't just disappear one day, people just stopped going to them in sufficient numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 06:55 AM
2

Usually yes but since loneliness is a subjective emotion self reporting is more necessary. That's why I provided actual measures of pro-social or anti-social actions. Concrete metrics are useful but I don't think volunteering is necessarily a strong indicator (it's "pro social" but not necessarily more "satisfying" than just hitting a bar with friends etc), physical contact is more useful. But the most relevant metrics (beyond self reporting) are probably just time spent socializing which is nea…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 06:40 AM
5

Generally because they were taught to not notice the ones they received from women. She wasn't a "best friend" historically, yes, she was a "wife-mother". I'm not really sure this is true either, or at least it's oversimplifying things. The contributions by women to the household including supporting their husband however had it's own place in culture/religion for being appreciated. It's more that it was considered different from the sort of socialization/bonding with men and that men shouldn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/25 07:13 PM
12

Feminist approach would be to end the social crippling that men have been receiving for centuries. For centuries, men have been taught not to find satisfaction in their own company or the company of their friends, because as long as he is generally put-together, he can get his emotional needs guaranteed to be met by a woman. Men were absolutely not taught this for centuries? If anything the opposite is true - most social and a lot of emotional investment was with other men and this was regarded …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/25 05:57 PM
7

There is only a loneliness epidemic, not a male or female one. But this thread is pretty illustrative of the bitterness and delusion among a lot of women/BP. "Just be gay" "Who cares fuck you" "Men did this to themselves" etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/25 05:49 PM
6

Women can always find men regardless of their circumstances. It's a question of whether they can get a "HVM" not just a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 02:55 PM
2

I'm not entirely sure what your point is. You should be skeptical about more extreme claims or stories but statistically it's true more and more people are struggling and social health in general is getting worse and worse. That's not an artifact of internet echo chambers, it's real world stat inference
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 02:44 AM
2

Policies on marriage/family formation and economic policies generally aren't the same. If the USA falls far behind China or Europe it won't be because of the former policies.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 02:37 AM
2

Women don't struggle getting partners either way, shifts in what's considered attractive only changes the difficulty in securing more attractive men (i.e. curvy women have better access to attractive men now but this doesn't mean thin women are struggling). As for whether it's sustainable that's simply beyond the horizon of most people to care or be aware of, similar to a tragedy of the commons.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 12:34 AM
2

Well all that's part of it yeah but I don't think that's very relevant to the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 12:30 AM
2

Society shapes attraction to an extent and influenced social expectations, but no it can't force visceral attraction. But setting that sort of attraction as the standard doesn't seem sustainable.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 04:35 PM
3

China and Europe are both in deep existential crisis over their birth rates. China takes it somewhat seriously trying to formulate ways to increase birthrates and probably that will intensify not lessen. There was a scandal there only a year or two ago with government employees phoning single women telling them to get married. Europe seems mostly content to simply disappear as a people outside a few countries trying unsuccessful fertility programs. The US will decline but not because of concern …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 04:28 PM
1

So as someone who scores usually around 148 on professionally administered tests (I actually got more time on tests in college because my high IQ is considered special needs - that’s not a joke you can look it up)… no. It absolutely does help in cognitively difficult tasks and there's no point at which this stops being true. This isn't disputed in any literature anywhere. Once you get to three standard deviations from normal it doesn’t help much in terms of business acumen or ability to become a…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 01:32 AM
2

I can find you studies showing women perform higher in IQ tests just like you can find some saying men do. The large majority of IQ studies show parity in adolescence and a small advantage (<5 points) in adulthood for men. There aren't very many (any?) studies showing the opposite. More important however is the different distributions in IQ. It results in men being over represented in the cognitive elite despite very close averages across the genders. Who knows how helpful IQ is. It's extremely …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:30 AM
1

By they I only mean an acceptance that others will either like you or not and that being yourself to a certain, healthy degree, while expecting nothing from the world is the least challenging or problematic path for people of all genders and walks of life. Least challenging or "problematic" is not the same as "best" or "happiest". And it's certainly not true that anyone (or almost anyone) "Going their own way" expects nothing from the world; they have substantial expectations with living standar…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 10:10 PM
2

But they seem to have always been worse at it which makes it so interesting adults looked around and said “the ones who aren’t as good at knowing stuff should be in charge because the other ones have babies and are smaller.” Being better at academics and "knowing more stuff" don't necessarily correlate 100%. Men still outperform women in general knowledge tests. And IQ distributions favor men in terms of the elite; the gender ratios at the far right side (top 1%) start heavily favoring men. You …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 07:03 PM
2

. What is interesting is for some reason women being naturally better at schooling (whose curriculum and teaching style was set up by white British men) didn’t used to result in women going to college more. There are a few pretty obvious answers here; discrimination against women and child rearing are the most obvious. However it's also true a much smaller portion of the population used to go college and it was weighed much more heavily towards the right quartile of IQ. Men are over represented …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 09:04 AM
2

I believe its because society has conditioned us to victimize women. So when a woman is involved, she is more likely than a man to be victimized by her partner (no matter their partner's sex) Not true at all, or at least not relative to men. The large majority of violent crime is directed towards men, in media violence against men is far more normalized and common, violence against women is generally punished to a greater degree socially and legally etc. It's not clear to me how society has cond…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 01:30 AM
3

Jokes about murder and violence are common even among many people that don't tell rape jokes. I don't tell rape jokes around women because they're more sensitive about them but there's really not much difference in principal between those types of jokes. Most people aren't funny either way
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/25 12:00 AM
1

White collar people can certainly be abusers but statistically they're much less likely to be so. Unless you want to say the crime stats are pretty radically wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/25 12:00 AM
–

Autism is definitely a real disease and it's blatantly obvious if you meet someone with "severe" autism. Many of them need lifelong caretaker support or will never be able to hold jobs beyond basic service work. It's debilitating for many in that category as downs syndrome is. The huge upswing in autism diagnosis includes many people who are essentially just socially under developed, shy, anti social, overly anxious, have moderate sensory issues etc. The gap between the above cases of autism and…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/25 09:09 AM
1

Why do men in particular want to argue that women are always at fault for being abused, as if we're ethereal mind readers that can always detect a person's intentions and can never be lied to? I don't think there are very many men who think that. Some abusers are more obvious than others. A lot (most?) of abusive men are from certain backgrounds with certain personality types. A felon who didn't finish high school, has a shitty job, and drinks a lot is significantly more likely to be abusive tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/25 08:56 AM
1

It's not common. You might see it on a few accounts but this stuff is not getting spammed in normie spaces or something. Anyway it's motivated in part by revenge fantasy and in part the reality there are going to be a ton of unmarried and single people in aging populations and these people have notably higher rates of depression and suicide (although men exhibit these trends more strongly than women). Lots of people in denial about the social crisis in modern society as exhibited here.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/25 08:26 AM
0

They don’t Trans men experience more unpredictable emotions on T even after they’ve been on it for years Transsexuals have different hormone profiles and biology than either their birth gender or the chosen gender. Y’all always want to talk about biology but it’s scientifically proven when women get on their period and are having “ uncontrollable “ emotions it’s from the testosterone being at a higher level Why don't you post a paper showing that? I doubt you'll find one. Look at a chart of horm…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 09:11 PM
0

You can't simply measure testosterone and say this person should be more or less emotional, a persons overall hormone profile (including it's fluctuation) is mostly what has significant impact on a persons hormonal based response emotional responsiveness. Men simply have more stable hormonal profiles because they don't menstruate. Men having higher levels of testosterone wouldn't necessarily mean they're more emotionally stable.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 08:41 PM
0

How is an entire sex weaker when they can bleed for 1week- months and still show up for work , go to school , take care of business ect Well they're literally physically weaker. Seems pretty cut and dry. When women have periods their mood is influenced by the hormone testosterone. Estrogen and testosterone both influence mood both by their presence and absence. Stable balanced hormone profiles usually correlate with greater emotional stability and men have less fluctuation overall in their hormo…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 08:21 PM
1

Post the study showing this
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 08:15 PM
3

Mostly true. I don't think most single women are convinced no one wants them. They know it's not that hard to get a partner and can have several different dates a week if they so choose. It's just that they believe (rightly or wrongly) dates would either be too far below their standards or that it would only be for sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 01:44 PM
4

If he had cash to spend and wanted to fuck her then whatever. It isn't "raising the bar for men", this type of thing has been going on since before money existed. Nobody is going to care enough about someone on the first date to throw cash at them for any real reason except to make it easier to fuck them. Not that I'm condemning either party here, it's just that I think if it were stated more plainly women really wouldn't like the implication.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 08:13 AM
1

You can just use calcsd.info for this stuff, 17% below five inches bone pressed.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 06:02 AM
3

More like less than 0.5% for 8 inches
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 02:57 AM
2

How long is your middle finger, in inches, exactly? How long is his, in inches, exactly? I'm not saying people should remember exact measurements which would indeed be odd. Stop pretending that's the question. I repeated "generally" several times. Don't you hang out with your friend all the time? Whose middle finger is bigger, and by how much? Who's middle finger is girthier? Is yours or his crooked? If so, which way does yours or his point? Of all your friends, where does his middle finger rank…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 06:45 PM
4

I'm going to go ahead and say that seeing your partner naked with an erection is a normal experience for the vast majority of women and recalling that shouldn't be much of a challenge for someone with normal intelligence and memory.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 05:17 PM
3

If you have sex with someone consistently and you genuinely can't even remember their general body proportions I honestly think you're probably just stupid. This is like failing the basic "can you imagine an apple" test. I wouldn't expect someone to know the exact measurements of their partners dick but if someone says they can't remember the size at all it's either a deflection (most cases) or something else is going on mentally (low IQ, poor memory). If you want to believe it's some sort of vi…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 04:58 PM
0

Most women can only handle 4-6 inches of dick, anything bigger your in world for pain. Like do people not look this sh*t up or are yall wearing blind folds when looking stuff up on the internet? No woman I've ever had sex with has had real problems having sex with larger penis and plenty of them have been on the shorter side. At most they're a bit sore after. I think that's true for most men with large penises as well anecdotally. What do you think the chances are we're all lucking into having s…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 04:05 PM
3

6 inches bone pressed (which most men are probably measuring) Western set is only about 60%
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 03:59 PM
5

She even says in the OP she's "never paid much attention to penis sizes. If you asked me about how big my previous ex sexual partners were, I couldn't really tell you as I didn't focus on that much." The idea that women can't even recall the general size of their partners penis is quite silly. "I can't remember whether my previous girlfriend had big or small boobs. They were just kind of there you know?"
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 03:58 PM
16

Nope. For the most part women judge much more harshly on social awkwardness than men. Men basically don't care unless it's a borderline disability or it's the 1% expecting class specific sensibilities.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 03:53 PM
0

There's way too many too many dumb "for women" questions on here that frame things such that there's a very obvious answer that most women are going to choose because agreeing with the OP essentially says "yes I am a bad person". Of course you aren't going to get much useful discussion out of that. The flip side of that are questions for women asking for advice that are some variation of what women like, which notoriously results in women describing friends not what they're attracted to and the …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 04:58 AM
6

It really depends on what "small" is relatively. One of the most common and baseless dismissal of studies is that sample size is too small, but that mostly depends on study design ie accounting for disproportionate homogeneity dangers. Many good studies have been run with relatively small sample sizes.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 04:40 AM
1

Fitness has a strong correlation with romantic success. Fitter is almost always better excluding extreme outlier like professional bodybuilders. That's a very consistent finding in studies on attraction. Lighting, posing, and the hair is doing a lot of work here as well. Put these guys in neutral lighting, in clothes, neutral body language and guy on the right will do at least as good and almost certainly better than guy on the left. In the real world chubby guys don't do better than fit guys un…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/25 09:55 PM
2

I don't think any sisterhood as such exists, it's more like an appeal to common interests among women when it benefits them i.e. affirmative action or rhetoric around pay gaps etc. otherwise women don't really care about other women that much. Women are more friendly with each other in general on a personal level than men but I don't think that really constitutes a "sisterhood"
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/25 05:14 PM
0

They should have voted for the millionaire banker or the other millionaire career politician.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/25 07:01 AM
1

who go gaga for Chad'd dick. Most of the exaggerations aren't accurate but this isn't really much of one. Women absolutely do go crazy for <0.1% genetics dudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/25 06:35 AM
1

It was like, you're not too shabby, we like the same music, let's fuck and go to concerts together. Yes that still happens all the time. But that's not a whole lot less shallow than matching on OLD for looks and having one or two things in common or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/25 06:31 AM
3

It's fine to criticize society for having outcomes you think are bad. In fact it's a pretty necessary and healthy attitude to have. When this becomes more extreme and dips into entitlement demanding other people do things for them, then that's bad. But if you aren't getting the dating outcomes you want then it's probably good to take a look at both yourself and society. I don't know where exactly this attitude comes from that only people who are untouchable losers have problems or criticisms or …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 06:40 PM
1

Women who go for guys like this know what they're doing and get what they deserve.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 06:22 PM
1

Being able to review a guys looks, career, lifestyle and potential standing in the community before wasting time going out benefits women I don't think OLD really let's you learn more about this stuff than just knowing the person as part of a friends group or something. If you want to understand a persons relative place in the community in person "90's style" dating was probably much better for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 12:46 AM
1

Option 2. Option 1 has a good chance of becoming emotionally abusive over time. I've dated women and see it happen with other men where women excuse their emotional or verbal abuse of their partner by saying they're in love. You don't disrespect someone you love to that level. Option 2 may not be as "exciting" as option 1 but it's a healthier and probably more fulfilling over the long term relationship; probably the only one that's really viable for a healthy LTR/marriage I think men will tend t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 12:41 AM
1

Studies that estimate things like rates of depression, mental illness, drug dependence etc compensating for under reporting; or proximal measures like suicide rates, asylum populations, drug use rates (of various types), family formation rates, and so on.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/25 02:18 AM
1

You need to read some diaries from the time. You could pick diaries from any given time period and make it seem like a very good or very bad time to be alive based on those individuals experience so this isn't very useful. Obviously social problems have always existed and some people have done very poorly or well regardless. Of course I don’t think there is any way to prove it was better or worse You can look at various measures to strongly infer that it was better or worse for whatever given cr…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 08:38 AM
1

I’m not talking about extreme cases—just a regular dynamic where women value security and men value attraction. Then you've already ruled the large majority of the time women get called gold diggers and basically ended the conversation. Most men don't think most women are gold diggers for wanting a guy to have a job that's decently paying. A gold digger is when a woman is ONLY with a man for access to his money.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/25 08:56 PM
0

No, men on this sub constantly virtue-signal about how attracted they are to their looksmatches and how they don't hit on women out of their league, when they're trying to dunk on women and whine about 80/20 And they call women entitled, superficial, delusional, and unrealistic as a result The same energy should be kept here. If women are demonized for desiring sex with attractive men, then men should be too and stay in their lane like they insist women need to do This is dancing around the poin…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 09:01 AM
-4

Proximal measures and studies accounting for social shaming etc imply that cheating, drug use, depression/mental illness etc was genuinely lower. People just believe that it must have all been covered up with no real evidence; it's essentially an inverted tradcon view of the idealized 50's. For some reason (in most cases ideological reasons) the idea that the social environment might have been better for the average person in previous generations is offensive to lots of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:54 AM
8

It's objectively true that people had more sex, got married more often, start families more often etc in previous generations. There were fewer single people and people were more social in both a romantic and general sense. Is that not better dating conditions for most people?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:37 AM
5

I think there is this idea among a lot of redpillers/the manosphere that women in the past were perfect or chaste. But I think that they often just hid it better because there was more stigma. There was an ideal, but that doesn't mean that people were actually like that in reality. I've never heard that from RP. This is another thread that confuses RP with tradcon. At best there is a general idea of societal norms restraining women (and mens) nature. Most of your post seems to be referring to so…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:32 AM
2

I don't think they tried near human androids in the USSR.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:22 AM
1

Do you think socialists don't analyze romantic-sexual relations in terms of a market?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:21 AM
2

All of these dynamics will feed into men’s resentment. I can appreciate the existence of substitutes for sex and intimacy with women, but the truth is that almost no matter what, men will crave the real thing with real women who they genuinely desire. I honestly think this is vastly overestimating the average "loser" mans desire for the "real thing". Most of these men don't even need real life social interaction much now that they have games and the internet, yet they'll be resentful fucking hot…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:16 AM
1

Never before have we heard the incessant throbbing whine of men who feel that they are being deprived of what is somehow owed to them. Men literally went around killing and pillaging to get women in many historical societies. Many societies had significant social ritual and obligation around getting as many men paired up as possible because they did indeed view companionship as something owed to and necessary for men (and often women). Men whining on the internet or whatever is by far most innoc…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:12 AM
3

Sex is a beautiful and sacred act between two people and turning it into some commodity that can be bought and sold is strange to me. Maybe I’m old fashioned. Sex as a commodity predates modern human evolution. The concept of sex as something sacred is a particular cultural view and certainly not one that's near ubiquitous in the context of the modern world much less most historical societies. This is such a dystopian concept to me and it’s honestly terrifying that it’s a possibility in the near…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 08:03 AM
1

And here I thought most men were sexually attracted to most women, their "looksmatches" in particular They are. They would also like to have sex with very attractive women. There's no contradiction there. You can't "practice sex" without real-time feedback from a sentient creature Fucking code won't make someone a good lover Of course you can. If the robot is complex enough it will be good enough to realistically simulate sexual feedback (if desired).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/25 07:56 AM
2

Lots of very successful men (movie stars, the rich and powerful) don't cheat and remain faithful to their partner despite having far more opportunity to cheat with attractive women than the average man could dream of. Obviously a fair amount of cheating still happens with some percent of said men but you see plenty of others maintain very long term monogamous relationships as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/25 08:09 AM
–

Most people both settle and convince themselves they're not settling. Settling has strong negative connotations but it's a normal and healthy part of most relationships (up to a point where it turns into self devaluation). The majority of women are genuinely attracted to their partner to some degree. Where I disagree is that most of these men are really "preferred" in looks. By far the most consistent predictor of a mans romantic-sexual success is his looks. Women have much harsher judgements on…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/25 08:08 AM
5

Bank is an exaggeration but most teachers do make comfortably above the median incomes in pretty much every state yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/25 07:52 AM
2

Girls have had higher GPA than boys since the 50's and many more boys graduate highschool now than ever. Both men and womens GPA has continued to rise at roughly equal rates and the current gap is more or less historically normal since modern primary education began. The only real modern "crisis" boys have academically is that that they've fallen behind women in college attendance. But how long term sustainable the current college system is is questionable anyway. Men are undergoing proletariani…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/25 07:50 AM
7

While this probably does happen more often with women that are on the more attractive side there's tons of women that can generously be described as "mid" that all have stories about friendzoning dudes, including ones that were fairly upfront and tried to kiss on the first couple of dates. Mostly this just feels like blaming men. And probably we shouldn't blame women either unless they're being intentionally manipulative - non reciprocal attraction just kind of sucks and it happens to men at eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/25 06:32 AM
1

Personally the whole "embracing the decline" mentality isn't appealing to me which is one reason I wouldn't consider myself RP, but I don't think whining about it necessarily precludes living an RP life - as long as they're following the assumptions in dealing with women and working on improving themselves along RP lines then it's fair to say they're RP regardless of whether they criticize society for whatever. Do you really think you would be happy with some nagging wife and disrespectful, ungr…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/25 03:03 AM
1

You can punch in the numbers here https://calcsd.info/ for bone pressed or non bone pressed using the Western data set. 5.5" is below average using BP and slightly above average NBP
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 07:58 PM
–

Sure whatever you want to believe
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 01:42 AM
1

Now? No. But the OP seems to be basically looking at it from a post scarcity standpoint where robots are doing all the labour etc, in which case maybe yeah. At that point of advancement it's not just a "sexbot", it's an android that does a bunch of labour for you and you also have sex with.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 11:07 PM
–

Actual Marxists are so marginal within the US political and cultural sphere as to be totally irrelevant. There's some crossbreeding between liberalism and Marxism (sometimes rightly or wrongly alluded to as "cultural Marxism") but mostly what's happened is just the progression of liberalism. Most Americans, including conservatives, are really just liberals that wanted the revolution to stop at certain point. But it won't and hasn't. It's just comforting to believe American liberalism has been "p…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 11:04 PM
1

An advanced enough android is going to be attractive to way more of society than just the dregs. I generally take a dim view of "sexbot" stuff but if you make it as advanced as the OP is suggesting a lot changes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 09:02 PM
1

The only groups that are above replacement rate place a high priority on marriage and traditional relationships. As things are now these groups will come to dominate society demographically so it's rather the opposite of what you're suggesting; everything else besides marriage is obsolete at a group survival level. As for your more sci fi points (most of which I don't think are realistic within the next ~50 years) Futuristic reproductive technologies could also contribute to decrease marriage ra…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 09:00 PM
–

This isn't feminist specific or universal to feminists. In fact it's a problem with left liberalism generally and just blaming it on feminists is an easy "out" to avoid confronting what American liberalism has become; the same is true of the right blaming "socialists" or "cultural Marxism" for the evolution of liberalism
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 04:30 PM
1

There's nothing stopping women in the West or China from having their own bank account or earning their own money?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 01:43 AM
2

but unfair bc culturally she is forced into financial reliance using his bank account What do you mean?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 08:05 AM
1

Ok just ignore the men who fetishize it/you. Who cares
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/25 10:31 PM
0

Isn’t it interesting that the average penis size is 4.5”? The average penis size in Western nations is around 5.5" with a good portion of men around or a bit over 6". Anything over 6” is not getting entrance to most vaginas. The majority of women don't have trouble with 6+", maybe around 7.5" or something you might see a significant portion of women having trouble, which usually just means not being able to comfortably have sex in certain positions.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/25 06:29 PM
1

8 inches is larger than most women will ever have sex with, most men in porn are between 7 and 8 inches, the very largest might hit 9 inches, 10 inches practically doesn't exist. Women that have problems with larger penis sizes will already be having problems with guys that are "only" 7 inches, although I think it's generally overestimated how many women that have problems having sex with larger dicks there are. Anyway you can't even get half of women to admit that looks matter much in attractio…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/25 06:24 PM
3

It's not just "more people", on a per capita basis people have fewer friends, spend less time socializing, have less sex, get married and start families less, report being lonely more, are more depressed etc. You think you're better than the men who came before you? You're just a victim of modern-day society as if they wern't? Never understood this mindset that observing what's happening means you think you're a victim or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/25 05:58 AM
8

That's the common defense of modern society, that there's always been losers and loners, but that ignores that mountains of statistics that make it clear people are far less social now than ever.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/25 08:15 PM
4

While it's always been tougher to make friends and date as you age it was far more common to stay "rooted" in a community than the modern world, not to mention technological social shifts. The modern world is not entirely comparable to past generations even if they share some common trends/challenges
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/25 03:10 PM
2

The "churn" of the college to city career track has an atomizing and alienating effect in general as longer term communal relations become supplanted by more ephemeral relations that only last until you graduate, or as long as you work at XYZ, or live in city XYZ etc. But that's only half the equation. The other half is the effect of technology on socialization - this actually hits younger people harder as teens and college kids are more likely to spend their free time gaming or on social media …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/25 03:07 PM
7

Everytime it's discussed here you have people claiming it's actually quite easy and common to have kids mid 30s and older or that men have just as many age related fertility problems
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/25 03:00 PM
1

So if a 6 year old chose to live in a crack house and never go to school that would be better than the parents having legal ownership over them?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/25 10:42 PM
1

White men and women have a similar rate of outgroup dating/preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/25 08:19 PM
3

Younger non orthodox Jews have like a ~70% outmarriage rate, a large part of that probably being that outside certain areas (i.e. NYC) it's quite difficult to find Jewish partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/25 08:09 PM
1

I haven't found it's that rare that women put they like anime and/or videogames in profiles. They're a minority but maybe 2 or 3 out of ten women have it in their OLD profiles in my estimation. More as you go younger naturally but I even see it in 30+ year old women with some regularity. I don't think it's particularly unrealistic to want those women as a partner. You just have to present well and not as a stereotypical "basement dwelling nerd". Both men and women that list that stuff tend to be…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/25 08:05 PM
7

Out of curiosity how do you think children should be raised?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 05:48 AM
2

Society was healthier 15 years ago but only in a relative sense. It was still on track to collapse demographically and was much less healthy socially than earlier generations. The internet was just pushing the gas on already existing trends.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 05:47 AM
5

Ultimately though the driving force behind our dating and marriage is based in our biology. We can't expect women and men to be on equal footing in the dating pool. Men who complain that it's too hard to get a woman are not going to change humanity with their grievances. They are simply going to exit the gene pool and leave the door open for more competent men, same as a male in any species that goes too long or cannot improve itself to find a mate. Just because there's some biological basis for…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 05:35 AM
6

The essential differentiation between slavery and "guardianship" is that there's no profitable labour being done in the second case. In most of the modern (Western and East Asian) world children aren't compelled into any meaningful labour and certainly they don't represent any surplus value accrued to the parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 05:24 AM
–

Historically conservatives were against big government Really depends on the time and place we're talking about. The anti government stuff is particular to the US mostly. and were dead-set against restricting women’s rights. Things change. I'm not really sure what your point is. Yes things change?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 10:23 PM
–

But more recently, I've also been thinking: to what extent is the dominance of feminism and radical social justice ideology an inevitable consequence of female participation in politics, as opposed to a modern-day aberration? It's mostly a product of the college system and media. Historically women could and did vote more conservatively/right wing than men in some countries. I doubt there's any salvaging the socially dysfunctional and ideologically captured current generations. Millenials and on…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 10:16 PM
4

I've been around and had sex with plenty of average and below average women. Being single and/or abstinent was always by choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 03:50 AM
8

Most women can get into relationships relatively easily as well, the idea that they're only getting offers from guys looking for nothing but sex is nonsense. Even if 80% of 100 matches just want sex that's still 20 something guys that are potential relationships. That's still far better odds compared to an average man.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 12:40 AM
3

Regardless of whatever mean things men might say about her online she would have a trivial time actually getting dates compared to the average man.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 12:36 AM
3

LLM are better writers than like 90% of the population, it's better at a lot of things than most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/25 02:11 PM
1

No but it's probably a dysfunctional relationship. I guess it depends on what the guy wants and is comfortable with. Seems like a gender swapped version of "is porn cheating?", which is also no but it doesn't mean you have to be happy with the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/25 02:08 PM
0

Absolute worship of "the market" has broken a bunch of people's minds.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/25 02:03 PM
47

The low standard women you're describing have a very easy time dating, much easier than an moderately attractive and successful man. High standards really only apply to a subsection of men, not average ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/25 02:00 PM
-1

Luddism might work but it doesn't matter because it's not really realistic. You mind as well focus on trying to get technology to adapt to human needs than trying to eschew it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:54 AM
4

"Experts" means nothing, there's plenty of people that see the birthrate as a major problem. But your original argument really makes no sense in this context - the population is shrinking as you want, there's no need to do anything. Such extensive spending only makes sense in a pro natal context.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:45 AM
1

Not everyone views the point of a relationship as only or even primarily to find love. People get into relationships out of lust or as practical partnership or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:35 AM
7

All fertility rates are on a per capita basis, what you're saying makes no sense. Some place like Sweden has a 1.4 fertility rate with a higher percentage of foreign born population than the US which has 1.6 fertility rate. Real world numbers do not support the argument you're making.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:32 AM
12

Northern Euro countries have some of the most extensive and robust family subsidization programmes in the world, they work fewer hours than most places, and have a high standard of living with fairly egalitarian wealth distributions. Their fertility follows everyone else's. Highly expensive government pilot programs aimed at getting people to have kids barely move the needle. We could spend more than SS and Medicare combined on such programs and it would have marginal results. This approach simp…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:20 AM
13

None of this stuff ever works in the real world. Most peoples romantic problems have nothing to do with economic precarity and family subsidization has very marginal effect on behavior. It's a fantasy that you can simply pump money into things and fix modern social romantic problems. It's rote liberal capitalism wannabe panacea.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:08 AM
1

Most people paired up into family formation units by late 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/25 01:03 AM
1

You're assuming everyones view of relationships is the same as yours
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/25 02:48 AM
0

I think the OP's intention was to say MGTOW need therapy rather needing women. Mostly just a cheap shot at MGTOW which is kind of funny given the context of not caring about men leaving society.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/25 02:47 AM
2

The population of the US in 1945 was ~140 million. US military size (all personnel) reached a maximum size of ~8 million. The majority of men did not serve in the military even just counting able bodied men. The (US) female labour participation rate didn't actually jump significantly in WWII although it did rise; somewhere between 25%-28% of women were in the labour market during WWII. It's much more true for Germany and the Soviet Union however who had far higher casualty rates and higher femal…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/25 02:45 AM
2

Absolutely not. This is a delusion of men who don't realize both how easy it is to live without men in a practical sense for these women and how many would rather cut off their nose than have it even be implied they have social problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/25 02:36 AM
1

Yes you're right most people don't care. Which is a bad thing - people should care about the social welfare of significant sections of society retreating from social engagement, especially in the context of crashing fertility. But most people lack a more forward thinking consciousness that allows them to care much about the long term effects - or if they do care they're so antagonistic for personal or ideological reasons they'd rather simply let things "play out". Frankly when it comes to this s…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/25 02:34 AM
1

Most men get interested in RP because they want to have sex more. That's it. All the revenge stuff or whatever pop psych stuff that gets thrown on top, while perhaps true for some men, is more about peoples reaction to RP than actually understanding why men read it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 11:24 PM
2

Divorce risk falls quote fast around age 20 or 22, you're vastly overstating the risk difference marrying in your mid 20s vs 30s
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 05:35 PM
–

It's one of the functions of the human brain in pattern recognition and there's significant neurological and psychological literature about how it works in relation to human social interaction and categorization. That is very much an autistic point of view Not understanding social categorization is literally a symptom of autism.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 03:11 PM
–

It's not something most people consciously do or primarily judge someone's overall character on, but yes most people are making relative value judgements pretty much all the time, it's part of human nature.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 10:04 AM
–

Let’s be honest here, anyone that tries to measure a human being by what “value” they are to them is not really someone that’s ever gonna do well with people. Sure they can. Lots of successful people do it. They just aren't as explicit or systematized (or autistic if you prefer) as discussion in these types of spaces. If you don't think people judge each other in terms of social-romantic hierarchy ("why is she/he with him/her?") that's pretty naive.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 09:45 AM
–

Decent height with a good education, good job, dressing well, great shape from consistely going to the gym, good grooming habits and consistent haircuts, friends, hobbies, personality. All of these things are the bare minimum and because you have these, does not qualify you for someone who has the same things. Those are clearly well beyond the bare minimum, lots of people don't do those things and have partners. A person that is consistent and at least moderately successful in all that is certai…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 09:43 AM
1

Most men come to TRP because they're struggling in dating. That's it. For whatever reason lots of women (and some men) have trouble accepting that that's their motivation.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 09:32 AM
10

Successful white guys don't give a shit if an asian woman (or black or whatever) is going after them because they're being fetishized.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 09:31 AM
0

No. It's only a problem if it develops into a more serious relationship where it's clear the person doesn't like you beyond those qualities associated with the subgroup. I'd wager a lot of people are in relationships like that without realizing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 09:29 AM
1

The only real significant privilege's men have mentioned here is related to pregnancy effects. Even the "less likely to experience sexual assault" is sort of outweighed or at least mitigated by being much more likely to experience violence in general. Female privilege's is mainly just having a much easier time (comparatively) in getting opportunities in dating and better outcomes in family court. The rest is mostly marginal.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/25 09:24 AM
1

These are the women who are on your "level" in the dating market. Not really. It's just a fetishization of markets as absolute arbiters of value.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:31 PM
2

The answer to these sorts of questions is always the same. Women will deny dick size matters, call it gay for thinking it does, imply you don't know anything about women etc. In the real world dick size does matter, most women do fetishize large penises to some degree, a small minority of women can't even have sex with larger dicks (somehow it's every 1/3rd reddit woman), having a small penis will get you disrespected and worse loyalty from some women etc. The equivalent would be reddit men tell…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:28 PM
2

This is actually one of the major problems with (vulgar) feminism, it produces a totalizing crude view of gender within society.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:17 PM
4

What radicalizes young men is just poor social conditions and economic precarity (i.e. uncertainty about future prospects). Young men would be getting radicalized even without the exposure to this stuff (which they aren't really that exposed to unless they specifically go looking for it or are unfortunate enough to have teachers really into it). Most of the more extreme feminist perspectives on men would be basically brushed off and ignored if their prospects were better.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:13 PM
1

You don't have to do anything. If you're fine with the way things are then there's no need to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:08 PM
4

What I've observed is that this phrase is mainly used to downplay and dismiss anything she "brings to the table" as insignificant. They dismiss what years of study, dedication, focus, loyalty, perseverance, and determination have honed and the character it builds. This is a fetishization of academia and credentialism far beyond what it actually represents. The mirror of this attitude is STEM computer nerds thinking how great they are based off making software money and being confused why women a…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:06 PM
6

Yes. I'd say it's at least 20% of relationships I see. Rare that the woman does nothing at all domestically though. Majority of relationships are more even.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 12:56 AM
3

Women largely don't advertise their desired relationships as such like men do, they're things that "just happen". They're more reticent in discussing it in general for several reasons (shame from men or women, being perceived as low value, avoid men creeping on them etc). Reddit is also filtered to certain types of women that are mostly outside the demographic that typically goes for older men. My personal experience is that I get a mix of 50/50 twenty somethings and women around my age as a lat…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 04:46 PM
2

Aging masculinizes both men and women and their tastes tend to adapt. It's always been true generally younger women/girls prefer more feminine/"softer" men and older (post mid 20's) women tend to prefer more traditionally masculine men. There's exceptions both ways (women that prefer more feminine men throughout life, younger women that prefer highly masculine guys from the start) but for the general population that's the trend.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 06:18 AM
2

Redditors stop selecting yourselves out of the gene pool and alienating yourself romantically challenge: Impossible
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 06:12 AM
0

Seems like more of a shitty liberal thing than a woman thing in specific
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 06:08 AM
–

Source needed. Last time i checked, women are overwhelmingly using therapy to work on their personality issues. lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/25 07:36 PM
8

Abnormal doesn't necessarily mean pathological. Starting dating in your mid 20's or whatever isn't even that unusual. I've even seen guys that don't really start dating until their 30's and go on to have healthy relationships without any need for therapy. Most men that start dating later just lack opportunity and experience, usually because they're under socialized and/or unattractive. Those with an underlying mental condition are a minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/25 01:32 AM
8

People do not need to go to therapy because they want to be more successful in getting women
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 08:41 PM
22

Well yeah that's kind of the point. RP is not for men who are happy and successful with their outcomes already.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 08:39 PM
1

I don't think you have a good grasp of what RP Is and since you're conflating PUA and TRP
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 08:37 PM
1

If your self-worth is still tied to getting women, then the “internal locus of control” is a performance, not a mindset. I don't agree at all. RP is explicitly about making a man responsible for his own outcomes - that's internal locus of control. RP does not encourage you to make your entire self worth about getting women, it's an aspect of validation and a goal as a consequence of self improvement and understanding the opposite gender. When something is a goal you can't entirely separate it fr…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 08:31 PM
2

RP is always going to have a fair amount of unattractive unappealing men because it's made for men who aren't successful or at least aren't successful on the level they want to be. It's like observing that a lot of self help books tend to be consumed by people with social or physical issues; that's its audience. It's not really a reflection of whether RP is correct or not, or whether it's useful for average men. Believing all of RP is unattractive and/or unsuccessful men or that attractive succe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 08:12 PM
1

If RP (theoretically) results in men bettering themselves, getting what makes them happy (sex/women/relationships etc), and teaches men to not be too overinvested what individual women think of them I don't actually see what the problem is. The locus of control is moved internally and the "reward" system is women - practically I don't see anything wrong with that given a happier, more successful man. Your point seems more concerned with a principal (women shouldn't be the "endgoal" or "reward" b…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 07:46 PM
1

Is it? Yes Where in the red pill is family and marriage promoted, and how can a man maintain a loyal and faithful marriage if he's desperately seeking female validation? Those are my own observations not RP. RP is indeed not concerned about family formation or birth rates. Tbf, you aren't the only man contradicting himself in his own posts, but men who insist that the birth rates/replacement rate/society/family/marriage are collapsing also admits he's just desperately chasing pussy. It's quite p…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 07:40 PM
2

RP is ultimately about getting women. There's a lot of conflation with MGTOW in the OP and many other posts in this forum. I find a lot of these "re center yourself away from women" posts boorish. There's nothing wrong with wanting women or even taking some pride in being able to get women. Yes it shouldn't be your only or even primary source of self respect or drive but it's quite healthy and normal to be seeking or getting some validation from women. I'm really not sure what the overall implic…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 03:03 PM
1

The patriarchy mostly exists anymore in places that aren't white.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 01:15 AM
0

Only rich white men benefit from the patriarchy, they can skip the military same as they can skip the part of having to work hard to provide for their trad wife. Why is it always white?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 10:35 PM
10

It seems that most of the growth in online dating is taking place over social media Is there really that much of a difference between OLD and Instagram (or whatever) besides possibly the latter giving more social context (i.e. maybe knowing so me people they follow/are followed by) ? I assume women prefer the latter but it's not necessarily a huge leap from OLD. and through extended social circles. I'm not sure what you mean, your source shows "through friends" declining pretty heavily Overall t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 10:30 PM
1

Women want to organically meet through social circles. Apps are a secondary avenue for most women, but then again a lot of women don't meet the men they want through their social circles.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 03:52 AM
–

That doesn't imply that women became happier or that "freedom" is the deciding factor here and not standard of living or social cohesion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/25 04:13 PM
–

No particular reason to think women are happy about it. Being single is more strongly associated with depression and negative social outcomes among women just like it is with men. They report as high or higher rates of loneliness than men. Just being happier than men single doesn't mean much of anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/25 06:42 AM
–

Self reported happiness and proxy measures (depression rates, mental illness, drug use, suicide rates etc) all strongly indicate this isn't the happiest women have ever been. One can argue "freedom" is more important than happiness but they don't necessarily correlate with each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/25 06:38 AM
–

It's clearly both
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/25 06:34 AM
8

I meant to say doesn't automatically fix these issues
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 09:42 PM
2

The endgame is just getting any outcome you want whether it's multiple partners or a single partner long term relationship. RP doesn't have and "endgame", it's supposed to be a guide on getting outcomes you want - those outcomes are up to the individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 06:53 PM
1

Is that what your grandparents were like? Or do you truly believe that's what the average persons life was like?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 06:52 PM
3

It's absolutely real. Status, even at Stavros level, can get even 3/10 dudes laid. Even highly socially charismatic/capable guys can shoot well above their level without being (semi) high status. If Stavros is doing well (he certainly wasn't when he was still on cumtown) it's because he got more famous, not because of his energy or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 05:31 PM
2

Ever wonder why birth rates are dropping? Why more women are choosing to remain single and childless? Or why marriage seems to be becoming a thing of the past? Not for the reasons you listed mostly. It's telling that often this type of argument seems almost hostage-negotiation like - give in to our demands or watch your society wither. In reality the more you improve the conditions for women in terms of choice, career stability/maternity leave/child care, lower chore loads, lower appearance expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 05:26 PM
1

Genetics weigh heavier on some aspects of child outcomes than others (i.e. adult IQ) but environment and structure are still quite important.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 05:19 PM
4

Theoretically maybe. In the real world it's extremely difficult and uncommon for outcomes to be equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 05:17 PM
17

Having the father present doesn't automatically fix these issues but it clearly on average improves the childs outcomes. "Perfect is the enemy of the good" pretty much sums up your arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 05:15 PM
1

There's quite a few videos that showcase how drastically it can change a woman's appearance. In most cases you're right though, average women don't change drastically but can move up or down a point or even two via makeup
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 03:42 PM
2

She's attractive and can easily get dates but she's also definitely obese.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 07:57 AM
5

The reality is top 20% only gets you somewhat consistent matching (as opposed to sporadic matching most men get). Guys that are constantly getting matches are <1%
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 07:54 AM
2

You don't have to base it off their looks. People could put effort into their profiles but that actually has an inverse effect for men where it lowers your chance of matching so it's pointless for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 07:52 AM
2

Wait till you find out what happened when they showed them apes mating. Women are aroused by sexual imagery in general easier than men, while mens arousal is more specific but more intense it seems.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 07:50 AM
5

You can regard it as virtue or vice, men are still attracted to average women while average women aren't (physically) attracted to average men in the same way.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/25 01:53 PM
12

The Madonna doesn't have any deficiency inherit in the definition unless you're specifically defining it as also being ugly and/or asexual which is different from how most people would define it. Madonna isn't a compromise for men. Beta bucks is deficient and a compromise by definition. There isn't a value equivalence.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/25 01:50 PM
5

Men rate average women as attractive based on looks, not just having a pussy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/25 01:20 PM
11

The obvious difference is the "Madonna" is not a compromise being settled for because she provides utility. "Beta bucks" implies a deficiency in the man (not attractive/exciting enough) that Madonna doesn't. There's not an exact symmetry between genders so trying to call hypocrisy doesn't work well when their views are simply different. The closest symmetry is in the idealized partners- women want the hot exciting chad that still provides and is loyal to just them, men want the hot chick that's …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/25 01:15 PM
1

People really be using their eyes smh
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/25 12:17 AM
4

Her facial structure does look somewhat masculine. I feel like it would be fairly easy to pick her out of a lineup of women as most likely transsexual.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 11:16 PM
2

You would have to specifically seek out communities where transX is largely seen as more or less the same as biological genders to get a larger variety of opinions than mostly "no", which puts you out of mainstream communities
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 10:43 PM
0

So, yes, fiscal conservatism is popular, once you promise not to touch people's social security or medicare. Peoples self material self interest is what's popular which is why there's a contradiction between what you posted and support for the two largest government expenditures. It largely depends on how you frame something - as being in individuals immediate material interest or not. "Fiscal conservatism" is popular when it's seen as something wasteful or unnecessary and unpopular when it's di…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 10:41 PM
16

Not dating transpeople is not an especially extreme opinion, the large majority of the public would say no.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 10:20 PM
8

No
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 10:18 PM
2

Anyone notice that my friends are all strong, brave, and calm while my enemies are all insipid cowards?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 10:02 PM
0

Fiscal conservatism is not popular
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 10:00 PM
6

Where's the debunking?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 09:59 PM
3

Younger women skew significantly more liberal than older ones and there's more older white women than younger. The average age for white women is 45.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 09:58 PM
3

Redditor starts thread about being exactly average look inside The person I'm currently dating (gender fluid, born a woman), is my height, and thinks nothing of it. We met on a dating app (they liked me first), and their dating history (in numbers), is about the same as mine. I wrote this example, because most users assume that the average man is completely hopeless. not average average people don't date "gender fluid" people
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 07:37 PM
2

I wholeheartedly agree that a woman is allowed get trumpers out their dating pool, but didn't most white women also date against their interest? Because there are more dimensions to a womans "interests" than just whether abortion is legal or not, if voting for Kamala or whoever would have mattered anyway (we literally just had 4 years of a dem president and nothing changed). And there are lots of women who think abortion is murder.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/25 01:01 AM
1

This is far beyond "reproductive rights" for men which might mean making condoms illegal or fertility pills or something; at a stretch it might mean making ED (i.e. viagra, cialis) treatment illegal. This is more like some weird hormonal slavery thing with no real world analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/25 12:58 AM
0

Homosexual relationships do not appear to be anymore healthy than heterosexual relationships in any overall significant way, at best they have relative strengths and weaknesses. The fetishization of lesbianism as somehow morally, ideologically, or even spiritually superior doesn't appear to have any actual evidence, it exists an idealization which is not realized in the actual world. This contradiction is produced by ideological reasoning (among other things). The principal problem with the OP i…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/25 12:45 AM
3

Men truly don't care about looks like you think we do. It's all about femininity and kindness. I know a 220 lb 6' rotund woman who isn't much to look at but she's super sweet and has a hot model boyfriend. They're locked into each other and probably getting married soon. I see this all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/25 10:35 PM
2

Yeah
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 09:36 PM
40

That's why being able to get casual sex is so important for a lot of men - if you can't meet the bar for hookups you aren't getting women from that pool at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 09:11 PM
2

Probably organizing society such that community socialization and family formation is integrated with or even precedes material and status advancement. But I don't think society is prepared or willing to change that much, so realistically probably nothing substantial.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 03:28 PM
5

You don't believe men love? You don't know any men that love their partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 03:12 PM
8

Men and women cheat at roughly similar rates until sometime in their mid 40s or 50s when it becomes significantly asymmetrical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 03:09 PM
3

These places are not generally more social than the US, they have better standards of living in some ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 01:04 AM
2

These would improve peoples material outcomes and "quality of life" certainly but I'm skeptical it would actually increase socialization much.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 12:56 AM
3

The same phenomenon exists across a range of economic systems and cultures. It's a product of material abundance, social liberalism, and technological advancement. It's not a capitalist specific phenomenon.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/25 12:54 AM
12

Having twice as many female ancestors as males doesn't necessarily mean that only half as many men reproduced. Highly successful men have much higher offspring survival chance, tend to be related to other successful men, can have multiple wives either simultaneously or in succession etc. You can find other studies directly looking at reproduction ratios that estimate Eurasian reproduction ratios of 1.2:1 female male which gives women about a 20% reproduction advantage which is probably more reas…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 10:30 PM
1

I should have said android
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 02:15 PM
9

Violence is possible in the West in the right circumstances. Things can change quicker than people predict. However mostly I'm referring to how much things can decline socially and materially. Fertility rates decrease year after year and one has found the "bottom" yet - even in extreme cases like South Korea. Not only is the population overall declining but the age pyramid becomes even more and more inverted (i.e. the society becomes increasingly old top heavy). Major population decline just by …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 06:21 AM
1

FGM doesn't remove the clitoral hood. It removes the clitoris. It's akin to removing the tip of your penis. FGM victims have damaged perceptions because they grow up in a culture where female sexual pleasure is not just shameful, but damn near illegal. Most people do consider removal of the clitoral hood to be FGM.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 06:14 AM
6

Doesn't matter at all. The orgasm gap is primarily down to men having an easier time climaxing during penetrative vaginal sex. That's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 06:02 AM
2

Most of the answers posted here are correct but it's funny to compare how women answer this question against "what do men provide".
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 05:59 AM
5

Things will be much worse than just the population and economy declining a bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 05:57 AM
6

It's very easy to see in almost every statistic a general social decline which is interconnected with the decline in dating prospects and outcomes. Under socialization and atomization have made peoples lives far worse socially but a huge amount of people remain in denial about this.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 05:56 AM
7

Men put up with mistreatment/rudeness from women because they're desperate and there aren't enough "good" women to go around. It's not even a "hot women" thing, it's a general women thing. Plenty of guys are dating average looking women that treat them badly because it's that or being alone. So lets stop with the complaining about who women date because its a double standard. Maybe true in a symmetrical dating paradigm but the real world is asymmetrical. Women have much more power in choosing pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 05:47 AM
7

The orgasm gap doesn't indicate whether foreplay has become less popular or not. For that to be a useful indicator we would have to know how important foreplay is in impacting likelihood of orgasm and also whether the orgasm gap has been decreasing or increasing. The answer to the first seems to be that foreplay is actually quite overrated in heterosexual womens orgasm likelihood https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1743609515322566 For the second point there's not much data ei…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/25 07:12 AM
7

Women keep posting that it's because they have sex and by definition not incels or that incel is a mindset about being bitter about not getting laid, but it's become extremely common for women to throw the "incel" label at any guy that has the "wrong" opinion about things or just had a bad vibe. Tons of men that get laid/have girlfriends/wives/kids get called incel. It doesn't mean anything at this point except as a synonym for loser.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/25 06:25 AM
12

Foreplay is also becoming less and less popular among men and they consider female pleasure a privilege or see it as optional. I What evidence do you have of this? I don't think it's really true at all. Consideration of female pleasure is probably as high or near as high as it's ever been.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/25 06:17 AM
12

Y'all will be ridiculed for having these subscriptions. "What? Couldn't handle a bio girlfriend? Lmao" This shaming will deter adoption and sales Why would men who are resorting to using AI's care? It's not like most men who might use these are in some social circle with women where using one will ruin their chances in dating someone. No one is going to care about the men using these except maybe as some generalized group to point to as the designated losers (i.e. incels) but that's not likely t…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/25 06:14 AM
–

Sex can be unsatisfying or lead to unwanted complications (i.e. STI, pregnancy). But more importantly sex isn't separable from social relations and thus social outcomes. If you take sex in isolation and assume it's satisfying then yes it's simply "good". But that's the same assumption as knowing people like/need food and assuming every meal is tasty and healthy while also not thinking about larger social consequences of eating. What are the negative effects on society? Single parents, high/endor…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/25 06:02 AM
1

Sex definitely has effects on society in terms of producing happy or unhappy people or producing stable social units or kids etc. Thinking of it as an unalloyed positive only and that it has no effect on society is naive.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 03:04 PM
–

Most religions traditionally did not consider women morally superior at all. In fact the traditional view of women was basically inverted in that they were considered the more lustful and sexually corruptive gender. The "Madonna" complex did not apply to most women. The modern view of women (religious or otherwise) is quite different from the traditional religious one.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 08:03 AM
–

Women don't thrive socially. Their socialization stats are very similar to mens
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:58 AM
–

It obviously is a privilege, just not a useful one.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:57 AM
–

Loneliness rates are reported as high or higher for women than men, yet both men and women repeat how much better women are doing with no evidence. People treat it as a contest but both genders are in serious social trouble.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:56 AM
1

I'm not "triggered" by it, I just think it's quite foolish in this example because it's likely going to decrease the health and longevity of a relationship. It's pretty common for "unconventional" relationships to be less healthy (in whatever dimension) than conventional ones. You're free to engage in it and make a case for it in discussion, but I think it's usually appropriate to treat it with some degree of skepticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:52 AM
1

People's behaviours can be consensual but also harmful. No one forces people to overeat, they do it because it's enjoyable, but huge amounts of people are obese and it makes society worse for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:44 AM
2

Race baiting
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:41 AM
–

Not really. The core of RP is descriptive of women's behavior. That's what separates it from general self improvement. Spinning plates is something that can be aided by that knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 07:35 AM
–

Something like 65% of the non profit sector is staffed and led by women, in spite of men claiming that women do not want to offer charitable help to men. I'm sure most women who work there do genuinely want to help men, but there's a reason beyond just being empathetic that NGO/non profit tends to be more female.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/25 05:29 AM
2

Telling low SMV men to date poly is basically the same as telling them to date ugly chicks. Yeah it works.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/25 07:39 AM
–

There's definitely women who can deepthroat most of a big dick unless it's like top .1% or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/25 03:52 AM
–

6 inches is just top 20% using Western averages on calcsd
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/25 03:49 AM
37

The 80/20 stat is describing how women express their preferences in men, not describing other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/25 10:30 PM
1

18-20 is when the IQ advantage manifests for men so it's unlikely that pregnancy is the cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/25 09:29 PM
2

Single women are simply more "standoffish" in general. Especially passed mid 20's.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/25 07:50 PM
2

There are tons of SAHMs for dudes that are working blue collar jobs making 50-80k. You don't have to be bringing home 250k to have a SAHM, you just have to live more modestly. Look at the houses the average American worker lived in in the 1950's.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/25 07:45 PM
–

In the context of Congress she's young and attractive and is promoted by the media a lot. That's it. Could it be that the very qualities critics claim to dislike—her confidence, her presence, her ability to command attention—are part of what keeps them so focused on her? I don't think she does that any better than most other higher profile Congresswomen. I don't like Pelosi at all but she's obviously very intelligent and skilled at her position while being highly confident and knowing how to wor…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/25 07:42 PM
1

Interesting, I've never heard anything about feminist movements like nemesis, but it makes sense they would start to emerge at the points of greatest contradiction. I suspect most feminist movements will remain bound liberalisms politics though.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/25 04:41 PM
1

I'm saying women possibly tend to mature faster intellectually than men thus in younger groups IQ averages tend to be about equal between genders. Adulthood IQ is less variable than adolescent IQ and men have a slightly higher average. I'm not claiming anything about generations
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/25 08:58 PM
1

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16823409/ Adult males have 4-6 point higher IQ on average, it's a consistent finding across studies. Alot of discussion either assumes an exact match in averages (or attempts to normalize them that way) or references younger populations where women may actually have a slight advantage. But an exact match of averages is actually quite unlikely when you consider the differences in variability between populations.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/25 06:43 PM
1

Women are not interested in some oppression matriarchy or oppression of anyone (generally). If you could sum up the average views of American women it would probably just "everyone should be nicer to each other". Of course they don't really behave that way in the real world mostly but there's not much ideological depth there that even allows for the conception and implementation of the matriarchy or whatever. Such thoughts would only be of interest to an extreme minority of women i.e. radical fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/25 07:42 AM
5

Adult men have slightly higher average IQ by a few points, which is somewhat statistically relevant because in combination with higher variability it makes the right tail slightly larger.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/25 07:25 AM
2

The replies saying women/feminists have little power abroad are correct. It's quite pointless for them to focus on the developing world where they have little influence and what they do have gets quickly coopted and integrated with neo liberal projects i.e. "Liberating Afghanistans women" The much more damning contradiction is within their own countries where they actually do have some sway and their reaction to the effects of immigration and fertility changes. You'll see mass (relative to their…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/25 07:20 AM
3

Not really, it's pretty middle of the road in terms of strength gap measurements.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/25 05:20 AM
2

Because it's a good overall indicator for strength and health However you can certainly use other metrics for measuring strength. For instance even when using populations of equally muscular men and women (i.e. something you basically never see in the real world), men outperform women substantially in almost every category https://x.com/zaelefty/status/1826986373808558230 https://x.com/zaelefty/status/1688158885889110016
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/25 05:16 AM
5

Well it sort of does. In grip strength an average 80+ year old male outperforms something like 90% of 30 year old women. https://x.com/TheRabbitHole84/status/1898754326492787026?t=KZRf-fU26kJNj1SUztN_JQ&s=19 A woman needs to be exceptionally strong to be as strong as an average male.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/25 02:44 AM
1

Sounds autistic + young + liberal
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/25 09:33 PM
1

This is the commodified view of relationships and even self commodification in which the natural human life stages become a "commodity" to be traded. But of course you aren't really a commodity like gold, you don't store value. Either you will have kids and family (or whatever type of relationship) or not, but your "value" will move in the same direction regardless. The "exchange value" is being able to start a family, having a loving relationship, or whatever. In 10 years your looks will probab…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/25 09:22 PM
5

There's two different points here - aging and starting a family. They aren't the same thing. If you want to maximize your looks/dating longevity then no don't marry young and have children. If you want to start a family then your best bet is probably mid 20's. Advice isn't going to be the same for two different goals so decide which one you want to prioritize. Yes, there’s the fact that fertility peaks in early-mid twenties, but most women aren’t financially stable enough for children that young…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/25 09:13 PM
19

"The wall" only exists when you compare older women to younger women, but other than that, the average man's value remains vastly below the average woman's at any point of their life. The wall is not women dropping below mens "value" as they age, it's a drop in their ability to attract "top" men or at least top men in their looks bracket, and especially to get commitment. Yes most women will always have options and possible commitment at any age bracket but their options get noticeably worse. It…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/25 09:02 PM
5

I would actually disagree. The media absolutely shapes our conception of masculinity, which you can see in fashion trends over time. It is more acceptable than ever for men to be more feminine, for example. There is much more that needs to be done on the representation of men in media (the point of my post) but the cause and effect is there. I didn't disagree with anything about the media shaping ideas of masculinity. I simply don't think it matters much in terms of the quality of life or outcom…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/25 03:09 PM
5

Extroverted women are putting themselves in spaces and social situations where they're getting attention and likely to be approached. Even shy women if they're in the right groups and spaces will get approached. That's why you have other shy women in this thread telling you they get approached. There's nothing wrong with not wanting to be in those spaces but then you have to consider OLD if you don't want to do that. And even attractive and extroverted women use OLD, it's not some insult or bene…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 11:18 PM
3

almost every anti RP type posters solution to mens struggle that attracts them to RP in the first place isn't to fix mens actual problems, it's to make them feel less bad about having problems, which is why they mostly fail excepting whatever small percentage of men that apparently don't care about these problems beyond feeling social pressure around them i.e. "I want to fuck women" vs "I feel like a loser if I don't fuck women"
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 10:10 PM
1

No. literally surveys show the first thing they want is kindness. These surveys do not represent the reality of behaviour. Physical attractiveness in every behavioural study is the number one predictor of mens romantic success.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 09:58 PM
8

Any benefit the average man could derive out of this is going to be marginal. Most mens problem is struggling to date and there's nothing being offered here beyond worthless platitudes. Women aren't going to be any more eager to date these men because the media now has fewer masculine men and more "soft" (or whatever) men represented in media. The type of man really invested in not being "traditionally masculine" is usually already "fighting" on the same side as LGBTQ people. This type of view e…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 09:55 PM
10

This is 100% about you and your sister refusing to use dating apps. Can't really have too much sympathy if you refuse to use the avenue that's basically tailor made for shy women.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 09:24 PM
14

Give the guy a better haircut and they're looks matched. Literally look like gender swaps of each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 06:29 AM
8

Confidence is internal validation. Gain that and you'll be the hottest man ever. No, you won't. Confidence will help most men but they aren't going to be jumping up three points in attractiveness by just being confident. Looks are still king, good looking guys can have "normal" amounts of confidence and do better than average dude that's confident usually. Having really low self confidence however can badly hurt even good looking mens prospects.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 06:28 AM
8

No one who struggles is going to give a shit about that. Just do what you have to do find success and happiness. The Western world is full of losers and pretentious people.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 06:22 AM
2

Or you can just use OLD. Half my likes come from women a decade younger than me. I'm not even particularly interested in women in their 20's.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 06:20 AM
–

Most women are going to find most of this shit "corny" and probably even actively hurt a relationship. Maybe a few things here and there or on special occasions will be appreciated. People don't like most romantic gestures or being "too polite" outside special occasions because then it puts pressure on them to reciprocate or feel like they have to live up to some standard. The number one rule for the average person is they just want will be most comfortable and least effort. Just look at the way…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 06:03 AM
2

For you to love them, and them you, you have to trust each other. Being In a relationship alone would show you do. Huh? No definitely not. People are in relationships for lots of reasons and with varying levels of comfortableness with vulnerability and trust. Example of a wrong time? Depends on the woman but for a lot of them it will be basically anytime outside of a direct family member or maybe pet dying.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 05:58 AM
3

The development gap between the "developed"/"developing" world is much smaller than it used to be, especially if we consider East Asia, the largest population on the planet.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 03:21 AM
2

Or maybe women in welthier countries like the US are less interested on dating, marriages and having children and less interested on men? Probably the biggest overall factor yes. People are less social and less interested in dating/relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/25 03:18 AM
0

Even in your own OP you bring up an issue where men have to be conscious of their behavior - if you cry or become too emotional in front of your girlfriend in the "wrong" circumstances (which is most of them) it can ruin a relationship, which are usually pretty large investments. It's easy to say who cares just find someone else but most men don't have the luxury of choosing emotionally ideal women or blowing off relationships after spending months or years in it. Relationships become complicate…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/25 02:50 AM
1

So most women would be fine with a sexless relationship just because they can technically get sex easily?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/25 03:12 AM
2

Most people get into relationships for a multitude of reasons, sex being one of the big ones for many men and women. Sex may not be important to some women, but they are a minority. How many women would even bother getting into relationships with men where there was no sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/25 01:14 AM
4

For most women it does matter. Most women will not be happy in a relationship where there's no sex or the sex is quite bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/25 12:04 AM
6

I don't think it's just a money thing. Middle class American has a lot of social and cultural connotations desired by these women.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/25 08:32 PM
7

Most guys I've known that have dated overseas has been pretty happy and successful with a couple of exceptions (eventual divorces). All nerdy dudes that struggled in the West (USA and Canada) and suddenly had long term success. Only common denominator is decent career which is not much valued here. I don't get all the skepticism about American/Canadian men doing well overseas, IME they continue to do well as long as they're "middle class" and not completely hideous.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/25 05:32 PM
1

Many women overseas are still socialized differently, they aren't living like they're in the early 20th century anymore but they aren't just Westerners with less money either.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/25 05:11 PM
2

The number of men for whom this is a hard rule is much smaller than for those for whom it's just a preference that's pretty easily bypassed if a woman shows interest, even here.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/25 03:03 AM
1

Submissive and less sexually experienced doesn't matter much for most men
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/25 09:52 PM
0

Social expectations in marriage isn't slavery nor was it really a necessity to partner up except for the financially desperate. The 1950's actually represented a notable increase in marriage rates (compared to the beginning of the 20th century) and a lower marriage age. Before there were generally a significant minority of women that married later (30's or even 40's) and some even not at all (albeit this was quite small minority for lifetime unmarried). These women survived just fine marrying wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 04:07 AM
1

Whether the human species needs to continue to grow in order to survive is a totally different conversation. It doesn't. Equilibrium or even a slow gradual decline in a healthy social environment would probably be fine. What's happening now is neither gradual nor are it's causes of declining fertility indicative of a healthy environment. And replacement levels obviously are calculated based on average. The fewer children had by other groups are not irrelevant and still contribute toward "replace…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 04:02 AM
1

Half those bitches were on amphetamines too and probably barbiturates as well. Drug use, both pharmaceutical and recreationally was far lower then. They were by all metrics much healthier (physically, socially, psychologically) than modern women (same for men). That lifestyle was also reserved for the white middle class and above. Housewives formed a significant majority of the married population.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 03:58 AM
0

That implies we can't really know anything concrete about the past which is of course quite silly. We know that they had much lower divorce rates, spent more time on domestic work, had lower n counts, married younger, had fewer psychological problems (no this is not just underdiagnoses), were more conservative, more likely to be family oriented etc. We also have people who still live in more "traditional" societies living now to compare against as well. There's quite a lot we can know or at leas…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 03:56 AM
1

Seems like the answer is obvious
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 10:17 PM
0

Sexual rates in the 1950's were significantly higher than preceding generations (as far as can be inferred) and comparable to modern rates. Average women then didn't have to be cajoled into having sex at least in the context of marriage. Indications are women were happy to have sex with their husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:41 PM
0

I guess not directly no. I'm simply saying that whatever hangups did exist it didn't stop people from having lots of sex, although perhaps not in the ways that interest you.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:36 PM
2

The assumption in your post is that thinking the 1950's would only be chosen due to romanticism and not actually being a better "deal" for some men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:33 PM
2

The 1950's are generally idealized because they were materially prosperous while still retaining an ordered and stable social paradigm. They're not traditional exactly but they represent a sort of fulcrum point between material modernism and social traditionalism.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:32 PM
-2

People in the 1950's probably had as much or more sex compared to the average person today (partly this is because of earlier and higher rates of marriage).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:29 PM
1

Women in the 1950's weren't domestic slaves.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:27 PM
–

1950's woman (with racism). Way better social and domestic orientation. There's not anything I would really be missing from modern women that I wanted except maybe lower expectations about going to church or something. does it mean that RP is better suited towards a time period that no longer exists? RP isn't "better suited" to the 1950's although some of the advice about womens preferences or behaviour is still going to be relevant in any time period. A lot of RP exists basically as a reaction …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 09:26 PM
-1

Chinas fertility rates are pretty in line with the rest of East Asias. It's likely they would have ended up in similar circumstances regardless. Note that the One Child Policy actually took place after a dramatic fall in fertility rates https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/12063/production/_104772837_china_birthrate-nc.png.webp Also note that chart is outdated and Chinas real fertility rate now is close to 1. In fact many provinces have South Korean level fertility rates. https://x.com/C…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 08:17 AM
2

Yes, and as those countries modernize, they all have birth rates that begin to fall dramatically. If anything, you prove the point. I'm confused about what your point is. It's certainly not economic constraints that are pulling the birth rates so low.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 08:12 AM
1

Do you have children? Because I find it's usually women who have never had kids and don't want them that typically think this way while women who have had kids usually roll their eyes at these kind of extremes where pregnancy takes on the role of some sinister disease or trauma (yes not all women and some really do regard it as the worse thing that's ever happened to them). Most women (excepting some groups) are with men that do help and take care of them during and after pregnancy, financially …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 08:06 AM
2

Having children AT ALL is essential, but the particular way those children are conceived and raised is unimportant to continuing the human species. Theoretically that's correct. In the real world however there's really only a few groups that reproduce above replacement rate under modern social and material conditions, they're almost all religious and traditionally structured (whether that be nuclear or multigenerational or otherwise). The rest is irrelevant because they do not actually produce c…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 07:51 AM
2

IQ is very good at predicting capability across a large range of cognitively intense fields. It's probably the most robust and well studied effect in psychology. I'd suggest if the psychologists you know regard it as a bad predictor of capability it's largely for ideological reasons rather than scientific ones. Sexism is not the patriarchy or necessarily an product of it. Biases can effect outcomes in a society without being part of a system. And men having larger tails in IQ doesn't mean men ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 05:08 PM
1

Ok sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 04:58 PM
–

Your implication that various studies about sexual abuse rates have been conducted with the assumption that women aren't sexual predators is wrong. There's extensive studies on step parents for instance and men consistently have far higher sexual abuse rates than women in the role of step parent. Generally in any environment men present a significantly higher danger of sexual abuse and this is usually reflected in studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 10:44 AM
–

It has been studied. Men consistently have much higher rates of abuse in almost any given environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 10:28 AM
2

A combination of CEO's being disproportionality from an older generation, male IQ tails, sexism, personality type gender associations etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 10:10 AM
4

who have no rights because they’re minors, Minors certainly have rights, they simply don't the same (greater) rights as adults.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 09:05 AM
1

Now. Look at who holds positions of power. In government. In powerful corporations. In an actual patriarchy women would not be allowed to be in those positions. Saying we live in a patriarchy because only 30% of congress is women or that women keep losing Presidential elections or whatever is simply wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 09:02 AM
4

In an actual patriarchy women would not be allowed to run for President period, much less hold positions like Senator, Judge, CEO etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:59 AM
1

Patriarchy is not just men with sexist views.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:55 AM
6

Neo-Liberalism is conservation of the status quo, and doesn't really seek to uppend existing insitutitions like capitalism or patriarchy. Neo liberalism is a capitalist oriented philosophy but it's not conservative at all. In fact it's quite radical in some respects. In neo liberalism the role of the state is not only to bring about "free market" reforms but also to maximize personal freedom, including and especially along gender and sexual lines. This means destruction of oppressive/regulative …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:52 AM
1

We see now that women generally outperform men in post secondary institutions (in certain disciplines) because they have been encouraged to attend, and fragile men are upset that women could possibly be better than them at something. While it may be that women are simply better at performing well in academic environments this view would be absolutely unacceptable in other contexts by many of the same people defending this particular outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:43 AM
–

There simply isn't an exact equivalency between the genders when it comes to sex. Men commit abuse at much higher rates than women and are probably more predatory overall, thus there will probably always be more stigma attached to them having sex with underage teens than vice versa. There's probably also some difference between how traumatic sex with adults can be between male and female teens although I don't think this makes it "ok" for older women in positions of power to have sex with teen b…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:39 AM
7

The "metoo" stuff is mostly irrelevant, including when men here say men stopped asking women out because of it. Men and women simply became less social overall which obviously had major effects on dating outcomes. MeToo never mattered much.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:28 AM
-3

Biden loved to sniff kids hair and was taking showers with his teen daughter, Bill Clinton was a sex pest and probably fucking teens with Epstein, Bush got a million+ people killed in just one of his wars, Hillary Clinton ran multiple intelligence operations with Obama that ended up destroying places like Libya etc. Sorry for your past but Trump isn't anymore "disturbing" than anyone else whos gotten into the Presidency and probably gotten less people killed than most of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:25 AM
1

What an incredibly broad and intangible mix of concepts and definitions. The point of defining "patriarchy" like this instead of the actual concrete system it historically was is to extend the life and purpose of certain ideological outlooks and beliefs. Academics and intelligentsia invest their life into studying and "fighting" patriarchy so as it receded from society they needed to define it more and more broadly until it encompassed anything related to gender, sexism, and social behaviour in …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 01:24 AM
1

the patriarchy is geriatric and power-hungry older people doing whatever allows them to keep their wealth and live as long as possible. That isn't patriarchy. That's simply the rich.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 01:18 AM
1

Patriarchy doesn't exist in modern Western society. Individual sexism or legacy effects of patriarchy do.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 01:16 AM
5

There's still a common perception that men are smarter than women despite the fact that women perform better in schools, are more likely to attend college, and (in modern societies) outperform men on IQ tests (this has emerged as a result of what's called the Flynn effect). Women do not outperform men in IQ tests. An "unpublished" study from more than a decade ago doesn't contradict hundreds of IQ/proxy IQ sources, many sourced from within the last decade.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 01:14 AM
2

Even after women could vote, the culture still heavily heavily promoted and favored male-led, heterosexual, married, Christian, child-bearing family units. "Child bearing family units" are the only way society perpetuates itself in a stable way. Everything else is purely theoretically or has already failed in practice. This is like blaming Darwinism for being unfair - it's simply the physical reality that either a paradigm is at least capable of reproducing itself at replacement or it disappears…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 01:11 AM
1

Women don't think that until men start complaining about how hard it is to date or womens standards or society being in a bad state or whatever. Then they absolutely will start asking men why they don't date single moms. It's ok to be an asexual monk or it's ok to have no standards and no criticisms. Wanting to date and having standards is what gets you criticized for being selfish by a lot of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/25 11:47 PM
7

Nice summary of the problem with average women
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/25 05:03 PM
1

As long as we've had marry-for-life monogamy, we've had this issue, this perspective that men want to obtain women for sex and women gatekeep sex with their icky "lack of consent" and "security in their own bodies", etc. Are you implying that sexual assault is a product of monogamy? Because we've been acting so unnaturally for so long, and our bodies know we are acting unnaturally, we feel weird. That weirdness makes its way into our media. Humans have a notable amount of evolutionary adaption f…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/25 08:32 AM
1

Does this historical record change the way people think about modern dating? The modern world is too radically different for it to have much relevance.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/25 07:24 AM
0

Why do you think women on average are more likely to swipe on men with no/short bios?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/25 07:29 PM
4

Attractive "good" LTR oriented men get paired up with attractive women and taken out of the dating pool quickly. Attractive men remaining in the dating pool aren't necessarily (and probably not) "bad" but they probably aren't going to be LTR oriented especially with average women. It doesn't really have anything to do with being attractive making people worse or better, just the reality of how the "market" works. I also don't understand the idea that there's no difference in treatment when you'r…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/25 07:04 PM
2

Most apps let you fill in common deal breakers like smoking/drinking/kids/job field etc which I do think is good to fill out. From the male perspective it's better to start a conversation because women are less likely to filter you for something minor once you've started talking. Women want to be able to filter as many men as quickly as possible but that's not necessarily helpful in starting a relationship. OLD by it's nature induces women to filter more stringently than they normally would.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 09:30 PM
5

5 dead average. Better hairstyle, more fit, contacts maybe, can easily hit 6 above average
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 06:56 PM
18

When that blog by a dating app developer was published a few months ago one of the biggest takeaways is that having a bio beyond a line or two actually hurts a guys chances to match. Photos are the qualifiers and bios are then used to disqualify guys who passed the looks test. So it doesn't really make sense to bother with a bio from the male perspective, better to match and start a conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 04:22 PM
3

Most men generally do read bios when matched. Finding a woman "truly attractive" doesn't matter much because the likelihood of matching is so low. What's the point of reading someone's bio when the chance of actually getting to talk to them is 1% or whatever?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 04:16 PM
2

Men envy other men that are substantially more sexually successful than themselves. The criminal part is extraneous.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 04:09 PM
3

Nuclear family still accurately describes a large amount of American, European, and now some Asian families though, it's not an outmoded term. In any case many of the effects of modernism are across family models and not specific to the nuclear family.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 02:53 AM
2

Again you're using the connotations associated with/conflated with "nuclear family" as the definition instead of the actual definition. Nuclear family does not mean people don't socialize and live near extended family. You're ascribing modern phenomenon (social atomization) to a family model far older than that. This is the same mistake Engels et al made in their original bad analysis and repeated over and over again by leftists. If you want to know the European family model was, it was very sim…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 01:56 AM
3

What are you disagreeing with? The nuclear family model has been around for many centuries in the British Isles, parts of Scandinavia/Germany/the low countries etc. The nuclear family simply means newly weds (or sometimes simply single men waiting to get married) went and built/bought their own dwelling separate from their parents (i.e. they did not generally live in multigenerational households) centered around the new parents as heads of the household and their immediate children (i.e. the nuc…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/25 01:03 AM
1

I largely agree that people have become focused on their partners as the center of all their socializing and should be involved more in social groups not dependent on their partners. I see many people, especially men, outright abandon their single friends when they get into relationships. This is usually because women want the guy to spend most of their time with them or doing things for them. Men need to put in more effort into their friendships honestly. Sure they do. But the social gap betwee…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 10:01 PM
3

The nuclear family is the traditional paradigm of family formation in much of Northern Europe and people in the 1950's were far more social than people today. What you're referring to is simply modernity and social atomization which has effected all patterns of family formation across the globe.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 09:54 PM
9

Generalizations are useful and necessary when discussing large groups. One can argue a generalization isn't consistent or widespread enough to be useful but this isn't the same as generalizations themselves not being useful.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 08:22 PM
4

Being sexually skilled only goes so far compensating for other things and visual stimulation is hugely important for a lot of people in enjoying sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 09:32 AM
1

I'd gladly take being an accountant over 90% of jobs even though I'm sure it's terribly boring.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 09:14 AM
1

Life B, mainly because the tradeoff of having lots of "success" early in life A isn't worth it for the suffering that comes later. I suspect you intended this as some sort of morality test of men but the reality is life B is a genetic dead end and quite depressing in it's own way. In a pure Darwinian sense Life A is a smashing success and Life B is a miserable failure. If one were to discard comfort as a factor and simply consider ones life "mattering" then Life A is the one that matters. I choo…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 09:12 AM
1

The average woman in the USA has a fat BMI but if you look at pictures of actual women with this BMI they don’t look like land whales. They look chubby to fat, it's just a matter of choosing flattering clothes that emphasize or deemphasize certain features (like plunging bust lines while concealing a gut etc). I find lots of these women attractive but it's quite silly to pretend like the average American woman isn't fat (like the average American man).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 08:54 AM
1

It's still extremely common for women to say they don't care about looks much. Part of this is sincere belief (usually not backed up by action), deflection because they themselves don't feel that attractive, or social posturing. This is still by far the most common answer if you ask the average woman. If you want to single out attractive college aged women or something then yes you can get lots of "honest" answers about wanting to fuck hot dudes or whatever. It's a really really insulated take t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 08:47 AM
5

It's an indictment of a persons observational skills if they're an adult and haven't recognized that some men are generally socially dominant and some men are generally socially timid. This is really all alpha and beta means and autistically attempting to disprove it by pointing out that socially dominant men don't walk into every environment and instantly become the top of the social hierarchy and power is quite silly.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/25 08:39 AM
0

Gay
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:22 AM
4

Thank you for your service
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:21 AM
3

I'm also suspicious of women who say they've never had a dick under eight inches. Aren't eight-inchers like 1 in 1,000? 4 in 1,000 yeah. Most women saying they've had multiple partners hit 8 inches are just taking a dudes bullshit at face value or overestimating or both. It's not uncommon to see women say they've seen 10 or 12 inch dicks, which basically don't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:20 AM
1

It's barely above average in the calcsd Western data set (59%)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:17 AM
1

Most likely because you can use the internet to order dick like it's door dash. Back in the day it was just luck of the draw. It's because of much higher exposure to porn/hyper sexualized pop culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:16 AM
2

Every woman who is above like 2/10 will get tons of opportunities on OLD.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:07 AM
1

The only genuine scam I can see in the way these apps work is the premium system, which is mostly catered towards the unattractive masses. Poor Billy gets no likes, and he thinks artificially planting himself in other people's feeds will suddenly make him likable. His ELO goes up by force, then it also goes down by force again, since women want nothing to do with him anyway, regardless of his monetary tricks. Chad already gets plenty of attention, so what is the point in buying premium? The app …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 09:02 AM
2

Lots of attractive women don't want to go to bars or clubs (or maybe they just don't want to date most men from there), don't have much exposure to men in their day to day life (i.e. socializing is girls brunch and pilates or something), and all the attractive men in their social circles or work are taken. I don't think apps are really as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Yes they have lopsided gender ratios but so do most cogender spaces (bars and clubs usually have the same ratios), yeah p…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 08:51 AM
1

It has way more to do with communication styles and emotional processing than gender. These things also correlate with gender. In my professional and personal experience that’s pretty evenly balanced across genders. Studies seem to consistently show different "listening styles" and responses by gender that are largely in line with the OP (i.e. women being more likely to listen and commiserate, men more likely to recommend solutions).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 08:28 AM
3

The leabian thing that has been debunked ? No I'm referring to DV rates against heterosexual men which are only a bit lower than among heterosexual women. And murder? Rapes? Because men do 98% of those Yes men are more violent in general (although if you want to talk about homicide than there are some groups of women with higher homicide rates than other groups of men). However this doesn't necessarily mean (and in fact most likely doesn't) that women aren't consistently having issues with anger…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 08:25 AM
5

Nope, they get diagnosed more because they actually care to seek for help There's no evidence this is true despite being repeated often. Studies consistently show women overall simply have higher rates of occurrences of mental illness, especially depression and common personality disorders, even controlling for factors like being more likely to seek diagnosis/treatment. instead of doing something stupid Like attempting suicide? Again women attempt suicide more often than men probably even accoun…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 08:11 AM
3

Everything this OP posts is bait yes
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 02:37 AM
1

Why is the idea that it's gendered stupid if the average in approaches is significantly different between genders? I agree both are needed at different times by both genders but that doesn't preclude obvious gendered preferences in approaches
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 02:36 AM
2

Is there any evidence that would be better for women and not just more convenient? There's no particular reason to think that's a healthier approach.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 02:32 AM
6

Tons of women have anger issues. Large reason why domestic violence rates among women are comparable to men's rates despite hormonal and strength differences.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 02:31 AM
1

The majority of them are perfectly normal
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 02:29 AM
7

Women have notably higher rates of mental illness and more suicide attempts - men just succeed at killing themselves at a much higher rate during suicide attempts.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 02:28 AM
7

Women will contort to any length to demonize "nice guys". It's fine to say you just think they're losers and you're not attracted to them or whatever. Most nice guys are just dudes who were probably just in the friendzone/orbiters or the guys who seemed nice but never got dates in your friend group etc. Somehow every "nice guy" is actually a stalker or behind some nefarious plot to rug pull you and "force" you on a date. Or maybe they're (secretly?) just as bad as the "bad boys" but hey at least…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 09:14 AM
2

One of the factors is cuz of an uncertain economy and increasingly expensive housing and food prices make the ability to financially provide for a family elusive for many men. I mean that's a factor sure, but it's not actually as significant as people like to think. It's "easier" in some ways to conceive of material solutions than solutions for mass societal social malformation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 07:50 AM
5

One is more likely to do so than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 07:48 AM
8

So does everyone deserve a cookie for being less shity than some other person? Or subjecting fewer people to their shitty behavior? Ideally you want a society that rewards pro social behaviour in whatever capacity yes
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 07:46 AM
–

About 14% of women under 40 attend church weekly with regularity in the US and not all of them will be "traditional" either (i.e. it's common for single moms in their 30's to take their kids to church regularly when they never went in their 20's). Probably closer to 20-25% of women willing to fit into a traditional role. For the right man of course. As in will be a stay at home mom? Yeah probably. Will they be traditionally feminine and be happy with a traditional patriarchal husband wife setup …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 07:44 AM
–

Believe it or not there are plenty of traditional women in the US/West, but they probably won’t be at the club in Miami or on Bumble. No, there aren't. Outside of serious religious communities they're quite rare. 10% of Western women in the dating age range maybe if we're being quite generous.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 01:37 AM
–

This perspective gets repeated a lot but I don't think it's quite correct. Western women aren't really worried about "passport bros" degrading their value via competition with the third world or whatever. All of them will still have no problems getting dates regardless of what passport bros do. A lot of their disdain comes from a) seeing passport bros as losers (exceptions are guys that are obviously very good looking or successful that end up with a foreign partner) and women really don't like …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/25 01:31 AM
14

Basically none of the OP is relevant for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 06:40 AM
6

Midway through college isn't really a latebloomer, that's where a lot of people start socializing romantically.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 06:40 AM
29

A lot of RP advice is basically for men who weren't successful in the past, including in their teen years. There are two primary groups of men that benefit from RP 1) "blue pilled" men that get burned in bad relationships 2) poorly socialized men that need help understanding women (i.e. the guys you're talking about in the OP). RP isn't underestimating the importance of early experience, in large part it's there exactly to help men who "missed out" on that experience compensate by giving them ad…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 06:35 AM
2

It varies a bit depending on which pollster you use but this purposefully "oversamples" minority voters and thus provides a probably better result for Asians. https://2024electionpoll.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/9.-AAPI-crosstab.pdf 58% Asian men vs 64% Asian women voted for Harris.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 09:46 PM
9

I think I saw a stat that said 1 in 4 men have no close friends. That’s just not the case for us, there’s no “loneliness epidemic” for us. It makes sense that we subconsciously value social skills in men! Women either report similar or higher rates of loneliness than men despite having somewhat larger social circles, probably because they desire more socialization than men. Men spend only slightly less time per week socializing than women. The social gap between men and women is actually much sm…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 07:43 AM
1

Liberal women tend to me more attractive than conservative women. What evidence do you have for this? Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29355104/ Most young women are liberal if not communist, and are very much more attractive than conservative women. Most young women are not communist or even understand …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 07:24 AM
2

The exit polls I saw show that Asian women voted democrat at higher rates than Asian men?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 07:19 AM
2

Trump received the slight majority of the white women's vote (who most conservative men prefer to date). The older and more conservative generations are much more white. If you're looking at white women in the usual dating age ranges they're more liberal.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 07:19 AM
-1

lol @ women here blaming this type of shit on red pill. Honestly curious if people are aware that media has existed before the internet and that these sort of sentiments are not actually new, these are views which have existed historically and are just being promulgated via modern media methods.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 03:18 AM
1

And this is why I say that focusing on these is the ultimate cope, because it tells me that you, as a person view yourself as nothing outside of your wealth and ability to gather luxury materials. You see this all the time; the expensive dates, the emphasis on being rich and the idea of ‘a man peaks in his 50s’ - all of this, is, quite frankly cope - but not for being ugly, I wanted to be clear, this is not where I’m going - but rather, its cope for the simple fact that you are nothing outside o…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 03:11 AM
23

Social status is incredibly important to women. Being with a guy who is socially awkward implies she herself has low social status and makes it more likely she will be socially excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/25 03:05 AM
1

Interesting approach to a sub about dating
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 03:59 AM
0

Largely correct but the flip side of this is women can dress modestly and still easily be successful by simply being more outgoing and/or showing more signs of interest. Dressing more revealingly is simply the more passive/easier avenue.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 03:57 AM
1

I think most men prefer a balance between modesty and revealing clothes when dating - a dress that can accentuate curves without being too tight etc. Very modest clothing is something that's only relevant to the religious communities. Revealing and/or suggestive clothing will easily net someone the most male attention though. But that's largely impulsive lust which is not what most women are looking for. However the "catch" to this is that women have enough power in dating that they can usually …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 03:55 AM
2

The more "shocking" statistic is that the majority of women under 50 have tattoos. It is completely illogical to frame tattoos as “masculine,” much less mutually exclusive with “being in touch with feelings.” Historically tattoos were largely something associated strongly with men, military service, and criminality they were definitely a symbolically masculine totem beforehand. The culture hasn't quite caught up to the reality of tattoos becoming so widespread and even more common with women tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 03:42 AM
1

Nothing makes redditors angrier than stereotypes. You're never going to get a useful answer out of them if you in any way link appearance and behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 03:37 AM
2

Yes this is actual answer https://www.americansurveycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/SV15g-young-women-are-much-more-liberal-than-young-men.png Younger (sub 40) women have moved much further left than men who have been basically static. Thus there's a lot of conservative men that basically have to date liberal women or give up altogether .
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 01:50 AM
1

Probably to some extent yes, but a major problem for these women is also just they simply engage with men much less and put themselves out there less. Naturally women that are on OLD or making obvious signs of interest in group spaces or whatever are going to have a much easier time getting dates regardless of how modest or immodest they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 01:47 AM
5

Everything in your op hinges on the idea that dating would improve and become more "diversified" in choice if everyone was themselves and that somehow you're also going to get everyone else to agree to this while being cognizant of media idealizations being fake. Obviously that's never going to happen so the idea is pretty much irrelevant. But let's say you could get everyone to act that way and media idealizations just stopped existing somehow. Would the dating market then improve for "non idea…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 01:39 AM
2

Lots of stable and "sane" women will fuck bad boys in the right circumstances. Much more rare they have a relationship with, at least past college age.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/25 03:25 AM
–

I find it interesting that the women are told to select from shapeless 3D cylinder computer models. Doesn't really strike me as accurate. This is actually an improvement over previous studies, or much more commonly, simple surveys (which largely replicate this range of size preferences) which lack size reference objects. People, and more so women, have poor size recollection or estimation without a reference object. Ask 5 different women what six inches looks like and you'll probably get 5 diffe…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 10:25 PM
3

TL;DR The flaw is in how dating platforms are designed. The online dating companies remove, or restrict room for users to display, mental and emotional traits and instead highlight looks. Women have nothing else to go off of. There's no evidence more extensive profiles to display these traits benefit men in matchmaking. In fact they may actually harm mens chances https://blog.luap.info/what-really-happens-inside-a-dating-app.html Having a profile (Other information than pictures) doesn't impact …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 06:41 PM
–

Uh huh. So, in short, women are just lying? Well basically yes. People will be dishonest about many topics under social pressure in casual discussion. In this case the social pressure is to claim no preference. Where are these studies? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC33342/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4558040/
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 06:32 PM
2

No, it isn't. Statistically it is, there's nothing to really argue here except whether you're statistically literate or not. The rate of correlation is extremely high for social sciences. See? Again this is basically whether you understand the stats or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 06:24 PM
2

I literally did though. Let’s look at black people - for example. The crimes they commit is far more correlated with socioeconomic status rather than simply just being black No, not really. Being black is actually MORE correlated with crime rates than SES. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GYVgTGqXYAQBiUH?format=jpg&name=medium however, for men who stalk or commit sexual crimes, the correlation is far less visible and men in all cultures, socioeconomic statuses and parts of world have shown this behav…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 06:23 PM
–

Women themselves consistently show preferences in penis size in studies. Women have a strong aversion to stating a preference when asked by individual men - likely due to social conditioning. From a physical biological perspective it's very clear that large penises can more consistently stimulate intravaginal erogenous zones. Of course if a vagina is too small/tight this is irrelevant since the size difference will cause discomfort, but this seems to be a definitive minority of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 05:31 AM
2

in other words, violent, day to day crime is more often related to socioeconomic status first and foremost. It's actually quite a strong predictor of crime for some groups, even stronger than SES in some cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 05:17 AM
3

There's a difference between being aware and taking reasonable precautions around certain potentially dangerous situations and the paranoia and anxiety that manifests in a notable amount of women. I don't take womens fear of men personally, it's reasonable to a degree and I would actually be worried about women that lack some sense of caution around men in certain situations. But then we see it can go too far and ends up in a sort of self justifying asocialness or disgust with men. Not really ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 05:15 AM
5

Men overwhelmingly commit more violence across all cultures, countries, socioeconomic boundaries, etc. The same is not true of race. It more or less is though. There is a pretty consistent average of which groups commit the most crime across a very large number of countries. There are exceptions but mostly in small areas that prove the rule. Nor is it even true that men necessarily commit more violent crime in every category - black women in the US for instance are more likely to commit homicide…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 05:10 AM
3

It's basically irrelevant and post facto to the obesity epidemic (i.e. the obesity rate would be just as high without it) but nevertheless I have no problem with people criticizing it because it's pushing acceptance of conditions that are physically harmful to people and probably psychologically as well. It's not something that should be normalized regardless of any social connotations about being attractive. Government lied about nutrition for decades (food pyramid). I don't see anything partic…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 04:58 AM
3

Because they can. And it works. Plenty of "thick" women can get fit men to fuck them/date them for a while. Much more rare for long term stable relationship to develop however.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:59 PM
1

It's pretty pointless to ask this question because women are not very good (or at least worse than men) at accurately guessing sizes, especially when a lot of it is going relative to their personal experience or using porn as a reference. If a woman has had 3 partners with 4" dicks then the dude with a 6.5" dick will seem huge - conversely if she's used to porn dicks/camera tricks then a 7" dick might seem "average". In reality a big dick makes sex better for most women - physically it's more st…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:55 PM
1

Saying it makes no difference in sex or that they have no preference. The former is simply not physically true and the latter would make them extreme outliers as a group (although to be fair this forum is filled with female weirdos).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:40 PM
3

So if a man wants to be able to hit the back of a woman’s Posterior Fornix, from any angle, in any position, without slipping out easily or otherwise causing a distraction/need to focus extra instead of just enjoying the fun, he needs a penis of about 8-10”… I agree with most of your post but if a woman need a 10" penis to have a spot hit she's out of luck- no such penises exist (or if they do then you can count on your hands the number of men with one). The most extreme 0.001% examples barely m…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:36 PM
2

This is an anonymous internet message board to talk about dating and sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:33 PM
2

Yes he's a gross fetishist. He posted about his ex wife being like 300+ lbs or something. Difference between being attracted to "curvy thick" women and only going for women on that end of the scale.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:26 PM
1

You should always be putting in some effort with your partner if you're interested in keeping them and committed to them. I don't think "never stop dating" is good terminology for this however. Dating phases aren't really sustainable long term, it's too high of an intensity usually (not applicable to all relationships obviously, especially those that just "happen" after spending time together). You still need to flirt with your partner, take them out at least a few times a month, plan special di…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 10:18 PM
–

No it doesn't
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 09:05 PM
–

It's not about body count self esteem, it's that older male virgins are perceived as losesr and by associating with him it implies she's also a loser. Most women are terrified of being seen as having low social value, even transitively
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 07:12 PM
1

There doesn't seem to be much evidence it actually had much impact in more modern studies
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/25 08:09 PM
1

That doesn't mean you can make assumptions about previous conditions.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/25 08:07 PM
-2

It shocks you to see what's underneath
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/25 02:22 AM
2

Another thread where the OP decides he knows what "the red pill" is, actual RP men tell him what it actually is, link him to material for it, he refuses to believe or engage with any of them. Why are 70%+ of the people who post threads about RP like this?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/25 06:45 PM
–

If one factor is roughly equal (i.e. looks) such that a second factor (i.e. personality) is the deciding factor in choice, it doesn't tell you anything about whether the 2nd factor is actually more important than the first; in real world studies looks consistently have the largest weight in partner choice for both sexes.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 07:00 PM
1

I'm not saying human beings were "meant" to do anything. That's simply what happens without either sufficiently complex social systems to control mating or technology to control fertility
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 06:54 PM
1

From an evolutionary standpoint people had kids with the first or maybe second person they fucked, probably at a relatively young age. They were socializing with each other but not in the way modern people do.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 10:11 AM
2

You can make observations about average heterosexual opposite gender group behaviour that covers enough of them to be generally useful insights in predicting their behaviour. It doesn't need to be true for everyone in that group to be useful, it just needs to be true often enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 10:08 AM
2

Of two equally hot persons, people choose the better personality. So personality > looks. This is a really basic logic failure I see repeated over and over again on this subreddit
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 08:45 AM
0

It's not uncommon for some women here to talk about how having kids around 40 actually isn't a big deal and it happens all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 11:09 PM
1

Submissive Male. She Comes First. Make Women Hairy Again!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 11:07 PM
2

The biggest example to me is that the majority of men on this sub say that women above 30 or even 25 are too old to date The majority of men in this sub don't say that. Most men here and IRL are open to dating their age + a few years or younger and a good portion are open to dating older women as well. You're projecting what a handful of men say here to the entire sub. and yet in the same breath complain how no women will date them. This is conflating a lot of different men with guys on the extr…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 11:03 PM
1

Traditional heterosexuality is still the only system producing replacement fertility. The highly religious will eventually replace modern heterosexuality (including feminism). Modern heterosexuality is undergoing collapse and replacement, traditional heterosexuality is still here just a smaller percentage of the population for now. What do you think is the alternative?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 05:52 PM
1

Heterosexuality isn't sustainable under modern conditions, that's correct. That's why birth rates have or will fall below replacement everywhere in the world. However heterosexuality under traditional societal is the only sustainable system. It's the only system that produces children and above replacement TFR. Almost every other system fails this basic requirement (the other being heterosexuality under modern systems designed around family formation). Homosexuality, transsexuality, or whatever …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 07:53 AM
4

Yes I'm old enough to remember when his physique shift in Spiderman was considered impressive. Now people would probably just laugh.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 10:25 PM
5

I'm not really sure what you're arguing. Yes Americans got fatter. Ideal fitness does not refer to what shape the average guy is actually in, it refers to what fitness level he would need to reach to be most attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 10:21 PM
9

The standards of what is considered "fit" by the average person has also risen. While you had dudes like Arnold or Stallone in the 80's they were understood as generally over the top extremes of masculinity. Instagram and marvel movies did a lot to raise expectations of what fitness for an average guy ideally is, by both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 08:28 AM
8

There's way more men taking steroids and following BB type workouts and diets than ever before. There's a strong bifurcating trend between the population in general getting fatter and the tail end of very fit men getting larger.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 08:24 AM
7

Obesity increase as people age, but obesity rates also increase among the young by generation. 20 year olds today are more obese than 20 year olds in 2000.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 08:23 AM
4

There's definitely a type of women that go for that, it's just much niche than "fitness model" look.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 08:22 AM
6

If you are a shredded, athletic, attractive man. Do you believe you would not have major success on Tinder today? I've been 10-12% bodyfat @ 200lbs 6'2 and ~20% bodyfat @ 225lbs "dad bod". Honestly very little difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 08:21 AM
9

I'd argue that women are not misguided when they are stating that the average man is unatractive to them, and that women's attraction woes come from a legitimate deficiency. My thesis is that modern society has uniquely deteriorated men's attractiveness to a significant degree. I agree that if you raised the attractiveness of the average male in society it would increase social-sexual engagement by women - however I don't think it would be by very much. Women consistently rate men much lower in …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 08:15 AM
–

Well birds of a feather... I'd say there's a handful of women that are casual commenters that seem like they're probably fairly chill and easy going IRL.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 08:45 PM
–

No, they show physical attractiveness has a significantly higher weight in mate choice than personality across studies i.e. women have a preference for looks over personality (like men) when choosing a partner. It's explicitly NOT a "looks win when personality is equal" it's "looks win over personality".
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 08:40 PM
–

Most of the women here have quite bad personalities as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 08:29 PM
–

Nowhere does any of it say “women only care about personality” or “women care about personality over looks.” One of the studies quite literally says this and the others make this inference obvious
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 08:27 PM
–

I also think one reason why ppl get stuck on sexless/loveless marriages is because women dont choose a man shes physically atttacted to, she chooses the best man from the men that pursue her. The number of men that are notably physically attractive to women is simply far too small for that to be viable for a lot of women. Marrying the "hot guy" is not realistic if only 5% of the male population falls into that category and you're an average woman. Studies consistently show that women consider th…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 08:25 PM
17

A lot of the dichotomy probably comes the type of women that post in TwoXChromosomes vs average women. The type of women that post there are likely to be more anxious, sexually inhibited, and hold negative views of men in general. I'm fairly certain a significant percent of twox were not even born women as well despite the name. In the general population it's just straightforward pretense vs desire. Women asking men to do "degrading"/rough things with them seems about as common as men asking to …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 07:43 AM
3

People don't like whiners yes. I certainly don't like being around mopey guys (or girls). But there's a distinction between saying how something is and just whining. The former often gets conflated with the latter when it's convenient for people who don't like hearing about life being unfair in whatever way or if offends their notions about what is fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 07:29 AM
4

A number of recent adaptions are from within the last 10000 years. Evolution can happen extremely quickly given the right circumstances
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/25 03:35 PM
0

Just seems like you have a low disgust tolerance for certain aspects of sex Nothing wrong with that, but I don't think that translates into being degrading from other people's views.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/25 03:20 AM
1

Seems like a fair opinion I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/25 03:18 AM
-1

Sexual hangups aren't uncommon among the general population
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 04:15 PM
2

Well it is pretty gay
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 04:15 PM
2

I actually agree with the OP blowjobs don't feel as good as the popular perception, especially "average" ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 04:13 PM
0

I enjoy giving oral, seeing her pussy up close, getting her juice on my face etc. I imagine for women that enjoy giving oral it's similar. Is that degrading? Well maybe but it's really not that big a deal to get off on some level of dominance or even degradation to a degree as long as the relationship is otherwise healthy. Mostly sounds like you have a pretty strong disgust reflex, at least when it comes to dicks (I guess not pussy?), which is understandable but not everybody does to that level.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 04:05 PM
0

I don't care that much about bodycount but the mindset lots of people have about "not caring" what their partner did previously is rather strange to me and I suspect false in a lot of cases. You wouldn't care if your partner cheated with multiple married people before? You wouldn't care if your partner used to fuck prostitutes? You wouldn't care if your partner just disappeared in the middle of the night leaving their previous partners holding a lease or mortgage? I can't help but think either t…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 09:50 PM
2

I think it actually matters very little. Most men will either get laid or not based on how socially successful and/or good looking they are. A guy that is gregarious and good looking can be picky about bodycounts and have no issues. A guy that is average looking and introverted can have no worries about bodycounts and never get laid. There's probably some correlation between bodycount anxiety and likelihood of getting laid but probably much less so than other things.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 09:45 PM
-1

Men and women are attracted to different things. It's not really women's fault that women are attracted to men who push themselves constantly, nor is it men's fault that they're attracted to women focused on "preserving" their feminity. But RP advice for women is much more focused on attracting a certain type of man, women don't need any advice to attract partners in general like men do. If you're not after a "top" RP guy then this is all irrelevant. It's not surprising most women reject it anym…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 06:30 PM
7

Only idiots aren't attracted to fat women?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 04:07 PM
–

"Natural state" means nothing here. The human population has been expanding significantly since the 16th century and massively in the last 200 years. We haven't been "close to the replacement rate" for centuries. Appeals to nature in a highly complex civilization are nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 08:22 PM
–

I have no idea what this line of thinking hopes will happen when the population starts growing again under the religious right. There is no permanent solution to environmental pressures from humanity. It can be addressed now or later, there's no "the human population is now 300 million forever" stability point.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 08:16 PM
–

"should be" means nothing in a world where people get desperate to maintain their material standards of living. It's really crazy how naive this degrowth stuff is.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 08:11 PM
–

Religious social conservatives groups are the only ones with positive birth rates. I already pointed out in this same thread "conservative countries" are also undergoing fertility collapse. Come on now, at least do research before spelling off I get tired of reading shit like this from people who put no effort into understanding things.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 08:10 PM
–

In Euro nations with very generous welfare states, extended maternal/paternal leave, subsidized childcare etc they have lower birth rates than almost anywhere in the world, including the US. Direct payment schemes to mothers also do basically nothing. You could redistribute the wealth of the 500 wealthiest people to parents within their respective nations and it would barely make a difference in fertility. Social collapse can't be fixed by throwing more money at it, it doesn't work in the real w…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 08:07 PM
1

Why would people become poorer? A return to local businesses would put more money in the average persons hands instead of corporations. The people getting wealthiest from automation are the people who need it the least. When energy costs go up or labour inputs increase less surplus value is created which generally means people become poorer. Possibly this is preferable in some ways to the modern economic paradigm but there's a lot that depends on that surplus value that people don't give up so e…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 07:47 AM
2

Always get a laugh at how predictable women downvotes are in these type of threads.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 07:21 AM
0

If people becoming poorer and regression in technological capability/competence isn't a problem or a "real practical issue" then I guess there's really not much else to say. Although just slow regression is the "good" outcome of collapse - the bad outcome is something like the Western Roman Empire. But I don't think average people really share your view. Ask most people if they're going to be comfortable dropping their standards of living at least somewhat significantly and they won't be agreeab…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 07:17 AM
-2

So tell me: where is the English Taliban? If they can't thrive in these conditions, how is the West going to be "taken over" culturally? Do the guys that raped thousands of young white women count?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 07:10 AM
2

A very optimistic chart given fertility rate changes and one that totally elides how top heavy and unstable this demographic balance is.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:53 AM
0

Yes. But that's basically irrelevant to the problems of modern society.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:50 AM
-1

Fertility collapse is not due to global warming, resource constraint, or some other reactive environmental pressure. It's due to unsustainable social conditions (which are inexorably tied to material abundance). We will grow again under a socially conservative and probably poorer society. Inexplicably this seems to be the path liberal women keep choosing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:49 AM
0

The collapse in complexity is followed by adaption. The "adaption" part is just one where there's probably a lot less surplus value and high tech modernity around. I don't think most people really want that outcome though, they want current society with half the population or something. But they almost definitely aren't getting that. If we take the average Western liberal (i.e. the overwhelming majority of people, including "conservatives") and dump them into such an environment they will not be…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:44 AM
0

Do you believe that continuously decreasing fertility, well below replacement levels, constitutes stability?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:59 AM
-1

It very much can and it is doing it. The reproduction within birthrates is normal and expected. There are multiple things that influence this, and we are now have a perfect storm where we can see some very noticeable differences. Modern birthrates are completely anomalous in a healthy society compared to any point in human history. They are lower than in any historical war or economic depression. Perhaps if you went to the most severe years of the black plague you could find something comparable…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:57 AM
6

Ok. Most men and women who reached adulthood had kids throughout history.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:25 AM
-1

A society that can't sustain itself in basic ways like reproduction is not a stable one. That's like thinking your bank account is stable when you spend more than you take in because you still have money in it right now.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:24 AM
1

Well obviously it's not going to decrease to 0. However it's basically been a linearly decreasing line for over 200 years (in the US at least) with the single exception of the "baby boom" (which is actually a quite small perturbation on the line and and more like a correction of the Great Depression fertility gap). More to the point though even in countries where it's considered a major crises and increasing amounts of value are inputted into fertility subsidization (i.e. the welfare state, pay …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:21 AM
1

You're explaining the utility value of kids and yes some people were thinking along economic lines when having them. However again consider that the only real alternative to not having kids was abstinence. How many people were really capable of that? How many peasants were thinking "I'll have sex because I want another farm worker in a decade and I'll hope it's a boy" and not just "I want to fuck my wife"? or alternatively "I'll stop having sex since I can't afford more kids".
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:12 AM
5

Sure. In fact managing population growth to be near equilibrium or even decreasing very slowly is reasonable. Very low and still constantly decreasing fertility rates though is something else and I doubt very much the type of people who support it understand what sort of society they're likely to end up with.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:06 AM
1

Supply/Demand curve will take care of reaching an equilibrium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand You think people will start having kids again because of...demand? I guess when kids become "profitable" again maybe, but that's a post collapse scenario basically. Also, don't write off tech, google artificial womb. Such technology is decades away and morally questionable if the purpose is to substantially raise birth rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 02:02 AM
-2

In simplified systems maybe. In complex societies where resource processing and utilization is a complex process relying on systems of scale and assumptions of ROI that's a poor assumption.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:58 AM
-6

That's basically totally irrelevant to the birth rate and the point in the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:55 AM
2

Prostitutes take care of the sex part. Other parties will address the procreation part. Who? Are you implying there's masses of women waiting to take jobs having kids over and over again?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:52 AM
10

It’s not going to cause civilizational collapse. What do you think the outcome of constantly decreasing birth rates is? If it's not collapse then surely it's replacement?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:50 AM
1

There's a lot of assumptions there that can backfire. A healthy robust modern state is a much better environmental steward than a desperate immiserated one. People really underestimate how much of the technocratic class and modernism in general is dependent on surplus value sustaining it via growth. Take that away and people will increasingly become reliant on the most economical and technologically simplified solutions - like burning tons of coal instead of relying on complex supply chains for …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:45 AM
8

The vast majority of people throughout history had kids simply because they had sex and kids were the result. They weren't making utilitarian value judgements (well maybe they were but mostly about whether to leave the kid out in the elements or not rather than having them in the first place). The historical alternative to not having kids was lifelong abstinence.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:33 AM
7

Prostitutes do not raise the birth rate and they certainly don't lead to healthy family formation.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:30 AM
-3

As you say those things will "raise birth rates a little" i.e. they're not actually effective because they barely make a difference. One of the frustrating things about this discussion is that people always fall back on subsidization of childcare etc or even just paying women straight cash. But those things don't work, they already exist/have been tried in the real world and the result is fertility rates just continuously decrease.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:25 AM
0

There's a lot of problems with a shrinking population beyond just paying for elderly care.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:19 AM
33

Originally, humans lived in polyamourous hunter-gatherer societies. (Circa 10,000 BC) There was no concept of marriage or a nuclear family. It was a matriarchal society because few if any of the children in the village knew who their fathers were. Hence, the family bonded around the mother, who was the head of the household. Even the Cherokees, up until European contact, had a matriarchal society where each female head of household would elect a male chieftain who would conduct military matters.…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 01:12 AM
–

The only major change in preference porn made for me was becoming more attracted to "thick" women. Otherwise it's been mostly irrelevant to my view of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:58 AM
–

Based
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:57 AM
–

RP men are almost uniformly conservative and religious No, they aren't. and the law records how conservative and religious men behave, and they are disproportionately perverse. Also not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:57 AM
2

Making small talk with someone on a flight is a bit different from approaching someone to chat at the gym.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:54 AM
12

Did she give any indication she wanted a guy to approach her? Did she start conversations with any of them in a warm way? Or at least smiling and eye contact? I'm not going to ask women out at the gym unless they make it pretty clear they want to be approached. I assume women don't want me to approach them if they're just there doing their routine. If a woman is just showing up at the gym waiting for guys to come hit on her without at least giving some hints then she's pretty clueless herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:51 AM
–

I'm not sure what this is supposed to accomplish really - it's unlikely to result in better socialized or more successful kids. If you lean more into something you get the same result - which currently is lots of kids with poor social-romantic and psychological life outcomes in general. I'm not even sure how you implement the type of communal child raising you're suggesting without basically copying kibbutz type models (which had poor results hence it became very marginal). holding parents accou…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:47 AM
4

I doubt you're hearing that from more than a couple of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/25 06:37 AM
–

not really, they have lower overall socialization markers, especially romantic ones, than millennials. It would also break 70 years of trends if they had the same instead of lower marriage rates than millennials. What are you looking at that makes you think otherwise?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 10:47 PM
–

Every generation following baby boomers has married at lower rates and at older ages than the preceding one, so we should expect the same to be true for zoomers (i.e. they will have a lower marriage rate than millennials). Given all existing known social trends for zoomers this is very likely to be the outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 10:35 PM
–

By that definition everyone has lived through communal childcare via schooling. But I'm not really sure what the point of this discussion is if you can't differentiate between different models of communal child care.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 10:25 PM
–

I guess I should have said will probably not be
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 10:23 PM
–

If you mean in the historical sense in villages where usually related people helped raise children yes, that's the normal historical mode of child rearing which disappeared following mass urbanization. It can't really be recreated at this point without massive societal restructuring. Communal child care in the modern sense is something quite different and has never been very successful in 20th century implementations.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 10:19 PM
–

Clan patriarchs/nobility being typically relatively closely related and having more wives, higher chances of children living, conquest replacing patriarch lineages etc. Humans have less diverse male ancestral DNA primarily because elite men are so much more successful in spreading/sustaining their genetic lines. There's also direct studies on female/male reproduction ratios and Eurasia is around 1.2 (that is women are only 20% more reproductively successful) going back around 600 generations (an…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 10:08 PM
–

Most people are married in their 30s. Only barely for Millenials and probably not true for zoomers
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:50 PM
–

I think the way of the future is more communal-childcare This has been tried multiple times. It's never been very successful or self sustaining.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:47 PM
–

That article has been posted many times here and is a terrible interpretation of the actual data (it mistakes lower male diversity inheritance to mean most men didn't reproduce when there are multiple other more plausible explanations).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:46 PM
–

our dating market has regressed to the neolithic age when only 10-20ish percent of men spread their genes There's 0 evidence for this and substantial reasons to believe most adult men have always reproduced.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:45 PM
–

No idea how you're trying to fit those analogies in
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:43 PM
–

Based on nothing except it conveniently allows apathy about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:42 PM
–

Uzbekistans birth rate is declining, it's just not below replacement yet. Most of the globe is already below replacement level and the parts that aren't will be within a decade or two (including Sub Saharan Africa). And there's not known bottom to how low birth rates will go. They continue to decline even when reaching catastrophic numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:41 PM
–

For most of human history, we didn't tend to pair up based on romantic free will - this is a modern, Western invention. There's no evidence of this. Most people almost certainly were pairing up based on desire. At the same time, if you ask around (or look around) the older generation's couples, what percentage would you say are in healthy, happy relationships? When i've polled my peer group, they say something between 10% and 20%. These people are happier, healthier, and have strong relationship…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 09:37 PM
6

I don't think most people consider average experiences of others that much. And no I wouldn't say that viewpoint is anywhere near average either.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 06:42 PM
4

Yes, although I'm probably not average in that regard
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 06:25 PM
3

No I suppose not but I was only speaking about understanding average romantic-sexual experiences, not in general life.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 05:28 PM
34

Those are mostly the women that I date and fuck so I suppose so. Women's experiences are much less stratified than men's. The decline from being able to easily get dates to unfuckable loser is far more gradual and tail ended with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 05:01 PM
0

This isn't an effect of patriarchy
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:31 PM
74

People are simply much less social in general, both men and women. But that's a bigger problem and somewhat more common for the former
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:29 PM
83

I think you're greatly overestimating how many women have any idea (or care) about the experiences of average/outside the top 30% men. Most women are clueless about average male experience and don't want to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:28 PM
2

"Soft" guys are mostly the ones sought after by teens/young women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:22 PM
2

In an large scale industrial war none of that matters much vs having men in boots. Ukraine is the model, all men are useful and necessary - fat, old, soft, whatever, they will be fighting.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:19 PM
2

Perhaps but modern society is collapsing socially and demographically; women mostly do not seem interested in or capable of saving it. "The best losers"
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:15 PM
1

Yeah most of this is explained by greater male variability. Women may be better socially on average but clustered around an average is not necessarily a good place to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/25 04:11 PM
–

That is correlation, not causation. They also report lower levels of happiness the more global average temperatures increase and the higher the price of bitcoin is. Social structure is far stronger as both correlative and causative factors in determining happiness levels and social outcomes than whatever arbitrary factors. Do you honestly think such major social factors are basically unrelated to social and psychological outcomes? Yes, left wing people are more depressed on average. No wonder, w…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 06:25 PM
–

Therapy probably has about the same level of efficacy in general yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 10:06 AM
–

Therapy as a replacement for traditional social structures like religion or the roles of family/older women in guidance is a fairly obvious parallel that's been observed by a large number of people much smarter than anyone posting here.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 10:06 AM
–

Why would you think feminists/women would be happier in a traditional system from religion? Because they self report lower levels of happiness as they drift further from traditional structures over time. And the more "liberated" a woman is along this axis the greater her likelihood of mental illness, depression, and drug dependency. The same is true for men. People assume modernism makes people happier because it's ideologically convenient to do so, rather than examining the actual outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 10:01 AM
1

Ranking people along some axis doesn't imply they're just a data point. It's quite possible to order people based on whatever criteria and not think that's some totalizing quality. I think this is moreso a viewpoint of people who are uncomfortable with the idea of hierarchy or of limited imagination.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 09:36 AM
2

-Rank everything and everyone, especially other men Why is this bad?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/25 04:27 PM
4

Based on what?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/25 03:51 AM
4

Exceptions are still broadly supported by Republicans and most states that have bans have exceptions
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/25 03:50 AM
3

The West hasn't been like that since Christianity and perhaps not before that depending on the place and time. There's nothing to revert to. Byzantium/ERE was considered shockingly uncouth in it's allowances for women by Muslims visiting it's court a thousand years ago
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/25 03:44 AM
4

Asia is collapsing demographically as fast as the West
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/25 03:39 AM
1

it's because they have to carry the pregnancy and deal with the physical ramifications. Isn't this just the same argument again - outside rape women aren't forced to become pregnant, they become pregnant as a consequence of their actions (having sex without birth control).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 12:26 AM
19

In contrast, this study found that 77% of women between 18 and 30 want to be approached for dating more in person, yet half of single men have not approached a woman for dating in person in the past year. They want to be approached by above average men. I don't think the effects of the internet and modern media on dating can be neatly divided such that you can behave and expect the same results IRL as previous generations. Most men not approaching are probably right that it won't work well for t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 12:15 AM
0

It's the total lack of support men have for their mental health. There's very few places for them to be open and honest to speak about trauma, negative experiences , the mundane struggles of daily life and problems occuring in romantic relationships. Society has boxed men in, so now the current backlash has led to unhealthy extremes that has created a battle ground between us instead of harmony and understanding. They can speak to a therapist and/or psychologist but I don't think that's really w…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 09:45 PM
–

If I'm asking for studies it's almost always in response to affirmative concrete claims.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/25 08:54 PM
–

By capitalism, I mean the bulk of economic and political power is with people who own things. Wealth creation is seen as being brought by wealthy people giving them value (Hobbsian economics) just like landlords provide housing. By socialism, I mean the bulk of economic and political power is with the masses who work for a living and their familes. Wealth creating is seen as being brought by people's labour giving them value (Adam Smith economics) just like architects and builders provide housin…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/25 08:39 PM
–

Good question. Why are fetuses allowed to be murdered in some states and not others? Why do liberals feel stripping their right to personhood is moral?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/25 08:26 PM
–

Really enjoy when asking for a study or just repeating study stats get's downvoted with no counterargument or source. Definitely happens way more with one gender than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/25 08:24 PM
2

Women as a group really do favor censorship and control over free speech on vague grounds of "harm reduction" or not hurting peoples feelings. All the cringe 1984 quotes about women were right.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/25 08:20 PM
1

I'm not going to avoid pointing out the reality that single parents have worse outcomes for their kids because it might make people less likely to leave DV situations. I doubt that has a strong effect but there's also a massive amount of stuff that would then be off limits to discuss because of some potential undesirable knock off effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/25 04:06 PM
1

Do you have studies showing this? Usually these effects are trans class
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/25 11:59 PM
1

Domestic violence is not the main reason for single parent households or poorer outcomes for these kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/25 11:26 PM
1

Tons of bad assumptions in this post.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/25 11:23 PM
1

Generally even unhappy (but not abusive) marriages have better outcomes for the kids than single parenthood. At least one study found divorce had similar negative effect on child development as the death of one of the parents. The assumption that divorce is the better option in unhappy marriages is often a convenient assumption on the parents part rather than sober analysis.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/25 11:19 PM
2

Kids from single parents with high incomes also have worse outcomes than their peers.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/25 11:14 PM
–

A high salary starting a job is not a requirement, but if you can get it always means that company wants you more and is the opportunity you should be pursuing. The concept is almost always the same. The better the "deal" is up front the more you're genuinely desired, the better the outcome is for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/25 11:06 PM
6

I don't agree at all. I think this is total misunderstanding of the present. This is like thinking the Parthenon is still in business because you can see the ruins in Athens and the cultural DNA is still present.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 09:47 AM
8

The former structures are in part why men are more represented in places of power, but it does not describe the character of actual existing society now.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 09:44 AM
1

They might use liberal language but I do not see any stymying of the pumping of money from working population of the USA up to the already very very wealthy. Liberalism doesn't really stop this either. It just adjusts for it via the welfare state. Even right liberalism mostly just wants to discipline and and reduce the welfare state rather than doing away with it entirely. You are saying "left" but what you seem to be taking as that is the Democratic party. Thye might be lesss authoratarian and …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 09:43 AM
5

It's not structurally present either. There's no laws or social structures favoring men or deferring to their will in marriage or divorce, inheritance, employment, education, government etc. That there are more wealthy men than women or whatever is not evidence of gender based structures favoring them, explicit or implicit.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 09:31 AM
4

Some like Trump et al use anti immigration rhetoric in this manner, but that's more or less the extent of it. The bourgeoise in the modern West is largely (left) liberalized in ideology and character. The average oligarch finds the idea of using that sort of 19th and early 20th century rhetoric and tactics repellant, nor is it even very effective given demographic changes in places like the US; it's more economically advantageous to most of them to create an ever larger homogenizing and pacified…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 09:12 AM
7

Patriarchy is a organized and codified system of social norms based around men as the centers of social organization and power enforced de jure and de facto. It would be more correct to observe that Western social society today much more closely resembles social chaos than any organized system. Sexist men exist in it (as do women) and power more often manifests in the hands of men (for various reasons) but no organized gender based codified and enforced system exists.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 09:01 AM
1

If that’s true, what’s the actual solution? If we’re all just acting out our biological programming, then men have no real agency. There’s no actual evolution—just submission to what’s “natural.” Red Pillers think they’re adapting, but all they’re really doing is accepting that they are slaves to their own biology**.** How is that mindset healthy for men? The "solution" is just to become more sexually and socially attractive by observing what type of men women choose to have relationships/sex wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:53 AM
3

These oligarchs then tell the working white man blame the women and feminism and black people and DEI for their economic power, respect and authority being taken away. No, they aren't or at least most of them aren't. It's funny when people just repeat stuff that hasn't been true for decades like some kind of pulling back the curtain.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:43 AM
1

Women having advantages in various ways isn't matriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:41 AM
10

How thoughtful.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:39 AM
7

If men hold most hard power in society then it is structurally a patriarchy. That's it. No, that's not what patriarchy is.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:39 AM
2

It was put into place by representative government of which women make up the majority voting electorate.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:36 AM
-2

There does not exist a organized system racial of oppression in the US (in fact as far as actual institutions go being a racial "minority" is mostly a positive). Sexism and racism are not the same thing as systems of oppression and if the measure is that sexist or racist people still exist then there never has been or ever will be any society that isn't gender or racially systematically oppressive.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:36 AM
15

Not all but a lot of those guys were sexist. This is what most women call patriarchy. But sexism isn't patriarchy. Having witnessed this real change in my lifetime, it’s hard to understand in the context of the recent US election. I thought we were done with the men who wanted to limit us, control us, chain us to a stove and turn us into breeders. It doesn’t feel completely dead quite yet. You people just can't control your insane hyperbole can you
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/25 08:31 AM
1

Based
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/25 08:11 AM
4

Because they're mostly not actually that dangerous (night clubs in certain areas can be dangerous but in a generally violent way) and average women aren't super paranoid about going to them. The weird fetishization of frats as rape clubs or whatever is almost entirely a myth and they tend to have fitter more social guys in them, which is what women are attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/25 05:55 AM
-1

Small and mostly irrelevant group of men
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/25 04:16 PM
1

This is all simply a c*ping mechanism for the breakdown of society. The average person is not going to be happy with MGTOW or some zen abstinence, nor will things change from a male dating strike even if such a thing were possible. People underestimate how far gone we are socially. There's no "normal" fixes for this stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/25 02:30 AM
4

Conservatives do statistically cheat less. However the effect probably isn't large enough to be a major reason to choose conservative over liberal women and is confounded a lot by religion, class, and ethnicity. If you want the statistically least likely to cheat partner it's a conservative religious woman with a low n count. Obviously this isn't backed up by any research so there's no substantiating such claims. Studies consistently find conservatism and especially religion are mitigating facto…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/25 02:00 AM
4

Lots of women really have a terrible time understanding theoreticals.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/25 01:54 AM
0

"autism" as a label means very little beyond some level of social incompetency or even just being shy. People with a genuine disability are a small subset of this group. For most men that call themselves autistic (including some diagnosed as "on the spectrum") they're simply socially maladjusted from under socialisation. Asking women for their experiences is just asking them what their experiences are with poorly socialized men basically (with some genuine experiences with autistic men thrown in…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/25 11:37 AM
2

What are the "mitigating factors"? Certainly single parents must pay a larger portion of their childrens rearing costs and have less time to spend, but this is a consequence of a being a single parent - thus being without a partners is definitely both a correlative and causative factor in worse outcomes. Numerous studies controlling for socio economic class find these negative outcomes reproduce across class lines. Same for children of divorced parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/25 08:19 AM
2

Very noble. But I'm afraid the L is permanent and without recourse
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/25 01:11 AM
6

Women L
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/25 12:42 AM
1

Activity levels and general social disposition are more important, which hobbies can act as a proxy for; I agree having the same hobbies or even any doesn't matter much per se. Someone who is hiking, kayaking, rock climbing won't likely be compatible with someone who mostly watches sports and games, not because their hobbies are different necessarily but because one is going to be wanting to go outside to do those things in their free socialization time. Someone who has travel as a hobby won't b…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/25 12:35 AM
2

Being a “mum” was never a full time job. It was something you did around having a job. Housework was where the large majority of female labour went before modern household appliances. Most women did not have a job outside the home. There are many statistics available showing this. The “being a mum and watching tv as a job” is a post war anomaly of certain middle class demographics who see it as a status symbol, and working class families who can’t afford childcare. The majority of housewives pos…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 10:21 AM
-3

Cottage industry work done in the household and sold at market or work done on the farm sure. But the majority of labour for married women was always done in the home. The shift in the 20th century to the stereotypical housewife with lots of free time was not a change in role but automation saving vast amounts of labour hours - most women worked in the home because that was necessary labour to survive. Cooking (often including a subset of farm processing labour) and cleaning took up the majority…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 01:27 AM
1

Sure. However that's not really what I was debating - I'm comparing relative outcomes. It's pretty clear "traditional" marriages produced better outcomes for kids and arguably it also produced happier individuals in marriages as well. Traditional marriage will die because of socialization changes, not necessarily because anything "better" is replacing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 12:28 AM
2

You can be good parents in a co-parenting set-up without romantic love. That's what we should support as a likely plan b. The reason why kids in single-parent homes are often doing worse than their married parents peers is most often poverty and a social background that was already difficult because the divorce occurred. Stable, healthy and well-off people that divorce usually continue to have healthy and happy kids. Children of single parents and divorced parents have significantly more negativ…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 12:11 AM
8

The Swedish system does not produce anymore children or make women more inclined to become mothers.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/25 11:54 PM
-2

It became the ideal version in the Western world after world war II, but you're talking about a dynamic that most families didn't have, And if they did for a very short time. No, most families both before and after WWII did not have a mother working for wage labour. The majority of women did not participate in the labour market until sometime in the 1980's. Most women were "stay at home mothers".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/25 11:52 PM
4

People are talking about wage labour.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/25 11:49 PM
9

TL;DR: Authentic love and passion is incompatible with traditional "till death do us apart" marriage. Therefore, traditional marriage should no longer be considered the bedrock of society. We need new arrangements for people to raise healthy families. Ok, what are these arrangements? Can you show any viable alternatives that produce children as psychologically/socially healthy as traditional families? Can you demonstrate that it produces happier individuals? As far as I'm aware no large scale al…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/25 11:41 PM
6

100% bait post. Mods should probably just ban this users from creating threads
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/25 06:08 PM
1

The rich account for ~<40% of income tax which is substantial but the state is still dependent on the UMC and MC, most importantly the top 25%
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 10:21 PM
1

Automated ports are not AI though. It's the same automation stuff that's been happening for 40 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 10:17 PM
6

"Please validate my feelings against this caricature"
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:54 AM
1

Sure you can. Make parents completely tax exempt from income tax. Until the child is 18. That would encourage precisely the type of people we want to encourage to have kids. High earners and high achievers. That would collapse the system since the state is dependent on these as basically the only group of net contributors of tax. Best part is the poor people who already have good fertility rates. Are not really affected by this. They hardly pay any taxes anyway. It's the middle and upper classes…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:49 AM
3

There's no evidence bringing down housing costs will boost fertility notably. Same with paternity leave and healthcare costs.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:46 AM
1

I don’t see declining birth rates as an unmanageable issue. The world can’t support its current population at current rates of resource consumption. There's no particular reason to think this, at least with reasonable reform.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:45 AM
4

One of the things I have noticed (besides the obvious like: education for women, religiosity, availability of birth control, poverty) is expectations of parents and kids, in South Korea and Japan they are sky high and their work culture is super anal to South Korea and Japan actually have substantially different models of education and work. Japanese students spend far less time in academic extracurriculars (student clubs are popular but they're much more varied) and in general academic expectat…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:44 AM
2

A third of US college students are 1st or 2nd gen and the percentage has steadily increased over decades.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:39 AM
1

After WWII there was a shortage of men (war will do that) and the economy boomed. WWII had basically no effect on the working male population of the US (the main center of global development) while Europe lagged behind permanently afterward. After the Black Death (i.e. plague) there was a shortage of everyone. The survivors had opportunities previously unheard of. The economic changes popularly associated with the Black Death actually started and were taking place several decades beforehand - th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:36 AM
2

Applying questionable and simple economic maxims to unprecedently complex systems is not particularly useful in terms of insight.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:31 AM
2

We are not close to AI capable of replacing real world workers (i.e. the most materially important) and no one really has any idea of when such a breakthrough will happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:30 AM
2

It’s also possible that it’s an economic shift - it used to benefit the family finances to have more children (farm work, factory work, etc). Now it costs the family to have more kids. If we could figure out some way that having kids is not a net economic negative, that might do it. Look at the fertility rate in the US since founding, it's basically a linearly decreasing slope largely detached by any real or imagined economic utility from offspring.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:28 AM
2

There is absolutely nothing in the political toolbox that will get us back to a total fertility rate above replacement level. Everything that government’s have at their disposal—parental support, tax incentives, sticks and carrots—has been tried and failed. Even draconian measures like blanket birth control bans and mass prohibitions on abortion seem to have, at best, modest results. That’s because plummeting fertility rates aren’t caused by public policy or social atomization; they’re caused by…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:19 AM
2

That's a fair rating. She has very good coloring and hair. Face is pretty average though outside that which is why I think 6 is also a fair rating.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 07:40 AM
2

He looks like most rural guys where I live and isn't ugly which slots into average for me. He has good eyes though.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 07:38 AM
5

I don't think most men love being in relationships with women outside romantic or familial ones. Most men I know including myself are more likely to enjoy friendships with other men more. The dudes I've known who socialized mostly with women were either gay or emotionally weird
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 04:47 AM
-1

6 and 7 is better than the majority of women and I see women as attractive on a semi regular basis.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 03:54 AM
2

No idea. However on an absolute beauty scale she's a 6 or maybe a 7 in my opinion. You're free to rate her higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 03:40 AM
2

I'd say dude is probably a 5 and she's a solid 6 at least. I agree it's not some crazy gap but he is dating up a bit. To me it's close to a looks match favoring her.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 02:52 AM
2

RIP
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 02:47 AM
1

Do you live in NYC or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 02:45 AM
4

100k isn't anything to women in 2025. Your pics are very good at showing what (many) women actually want which is the "Instagram" ready travel and nice things lifestyle; it's not money per se but showing off the "correct" lifestyle enabled by having money. I make 140 in a middling to lower cost of living area and am generally considered above average attractive. I pretty much always "date down" in looks because that's what I get on OLD. Your photos are far better than anything I have on terms of…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 02:43 AM
7

She is by a point or two. Not a massive gap though that would make me turn my head.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/25 02:28 AM
–

Any complex system or ideology could be summed up in some neat and inoffensive paragraph but that would totally elide both their own depth and how they interact with the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 04:10 PM
–

Lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 04:04 PM
–

Useless oversimplification.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 04:03 PM
2

I think you're both greatly overestimating women's ability to "read" men and the disparity between men and women in older couples.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 03:09 PM
–

No idea what your point even is as we're discussing idealized male vs female gaze not how realistic it is for the average man. Porn stars aren't realistic yet we can still learn something from male gaze in this case in inferring traits that men find attractive in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 06:24 PM
–

Most women I see on dating apps specify they don't want kids, are still "undecided", or already have kids and don't want more. Women who explicitly or even implicitly want kids are a definite but notable minority. Perhaps this has something to do with my age group (mid 30's) or apps I'm using but I don't see what you're claiming reflected in most profiles. Regardless though just putting in that you want kids is not going to suddenly majorly boost your matches even assuming most women using OLD d…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 05:55 PM
–

The traits those men display are consistently shown to predict real life romantic success in studies. Muscularity/fitness, "athletic" frame, social dominance, competence displays, confidence, physical capability etc are all very good predictors of mens success. That most men aren't like that doesn't mean that women don't find these ideals attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 05:46 PM
3

Men simply want the best sexual opportunities they can get. Most men will prefer 2; there are way more men comfortable being "boring" and stable than there are women (or at least comfortable with their partner being that way). However it's recognized that that gives them much worse sexual options (both in terms of quantity and quality) than 1.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 05:32 PM
–

No Pill M 21 Virgin Asking women, especially in the context of reddit nerd women, what they find attractive is a terrible idea. Whatever faults RP has you're almost certainly better off pursuing that ideal than listening to what women here say. Principally fit/muscular, confident, good career are by far your best bet in becoming sexually successful that you can control.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 05:25 PM
–

From my singular perspective, it’s an echo of his own gaze. It’s the homoerotic, homoadjacent male archetypes he finds aesthetically pleasing. The Hemsworths, The Witcher, 300, Gladiator… Comic book superheroes, actors/roles from mythology and historical dramas, MMA, rugged pro athletes, and for a certain subset of men, whichever red faced, screeching man serves as the figurehead for authoritarianism. Generally these men are or have the traits of men that are IRL predictive of mating success. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 05:22 PM
–

"normal fit guy" is hard to define. Generally being visibly physically muscular but sub bodybuilder levels and lean is the most attractive bodytype. "Moderate muscularity" is usually underestimated in how much muscle mass you actually need to carry while lean. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167207303022
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 05:14 PM
5

Singleness and loneliness rates are also up. In general any social health metric you want to measure is worse now than in earlier decades.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 09:45 AM
3

No not really. Women are having less sex than they did 20-30 years ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 08:05 AM
1

The answer is, like buying a house, it's something younger generations need to accept is much harder and way less people would achieve and the older generations need to appreciate just how much harder it is to attain and that they themselves would struggle immensely in todays dating landscape. What do you mean by accepting? If you mean being realistic about conditions I agree. If you mean there's nothing that can be done about it I don't; people aren't going to take the steps necessary for chang…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 08:04 AM
3

California has been democrat dominated for a long, long time and has the worst income to housing price ratio in the country outside Hawaii.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 08:01 AM
3

Different ethnicities commit differing levels of crime under the same material and similar social conditions. That's why ethnicity is a strong predictor of crime trans social-strata.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 07:51 AM
1

Overseas dating is definitely harder than dating someone in town.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 02:38 AM
7

We can pretty clearly track the rise of mid life singles and fertility rates. This is definitely a far worse environment for pairing up and family formation
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 12:57 AM
3

IQ has a strong correlation with management and social capability generally (to a point). We can also just look at executives backgrounds and they tend to be heavily correlated with high academic achievement and filtering as well implying a significantly higher average IQ.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 03:36 PM
1

That's true but I'm not making any claim otherwise. I'm only discussing the effects of mens shifting mental health and how it's being interpreted
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 03:32 PM
1

This is straying from the point being made. I'm not saying men being dangerous is a media creation. I'm saying the focus on mens mental health as a recent phenomenon as men generally became less dangerous doesn't reflect actual societal effects of the shift in mental health. Men are not more dangerous as a group now which is the opposite of what is being implied or stated.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 03:20 PM
3

They absolutely are in IQ terms
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 03:15 PM
3

Greater variability combined with a slightly higher average absolutely matters when talking about positions that tend to be dominated by outliers
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 03:14 PM
1

Sort of yes. But society is actually becoming safer and less violent as mens mental health declines. Mostly this fear exists as a media creation rather than a reflection of likely dangers.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 03:09 PM
2

To a large degree there isn't a difference - in both genders cases it's socialization, material security, and some level of general life stability. There are differences in the specifics of how men and women satisfy these needs but these are things like having large social networks for women or more active semi competitive social networks for men etc rather than a difference in kind. The hyper focus on "mens mental health" is a bit strange because it's very clear that women are not doing well ei…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 08:10 AM
1

There's no particular evidence or reason to think this conditioning results in serious psychological problems for most men. In fact as men become less conditioned in this way their mental health has deteriorated and women who are not conditioned this way consistently have worse mental health metrics than men; not direct evidence this conditioning is "good" since there's a lot of other confounding factors going on in modern society but at least it seems to indicate it's not very significantly ben…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 08:01 AM
2

If people do have genetic advantages then it makes sense to separate them. I have bad news for you about almost all sports
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 07:36 PM
7

Poor hygiene probably correlates somewhat with not going to college.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 03:29 PM
1

IQ tests are not a matter of being "motivated" outside statistically irrelevant MENSA applicants
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 02:51 PM
9

Adult IQs still show gender disparities in distribution and a slightly higher average for men
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 02:48 PM
1

What AA for men are you referring to? Gender quotas in college? Both men and women are declining in mental health. And I don't particularly it's awful if male enrollment in college drops somewhat - for a lot of people the college system has turned into a for profit degree mill of dubious value beyond boosting earning chances for office workers.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 05:40 AM
2

Marriage forms which compromised the overwhelming history of marriage, at least in the West, can rightly be considered "traditional" or else the term is completely meaningless.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 01:02 AM
1

Perhaps but that's not affirmative action. It's gender quotas in corporations, government, higher education programs etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 12:58 AM
0

And yet every statistic available says people had far less casual sex in the 1970's
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 09:03 PM
0

On paper no these are all fine. In reality 4 and 10 quickly get turned into affirmative action policies
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 06:33 PM
5

There was far less casual sex in 1970s. The majority of newlyweds were virgins. What you see in the media is not the same as how average people behaved. You want the greatest access to casual sex it's probably late 1980s or through the 90s
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 06:03 PM
2

Why don't you list out of what mass shooters you think are motivated by TRP or are even just "red pilled" so we can contextualize the violence? If there's almost none I would say it's not any kind of serious public danger, yes, compared to other groups.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 02:43 AM
5

My argument is that TRP is totally irrelevant as any kind of public danger. You're more likely to get hit by lightening or one in a million disease than be in danger from TRP, several times over.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 02:20 AM
9

Consider this illuminating and calming example https://www.np.reddit.com/r/fightporn/comments/h0706q/man_goes_wild_in_a_party_sorry_for_the_minecraft/
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 02:16 AM
4

Let's compare the homicide ratio to various other groups along religious, ethnic, cultural, or other lines and see how dangerous TRP is in relation.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 02:12 AM
1

Many HG societies were extremely violent. There's no single model for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:28 PM
1

As an institution it's new, not as a known concept. It also doesn't mean women had no choice before it's spread either.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:24 PM
1

Mixed gender socializing was very common in many societies, at least in Europe
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:21 PM
1

Limited bachelor pool is not the same thing as arranged marriages. And men over 25 single were not super uncommon simply because of maternal mortality rates
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:19 PM
2

0 evidence of this
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:15 PM
1

The large majority of people throughout history did not own significant assets of any kind including land. Marriage as a financial lever was irrelevant to most of them. This is a backwards projection of the ownership classes motivations onto proles.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:14 PM
1

The question wasn't whether women were oppressed or not or if they had significant social power. It's whether most average women had some form of choice or not in partners. At least in Europe historically they did.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:11 PM
1

Men can’t seem to understand that men are taller, stronger, and generally make more money than most women, so of course women are dating bigger and stronger people with more resources. This is totally irrelevant. The pressure is to pursue the best men available (to secure genetic fitness/social status/resources etc), not simply to find a man more robust than a woman, which is trivial.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:26 AM
4

Most of known history people have lived in polygamous societies. Most societies followed a mixed polygamous-monogamous model. Elite men (often but not always) practiced polygamy and average men practiced monogamy. Having more than one wife was not something the large majority of men could afford. In many societies "average" men taking more than one wife was done out of obligation (i.e. your brother died and now you have to take care of his widow) rather than choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:21 AM
0

"Objectivity" has nothing to do with it. It's a question of observing human behaviour in a given societal context. Both men and women pursue people with markers that make them more attractive as partners in whatever capacity; this is something repeatedly demonstrated in basically every study concerned with measuring mate preference. Whether this actually makes them more "fit" partners in an evolutionary sense or whatever is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:19 AM
-1

There is 0 evidence most people engaged in arranged marriages. What evidence we do have of average people is that they (women and men) mostly pursued individuals within a given social-class context that made them "reasonable" partners. Most peasants (i.e 95% of people throughout history) were not compelled by authority to pursue arranged marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:15 AM
3

Love marriages being recent (which is also wrong) doesn't mean women had no choice in mate preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:12 AM
6

They haven't. The majority people across human history were poor and had little to no choice with who they mated with. Why would the majority of people being poor mean that they had no choice in the matter? Most poor people ended up with other poor people in which case there is little motive in compelling someone financially - because there's likely very little to gain.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:10 AM
5

Behaviourally modern humans from the last 40k years and even within the last 10 or 5k years are what's really relevant. Human hierarchy rarely translates straight forward into individual physical strength
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 06:20 AM
53

Your presumption that women had no choice in partners is wrong. Most women chose from within their group/class like most men. Most did not have arranged marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 04:41 AM
1

Not sure if you're joking but a very small percent of gay men get married and infidelity is super common. But for those who do I assume it's mostly for romantic reasons
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 04:09 AM
14

Marriage is for guys in their 20s or early 30s to start a family. Beyond that it's risking a lot for a vague sense of archaic romanticism and/or demonstrating loyalty to the benefit of the woman. Society has moved beyond marriage as a institution; the social context which made it a valuable investment for men is gone. It's value is for children and women only now.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/24 05:02 AM
–

Based on your OP I'm going to guess this has a lot to do with your self selection of partners/environment
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:21 PM
–

Black womens ratio of higher maternal deaths follows across class even when they have access to much better healthcare. It largely tracks with obesity rates and obesity related causes of death account for the large majority of black maternity mortality. Medical bias may be part of the cause but unless you can produce a study showing it's a major component of maternal mortality outcomes and not the obvious fact that AA women are simply far unhealthier due to lifestyle then you're just starting wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:44 AM
–

Also, not for nothing but the maternal death rate for black women in this country is 1.5 times higher than white women. Black women suffer the most due to those draconian laws. 49.5 per 100,000 births. None of you really care about that but just thought I would share that fact. Whenever men talk about abortion and maternal death I know they are talking about white women but it’s a bigger problem for black women in general. A lot of this can be accounted for AA women simply having a much higher o…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 08:45 AM
–

So why aren’t I reading more about this disaster in this sub right now? Do you think the end of Roe v Wade has been a disaster for men, women and dating? Because it's not actually having any significant effect on dating. Everyone is dating like they did before hand. Liberal women who are really invested in roe v wade are going to date exactly the same type of guy they would have before the ban, or stay out of dating altogether probably at roughly the same rate, perhaps slightly higher. Outside m…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 08:37 AM
–

Women value social status much more than men but this doesn't translate into some totalizing evaluation of men. Most men are average status and their looks are their most important factor in their dating success. However a very high status guy can have poor looks and still be pretty successful, wildly so compared to any men but the <1% in looks. On the other end even being mildly socially below average is a death sentence for a man with average looks - good looking guys can overcome this unless …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 10:25 AM
1

Look at the population group (not going to explicitly say due to rules in this sub) in the US with the highest rate of single moms. These men are raised by women exclusively at a much higher rate than any other group of men. This culture is basically where a lot of "red pill" thinking started. Criticizing simping, lower degrees of being providers, lower rates of fidelity etc. are more common in this group. So I don't think your thesis really holds. Being raised mostly by women doesn't necessaril…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 10:15 AM
0

Lots of people who have some disease, too low IQ, or other disability can't survive unassisted either. Generally we don't consider bodily autonomy to be forfeited based on survival ability.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 06:46 PM
1

The obvious objection to this argument is that fetuses have a right to their own bodily autonomy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:36 AM
1

Wage labour was actually a substantial portion of the medieval economy as well - perhaps as much as 1/3rd of the workforce (presumably mostly male in this case) in 14th century England participated regularly in wage labour. Regardless though I think it's difficult to show any legal or material degradation in the conditions of women coinciding with capitalism beyond that which affected both genders (via enclosures etc). Capitalism broke down traditional systems which could include displacing the …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 04:07 AM
1

Engels sociological work is rightly regarded as garbage contingent on a bunch of debunked presumptions about the uniformity and character of early society. Contrary to most of the posts here Marx et al regarded capitalism as a overall positive (and inevitable) development for most of society, including women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 02:08 AM
1

It is true that the shift from feudalism allowed for the rise in womens rights, but this is just because early capitalism created the space for well off white women to demand equality (only for them and it was tone deaf in many ways). But capitalism also perpetuated patriarchal structures by widening the division between “productive” and paid labor, vs “reproductive” and unpaid labor. And well women were responsible for the unpaid part. Women have a double burden here. In what concrete ways did …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 02:06 AM
3

Most of the benefits of these things are just women becoming less neurotic from their own self perceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 01:45 AM
4

Glad you're gone
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 01:13 AM
2

She has print outs from a text conversation implying the guy is in trouble for cheating or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 01:11 AM
0

Negative stereotypes about men can be true without being misandrist. Men are more prone to severe violence, rape, aggression etc. Both genders are more prone to certain negative (or positive) behaviours and pretending otherwise is just a denial of reality. The same is true for subpopulations (i.e. ethnic groups and/or classes) of these genders. In any case I think the basis for this type of concern - that misandry is a major force and responsible for a lot of modern mens problems - is basically …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 01:09 AM
5

Going to guess the OP is a immigrant in Canada within a subcultural bubble if they think this.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:23 PM
1

Yeah? Where does romantic baggage come from?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 11:52 PM
1

There are quite a lot of Superman and Spiderman stories where Lois Lane and Mary Jane are either not in the story at all or mostly secondary. The large majority of Batman stories don't have strong romance elements (some do). Superhero movies tend to push the importance of romance more to reach a broader audience than teen boys/men who consume the majority of actual comic stories. Mostly though what differentiates something like Cinderella from a superhero movie is that Cinderellas character adva…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 11:51 PM
6

"Harem" anime means that the main character is the subject of multiple womens romantic interests, thus he ends up with a "harem" of women chasing him. Typically these are lightly erotic in nature and not explicitly pornographic and the storyline is semi humerous, driven by the main character trying to balance out and decide which woman to end up with.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:33 AM
8

Interesting interpretation but I'd say the difference is that romance is almost always secondary or sometimes totally absent in superhero stories where the main drive is usually realization of individual identity and/or power fantasy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:24 AM
0

5 years is not a long time in a lifespan, it is however a long time in formative adult romantic experience that takes place for most people in their 20's.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:20 AM
-4

Women that are single in their 30's have likely already been divorced or fallen out of a long term relationship or have kids or loads of baggage from however many dudes etc. The reality is people are generally more pleasant in terms of dating before they experience these things. The same is true for men but men don't develop exactly the same way as women, especially if we're talking about men who developed from being unattractive to attractive (relatively) in their 30's.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:16 AM
1

We joke about how Greek dudes, Samurai, etc, used to get it on with their bros, but that is a legitimate strategy to make sure needs are being met. The ancient Greeks people typically think of as having homosexual relations (which was not most of them) did not do so out of desperation or lack of women. The Theban band or whoever else among that class of society could easily have and afford women as they pleased.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:09 AM
0

Humans will decide what they want and if it works, it worked and if it didnt, then someone or something else will take its place. The dating market is not disfigured Replacement due to fertility collapse strongly implies there is in fact something "disfigured" about the dating market.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:56 AM
1

The same is true of your assertion that women were chattel and had no choice in partners. You're just as bad as what you're complaining about.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:50 AM
0

There is good evidence that in prehistoric m, tribal societies, everything was communal including sex. Not really. In some perhaps but the evidence is quite varied and mostly against that level of communalism.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:48 AM
8

I used to not mind it when I was a teen (20 years ago) but mostly I think it looks bad nowadays. I see way more women who are overweight with questionable looking hygiene and lots of bodymods with dyed hair than I do attractive and well groomed women. In that sense I guess it's similar to the stereotypical overweight nerd dude wearing an anime shirt - I like some anime but 90% chance that dude is kind of gross. Also it can really hurt the texture of the hair, especially for post college age wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/24 03:10 AM
1

I'm not a capitalist and I would be fine with paying women to have more kids if that worked. It doesn't and most of society is opposed to doing anything about it so they will be replaced by people who do have kids. The psychology of modernism effectively sterilizes itself and there's no easy fix like expansion of the welfare state or just direct payments.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 08:59 AM
4

Feminine presenting men can do fine with subgroups of women as long as they physically fit the profile and have some level of social confidence/capability (this doesn't mean they need to super assertive or "alpha" like stereotypical masculine men). However this basically requires them to have a particular appearance; thin/wiry, tall, good hair, younger, and good looking gracile facial features...so basically just be quite good looking to start with. A small minority of men. Most guys can't pull …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 08:51 AM
1

I don't think abortion is really very relevant. Abortion restrictions haven't been shown to impact fertility much one way or another - in fact fertility mostly continued to drop even in states that enforce bans. Mostly it's simply that the only groups with a positive TFR are highly religious or 1st gen immigrants. High TFR combined with a collapsing fertility for the mainstream population produces drastic demographic changes over a few generations. High status cultural positions are monopolized …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 08:40 AM
2

Salary is not enough, it keeps your income the same but children is MORE expenses so you have to pay MORE than the original salary to avoid lowering the lifestyle. Problem is that children still lower your lifestyle. Same income + more expenses for the child = lower lifestyle. There isn't any feasible way to pay for that so it's a moot point. If the demand by women is basically "pay me to live a comfortable middle class lifestyle to have kids" that will never work. It would bankrupt any nation s…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 11:28 PM
0

It will become more psychologically fit in the evolutionary sense. It's a question of whos psychology can handle the conditions of modernism. It turns out lots of people can't and are being selected out of the gene pool similar to the effect of a major plague.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 11:17 PM
0

I can't argue against a lifetime of ingrained nihilism. Like I said modern society produces people who aren't interested in building or maintaining society. They're a psycho-evolutionary dead end. Nature will simply have to take it's course until psychologically fit and healthy people replace them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 10:59 PM
2

There is no amount of money you can pay women that is economically feasible that will raise the birth rate. The US has a higher fertility rate without widespread long term maternity leave pay and without direct payments. Countries have already tried basically paying women a salary, subsidizing their housing, massive interest free loans etc. These things don't even get fertility above 1.6 Money won't solve this.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 10:56 PM
3

Things aren't solutions if they don't work. Paid maternity leave does not meaningfully raise fertility levels. Deflation has a multitude of negative economic effects beyond just making some things cheaper.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 10:11 PM
3

Many countries already have that. They have lower fertility than the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:57 PM
2

The first will have negligible effects on fertility and deflation is not nearly so simple as a cost of living crash.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:57 PM
1

And then he says he's going to try and bring them down with cheaper energy. I don't particularly believe he will succeed but it's quite different than simply saying he has no intention of doing anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:46 PM
1

Not to mention that an IQ test is the same as a poll tax that was popular during Jim Crow. lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 08:48 PM
0

Within a week Trump admitted he has no intention of doing any of those things. No he didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 08:45 PM
0

People asking this question seriously need to understand that most people and women especially do not care nor do they have any serious answers that extend beyond expansions of the welfare state, which doesn't work. They do not care about the future, they do not care about society, they don't care about children. They fundamentally have a disconnect and ignorance of their own standard of living and the material reality needed to sustain it. It's like people who think farmers are parasites and fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 08:42 PM
2

"all of womens rights" now consists entirely of access to abortion in every place at all times
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:45 AM
2

100% convinced the windmill_flowers account is just posting engagement bait. All her(?) ops sound like stereotypical and dumbed down feminist posts contrived to get men to post against rather than coming from actual belief. Then I see her replies to stuff that seem more sincere and she just seems kind of like she actually fits said stereotype.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:38 AM
3

Omg people are just salty that a black woman went viral for doing the bare minimum for once like white women do every day. This is almost entirely a black social media thing, really doesn't have anything to do with white people on either end
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:31 AM
1

It's basically a watered down version of tradwife which is toxic for obvious reasons. It's not obvious to me why this is toxic or why women shouldn't and couldn't find validation and happiness pursuing this lifepath. Lots of women do. As long as other options are made available to women (they are and have been for a long time) I'm not sure what the problem is. Male versions of this, where they're constantly working on stuff for his wife and kids, is largely seen as a good thing by many of the pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 09:18 AM
7

Liberal women dress more modestly if they're college educated middle class/umc types, much less so if they're more working class or "college hippie" type. To an extent the same is true for conservative women except there's a much larger contingent of religious conservatives with modest dress across class lines. More risque UMC conservative trophy housewife types are also a thing seemingly more so than for liberals
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 06:16 AM
5

Most people will gladly watch entertainment depicting sex/violence/exploitation and then feel uncomfortable with it when someone partaking it in is humanized or the fantasy made "real". This woman is making the rounds because the interview with her humanized her and invoked disgust both towards her and the consumers of porn (i.e. the audience themselves in many cases). It's not anything unique to men or porn.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 11:04 AM
8

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/24 08:34 PM
2

lol @ a zoomer complaining about patriarchy. It doesn't exist anymore, some men being wealthy and exploiting other men or women isn't patriarchy. You don't suffer from it, your parents didn't suffer from it, probably even your grandparents didn't. It's basically irrelevant compared to class lines. Complete ideological confusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/24 08:31 PM
2

No wealth unless you have children? I mean, what about self-made people? Zuckerberg is a college drop-out, how would you have prevented him from attaining his lifestyle (established long before he had kids)? If marriage and kids had been a requirement for top college attendance and being a CEO, he would have done it most likely. If not then I really don't mourn the loss of another tech billionaire. But extreme outliers like Zuckerberg don't really matter much anyway. I'm still not sure why the s…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 09:09 AM
1

Many countries have tried various subsidy and direct payment programs, including programs that are simply unaffordable if adapted at mass scale, to try and study the problem. They all fail to significantly raise fertility rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 08:45 AM
2

What does "heavily disincentivizing" singledom entail, specifically? Economic/career/educational attainment being more costly up to and including possibly making it prohibitively expensive to pursue a bourgeoise/UMC lifestyle and it's attendant social positions. Everyone deserves a living wage but beyond that it's whatever it takes to incentivize people to have children (and disincentivize voluntary childlessness). If you want to incentivize children, that's one thing. But going a step further t…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 07:54 AM
2

Russia does not have a gender imbalance (well it's actually slightly more male in younger groups like most countries) until you get to older groups outside child bearing age.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 07:12 AM
2

Just to be clear, I'm not interested in being repeatedly told the logic of the idea that without children, a society won't exist/will be taken over/will have its values destroyed/etc. I already am well aware of the logic behind the belief. What I want to know is if this is an actual personal belief you hold at any level. Do I believe that will happen? Yes I do. I believe that society should be restructured such that people are heavily incentivized to marry and have children and disincentivized t…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 07:07 AM
–

US losses in WW2 were basically a blip relative to it's large population. Vietnam was about 15% of WW2 causalities. They weren't really having any detectable demographic changes.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 06:49 AM
–

No you're describing generalized sexism and gender roles, which a large part of the population doesn't even believe or participate in. There's no formalized concrete system enforcing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/24 05:00 PM
–

Patriarchy is an actual concrete system of social organization usually de facto or de jure codified into government. The confusion is that it's often conflated with sexism in general or just "unfair" outcomes for women. The presidential races of Hillary and Kamala are actually good examples. There were no legal, institutional, or economic impairments to their campaigns. In fact the establishment largely preferred and supported them. You could argue their losses involved sexism but their history …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/24 04:57 PM
–

Patriarchy as an actual system doesn't exist in the West. There are some vague ideas about how men should act and what responsibilities they should have but most of these aren't concrete or consistent. Just blaming patriarchy is just a convenience to not really think about actually existing societal conditions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/24 10:49 AM
–

I agree that the "brainwashing" narrative is basically nonsense. In fact the whole narrative that young men are becoming significantly right wing doesn't have much evidence - young mens politics are currently fairly in line with their historical dispositions. It's young women that have significantly moved "left" for some definition of left - generally this means they're more socially liberal and vaguely "anti capitalist". It's against this shift in womens politics that young men appear right win…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/24 10:45 AM
2

Maybe I don't know. But I'm skeptical that's a major reason vs people just not being very social in general anymore. If you look at the boomer or silent generations for instance most of them didn't meet in entertainment venues or whatever. Most of them paired up at school, work, church, family matches, or through friends. Most socialization happened with people hosting get togethers/parties at their houses.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/24 12:45 AM
5

For reference, if you're a man whos 6'0, you're already taller than 86% of the male population Had a woman ask me how tall I was last week and when I told her 6'2 she just said "oh average all my friends husbands are that height or taller" seemingly totally genuinely. I jokingly told her she just beat the female average at 5'7 and she made a point that she was beating the average by an inch. Most people really don't understand averages.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/24 12:15 AM
2

So I'm curious, do you believe that women desiring the 666 perpetuates mens' dating struggles? To an extent. I've been "666" for a long time and it's mostly meaningless. Most men struggle because they're not handsome or socially popular enough. However proliferation of idealizations is probably not good for average mens chances. It's more like a combo effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/24 12:10 AM
42

But here’s the issue: whenever this advice comes up, whether it’s about raising standards or being more assertive, there’s always resistance. The excuses usually boil down to desperation: “I can’t be upfront because I’ll scare them away,” or “I’ll take whatever I can get.” If that’s your mindset, fine but then stop complaining when things don’t go your way. If you prioritize desperation over your true desires, maybe those desires weren’t as strong as you thought. Most average men don't have opti…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/24 12:02 AM
5

That doesn't really debunk young people dating less, it just says it's not heavily gendered. It's actually evidence for the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 11:54 PM
1

Yet earlier generations managed to meet and date while working the same or more hours.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 11:53 PM
8

I don't see how it's actually that dangerous in a society like Sweden. There's a robust welfare state and most of these women likely have relatives that are doing well enough to help them. If they need to re enter the workforce they can. None of these women are in danger of ending up homeless and starving, the greatest "danger" is that they end up working class instead of career women. They're only "dependent" on a man to the extent they demand a middle class/upper middle class lifestyle without…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 09:42 AM
1

Date? Yes. Start a family with? Probably not unless she turned things around. Most women I've dated have been some combo of this although most had jobs. This thread reads like it's intended as an uno reverso gotcha question but women and men are not just slightly asymmetric mirrors of each other. They have quite different desires/values.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 08:13 PM
1

Perfume has been used for hundreds of years to cover BO. BO is something people put up with because they didn't have many options not because it didn't bother them.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 05:21 AM
–

Crazy anyone thinks Pattinson's outside the top 1% even if they don't find him attractive
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 02:49 AM
–

Davidson is the type of dude I always found skeevy and annoying but his energy does seem attractive to a lot of women inexplicably to me. Pure looks wise I think he's just above average.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 02:48 AM
2

There's a lot of cultures beyond just white where attraction and intelligence/academic performance don't align. I'm not even sure how true that is for a lot of Asia.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/24 09:25 AM
3

True but if you follow this line of logic for society I think it actually ends up illustrating why the OP might arrive at such a conclusion. People can learn that eating excessive calorie dense foods is bad for them - but large amounts of people still end up obese. People can learn drugs are bad but we've been in a major drug crisis for many years. People can learn hyperstimulative electronics are socially/psychological harmful overused but they're only increasingly popular. A lot of people just…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 10:42 AM
5

You've overdosed on blank slatism and ended up in absurdity. Lots of people have different reactions to very similar environments and stimulus.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 10:32 AM
4

Is that what's happening now?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 08:53 AM
1

I've noticed a growing trend of liberal women claiming that conservative men love cheating on their conservative wives with liberal women. How true is this? I've also come across claims that conservative men are lying about their political affiliation to date or be with liberal women. Is there any truth to this, or is it exaggerated? Not at all. The greatest predictor of fidelity is religiousness, which tends more Republican. Otherwise (weakly religious/secular) Dem and Republican men are probab…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/24 08:56 AM
2

Most of these guys don't have autism and even putting them on a spectrum with such a disorder is questionable. Most people don't realize how "weird" was just something normally encountered in daily social life and most people still got paired up through various efforts (family, church, whatever community) before mass media. Social flattening from mass media makes any sort of social deficiency or nonconformity social poison. Women are very sensitive to negative social feedback and men that fail t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 11:38 PM
2

Not very many. Probably much less than a single days worth of traffic accidents.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 11:16 PM
2

The fact that Trump won from Harris already shows just how stunted the US is in regards to accepting anyone that isn't a white man. You guys have never even had a female president before and would still rather choose a demented orange over someone who's actually capable, just because she has a vagina. The President before Trump was a black man (as he identified) with a foreign name and early life background. Harris was badly incompetent at campaigning. That's why she totally flamed out in the De…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 11:13 PM
5

Yes but usually they tend to be middle aged mom types or women not interested in dating much. Most public venues you go to tend to be more male on average, outside specific bars or performances aimed at women. Statistically there's only a small gender gap in hours spent socializing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/24 12:47 AM
11

Yeah the things people complain about on dating apps are often just reflections of IRL spaces too. Most women IRL seek out the top 10% guys in any social situation. Most places IRL have lopsided gender ratios favoring women. Most guys get judged on visual appearance over personality for initial dating opportunities. etc
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 09:28 PM
3

Match making rankings (which is the algo basis almost all apps use for feeds) is not really the same thing as trying to keep people single, it's engagement farming technique. I'm not saying dating apps don't try to keep people single in some ways but I think it's exaggerated.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 09:26 PM
11

Because there's a bunch of men swiping right on them so every other swipe for women is a match, which is far too many. If it was rarer to get a match women would swipe right more often as their filtering would decrease.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 09:24 PM
6

They aren't necessarily exclusive. However they do have correlations with personality types which are better or worse at parenting. A typical "player" is more likely to have these traits and is less likely to be egalitarian in child rearing/have high parental investment.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 08:52 PM
6

Women who don't want kids are just as picky and more egalitarian men in child labour care are not notably anymore fertile or hugely more successful in mate pairing. This might theoretically make sense but there's too many confounding factors and "built in" patterns to actually manifest in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 05:53 PM
7

13 of 50 states have a full abortion ban (with exceptions for the life of the mother, incest etc. )
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 01:03 AM
5

A majority of Republicans oppose national abortion bans. Only a small minority of them support abortion bans in all cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 01:03 AM
0

Musk founded SpaceX and became Tesla CEO when it had 3 employees.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 12:59 AM
2

Wage labour has been a significant amount of the workforce since at least medieval times. Something like a 1/3rd of medieval England were full or part time wage labourers https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0289.1990.tb00535.x
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 12:43 AM
1

Wage labour (or barter for labour) of some kind wasn't that uncommon.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 12:17 AM
2

Women mostly did not have careers in the sense we usually think of them. They were more like part time or seasonal labourers mostly, although there are exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 12:15 AM
1

He probably has an IQ around 120. Kamala probably had IQ about the same. The low IQ stuff is from midwits.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 08:38 PM
0

That's cool. But a ~70lb (35lb per side) overhead press would be considered an intermediate trained lift for a 160lb woman. I'm sure there's women that can do that even untrained, but not the average woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 08:10 AM
1

Women didn't have full legal rights until the 1970s. This creates miserable conditions for them that made creating happiness or independence incredibly difficult. There's no evidence women got significantly happier afterwards. In fact the opposite seems to be true but this is probably not related to gaining rights but general social deterioration that affected both genders. But even if it were true they got happier afterwards, thinking men were the "historically been the sole source of womens wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 07:59 AM
0

I think you're underestimating how difficult that would be. Holding a toddler next to you is significantly different than holding 30lbs one handed overhead. Most women would have to train to get that kind of strength.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 07:37 AM
0

Influencers are in complete control of what is being shown, so there is literally the problem of a life being shown to people when the life isn't real, and really hasn't been real. That's probably the best criticism leveled here. A lot of this stuff is just a show and it's very difficult to tell what's real. "Real trad" is something confined to marginal religious communities now and not something that can be returned to in mainstream society. "neo trad" is a bit of an oxymoron but probably the b…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 07:25 AM
–

Womens promiscuity is generally overestimated but this does not mean that a lot of TRP propositions aren't supported by stats. Also stated vs revealed preferences is quite important. Dark triad, musculature, height, aloofness, facial attractiveness, financial success etc all have evidence of moderate to significant impacts in mens success/attractiveness, usually to a degree greater or even contradicting womens stated preferences. Nor did anything you posted really contradict the idea that women …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/24 12:36 AM
2

They have high rates of singledom and loneliness. How is that different from straight men? Because single homosexual men are dating and having sex at much higher rates than heterosexual men as I keep repeating. They have much more success attracting partners and getting sex. They have a harder time maintaining committed monogamous relationships with those men they do date. I'm not sure what's missing here that you don't understand the difference. Based on what? Statistics that show homosexual me…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/24 12:16 AM
2

Simply look at any study of MSM behaviour and you will see they have far higher rates of sexual activity, recent partnership formation, partner counts and so on. They are not having the exact same problems. Why are bi men saying gay dating is actually harder than straight dating? Statistically this is only true if the overriding criteria is committed monogamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/24 09:13 PM
–

Regarding the genetic diversity: doesn't less genetic diversity coming from men mean that fewer men reproduced. It's mostly explained by men/groups of men who are very successful rather than average men failing to reproduce. Elite men were much more likely to have multiple wives (either in serial monogamy or in polygamy), be related to other elite men, and have their children survive to reproductive age. In war you also see entire groups of related men get wiped out on the losing side while the …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/24 09:05 PM
–

Kinseys data was not very good (because it came from biased sample sources) and tends to overestimate the rate of sexual activity in various areas. The 77% stat is also not for women who had pre marital sex (Kindsey reports this as around ~50% and that's probably an overestimation) but for women who did have pre marital sex and didn't regret it. The "1/4 men reproduced" stat I got from this article Citing a 2015 study by Monika Karmin et al. This article is a bad interpretation of the study - wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/24 08:39 PM
7

The sexual activity rates among the "single" homosexual men is significantly higher (on average) than it is among the single heterosexual men. Gay men simply have different dating and sexual patterns than heterosexuals so you can't directly equate these statistics. If there are homosexual men who are single and lonely at similar rates to heterosexuals then it's not for the same reasons, as already mentioned.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/24 08:08 PM
–

Link to such a study?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/24 06:21 PM
7

Gay men and heterosexual men mostly do not have similar dating issues and equating them is dishonest. Gay men mainly struggle with commitment and opportunity in low population areas. However they can get dates/sex far easier than straight men in any population center. Heterosexual men mostly struggle with women finding them attractive and/or living up to the standards women set for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/24 06:18 PM
1

I'm not really sure what your point is - yes Republicans push conservative judges that overturned Roe. What do you think the ideological bent was of the people who set the precedent in the first place? Why was it repeatedly an untouchable precedent in challenges for decades despite the questionable legal reasoning? There is always an ideological nature of the courts. This doesn't mean poor or strong legal reasoning is irrelevant. It simply means that a given precedent will be more or less likely…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 04:20 AM
–

I am referring to the Marxist definition. The social views of the rich are generally more liberal than that of the working class, and the bourgeoise represented a radical break with the strict hierarchists of the landed/rentier class. The petit bourgeoise/"PMC" class are generally the most socially progressive of all classes. If you want to find the strongest supporters of gay rights, womens rights, transsexual rights, immigration, welfare state etc then generally those are the classes where the…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 04:14 AM
3

I believe the court would have been much less likely to overturn Roe if the legal reasoning behind it was more sound and less obviously tenuous, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 09:37 PM
6

SCOTUS has the authority to do a lot of things. When it sets bad precedents then those are likely to get repeatedly challenged and eventually overturned with enough persistence. Roe was overturned because it had very flimsy legal justification such that it was vulnerable whenever ideology on the court shifted. If it had better standing and less convoluted reasoning it's unlikely the court becoming more conservative would have endangered it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 08:54 PM
5

What's actually missing right now from men's lives that men have always written about positively is friendship and community with other men. Again, read books by men, from the past. They're mostly pretty clear that their wives are nightmares and their friends are great. I can't say that's been my impression reading older literature. Bad or failed marriages are sometimes plot points sure, often even just for comedic effect, but I never got the impression there's some consensus about marriage bein…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 08:39 PM
–

The bourgeoise represent a revolutionary force against "natural hierarchy", specifically it's a rejection of ordained hierarchy with a sort of social Darwinism. Meritocracy is what the bourgeoise believe in - they simply believe themselves the most meritorious (although many don't even believe that anymore). This is why the social views of the bourgeoise and the progressives are largely in sync and indistinguishable from each other. Where they differ largely has to do with the role of the state …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 08:20 PM
–

Have you considered that progressivism keeps producing dysfunctional society killing low fertility cultures and people sense somethings wrong with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 10:29 AM
–

Progressive social views align very strongly with class positions. They're the strong majority among the bourgeoise.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 09:31 AM
1

Not really most people still followed patterns from earlier. The free love types were a relatively small minority. Half of women were still virgins at the time of marriage for most of the 60s for instance. Casual sex didn't become mainstream until the 1980s to 1990s
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/24 09:19 PM
-1

U.S. dating dynamics are hyper traditionalist and as time goes on discourse has been about how men need to pay for everything and women need to be wined and dined from the word go. This doesn't make US dating dynamics "hyper traditionalist". People from 60 years ago would be completely shocked at how quickly and casually most people have sex. Just because (some) men pay for more things than women doesn't make it anywhere close to traditional.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/24 08:28 AM
1

True but generally manufacturing involves more complex processes and positions than the service economy - probably even more importantly it produces actual material results. Industrial capital is better for workers and the nation than finance capital (interlinked with the service economy). That's why the US and the West have already lost to China in future economic development.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/24 10:41 PM
9

Gay men are not just mirrors of heterosexual pairings with one gender swap, the behavior and values are different for the large majority of them. Your troll implication doesn't really work here.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/24 04:04 PM
11

I'm not sure I agree with grouping all those positive traits under beta, but yes being beta isn't a bad thing as far as LTR success or having a family. The point of contention that usually arises is that most of these traits are secondary to attraction and excitement, especially in the prime dating years (20's). So lots of beta men end up getting selected as compromises for LTR, not because beta traits are bad (many of them are pro social) but because they don't matter much for attraction. Avera…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/24 07:56 PM
9

The main thing foreign professional women have going for them over American women is that they genuinely value professional men and consider them attractive (or at least good) partners, at least from the perspective of the typical STEM guy. American women value social status (basically how "cool" a man is) and looks (average looks being an unfortunate compromise) over most everything else. A guy being a professional is either a nice bonus or in most cases "making up" for not being attractive eno…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/24 07:44 PM
1

People who were born and enculturated in America. What a silly attempt at a "gotcha"
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/24 07:25 PM
-1

50k is sufficient to raise a healthy capable kid. 100k buys luxuries not necessities
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/24 02:08 AM
0

In later generations yes, 1st generations and sometimes 2nd tend to maintain their fertility. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12134-024-01121-4 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X2300120X These immigrants are the drivers in Europes growth. Most nations would have already had a shrinking population without them (Germany would have already shrunk by 5+ million people for example). For Euro nations with significant immigration populations you can probably knock of…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 11:45 PM
2

If a man is making 50k then that is more than enough to provide a reasonable material standard of living to children. If the woman is making 100k and demands the man also make 100k+ then she isn't struggling to find men to provide who can provide her kids with a reasonable first world standard of living - she's demanding he be of a certain class. That's her prerogative but it's false to claim she's struggling to find a man to provide.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 11:36 PM
1

If you exclude immigrants many euro nations are closer to 1.3, very close to Japan. Sexism doesn't really appear to be much of a factor is the point
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 10:57 PM
2

Japan has a similar TFR as most of Europe (excluding immigrants). India still has a TFR better than most of the rest of the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 09:11 PM
0

so now what we have is a progress problem. women have advanced so much that they are struggling to find men who can provide, and make them feel cared for and protected. i don’t know what the answer is, but at least we need to be honest that women want to end up with a provider, and if we as a society don’t support men in this role, we will end up with a lot of single and childless women. No, they aren't. There's no shortage of men that can provide, care, and protect them at reasonable levels. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 09:09 PM
-2

Kids aren’t a free labor, but a luxury that a lot of people just can’t afford. The vast majority of people can afford kids. People have kids making 30k all the time that turn out fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 09:07 PM
9

Now let's bring this back to the election of Trump. Working class men would rather exist in a poorer performing economy where male led manufacturing has a greater role in the economy, exemplified by Trump vision to turn the clocks back to the ages of mercantilism and protected markets than exist in a richer society where services, dominated by women are the biggest generator of wealth. Because this will have an impact on their dating prospects and social lives. They are less disposable in a worl…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 09:06 PM
6

Over the past century, social and gender roles have transformed profoundly—especially for women—while, arguably, young men are struggling to find their footing in a world that seems to be changing around them. Both men and women face challenges, but modern social narratives might be unwittingly contributing to a widening gap between them. There is no widening gap. Both men and women are doing terrible in terms of social and mental health and both are on a downward trajectory. One of the problems…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 08:51 PM
1

Nothing will change because the recent election or backlash from it. Tons of people are already choosing not to have kids. It's largely an enculturated thing in which politics and material conditions plays a role but only a secondary one. Externalization of the choice not to have kids onto politics or material conditions is avoidance of the main "issue" - which is simply most people would prefer to have an easier life than spend time raising kids, or have lots of anxiety around caring for kids, …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/24 08:39 PM
4

There's a huge preponderance of data and studies that show men are more prone to violent crime. My opinion is a direct reflection of statistical outcomes presented from a diversity of sources.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 07:18 PM
5

That statistic is a reflection of how the Justice system treats men and women differently, not a reflection of men's behavior. Women are not committing anywhere near the amount of violent crime that men are. It is a reflection of mens behaviour. The idea that any significantly lopsided justice outcomes are a result of discrimination is absurd.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 07:15 PM
3

Men are inherently more dangerous.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 07:12 PM
4

Men's reactions to women doing the 4B movement is so disgusting. The point of the 4B movement isn't some secret conspiracy to hurt men in any way or flip elections or anything like that. The only reaction I've seen with any consistency is that men think it's a stupid waste of time (lots of women seem to think that way as well). While I'm not personally a proponent of it, all the 4B movement is saying look, the American people at large have shown that they are unsafe for women, and men are very m…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 07:09 PM
6

After the recent election, it seems pretty clear that women's issues are not being taken seriously. Abortion amendments (either to protect abortion rights or make it illegal) have been on ballots all over the country. It's been a major motivator for people to vote and is discussed constantly. It was one of the most important drivers in the election. Womens issues are taken extremely seriously. It's just not the complete ideological identity of most people, men or women. The women who are obsesse…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 08:47 AM
2

A lot of us are happy to have our relationships with other women, but fewer gen Z men are LGBTQ+, so since more women are getting together than there are men getting together, well, that's why a lot more men end up relationshipless I bet. Not really. There are many more bisexual women but more "actively" gay men than lesbians.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 08:30 AM
0

They shouldn't be blaming them. They should be celebrating them! Congratulations to all male and female Trump voters for making the right choice!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 12:01 AM
1

Race isn't a biological category and female is. People are male or female because of their genetics. People have different phenotypes because of their genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 11:48 PM
1

These posts (ex red pill to male feminist types) always read some like someone writing a HR exercise wrapped up in overly contrite anxiety. Like if you no longer follow or like follow those guys, that's fine, move on. Writing some self loathing spiel about how your entire worldview is re oriented around feminism and you deeply regret your past or whatever is obnoxious - it's overly pretentious and narcissistic. The "healthy" approach is realizing none the gender war stuff actually matters that m…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:32 PM
–

lmao I hope for your sake this is bait.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 07:39 PM
–

The "foundation" of my claim is the course of the war in late 2014 when the bulk of Rojava was under ISIL control and Kobani was in a losing siege until the US starting air striking ISIL and forced Turkey to allow free movement of Kurd forces across the border. Without those factors Kobani certainly would have fallen and likely the remainder of Rojava as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 11:39 PM
1

The point is not whether cancer is a relevant factor or not. It's that the methodology for determining maternal mortality rates are not the same so comparisons give misleading statistic conclusions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:52 AM
–

There's a strong correlation between parent and child political affiliation.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:48 AM
–

True, Trump reduced the GOP's anti-abortion extremism so far that now we have girls dying from miscarriages because doctors will go to jail if they help her. Big time reduction there. No, doctors will not go to jail for that. In both cases where that has happened in the last 4 years it was due to the doctors not understanding that it was legal for them to "abort" in cases of miscarriage that threatened the mothers life. The fault was with the hospital/doctors not understanding the law.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:48 AM
–

It's reification of their value imparted by the bourgeoise. Credentialism and the supposed correlation with intelligence is how they define their social standing in modern society.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:41 AM
–

I guess they did on election day
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:36 AM
–

Focus on issues impacting the working class and draw out more voters. That is the path ahead. Not catering to those casting spite votes and hoping for revenge. Don't waste your energy appealing to those who wish harm on you. The working class is repulsed by the (group) self hating exclusionary urges among progressive women (and men but the OP is about women). It's always funny when "progressives" (left liberals) try to promulgate this working class appeal when they come across as histrionic ideo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:35 AM
–

What a load of nonsense, especially the progressive monastery stuff. And counterpoint: litterallly jihadists were destroyed by Kurdish Libertarian Communists,many of them women. No, they weren't. Rojava was on the edge of being overrun when the US and other parties intervened. They would have been totally crushed otherwise. 20-40% of police officers depending the country are women Women make terrible police officers.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:14 AM
–

Patriarchy isn't necessary just some sort of sufficient social enforcement and structure. The "problem" with modernism (including feminism) is that it's tendencies only go in one direction - socially anarchic. Patriarchy was defeated but it's conquerors were ideologically incapable of producing a capable social order (in the long term) to replace it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:10 AM
–

But they're not shitting on men. Young men are taking the most extreme things they can find women saying on the internet, attributing it to leftists, and demanding Harris answer for it. The OP and news media is blasting Fuentes ("your body, my choice" which was itself a joke) as an example of women being threatened when the guy has a mid range twitter following and perhaps 5 figures watch his show. The same guy also attacked Trump for being a moderate and said not to vote for him.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:03 AM
2

Like half the posts by women here are completely missing the point about stats the OP is making and arguing about how awful the US maternal mortality rate using the stats that are the whole point of the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 08:39 AM
1

I wonder why the CDC would choose to falsely inflate the stats to make American health care look bad? Why would Sweden make itself the rape capital of the Western world by changing the definition of rape? The answer is a mix of ideology and bureaucracy. On the cancer point, how would you prove the pregnancy wasn't a relevant factor? This totally misses the point of the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 08:36 AM
1

Whether the deaths should be counted or not is not the point of the OP. It's that some stats are counting it and others are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 08:35 AM
0

In large part because of certain groups with much higher obesity rates and all the health issues that come along with it (including elevated maternal mortality)
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 08:32 AM
–

That's fine with me. Women shouldn't be conscripted unless absolutely necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 12:57 AM
–

The US hasn't needed conscription for self protection since the revolution and maybe WWII
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 12:55 AM
–

The actions are there, it’s really just a lack of messaging. They also lack effectiveness. Most of this shit just gets eaten up by bureaucracy, NGOs, and other types of grift. Billions get spent and often the total local effect is refurbishment of community centers or something equally useless. Even with the draft, Biden’s Administrstion spent countless amounts of money enhancing our war fighting technologies in a way that practically eliminates the need for a future draft This is propaganda. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 12:50 AM
–

The EC was intended as an anti populism measure originally, where the electors were supposed to be able to choose who was president and the popular vote was more like a "suggestion" to take into account. That it benefited the South via the 3/5ths compromise is an effect but not the original intention (and the South would have benefited from the compromise without the EC anyway via the house).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 12:45 AM
2

Looks match (meaning without makeup) and lifestyle match. I doubt most women will accept the former though. They're somewhat more reasonable on the 2nd (they still chase exciting guys but aren't offended by the thought of dating someone with their own lifestyle)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 04:06 AM
–

Most men and women of different groups voted similarly and had a relatively small gender gap difference. Only Latinos had a large gap. So I don't think it will make a difference at all. Liberal women are just extremely up their ass with thinking 90% of other women are like them.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/24 10:41 PM
–

Correct and yet Sanders bowed down and voluntarily put on a collar for his masters until it was "safe" to start making criticisms again.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/24 10:38 PM
3

It's just women that are good looking and put themselves out there in some way (OLD, social media, local high traffic places whatever). Most everything beyond that is irrelevant to getting guys after them, there will always be some group of men chasing them if they're attractive and seen somehow. Introverted or extroverted, religious or secular, fitness freak or couch potato, just be attractive. Stereotype "fun Instagram girl traveling in revealing clothes" with a hot body probably has the large…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 10:39 PM
4

Everyone thinks the feminist revolution is cool until they have to nut up and actually kill some men. Sad!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 10:27 PM
1

I guess I have an abnormal life path?? Well pretty clearly yes. Asexual lesbians are a small minority of the population.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 08:03 AM
5

If you’re on the normal western life path, sex will become harder to achieve. I’ll explain why. What you're describing is no longer "normal" (experienced by a significant majority of the population). Only ~44% of millennials are married, only 58% of women born from 1982 to 1986 have kids (i.e. the edge of millenial women fading out of fertility). What you're describing as the normal life path applies to half or less of the population and it's only decreasing in relevance for Zoomers. Anyway I di…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 07:59 AM
–

In some cities yes, nationally no https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article288917448.html The 20's are when income matters the least vs social desirability anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/24 08:51 AM
3

No that's not what I'm saying. But I doubt you'd be interested in my point anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/24 08:26 AM
3

I have read texts from a lot of religions. Inevitably these big brained reddit atheist takes misunderstand the motivations and sincerity of beliefs of the genuinely religious. In the modern West there's large swathes of "liberal" interpretations of religions that basically jettison most of the rules considered sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/24 06:47 AM
11

Some men already do. It's just a marginal and mostly ignored endeavor and will remain so for several reasons. People in general don't believe men "need" gender specific treatment. Women simply have greater need of gender specific care. Who do you think started this for women? Surprise! It was women!! It was a mix of men and women. More women for sure but there's always been a substantial group of men supporting it and helping pay for it. So my question is, why do men blame women for having these…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/24 01:35 AM
2

Your view is entirely one of exploitation that excludes other possibilities as motivations (such as wanting a "better" bond, religion, more likelyhood of loyalty etc). Cynicism and bitterness usually go hand in hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/24 01:26 AM
5

Streaming has produced a handful of good quality shows, a few middling shows, and 90%+ garbage.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 04:30 AM
3

I'm not really sure most straight men hate it or really have thought about it since it went off the air. But in a lot of straight male circles, I’ve noticed real disdain for it. Many see it as the embodiment of “what’s wrong with modern women.” To me, though, Sex and the City is fascinating because it explores how different “modern” women navigate relationships, dating, and sex. Well that basically explains it. "Modern women" has come to be defined by a deeply urban, consumerist, "experience" se…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 04:26 AM
4

Never heard of this comparison
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/24 06:10 PM
13

Yes. I'm saying that even accounting for STI asymmetry women seem to be overall having a disproportionate rise in STI cases which likely can only be explained be partner choice given they aren't having more casual sex. Let's take syphilis, which is the largest source of recent STI growth. Syphilis is not an STI that has gender asymmetrical contraction rates (women are not biologically more likely to contract it than men), and the the majority of total cases in men occur in homosexual and bisexua…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/24 06:05 AM
15

But all that has always been true. Women did not suddenly become more likely to catch STIs or test for them (at least within the last 30 years). And this is happening while sexual activity rates have fallen - women aren't having more casual sex (compared to the 1980's they are having less) but they are catching substantially more STI's. Mens STI rate has also risen at a more moderate rate but this is probably accounted for by changes in the homosexual community which makeup a massive amount of m…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/24 03:05 AM
0

Picking the second is basically mandatory unless you're someone from an extremely religious background A traditional wife; Stays a virgin until marriage, gets married young, spends her twenties and thirties having multiple children back to back, and lives to serve her husband (3 home cooked meals a day, laundry, cleaning, childcare daily etc). No degree, no career. Complete financial dependance of her partner, submissive to all his wants and needs (even if you don’t agree), obedient. This isn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/24 10:01 PM
8

This doesn't match up with actual studies or any observation of data from OLD. Women that are statistically median in attractiveness consistently have options (and most well below that median as well). Whether or not men understand what average is (they seem to understand it better than women at least) they consistently choose to pair up with average women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/24 09:13 PM
1

Are women better because they have bigger boobs than men? Well, it's definitely a point in their favor
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/24 09:02 PM
6

Women nowadays are doing quite well though. Better than men. Not really. Men still out earn women and have fewer mental and health problems. For some reason college attendance rates are the only metric that matter when people declare this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/24 09:01 PM
4

Sounds like you're stuck in a pretty low class culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/24 09:00 PM
18

Every study ever on this shows men are much more likely to find average women attractive than vice versa. Mens standard for women is very average.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/24 09:00 PM
4

Your fat fetish is really distorting your view of what's normal. A lot of shorter women are medically obese at 180 pounds nevermind chubby.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/24 04:43 PM
22

It's hard to disagree with what you're saying because obviously treating someone platonically results in a platonic relationship - but I think that's kind of mischaracterizing the advice. The point is to develop social skills, a social circle, and then pursue someone you're interested in. It's sort of assumed that you're pursuing someone romantically/sexually in the context of building a social circle. That said most men are better off just using dating apps if they're working age/post college t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/24 10:05 AM
4

The never ending quest by women to make nice guys into evil deceivers who deserve to be losers.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/24 03:41 AM
1

1- I think that we can all agree that men tend to get more angry than women (and they act on it to a greater extent). Anger is also an emotion, which I rarely ever hear anyone bring up for some reason. Spousal abuse rates are about similar between genders and emotional abuse rates (motivated by anger) seem to be higher among women, so I'm not sure this is true exactly. Women are definitely more inhibited in expressing anger when it's more risky but put them in a situation (such as romantic relat…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/24 09:24 AM
1

Legal immigration suppresses wages in many fields just as illegal does. And it causes population churn which has disruptive social effects. It's only unequivocally good from a GDP spreadsheet perspective. Illegal immigration may be most concentrated at the border but the whole country has a significant population of illegal/"grey market" immigrants. Almost every state in the US has had a significant demographic shift from it. The idea that only border states are affected is nonsense dispelled by…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 08:16 PM
1

The same thing is/will happen due to low fertility rates, a shrinking labour pool in many countries. In the long run at least a fertile population can recover and grow again - an infertile one can't
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 08:04 PM
1

Women had most of the rights they do now by the 70s. But regardless it still functioned well and in some ways better than now even if it was more sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 08:01 PM
18

Option 2 or 3 won't happen because they fundamentally go against human nature in a "free market". 1 is obviously most likely to actually happen. 4 via state measures to restructure society to heavily incentivize family formation is probably the only one that could actually manage significant effects at a demographically significant level.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 07:58 PM
0

If it's critical how did pre 70s (large scale entry of women into the professional workforce) function? Were these not advanced industrialized societies? Is the demographic collapse happening now preferable somehow to more mothers being out of the workforce? I'm pro choice but this argument doesn't make much sense to me
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 04:10 PM
-1

There's very few places that aren't affected by immigration in the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 04:03 PM
57

Men who are both attractive (as in actively attractive to women, so a very small % of men) and relationship oriented are rarely on the market. Men that are "average" in attractiveness (i.e. the vast majority of men) and relationship oriented are more likely to be on the market but still less so than short term oriented men. Men that are attractive and short term oriented are constantly going to be on and off the market. Men that are average and short term only are actually not that large a perce…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 10:07 PM
1

I don't think that's likely to explain either phenomenon, only male homosexuals higher partner counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 09:33 PM
1

Both as far as I can tell. The exclusively homosexual male population is higher and so is the "experimentation" rate. Women report a much higher rate of same sex attraction but seem to act on it a much lower rate for some reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 05:12 PM
1

A "good" dating app would be some kind of AI powered match maker produced and run without a profit incentive that would take both personality and looks into account. I doubt women would like it more than what's available now since it would be much more likely to match them with "average" men.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 05:07 PM
0

More women are queer and date eachother Men have a higher proportion of actual same sex experience/men who date other men. Women report being bisexual or "questioning" at higher rates but engage in homosexual dating less often.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 05:04 PM
9

They tend to fast track emotional intimacy because both of them are capable of that. Are they? I mean it seems they desire it more certainly. But it also seems to be a source of a lot of problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 08:26 AM
0

It's been a normal avenue of pairing forever.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 10:25 PM
3

Most people are fat, weak, and stupid. They don't see a need to address any of those things either. They're not a good metric for whether something is a major societal issue or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 10:24 PM
11

Because it's indicative of poor social and life outcomes. You'll notice it correlates strongly with depression and other mental ailments. Apathy rooted in defeatism (which is what's happening with most men in this category whether they're capable or willing to acknowledge it or not) is not good for them. You mind as well ask why it's an issue that obese people can't stop eating food. They seem happy enough right?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 10:21 PM
1

Cynicism isn't a substitute for intelligence or knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 10:18 PM
2

Is there a solution for this? Under socialization and/or mal socialization is the root cause of low pairing rates and family formation so if you could fix that it would mostly fix those issues. But to answer your question no, there isn't. The typical redditor, which is sadly representative of a increasingly large amount of the public, is a social and societal nihilist. There's nothing you can tell them that would convince them to turn things around - among the general public few would accept the…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 10:15 PM
1

Stronger and more capable body and you don't have to deal with menstruation or pregnancy. A little bit better chance at having higher IQ. There seems to be a greater number of men who have a thought process/ideology I respect than women but it's hard to pin down how much of that is really biologically gender based or a side of effect of higher IQ variability.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 06:49 AM
1

No for a variety of reasons not related to dating. Dating being easier is not enough to make being another gender enticing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 06:35 AM
3

No, it isn't. It's pretending something is sexy because it induces men to do those things. It's like saying women who cook or do dishes are sexy - no it's just nice to haves and anyone who can't see the obvious bait and switch is stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/24 07:09 AM
3

Can you quit your job and comfortably live off your assets? No? Then you ain't upper middle class. Outside the retirement class of seniors, that's like <1% of the population which seems to make the UMC almost meaningless small.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/24 03:15 AM
1

According to Bourdieu, class is determined by three things: the social capital (who do you know?), the economical capital (your money and assets), and the cultural capital (what school did you go to? Are you cultured? Interested in art and history?). These three things determine the profile of your future partner more than any other factor. Well you're choosing Bourdieus interpretation of class which isn't what I would define it as (your means of income). But the variables you listed do impact d…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/24 03:08 AM
5

I don't really have a problem with it. But if women keep claiming that they're doing better than men in these ways then I'll keep pointing out there's no actual evidence of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/24 01:56 AM
8

I did. You said it was stereotype that men were less emotionally unstable (I'm saying the stereotype is true) and that men were just as much of a "headache" as women (this is vague but statistically men have fewer mental/emotional problems). You're drawing equivalence where there isn't and concluding it's men's problem that women treat them some way based on the aforementioned stereotype
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/24 04:04 PM
7

The idea that women are better at dealing with emotional problems or are more psychological resilient is not based on anything substantial. Women very clearly have a significantly higher rate of mental/emotional problems. Anecdotally I've also seen far more women that trauma dump on men or are emotionally abusive - perhaps in part because people are much quicker to point out this abuse when it's a man doing it. Lots of women equate consumption of mental health services and products (psych meds) …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/24 03:43 PM
18

RP is a selfish reactionary strategy to get women. It's explicitly not about the larger interests of society, or even men as a gender - it's about how to get the best dating/sexual results for individual men. If you actually wanted to help, your fight should not to bring back the traditional family, or keep coping with traditional "golden age values" , if you want to help men, you should do it by making them independent of women. RP is not concerned with those things. In fact most of the advice …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/24 11:03 PM
-1

There used to be propaganda that pregnancy and birth were wonderful, beautiful things but now women see it for what it is- it destroys your body, destroys your finances, destroys your partners attraction to you and potentially destroys your health. This is just another kind of propaganda. Yes some women regret having kids and end up with major health problems from it. The majority of women can come out the other side of pregnancy healthy, stable, and as fit with some work. Lifestyle plays a majo…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/24 10:22 PM
3

Drug abuse absolutely was worse. In 1980's drug deaths from overdoses averaged around ~8,000 per year. In 2020 nearly 90,000 people died from drug overdoses in a single year. A whole magnitude of difference. Crime was far higher It was higher yes. But I didn't really mention that. Mental illness often went undiagnosed, All direct and proximal (i.e. "hidden by underdiagnoses") measures indicate the large majority of growth in mental illness is novel and not a result of better diagnostics. and the…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/24 08:05 AM
2

"40" years ago were the 1980s, well into modern marriage/social trends. And no they weren't worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 11:57 PM
1

Many churches absolutely are yes. They have a very "liberal" interpretation of the bible, female or even homosexual clergy etc. More to the point though "church-dating" is all about conventional social contracts - essentially it's the stereotypical "nice guy with a job" tract that everyone derides (for good reason, it doesn't work).
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 11:48 PM
1

No, if you're perceived as being "too soft" or too "uptight" you absolutely can fail while being pro social. And if you're not physically presenting yourself in an attractive way you will also fail. If you don't think so you have never seen the type of guys that are in church every Sunday and wash out with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 11:46 PM
2

People having kids at 21 was an unmitigated disaster for society. The generation that got married at 19 and started popping out kids at 20 also had incredibly high divorce rates, lots of "latch key kids", etc. The divorce rate did not explode because the age of marriage (usually age of first kid or slightly earlier) dropped by a couple of years (average age of first marriage was ~22 in 1900 for women and ~25 for men, then in 1950 ~20 and ~23). Divorce rates have declined mostly in proportion to …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 11:40 PM
3

Most people consider a 7 or 8/10 handsome. The large majority of men are 5/10 or less when women rate mens faces in studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/24 11:34 PM
2

A "normal" man doesn't think about larger societal issues at all. He's fat, maybe 100 IQ, and thinking about where his next endorphin hit is going to come from. Why would I particularly care about what normal men do? That's not really an argument against judging people for their partner choices and trends among groups.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/24 08:48 PM
0

Men have to be extremely good looking to have wide aesthetic appeal to women because of the way women view men's looks. The men who rate above a 6 or 7 are extremely rare, less than 1%. Women's looks get rated along a mostly normal distribution curve so there's far more women that are 7+ than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 03:06 PM
2

Because men and women's sexualities aren't mirrors. Some sort of status or social excitement is attractive to women, even necessary for some women. Men mostly derive their attraction from visuals and everything passed that is a "nice to have"
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 02:56 PM
13

Two weird looking women saying "they're in a sea of amazing women" and maybe 1 attractive dude. Sums up the incredibly lopsided way women look at each other and men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/24 10:41 PM
–

A guy can be 6'2, make 6 figures, above average attractiveness and fitness and still strike out (with desirable women) because all those stats don't consider how extremely important social pecking order is to women, more than any particular physical stat. For men it makes sense to describe a woman as attractive based merely on physical description. For women not so much.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/24 08:18 PM
–

I have no trouble believing it. Women have a massive amount of things that cause genuine "ick". A lot of them are quite stupid trivial things that indicate an overly anxious and sensitive psychology. It's the psycho-sexual equivalent to being a picky eater. You desperately want to believe older women are jealous, but there's no wall, there's no lack of male attention as you grow old. Women always get male attention. The wall is a notable drop in the ability to attract the subset of actually desi…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/24 08:16 PM
1

The type of women who get into doing sex work (at whatever level) and the average female redditor (at least the ones that post in a place like this) aren't the same, they're mostly not going to defend sex work at any age so I don't think you're going to get much out of this. The overlap between women who defend sex work as "female empowerment" and actual sex workers (mostly onlyfans nowadays) is pretty large, average women have at best a neutral to somewhat negative attitude towards it. Regardle…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/24 07:11 AM
1

Alright well I thought it was clear we were discussing something else. Peace
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 05:34 AM
0

I'm not sure what your point is. There are women that get off from having sex on camera even if it isn't focused on their pleasure. I don't think you understand what hyper sexual people are like.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 05:27 AM
-1

I think you'd be surprised about what the average woman who ends up in the porn industry is like. Hypersexuality and exhibitionism is very common. It's a particular demographic
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 03:13 AM
–

Finland barely does better than the US on PISA scores and that's with the US having large "underperforming" minority groups. Although Finland now has those groups as well at smaller proportions
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/24 11:55 PM
1

I don't think I agree with your list. Those are all good things sure but really a guy can just be exciting in whatever way, or high status enough, or even just dependable enough to succeed in relationships with at least some women. Longer lists tend to fall apart under scrutiny because a lot of relationships can be "good enough" to last with only one of those former things.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/24 11:45 PM
3

Sounds like something new yorkers made up
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/24 11:36 PM
-2

Lots of women in porn are literally nymphomaniacs and do legitimately get off throughout a scene. Some are pretty frank that they don't even particularly like sex. So it's a mixed bag
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/24 11:28 PM
6

You seem to want human psychology to operate in the way you think it should instead of understanding the way it actually is
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/24 01:53 AM
0

More feminist/liberal inclined men and women don't have more children, they have less. Right now the selection pressure is strongly against everyone who isn't trad religious types. Those are the only group with "good" fertility rates So really a man's (and women's for that matter) best bet as far as evolutionary fitness is concerned is to reject modernism and seek out religious partner inclined towards traditional gender roles. If women are in control then what they're selecting for is trad men …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 10:56 PM
–

If you're selective enough for what you consider "real universities" maybe, but that's <10% of the population while ~50% of the population under 50 have college degrees.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 06:52 PM
0

-the woman is not wrong for wearing clothes that "violate modesty", whatever THAT means. I'm always curious what the cutoff is when women repeat this. If a woman worked out naked clearly that's "violating modesty". If she's wearing a string bikini most would say the same. If she's wearing booty shorts that outline everything and a spaghetti bra suddenly it's impossible to understand what modesty standards even mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 06:08 PM
–

The average IQ of a college grad is around 100 and grad students around 105-110. Education and IQ aren't the same thing. It's more correlated with general SES (which is in turn more correlated with marriage stability) than IQ.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 06:02 PM
–

Actual Autism is a developmental disorder. "Broad spectrum" autism diagnosis are largely inclusive of people with lower levels of social development/high social inhibition and has largely become worthless as a diagnosis.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 06:01 PM
2

"Passport bros" want to maximize both easy access to sex and the benefits of a "traditional" feminine partner. Actual "trad bros" largely wouldn't be looking overseas to find a wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 05:58 PM
-1

Cleanliness standards and time spent cleaning is something that's largely been used to criticize men. The OP is a counter argument to that. I'm not sure where women are being put down exactly? Seems male loneliness needs to increase and the birth rate needs to continue to decrease before men learn these lessons the hard way. That's not how it works. Humanity is right now going through a major natural selection event that is filtering for people more inclined towards traditional gender roles (i.e…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 05:51 PM
0

No one "wants" to do household cores. They do them because they have to be done, and the amount of time someone spends on them tends to reflect on your personality and your upbringing how much pride you take in yourself and your home. Does it? I've met plenty of fat and plainly groomed women who are absolutely OCD about cleaning. I've also met plenty of fit well put together corporate types with messy homes. I agree it is a reflection of your personality and upbringing (to a degree) but I don't …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 05:46 PM
–

If you look at what group has a demographic has the highest fatherlessness rates, where "natural red pill" men tend to come from, and average outcomes there including sexual success rates, it will answer most of the questions in the OP. Father figures tend to be important for generalized life outcomes, but not social-sexual success necessarily. "Red pill culture" stuff (i.e. the internet media beyond basic RP observations) is almost entirely the product of low social trust societies.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 05:22 PM
–

IQ is only weakly correlated with post primary education level now.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 06:11 AM
–

Modern IQ tests are pure spatial rotation, pattern recognition, and short term memory management. I don't think they can reasonably be called insanely biased. no serious study would ever include internet sources either
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/24 06:03 AM
0

She's legitimately in the bottom 5% of non fat women
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/24 01:15 AM
1

Bezos was in the top 1% when he met his wife already, he just wasn't ludicrously wealthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/24 01:14 AM
3

Why? Biologically 20s is the best time to have kids, the only downside is lower probable income.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 04:23 PM
0

Good, no. But grandparents raising kids isn't that unusual or bad either - just not ideal and effectively what would be happening age dynamics wise. Given choices between divorced parents, single mom, pharma dependent, checked out, or older parents, the last is IMO clearly the "the least bad" of commonly accepted and excused parenting situations. It's not something I would advocate for or encourage like the OP (I think mid 30s is already late to have kids) but it's not some horrible outcome in a…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 09:12 AM
0

It simply isn't fair to bring a child into the world knowing full well that you are going to be providing a poor life standard for them. I don't think having older parents equates to "poor life standard". It's not as ideal as having children young (which I think more people should pursue over having children in the latter half of their 30's) but it's not some guaranteed awful outcome for the kid either. With all the social "challenges" present in the modern world having older parents is hardly t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 08:17 AM
1

I’m not sure about this, it seems the term is not well-defined and many people have conflicting interpretations of it. Historically and anthropologically it was pretty well understood as what I said. If the definition has expanded then it's largely along ideological grounds of equity - i.e. any gendered imbalance in power and wealth is considered "patriarchy". But this is merging what was previously understood as a (semi) concrete system of gendered rules governing inheritance, employment, relig…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 06:15 AM
3

We certainly live in a patriarchy, seeing that the people at the top have historically been men and are still mostly men. Patriarchy is not "the wealthiest group is majority male", it's a system with gendered rules that grant privileges to men. Wealthy men do not have major legal or implied privilege that wealthy women don't - at most you can argue there's some degree of sexism among some men that might impede womens accumulation of wealth. An example that shows men are not favoured is how the m…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 03:17 AM
–

Most western Men want traditional submissive compliment women but who also pays 50% of the bills and majority of the house cleaning Not really. The men that are looking for traditional submissive housewife types generally don't care about a 50% split. A lot are even ok with their partner not working at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 12:04 AM
–

I think right-leaning men tend to talk about the importance of lifting a lot, but that often doesn't translate to actually lifting more. The dudes who actually shut the fuck up and get under the fucking bar consistently are a varied bunch. The OP is exaggerating but hours in the gym do correlate with likelihood of being "right wing" https://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/articles/Muscular-men-less-likely-to-support-social-and-economic-equality-study-suggests Then again the Warsaw pact was…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 12:03 AM
5

Every fifth guy is not getting chased by women. Even every tenth guy is not. Every 20th guy (5%) maybe is actively pursued.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 09:53 PM
2

I think this is more or less true in most western & first world countries, mainly because improving equality means more freedom and economic power than women ever had before - many can afford to live alone, and plenty are content with their own company (especially when the alternative is a mid husband who adds to the labor demand at home instead of helping with it) so in order to be worthwhile, a man has to IMPROVE upon happy solitude. Womens mental illness rates, drug abuse, suicide attempts et…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 08:36 AM
3

Women have always been valued. Read some history books. Not nearly in the same way as modern women are.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 08:32 AM
2

Physically attractive Financially wealthy Without personality defects/ red flags That's basically a top ~1% which have always had it pretty good. Maybe they have it even better now but it's not a magnitude of change. Thanks to modern science and fitness culture, there are more attractive women than ever before I'd say it's more like the the hot women got even hotter rather than there being more hot women On the opposite side, average men are getting more fat and ugly and uneducated and poor and …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 08:29 AM
7

The top 20% of men are probably valuing women the least out of any point in history, which is ironic because it's the 20% most women are chasing. The other 80% are left begging for a chance with women who, historically, would have probably been perfectly fine with a guy in that 80%. Top 20% of men is not nearly high enough to be "chased". Top 20% gives you decent dating prospects in that you might actually have choices to pursue. Guys that are actually actively selected for by women are in the t…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 08:21 AM
7

Most men just want my kind for sex and sometimes loyalty, companionship, and domestic labor. That's...literally what most women are looking for in men too.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 09:44 AM
1

or (maybe) a foreign man Well yes, that's the entire premise of the OP
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 08:57 AM
1

No, they aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 08:56 AM
2

Dating apps are well known to be sausage fests. A lot of men use apps as a way to try to “order” sex, much like at McDonald’s or at a buffet. So many women feel disrespected on these apps that they forgo them all together. Most places you can go as a man are sausage fests. Most men use apps because that's the only place you can consistently find groups of single women interested in dating. In the real world you have to be constantly hitting on women to have a chance at getting the same reach as …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 08:55 AM
2

The OP has an obvious motive but most of the womens responses here are clueless so I guess it's having the intended effect. It absolutely is far easier to date in Asia and if you want a much "easier" dating life then Asia is the place to go as a "Western" man. Literally every dude I've known that's gone has gotten married/ltr to a woman that's usually "superior" to the any typical Western woman he can get (i.e. they're successful professionals or at least educated, fill out a stereotypical femin…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 08:52 AM
2

I mean, it's not like Western men are rare in Asia. Yes, they are. They're like <0.1% of the population in most of Asia outside areas immediately around military bases or very popular foreign tourist spots (where they might be 1% of the population).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 08:38 AM
1

You can definitely date in Asia without those things as Western man....or even as a native unless you're dating UMC.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 08:34 AM
0

This is nonsense as far as maturity goes. Men have larger brains than women on average, that doesn't make them smarter than women. Adult men do have a slightly higher average IQ and larger tails. It's just not enough to make a notable difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 12:22 AM
2

I don't think the crossover between "financial abortion" and Republicans who are "pro life" is significant. Most of the latter are for enforcement of financial support of kids. To the extent the latter are making it easier for the former it's not really substantial. By doing nothing about deadbeats who get away with being deadbeats Non payment of child support is one of the only "debt crimes" that can get you thrown into prison. It's actually prosecuted almost uniquely for failure to pay.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 10:27 PM
1

Theoretically I guess? The Manosphere is pretty small even if they were doing what you're saying, the amount of men that both want to make abortion illegal and have 0 financial obligation is quite small.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 09:17 PM
2

In what way are they doing that?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 09:14 PM
–

. But today there's people with an odd obsession with population numbers It's not an odd obsession as demographic dynamics have massive impacts on society from the social to material. Rather it's bizarre how blasé many people are about one of the most important aspects of society. But you know, back then unwanted/unaffordable children were sold off, sent to factories work, shuck oysters, or worse & etc. The large majority of kids were raised by their parents in normal family units
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 09:13 AM
2

Even if they become viable they're likely to be quite expensive and risk prone for a long, long time.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 08:56 AM
2

The trend exists but not to any great disparity. Modern society enculturates reproductive poison. It's full of fat, depressed, anxious people who are oriented towards consumerism and finance over family formation. The current life track most middle class people go through emphasizes material acquisition to obtain a life that's quickly retreating in accessibility while ignoring having kids - and no it's not the 1950's people are chasing, it's the 1990s. It's a house of cards that's quickly (well,…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 08:54 AM
3

lmao you think the stereotypical deadbeat dad is voting republican?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 08:48 AM
2

Then it doesn't really seem like it's sexy. It just makes you like them more.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/24 09:39 AM
3

I have seen these types of statements and they usually have NOTHING to do with sex. I can't say that I have seen males do this though: "The sexiest thing a woman can do is be stoic" Well there you go. These things aren't actually sexy - they're how they want their man to act to make their lives easier/be more compatible. Sex is the implied inducement here; "act like this and I'll be more likely to have sex with you". How self aware women are when they make these kind of comments probably varies.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/24 09:36 AM
1

Do you want your family to see how you would answer questions about people you're trying to fuck?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/24 12:26 AM
1

One of the solutions would be to share more personal information about ourselves. Our goals, our desires, our dreams... and whatnot. There have been/are apps that were more geared towards that - OkCupid was the first popular dating website/app and basically what you're describing. I'd say it worked a bit better in terms of personality matching than Tinder but it wasn't as exciting so it mostly fell off and eventually got bought and made worse (on purpose). Anyway I think if you were truly trying…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/24 12:24 AM
5

But I'm not gay Cap
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/24 06:31 AM
1

Holy fuck balls my dude! Cringe much?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/24 01:25 AM
8

In what way have you been massively negatively affected?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 07:28 PM
2

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 06:49 PM
1

Are you saying these things have increased or that they should have increased? I'm saying it's extremely unlikely that underdiagnoses explains the large growth in mental illness because proximate measures for mental illness from preceding decades aren't nearly high enough to reconcile with that theory. Instead it's likely there's been both a significant growth in the actual prevalence of psychological problems and better diagnosis. If you have some way to eliminate all illnesses, please let the …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 08:01 AM
3

How do you know that? How do you know it's not simply people seeking treatment for their problems at higher rates than the past? Because the massive rise in mental illness rates would have indicated a correspondingly massively higher rate in proximate measures for mental illness (suicide, self harm, social dysfunction, mental instability etc) which simply don't match up anywhere close to the assumption that they were just underdiagnosed. Peoples mental health is actually getting worse despite th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 10:38 PM
1

The surplus is not the only reason for the rise in individualism but a complex mix of technological change and enculturation. You're supposing that it was only material constraint that stopped people from adopting high levels of individualism but that's not clear - it's also not clear that it's actually making them happier or improving their life outcomes (it appears to be doing the opposite). It's like assuming people really wanted to be obese and are better off for it because there's now a lar…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 10:30 PM
22

In the RP it is commonly argued that modern women are “delusional” and have standards that are “too high” (what they really mean is they are too selective) because many men are not picked. But I would argue that they don’t it’s just that modern men have less to offer women individually and women have adapted to that by becoming pickier. Yes modern men offer less and are less "fit" than their ancestors. But so are women. The motivation for decreasing investment is mutual. Which is the crux of the…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 10:24 PM
3

I think the relative lack of focus on male victimization may in a way be beneficial for men. Pathologization of victimization or even fetishization of it often makes these incidents more mentally scarring and leads to poorer outcomes. Not that we shouldn't be talking about and aware of this, but I think taking the route society has taken with women WRT abuse is not actually good for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 10:16 PM
2

Well why don't you just lose weight? Structure your diet and maintain a consistent calorie deficit
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 07:55 AM
5

1) It's not just that people are getting more treatment for mental health, society is producing a population with higher baseline rates of psychological problems. 2) Treatment for mental health rarely "solves" the problem, it just treats it with drugs or therapy (which has low efficacy for many mental health problems). Being on anti depressants sucks and the more people need them the worse off society is.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 07:38 AM
7

The next generation will understand the importance of physical and mental health and how vital it is to be able to attract a partner. Of maintaining strict beauty standards, not letting yourself go, of being in tune with their emotions, having empathy and so on. I foresee that generation having much less problems than we do now. GenZ has the highest rate of mental illness and obesity ever. Things aren't getting better. Gen Alpha will probably be worse based on trends.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 07:32 AM
10

I don't think your premise is correct. The large majority of people, including introverted/less social people, still desire romantic partners and some minimum of social network - even if it's say just their family and a few close friends. Social and mental health markers have generally been inversely correlated with rates of individualism (i.e. people have poorer outcomes). People that are genuinely happy being true loners are rare. To address this from another angle highly individualistic moder…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 07:30 AM
1

I see, less "fertile" as in "fewer kids." Why is that a bad thing, again? I suppose it depends on your perspective. If you're anti natal/eco fascist/misanthropic or whatever then it's not a bad thing. If you like the current liberal society then it's a bad thing because it leads to replacement by religious conservatives (which have a relatively strong inheritance in ideology/lifestyle) and massive problems economically since almost all economic investment is leveraged on profit growth and demand…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 02:52 AM
2

Source? Using "liberalism" as a proxy for feminist or at least "modern" oriented men, it's pretty clear there's a large gap in fertility rates https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GMN7vXWXMAE3v2a?format=jpg&name=small Religion as a proxy https://ifstudies.org/blog/americas-growing-religious-secular-fertility-divide "Benevolent sexism" as a proxy https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8158974/ Politics as a proxy https://econweb.ucsd.edu/~gdahl/papers/partisan-fertility.pdf https://app.hedgeye.com/i…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 02:14 AM
–

Sounds kind of like grooming, lol. Do you think people aren't currently being enculturated to find certain qualities or personality types attractive? The reality just is that women are already dating the guys they should be dating. People date who they want to date and who they want to date is what they should date... The assumption of your premise (that the men selected are notably more competent than shy men) is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/24 10:27 PM
0

The US has a higher suicide rate and only somewhat better fertility rates than Japan (not counting immigrants). The same is true for Europe (some of them have lower fertility rates). SK is a uniquely dystopian society.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/24 10:22 PM
3

Lots of men have and are willing to change. These men are far less fertile. Sub replacement fertility is caused by men and women choosing to have few or no children. It's not caused by "left over" men or men not willing to change - in fact the latter are the only ones who are successful in an evolutionary sense. The current drive towards extinction (for certain segments of the population) is a result of men changing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/24 10:19 PM
0

As you say oral or hand stimulation doesn't satisfy most women without a PIV component. These are good but adjacent to PIV keeping a woman sexually satisfied in a relationship, which massively increases the likelihood of the woman remaining in the relationship. I wonder if the high rate of Lesbian asexuality in long term relationships is related to lack of conventional penetration despite higher orgasm rates (compared to heterosexual women) in the beginning of relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/24 08:13 AM
1

lol @ how many women are just straight up agreeing the premise that men are basically disgusting to them
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/24 08:03 AM
1

If that's genuinely how you feel you might be asexual or homosexual yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/24 08:00 AM
–

Like why can't these people face reality? Even on this sub I've run multiple Q4W posts for women in LTRs which has shown over and over that a man's social skills (i.e., personality, character, charisma, behavior ) are the main (or one of the main) reason(s) they were attracted to and remain attracted to their boyfriend / husband. What women (or men) say they look for or want in a partner is not necessarily the same as what actually motivates them in partner matching. Studies consistently show lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/24 06:44 AM
5

Criminals tend to have a high level of social aptitude. Depends on how you look at it. They tend to be self confident and good at bullying people. However they also tend to be quite poor at navigating social norms and empathy in general. Social complexity is usually a challenge for them - however self confidence is definitely a social strength especially in certain environments.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/24 09:21 PM
3

RP doesn't claim to have womens or anyone else's best interests at heart. It's explicitly a selfish outlook for getting laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/24 03:54 PM
6

The OP is not RP and I've rarely seen RP talk about daughters at all
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/24 03:51 PM
3

TradCon men are against their daughters going to college because of it's effects on their ideology primarily and the implied sexual promiscuity secondarily. There's no particular reason for RP men to be against their daughters going to college beyond whatever ideology they bring with them into RP. RP doesn't really have anything to say about your kids. I think your reasoning in the OP is relatively sound, except just going to college does not give access to elite men, going to elite colleges doe…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/24 03:36 PM
2

Ok sure. That also doesn't mean they were actually socially or psychological harmful. Getting asked out by the same guy two or three times across high school or college or whatever did not scare or harm the vast majority of women who experienced it. It's completely absurd to regard it as stalker like behaviour or deep violation of someones consent. Maybe if the guys asking are jumping out of a bush at night or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/24 11:49 PM
2

It used to be fairly common for me to come home and beat the shit out of my wife for overcooking my lasagna No, it wasn't. That was never considered anywhere close to socially acceptable or legal, nor was it "common". Abusers got away with it more in the past for a variety of reasons. Higher domestic violence rates in the past doesn't mean every other guy was beating the shit out of his wife and people were just shrugging their shoulders about it. What are we talking about here? It might’ve been…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/24 11:44 PM
–

50K is well over the poverty line in every state in the US. It could only be considered around poverty level for someone living in the most expensive cities.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/24 08:31 PM
–

50k is not poor, it's literally above the median income in the US. Do you live in NYC or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/24 07:43 PM
1

Some day a real rain will come and wash away these red pill bastards...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/24 07:38 PM
3

It actually used to be fairly common and normal and I'm sure still occurs some before people became so socially stilted and paranoid that they think asking someone out multiple times is "insane". I'm sure you would be shocked at how many average "creepy insane" men only got married because they were somewhat persistent in seeking to date a given woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/24 07:34 PM
10

Women being sexually pure, chaste, modest, yada yada was a religiously led ideal that women were told they were born to fit and shamed and shunned for not fitting It's probably as much cultural as religious. In many places in medieval Europe women were considered the lustful sex ruining the purity of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/24 06:44 PM
2

While I'm sure there are men who aren't interested in successful career women for whatever reason, I'm curious how much common personality types for those women makes a difference and is perceived as being intimidated by "ambitious women".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/24 10:39 PM
36

In other words, is the often-cited claim that relationships are declining "because women are outpacing men and can't find a suitable partner because of earning" actually false? It's less about earnings and more about about perceived social hierarchy and enculturation for many women. A guy making 50k with a masters is higher status than a guy making 100k with his HVAC company or whatever. And the college educated guy is likely to be more socialized in the "right way" for college educated women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/24 10:35 PM
6

You're greatly overestimating the difference between average gay and straight men by focusing on the top % of urban gay men. While the average fitness and grooming is a bit higher for the most part there isn't a huge gap.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/24 06:44 PM
1

No one is denying that the shit actually happened, The literal post right above is. And in fact I've seen many people both online and off claim that Aztec sacrifice was almost entirely made up by Westerners. The Aztecs probably were killing/sacrificing several thousand people per year, perhaps more during important (politically or religiously) years. Yes this became exaggerated in various accounts (with tens of thousands people supposedly being sacrificed in a single day) but it's quite possibly…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/24 09:24 AM
2

Meaningless ideological Pavlovian response. Nowhere was I commenting on or justifying Western history in the Americas, so why the projection? To re affirm identity and ego formed in opposition to "White Americans".
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/24 09:20 AM
3

The primary purpose for marriage was economics, procreation and inheritance. Sort of. At least if not more important was the social contract it represented that created stable family units (which of course also has an important economic dimension). These things (along with romantic/sexual desires) aren't completely explanatory on their own or separable. That's why virginity was important. That's why we had dowries They were important to enforcement of social contracts which again had an economic…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 08:28 PM
1

Valium was the most commonly abused drug and you can still get it in addition to stuff like Xanax or half dozen other equivalents. Another part of the mythology women have built up around housewives is that they were taking exotic drugs way stronger than anything today - in reality they were mostly taking anti anxiety/sedatives and anti depressants more or less equivalent to what women use today. Alcohol use among women is also significantly higher now than then. But the main point is that women…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 08:07 PM
-1

Also housewives took a certain kind of drug since they were all so miserable. I can't for the life of me remember what it was called. But it sounded great and I wish it were still a thing. It's a bit odd how many women repeat this, pharma drug use to treat depression (and proximate conditions) have only steadily risen since then. There are way more drugged up wives (and single women of course) than there were back then.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 04:55 AM
1

Any man who can find a girlfriend usually thinks that relationships now are better, They have nothing to compare it to besides some cardboard cutout idea of the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 04:51 AM
2

Having a family to support means nothing for me if that family isn't well put together and stable. Which social paradigm produced healthier (mentally, socially, physically) people and more stable relationships?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 04:50 AM
5

There's no possible reason to believe that relationships were better in the past. There are many proximate social measures we can use to measure happiness, such as suicide rates, drug use and dependence, self reported happiness, mental illness/depression rates, social outcomes associated with happiness etc that might indicate people were happier in more traditional social paradigms.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 04:48 AM
2

My issue with this belief is that the standards of what constitutes a "happy relationship" have changed so much over time that the comparison is pretty moot. Considering all that: do you still think things were better in the past, even according to modern standards? An interesting question. I think men (and in many ways women) were overall happier in a more socially stable society where marriage was the bedrock of the family unit and wider community. But strictly under the standards of modern me…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 04:35 AM
–

I don't think it's used to justify treating men poorly as such. Rather it's used as justification for the status quo and shutting down criticisms. If men do poorly in the new status quo that's just men experiencing a free and equal dating market. If you criticize the outcomes then it's because you want to return to an (imagined) era of sexual slavery. Having trouble dating? Boo hoo, all their grandmothers were raped and beaten by their grandfathers (that they hated), so why would you even have t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 07:50 PM
2

Strange I didn't say anything about that, just your massively stupid assertion equating mythology to actual history. You have some of the genuinely dumbest takes and gratingly angry posts here. Pretty ironic user name.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 08:52 AM
3

So did OT God, so… primitive societies sometimes drowned innocents, sometimes chucked them into volcanoes, sometimes slaughtered on alters (like OT God), and sometimes set bears upon children. Do you understand the difference between mythology and evidence based history?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 08:42 AM
2

Except in the Aztecs case they literally did kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of people in human sacrifices.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 06:58 AM
5

archeologically you'd expect to find hundreds of thousands of skulls and bones from all that sacrificing, wouldn't you agree? The archeological evidence doesn't hold up though. Uh, they have. There are literal skull towers and many tens of thousands of skeletons, including skeletons that have clearly had the rib cage punctured to remove the heart, that have been excavated around Tenochtitlan. The archeological record very strongly supports the narrative of mass human sacrifice and killings by th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 06:54 AM
0

You can criticize a market as being unfair without also thinking sexual slavery is good. In fact it's fairly normal for people to complain about the outcomes and state of the dating market for a variety of reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 03:19 PM
7

They're just pointing out the contrast of attitudes towards "markets" between the material and social attitudes of many leftists, not demanding state girlfriends.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 03:15 PM
2

Maybe, but I don't particularly care. It's a valid phrase when telling a male to stop being overly emotional and sensitive to the point it's interfering with their or others lives - the video is actually a good example of a "guy" emotionally collapsing. However the way most women use it it's used to control and shame men into doing something that benefits them. "man up" usually just means do XYZ for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 12:02 AM
4

No. That woman is for religious men who are primarily interested in starting a family and little interest in carnal desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 11:57 PM
6

TRP basically never talks about virginity either way, it's assumed you're not dealing with virgin women but average adult women with typical sexual-romantic outlooks. Seeking virgin partners is almost an entirely "trad" thing that exists adjacent to TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 11:55 PM
1

Under socialization, mental illness, obesity, fragmented sexualities, atomization, broken families/single parents etc rates are all rising and contribute to failed mate pairing and poor social romantic outcomes (ie social decay), which is the primary driver of the growth of manosphere and reactionary romantic/sexual outlooks. Would honesty affect the attraction of those social views? Probably but only marginally compared to bad social outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 09:57 AM
0

I don't think honesty would matter much. Manosphere et al are symptoms of social decay. The primary driver by which they rise or fall in popularity are the social health of society. Being honest about "loser" mens chances still leaves them bitter losers.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 09:33 AM
9

The bigger issue you’ve got is the rise of misogyny and violence against woman. We’ve all heard of even recent incidents of young men hurting and killing woman. The word “incel” no longer means involuntary celibate, it’s now a group known for celebrating the destruction of woman. There’s also the notorious shootERs that are are pronounced as kings or gentlemen for committing acts of violence against woman. Misogyny and violence isn't rising against women. This is by far the best and least danger…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 09:32 AM
1

I mean they average around a quarter European genetic ancestry. AA are mostly a "mixed race" population.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 05:50 AM
1

Average African American is a quarter "white" so not exactly the same as someone who's straight from Africa, although their looksmax strategies are mostly pretty similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 05:12 AM
3

As you say most women end up dating average men, so arguably no they don't. But you also have an ever greater contingent of people deciding not to date at all unless it's "worth it" (in reality this usually means an physically attractive enough partner), which puts greater pressure on the dating market to have good looks. So it's more complex than either the "all or nothing" black pill category or blue pill optimism.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 05:02 AM
6

Of course nobody is perfect and you will need to make compromises to be in healthy relationships as well That's basically what settling is. It just has a bad reputation from the extreme end of the spectrum i.e. people settling for someone they don't even like all that much. Most people do and should settle to live a fulfilling and happy life. That's how the large majority of humanity got a long until now.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 04:51 AM
6

You're missing the part where the guys who have that mentality are completely defeatist and think since they weren't as 6'4 white chads they'll never actually be lusted after, Well it basically is only elite men (not necessarily along those qualifiers but top % regardless) that are actively lusted after. Women can be reactively attracted to or develop attraction to more average men but based on how women rate men in study after study, the black pillers are basically right about active attraction…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 04:49 AM
0

Subsidized housing for new parents. But as another poster pointed out, people are demanding UMC conditions before they have kids which isn't realistic. Plenty of people have kids in modest dwellings, including apartments. It's another thing which kills fertility - expecting to live like the top 10% before they will consider having kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 07:23 PM
–

That average is skewed by HCOL areas like California. a breakdown by state tells a different story. Teachers make decently above average median income in almost every state, even the poorer/lower COL ones. National averages more or less replicate across the individual states And in what world does a career that requires a masters degree is even $70k enough to raise a family? That’s about $900 a week in take home where I’m from and my student loan repayment is about $800. My mortgage is $1600, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 07:19 PM
3

We are nowhere near that point and govt can do a lot of incentivise women to have kids but it won't work because they need to incentivize men too. Except we already have seen governments and private organizations have pilot programs and experiments using extremely generous (as in not real world affordable) pro-natal programs. They don't raise fertility nearly enough to work. Throwing money at it is not the solution to this problem, people want it to be so they don't have to worry about their lif…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 10:01 AM
-2

It depends on the implementation. A "soft" approach is making college (more) expensive for people (regardless of gender) who don't have children and free for those that do, or making debt forgiveness dependent on having children within 10 (or whatever) years of graduation. A "hard" approach is making it a requirement. It doesn't need to be limited to college either, corporate/government promotions or hiring is also applicable.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 09:56 AM
–

Average US income: $59,384 (median $37,585) Average teacher salary: $69,544 (national public school teacher) In addition teachers usually have better benefits and stronger unions than most professions.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 09:51 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter