TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

AlmondMilkMaybe Archive

View 6 posts and 482 comments by AlmondMilkMaybe on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

I figured and was trying to patiently work through the commenter's reasoning, but when you put it like that... 💀😭🤣
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 08:16 AM
–

I'm also skeptical of most statistics (on both sides), but it seems like you're saying that irrational human behavior means something more than "humans are irrational." Sorry, but that proves nothing. You can say, "He couldn't have been beating her because she always took him back." If he was beating her, he was beating her. You also can't say, "Base jumping isn't dangerous because people still do it." You look up the accurate death reports and use that to prove or disprove the level of danger. …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 04:59 AM
–

"If she asked me to do something which I don't really want to, but which would make her really happy, I'd likely do it just to make her happy" In that case, and even with the duty sex example, I don't think you'd have said "No" repeatedly a bunch first, though...right? That is, a person who genuinely finds willingness because they want to please their partner (even if that's the only reason) isn't doing it because of pestering. And that's key because the pestering is the (arguably) coercive elem…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 11:34 PM
–

I actually agree with the core of your argument, which is essentially, "You can't tell people how to feel." I've got that. But I don't think you really answered my question about the morality of accepting something finally given for reasons that have to do more with pressure than genuine willingness. Your examples about your wife (and other historical negotiations) sound like they were attempts at producing genuine willingness. Or at the very least, creating the circumstances where genuine willi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 10:16 PM
–

I sort of understand your argument then: "What happens in the domain of a couple's interactions, and what people do or don't accept, is their own purview. It's not for us to tell them to accept or not accept anything." Right? That's not logically inconsistent. However.... Isn't that what we're always doing here: judging private dynamics as a collective to "sort out" issues between the sexes? So, you're not wrong. I just think you're hiding a bit behind "It's none of our business" when this sub i…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 09:31 PM
–

If scammers constantly call me asking for my SSN and I eventually give it to them to stop the calls, was I victimized? Um... Yes. This is a really fun example tbh because there are a lot of elderly people getting badgered and emotionally bullied into giving over all of their account info, money, etc. Imo, they're being coerced and abused. Would you say that they aren't?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 09:08 PM
–

Genuine question for you, but if the woman says "Yes" on the 10th ask, but the man knows she is only doing it to stop the asking, then is it moral for him to have sex with her? In this scenario, he knows she doesn't actually want to have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 09:03 PM
–

I don't think people think "asking = rape." Instead, they see repeated pestering as a disregard for others' boundaries, which is a characteristic of people who are generally unscrupulous. No one wants another person to try to corrode their "No," whether it's in the bedroom or on a used car lot. It raises people's hackles because it shows low respect.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 08:59 PM
–

You sorta had me with your first comment, but now I'm confused af. Is the dog in this scenario meant to apply to the person saying "No" to sex or the person being "denied" sex? Because your initial comment sounded like you were talking about women's mental state (and that no one can say that they're not happy to change their mind on the 10th ask). That's not an unreasonable argument. But adding this makes it sound like you're talking about the mental state of men, and how we can't assume he's no…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 08:49 PM
–

Both!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:37 PM
1

Apparently! lol
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 09:36 PM
3

"A man with an ugly face is objectively higher value than someone who will need help with every basic task for the rest of their life" Nice dodge, but we're not talking about societal "value" or functional capacity. We're talking about sex, love, and dating, which are the realms of desirability. Otherwise, you could argue that "In dating, any man is objectively higher value because they're stronger and better for hard labor" or something asinine like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 09:36 PM
1

You can think that if you'd like, but would you answer my question: who do you think is more desired? A woman without legs or a man with an ugly face?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 01:26 PM
2

I'm not trying to be edgy. I just wrote what (I think we both know) is true. And I had to point that out because you took issue with those two people being in the same league, like having a disability makes a woman untouchable or something. lol Like a man with a bad face should be loath to even look in a disabled woman's direction? Puh-lease...
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 01:17 PM
2

I think you're asking, "Does the redpill minimize having an ugly face as a man?" I'm talking about what the commenter I'm replying to said, specifically.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 12:57 PM
11

It's wild that you scoff at a "women with no legs" but minimize having an ugly face as a man. Tbh, a woman with no legs is probably way more desired.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 12:38 PM
4

Almost never from just looks. It's just some stranger who's decent to look at, but that's not enough to turn me on. I recently started watching these "police interaction" channels on YouTube that cover crazy traffic stops, chases, or whatever. A lot of times I'll find myself saying, "This cop is weirdly hot" way more than I would on Tinder or walking down the street. But I think that's because I like how the officer is handling the situation: competent, commanding, precise, and calm under pressu…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 12:38 AM
36

"I separate thinking "that’s a good-looking man” from “I want to sleep with this man.” I couldn't have said this better! YES. This is it!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 12:34 AM
–

I've lived in several urban areas in California, and it's a mixed bag at least, so I really disagree with this "universal" removal of shoes. I was once criticized behind my back for removing my shoes upon entry into someone's home. My American friend's mom said it was a sign I was "too comfortable" and being informal.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 02:01 AM
2

You've gotten some shade from other commenters, but I still think this is interesting. Why do some women trigger the "whore" in "madonna/whore complex" vs those who are "girlfriend material?" It could be so many things: style of dress and makeup, seeming desperate for male attention, race, body type, being trans, confidence and attitude, looking more conservative or not, etc. I wear glasses, and sometimes I think that's why I get more "girlfriend material" treatment. I'm being 100% serious about…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 08:55 AM
1

Fair enough! I'm Filipino American (mixed, with an American dad), and my parents/family do a hybrid where shoes and the dog are allowed downstairs (on tile and hardwood), but not upstairs, where it's carpeted and the bedrooms are. So, I get it! Thanks for answering!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 07:39 AM
4

"Most men will not care if you don't date them" That's been untrue in my experience, for various reasons. But also, men seem to really like the cleanliness a lot, as long as I'm doing it. Think of the benefits: the dishes are always clean and ready to use, and random clothes don't get missed during laundry day because they were on the floor instead of the hamper. Food in the fridge isn't old and rotting, so you don't have to smell-test things every time. Guests are more impressed with the state …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:43 AM
1

lol I still upvoted you for the first half, but your point about washing dogs' feet threw me a bit. This is off topic, but how do you feel about shoes inside the house? I always take my shoes off in my house, but I also don't have a dog. I guess my perspective is that, since most people Americans allow for shoes on inside their home, then unwashed dog feet is about the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:29 AM
5

Thank you! I love being in a beautiful and clean environment, and I just can't imagine inviting anyone in who would compromise it. So, I do feel harsh sometimes, but it's definitely "protecting my peace." :-)
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 01:10 PM
22

Tbh, I agree with this. I'm very clean, and I know that's my "thing." And if a guy is messy to me, he has the right to live his life that way, and he was happily doing so long before he met me. So, who am I to impose change upon him? That said, the consequence is that I'll immediately stop dating a guy who doesn't meet my cleanliness standard. I won't even ask. I won't even say, "This is a bit messy for me. Can you clean/adjust/change this?" because I don't think his efforts would last. And I fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 12:57 PM
9

I'm pretty confused by your argument, but I'll try to respond to what I think you're claiming. 1) It's possible men put more effort into these endeavors when they're being paid, obviously. So, being skilled/hardworking professionally doesn't mean that their performance in unpaid domestic spaces would be of the same quality. 2) Women's complaints (in the domestic space) aren't just about quality, but also quantity. So, even if it could be argued that the quality is always high in both professiona…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 11:05 AM
10

Thank you! I thought I was having a stroke trying to understand OP. 😭
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 10:21 AM
2

lol It's EVIL to think he's being manipulative? Lord.... Anyway, since you've accused me of using academic speech to confuse the masses, I'll say it again with smaller words and pictures: he wanna fuck! 🍆 not hav a relationhisp!! she prolly busted in the face 👹 so he beeeeeeen lyin bro! 🤣 jus want to clap cheeks not spend💰on sum ugly ho
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 05:51 AM
2

I agree it's very interesting! But I disagree that there was no "better way he could have approached" this. The voice note is manipulation under the guise of blunt honesty, which is a very common tactic. That's because he is only honest about what he wants, but dishonest about why he wants it. And that's the rub. "If we’re going to your place on Thursday, I am looking to have that physical intimacy to see if I am sexually compatible with you," and "If I’m going to come over, I would be hoping to…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 12:13 AM
1

She could be interested in him, but not interested in having sex on their second date.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 11:40 PM
3

Thank you!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 01:02 PM
3

Lol l'm cackling at "robo-brothels." I don't even want to think about the sanitation, though they could probably be programmed to clean themselves! And thanks for indulging my curiosity! I can always spot a writer, which is what inspired me to look at your profile. Fanfiction definitely counts, so I feel pretty satisfied that I was right! lol "If this was how it would be for everyone, this technological change would almost only be positive, but I'm not that naive." Yep. This is it right here. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 12:51 PM
3

Yes, exactly! And we're right on the cusp of it! We have more control than ever over how we're living, and whether it will even be life itself. lol What time to incarnate! 😂 I also creeped on your profile btw! lol Forgive me, but are you also a writer? Have you ever explored these sorts of ideas in any stories? Also, I have to ask if you'd ever be inclined towards the temptations of the simulacra or obliterating any of your own desires (if we're aiming at the root)? I'm just curious!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 11:32 AM
3

I'm happy to clarify! Yes, I'd grieve for the snuffed-out sexuality of rejected people. I'd grieve for the way they'd be less human (by my definition) than they were before. And I get that it may sound absurd: Who cares if a person is not horny? Why would I even be impacted by that? But consider a society where the majority of people make that choice. Nothing would seem missing, and yet something would be. And that something is important to me, in my experience. Another way to think of it: if we…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 11:04 AM
2

That's astutely observed, and I agree. Also, thank you!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 10:44 AM
4

Hmm.... in my argument, I stated that telling someone they should obliterate their desire is like telling them to "kill themselves." That said, I am not against suicide. Essentially, it's the individual's choice always. In Brave New World, this relief from suffering is imposed. In OP's post, it's prescribed. But if a person decides for themselves, then I couldn't call it unethical, even if that piece of their humanity is something I'd grieve. That said, my grief would be selfish! The people I re…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 10:32 AM
5

This is an interesting argument... It may feel very satisfying to scratch an itch, but it could be argued that not having the itch at all is the most ideal state. Why not obliterate the desire when that desire may not be fulfilled? Why not end striving for anything besides our most basic needs since striving often leads to disappointment? I have pondered on this, and it's come to me that...such is life. The interplay of desire and disappointment (or reward), or of chasing and missing (or gaining…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 05:25 AM
–

Then you're just speaking for yourself, and I can't make you believe me. That said, I think it's very weird for you to tell me how I feel when I'm telling you that's not the case. It means your only contributions here boil down to "Nu uh!" lol Anyway, I'll leave it there because this argument is too weak to entertain. Take care!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 12:48 AM
–

LoL Oh, so now we're just making shit up and calling it an argument? I absolutely wanted to fuck my crush. Are you kidding?! 😂 But you're so desperate to validate your worldview that you're grasping at straws.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 11:33 PM
–

"Why would any man sign up for this?" He don't have to, honey. lol
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 08:40 AM
–

Umm... I also don't think I (or the commenter) implied that this should happen while you're aroused, though. Like, I'm not saying "Have this conversation while you have a boner. That's the right time!" So, I'm not sure where you're getting that from. "More than that, it just makes me not care for it in the long term." ^ This is probably the more interesting idea. My question is "Why?"
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 05:14 AM
–

I don't think the conversations u/fakingandnotmakingit are describing are meant to be arousing. They sound like the honest, logical conversations that adults have when planning their lives. lol Not to shade you, but this sounds like you're saying, "But that doesn't make me horny! 😭" to mature discussions about life and family planning. Like... what? lol
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 04:47 AM
–

Not all women's bodies/sensations are the same, and if I'm not aroused, every positive sensation is flipped on its head. This is especially true if my partner is well-endowed, when lube and prep aren't going to relax me enough for comfortable penetration. So, if we do, there's going to be some degree of "grinning and bearing" it. Perhaps it's just uncomfortable, but it can also be painful, which is the definition of "bad sex" for me. As for it feeling violating, I think the cumulative effect is …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 04:38 AM
–

That's certainly a potential strategy, and there are some men who can live that life, but I don't think it's most. It's just like how there are some men who pull plenty while "being on the streets" too. But I guess I'm thinking more about the average dude. Do you think that most (or even many) men can do what you're describing?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 03:24 AM
–

"I’d agree, but the thing is you can’t necessarily conclude it’s lower because it just happens to be lower in general, or if it’s lower FOR YOU specifically." Fortunately, I'm too arrogant to worry about this. lol But in all seriousness, it's true. To speak to the specific example you gave: maybe his libido returns when he's single because the relationship pressure is off of him. People often have that "I'm free to fuck everything" surge of energy when they're newly single, because they're seein…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 03:04 AM
–

Totally valid. Seriously, do not be in a relationship where you feel poorly. <3
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 12:34 AM
–

Not being able to pull consistent, casual sex does not mean a man is low value. I wouldn't bother even being with a man I saw that way. But, as you acknowledged, consistent access to casual sex is just not going to be accessible for the vast majority of men. That's just the market: The women who are up for that are highly sought after and are far fewer than the men who want it. Not to mention that the apps are overrun by men. Tbh, I could list so many reasons, but the very forces that make it ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 12:33 AM
–

Umm... well, your partner should want it. I mean, you want her to want it, right? And if doing anything to support that feels unfair to you, then just feel victimized and don't fuck. Or get a sex doll. Their availability is independent of any feeling. So, you can get what you want without "earning" it because her thoughts and feelings don't actually exist. It's truly a dream come true! lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 11:45 PM
–

I actually think about this very idea a lot, especially when I'm considering never dating seriously again. Maybe I could just see a guy from time to time, when I had any interest in him. Maybe once a week? Maybe more, depending on the man. But it makes me think back to a relationship I had where my ex "crashed out" on me for not fucking him enough and then (predictably) tried to beg me back. The average man is getting more sex in the context of a relationship than he would out in "the streets." …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 11:10 PM
–

Common, bro... You referenced 10,000 years of pre-feminist human mating, and now you're citing the 90s??? Smart dodge, though, because being honest about how people fucked before socially enforced monogamy would kill whatever fantasies you have about evenly distributed mating. But that aside, you're saying that 10% of men (not necessarily the bottom, but some, you guess) would create a revolution to make sex and dating like the 90s. lol Well, buddy... feminism was alive and well then, including …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:34 AM
–

😂 Sis, all my work meetings are on Tuesday! But I can offer hand jobs every other Sunday. And I'll produce more "general smiles at nothing" to look pleasing while walking throughout the week. I hope it's enough...
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:16 AM
–

Reality isn't a threat, but putting forward this specific argument is a choice, certainly. You ask, "What is 100 years of feminism compared to 10,000 years of the thing before?" First, what exactly do you think the "thing before" was? This is an appeal to historical precedents that you haven't defined. And this key, because I assumed this "thing before" is what you believe the revolution would bring back (or what we should aspire to). So, please define it. You say it's not socially enforced mono…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:07 AM
–

I'm always so weirded out by this argument because it's essentially a threat. "You guys need to choose us or else there are some of us who will make you." Is that supposed to make the prospect more appealing somehow? My other issue with this perspective is that enforced monogamy (the presumed solution) wouldn't appeal to men who want to be genuinely desired, no? Isn't the term "oofy doofy" reserved for men who end up with wives who don't desire them and secretly hate their guts? So, what exactly…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 08:20 AM
9

100%. I don't know how many "Don't text him" conversations I've had with girl friends. It's nothing to envy, and if anything, it's given me an aversion. When I meet a man who looks a bit too good (and obviously knows it), I'm much more cautious.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 06:37 AM
3

Feel free to read the rest of this thread, and you'll see that you've misread my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 02:07 PM
5

I see you've abandoned any attempt at sincere engagement, so I'll assume you don't have a proper counterargument. Boooo....
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 12:10 PM
0

Cute spin, but it's the pursuer who usually chooses the venue/cost of the experience. So, the idea that I (or average women) are whoring this way is so laughable. Tbh, I am genuinely chuckling because I'm independently well off, but maybe pretending to be that desperate for a free meal could be some new, weird kink I could try for fun. Anyway, men should stick to whatever they can afford, and women are still under no obligation to do anything in "exchange." And if that's too much of a stretch fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 11:55 AM
-1

lol You do know that it's men who are actively (and often desperately) trying to be with women, right? And yet you act like our company/time/attention isn't inherently valuable in and of itself. It absolutely IS. The market proves it. Men prove it every day.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 11:41 AM
2

"...if he’s organizing and paying for the date, what is she doing" What she's doing is being pursued. I've sometimes heard men act as if a woman's company and presence aren't enough, but if he is pursuing her (based on her attractiveness), why is the expectation any greater than her showing up to get to know him and give him a chance?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 11:32 AM
6

Damn, that last line is so sad and really captures the mentality. I'd also add that I think women are more likely to have a support network that they share details with, and I think that network is more likely to say, "That treatment is unacceptable!" Compare that to guys who may be less likely to "go there" when it comes to sharing those details, which makes them more emotionally isolated as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 02:21 AM
22

Keep your eyes on her when she's emotionally dysregulated. You'll learn more in one conflict, disagreement, or misunderstanding than 100 happy dates. Mature people know that stress and disappointment are a part of life. They will communicate rationally and clearly, even if they have to take some time to compose themselves. Tears and frustration can make sense depending on the situation. But spite, cruelty, rage, and punishing behavior are a No. Her losing control of herself is a No. "Crash outs"…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 01:14 AM
5

This is all from my experience and observations, but unless it's being consciously withheld, people's pasts come up. Over time, you talk about exes, dating experiences, kinks, likes, and dislikes. Sometimes men assume what her past "probably" is (especially based on how fast/slow she did things with him, her level of hotness, her amount of guy friends, her social media posts, etc.), and some will go into investigation mode. Others avoid the topic completely because they don't want to know (or sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 12:58 AM
–

Sink us both? That's a strange framing for simply not wanting to be with or date a person. I should go around to men and tell them to date me and pay half, or else they're spiteful and selfish. I'm hot, so that could actually work, but you know... it's still delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:44 AM
1

you can not be sure if you haven't been in such a situation can you ? True, but I'm pushing back on your argument because neither have you. Yet, you're leading with your presumption being a given in order to formulate your argument. I mean...it's an interesting question. What would most people do? I guess we can agree to disagree, since we're both only guessing. Anyway, thanks for the chat! Cheers!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 09:42 AM
–

Then hopefully the taller person is very desirable. Otherwise, there may be no dates at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 07:48 AM
2

Omg, yes! Your approach sounds more like my bestie's. She goes "full bro" with every guy she really likes, and he just looks confused. I tend to just go super silent/withdrawn, though if we've texted for a while or spoken on the phone, that helps a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 03:17 AM
2

This is so true! I withdraw from anxiety, but I have a close friend who becomes really intense around guys she likes. She starts roasting them and shit-talking, which is her way of flirting, but a lot of the guys seem put off or overwhelmed by it. I think it's her nerves too. 😭
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 03:07 AM
6

Man, this is me. I get so nervous, and I guess I'd rather look aloof than like a slobbering fool. This has happened even when he seems interested (which I can still detect intellectually), but my nerves will still short-circuit unless I've had a few drinks. 🫠
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 03:03 AM
8

Imo, the person asking the other out/in pursuit treats. They're usually picking the venue as well, so I think it makes the most sense. That said, if the date goes well, I usually make the guy's life easier by suggesting and planning the second date, which is my treat. I think that's fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 02:53 AM
1

It's not necessarily about comparison, and I could definitely think of several men who I would not be sexually drawn to even without comparison to anyone else. I wonder if some people (mostly men) have a sexuality that builds and builds independently, until any reasonable outlet around becomes appealing. But personally, my shit is either on or off. And if it's off towards a man, it's not building and then randomly latching onto him, even if he's the only person around. I would just never have se…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:21 PM
1

Hmm... I mean, in my fantasy of this scenario, the guy is hot, so sure! But most people aren't. So, maybe I'm the weirdo, but the idea that it could just be any man, and that time and proximity would just make me want to be sexual with him seems insane to me. And I get the horniness would arise, but why would I want to apply my horniness to a guy that I'm not attracted to otherwise? Even if he's the only guy around, masturbating would be better. But again, maybe I'm weird for that. I honestly do…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:28 AM
3

"it's kind of inevitable that they end up fucking, at max within a year." You lead with this presumption, but I don't agree with this at all. Why do you think that's true?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:06 AM
3

Justify it however you will, but every woman who learns that men justify manipulation in this fashion is just going to become more unforgiving and withdrawn. So, you're also doing a disservice to the whole dating market. That reminds me of a guy who posted asking why men couldn't collectively stop simping to reset women's standards. I commented that there would always be men who "break the picket line" for their own gains, though I not-so-secretly think that's most men. So, it would never work, …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 04:51 AM
2

I think many men learn to only bend the truth as much as possible, not to flagrantly break it. This isn't due to noble intentions, though. It's just to prevent crash-outs and reputational destruction. Essentially, it's preventative damage control. For example, he'll say "I'm not dating any other girls," though he had a drunk ONS last week and is in the DMs of a half-dozen women. When confronted, he'll say the ONS doesn't count because that was just a meaningless hookup, not actually taking her o…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 03:20 AM
6

Lying in worse, but I believe that most men think that paying is worse (and not just because they're losing money). It's as if lying could be considered part of the "finesse" of convincing a woman to have sex. However, paying money is them admitting they can't even do that. Thus, I think some men see paying as the ultimate sign of failure. In contrast, lying is framed as the man "having game" or being a player. It's all in service to the ego, where one can be rationalized to preserve the man's s…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 03:00 AM
5

"the woman's quality of life and happiness takes a noticeable hit cohabitating with a man." Yes. But if a woman complains, she's "nagging and neurotic," and if she decides to leave, the man is wounded or rushing to make promises to change. And it usually goes back to the status quo regardless. I once ended things with a solid guy (on date three) when I saw that he was comfortable with a super messy environment. I didn't even bring it up. I didn't ask him to change it. I just got through the date…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:57 PM
1

Maybe I'm an anomaly, but if I'm in love, I'm in love. It's wayyy different and better than a hookup with the hottest guy, kind of like being high. Erotic experiences with a really good-looking person are fun, but it's not the same, and can't really compare. But it's interesting to me that a lot of guys think and ask this. And it makes me wonder if it's them that see women this way (and they are actually projecting). That is, if a man has a gorgeous ex, is he always wishing he was fucking her in…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 10:44 AM
39

Imagine this being your nickname 😭😂
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:08 AM
2

Heard, and fair enough! We may have to agree to disagree, but thank you for the conversation!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 10:16 PM
1

I think that's a misread of what I wrote. I'm not saying that she (or the man from the OF example) doesn't desire their partner. And imo, it's unnuanced to have black and white thinking like: "If I'm not as hot as the hottest person you've ever sought after/slept with/simped for, then you don't desire me sexually." Also, if I broke up with a great guy because he was honest about something I already know (like how I look), especially if I asked, I'd feel delulu. But to each their own.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 11:08 AM
1

These are strong answers. Thank you!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 04:52 AM
1

I think a reasonable answer could be as simple as "I only cared about looks then, because the hookups weren't meaningful to me." Again, it doesn't sound flattering, but what she's saying is that the "sum of the parts" for the man she is currently with is far greater (considering everything) when more than sex matters. It would be like the math for hook-ups is: looks = 10, intelligence = 3, kindness = 4, integrity = unknown, humor = 2. And the math for a current boyfriend is: kindness = 10, integ…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 02:51 AM
0

That's why guys take it as an insult when it's stated in that way because they don't want to be the good enough for a relationship but not a hookup kind of guy. I hear you, and I can see why it would bruise the ego. (It's not something I would tell a man I was with or loved). But I think my perspective is that while it's ego-bruising, it's not unreasonable as a matter of fact. That is, (even if I wouldn't say it), it doesn't mean she's settling from the perspective of her own values. A maybe wei…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 02:18 AM
0

Hmm.. why is "good enough to hook up with" the standard? I keep seeing men say that as if it's some obvious thing, but why is that the metric you're using for what it means to settle or not? An example: I once hooked up with a guy who was as dumb as a box of rocks. We met at a bar, and he was handsome and had a ton of free booze and his own place. For where I was at that time, it was what I was looking for. However, his character meant I couldn't respect him, so I didn't introduce him to my frie…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 12:41 AM
3

Interesting. It sounds like (from your first paragraph) that any guy who isn't "Tinder hookup material" is being settled for then, yes? Also, because of how you wrote your post, I wonder if you're referring more to casual sex culture. I'm thinking more of the "dating socially" thing you mentioned: building relationships, not just app hookups. But thanks for the answer!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 09:14 AM
9

"Would the "average" gf be ok with the man simping over hot OF models, but not simping over his current "average" gf? In other words, would the "average" gf be ok with her man giving other women who mog her much better treatment than her?" Because of your last line, this sounds more like cheating/violating the expectations of a "current" relationship. That's not really what I'm referring to, but thanks for answering question 1!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 08:27 AM
7

What would you recommend women do then? Continue to try to date up, or not date at all, or something else?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 07:42 AM
5

I have no notes. lol
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 07:41 AM
10

Sorry about losing your post! I always hate when that happens... But yeah, I get that that's at the core of it. I just think it verges into being unrealistic (especially with the way men describe it here). You are right that they seem to want women to want the average guy as much as ya'll want us, and it's never going to happen. There aren't strip clubs full of men (even the hunky, "perfect" type) for a reason, and even those "erotic male shows" are half a joke! So, I agree that the unhappiness …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 07:40 AM
4

You didn't really answer my questions. These are just whatboutisms that that divert to an entirely different argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 07:29 AM
4

That's yes to question 1, right? If so, then are you suggesting that women not get with men on their own level? And if she's not doing that, then who should she date (if she dates at all)?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 07:16 AM
10

Certainly, many would. Look at religious "duty sex" culture. I actually believe many men are okay with coercion, or don't see it as coercion (even when it is). It's extremely common, though maybe that's lessening with younger generations.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 01:19 AM
3

If you're taking that stance, then the country I live in, the clothes on my back, the food that I eat, and every product that I buy are built on the violent subjugation of a lot of people. You want to purity test every type of porn (even the kind made by enthusiastically willing and well-compensated creators), then I hope you're being just as honest about everything in your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 12:02 AM
3

Interesting question! I'm bisexual, though more into men, but yep!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 12:14 PM
2

Ugh! What's it to you? Let people live.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 11:25 AM
16

I have some of those worries because the ethical issues are well-publicized and real. To your list: coercion (I mind.), women in porn "faking it" (I don't mind.), being opressed drug addicts (I mind.), it being unrealistic (I don't mind.), objectifying women (I don't mind.), etc. And with the concerns I do have, just like a person can buy ethically sourced meat, there are also ways to reduce the risk when consuming pornography. Even just watching content from big names who have more agency (like…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 11:01 AM
15

Agreed! I'm a woman who watches porn, and most women I've met and talk to about it do as well. I live in a politically left, sex positive area though, so I wonder if that makes a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 10:47 AM
–

So, you just want to selectively roll back medicine, but only in the realm of reproductive and sexual health advancements? lol Yeah... a fantasy. Why don't we just turn the clock back to when it was all completely natural? There wouldn't be any incels because they would've been clobbered with a rock by Chad! Seriously though... men's fantasies about the ways of the past always seem to stop right around "mass socially enforced monogamy and low women's rights." You: Let's turn the clock back to "p…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 02:18 AM
–

Hmmm.... let me explain why I asked. Everything else on your list could be argued as an unfair financial advantage that is taken from men. I'd argue against most of it, but it's a logically consistent counterargument that could still be posed. And then you throw in "birth control..." So, your argument isn't about your thesis: "Women will find out real quick how much they need men when they really are on their own and can no longer be a net drain on men's tax dollars." Your argument is that women…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:58 AM
4

Yes, it's possible. BUT something I've noticed is that the vast majority of men who are interested in being "friends" with me are actually interested in being more than friends. So, it's rare because I think many male/female friendships are built on a false premise. This leads people to believe that maintaining a friendship across sexes is super difficult, when the truth is, most are intended to be more (by one party or the other) from the very beginning. For example, I had a glow up in my early…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:33 AM
–

What's your reasoning for birth control being on this list?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:16 AM
–

I must be full of it then because u/polecat9669 is correct. For most women, sex with men usually results in no orgasm, statistically. And most men are bad in bed. Also, sometimes you can get hurt, and men are often trying to put it in before a woman's body is even ready for it to feel pleasurable. It's sad, but true.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 10:32 AM
2

"But it is not the biggest determiner because an overweight woman in her 20s will have more options than an in-shape woman in her 40s" This would be a fun poll! lol And tbh, I still don't agree, though it could depend on whether we're talking about a little overweight vs very overweight. Either way, we can agree to disagree, since there isn't any data! Thanks for the response!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 01:10 AM
14

I don't know if this is true. Neither gender finds the genuinely old (very wrinkled and grey) particularly attractive, but I feel like weight is the biggest determiner from what I've witnessed going out with friends. Most men I've met would pick a fit 30-year-old over a "big girl" who is 20 years old. Femininity is up there as well (long hair vs very short, sundress vs "masculine" clothes). Thoughts?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 09:45 AM
1

Are you saying, "These fucking people" in reference to me? I was wondering if she really got extremely upset over a lack of sex, or if you were just exaggerating. No need to get sassy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 10:43 PM
–

A woman running these types of tests during dating will probably make your life hell. Sane women know that there are plenty of ways to see your character in action during normal life. She doesn't have to set up weird scenarios. She just observes.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 01:53 AM
1

"Nuclear meltdowns" over not having sex sounds mentally ill, no shade. Maybe this is hyperbole?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 12:00 AM
2

A human right?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 11:42 PM
4

We can agree to disagree, though I'll just add that I'm more focused on controlling my own monkey brain than other people's. I hope that my partner does the same for himself. And if we can both manage that, then (in my experience) there's plenty of desire and cooperation without needing manipulation. Anyway, thanks for the mini debate! It's an interesting post, and cheers!
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 01:52 PM
7

Ah... I see. Well, if a guy's self-esteem is so low that he wants to take a woman on a date after she's treated him like shit, his solution isn't pretending to be what he's not to try to change her behavior. That IS short-sighted and manipulated. His solution is to work on why the hell he wants to take her on a date at all, given how she's acted. And that would be my advice, if he were my friend. Don't take her on a date, not so you can train her into treating you better, but so you can get your…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 01:39 PM
7

Of course, it's not manipulative because a man who has been treated badly by his gf probably doesn't want to take her out. His behavior (not taking her out) is representative of how he actually feels, not designed or altered to get a specific result. Not rewarding bad behavior is just Adulting 101. You seem to have shifted the goal posts, but your original post isn't talking about avoiding rewarding bad behavior. It's talking about altering behavior (providing treats) to produce a result.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 01:13 PM
9

This seems extremely manipulative, like you're giving suggestions on training a dog. "The house is clean! Come get your treat!" Makes me dry just thinking of it. lol But out of curiosity, do you agree it's manipulative and you just accept that, or do you disagree and think that it isn't?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 12:47 PM
5

I wouldn't go for casual sex, but I'd probably choose a partner instead of keeping to myself and just masturbating.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 09:28 AM
3

Personally, I'd rather die early. It would be better than coercing care from younger people who were made for that reason, especially if their circumstances sucked because their parents couldn't actually afford to have them. I mean... I say that coming from a third world country where people frequently birth children into abject poverty for labor and as their insurance/elder care plan. It's just existential hostage taking to protect my own interests, and no selfish af justification would ever sw…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:23 AM
7

It's usually very selfish. People want to pass on their "legacy." They want "mini-me"s. They want the satisfaction and social approval that comes with being a parent. They prefer bio kids because they think their genetics are something special. (They're not. lol). They don't want to "die alone." They want to feel normal. They don't want to miss out on what others experience. It's only framed as "selfless" because it makes their lives harder (which they chose), but just because something is harde…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 07:16 AM
2

Imo, saving for retirement is a personal responsibility. And it seems way saner than betting on the young to subsidize the old by having kids they can't afford.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 01:59 AM
3

"Time to get off the internet again." Right?! Or maybe just PPD. 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 06:47 AM
9

It's not practical for a man to be with a woman 24/7 to see what she's up to... So a man's entire sense of security with a woman comes from his assessment of the likelihood that, should a kid pop out of her then it will be his kid. There are basically only two things that factor into this: how much she wants his dick in particular vs how much she wants those of other guys. lol This seems so wild to me. How about: getting to know a woman really well, to the degree that you understand her characte…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:35 AM
7

Hmm... is that the whole picture though? Because I suspect that you're quietly including, "But I have to be attracted to her, of course!" which is what OP's post is really speaking to. So, if I had to guess, your type is also: not fat, not old, long-ish hair, grooms herself well, and is feminine? I write this because men often depict their preferences as down-home, common sense, and humble, when it's often much more than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 01:03 AM
2

So true, for men and women. But it's somehow a huge faux pas to even suggest that someone would not make a stellar parent. They all think they would crush it, like it will be independent from their countless personality flaws, unhealed trauma, poorly managed lives, general lack of integrity, and toxic copes. "But I'll be different when I'm a parent!" Fast forward to them creating another batch of fucked up kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 12:42 AM
3

Too many men would cross the picket line. That is, even if you could get some collective action going: men to stop simping or validating women out of horniness and desperation, too many men would see the vacuum as a prime opportunity for personal gain. I truly question whether they'd have the fortitude not to exploit that. This endeavor is like trying to dig a hole below the shoreline. It's just going to get filled back in the moment after it's created.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 09:19 AM
2

She’s not gonna reach out to you with this strategy unless you ask her to text or call in the moment so you can get her number You just made me realize that maybe more guys are doing this exact thing to make sure they get a real number. But like, what's the point at that point? It's just social hostage taking, only to get blocked later.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 12:07 PM
15

I see what you're getting at, but I think the result will be the same. If you offer your number, then I'll probably just agree to save your contact info, knowing I'll never call/message. It's not that different from being asked and giving out a fake number/planning on blocking as soon as he reaches out. The ideal circumstance would be if I felt safe saying, "No, thank you!" and it was left alone. And this actually reminds me of the last time I went out to karaoke. Two separate guys, a few hours …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 12:04 PM
–

Yep! 100%. It's a combination that makes him special and "right" even if he's not perfect looking.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 02:07 AM
–

Tbh, I don't think this is true. Like, you're talking about the average guy? It seems like most of them have a wide range of what they find beautiful.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 02:06 AM
–

is it like this also in the same age bracket Yes, of course! I'd date almost 5 women out of 10, considering looks. From what I see is nowhere as close for women. It's not close for the average woman, from my observations. Is there something a guy can do about it? I think there's a reason why the "warm approaches" of the past yielded better results for men. They offered a way to make oneself remarkable and distinct from the generally uninteresting male masses (besides having a killer face card on…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 01:45 AM
–

I can imagine that sucks, but I believe that "our genes don't care about our happiness." Essentially, we're still animals with genetics that are interested in our propagation, not our joy. And if you look at the animal kingdom, nature literally sacrifices animals for the chance to (and during the act of) reproduction. In humans, given how biologically inexpensive it is for a male to bust a nut, it makes perfect sense that ya'll's biology would make any opportunity to do that (average woman) extr…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 01:21 AM
–

I wonder if men's biology makes women (even the average one) super compelling to them, and they feel like not having that in return = they're ugly. And I could get why that would be confusing. If you go through puberty and have all of these drivers that cause you to see the average member of the opposite sex as alluring, I can understand expecting that to go both ways. Instead, men are like, "I want you. Of course, I do! You're lovely, and I'm hardwired to like so much about you for just existin…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 12:59 AM
–

It's not that I find them ugly. It's pure neutrality 95% of the time, unless someone is exceptionally good looking or exceptionally bad looking.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 12:39 AM
5

Ngl... I'm also a bit surprised by how some of this is characterized by OP, like the trauma from kissing an ugly man thing. Like... hmmm.... That said, not everyone is great at articulating their perspectives, so I try to be charitable.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 05:16 AM
4

I don't understand why you think its wrong to shame women for using men. It sounds like you agree that women should stick to their high standards then?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 02:11 AM
–

The world isn't that black and white. Man, that deserves a post in and of itself... but essentially, most men who do this (at least the ones I've known) are morally dubious, but not necessarily willing to do anything that would make them see themselves as "a bad guy." Honestly, any man could go the pyschopathic route and just outright lie. They could say, "Right after we fuck, I'll make you my gf, I promise!" Or maybe they could say, "You're my gf now!" and then smash and ghost. And yet, most me…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 05:10 AM
–

I usually hate having to quote myself. It feels a bit self-aggrandizing, but in case you didn't read carefully: "Mind you, this doesn't provide any guarantees. It doesn't control his behavior or mean that he can't change his mind, but I find a lot of manipulators leave when you remove the opportunity for easy plausible deniability (which comes from lack of clear communication)." So, yeah... I already acknowledged it's not foolproof.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 04:50 AM
–

What a misshapen strawman you've built. I'm talking about being clear about both parties' intentions before sex. This doesn't make him responsible for anything besides his own honesty. And if I ask for that, and a man can't give me honesty or a straight answer, then I just wouldn't have sex. That part is my responsibility. Being honest is his.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 04:45 AM
–

Who in their right mind discuss "serious relationship" before having sex for the first time, except the religious people? Me! I'm not religious or conservative, but I'm very honest about how sexual intimacy impacts me. So, I let men know: "Sex tends to make me a lot more attached, and I need to know there's a deeper connection before I go down that road. If you're not sure if you're ready for commitment or see me in that way, we should hold off on sex until you are." Mind you, this doesn't provi…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 01:55 AM
3

A man looking for commitment might be disappointed at consistently being kissed but not much else But how do you differentiate between this guy and the guy who is just disappointed because he's horny? I feel like most guys (regardless of interest in commitment) are disappointed when "more" doesn't happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 09:38 AM
0

I hear you, but it makes me think of one guy I had a phone call with before a date. I wouldn't have eliminated him for being shy, awkward, or taking some time to warm up. That's to be expected, just like what happens on a first irl date. But on the phone, I got to ask deeper questions, and he ended up revealing some really shitty beliefs about women. I'm really glad I wasn't in the middle of a date, having to think of an escape or pissed that I wasted my evening. Thanks for the reply though!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 01:37 AM
1

now im not saying texting is better or preferred. they both suck in different ways. that's why i think IRL meeting should be done asap to establish is there attraction yes or no. We can agree to disagree, because I think what you're stipulating (awful on the phone but amazing in real life) is the exception, not the rule. But I can't prove my perspective, admittedly. Personally, the idea of meeting a nearly complete stranger in real life is what makes me feel burnt out and/or full of dread. And t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 01:32 AM
2

I'm not saying that success on a call means guaranteed success in real life. I'm saying that a person with whom you can't have a decent phone call with will very likely be a bad date. So, it improves the process by introducing a lower cost, lower risk, less time-consuming filter before a bigger investment. Think of it as a slightly higher bar to clear than "matched with me and can text like a sane person" but is still lower than "a full-on date in real life." Clearing the mid-bar of a phone call…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 11:45 AM
2

Really? I feel like most of my friends go from texting on the apps, to normal texting, and then straight to meeting irl. It doesn't seem like people do phone calls before meeting for a first date.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 10:13 AM
3

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting that phone calls become a total replacement for IRL dating, but I'm suggesting it as a preliminary step before meeting in person. That would be in contrast to texting on the app -> texting on the phone to arrange a date -> meeting in person.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 10:12 AM
3

When it comes to dating, why don't people talk on the phone before meeting for a date? I don't think this is worth a whole post, but it really confuses me. If people did this, they could find out the vibe and potentially save: the cost of the date, time getting ready, sitting across from someone at dinner when you quickly realize it won't go anywhere. You can tell if you have conversational rapport, or like/are turned on by their voice. If anything, you already know what the person looks like be…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 08:46 AM
6

Jesus... I would be mortified if someone did this to me. Imagine if she knew you felt like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 01:12 AM
3

Need many sources of spiritual strength to withstand the storms of a womans moods and tests. Why not just refuse to be with someone who sounds...frankly...unstable? Or do you believe all women are like this?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 04:38 AM
3

From his username, one of the most notoriously seedy sex tourist cities in Thailand. The dollar goes far, and the coochie is cheap, hence money being "irrelevant."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:19 AM
–

Earlier than what number exactly, homie? 🤨
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 01:41 AM
1

Hmm... I suppose that, like all humans, they would prefer to have the ability to get what they want. But why should that mean anything to me, or anyone else? Maybe my main contention is that the loser guy who still gets laid can be happy with himself for whatever reason. And the loser guy who doesn't get laid can be envious for whatever reason. But I'm not going to validate their measuring stick for what makes a person worthwhile. Being able to get sex does not make a man worthwhile in and of it…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:16 AM
2

That's a strawman of my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:42 PM
4

I think all niches are high risk/high reward.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:29 AM
13

Tbh, that's such a weird point of focus to me. Imagine: two terrible men. One gets to put his dick in people. One doesn't. I see... two losers.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:01 AM
2

Ah, okay. In short, I think it's societal.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:32 AM
12

There are too many men who require this kind of help. Picking any single one to give a chance to would be similar to picking a guy from a dating app. Plus, there's the risk. I've been hurt by all varieties of men, including the "lonely nice guy who is just shy." There seems to be a strange narrative that this type = virtuous and well-meaning and pure, unlike "Chad." He'll treat you like a queen if you just give him a chance. Actually, no. Maybe I'll write a post about this, but an unattractive, …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:01 AM
–

I wouldn't be offended, but I'd definitely feel slightly on edge. I've had too many bad experiences, so it always makes me feel a bit cornered.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:29 PM
2

If you consider the uterus the most important organ for babies (arguably true) and cocks are cheap, then vaginas should be optimized for many loads. Need to fuck many guys to be sure. One could say the fact that women have cycles means they should be fucking all the time to be sure. lol Is this your kink? Asking seriously. I had a whole thoughtful response, but I feel so many posts of this sub are just dudes explaining their fantasies to the unwilling like there's some profound truth behind it. …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 11:08 PM
4

Hmm... If one "could argue" it, then I think you may have to. Why would more dicks/semen from different men improve conception over just taking multiple loads from the same guy? Also, a big issue with this argument is that women are only fertile for less than 1/4 of each month (technically just a couple of days). Essentially, women have far less ability to pass forward DNA as offspring, constrained by ovulation and the time required to gestate one child. Compare that to one man who could father …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 10:09 PM
2

"A woman can get cummed inside by 20-30 guys every day" lol Yes, but how many babies can she have per year?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 09:49 PM
7

100%, but if I'm being cynical, I genuinely think it's a vanity thing more than anything, and the hygiene stuff just gets used as an excuse. Natalists want their kids to be "normal" so badly, and I find it quite sad.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 11:43 AM
8

You'd think it would be more ethical for parents to .... I dunno...teach their sons proper hygiene, unless you believe men are retarded and incapable?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 11:20 AM
3

This sounds like folklore, though you may be correct. Do you have any sources?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 09:25 AM
5

In America, it's more common than not, even for non-Jews.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 08:59 AM
24

I'm entirely against male circumcision as well. It's truly a disgusting act informed by religious brain worms that got absorbed into mainstream culture due to ignorance and parental vanity. However, when I've argued this, it's often men who say it's better and that they don't want their son's penis to be "weird" or whatever. Just saying...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 08:58 AM
4

Ah, to clarify, I mean 1000+ potential likes. For example, I was curious and paid to see every guy who liked me, and it was over 1000 in a couple of days. But at that point, what's the point? That is, if they're liking almost every woman, it's the same as walking into a crowd at a festival or bar full of guys knowing that most of them would say, "Yeah sure, she's fine. I'll talk to her," like they would for most of the other women there too. So, what's new? lol Anyway, yeah! I like the idea!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 01:48 AM
5

This would actually be really fascinating, because you'd know that if you match with a guy, it actually means something to him. And it would also make the number of matches a woman gets a meaningful metric, vs every woman just getting 1000+ potential likes every time.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 01:34 AM
1

Damn... Did you ever succeed or did that experience deter you from trying again?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 11:43 AM
1

I know she's not actually trapped. No one is really trapped, and you could probably hand-wave away most of the things men discuss here in a similar fashion. "Women's standards are too high!" -> "You're not trapped. Just don't date and be alone. It's a non-issue." Yet, we're just here on this debate subreddit, trying to work this all out. 🤷🏽‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 11:59 PM
1

If you mix different groups of men together and call the result contradictory, then the criticism is still built on a fake collective. Nope! As I said, "I'll introduce three common perspectives I've seen on this sub. And yes, I believe there are plenty of you holding them simultaneously." If you do not even believe the outcome, then you just exaggerated the view and argued against your own version of it. There are men who do believe these things. I've literally been arguing with them throughout …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 10:40 PM
4

Out of curiosity, do you think that's gendered, or would you say that anyone who is promiscuous (including men, obviously) are more likely to cheat?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 10:32 AM
4

That whole argument falls apart because it treats men like one hivemind with one set of rules, and that is obviously not how real life works. The literal opener of my post: "I hope most men understand that the worldview I'm critiquing is internally contradictory and practically untenable. But since I'm on PPD, I'll introduce three common perspectives I've seen on this sub" Plenty of men still date, sleep with, and commit to women who do not fit those standards perfectly. So this idea that one ba…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:21 AM
2

1 only applies if the individual slept with other people faster. I really hate this because it's like she's trapped in having to fuck in a way she doesn't really want, even if she changes her mind, or else he'll presume it's because of a lack of attraction. And the reason could have nothing to do with attraction. Again, she could be trying to take her time and "pick better" to keep her body count low, like many men advise! Instead, it's like, "Well, you're a whore now! Give it up fast like the l…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:09 AM
3

The complaints are usually about women that had sex relatively early with other guys, but not him, or women that are extremely promiscuous. That's the issue, though. He doesn't want to be "left out," but if she had sex relatively early with other guys and now him, that just adds to her promiscuity, so she is heading towards deserving the "complaints" you mentioned with every guy unless they stay together. I also would push back on what's considered "extremely promiscuous" because that's very sub…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:01 AM
3

Women who sleep around are more likely to cheat and not be exactly the best long term option, if she doesn't cares about sleeping around and goes with whoever, why wouldn't she do that while with you? If you believe this, then you can remain consistent by not also saying, "Sleep with men quickly or else you don't like him." If you're not saying that, then you can believe whatever you want, really. I'm just addressing the premises I've outlined for the men who do believe all of those things.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:54 AM
3

I never said it was his fault. No one forced her, and him "not being ready to settle down" could be explained in a completely blameless way for either of them, actually. More than anything, the culprit is the premise that women should sleep with men quickly (pre vetting) to prove that they desire and value them. You can say it's "her fault" for believing that, but that's just a stronger indictment of the beliefs in those three ideas. And that is indeed the point of my post, once again: I'm criti…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:50 AM
1

She then finds out that in the past I used to become exclusive really quickly, but for her I chose to keep some side flings going on until I was "certain" about her. Nobody would blame her for judging me, feeling insulted, and ending things. I would blame her if she didn't mind side flings pre-formal commitment until she found out that it was "new" for you. People are allowed to change, and there may be many reasons why your approach is different now. So, it's fine if "side flings" just isn't he…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:41 AM
2

I've considered that, honestly. But I wanted to point out the issues for anyone else who hasn't noticed them.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:31 AM
1

Point one is misstated. If you make a guy wait for sex, when you gave it quickly to other men, it shows that you find him either less attractive or less valuable than the previous guy. Consistent standards are more respected. I included my example for this very argument. What would you advise the young woman I described to do? Should she keep sleeping with men quickly after Alex and throw vetting to the wind to avoid being inconsistent? Should she conceal her past from the men she dates so they'…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:29 AM
0

It could be her fault. It could not be her fault. In my hypothetical, I didn't specify why things didn't work out with Alex on purpose because those situations can go a multitude of ways. However, you came in and wrote a whole screenplay about what did happen, in my hypothetical, and now you want me to agree that she's to blame. 😂What?! That is an astounding level of hubris. That would be like if you wrote a hypothetical where a guy loses custody of his kids even though his ex-wife cheated, and …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:29 AM
0

lol I tried to be charitable and not call you out, but you've rewritten my hypothetical to make up a scenario (the one you actually want to argue against) in which you think she would be to blame, and I'm saying "No, she's not!" If that's your goal, I can't stop you, but you're alone in an argument that you're inventing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:14 AM
8

Lol You're so right. We need to somehow know him before we know him. Or get to know him very well while also fucking him quickly. Perhaps the strategy is to have in-depth conversations while getting railed! I wouldn't even be shocked to hear it at this point. 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:01 AM
3

"I’d just find a woman who can show me genuine desire up front and doesn’t have to weaponize sex." Wanting some time to learn who a person is isn't weaponizing sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:55 AM
4

But the framework still exists for the people who don’t have the intuition. Certainly, but what I'm questioning is that framework. I'm looking at the "sheet music" and thinking, "This is going to sound...really bad." And I think you agree that it does, even if we've briefly quibbled about who has written these songs.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:51 AM
0

It's possible, but it could also be that they were comparably attractive, but because she's relatively inexperienced, she didn't see Alex's "I'm still figuring out what I want, but I really like you" ploy as the manipulation it often is. Regardless of the reason though, my conclusion still stands: if she doesn't get the game right very early (if not her first time), she's set up for a "downward value spiral" if the three premises I laid out are what men believe about women. So, even if your theo…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:46 AM
5

It's contradictory when the premises work together, because men say that they want women who are of high value while holding beliefs and acting in ways that actively undermine it. This is not the same thing as age, which is an inevitable decline. These are active beliefs and behaviors where men argue for rapid access to women and then devalue her in the very act, unless they stay with her. Do men want women to better preserve their chastity? If so, then women should wait. But also, "No! No! Beca…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 02:47 AM
6

It was to illustrate the point that her devaluing happens gradually, and even at a low body count, it still has an impact. So, sure! She'd still be regarded as "relatively pure" by most men because anyone over the age of 25 will probably have more than 2 partners. But the point of my illustration is that 2 becomes 3, and 3 becomes 4, and so on and so forth, until a woman crosses whatever invisible line that the men who have these beliefs hold that means she's got a "high body count"/is low value…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 02:13 AM
9

This wouldn't work because she requires knowing Trevor in order to vet him. So, the time she waits between him and Alex can only help so much. For example, what if she met him on an app (like most young people do) and doesn't see that he's got anger issues until a month in, after he loses it on a waiter? What if it takes her time to realize that his schedule is nuts and he doesn't balance it very well? So (though he promised more), he can only see her once a week at most? There are just things y…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 02:00 AM
15

Sir, this is a debate subreddit. If you don't want to "worry about what other people say and think," what are you doing here?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:46 AM
2

I'm not sure if I even agree/disagree with you because your follow-up arguments are kind of all over the place. If your main point is "Most people don't subscribe to either worldview and eventually find romance/sex/commitment/babie," I agree!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:42 AM
7

It may be easier, but it's not foolproof. 1) A lot of people lock their socials down, and 2) what you're seeing is curated. So, you can find a facebook or instagram with highlight reels and a LinkedIn? That's not going to help vet a person's actual character by a long shot.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:26 AM
9

That's a crazy expectation that is essentially: "Women only really want men they are willing to compromise their values and well-being for." And I'm not accusing you of this, but that perspective justifies men who expect women to go to any length, even self-degradation, to prove genuine desire. "If you really loved, you would..." 🥲
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:20 AM
9

In a perfect world, am I right? I think it's possible, but your perspective requires a rare, flawless execution that reality often flies in the face of. That is, it requires a) her accurately assessing her desirability as an inexperienced dater, b) having a social circle to date within vs meeting on an app (which is far more common), and c) them staying together, even as young people who will learn, grow, and change. It's possible, but hard to predict. And again, she's inexperienced. So, what if…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:12 AM
8

I'm not sure what your argument is. "Find someone to have sex with, and have a lot of sex with them" sounds like finding a boyfriend? So, sure! But people leave, or cheat, or relationships end for whatever reason. The way you frame that, it sounds like you think it's easy for it to be a "one and done" -- find that perfect person, and just keep fucking them. Umm.. yeah, that's the dream for many. lol
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:04 AM
11

Vetting takes time, and most people are meeting on apps. In the past, it was easier to secretly stalk and assess men before formal dating began, like in a small town or when people left their houses more and were part of "scenes." But that's becoming less and less common.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:00 AM
8

What if she's trying to figure out who this guy is/what he really wants first? What if she's been burned and is trying to "pick better?"
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:56 AM
18

I actually think that's valid and just about wanting to be with someone who you know really likes you. Imo, women have the same desire, even though it may be described differently: "My boyfriend only jerks off to big booty red heads, and I'm not that." So yeah... I think that kind of concern is universal and not unreasonable.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:45 AM
9

Hmm... I'm not doubting men experience the trap you've laid out, but I also think that men are responsible for that too. That is, I don't hear women saying those three things to men. I hear men saying that's how the "world works" to other men, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:39 AM
5

Hmm...yeah.... I can't find those numbers anywhere, not with standard research or even cross-referencing all of those links with other LLMs. And maybe those figures do live somewhere credible, but this leads me to believe that the data you've supplied are hallucinations that don't even exist in any of these sources. If that's so, then the AI likely used these sources to infer and concoct a figure because it couldn't find the exact answer to "married men's mean incomes vs married women's mean inc…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 12:47 PM
5

I see! Before I elaborate on my points, can I ask what sources the AI you used cited when it drew up these figures? If it didn't specify, you can ask it. This helps double-check for hallucinations and gives us something grounded we can both analyze. What I'm most interested in is where you got "AI slop machine says that the average prime-age husband in the same year earned $94,182, versus $59,844 for the average wife" from. Thanks!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 12:08 PM
18

My biggest pet peeve with your post (for now): You've justified using the average incomes over median incomes to stay consistent with your time figures, but this has introduced a logical error. There are men who make millions a year that can (and do) drastically skew average incomes higher. However, there is only so much work and childcare to do in a home. Or, to use AI slop as well: "A high-earning husband with a $500k salary pulls the income average up dramatically, while that same husband's w…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 11:27 AM
2

This is the way I see it. For the most part, a good man is just a good person...with a dick. And that's not a bad deal! That said, most of the positives come from the "good person" part. The dick just makes it niche.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:57 AM
4

You have valid points, and I want to acknowledge that being the breadwinning partner isn't necessarily a cake walk or without drawbacks. However, my core idea is more about the economics-focused rhetoric specifically and what I believe it reveals about men's attitudes. I'm not even particularly traditional, so I'm not advocating for men or women to get married. In fact, one of the reasons I think women should be skeptical of doing so/falling into the traditional role is because of what I wrote i…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:01 AM
1

We're belaboring the same points, so this will be my last reply. You don't want to accept polling data that says that more men want to marry than women. Yet you can't prove that the men who aren't getting married are doing this on purpose, even though they say they're not. You turn it back to me, and then acknowledge that women are marrying less than they used to, but you also say, "Eh" and are inconclusive regarding your own "best litmus test." What? What do you even want out of the conversatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 06:05 AM
1

I think maybe I'm weird for this, but there's a 9/10 chance I'd still fuck them because I'm bisexual and very personality-based. I've also dated the "ugly" guy, and he wasn't ugly to me based on his character. Plus, in your hypothetical, I love them, so sure! I'd have sex with them, except for the 1/10 possibility that they're extremely unattractive. That would probably require a severe deformity or scary skin condition or extreme obesity. If they are at least still "average," or maybe even reas…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 05:39 AM
1

Actually not getting married seems more like "bowing out of the game" to me than "deprioritizing in polling data". Can you prove that these men aren't getting married by choice? That's the crux here, but it's also what you hand-waved away. "Domestic labor" is objectively worth less than staying in the place. Otherwise, rent would have been either zero, or negative. There are less chores than ever, less cooking than ever, and the rest (laundry/vacuuming) is automated more than ever. Once again, y…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 05:07 AM
3

She has already received the provision equivalent to her worth during the marriage and if the assets are his then she’s simply no longer entitled to access half of them. I agree. You're not expected to continue to share freshly made assets with someone you're no longer married to. The only thing that's split is what was earned when the couple is together. Once they divorce, he's not still paying for her life (unless there is alimony, which I've already said is rare). It sounds like you think tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 03:55 AM
2

"There are consistenly more never-married men than never-married women in (afaik) EVERY year we have reliable data on, and lately more than ever." So, you're arguing that more men are choosing not to be married as opposed to struggling to find someone to marry? I don't buy that. And regardless, I was mostly referring to the polling data on younger men and women that shows that women are deprioritizing marriage and having children at unprecedented numbers, while men are not. By the same logic hou…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 03:43 AM
3

This is another flavor of the "women can be bad" argument with an added twist: "And if she is terrible, the man/breadwinner is still on the hook to legally pay, unlike in the reverse." So, if you're married to a woman for 3 years, and she's not who you thought she was (cheating or having kids with someone else), then leave! Yes, the assets you acquired during that period are still split. However, just like aspiring tradwife can have a kid with a man who could also cheat, lie, and abandon her, so…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 12:38 AM
3

What a lot of men are reacting to is something different: divorces where the woman wasn’t a long-term SAHM, still had a career or income, sometimes even comparable earnings and still ends up with a disproportionate share of assets, the house, and/or ongoing financial support. I don't know if I buy this, because why is this happening? Is there proof that this is happening? If this is to be taken at face value, we'd have to assume that the courts just see "Woman" and give more because of that, as …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:46 PM
5

I totally acknowledge there can be bad people/actors, and I'm sad that you had a terrible experience, but I don't think exceptions or anecdotes can be effectively covered by a general argument (which is what I'm making). That's why my analysis doesn't account for them. It would be like if a man argued that "Women don't understand how much pressure men have to be emotionally strong and stoic," and my counter was "Some men, like my ex, aren't stoic. When he was angry, he'd actually scream and punc…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:26 PM
4

15-20 hours a week!? So...4 hours a day to take care of a home and kids??? lol I don't know if you have done this yourself and figured out some amazing hack, but you should share it with these men who disagree with you. Also, before they marry/become the domestic-sphere partner, most women are also building careers and working. How do you think they're supporting themselves while they're single???
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:14 PM
7

LOL What? Imagine that a couple is together for 20 years, and during that time, the breadwinner brings in 1 million dollars. During the marriage, they spent half between them (500k), so upon their divorce, there is 500k left in savings and assets. Spent during the marriage: Her: 250k - Him: 250k To be split after the marriage: Her: 250k - Him: 250k How in the world do you get 75%?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 12:16 PM
11

I'm struggling to understand you, but I think this is the second time I've seen this strange argument. I'm not referring to post-divorce assets. That's not a thing, unless you're talking about alimony, which is uncommon. Assets earned during the marriage are assets of the marriage. I believe you're thinking of money that wasn't spent in the moment (including assets that still exist like housing, cars, etc.) as post-divorce assets because... I guess they still exist? So, it's like if you had a gi…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:58 AM
5

"trust me bro, i was good for you!" - then why are they divorcing xD? That's fair, and this made me laugh. lol I'm about to go to sleep, so I may unpack this a bit better tomorrow, but for now: would you propose quantifying domestic labor in the moment then? My god, I feel like everyone would see that as a tedious enterprise. Or I suppose, once the divorce is in play, the state (and the lawyers) will split everything anyway, and if he thinks he got shorted, then it is what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:08 AM
9

Like other men here, you are also seeing the money earned by the breadwinner as solely his, which only reinforces my point that the domestic-sphere partner (wife/mother) is not seen as a contributor of equal value. And I also have to note that you didn't mention the key point of my post: motherhood and domestic labor. I'm referring to marriages where a family was supported via her work in the home, children were raised by her labor, and then there was a divorce. Your framing: She's a spendthrift…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:51 AM
6

Your logic tracks well enough, but I'm very curious what numbers you've come to, since it sounds like you've done the math. Also, are you factoring in what she might've gained if she had stayed in the workforce and earned a pension? Other questions: How many kids are in your formula? How long is the marriage? And are you calculating the payment for births (using the cost of surrogacy)? I've actually looked into something similar, imagining a single guy who wanted to pay for all the wife/mother s…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:40 AM
4

I won't argue about family court here, as it's not the point of my post. That said, of course, I don't want any f*cked up or unfair cruelty towards men in regards to custody. I'm just not an expert on this particular topic, and it's not what I'm arguing. Thanks for sharing, though, and perhaps this topic would be a worthy post of its own.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:27 AM
17

"It's much harder to tell wife is doing work." I don't deny that there are grifters, and I'm not missing the visibility aspect. I actually agree. Domestic labor and what's traditionally framed as "women's work" in the home has largely been invisible in society. But it's also 2026, so I don't think "I didn't think she was doing much" from men is a valid play, given all of the conversations. "Now compare this to a man's situation: he goes to work. there are quarterly reviews of performance. report…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:21 AM
8

I think I get what you're saying. But what you're failing to comprehend is that you're applying that retroactively. That is, you're going into the past to deduct from what was earned when she was a wife because she's no longer going to be your wife. However, it's not like her contribution of labor can be taken back from the past. It's not like she can go back into the past and subtract all of the wife stuff she did then, only leaving what she did for the kids. I'm really trying to work within yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:03 AM
5

I'm not an expert on custody, but the main point of my post is that "She took half of what's mine" rhetoric reveals that many men don't value motherhood. Your anecdotal experience with a terrible ex doesn't really speak to this debate, but if you are worried about ending up with a bad one, then don't marry or have kids. Simple!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:58 AM
24

100%. I think this idea has seeped into culture so deeply that it's just become natural to many men. They see being the income-earning partner as an extremely benevolent offer (because remember that everything is theirs) and that "losing half" for any reason besides extremely terrible behavior on their part is a deep injustice. And yet, somehow, women have become "crazily irrational" because we no longer want this "sweet life" and would rather provide for ourselves! Must be that feminist propaga…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:39 AM
9

I sort of see what you're saying, but I don't think it makes much sense. Why wouldn't she be entitled to "assets or anything made during the marriage" if she was actively a mother and wife when they were earned?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:28 AM
9

What? I'm sorry, but I'm struggling to understand what you mean. Can you give me an example to illustrate your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:05 AM
10

My sister was in the same boat, and I appreciate you noting that because child care costs are so brutal, and most of the time, someone (usually the woman) compromises to stay at home because of it. But it's interesting to me that many men will understand the exorbitant costs of child care, but not see the value of a woman staying at home with kids. You seem to get it, but not the men I'm aiming to reach with my post.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:54 AM
13

It sounds like you both have good jobs, and I'm glad you found an arrangement that worked!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:44 AM
10

Solid! Can I ask how you two handled childcare?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:38 AM
12

I'm just talking about half of what was earned during the marriage. But if you're referring to alimony, that is actually pretty uncommon.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:37 AM
32

Alas, he wrote: "Now, in one scenario, the man cheats on his wife, or becomes abusive, or what have you, and the woman decides to leave him, divorce and all. I feel like she's definitely owed half..." and then "but the man comes home from work early one day to find his wife cheating on him, or maybe she just decides to opt out and no longer does much of anything to contribute, I feel like it's downright evil that she could divorce him and take half of his home, pension, what have you...." So, if…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:18 AM
15

I don't know what to say about these "bad" women, though it seems like you're just cherry-picking the worst actors. That said, it's worth noting that (from all the data I've seen) over 90% of custody cases are mutually agreed upon, without intervention from a court.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:14 AM
17

Already, on this thread, someone reframed what I described (domestic labor + raising kids) as just being "a housewife," like all I'm talking about is throwing a couple of loose socks in the laundry and then turning on soap operas. 🫠 Edited for clarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 07:58 AM
34

By this logic, she only gets her half of the contribution if she's "perfect." And mind you, I looooathe cheating. I've been cheated on, and it disgusts me, but I hope you see how he has all the power in your scenario. Essentially, if he cheats, the outcome is the same for him, but if she cheats, she deserves nothing?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 07:52 AM
16

I'm not just talking about being a housewife who drinks chardonnay all day. I'm talking about giving up a career to raise children and do domestic labor. I was just talking about this on another thread, but childcare is so expensive that often one parent has to stay at home. And if you've ever raised children...especially under 5...holy shit, it's hard. I helped my sister with her kids because the dad was a complete loser, and I would need a lot of money to do that all day as a paid job, even th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 07:42 AM
4

Ideally, she could, but if you actually look at the practicalities of the situation, it's often extremely difficult. What about childcare while she works? That alone can cost half a person's salary. Also, is she educated? What about teen mothers? The people who are the poorest/have the worst economic prospects are often the most likely to be confused about who the father is. And sometimes the bio dad just...leaves, or is incarcerated, or even killed. So imo, it's far less about not having "luxur…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 07:38 AM
4

Yes, they should definitely have the right to renounce. I'm aware that the state has incentive to force men to financially support children, even if they were intentionally duped into providing for them. But this is unethical. I'd genuinely prefer better tax policies that would fund and democratize the responsibility. I mean...everyone is going on about the declining birth rate anyway, right? So, those natalists (most people) should pay up and robustly provide for mothers and children.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 07:00 AM
4

Totally out of curiosity, but did you meet her in your own country?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:42 PM
5

I agree with your argument, and it sounds like you're aware of why this young woman is with you. But, I don't know if I'd call her your "girlfriend."
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 09:58 PM
1

It should be proportionate IF the higher-income person wants to maintain their lifestyle. For example, if you want a $3000 couples vacation, and she can only afford half of a $300 weekend trip, asking her to go 50/50 would render her financially irresponsible and eventually depleted. This should apply to food, housing/neighborhood, recreation, etc. However, if you both are okay with living humbly, based only on what she can afford, then I could see 50/50 making more sense, at least until you are…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 10:37 AM
2

Got you! It seems like they're just saying that being educated means women are more likely to marry, maybe because less educated people mate/date without entering into the contract of matrimony (for various reasons). So, I think what a person actually wants is key. If the goal is fucking more recklessly and having a bunch of kids, regardless of the circumstances, then maybe there's an advantage to being in an impoverished community. But if the goal is gaining/providing the financial and societal…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:33 AM
5

That's a fascinating observation! I low-key believe in the law of attraction (because I'm a simulationist), and one of my favorite teachings is to be grateful every time I pay a bill because it means I'm badass enough to afford a good life. I'm well-off though, so maybe that's just my rationalization, but it's funny how mentalities can be the absolute opposite....
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:24 AM
2

If you look at how it pans out, I suspect lower birth control use too. Imo, it's why the same communities also have more kids, even by teenagers, and end up using more social services. The family planning, caution, and judgment are just more compromised. Edit to add: It could also be argued that being involved with a man with anti-social tendencies like criminality and gang membership is inherently high risk. To your first question, I'm not sure what you mean by "other factors than education the…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 02:23 AM
14

"Why do gang members and criminals have far more sex partners then?" If this is statistically true (which I don't necessarily doubt), it's probably because the women they're around (who are also from impoverished and traumatized communities) are also prone to more short-sighted, high-risk behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 02:01 AM
14

I think being a criminal offers a different kind of currency, even without much financial success or literacy. A lot of it is coding for masculine cliches: a willingness to take risks and an aspirational "provider" mentality (even if it fails). Of course, it's shambolic because we're talking about traumatized communities in poverty, but in that context, it may be the closest thing to a "grindset mindset"...not dissimilar from a meme-coin trading frat boy who is leasing his sports car, but can pu…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 01:55 AM
1

At least you're honest! But out of curiosity, are you willing to pay for that monetarily? And if so, could you actually afford it?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 07:02 AM
–

I think that's one of the issues with this sub. The "access challenged" and the "relationship challenged" men are all blended together. However, I doubt that completely dateless men are jumping to "I'll get a woman above my league" instead of just trying to get a woman. So, I really doubt he's referring to incels here. I could be wrong though...
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 09:31 AM
–

Become very competent at sex/genuinely pleasuring a woman. It's so much rarer than men even know, and it goes a long way. I know a few successful hobo-sexuals, and this is literally all they "bring to the table."
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 06:35 AM
–

As long as we both agree you're being unethical, then I believe we've achieved consensus! 😬 Cheerio! lol
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 11:49 AM
–

Then you are an ethically inconsistent person, which is no surprise.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 11:36 AM
–

Yes. I'm all for ethical non-monogamy, but the circumstances you've described sound coercive. You seem to have rationalized something that is still hurtful by focusing on semantics, while banking on your wife's lack of the "clarity of mind" to self-advocate. It doesn't affect me personally, of course, but I find this behavior unethical.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 11:31 AM
–

Sounds like she doesn't, which you're happily benefiting from....otherwise, you would leave, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 11:22 AM
–

100%. His wife will file for divorce, and he'll be gobsmacked like, "But I told her!"
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 11:12 AM
–

Are you okay with her sleeping with other men?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 11:07 AM
2

We can agree to disagree because we're both speaking from subjective experience, but I'd bet good money that someone (though not you) would be willing to rail her on a slow Tuesday.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 07:50 AM
2

😂 The fact that you think a man's thirst means anything is hilarious to me. I've lived enough life, dated plenty, and even had enough guy friends to know that a man's horniness does not necessarily correlate with a woman's attractiveness. In fact, the most appealing thing in that moment may simply be that she's down. That's it. And if you disagree, why do the terms "post-nut clarity" or "coyote ugly" exist? So, maybe you have a high standard, but enough men don't that the idea that it should inh…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 06:09 AM
1

I think your points are fair too, which on this subreddit, makes me feel like we're one step closer to world peace. 😂 But yeah... I guess I am pretty blackpilled, mostly from lived experience, but I think the data bears it out too. And of course, I wish the world weren't this way. Anyway, cheers and thank you for the chat!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 03:25 AM
5

I appreciate you not deleting it! "if someone is willing to treat you as a bangmaid they at LEAST,among other things, found you physically attractive enough to sleep with(which doesn’t mean shit to most women but that’s beside the point), so “ugly” doesn’t seem like the most logical first conclusion." To your points, this would make sense if men weren't so vocal about how they settle, even for women they find "ugly," especially because of their desire for sex. From what I've observed, these are …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 01:49 AM
8

"Do women really feel ugly when they get used for sex?" Pardon me, but are you joking?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 12:25 AM
7

For what it's worth, I'm on a fitness journey now, and it's made me realize that the category of "overweight" (BMI of 25+) also includes bodies that most Americans would probably see as average or attractive. Note that this woman is still "overweight" in her after photo: https://myprogresspics.com/progress-pics/20291/f26s-43-lbs-weight-loss-journey-over-2-years-using-cico-and-sports-nutrition
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 10:33 PM
–

I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that every monogamous woman can only ultimately be with one man (which could be argued would be selected from her "fans," so I guess one of them does get lucky). But my point is that your argument sounds like it's against women's monogamy, and I'm wondering if that's what you're arguing against.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 05:35 AM
–

This is such a strange framing. In a generally monogamous society, each person will end up selecting one person. So, from that perspective, is every woman a quasi-celebrity simply because she will only ever choose one man, even though so many more desire her? I mean...it's not like she can be with/fuck everyone. O_o And to the point, even the women you mentioned that are "open to the public" (like 35+ women or girlboss) also still have tons of suitors and will only end up with one. So, how are t…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 05:30 AM
–

Can you elaborate on exactly what "open to the public" means? I'm lost because you've given the qualifiers of how she can be open to the public, without clearly explaining what that means.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 04:56 AM
2

Why does it matter if a preference is in anyone's "control?" Think about preferences like boob or butt size. Most normal people aren't getting/can't afford plastic surgery, but that doesn't make an ass man's preference for a massive booty messed up.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 11:10 AM
0

I agree with the core of your comment: preferences are legitimate. But some slight pushback: Not wanting to date an obese person (obesity is a choice and objectively unhealthy) isn't equiivalent to height preference (genetic; only 15% of men are over 6 foot). Women aren't only mating/dating men over 6 feet, even if they do prefer taller. And men seem to prefer slender women (BMI of 20 according to the data, which at 5'4 is 118lbs) over an average-size woman, even if the average size isn't signif…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 11:00 AM
10

I think that's OP's point. Who decides what standards are reasonable? If a woman told you to date someone who is overweight, or someone you had no attraction to, you'd think they were being ridiculous, no? But when women balk at men telling them to be with men we're not attracted to, then we're also ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:28 AM
14

I've worn them regularly before because they don't show panty lines. Certain cheap "party dresses" with thin fabric will also show every crease, so a thong gives a smoother silhouette and is better than going commando imo. Also, not every thong is a thin g-string that rides all the way up and in. Many just sort of "rest" on top of your crack, just fyi.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 12:58 AM
12

Maybe it's the kind of guys I date, but it's usually an unspoken guarantee. Guys do it maybe 90% of the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 04:52 AM
4

In Lillith's defense, I don't think she's being prescriptive about what women should or shouldn't want (at least in this post. I haven't searched through her writings). I think she's making a claim that most women don't want casual sex in the way that men do, and that men shouldn't be butthurt (or attribute malice or deficiency) to that difference. Do you believe that most women do want early or casual sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 03:27 AM
1

Most sexual experiences of most women aren't rape and most women aren't dumb and men aren't much smarter than most women to manipulate them.' This is a severe oversimplification of my argument. 😬 All those multiple reasons in the overwhelming majority of cases can be explained by her not being as attracted. You definitely don't know this because you're not capable of mind-reading all women. But I bet that every time a woman states that's not true, you just don't believe her. And that's fine. But…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 10:16 PM
–

What always baffles me about this strategy is...what about the guys in those countries? I feel like the original men of whatever place (like my home country, the Philippines) always get disregarded by passport bro types, like these countries are only filled with women in ya'll's imagination. Or are you essentially telling those dudes "tough shit" as you create more competition in their dating markets? Genuine question! Thanks!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:53 PM
–

It seems like there are a few studies on this. Here's one: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12178563/ "Our results suggest that single women, on average, report higher levels of satisfaction with relationship status, life satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and lower desire for a partner. Exploratory analyses showed significant gender interactions with age and ethnicity. Overall, these findings suggest that women are, on average, happier in singlehood than men."
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:41 PM
5

Not caring about a woman's economic prospects is men's choice, but it's not necessarily a virtue or smart for ya'll either (unless you're rich).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 05:48 AM
18

Most of this is...questionable. But I have to say that calling income a vanity metric in this economy is wild to me, especially if people want kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 01:30 AM
1

It's better if OP's goal is to distance herself from men who feign being interested in deeper connections, but are actually solely sex-motivated. Yes, some of those types will have endurance, but (at least in my experience) a good portion of those guys will see the delay in sex (the one thing they're truly interested in) as a waste of their time, and they'll go. But men here (and now pretty much everywhere) also understand that the same woman probably didn't establish connection before sex with …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:48 AM
11

I'm the same in many cases! If the date is bad, or I realize I just don't fancy the guy, I feel much better if I've paid for something.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 03:40 AM
4

I was on a second date recently and, as is my custom, I insisted on paying. The guy seemed initially very uncomfortable with it, even though neither of us is broke. I suspect this could be because a lot of men understand that they're in competition for quality women, and demonstrating generosity is one of the ways they distinguish themselves. Essentially, even though we're both comfortable financially, it's still a signal that he wanted to transmit to me. And most wealthy men I've dated are the …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 03:34 AM
7

It's not relevant because OP isn't questioning men's desirability. She's questioning a position that some men take which asserts that men are only loyal to women against their will. It's that idea that undermines men's desirability. The framing is: "As a man, how can you have this perspective about your own kind and also promote that being with men is desirable?" It actually can only really be answered by men with those views. So no, a polamorous woman's dating life has nothing to do with it sin…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 12:47 PM
6

Okay then. Please volunteer your entire dating history and proclivities to the class so we know how to judge your arguments. I'll make sure to weigh that information primarily, regardless of relevance, instead of simply engaging with your posts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:59 AM
5

That's just wrong and not in the spirit of any civil debate. But even more: that's a funny take from someone who has all of their posts hidden. lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:52 AM
6

I'll explain this, since I don't know anyone's ages or IQs. Instead of engaging with her post, you needlessly turned it back on her personal life, which isn't relevant. Has my explanation helped you?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:45 AM
5

Attacking the poster and not their argument?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:31 AM
4

I'm not saying that it's meant to remain platonic, of course. People generally still kiss and are amorous, even without sex. It's just that the connection based on character is established before sex. Also, and I'm not trying to just go after you...But I feel like the men here are pretending not to know what this is, even though traditionally, it's the blueprint! You learn about a person and develop an affection or attachment before just fucking right away. This isn't a new concept! Are people p…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:18 AM
8

I'll take the risk of that over being repeatedly pumped and dumped.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:14 AM
1

Ahh yes... because "By having a body count of 0" is certainly provable, right? And you've definitely met your burden of poof first, since you made the first positive claim, no? Note that I didn't ask you for evidence, mostly because I know your claim is an unprovable opinion, and I gave you the same energy. That, and I've given up on expecting much from this sub. I only asked for a substantive rebuttal (simply based on reasoning), but I think this sub has been flooded by teenage boys because the…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:10 AM
4

The most common (at least for me) has been when you can tell they're just going through the dates as checkboxes. I'm trying to learn if we're compatible for something meaningful and invested. He's trying to get through a requisite number of hours because that moves him closer to a goal that (apparently) doesn't involve actually getting to know me. It's obvious, and we can tell.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:59 AM
1

Do you have an actual rebuttal for what I've claimed?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:46 AM
6

You seem so desperate to drill into this utility point. You think women are resource predators who are only interested in getting to know men's characters to see how they can use them? And that cause delay, yes? God, this sub is jumping the shark... Do you have any evidence that women spend more time vetting men, to see "what utility" a man can provide, or are you just reading these ideas off your own balls? To the one argument you actually presented: "The friend zone exists. Women are rarely tu…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:41 AM
3

Nah... plenty of men will have no hesitation using a virgin just like any other woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:37 AM
8

None of which requires very much time at all to form Maybe for you? But honestly, how long does it take you to get to know a person's character and come to care for them as a person? Just a few hours and a drink or two? lol and all of which is intertwined with sexual intimacy. People can form emotional connections with friends without any sexual intimacy at all. That's the kind of connection I'm referring to. Caring about who the person is in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:27 AM
2

Ah, got you. Thanks for the reply!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:20 AM
4

Just out of curiosity, would you consider yourself average, below average, or above average when it comes to conventional beauty standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:16 AM
6

I'm thinking about connection as in "emotional connection," aka bonding/caring about each other based on their characters (likes, dislikes, values, ways of being in the world, how they treat each other outside of the bedroom). People can definitely have sex without even knowing about any of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:12 AM
7

Are you saying that no quality man with options is willing to wait for connection?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:57 AM
19

I think the best bet is to wait to have sex. In my experience, the men who prioritize connection are far more willing wait until a connection is genuinely formed. And those who are the most interested in sex usually lose patience. It's not foolproof, but I think it eliminates a large proportion of the "mostly wants sex" guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:30 AM
1

I finally read your post, and it seems like its only point is that men have different desires, interests, and fears than women. Nice to read the possibility of being raped being compared to losing "income credits," though. It's a nice reminder not to take engagement on this sub seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 11:01 PM
3

They literally ask people what they're looking for.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 04:45 AM
-2

I have to push back on this because quantity and quality aren't the same thing. For example, a woman can get a deluge of offers, but if these are for hookups and that isn't what she wants, then what? Also, a lot of men are obviously lying about their age, have no information filled in, are looking for something casual, or are taking some dimly lit photo in what looks like a dungeon. And that's not even getting into the bios. Then you match and get inappropriate messages. Or you meet in person an…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 06:08 AM
–

Not OP, but there is recent, credible research on this. Summarized by AI but: "A 2017 study also published in Archives of Sexual Behavior by Frederick et al. ("Differences in Orgasm Frequency Among Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Men and Women in a U.S. National Sample") surveyed over 52,000 adults. It remains one of the most comprehensive datasets on the topic. Key finding: heterosexual women had the lowest orgasm frequency of any group. The study also identified behavioral factors ass…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 12:21 PM
–

Ad hominem fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 10:40 AM
4

At what point does a condition cross from being a private health matter into something that employers are legally obligated to accommodate? There are plenty of conditions that are private health matters (like disabilities) and also something employers are legally obligated to accommodate.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 10:08 AM
–

To recap, you agree that you brought it up first. And the only evidence you've cited for your argument is that there are men, on this literal thread, who say they have experienced this. However, I looked and found nothing, literally. Some agree with your opinion in general, but there were no experiences or evidence shared. What I did find from men, all from different posts: "It's never been used as a reward in my relationship. The only frame it had was her being frustrated that we don't do it en…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 12:03 PM
–

You're the one who brought up OF and sugar baby work. This is untrue. You brought it up in your first response to me. Yes, including from men who have experienced it agreeing. It makes sense that you as a woman (if you dont use sex as a reward) have never experienced it but that doesn't mean men haven't. Even many men in these comments have. I'll do the legwork of looking for those comments (though again, the burden of proof is yours). Also, you never answered if you've ever experienced this, so…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 10:56 AM
–

In other words, so many women use sex to get money and openly talk about it that it's stopped shocking you. Isn't that a sad reflection on women? At this point, I'm just trying to clarify the scope of your claims, but if you're literally including prostitution as your evidence... it's kind of weird to imply that can be extrapolated to most women. I mean, are you even trying to say this happens in most relationships? I'm genuinely trying to understand. And if you are, do you have any evidence of …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 10:18 AM
–

They would tell me because a lot of women tell their friends a lot. They've told me when they've cheated, had STDs, faked orgasms, and what size their man's dick is. I'm pretty sure "I use sex to get my guy to do stuff" would be amongst the milder confessions. Even prostitutes don't go around telling other women that they're prostitutes or have an OF. This is also untrue, as I know several women who have told me they done sugar baby work and OF. I was in the restaurant industry for a while, and …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 09:33 AM
–

it's like an animal trap where the animal gets to still eat what's left while the trap door is closing. Melodrama: a sensational dramatic piece with exaggerated characters and exciting events intended to appeal to the emotions. I know the definition, and you were being melodramatic. Also, I never said sexless relationships don't exist, which is why your comment wasn't a refutation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 08:35 AM
–

I'd love to, and I'd probably get banned. But could you refute my points? I mean, I think it's pretty simple, no? Maybe it's a hot take, but if a marriage gets to the point where "sex as bait" manipulation is happening (presumably in an otherwise dead bedroom), then that shit is over. If it were me, I'd accept that the divorce is coming and get my ducks in a row.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 08:27 AM
–

If this is truly the fear, don't marry. And when sex becomes incompatible or less than what you'd like, leave! But this melodrama is crazy to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 08:20 AM
–

I find this extremely weird and have never known a woman who does, or at least admits to, doing anything resembling this. Also, the book you quoted was written in the 70s, so I wonder if it's some boomer "trick" back when marriage was way more survival-based, and divorce was basically a non-option. Because yeah...in the modern era, what? Most women I know either stop wanting sex because they start seeing their partner as a man-child or just leave. But they're not purposefully dangling coochie in…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 08:16 AM
2

That's a pretty weak rebuttal.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:40 PM
2

This isn't necessarily the case. I had a friend in college who had terrible boundaries, so she'd often have sex early, mostly based on the amount of pressure she felt from the guy to put out. Ironically, the best guys who actually cared about her usually waited longer because they cared about the fact that she wasn't comfortable having early sex. And I've known multiple women who have had those kinds of experiences, which isn't helped by men adopting "If you like me, you'd immediately be down to…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 06:11 AM
8

If he was doing it so that it "would work" on me, then it would've been performative and on the nose. But he didn't even know that I saw this because we were all giving our IDs to the bouncer, and he sort of just snuck off to the side. He actually looked slightly embarrassed when I mentioned it. So, yeah...the same action can be performative or sincere. But I could tell he just did it because it aligned with his values, which people often do.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 05:02 AM
8

I was friend-quaintences with a guy, and while our group was walking to a bar one night, he stopped to give a homeless guy a bit of money. It wasn't a lot, but it told me a lot of good things about his character all at once. Yes...there are arguments about if that's good/actually helpful for homeless people, but it had the opposite of the "rude to the waitstaff" effect. I definitely started clocking him as a contender after that.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 04:09 AM
–

A lot of women end up rationalizing it as lack of attraction or intent, even if the date was great. Tbh, I've never heard this. You're saying that if there isn't sex on the first date, women take that as a bad sign? I've heard the opposite more: women say they would prefer to wait, and more men saying delayed sex = she's not into him because she'd put out for Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 08:38 AM
4

My ex was 7, and we made it work, but I wasn't happy about having to. It takes a lot of the fun/momentum out of the moment, worrying about pain while trying to get it in there. 5-6 is ideal.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 11:59 AM
–

I've slept with men around the third date, but I'm revising my approach to wait longer because I don't want to sleep with men who may be sleeping with other people. And that seems much more likely while things are still uncommitted/ambiguous, you know? I'm just wondering if you mind that possibility/how you approach that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 04:34 AM
0

Out of curiosity, how do you explain women who are abused by men who are ugly?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 11:14 AM
2

?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 06:09 AM
2

I'll grant that for the sake of argument. If a safe guy is someone that a woman doesn't really want or desire, but needs to be with/keeps for some reason, then I don't see that as a genuine relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 04:40 AM
3

Got you! My perspective revolves more around women having "a minimum standard of physical attractiveness" that a man has to meet. If a woman is going below that for "practical" reasons, even if it's because her bio clock is running out, then I think of that as a transaction. Essentially, she's using him. Maybe that's harsh, but that's how I see it. Now, if your argument is that, above her minimum standard, some guys will be hotter and some guys won't be as hot, I feel like that's almost... quibb…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 04:36 AM
5

Interesting perspective, and you really made me ponder, but my issue with your argument is that I think it too directly presumes "hot" = unsafe and "not hot" = safe. My ex was both hot and safe, because he wasn't "for the streets." He was actually sexually "traditional" and a very loyal person. He wasn't a bad boy, and that's what made him safe. I've also met less handsome men who were "for the streets," because they would sleep with absolutely anyone, paid for it, etc. They were 5s, who were ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 04:11 AM
3

You just taught me a new term! Thank you! 💛
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 03:47 AM
3

I think I'm too WGTOW-brained, but settling for what? For why? And that's why I mentioned that she may be seeking money or something else. Does she think her life requires a man that she doesn't desire, because her religion expects it, or she's poor, or...? It's possible, but in the West, among young women, I don't see settling. I see women telling men they don't desire that they don't need them and to fuck off.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 03:46 AM
2

Maybe I'm misunderstanding because what you're describing is settling. What I think OP is describing is getting with a man who isn't "the bad boy." Edit to add: To clarify more, I see that he's equating being with the safe guy AS settling. My point is that these aren't the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 03:41 AM
12

This question is really strange to me because the "safe guy" is a genuinely desired guy. That is, I've been with the hot guy/bad boy archetype and genuinely desired him. And I've also been with the "safe guy" and genuinely desired him. Why would I, or most modern women, be with a guy that we don't desire (assuming we don't desperately need his money or something)? "What's the sign that she likes him physically instead of just emotionally as a person (almost like the asexual nerd or gay BFF)." Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 11:52 PM
–

That helps! Thank you!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 11:15 AM
–

No. I remember this verbatim, but I guess if no one else remembers/minds, it's nbd. It's that, or I need to play the lottery.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 11:10 AM
–

Either you've posted this exact post before, or I'm becoming telepathic.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 10:16 AM
2

I mean, we're talking about systems, so of course power dynamics and leverage are factors. I wouldn't say women are "all about it," but it would be naive to think it doesn't have an impact on how people operate.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 10:10 PM
5

The same is true for us men. Buck up like we do! Why would I do something that doesn't give me anything that I want? And if men really see no benefit for themselves either, why should/do they buck up? I have my own theory, but there's been pushback, so I'll ask you.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 12:40 PM
3

That's interesting! I think my position is more representative of most women, but since I doubt there's a study on this, I acknowledge that I could be the outlier. Do you think that most women share your perspective? Also, I'm so curious about why it would bruise the ego... Let's say it's because it means that guy thinks you're too ugly to fuck. If you know scores of men who definitely don't think you're too ugly to fuck and are even attractive enough to date seriously, then how could it bruise …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 11:18 AM
2

Legitimate question, but do you struggle getting sex from men?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 10:55 AM
5

Most women DO know they're inherently sexually desired by men, even if it's not that one, exact man. Also, what kind of woman are you imagining, sir? lol One who says, "Would you like to date me?" He says "No," so she shouts, "How about a fuck? Please, just a fuck! I need to be at least good enough for that!" That's men. 😂 Anyway, jokes aside, I've gtg. You can have the last word. Thanks for the debate!
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:57 AM
3

I think that's fair and well-reasoned. Though, I still think my horniness hypothesis is a major factor as well. But I have a bias, being a woman. A small anecdote: I recently started taking a supplement, and it had the unexpected side effect of making me uncharacteristically horny. This experience has been very illuminating and gave me an intense moment of empathy for men. Normally, I scroll through my dating app options and feel apathetic at best...bored, annoyed, hypercritical. But suddenly, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:44 AM
3

So yeah as I said, being rejected by a man tells a woman that she's not good enough even for no strings attached sex. Yes, of course. It's a complete rejection, but I don't think this psychologically affects women in the way that you think it does. It does convey he doesn't even want to bang, but it's not like women walk away thinking "It really hurts he wasn't even interested in some free coochie," because that's not something most women want to give out anyway. It would be like if you really w…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:30 AM
1

I appreciate the stats, but I don't think the analysis is quite right. Ergo most young men and women are either dating/paired up or want to be. This can be true, but it doesn't speak to the state of these people who want to be paired up but aren't yet. That is, we can have roughly an equal number of men and women who want relationships, but it doesn't speak to who (of those single people) wants them more. I hope that makes sense. To use a tired metaphor, imagine a dance. 70% of the people are pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:15 AM
4

despite women claiming that they want to be valued primarily for their personality, being rejected for their body hurts their self-esteem infinitely more. I think you misunderstand me. I actually wrote that line about low effort cheek clapping because, in my experience, the most emotionally brutal experiences are when a guy has pretended to like me, only to use me for sex. If that guy had just said, "No, you're not my type," it would sting. But it wouldn't be heartbreaking. If he'd said, "You're…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:58 AM
1

So what you're saying is you expect to men to accept and deal with what you wouldn't i.e. a dynamic where they feel less desired/valued than the person being pursued plus the possibility of being used for attention/resources by someone without a genuine interest in them. My first reply was going to be "Yes, because I have a pussy and they don't." lol That's mostly a joke. What I mean is that I don't want men enough to endure that disadvantage. I acknowledge that men shoulder it because they want…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:27 AM
16

Everyone has already mentioned the "women don't have to" take, so I'll offer an alternative: I don't approach men because it yields bad results, even if I'm successful. I don't want to be in a relationship or dating dynamic where I'm the pursuer. It's not romantic to me or appealing to me. Also, men who are lukewarm about a woman will often still entertain her because of the possibility of low effort cheek clapping. In short, I've noticed I'm usually treated worse for my effort. I think this is …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 04:53 AM
6

😂👏🏽
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 06:53 AM
3

"You have poor critical thinking skills." That's a bit mean-spirited. I wrote: "I thought that, historically, most men didn't pass on their DNA. Instead, the most dominant men usually had multiple women..." You asked for proof of my statement, and I literally went and got it for you. Now, to save face, you're fussing over the scope to shift the goal posts when you could've refined your inprecise phrasing immediately after my objection. Instead, you doubled down and linked an article that didn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 06:51 AM
5

Thanks for the source! However, "This has never happened before" is a very strong statement. There isn't any information in that article that references historical data on human mating, no? And what I'm referencing goes further back than the societally enforced monogamy trends in Western culture. But, you're saying "never," so that's why I'm confused. Also, here is the abstract of a metadata analysis that supports my claims: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12962309/ "The results of our SNP analy…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 06:26 AM
6

This doesn't track to me. I thought that, historically, most men didn't pass on their DNA. Instead, the most dominant men usually had multiple women (contradicting "Never before have there been generations of men that are single and women that aren’t, this is very clearly an artificial externality.")
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 05:08 AM
6

"You're assuming they're just like you, so you're failing to recognize one of the primary motivations for men." The irony here is that I'm actually from the Philippines. So, I do have strong opinions, but nothing about it upsets me. Also, I don't look down on sex work or grifting in romance to survive. I'm just being honest about it. To some of your points: I doubt most passport bros have copious amounts of wealth. The point of going to a developing country is that you don't need copious amounts…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 12:12 PM
5

"The wife can get permanent residency after 2 years of marriage, then divorce his ass without ever being deported. So if they're all just with the men for money, why wouldn't most of them do this?" I think you're conflating getting citizenship with just getting money. Not everyone "just wants citizenship" or something equivalent (which isn't the prize Westerners always think it is). Think about it: she marries and divorces for permanent residency, and now she has to get a job in a country away f…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 10:23 AM
2

I don't think this woman is representative of most women. Most of us couldn't care less, and we know why it's happening: prostitution for lower prices. Duh. So, I kind of feel like both her shock and calls to "stop it" are...dumb. Personally, I actually feel bad for PPDs because this "movement" seems to promote the idea that they can genuinely find love (which I believe is exceedingly rare). And if they fall for that, there is often a lot of financial abuse (of the men). Then there are those guy…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 08:28 AM
6

Assuming we're talking about the general person (not the hottest outliers), based on demand by the opposite gender: Men: 18-25 = mid, 25-35 = slightly higher than mid, 35-45 = mid, 45+ = low Women: 18-25 = extremely high, 25-35 = very high, 35-45 = still pretty high, 45+ = mid
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 01:47 AM
8

This doesn't make sense. How are you "pumping and dumping" women to get your "money's worth," when you've also said that you ghost these women because they won't fuck you?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 11:05 PM
11

If a man dumped me for not putting out on his schedule, then I wouldn't want him. Maybe the girl who chased after you had low self-esteem.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:48 PM
2

At least a month of talking and 3-4 dates (usually over the weekends). Plus, the talking can't just stay at "How are you" + surface answers back and forth. So, the better answer is "long enough that they don't feel like essentially a stranger still."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:29 PM
2

I usually wait if I'm looking for a long-term relationship and don't want the relationship to fall into a fwb dynamic or situationship. Imo, early sex sets a tone that our personalities/characters are less of a priority than scratching a sexual itch, so delaying sex has always meant that I liked a man more. It has little to do with how hot I find him, because some of the men I waited with were the hottest/I wanted to keep long-term the most. Waiting also helps men only looking for fwb/situations…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 09:43 PM
–

This isn't a bad post, but what does this have to do with sex, gender, dating, or any of the "pills?"
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 11:42 AM
0

LoL. In an effort to help you understand your own "arguments," let's take this slowly. "But you're saying sexual competence or performance is better judged by someone who's a lot more likely to enjoy it anyway" Why....why do you believe this? You made this point several times, so I think it's fair to ask you to justify it. We'll start there.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 12:21 AM
1

I have a feeling you're only pretending to misunderstand me, but just in case: I'm referring to men who are low competence when it comes to actually pleasuring women sexually, not just attracting them, obviously. Given that being more open to premarital and random sex with multiple partners is - even shown in research - being more likely to cheat, more insecure, like in hoe phases, etc. , so making one less selective. And the dictionary even says it too. If your opinion differs with the research…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 10:41 PM
2

"First, a man would have to earn sexual interest or validation from a woman through investment, and so would have more to lose in "walking away" from a relationship." I would refer you to my points about the qualities that (most often, in my opinion) greatly improve a man's access to being a slut: good looks, money, and manipulation. I can't say I consider this "investment" in any meaningful way. "The man's promiscuity would be measured not only by his body count, but also by his material or psy…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 02:58 AM
8

I think people misunderstand why slut shaming exists, including you. It's not because of some "lock/key" nonsense, where the men who sleep around have some "secret sauce." He could just be a Chad (genetic lottery winner), rich af (essentially paying for it), or manipulative/predatory. These are not inherently laudable qualities that make a man more worthy than the guy who isn't slutty. And these qualities also don't make this man superior to the female slut. Imo, slut shaming exists because: a) …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 01:02 AM
5

Yes, people have kids for selfish and narcissistic reasons too. Since you're not interested in a substantive back-and-forth, I'll take this concession and consider it a victory. The rest I could rebut, but I'll simply wish you a "Merry Chrysler," as my niece says! Cheers!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 03:42 AM
5

Same! My god, in hindsight...it was so bad. He was older and more experienced, so I thought, "This must be what sex is" and I blamed my lack of orgasms on myself. Meanwhile, he thought he was God's gift! 😂 The worst part is I stayed with him for 2 years, and by the end, I thought I hated sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 11:20 AM
8

To play devil's advocate: It is generally selfish to not want kids. This is because most people's reason for not wanting kids are selfish. They are usually things like not wanting the responsibility, wanting more money, wanting more time to travel, not liking kids, etc. All of these motivations are self-seeking. Isn't it also selfish to want kids, because you know... people also benefit from that? The reasons I hear people give: they get to have the experience of fatherhood/motherhood, they want…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 07:44 AM
10

Np! And I totally agree. My nephew is a teen, and he wants a "traditional" life (be a breadwinner, stay at home wife). Even though I'm a liberal feminist type, I've told him to go by the book on all of those values to find someone who matches. For example, he's not going to turn a girl he's gone 50/50 with in dating into someone content with giving up her career. And if he picks a woman who doesn't see motherhood as the highest honor, he can't be surprised when she starts calculating the risks t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 07:20 AM
1

Thanks!
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 06:34 AM
20

"if they were red pilled, they wouldn't need to try and negotiate with women to get them pregnant." If it helps, I took this to mean that RP men would select for women who share the same values and thus, would want to become mothers, even with the risks involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 06:30 AM
9

So the competition is in getting it, not keeping it. Hooo boy... That's a convenient place to draw the line, certainly. And it's interesting to me that your core refutation is, "Well, those men don't want to keep the experienced woman anyway!" I mean, you get why that's convenient for men with low competence, right? she wasn’t as selective in choosing him and isn’t selective in her partners, so she’s likely to have enjoyed it anyway I'll try to say this kindly, but the way you apply logic is...s…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 06:20 AM
7

So it’s fair to say I did not have much integrity...So This makes me think what would I tell my son when he comes of age. I appreciate that! And I have one other point of contention: Also, if you fck an experienced woman and she likes it, what have you accomplished? If you fck a virgin and she dedicates to you and desires you sexually and strongly from that point forward, that would be the real accomplishment. What you've accomplished is competence in a field that's, by definition, far more comp…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 05:02 AM
11

Why is it selfish not to want kids?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 03:49 AM
0

SMV = Sexual market value. I'm also curious what RMV is.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 03:49 AM
31

What's weird to me is that, as soon as you had sex with them, they stopped being virgins. So, then... you ruined them? You've made them bad role models for future daughters and poorer at pair bonding? By your logic, if you had integrity, you shouldn't sleep with a virgin you don't intend to marry because you're just "tarnishing" them, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 03:42 AM
1

This is why if you are dating a woman, arguments rarely start with what they say they are about. It is not about taking out the garbage. It is about not wanting to take out the garbage. The task is irrelevant. The emotional meaning attached to the task is the real charge. Men approach conflict differently. Fewer issues at once. Less emotional amplification. More focus on function and outcome. Fix what is broken without re-litigating the entire relationship. In my experience, situations don't bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 11:12 AM
8

There's a teenage lad in my family I had to "un-indoctrinate." And tbh, it's a labor of love, because you have to debunk point by point, identify all of the poor reasoning, misframings, and contradictions. So, we're talking nearly a year of watching RP content together and having calm, unemotional debates, where you have to hold space for even the most absurd ideas. If he says he felt like “women have it easier nowadays” what would you say? And in turn, he said “men are really the victims now an…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 10:20 AM
13

I write erotica, and I think men (and people in general) largely misunderstand it. There can be a lot of delicate nuance in something that looks absurd, problematic, or "gross" on the surface. That's because a skilled writer... well, we have a lot of words. So, experiences can be intentionally shaped in extremely thoughtful ways, and what's really offered often isn't what it looks like on the surface. I present to you my dream man discussing a book about a woman fucking a minotaur: https://www.i…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 09:05 AM
3

Be kind, affectionate, and connected with me before trying to initiate. The worst is when a guy is upset because he wants some, brings you "tantrum" energy, and then expects you to enjoy lying on your back. It's so tone-deaf and stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 06:52 AM
1

Maybe they haven't been updated, but u/OpticalEpilepsy is clearly referring to rule 6 from the list I shared.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 11:19 AM
1

Not sure what you see, but I've got this on desktop: <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 10:50 AM
3

100%. If they're not segmenting by age, the data is nearly useless imo.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 07:20 AM
1

Off topic, and I'm not sure if you're doing a bit (Neo Victorian), but the way you explain your thoughts obscures rather than elucidates.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 05:00 AM
3

Fair, but whenever it's called out, the defense always always always shifts to an issue with women's rhetoric. Suddenly, "You should fuck us too!" --> "We just don't like that you talk shit." Huh? That just feels disingenuous to me, because why isn't that ever the original complaint? Why is it always "Women are too hypergamous!" and "Women just want Chad!" instead of "Please stop talking shit about the men you don't desire," or "You can be honest about what you like or don't like because we alre…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 04:57 AM
8

If you mean that, then I hope you're content with the majority of men being forever alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 02:27 AM
3

Why are pro-feminist people coming for you? I'm so confused! lol
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 02:23 AM
1

Incel/Black Pill/"woe-is-me for lacking access to women's bodies" posters.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 02:19 AM
6

You misunderstand OP. Their overarching framing is actually feminist and not in line with men who "are retaliating against women for not having sex with them." This post is a critique of that, and they are using those terms to highlight the absurdity.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 02:17 AM
5

I don't think that's OP's criticism. It's OP framing the criticism of the complainers with that language. If you read the entire post, they're positing that the men who complain about modern women and feminism only do so because they see sex as something women should be doling out to all, which is delusional. From the post: "They also wouldn't complain about boss babes and college degrees if women found 90% of men hot enough to overlook them making less money and still get turned on and have eno…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 02:12 AM
2

Sure, but can't it be deduced that that's the end game of men who complain that women only want the most handsome/most impressive men? If the issue is that women give sexual opportunities to too few men, then it follows that anyone upset by this would want women to give sexual opportunities to a wider array of men, whom the women (as evident by their behavior) do not desire. What am I missing?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 12:06 AM
9

100%, but I think the OP's framing strongly implies that it's men who regard it as something to be distributed, not that women should be distributing anything to anyone. So, your critique was just strange to me. But n/m! I think you're in my camp anyway, so we're probably just splitting hairs.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:49 PM
15

I don't think it's fair to quibble over OP's word choice on this when they're clearly just referring to the sexual "marketplace": who gets laid and who doesn't. Feels like a nitpick.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 07:50 PM
24

The fantasy is that a woman would only be slutty for them, because while she's adventurous and explorative in pornified ways, her sexuality begins and ends with him. Women should be chaste generally (because that's what's good and right for society), but also somehow, there are enough "sluts" that they can rack up a body count and satisfy their "natural" desire for variety.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 07:46 PM
13

Huh? "Pump and dump" is derisive towards promiscuous women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 07:38 PM
–

I'll save you, friend, because I once thought similarly: "How could I really know? Am I just relying on authority to tell me? The no-math, easily perceivable solution came to me after extensive pondering: If the sun were moving over the top of a planar surface, it would get smaller and smaller as it sets (the same way a person does when they walk away). The fact that we have sunsets where the sun looks massive and is "cut in half" by the horizon as it drops = it's moving below a horizon line. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:26 PM
–

100%. If piss was the true antitode, it would only be right to help, and I mean that seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:08 PM
–

If you really want to make sure, send it to a friend or neighbor.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:07 PM
–

Did he buy ya'll the house, as in, it will be you/hubby's legal property? Or does he still own it, but you guys just live there for free? If it's the former, don't turn down a free house. You could always sell or rent it if shit goes south. If it's the latter, then hell yeah he'll have carte blanche, because he'll be your SO's dad, ya'll's landlord, and both of your employers. It would be hard to find a more controlling setup, and if your husband already has issues with him...I wouldn't recommen…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:05 PM
2

Ugh, he went on some weird rant about how the tech industry would suffer with fewer men, but how whites (presumably white women) in certain Slavic countries could pick up the slack. It was something about how if we rely on white nations, then the world will be okay, but that non-whites would be a risk to this. I only half remember it, but that was the gist. Then, after I clapped back, he tried to chastise me and this whole sub for apparently "acknowledging differences in gender but not accepting…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:36 AM
–

My question is very clear: What example can you give that has data to support it? Of course, there are ways that a woman can not be accountable. All humans are capable of a lack of accountability. But that isn't meaningful just because some women you know have been unaccountable. And, to be frank, the reason I'm asking is that I don't believe this phenomenon exists in a way that makes calling out women in particular valid. That would be like if I met a couple of men who sighed loudly, and I aske…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:00 AM
–

I don't think I've ever heard men say this besides in online spaces where women are framed as infantile. Some toxic behavior will be highlighted (via anecdote) and then extrapolated out to describe "all women." So, I have to ask you OP, what example can you give that has data to support it? For example, if I were to claim that married men are more likely to cheat, I could find data to back that. If I were to claim that men are more likely to leave their sick or dying partners, there is data to b…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 04:32 AM
5

Many men are struggling to get with any woman, let alone date hypergamously.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 10:40 PM
–

I've been out and had female friends protect me just as much as any man, even if the physical risk for them was greater. Meanwhile, the so-called "good guys" standing around did nothing. The "protective man" myth really needs to die, because that is down to the individual more than gender these days.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 10:29 PM
–

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 09:54 AM
3

lol As a black woman who works in tech, this conversation has jumped the shark. Thanks, PurplePillDebate! This sub never ceases to disappoint me.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 08:41 AM
4

I write sci-fi, so I've pondered this before, and I could see a ratio of 1:4 being very viable. Yes, this becomes "eugenics-y," but we're on PPD, so fuck it: - The population could be easily maintained, since men's reproductive capacity is more fruitful and convenient - Hard labor/physical strength becomes less relevant with technology - We'd definitely see a reduction in violent crime, and everyone (not just women) would feel safer - I imagine the men that exist would be happier with less repro…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 07:57 AM
1

Sure! I'm fairly new to PPD, and I kept seeing comments where some men expressed very pragmatic desires for dating and relationships. Basically: "She does these things, and I'm happy," with some even advocating for ends-justifies-the-means approaches to get her to do the things. I started to wonder, do they care if she's happy to be there or loves them? Also, how many men feel this way...or shades of this way, and why? So, I crafted this to try to glean how important her doing the things is. Is …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 07:13 AM
2

I acknowledge that the ideal of love has existed forever, but assuming it's paramount when it comes to traditional expectations is contradicted by the evidence of our world. But since you brought up religion, imagine a very traditional woman, from a religious community, falls out of love with her husband. Culturally, how many in that community would encourage her to divorce him, given her newfound feelings? How many would say, "Even though you're still meeting every other expectation, the relati…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:40 AM
3

Thank you! A few men on this thread seem to be arguing that it's impossible for women to willfully have sex with someone they don't care about, OR that if this happens, it's no longer "traditional." Do they think the traditions are inherently built upon love, and thus love cannot be separate from it? I wish!!! If so, I'd be traditional AF!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 03:56 AM
2

"So the premise is false, there is no way to fulfill the other "traditional desires" without love" You seem to want to insist on your own lofty definition of "traditional." Would you agree that historically (and still in many places throughout the world), people fall into roles to fulfill the expectations of society when it comes to relationships/dating/marriage? And if yes, do you believe it is somehow not traditional if love isn't involved, even if that society doesn't particularly care about …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 03:52 AM
2

Innnnteresting! Sure. She can! And would that make all the difference? If so, why?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:35 AM
3

Would it be a "No" if she didn't desire you but was just compliant?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:21 AM
3

When I was crafting this, I wasn't thinking of a robot, but maybe more like a sex worker or wife through arrangement. She has a personality, and she doesn't particularly like/love the man. She's ambivalent, like someone might feel about going to work. So, while she has a sense of humor, it may not be one you'd really get to enjoy.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:20 AM
3

It's fundamentally impossible to "perform sex" with someone you're indifferent towards. What would you say about prostitution, in the case where sex has become rote for that person and is done for basic survival? Do you believe they still experience dopaminergic lust and novelty?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:11 AM
2

Thank you! I hesitate to mention this, but I am autistic, so I'm studying all of this a bit like "an alien." Your insights have been helpful!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 01:59 AM
1

😂🤣😂
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 01:57 AM
4

I think so! My guy friends have bragged/swooned over receiving such images. And we're talking about faceless, close-up photos of just a woman's crotch. They seemed ecstatic over this, which always made me laugh. lol
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 01:53 AM
1

Sigh... There is no dichotomy in my hypothetical. There is only a dichotomy in the hypothetical you've invented and additional constraints to. In other words, you are creating an alternative hypothetical that you accuse of being falsely dichotomous. But that hypothetical (where sex, child birth/rearing, domestic labor, and fidelity must come from love) is solely your own.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 01:45 AM
7

I asked this question because I've seen these sentiments throughout this sub, and they genuinely surprised me, so I sought to evaluate their prevalence. Given how many men have answered "Yes," it appears the question has merit. But I can't argue with a person whose only contribution to this discourse is accusing me of being an asshole with scant evidence and no genuine curiosity about my goals. And if you want to fancy yourself a mindreader who concludes that you (or your ilk) are being victimiz…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 12:49 AM
1

If you re-examine my question, I clearly explain that the list of "services" is provided lovelessly, which is why they do not flow from love in the hypothetical I've outlined. Maybe from your vantage point, you want to believe such things can only be done through love (which is actually pretty romantic), but that is simply untrue. These actions can be performed in a loveless way. You're attempting to reframe my hypothetical according to your personal stipulations in order to accuse me of a logic…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 12:37 AM
3

lol This is so true. I think that men expect women to see dicks the way they see vaginas. They send dick pics because they expect we'd react the same way they would if they got a pic of a woman's body parts. I've been sent genuinely beautiful, unsolicited dick pics before, and my reaction at most was a brief "Not bad!" followed by "Why the fuck would you send me this?"
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 12:14 AM
1

To do that without love aka physical attraction is almost impossible. The mental capacity for women to do that for 30 years straight is unbearable. Every wrongdoings that the man do, will eventually turn into resentment and disgust Imagine your body being touched by someone you disgust for 30 years straight. If I were in that position, I’m gonna kill myself There are certainly women who've lived this life. But maybe your point is that it can't be done while she maintains genuine indifference. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 12:10 AM
3

For the record, I'm not trying to set up a trap. This question was inspired by the comments I've seen through this sub that were along the lines of "She just needs to fulfill a/b/c actions!" or ones that diminish the romantic/emotional elements of relationships. Those ultra-pragmatic statements actually puzzled me, because I lean heavily towards feelings/romance, so I wanted to gauge how men saw things.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 11:58 PM
2

Nope. It's not a false dichotomy because I'm not presenting an "It's either this OR that." I'm asking if this scenario would be acceptable to an individual, and "Yes/No" questions do not equal a false dichotomy.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 11:46 PM
5

I phrased it that way because the woman is indifferent to the man in the hypothetical, not interested in, attracted to, or in love with him. They're only "civil," and not even particularly friendly. So, it follows (at least to me) that the sex would be submitted to or performed. I'm not shoehorning men, because men can say "No" to that, which is the opportunity I gave when I asked this question. So, I'm not sure why you're being so uncharitable regarding my intent.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 11:40 PM
5

How do you know someone loves you at all if not by their actions? You could always ask, if you wanted. A person's inner reality is separate from behavior, so even if there was just intellectual intimacy, you could pretty easily know how that person feels. For example, imagine a woman has an intense, over-the-top orgasm. That could be taken at face value, but if you ever asked, "Did you come? You can be honest," then now you care about the whole picture...her feelings that would've otherwise been…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 12:41 PM
5

Fascinating! Thanks for the answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 12:08 PM
9

That's so interesting. Why would it matter if you know she doesn't have loving feelings toward you? I mean, I could see faking it in front of others, to keep up appearances, but why behind closed doors or in bed?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 11:48 AM
1

There is so much ASPD energy on this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 10:47 AM
–

Are you referring to single mothers exclusively? Because, as a single woman w/o kids, where are these subsidies for women to just exist and live?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 10:26 AM
4

Whoever isn't a psycho and has more wilderness/navigational skills. Why is anything else relevant?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 03:57 AM
11

I'd love to see research into male birth control over hair growth. But, regardless, I support it! Women also enjoy men with awesome hair, so it's good for everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 03:55 AM
0

Ah, I think I see what you mean. Your framing is mainly around age, not gender. I balked at the sentence "What OP observes might just be that a lot of women learn this lesson later in life" because I thought you were implying that this kind of immaturity is only present in women. But n/m!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 12:25 PM
3

I don't think that's fair at all. There are also men who are crash outs, controlling, and irrational, and we think of those guys as just "nuts." We recognize they are outliers, and I feel like this is the same. Flipping out because your man can't cuddle you is bordering on insane to me. Imo OP is just picking bad eggs because the women in his family have broken his "normal."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:54 AM
4

Ew.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:43 AM
7

It may be that both your female family members and your romantic type are...particularly emotional and expressive (cough cough). Not to get too Freudian, but yeah...there may be some overlap if that's what you're used to because it's been modeled to you in childhood, you know? I don't think those kinds of histrionics are a "woman" thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:41 AM
1

Hmm....... actually, that's fair. I'm surprising myself by saying this, because my initial argument was: People can say "You're flirting wrong," given your results. If you're unsuccessful, then it could be rationally assumed that it's because of your poor performance, even if they can't explain why. However, that's untrue. For example, you could be unattractive (for other reasons) to the degree that no kind of flirting, no matter how skillful, could be effectively applied by you. Thus, you could…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 12:45 AM
7

From your comments, it sounds like you agree that certain subtle phenomena exist. You're just cross that people can't explain or articulate what they are in ways that are concrete/helpful to others. Have I understood you correctly?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 12:29 AM
13

"To me it just reveals a more transactional and cold mentality, whereas men are more romantic and love women and want to be with them." This doesn't seem true to me, especially given that men are more likely to cheat when women are pregnant, much more likely to leave when women become sick, and generally receive more domestic chores/labor --- and that's not even touching on access to sex, status, legacy, and saving if they're splitting bills. Your framing makes it sound like men are just happy t…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 10:17 PM
3

I hear you, but I have guy friends, and it really is grim, even for some guys I'd consider a bit above average with solid careers. I actually met my ex on a dating app. 6'2, handsome, and an above-average earner, but he was also a ginger with a dad bod (which I actually like). He was truly, exactly my type, so I plucked him out of the masses. But when I asked him, he told me he only got 1-2 matches in a good month, and they were sometimes scammers or OnlyFans bait. I think it's because a lot of …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:56 AM
2

"Then show the thousands of matches that he gets with beautiful women in just a few days." Umm.... Well, if you know some sort of secret code that bends the rules of reality and your experiment succeeds, I can only ask that we go into business together. I'm quite interested in becoming extremely rich. So, if you can pull that off, please DM! lol
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:19 AM
2

Are you being sarcastic?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:03 AM
1

I can relate to this, actually. I've tried many times, but the incompatibilities I've experienced have been very difficult to surmount. It does feel like luck of the draw, because some people have made it and seem so happy, but I grow more skeptical that it will work out for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:35 AM
2

In a sense, you're confirming this doesn't apply to most women. By simply citing "lots of intense exercise," you rule out most men and women in the West. So, I'm not sure what the point of your comment is, except to position yourself as exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:29 AM
1

I don't assume there are always fundamental incompatibles. I posit that there are fundamental incompatibilities in general, which brings me to my next point: I've already acknowledged that I'm speaking in generalities because I'm interested in broad trends. Did you happen to read that in my post? Secondly, we're on a sub that traffics in generalizations about men and women. No one here (I hope) believes they have a perfect, universal understanding of either gender, without exception, but we're a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:24 AM
1

That's not my point. You can be moral and considerate, but not want to enter into commitments where there are fundamental incompatibilities.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:21 AM
3

Do you believe that's typical of women?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 10:57 PM
7

Well, a lot of the changes that removed "need" from the equation are relatively modern, and the birthrate has fallen steeply in many countries. So, I think time will tell!
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 01:52 AM
1

"My perspective is that I will never truly know what lies inside another person's head" That sounds like such a cop out, and you're writing as if action and hard boundaries are the only valid forms of communication....the only things concretized enough to take seriously. "If Carly knew the consequence of ignoring the warnings she would not have ignored them." If your partner is suffering, that suffering is a consequence just as much as their leaving is. It's just that their suffering is a conseq…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 01:40 AM
3

That's genuinely interesting! Do you think she bears any responsibility to care that Tony is suffering or be considerate of the state of their finances too? Is she not also responsible for a) understanding the impact of her spending b) caring about his depression, or c) being moved by all of times he communicated the impact of her behavior on his well-being? It's a unique perspective, but it sort of sounds like you believe "As long as a hard line isn't drawn, anything else is irrelevant." But th…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 12:41 AM
2

You're definitely missing my point. People in this situation walk away because they don't want a person only interested in doing the bare minimum. The "blindsided" person is focused on maintaining a NEW bare minimum, when their partner's core issue is that they don't want someone only interested in doing the minimum at all! For example, Tony is the breadwinner, and Carly has bad spending habits. They have no kids, and she has no job. Over the years, this has escalated to a lot of wasted money be…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 10:37 PM
1

Do you think women bringing up their issues/upsets in a relationship is crying wolf? That is, are you saying she's not upset and just faking it for attention or something? Genuinely confused.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 08:00 AM
6

This is so true. The "tolerating" was the status quo. "Sudden lack of tolerating" = a blindside. "I thought I was successfully maintaining the bare minimum! You mean to tell me I'd slipped below, and you didn't tell me? And now you're just leaving? At least give me a chance to do slightly more, so I can find the new bare minimum, so you'll stay."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 07:54 AM
7

I'm playing Devil's Advocate a bit, but do you feel like the same could be said for men? For example, if a man rejected a woman for being fat or having a jacked-up face, would you still think it makes sense to say "You're unattractive, but the problem is still my standards?" Edit to add: My main perspective is actually that the standards (for men or women) aren't the problem IF a person is willing to live with the consequences of having them.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 02:53 AM
1

Would it be valid for women to tell men, "You are the problem," in response to those men asking, "Why won't you date us?"
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 01:45 AM
3

Agreed! But while the bad actors are fewer, their work is prolific. Essentially, and I'm just sharing what I've observed, the problematic guys can go through a lot of women in the modern era, and they "attempt/approach" more than normal dudes. So, there's a skewing effect, like that 80/20 rule, but in a bad way. It seems like the decent guys are either (ethically) for the streets, already bagged by a woman if they do want a relationship, or have stepped out of a game they feel like they can't wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 07:20 AM
10

I've had a few less-fortunate-looking girlfriends, and the unfortunate reality is that some women are just as likely to be treated badly/used as an outlet for (often terrible) sex. Even some unfortunate-looking men are angry to be with an unfortunate-looking woman, so this can happen even if she's not just going for "Chad."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 02:39 AM
21

The way you quantified "ahead" is strange. It was one guy who ultimately left her in a way that sounds brutal. How is that a win just cause she's had sex? That's almost like saying a guy who paid a sex worker, even if he got an STD, is "ahead" of any dude who's a virgin. Obviously, it's not a one-to-one comparison, but doesn't the quality of the experiences matter too?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 02:35 AM
8

Kudos for the answer. Thanks! But...I still have to rebut this. The stats on women who are choosing not to have children are increasing as well, and with younger generations, it outpaces men: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/07/25/the-experiences-of-u-s-adults-who-dont-have-children/
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 03:20 AM
12

"There are many reasons for that which you probably are not ready to hear." Sounds like a cop out. This is a debate sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 02:55 AM
1

I'm so glad I don't live wherever you are, where there are no handsome men and average guys are 0s who can only stay 0. Geezus. lol I can't even argue with this because your opinion is so subjective, and it almost sounds like you ... don't believe in the existence of women's attraction to men. LOL What? "See, not even you find the male body this appealing since you had to jump to a material good." I hate to break this to you, but all clothes are "material goods" that adorn and/or decorate the bo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 02:59 AM
4

That's a false equivalence.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 02:45 AM
6

It's interesting to me that we don't expect men to dress in a way that's less appealing to other women when they're in a relationship. That shirt that shows a bit of his chest? Acting single! Those pants that hug his ass perfectly? Acting single! Flexing a nice watch? He's trying to catch another woman's eye and acting single!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 02:41 AM
7

The "super sexy" girl who flaunts it. When I was in that "era," the guys who were drawn to me always became massively insecure once we were actually together. What drew them in made them always on guard and edgy if we were around other men (even though I've never cheated in my life and stuck right by their side). Only one guy, who was really tall, buff, and handsome, actually encouraged me to lean into it. But I was already so over the drama that I only wear more conservative clothes now.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 12:38 AM
5

Is this hypothetical guy's "struggle" his desire to contribute as little as possible for maximum benefits and praise? I'm honestly trying to be charitable, but your framing is extremely bizarre.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 05:25 AM
1

Yes, that's true. Men and women's circumstances in dating and relationships are very different, obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:27 PM
7

"They'd get much, much higher return of investment if they just focused on becoming attractive." Probably, if they could achieve it. And for the record, I'm not saying it's foolproof advice, which is why I put "some" before "hope."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 11:21 AM
3

"Well, the "why" is also conveniently changes to fit the narrative." We're not talking about the "whys" that women give in any particular situation. I'm talking about the "why" we can discern in our analysis of the topic in this conversation. Why would anything else be relevant, unnnnlesss... you're eager to find fault in women broadly again? And I'm not saying women are without fault, but be careful of that knee-jerk compulsion to default to some RP talking point. This conversation is about the…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 11:15 AM
7

I offer what I wrote above: "It's that you realize that a decent-looking guy who isn't trying to party forever is just...way better. A normal person who isn't as vain is better. A person who had to develop and mature because people aren't always trying to suck their dick...is better." It's less about settling than growing to care about more important things. Not all that glitters is gold, and time teaches that, and that goes for both genders.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 11:01 AM
11

Man... I think this may be above my pay grade. I guess you don't have to have morality, but if you're building your personality based on what you can get for being whichever way, it's giving psychopathy tbh. So...I don't know what to tell you.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:56 AM
8

What? What are you even responding to?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:52 AM
7

"By the way, I am trying to gotcha a little, because it's interesting to me how can we say the same thing but when you say it this way it's ok, when I say it differently I am a misogynist." You say it's just about the outcome, but I care about the "why." Imo, the "why" is the most important thing, otherwise (like RP tends to do) it's easy to shallowly and reflexively paint women as villains from a place of pain and bitterness. That maybe that's where the misogynist accusations come from... thoug…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:48 AM
14

Be decent and kind to all, for yourself and the betterment of humanity. But sure... being nice to get laid probably won't work if you're undesirable. That's just manipulation anyway, which doesn't sound very nice at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:40 AM
2

It's subjective, of course, but for me: kind, boundaried, self-respecting, compassionate, thoughtful, emotionally intelligent, actually intelligent, practical, non-reactive, non-violent, respectful of boundaries...to name a few.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:38 AM
9

For some, skills are required, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:35 AM
11

Ehh... I'll confirm young people being shallow and fucking each other without much thought...on both sides. But I think it goes further than what you wrote. Hot men and women are (just from what I've seen) harder to bag and "settle down." If either gender could turn super-fuckable idiot into husband or wife, they probably would, but you realize quickly that the desired outcomes are untenable. So it's not that women are trying to get their reckless fucks with the hottest men before finding a man …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:34 AM
14

For dating, certainly a desirable guy with a bad personality. But mating and dating are usually the realm of desirability, even including some personality traits that actually aren't good for the long term, like being the chronic life of the party, flirty, cocky, flashy, an irresponsible spender, etc. That said, I've also known decent guys...quiet, not the hottest, hard working, but they're awesome, and they find love. It's not "shooting fish in a barrel," and they've never gotten "a lot of ass.…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:24 AM
151

As a woman, I can confirm that the guys who get laid often have bad personalities, just like the guys who don't get laid often have bad personalities. It's just that the bad personality guys who get laid have other qualities that make people overlook that. It's almost like "He can get away with that because he's also got a, b, and c," but with undesirable men, the perspective is "You can't afford to have personality flaws, etc, because you don't have the enticements that a desirable guy does." H…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:04 AM
1

Your "additional barrier to finding sex partners" comment led me to imagine a future in 20 years where men have "non-consenting to fatherhood" listed on their dating profiles. Before hooking up, he pulls up an app that has the disclosure. She signs with her retinal scan before scrolling to check his recent STD test (verified in-app and sent directly from the clinic), actual marital status, and criminal record. On her phone is the same + an implanted birth control confirmation. He keeps the breat…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 08:10 AM
4

This is a fascinating idea, but I wonder about the actual impact since the men who would take that level of care are probably the most responsible already. I mean, I like the idea of them having an added layer of protection against baby trapping/reproductive coercion. But I think that most of this issue comes from the same men who'll roll their eyes at being asked to get STD tests before sex or rely on their "pull out game." They're not filling out that extra paperwork, and they're the most like…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 07:36 AM
17

Good points, and I appreciate the research! My biggest facepalm moment was when she talked about how his crotch smells like a homeless person who reeks so badly that other people leave the subway car. I mean...I'm not even a dude, but I died a little inside.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:07 AM
2

You contradicted yourself a few times. "She is taking half" you say right away, and then later: "True it's not usually half..." Then you say, "So while not half, women make out massively..." I'm not saying it can't be financially advantageous. I'm talking about the myth of "It's half" of what he's earned in his life. You lead with "It's half" and then debunked your own argument. Am I missing something?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:53 AM
1

You know, actually... you just inspired me! I'm being 100%, because I was just in this situation with a "Just wanna see where things go" guy. And, I did ask him, "What do you mean?" He replied, "I don't know. I'm open to anything." They just repeat themselves and waffle about, so no: you're not getting more information from someone pretending not to know his head from his ass. Literally, they pretend to be stupid and confused. But maybe next time, I'll say "I just want to see where things go" to…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:14 PM
1

This isn't about making decisions (which would be the case if OP were clear with his intent). It's about identifying hidden intent when it's being purposefully muddled with ambiguous language. If you've never encountered this coded language before (inexperienced), are psychologically biased towards reading positive meaning (limerant), or are someone who struggles with subtle insinuations (autistic), you are severely disadvantaged. And that's not to mention that saying, "I just want to see where …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:14 PM
2

What does not "living like a student" look like to you? Are you talking about home ownership or getting marital tax breaks or something else?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:52 AM
1

"By placing the burden of being a better person for the sake of it on men. Excusing women in their entirety for their rhetoric against men as a whole." Whaaaat? Just to be clear, you got that from me saying (and remember this was all I wrote): "Because you know the difference between right and wrong. Your post implies that the core motivation for men should be others' perception. How about living based on what your standard for being a good person is? Otherwise, it actually is performative." Yet…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:58 AM
2

Maybe you're right about the commenters intent (not a mind reader), but their comment was a reply to OP's post about replacing women in relationships, obviously. So, the question was never, "Will society still function if men or women don't fulfill certain jobs in society?" (That actually could be argued. For example, in the absence of women, would men take up more positions in healthcare or teaching?) Unfortunately, what we're actually discussing is whether one half of the relationship equation…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:31 AM
2

"Your stance implies women are not to be held to the same standard." - Umm, where? How in the world did what I wrote even remotely imply that? "Men must act in a way that puts women at ease and to minimize misogyny because it is morally bad." - Men don't have to do a damn thing. "Yet for women, viewing men as a whole as potential rapists, criminals, abusers, plotting, and conniving is perfectly fine?" - Same as my last point. Like men, women can view "the other half" however they please. "Simply…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 07:22 AM
1

"Right and wrong are not objective." I didn't say they were. That's why I noted OP should live by their own standard of right and wrong. "If there’s no incentive, many people will not do “right” things" Sure, but plenty will. The argument that some people suck isn't really saying much, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:10 AM
2

No, that's not true of inexperienced women, those with crushes/are limerant on that guy, or women on the spectrum like myself. This is justifying manipulative behavior with the tagline, "She should've known what she was getting into."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:57 AM
1

Speech.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:53 AM
1

"I think there is much better ways to show you want NSA sex without actually saying it." So, you discovered manipulation? Very used car salesman energy, and tbh, if you're going to be misleading so consciously and willfully, you might as well outright lie. You'd have more integrity doing that instead of pretending you somehow hinted enough to not be considered a liar.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:49 AM
4

"If this is the case, what is the point in ever striving to treat women “better” or to minimize misogyny, if all actions still result in being seen as guilty?" Because you know the difference between right and wrong. Your post implies that the core motivation for men should be others' perception. How about living based on what your standard for being a good person is? Otherwise, it actually is performative.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:57 AM
10

No offense, but that seems like an antiquated perspective given how atomized and individualistic all of Western society is. We have enough purchasable services and autonomy that men and women no longer need relationships with each other to do anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:35 AM
3

If the suffering from hormones is so severe, then men should just pay for it. But it's really bold of you to say, "I need that desperately," and then go on to complain about what's required for you to access it from that other person. To put it in other words, it's like saying, "I don't want this job, but I desperately need money." Well, it sucks to suck. Women, on the other hand, are like, "I don't want this job, but that's fine because I'm rich. So, bye!" Do you see the difference?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 08:47 PM
7

If the labor isn't worth it to you, then don't date. It's what women are doing, and everyone has the right to say "The juice isn't worth the squeeze."
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 11:27 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter