Asehpe1968 Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
0	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men You have witnessed? Do you live in the kind of polyamorous culture Sonia is talking about? If so, what's your experience exactly? If no, how can you have 'witnessed' anything about it? But perhaps you're just projecting, which is the easiest thing to do when you don't really know what is being talked about. Sexless men, like all men, have a better chance in a polyamorous society, quite logically -- a rising tide raises all boats, regardless of what you want to project on said tide.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:28 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Which is what you project on what she said, since, objectively speaking, she said nothing like that. But if you want to live in your own imaginary world, by all means, knock yourself out. Just remember not to make too much noise so as not to disturb the rest of us.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:25 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Ah! So it's not just about sex, it's about getting the 'hot' girls, right? Unfortunately, the 'hot' girls are a small minority in the group of women as a whole. Even like this, you'd still have more chance of getting a 'hot' girl in a polyamorous society (because they would all still be available, i.e. there's more chance) then in our current monogamous one. Since they are a minority, however, your chances would still be rather low. But so would everybody else's. Fortunately, not all men choose …	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:24 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Actually, there have been dramatic changes from society to society. As I keep saying, if you saw what kind of women are seen as attractive in some of the societies I've studied, you'd be scared or go eeeeww.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:04 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Nope. It isn't. Let me say that the women some societies I've studied consider attractive would more than certainly make you run and go eeewww.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:03 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Hm. Any reason why? It stands to reason that if (a) more people are having sex with more people (assumption of non-monogamy) and (b) there is no pressure for you to select only your best bestest option as your only choice, then there are more chances of getting laid for everybody, including low-SMV men, when compared to monogamous societies. As the saying goes, the rising tide lifts all boats. But your answer suggests something else to me -- your interest is not so much sex; it is "being the mos…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:42 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Hm. Any reason why? It stands to reason that if (a) more people are having sex with more people (assumption of non-monogamy) and (b) there is no pressure for you to select only your best bestest option as your only choice, then there are more chances of getting laid for everybody, including low-SMV men, when compared to monogamous societies. As the saying goes, the rising tide lifts all boats. But your answer suggests something else to me -- your interest is not so much sex; it is "being the mos…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:42 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men You still haven't said why. May I presume you don't know why? As for changing "my interest", this would have no effect, of course. The original post was about communities. If you change the societal paradigm, even within a smaller group, from monogamy, then the number of people looking for sex increases, the amount of sex being had increases, and the possibility of accepting partners that aren't just your first bestest choice also increase. As they say, the rising tide lifts all boats.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:34 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men You still haven't said why. May I presume you don't know why? As for changing "my interest", this would have no effect, of course. The original post was about communities. If you change the societal paradigm, even within a smaller group, from monogamy, then the number of people looking for sex increases, the amount of sex being had increases, and the possibility of accepting partners that aren't just your first bestest choice also increase. As they say, the rising tide lifts all boats.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:34 PM
5	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. It's not simple that you're dismissing outright cultural factors, Novice; it's that the sources you mentioned (which you obviously haven't read) disagree with the point you're making. Such quantifiers as "all (men) share the (same) motivations" are anathema to them. And they also show you're not up to date on Ev Psy. Have you heard about culture-brain co-evolution? It has a lot more in its favor than (pseudo-)Darwinian Ev Psy (which its best practioners define as a set of hypothesis related to t…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:25 PM
3	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. As a man, I beg to differ. Sex is the motivation for, say, 40% of what I do at most. Your conviction that "that's how we work" reminds me of pious Christians claiming that "men was made evil because of original sin" and "there's nothing we can do about it" -- i.e., an article of faith, not a well-documented fact. And no, I don't live in the woods, but in one of the largest American cities.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:18 PM
5	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. I think he was trying to offend you, which is a pity, because you didn't say anything offensive, and all your stamdards for picking up partners are quite applicable to women by men, too (minus the 'scary' part, though I must say some women did scare me).	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:14 PM
-1	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. No, 1911 -- God forbid a man actually saying something that is wrong.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:06 PM
0	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. Not my society, no. Making blanket claims without evidence isn't going to get you anywhere.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:05 PM
3	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. No, she's not saying that. You're presuming and assuming things that go way beyond what she actually said. I guess you love such roles as incel and virgin so much, you have to do your part in making sure they have stable existence.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:04 PM
1	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. I think you're projecting your opinions and that of your (hopefully online) circle of friends on society as a whole. Personally, I have never had any problem with virgins of either sex, having, like everyone else, been one originally. I have never observed the dichotomy you claim to exist among any people I know, male or female.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:03 PM
0	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. Agreed. A lot of it is name-calling plus "it's not my fault!" which creates undue resentment either at society (which is an abstraction you can't attack directly; you always end up attacking people) or at women (who are concrete beings).	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 05:58 PM
8	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. You may be right, but that's quite a leap there -- the original post author didn't say any such thing. It seems our current society wants to treat everything like "code" or "extreme" -- like Trumpists saying that DEI is code for prejudice against whites, or that experts are snarky elitists, or that judges' verdicts are extreme left-wing declarations by people hellbent on destroying our country -- all things our beloved President has tweeted. We shouldn't be like those people. There is such a thi…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 05:04 PM
5	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. Actually, they can be very entitled if they think that their never having touched a woman is "someone else's fault" and that that person should "solve their problem for them." That, besides the general level of entitledness that comes with thinking that living in a country with so much stuff in every supermarket is something that everybody else in the world enjoys. But that is actually true for all of us Americans, not just virgins.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:59 PM
0	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. Let's see: - "fucking blind". "can't see reality" - "women cheer at violence" (implying: it's OK to say horrible things in revenge if others do, even to people who didn't say anything horrible) - "where's your outrage?" (before even asking if she knew of the case and is or isn't outraged by it) - "do you consider this behavior less deplorable...?" (insinuating she does) - "get real" And that was in only one post. I think people say pretty bad things to women (and to men, too) right here, in this…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:39 PM
9	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. I've often asked myself this question. It's as if the people who post the sort of stuff as the one that started this thread thought that there's some kind of 'socio-sexual equality rule' that says everybody is entitled to everybody else's body or something. Alas, that's not the case, and we have to deal with personal preferences. If a woman doesn't want to have sex with someone, then so be it. If a man doesn't want to have sex with someone, then so be it, too. Isn't that what humans do in all th…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:34 PM
3	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. Funny, I've had more than my fair share of rejections, and in my social circle I never became "that guy" (and even one of the women who at first rejected me later changed her mind). Perhaps this kind of behavior depends on the kind of people you have in your social circle?	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:30 PM
4	A man who can effortlessly get sex is exalted. A man who desires to have sex but is unsuccessful is seen as disgusting. I'm not sure I fully understand your point. To me, everybody should "stick to their unoffensive roles" (why the heck would I want to play an "offensive" role if the person I'm talking to didn't offend me?), not just incels, virgins, men, or women. As for assuming women are interested in virgins only platonically, I can tell you from personal experience that that's not the case, as the woman who took my virginity was quite turned on by this simple fact -- she would laugh if you told her she had e…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:28 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men You'll only be "someone's pay pig" if you want to. Nobody is going to force you to do it, but if that's your kink, I say knock yourself out. Lmao. Seriously, though, you;'re not being honest here. You're not trying to make any sense. Therefore, this is my last reply to you. Have a nice day, and may your world be as dry as you want it to be!	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:14 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Re-reading your post, it seems that what you really want is to change a woman's physical preference rather than actually getting laid. Is that so? It's not clear to me what exactly you're looking for.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:08 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men There's no "begging." There is only you, your choices, and her choices, and whether or not either of you can put up with both. The argument is solid and rational. If not, please say why.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 04:06 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men It doesn't work for us at all, and I'm in a committed monogamous relationship. I just know poly people and can attest that they're quite normal. I don't think Sonia is telling you anything like what you're reading in her post. She doesn't talk about 'paying', you're reading that into her post for some reason. And nobody is telling you to do anything you don't want to, but you'll have to agree that YOU don't want to, and what doesn't work for YOU may be great for others, or even in average. Reall…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 03:50 PM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men I don't understand why you say 'pay.' Are you implying the other relatioships either person has are 'payment' for being together? I don't see this at all in Sonia's original post. Personally, I think it is perfectly possible to be (physically) attracted to more than one person -- that's what whole industries, from porn to fashion, are based on. I often feel attracted to strangers I see on the streets. My wife feels attracted to several different male actors she's seen in movies. So I find it har…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 11:12 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men All you're saying is that your interest (not need) for fucking women is much stronger than your interest in basketball, which I understand. But you're totally missing the point if you think the intensity is the point here. Please re-read the post. Besides, having a high sex drive doesn't logically lead to polyamory being wrong. Both things can be simulatenously true to the same individual -- s/he may have a high sex drive and be ethically polyamorous. You need to explain the connection you assum…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 11:05 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women I wasn't replying to your statement, Superannuated_punk, but rather to 5860's. His is the behavior that got me to ... kink.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:59 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women My entire life philosophy with respect to friendships (and romance to some extent) could be summarized as "please avoid assholes." It doesn't take long to see that red-pillers have a surprisingly high rate of assholes among them.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:57 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men An implicit one. If you find it necessary for understanding, let me restate my previous post: "Do you think "attracted to" means only "to hot guys"?"	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:53 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women I agree 100%. Such self-proclaiming statements usually describe who they want or would like to be, not who they are. More imagination than accurate self-appraisal. And that, when they are said in good faith, which is not, in my experience, the majority of cases.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:50 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women 'Sameness' is only really true if you are both people in a relationship, which, let's all agree, would be quite sad. I'm sure you must mean something else. The bad word choice of others doesn't work as a justification for your own. Again, what do you mean 'equal'? 'Equal before the law'? 'Having the same human value'? 'Being citizens of the same country'? What do you mean? (The original poster clearly meant something different than you, I'd say; but even that I am not sure about.) If you don't l…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:45 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men You didn't answer my question.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:37 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women 'Time and again' implies the need for some statistical data. My experience doesn't match yours, to put it lightly. No--you explain what equal means to you (since you used it first), as I'm curious about which definition would lead to statements like yours.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:32 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women No you're not, but subreddits (like so much of the internet) tend to attract extreme viewpoints...	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:27 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women That's also my experience. The least well-achieved and well-rounded a woman is, the more likely she is to have an über-masculine partner (or at least a partner who talks the über-masculine creed, regardless of any actual achievements).	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:26 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women There's a lot of truth in that, with respect to the whole red pill community. They're afraid of ghosts looking over their shoulders and passing judgment. They bring to my mind an old Islamic tale about a man who, once, thanks to a djinn, had access to the Book of Fate and a pen to write in it. You'd imagine he'd turn to his page and write himself a wonderful fate; but no, he spent all his alotted time looking for people he disagreed with and making their fates miserable. When he ran out of time,…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:24 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Speaking as a man who was for a while in a relationship with a girl boss who was much more self-aware than the one you describe, those can be a lot of fun. We're no longer together, but not for any reason having to do with her personality. She showed respect for me, and I for her.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:21 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Yep. His error is thinking that all women are, or should be, the 'nurturing' type. Or that men who aren't 'providers' aren't men.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:19 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women You have obviously not been out much. - "subconsciously" is not the right word here -- you mean "as I imagine them" - yes, if you assume 'equal' means 'atomic/molecular equality', as in 'we're clones of each other'. But since that's not the meaning the word has in this context, your bullent point is just arrant nonsense.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:17 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women That actually makes a lot of sense.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:15 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women I think men like the red pill ones above want more than feel 'needed' (that's a basic human desire after all) -- they want to be 'necessary', as in 'you can't even live if I'm not around.'	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:14 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women This does make sense. It's your curiously kinky worldview (at least, what I can see reflected in your previous post) that makes no sense when compared to reality.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:13 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Since hardly any men agree with you, I have to say, no, it's not simple.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:12 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Frankly, college has become way worse since it became sort of a mall for students to hang on. And I work at a college, I say this with personal experience. But nothing compares with the current administration War on Colleges. They may not survive that. After it goes, we'll have lost our comparative advantage in any advanced field. What a shame.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:11 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Sadly, Elizabeth, you're probably right: he probably doesn't. That does make me feel a little empathy for him. But still, his selfish posturing is quite symptomatic. I don't think he's worth paying any further attention to. What a pity.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:09 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women I just did. You don't look high-value at all, "well educated" is an overstatement if I ever saw one, I can't talk about 'attractiveness' since I'm a heterosexual male, but in these days I guess anything is attractive to some kinksters. Besides, people never lie in their profiles, now do they? Your girlfriend from Canada probably says so. Your answers are predictable like a computer program. There's nothing new or insightful in what you say. Have a nice day, and hopefully a good life!	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:07 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women "In the west? Absolutely." Not in my experience. And I've traveled widely in the Western world, all the way from Ukraine to Chile, and from Canada to Argentina. "I generally hang out with wonderful women who constantly remind me how fucked up everyone else is, on average. Keep being in denial." Well, you clearly need to abandon those assholes. And it's almost cute how you fetishize the word 'denial', since it seems to apply so well to you. (Then again, people do tend to fetishize their traumas, …	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:04 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women No kink-shaming, but the kind of woman you seem to prefer is actually quite rare among independent women, judging by my experience. You'll have better luck in the femdom subreddits.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:01 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women "Keep being in denial if that works for you." It clearly works for you. "Most modern indipendent women are neurotic and nothing makes them happy, which is precisely why they're angry, rude and overbearing." Well, I don't know anything about indipendent women (from indie groups maybe?). But the independent women I know are quite compassionate and caring, not at all like the bitch stereotype you seem to worship. And, above all, they're quite rational -- something I, for one, find greatly refreshin…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 10:01 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Note that stereotypes, like the stereotype that men are just animals, are usually wrong. That's why it's called a stereotype. (Go check what the prefix 'stereo-' means in this word. It has nothing to do with music players.)	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:55 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women "No they don't." No you don't. And I don't either. Good for us. "There is a (stereo)type of woman that just values luxury and will use partners or other means to get it. People who actually work for their money are not the same." That's logical, and I agree. But this stereotype (which, like all stereotypes, is wrong) is so often extended to all women, regardless of how hard they work... I've seen men, some from my own family, make the kind of assumptions Elizabeth mentions -- 'if she owns a hous…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:52 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Note that this is not the fault of women per se, just of (again) abuse or selfish women. Guys who describe themselves in similarly successful terms (I know some stock traders who do) also tend to turn out to be assholes.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:47 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women But this suggests that the dating dynamics in other countries is somehow 'fairer' -- on which, please ask average-looking guys from those countries how they feel about dating their countrywomen vs. dating foreigners. Unless you mean the economic advantage Americans have (which you explicitly excluded), I don't see why this assumption is warranted. Having some experience with both South American and Eastern European women (I married one of the latter, and we've been together for over 30 years), I…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:45 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women In my own experience, women from Mexico and other Hispanic countries were much more judgmental of their man's behavior ('why didn't you give me THESE flowers rather than THOSE flowers?') than your average American gal. (Sample size may be too small for real conclusions, though.)	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:40 AM
–	No, Men are not intimidated by strong independent women Most men not having an issue with strong independent women is something I used to think (despite coming from a family that definitely valued men over women). But now, in the Trump age, so many public statements from the government and/or members of it, including several policy decisions, are in conflict with your vision, that I'm no longer sure. Perhaps there are many more men (and women) than I thought who do think of powerful women as 'emasculating' (or at least against 'the natural order') an…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:37 AM
–	Monogamy Is the Only Logical Sexual Pairing Model If indeed "almost everyone" steals something at some point in life (and I assume you're not just talking about children getting cookies from the cookie jar when the parents aren't looking). then yes, maybe we should have a look at exactly what's going on, because "it isn't right" plus "it happens all the time" is quite an awkward combination. (There are ethical and also social analysis of the phenomenon of theft in general, for instance, with reasons going from the psychological to the socio-eco…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:29 AM
–	Monogamy Is the Only Logical Sexual Pairing Model How? Monogamy to me seems like a way to encourage relationship drama.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:17 AM
–	Monogamy Is the Only Logical Sexual Pairing Model Not if you're lucky... And besides, if you're like most Westerners these days, your partner may very well be cheating on you, and in this case you'll may that shot on the ass even if you're monogamous. Better be more open to communication and really interested in solving both sets of needs?	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:16 AM
–	Monogamy Is the Only Logical Sexual Pairing Model "Nature is amoral. It’s our shared cultural ideas of morality and social constructs that determine what is “best”" Yet our culture is our nature; as it has already been said, humans are the only species whose state of nature implies culture -- as any feral children raised by wolves will be glad to tell you. "Ultimately as a society, we have found collectively that monogamy/ serial monogamy seems to work best to get more healthy, well cared for offspring into the next generation while making the …	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:14 AM
–	Monogamy Is the Only Logical Sexual Pairing Model Well, you don't provide any arguments, you just state a belief ('it's logical') without any reasons. So I'll wait for you to present arguments before engaging. Have a nice day!	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 09:04 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Judging by my experience, you've probably met at most one promiscuous woman, and you're overgeneralizing her flaws to all others. Not a good move if you understand statistics.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:44 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Any links or references?	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:43 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I think I disagree -- unless by 'vicious status competition' you mean simple things like trying to be the best at something. It's like philatelists (stamp collectors) 'competing' for a rare stamp so they can have 'higher' status (or is it just that they're really interested in the rare stamps?... who knows?...) I've seen enough small communities to think that there are always big-ego individuals who try to monopolize things and make it all about them -- those are th…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:42 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men I've googled all that, and thanks for pointing it that way -- it's an interesting cluster of phenomena I wasn't aware of. Seems to me, though, that 'attracting weirdos' is what all kinds of niche groups do. The same can be said for, I don't know, the anime otaku community. Or at least it was like that at first, when it was a shameful thing... now, that more and more normies (ah, the flexibility of the normies!...) enter it willingly and view anime as one more type of art, the stigma is being era…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:39 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Judging by the video you linked, Aella's gang seems pretty harmless. I'll try to find any bad sides to it, since it seems that's what you're implying by calling it a 'cult.'	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:33 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men But don't forget that what you call 'normies' is a statistical phenomenon rather than a naturalistic one. Personally, I've studied a couple of societies where 'normies' are so different from Americans in terms of sexual behavior that you'd call them 'cults'. And yet they're there, they're happy, and they're not going anywhere. I agree, though, that it may take a very, very long time to convince Americans (or even Europeans in general) to give it a fair try, mostly for social, but also for psycho…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:30 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men If you want to go by one example to make blatant statements, I guess we can say you also prove that American 31-year-old men are all virgins. Because, if there's a single exception to that, than it would be completely wrong... right?	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:24 AM
2	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men In my own experience, so-called 'hot' women even actually learned a couple of things from so-called 'ugly' men. And vice versa with all combinations. As Mr. Spock would say, infinite diversity in infinite combinations.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:23 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Why would she do that? It's like saying she joined a yoga class, benefitted from it, and then later on insisted that all her friends be 'yoga-free'... My personal experience tells me women like sex quite a lot (just look at the success rate of female-oriented sex shops, or of writers of "romance" novels...), they just don't concentrate on the same things men do. Men and women tend to be different, but not as different as you seem to assume. Your conclusion hinges on your misunderstanding of wome…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:21 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men I tend to agree. With the caveat that this preference was probably the result of cultural influence from an early age, in you and in others. Which is why I wouldn't support polyamory for all. I would support, though, it being de-stigmatized, so that those who are OK with it can go to it, and those who aren't can stay away from it, no stigma to any of them. Letting polyamorists be openly polyamoristic would, I think, help decrease the cheating rate later on--which would be a good thing for monoga…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:15 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men No, not too niche. And no, men don't have to be high value in other aspects. But they do have to be willing to grow -- which I think all human beings on this world should have.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:12 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Do...you?	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:11 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men It would make it more likely that they have sex, though.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:10 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men It's a question of chances. Making everybody open to more partners ('promiscuous' sounds derogatory) would increase the chances of a person who people don't want to sleep with (= actually, a low-SMV person; "people don't want to sleep with" begs the question). And that's a good thing. What you're referring to is that, if their chances were very low to start with, increasing them by say 25% won't do much -- they would still get rejected more often than not. Still, as statistics teach us, it would…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:09 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Her community sounds depressing TO YOU. People who start their arguments with "most people" have usually not done the math, and they have usually not considered social factors. I've seen poly relationships. (a) In NONE of them do the men want to eat dog poop. (b) they do actually get laid, and learn how to deal with people in addition. I don't think you know any of what you're talking about, 204.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 08:02 AM
2	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men I agree with your viewpoint in general terms, but in practice, why should it be easier to find two women with the specific division of skills you mention (one is great at being a mom but not at blow-jobs or hobbies, and the other one is the other way round) rather than one who is good at the three things? (I know you might cite probability theory, but if you actually do the math, the difference isn't that overwhelming.) I end up thinking that relationships, monogamous or non-monogamous, need a l…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:59 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men This is the frequently-mentioned theory of innate monogamy, i.e., most people just want one partner and that's it. Sexual fantasies tend to belie that, and actual sexual behavior runs counter to that (yes, including women). So I don't really think you know what you're talking about. One thing is true, though: non-monogamy does not guarantee drama-free or hurtful behavior to be excluded. Of COURSE there are people who take advantage of it for their own ends, just like there are those who do so wi…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:53 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men I know you think so, it's the reasons for thinking so that evade me. If you think "attracted to" means only "to hot guys", then you really don't know many women. You should get out more.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:49 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men This makes no sense, 3014. It's like saying that if I'm attracted to a certain kind of sports, say basketball, then I should never be attracted to other kinds, say football. Is that how your sports preferences go? The hopelessly romantic tend to believe in things like soul mates or eternal hard-ons, but the practically-minded person knows humans are complicated, relationships involve both commitment and thinking/planning, and way more variety than your immediate assumption that low-SMV in poly r…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:48 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Which is why I think the question itself is based on wrong premises. None of the relationships I know has a woman who 'settled' for a 'lower standard' man in a committed relationship than in a ONS. It's usually the other way round, or then ONS partner choice is all about hotness while long-time relationship partner choice is all about happiness.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:40 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men No, he just doesn't understand how people (including women) actually work.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:37 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Not really, because (a) you're treating sex and sexual attraction as a very simple thing, which it is not, and (b) the real analogy is not trickle-down economics but free market economics (+ culture), which has been a resounding success in this country.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:34 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men 'Attractive' here meaning a lot more than you give it credit for. In monogamous societies, there'd be even fewer chances for unattractive people. A non-monogamous society would increase their chances. Surely that's not bad?	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:33 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men You underestimate the importance of culture. As has been said, humans are animals whose state of nature is found in culture. The instinct to have a culture is our strongest instinct, possibly also biologically determined, and certainly stronger than our sexual impulse -- as any feral children raised by wolves would gladly tell you. Mating paradigms were never really mostly about children (for most of the prehistory of our species, people didn't even know that sex led to children; some primitive …	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 07:21 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men TLDR just be happy it beats everything else lmao	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:59 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men Ah, but variations like polygyny (= many-wives) were quite the rule, especially among the elites, in many if not most human societies for quite a while. In all of Antiquity at least the kings got to have many wives, and certainly also noblemen. So we started out with multiple partners, at least for men. And now we've come to monogamy. It seems to me the reason why this might be surprising to you is the lack of consideration for the effects of culture, which are paramount, especially in family an…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:58 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men If my own experience is worth anything (and we all know that "data" is not the plural of "anecdote"), then quite a lot of women would feel this way, actually. Don't get me wrong. It's not that there aren't superficial women constantly looking for status. Just as there are men constantly looking for money and success. But if you think this explains all of women (or men), or a majority, or even a really significant proportion of them... then the real world would like a word with you.	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:55 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men It seems to me that you're being too dismissive of low-SMV men. They are not as bad, as unskilled, and as uninteresting as you paint them. Many have qualities that stand out once you look at them as something other than "ugly" (or whatever term you'd use in common parlance). Low-SMV people of both sexes can be good at something valuable, or can be good listeners, or can show genuine interest in other people's feelings going beyond the "unexperiencedness" that you overgeneralize about and conside…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:50 AM
1	Highly promiscuous societies are often good for Low SMV men "So despite being literally undatable and mid at sex, you still got to bang Chad. Great first selling point for polyamory to LVM." Yes. In other words, an otherwise undatable person got to date thanks to polyamory. You think that's bad? Weird. "Sounds great... For the people offered this type of support (women and attractive men)." And unattractive men. "The average LVM does not meet the bar for commitment-less sex. So the less commitment is sought, the more ostracized the LVM becomes." This str…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/06/25 06:34 AM