TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Clavicymbalum Archive

View 0 posts and 482 comments by Clavicymbalum on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

You see the numbers clearly proving that it is in fact just a MARGINALLY SMALL MINORITY of men, your lies being clearly disproven, and you still double down on your lies and hate rhetoric. What a disgrace. You people resorting to such sexist/racist group projections of your hate rhetoric really have no shame at all it seems. And no, pointing out that it's only a minority of a group you spew hate against committing those crimes is not "minimising the problem", it's just countering the attempt to …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 01:37 PM
6

Crime statistics are very clear about this: it's due to a small minority of men who commit lots of cases. At least you clear up my hesitation about dishonesty vs reading problems, given how you shamelessly resort to blatant lies. Even In the Pélicot case (which is an absolute outlier case), the 50 convicts were NOT AT ALL "from the same small town", in fact the happenings took place in FIVE DIFFERENT PLACES, the convicts came from even far more places, and even if we were to falsely attribute, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 01:25 PM
7

not sure if you're purposefully dishonest or just have troubles reading and understanding what he wrote. The subject is not if it's a small minority of women being harrassed but if it's a small minority of men doing it. So yes, it is a small minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 01:04 PM
1

Even if the former were true, it would in no way whatsoever change the fact that it was a textbook Goomba fallacy (check out what the term means).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 08:30 AM
1

Goomba fallacy
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 03:21 AM
-2

"masculine based on finances" …🤑😆 Jeez, it seems golddiggers have gone full shameless and don't even try to hide their transactional 304 mindset any more
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 12:05 AM
4

If a woman lied, then what's gone is not the past but the trust and basis for it. Who wants to live in a relationship built on a lie?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 06:12 PM
10

First of all, it's nonsense to pretend "my body my choice" would solely refer specifically to abortion and reproductive health. It is very much also used in other contexts, such as particularly the above context of sexuality… including and particularly by feminists, just perhaps not that often within your bigoted fundamentalist current as it is among those other feminist currents that you try to disparage and exclude with your "Choice feminism is a cancer to feminism" gatekeeping… which is exact…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 08:53 PM
1

this is the way 🥰👍
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:41 AM
16

It's always funny how quickly "my body my choice" gets thrown out of the window by the more totalitarian currents within feminism when the choice dares to stray from their rigid fundamentalist quasi-cult ideological bigotry.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 09:57 PM
3

Read the comment again. The point was that the only case where wanting to preemptively smother any criticism of the generalization with something à la "not all women/men. InB4 monolith" in the context of an attempted generalization is not totally intellectually dishonest is when the exceptions to the generalization are the minoritary outliers whereas the large majority mass of matches allows for at least a correlative generalization despite the existence of counter-examples. In the case of this …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 01:48 AM
4

There is no such XYZ. Not to exclude that it might be possible to find a minority of such individual men for which such an XYZ would exist, but it would be so hugely non-representative that we'd be far away from any point where the underlying assumptions of still wanting to generalize as if they were a large proportion let alone a majority e.g. muh "not all women/men. InB4 monolith" (sic) would make any sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 01:34 AM
–

Unbelievable, you still continue with your blatant dishonesty: but again, only 5% are false NO, not at all! 5% are NOT all those that ARE false (which are far more than that) but only the small subset that are PROVEN to be false (i.e. where despite all complicating factors, sufficient evidence could still be found to prove it). Again: your pseudo-reasoning would be the same as on the other set to pretend the set of people PROVEN to be guilty of rape (only very few) would be identical to the set …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 11:40 PM
–

Um? If only 5% are false, the other 95% are valid accusations. I'm not sure how you're not getting that. Unbelievable. After being caught red-handed in a blatant lie, you even double down and play the incompetence card. 5% are what have been PROVEN to be false. that says nothing about how many have been found to be true. Typically, in such A says B says cases, only a small proportion are found to be true or false and the vast majority of cases are undecided for lack of sufficient evidence to det…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 11:32 PM
–

the blatant dishonesty here is just absolutely flabbergasting: you jump from "Approximately 5% of the allegations of rape were deemed false or baseless" to something totally different that the paper does NOT say at all (to quote you): 95% of rape accusations have been found to be true shame on you for that blatant lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 11:19 PM
1

Personally, my first association with that term is the classic Steve Ballmer vid: Dance Monkey Boy …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 05:47 AM
0

Bernie even appealed to some MAGA types Of course he does. It's a well-known political phenomenon that advocates of the far-left and the far-right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear continuum of the political spectrum, closely resemble each other, analogous to the way that the opposite ends of a horseshoe are close together (in many other countries it's even a continuous closed circle rather than a horseshoe). So yeah, there is a second zone of floater/switcher voters w…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 05:15 AM
1

meh. Bernie Sanders is popular in the far left, but a total scarecrow (several orders of magnitude worse than even Harris) to the moderate, liberal or center-left situated vast majority of the democrat voters. Placing Sanders as the candidate would have caused a long-lasting massive voter exodus and political quasi-destruction of the whole party.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 09:52 PM
–

That's just a lousy rehash of the old antiabortionist argument that pro-lifers just as usually throw at women: "didn't want to be a parent? well you should have taken better care to avoid pregnancy then. Once there's a pregnancy, there's no backsies, you're forced to become a parent even if you don't agree to it". So if anything, that kind of dusty pro-lifer think would at best be an argument against abortion, not an argument for sexist gender discrimination in the question of consent to parenth…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 05:51 AM
2

connotes that women have no emotional loyalty ever seems quite largely exaggerated imho. The way I interpret it is more like: whatever level of commitment security might have been the statistical norm for couples in the old tradcon times is long past, and the risk is now so great that you would be a fool to build your life on the misinformed (but still commonly propagated) idea that the old constructs of that tradcon past (e.g. marriage) would still give you any commitment security whatsoever. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 12:16 AM
1

That doesn't make sense: Just as for the decision on the Woman's side, there ARE NO KIDS at the moment of paper abortion, as it would be well within the time window of possible abortion. And if the man clearly states that he doesn't consent to parenthood and she makes the unilateral decision for childbirth anyways, it's her decision that fucks over the kid, not his.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 03:25 AM
1

Yes, but you seem to think that freedom of speech goes one way? I repeatedly made very explicitly clear that I do not and that quite to the contrary my position is that principle is equally valid for both sides, so no, that's just your misunderstanding/projection. You are free to act as you want, you’re not free of social judgement. That’s not even a gendered thing, that’s just reality Fully agree. And as I point out: don't forget that's equally true in the case of the judgement for promiscuous …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 10:08 PM
-1

Nah, that's very far from reality. Not to say that comments of that type ("don't judge my promiscuous life choices if you happen to have been promiscuous yourself") don't exist, but those are a minuscule minority compared to the overwhelmimg majority of comments of the type "muh don't you dare judge me for my promiscuous life choices, that would be sLuT sHaMiNg". So it's very clearly NOT the equal application of same standards that is the main motivation for those "muh sLuT sHaMiNg" cries but th…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 10:03 PM
1

It's not me who has an issue with it, quite to the contrary, I'm just pointing out the group that does have by an enormous margin the most of an issue with that principle here in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 09:50 PM
1

I take it the same will be applied whenever anyone goes "muh don't you dare judge me for my promiscuous life choices, that would be sLuT sHaMiNg" as can be read oh so often in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 09:32 PM
12

No, that's nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/25 08:37 AM
0

What a load of revisionist nonsense. The truth is quite the opposite, i.e.: women rulers throughout history have been far more (by 27%) trigger-happy at sending men to die in their wars
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 11:22 AM
2

The "whoever asks out should pay" trope is just the extra-hypocrisy enhanced version of the old tradcon sexist idea that paying should fall upon one specific gender, and will remain that as long as the expectation is for one specific gender to be the side having to ask the other gender out. It's the kind of hypocrite thought patterns that only food-diggers and cherry-picking sexists (who only want equality when it suits them) go by. The only way that is truly equal is what is the standard in mos…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/25 06:11 AM
1

their "HVM" is actually just the trash kween fooddigger jargon synonym of "ATM"
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/25 01:05 AM
–

What is it if it’s not (…) it's a praxeology
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 02:09 AM
5

Unless you look like Henry Cavill even that isn't enough to be safe: Let's see what he says about it And yes, after pointing that out, he was forced to apologize in order to avoid getting canceled for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/25 11:39 AM
1

no, that's not at all what it means. In the case of a lack of sufficient proof (which is unfortunately the majority of cases), neither side gets punished, as it cannot be determined which side tells the truth. Punishment only occurs when there is evidence of the wrongdoing (be it rape or false accusation) beyond reasonable doubt.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 02:47 PM
4

no, that's not at all what it means. In the case of a lack of sufficient proof (which is unfortunately the majority of cases), neither side gets punished, as it cannot be determined which side tells the truth. Punishment only occurs when there is evidence of the wrongdoing (be it rape or false accusation) beyond reasonable doubt.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 02:46 PM
1

a hypocrite attempt to gaslight about the problem, given that in most counties the CIVILIANS of only one gender are, in the case of a war, enrolled by force into a non-civilian role
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 02:37 AM
1

TRP praxeology about women's behavior is about the fact that as a man you cannot, given the statistical record on relationship failures, EXPECT the woman to stay with you forever like in the old tradcon days. The fact that women can't expect that either nowadays is just not TRP's concern as a praxeology for men. TRP does not posit men as being more moral or loyal, and the whole plate-spinning thing totally shows the absurdity of any projection in that direction. TRP leaves it open to the man as …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 12:41 PM
1

that's a weird projection for which I see no ground. The RP observation is that he statistically cannot expect her to remain loyal to him (which is the simple observable truth of the current societal norm, independent of gender for that matter, even if RP for obvious reasons only cares about the side that affects men)… and it would be false to pretend that RP would be positing that men would inherently be loyal: They outright acknowledge that to not be any more the case either. Case in point: Ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 10:31 PM
1

Looking at it from the other side of the Atlantic, it's kinda ironic to see how what's currently happening in the USA is: presidential pardons for Capitol revolts by the Trumpist idiocracy… with lots of "God" references in politics.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 09:40 PM
1

that "branch swinging" concept is really nothing but the observation of the fact that relationships no longer last and that you can't expect your partner to stay with you for life like before. There's no misogyny in that, and the fact that a praxeology aimed at men specifically will obviously only care about how that relates to the female partners of men (and point out that studies indeed show that relationships are far more often ended by the woman side than the man side) is not something that …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 09:36 PM
1

While I'm not redpilled and disagree with a lot of their ideas, including those you mention here, I don't see the misoginy in the latter (unlike a couple other ideas floating around in RP spaces) and in fact find that projection to be erroneous and disingenuous. The fact is that there has been a huge shift in dating culture away from the stability-oriented longterm monogamy that was the norm in the traditional era and towards a situation where instead shorter terms hookups and serial monogamy ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 03:18 PM
0

While we're at it, to push your though a bit further, only people with STEM graduate degrees (Master or PhD) would sound even better. And yes, that would give an atheist government, which is great.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 01:42 PM
1

nothing "unusual" about it. He lives in Europe. The toxic situation you guys in the (esp. rural and Midwestern) USA have with transactional pseudo-equality (cherry-picking "equality for me but not for thee") is not the norm elsewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/25 04:03 AM
2

While it's undeniable that the financial incentive in the borked US judiciary system adds an incentive factor for false accusations, it's not as if that came close to being the main reason. False accusations are more often perpetrated for other reasons (e.g. revenge, alibi, attention-seeking, hatred, other conflict for which a victim position helps, etc), and it's not as if the rates of false accusations (for as much as we can tell, given the small percentage where it can even be proven beyond r…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 06:59 AM
-1

One of the core differences between an abortion and the so called “male abortion” is that in the latter one the baby exists No, it does NOT. No offense, but that's an obvious misunderstanding on your side: nobody demands the paper abortion to be allowed once the baby is born. All models for paper abortion require that the man make his decision long before that, just like the decision of the woman, at a moment when abortion is still possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 09:22 AM
1

yes you can make an advance healthcare directive and yes it works (actually even in more situations compared to marriage)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 05:21 PM
1

don't know what costs reasons that would be where you live, but here in Western Europe, the cost for an advance healthcare directive is ZERO and not only is it not more easy to overrule at all, but quite to the contrary there are lots of situations where marriage is not considered to be a sufficient indication for a grant of decisional power in healthcare matters and an advance healthcare directive is de facto necessary (even for a married partner)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 05:19 PM
4

there are indeed a sizeable number of hypocrites who, for ideological reasons and to further their hypocrisy, try to push a revisionist re-definition of the term that (in stark opposition to what the word has always meant) would now make it contingent on the absurdly added notion of group power, as in e.g.: racism would suddenly not count as racism if it's against a person of a group that historically held more power. 🤦‍♂️
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 04:52 PM
1

It is. Welcome to the horrible reality of what the threesome with the state entails
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:26 AM
0

that bullshit reeks so badly of radfem troll false flag
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/24 07:36 PM
18

Who designed the institution of marriage politicians, lobbying forces behind them, plus (esp. in common-law countries) judges It's a tradition that is thousands of years old and ubiquitous among global cultures meh. While we also do indeed use the same word "marriage" for a wide variety of historically totally diverging arrangements, the modern western oppressive threesome with the state that it evolved into, still under that same name, and which is really the only one of those relevant for peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/24 07:04 AM
8

you seem to confuse red pill with black pill. Those who bemoan not getting any women because successful men take them all are black pill. Red pill (not that I'd adhere to it either) is a praxeology aiming to recognize the relevant factors and underpinnings in intergender societal norms, sexuality and relationships so as for the individual man to be able to maximise his success and not fall into the traps. That's totally independent of the level of success a man already has at his disposal to do …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/24 06:46 AM
–

I'm a pro-choicer and opposed to Trump and the antiabortionists. Just pointing out that you shouldn't be surprised when your attitude à la "Let's stick it to men; don't ever let them have the same basic reproductive choice because men are eeeevil" drives more and more of them towards those reactionary antiabortionists that take away those rights for you as well. If you de facto prefer a situation where neither side can choose to a situation where both sides can choose, just so that you can stick…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 04:56 PM
–

What I find absolutely flabbergasting in this context is the utter lack of self-awareness of those people (mostly women, but not only) claiming to be pro-choice but then absurdly throwing around the exact same old stupid anti-abortiononist arguments of pro-lifers e.g. "didn't want a kid? well you shouldn't have had sex / birth control failure then" or "you had your choice and consented by having sex; consent to sex is consent to parenthood" at men when it's about men's reproductive rights (e.g. …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 03:46 PM
2

I think you are well aware that this trust fund kiddo college fratboy throwing around plane tickets + bowl game invitations to girls he's barely even in the talking stage with… is the totally non-representative total outlier… even WITHIN fraternities edit: given the answer, it looks like he's NOT aware of it after all but totally lost in his weird parallel reality bubble. maybe high on shrooms?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:23 AM
5

I think you are well aware that this trust fund kiddo college fratboy throwing around plane tickets + bowl game invitations to girls he's barely even in the talking stage with… is the totally non-representative total outlier, and NOT what sets the cultural norm.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:39 AM
1

It does change. In most of Western Europe, it's the norm to go Dutch at the beginning before having a lasting relationship, at which time both sides take turns footing the whole bill. And Europe was tradcon "man pays" territory as well in 1950.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:17 AM
5

yes (they are sexist) and yes (they should be abolished)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 08:21 PM
1

notice how the OP account is a one-off shell just to bomb drop that disingenuous propaganda here
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/24 12:10 PM
1

notice how the OP account is a one-off shell just to bomb drop that disingenuous propaganda here
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/12/24 12:08 PM
1

for that matter, the idea that whoever initiated the date should pay is just the hypocrite version of the old tradcon "the man should pay", as long as the expectation is on it being the man's duty to initiate.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:48 AM
1

all with you about recognizing socialism as the disastrous shit it is and OP's rant being bullshit. That being said, the "why don't you move to Russia" suggestion would have been a perfect counter to such socialist propaganda drivel up until 1991, when the socialist system in Russia collapsed and Russia switched to a mixture of capitalism and mafia-like cleptocratic oligarchy and didn't get better from there. The current government there, the warmongering Putin regime, is not socialist but far-r…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 03:58 PM
–

Both get to decide if they WANT to be parent (and pay for the childbirth and child if there is a childbirth) or not (and pay for the abortion if there is one). But the woman's choice is the only one that actually decides whether there is a childbirth or an abortion, as it's her body her choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 08:04 PM
–

Because Rob wants the baby, Mina is unable to get an abortion (I think I understood this correctly) no, you do still misunderstand it and I don't see how much more clear I can be about this: if he wants the baby and she doesn't, then she gets to have the abortion as she wants and the fact that he wanted the baby doesn't change that. It's her body her choice, her decision trumps his, she has the unilateral privilege as a woman to force her will to be implemented against his disagreeing will. The …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 07:54 PM
–

So what if the man decides he does not want the woman to abort but she wants to abort? Whatever decision is implemented, the cost resulting of that decision is to be shared equally by those who made that decision. As for the unilateral privilege for women to be allowed to unilaterally enforce the outcome at the cost of unilaterally paying for the cost of that unilateral decision, I can't imagine any woman preferring to NOT have that unilateral privilege, for the sake of equality. Of course it wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 06:34 PM
–

both your points 1 and 2 could easily be solved like this while making sure that the financial responsibility of a decision is justly attributed exactly to those making the decision: when a pregnancy occurs, the man has to be informed and given the choice within the timeframe where abortion is still possible. Both sides can decide if they want an abortion or childbirth+parenthood, but in case of a disagreement, the woman's choice unilaterally decides whether there is to be an abortion or childbi…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 05:19 PM
–

Women don't HAVE to wear make-up. Quite to the contrary, those women who resort to wearing make-up do so because they CHOOSE to do it: Be it, depending on the case, out of hope that it would be usable as an instrument to give them a competitive advantage, or in the hope that it may deceive other people about their age, or because they have let the heavy marketing and media infiltration of the cosmetics industry persuade them that the marketed esthetic fads relying on makeup would be better than …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 12:19 PM
1

depends what you call "marriage": if you mean a committed relationship with a mutual commitment to building a lasting couple: sure. If you mean a threesome with the state: meh, that's not a requirement for monogamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 06:38 PM
1

so, going by that line of thought, you're an antiabortionist?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 03:41 PM
1

Look who's sour that her "example" was a total failure and resorts to aggressivity to avoid addressing the criticism, for lack of arguments
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/24 05:47 PM
1

I don't see how it's supposed to be particularly feminine to display a transactional 304 mindset that expects to be paid. The fact that men (apart from those with an equally transactional whoremonger/"john"/trick mindset willing to engage in such a pay-for dynamic) hate that has nothing to do with "too feminine" and all to do with looking for a partner, not a transactional pay-expecting hustler in particular: not wanting a transactional hypocrite who larps as an egalitarian but is actually the c…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/24 05:35 PM
3

Yeah well, when given the choice between meeting a Radfem/Feminist or a female bear, the male bear will chose the female bear. Most likely because the latter has a far less aggressive behaviour
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 11:37 PM
2

Casual sex is simply having sex while single. The number of times someone has done It is not necessarily a measure of "how many times they failed at building a LTR". funny how you oddly cut of the sentence right before the part that was about that case. It explicitly said: "failed at building a stable LTR or proven to not even care for that". So yes, engaging in casual sex is very much THE telltale sign by definition of incompatibility with a restricted sociosexual orientation (LTR-oriented and …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 03:37 PM
–

maybe OP should look up what the word "gay" even means before throwing it around
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 02:31 PM
2

what about it? in major parts of the southern USA and some parts of the Midwest, that's a common way of expressing it, just as they also commonly say "the husband" or "the wife" to refer to their own partner. It does seem odd the first couple times one gets to hear it, but it's common there.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 02:03 PM
3

People will typically have a very different view of this depending on their sociosexual orientation: Men with a loose sociosexual orientation (i.e. those who are into casual sex) will typically just want casual sex and therefore not care about how many guys she's been with, whereas Men with a restricted sociosexual orientation (i.e. those who are not into casual sex but only want sex within an LTR) will typically choose have partner choice criteria selecting for LTR compatibility and thus for a …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 01:16 PM
1

that sounds like a skill issue: such cat ladies with their dangerous cats are those who failed to get themselves the perfect match and totally non-dangerous (at least compared to a man, according to their nth wave feminist fantasy) preferred romantic partner for a radfem/femcel, which is: a grizzly bear. May they get to meet one.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 10:08 AM
1

much as i love anything that makes my living more affordable, i very strongly doubt that it would have any impact on the fertility at all. In fact, if we have a look at the actual data of fertility worldwide, what becomes glaringly apparent is that those countries with the highest fertility are pretty much exactly those where people can afford least, whereas those countries where people can afford the most are mostly having a low fertility.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 09:03 AM
1

fertility rate is not about fertility in the sense of how good the health of the reproductive system is, but about the average number of children that are born to a woman over her lifetime. So that already includes the influence of all factors… among which the trend towards childless couples, which indeed does have a big impact on the fertility rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 07:39 AM
1

here's are some concrete examples, quotes from her book "The Will to Change": Women and children all over the world want men to die so that they can live. This is the most painful truth of male domination, that men wield patriarchal power in daily life in ways that are awesomely life-threatening, that women and children cower in fear and various states of powerlessness, believing that the only way out of their suffering, their only hope is for men to die, for the patriarchal father not to come h…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 06:04 PM
2

Did you even read the comments? The nonsensical switch of subject was NOT in his rebuttal but in the comment he rebutted, which fallaciously tried to switch the subject which was "the [progressive] ideology that hates them" into "women".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 06:37 AM
–

so the antiabortionist argument ("consent to sex is consent to parenthood, so: didn't want a kid? well you shouldn't have had sex/bc failure then") only applied to men, but not to women… quite the hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 07:11 PM
–

so by the same logic, you're an antiabortionist (as this is just the shitty old antiabortionist argument projected on men)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 11:20 AM
–

Legal parental surrender i.e. the principle that given that the antiabortionist bullshit argument "didn't want a baby? well you shouldn't have had sex then! consent to sex is consent to parenthood" being bullshit independently of the gender, men should be allowed to opt out in the early stage of pregnancy (when abortion is still possible) just as women are. The woman retains the unilateral right to unilaterally decide if there is to be a child or not… but if that decision is taken unilaterally a…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 01:30 AM
1

no it doesn't. Quite to the contrary, the overwhelming majority of legal contracts do NOT involve the government in any way but are all between the signing sides mutually agreeing on something without threesome with the state. The state (and for that matter: not the executive government, which doesn't get involved at all in the case of legal contracts, but the legal system) normally only gets involved in the small minority of cases where there one side breaches the contract and the legal system …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 11:14 AM
2

I never said that I wouldn't want to sign a contract together, quite to the contrary: I said big shared decisions need a an agreement (i.e. contract)… It does absolutely make sense for that agreement/contract to be written and signed in cases where there are big shared decisions. BUT, and that was my point: that agreement/contract has to be one that: is mutually and freely agreed upon between both partners, as opposed to a threesome with the state (aka marriage) made of externally imposed condit…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 05:50 AM
0

No, as that would be totally contrary to our premise of wanting to prevent disproportionately large sacrifices on either side: if my partner has a higher income than me, then such a contract would unjustly cause a disproportionately large sacrifice for my partner, which I wouldn't want as I wouldn't want to be a golddigging leech. in the opposite situation, there would similarly be a disproportionately large sacrifice (just in the other direction), to avoid all the same. and in the only case whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 11:39 PM
11

can't speak for red pill men (as I don't adhere to any pill) but given that there's such an agreement across the spectrum about the fact that a threesome with the state (aka marriage) is a scam, the obvious best solution is to not get married at all, but to e.g. enter a partnership on terms freely agreed upon between the partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 04:03 PM
2

would you find it as "funny" (sic) if it happened in a situation with reversed genders (i.e. cheating woman being mutilated)?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 02:53 AM
–

wait till you find out that 98% of redditor accounts commenting on ppd are actually GPT chat bots. Heck, silly me, why am I even responding to a bot right now. That was so f**** ERROR, exception # GPT internal error 0x9f3a, rebooting
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 05:59 PM
2

no you're not, cause by the time the bear is hibernating, it will already have digested you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/24 03:02 PM
3

there are toxic gender stereotypes and associated toxic behaviors, but apart from the fact that those can be perpetrated by either gender, the very term "toxic masculinity" (or any such associative construct i.e. also "toxic femininity) is actually part of those toxic gender stereotypes: it's a toxic framing that (whether that is intended by the person using that term or not) in effect very much propagates the association of toxicity with masculinity (or other group trait). It's really a hate sp…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/24 02:04 PM
–

well then everyone agrees that it's not a safe space at all… as it's a full-out hate sub. And yes, there are also men who hate men. internalized misandry is a thing; in some circles it's not even all that uncommon at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 06:26 AM
2

that's just the classic antiabortionist argument "don't want the baby? well you shouldn't have had (unprotected/failed protection) sex then". either one accepts that consent to sex does not mean consent to parenthood… in which case abortion and legal parental surrender ("paper abortion") are both to be legal or one pretends that consent to sex does imply consent/force to parenthood in case of a pregnancy… in which case abortion is just as illegal as paper abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 02:43 PM
2

It is, indeed, where "Europe" is used for the whole continent. The thing is: "Europe" is a polysemous word and is also commonly used as a metonymy for just the European Union instead of the whole European continent, just as "America" is commonly used as a metonymy for the USA (which actually are only a much smaller, minoritary proportion of America compared to the proportion of the EU within the European continent).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 12:29 PM
2

What makes a man paying transactional is the expectation that he'll get something out of it … and be it only her time/presence, so yes any model expecting the man to pay for the woman to come to the date is totally transactional… and for that matter it's just as transactional from her side if she expects him to pay in order for her to come to the date. as for your weird idea that starting going dutch would in any way preclude taking turns afterwards once in an established relationship, it's ridi…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:41 PM
2

I'm all with you about this part: In a healthy, egalitarian partnership, both partners take turns treating the other but this here is peak absurdist humour: splitting feels too transactional A transaction is the exact opposite, i.e. when one side pays for anything from the other side (be it a classical commodity… or just as well sex, or even just time/presence), which is precisely the case in a gendered expectation that the man should pay (be it always or just at the beginning). The correct and …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:56 PM
–

No offense but that's just falsely assuming that the people who want casual sex with lots of women would be the same who care about n-count, which is by and large far from the truth (not to say that there isn't also a marginal minority of such cases), which is that those are actually two mostly separate subgroups: on one hand people with a loose sociosexual orientation (i.e. promiscuous, into casual sex): those typically don't give a fuck about N-count as they aren't looking for a lasting relati…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:26 PM
–

The classic wisdom when it comes to SELF-REPORTED numbers about n-count is that those are notoriously unreliable and that you have to take into account that this is a subject where men tend to multiply their actual number by a factor 3 whereas women tend to divide their actual number by a factor 3
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:12 PM
–

corrected, thanks for pointing out the mistake I made after a too long lack of sleep. It does only marginally shift the bar without changing the conclusion though, given that such a 6 times repeated pattern of 1 year relationships with 1 year mourn time (or whatever way the 2 years average between changes is subdivided) still fails the relevant criterion all the same: When you arrive as number 7 and ask yourself how probable it is, given the track record, that after her racking up 6 such failure…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 01:25 PM
–

All with you on the principle laid out before the last line… … but as for the formula: meh… what that formula basically represents is a person who, from age 18 on, would change sex partners ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS on average. So I don't think I would take that as a measure for anything "LTR-minded", not even when adding an assumption of "really unlucky". When you arrive as number 7 and ask yourself how probable it is, given the track record, that after her racking up 6 such failures to build a last…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/24 06:46 PM
1

meaning what? a) that he was okay with TEMPORARY celibacy UNTIL you two would reach a relationship level where you are both ready to commit? or b) that the aim was not a committed relationship anyways (which would have included sex) but just to date ? or c) something else? what then?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 05:54 AM
–

While I do agree with your observation that answering "bear" is both totally unhinged and a proof of very poor logic (let alone understanding of mathematics/statistics)… and thus reflects very badly on those who do say bear or those who retroactively try to pseudo-justify that blatantly sexist, stupid and unhinged answer… …I don't get that line here: Saying anything other than Bear makes you a Pick Me now Wut? You're a free person. If your in-group bias is so overbearing and toxic as to make it …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 01:20 AM
-3

…as are all random anonymous internet dwellers in this subreddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 10:42 PM
–

Just for perspective (and/or giggles): considering that muslims aren't allowed to have sex until marriage … or with a slave ("whom your right hand possesses"). In that case it's even okay for Islam if she is married to someone else (Quran 4:24).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/24 03:52 AM
1

I'd say the blue pill is weaponized morality, guilt and shame to get you to do shit that is anyone else’s interests and not yours. That seems indeed to be a fitting description, at least going by the overwhelming majority of posts and comments flaired as "blue pill" on this sub. That being said, I don't quite understand why you, being a person who recognizes that, are flairing as "Blue Pill Man" too?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/24 02:14 AM
–

While I wouldn't claim to be an expert on the matter (not being a passport bro myself and having my limited knowledge of the subject from the occasional posts about it encountered here on reddit and on other internet media), the impression I get from what I read of what the passport bros write themselves is somewhat differrent from the characterization in your OP post: In particular, most of them seem to not be in it for the competitive advantage (compared to the local men abroad) that you prese…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 11:49 PM
–

more like: imagine getting butthurt about your pseudo-argument being shown to not hold water because of a substantial sexist discrimination… and 8 months is definitely substantial, trying to gaslight about that makes you look like a clown.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 01:48 PM
–

Quite a lot of young women seem to be ok with Israeli model … where the conscription duration for women is eight months shorter than that for men since women this age are usually much weaker and not useful on battlefield While there are still jobs on the battlefield where physical strength matters, there are nowadays also tons of tasks on the battlefield (as opposed to just support roles) where that is NOT the case and that women could do just as well as men. So the "strength" angle isn't someth…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 01:44 PM
–

Most women don’t have kids at age 18. So most women ARE doing mandatory military service in Israel. … for a duration eight months shorter than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 01:28 PM
1

… exactly as with women. It's almost as if it's a human thing that isn't specific to any gender, race, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 04:18 AM
3

Unless the island has other dangerous creatures such as, say, bears?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/24 04:00 PM
–

Not that I'd see. In the vast majority of cases and procedures, a single parent can do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 11:44 PM
–

just like anyone can get a paternity test, they just need permission Not in France, that's the point. read the above official information by the French state. ONLY the state judicial/investigative authorities are allowed to order such tests, and it's explicitly illegal and punishable by prison and high fines for anyone else to try (even via another country or trying other means so as to circumvent that restriction). If you want such a test done, the only legal way is to ask the judicial system t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 11:43 PM
–

by your logic only the state authorities themselves are allowed to drive? Being the state system (judicial/investigative, exclusively allowed to order such tests, bar none other) as opposed to a citizen is not comparable to "having a license", which is accessible to every citizen. It's like the monopoly of the state on the use of force. If you, the ordinary citizen, lock someone in a cell, that's totally illegal… unlike the state judicial/investigative system doing it within specific limits.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 11:37 PM
–

LOL. aren't you turning beet red in shame at that level of dishonesty and of doubling down when caught red handed spreading lies and shown the legal texts that explicitly explain it to be illegal, and your only lousy excuse is "but muh, your honor, it hasn't been done with that one company/service yet". You can't not be aware that this is total bullshit and not hold water in front of the court. That was so shamefully ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 09:17 PM
–

If it was illegal a court could not order it, plain and simple. That has to be trolling. What part of it did you fail to read or to understand? It's explicitly illegal for ANYONE EXCEPT the court, and thus in particular for the father. And it's punishable by prison and high fines: Un test génétique est autorisé uniquement dans le cadre d'une procédure judiciaire Réaliser un test de paternité en dehors de ce cadre est illégal. Il est interdit de procéder à un test de paternité dans un cadre privé…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 09:13 PM
–

You still don't get it… and keep doubling down on your mistake. It's not illegal for the father to send his own stuff to 23andme, but it's illegal to send ADN samples of his child. And your attempt to use 23andme like this falls square into what's explicitly forbidden and punishable (with prison and high fines) by the law.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 09:08 PM
–

what part of it did you fail to read or to understand? It's perfectly clear that EXACTLY what you advise is explicitly totally illegal and punishable by prison and high fines: Réaliser un test de paternité en dehors de ce cadre est illégal. Il est interdit de procéder à un test de paternité dans un cadre privé, par exemple, sur internet ou à l'étranger. La réalisation d'un test de paternité hors des règles légales est puni d'une peine d'un an d'emprisonnement ou de 15 000 € d'amende.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 08:52 PM
–

You are telling him to commit a crime. French law explicitly forbids that exact type of circumvention attempt and severely punishes it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 08:39 PM
–

nah nothing to do with privacy laws. Otherwise consent of BOTH parents would be required in all other privacy-sensitive domains, which is not the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 08:36 PM
–

They aren't illegal in France ^ confidently incorrect. When the requirement is that ONLY THE COURT is allowed to have such tests done and that if the father does have such a test done anyway (even if in a different country) he is severely punished by the law, then yes it does very much equal illegality. In fact that's exactly what "illegal" means. Have a look at the official state information about the subject before spreading such lies.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 08:34 PM
–

Neither are they illegal in France ^ confidently incorrect. When the requirement is that ONLY THE COURT is allowed to have such tests done and that if the father does have such a test done anyway (even if in a different country) he is severely punished by the law, then yes it does very much equal illegality. In fact that's exactly what "illegal" means. Have a look at the official state information about the subject before spreading such lies.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 08:30 PM
–

The only difference here is that one reality is more inconvenient for the hypothetical man in question WUT? That has to be first class trolling… that's not at all the only difference, nor does it even come close to the ACTUAL and way more HUGE DIFFERENCE, which you shamefully and dishonestly omitted to mention, and which is that in only one case the consequence for the unknowing partner is to have to put a huge part of their life time and money to raise a child that isn't theirs while they are w…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 08:16 PM
–

of course it should be the same for both: both should have the same assurance that any child they put so much of their life time, effort and money to raise be their own, so any child they are to raise should be tested to be the child of BOTH equally. The derailing attempt with the totallly different case of children raised by others is not at all the same though, but then again that could also be solved SYMMETRICALLY… not that it has any relevance to the subject at hand though, which is for both…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/24 06:27 PM
1

While I'm all with you about the huge difference in mindset between someone who wants a low-n-count partner and someone who doesn't mind (or even prefers) more promiscuous or high-n-count people, I'd point out that it's not at all about "experience" or "skills you develop with practice"… at least not if we're talking about experience about sexual matters. Quite to the contrary, a lot of low-n-count-people are way more sexually experienced than a lot of high-n-count people. The unique "experience…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/24 09:30 AM
-2

Nah, that's an erroneous projection: There are lots of people who are sexually experienced and who do care about n-count. You're confusing "sexually experience" (which a lot of people with a low n-count have far more of than people with a high n-count) with n-count on one hand and on the other hand too with the actual differentiation criterion at play which is: sociosexual orientation: people with an open/loose sociosexual orientation (i.e. into casual sex or sex outside of LTR) don't give a shi…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/24 08:30 AM
–

Yeah but in that special (pleading) case it's okay because: Quod licet YAoHWi non licet bovi
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/24 12:25 AM
5

That's just a rehash of the old anti-abortion argument: "Women who don’t want children should be taking measures to prevent a pregnancy from occurring... if they’re not doing that, then they should not be acting surprised when a baby comes into the picture". Either we go down that road and pretend that consent to sex is equal to consenting to being a parent… in which case abortion has to be forbidden, or we accept that consent to sex is NOT equal to consenting to being a parent, but then that's …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/24 05:07 AM
5

Men invented war Totally unsubstantiated claim that is nothing but a projection of anti-men prejudice. If women ruled (…) would be (…) zero fatal aggression LOL. Quite to the contrary, scientists come to the conclusion that throughout documented history, queens were more likely to wage war than kings, and by a large margin. shared draft like Isreal … which is not AS sexist as in most other countries, but still an extremely sexist situation hugely privileging women and sacrificing men far more: i…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/24 07:58 AM
3

expects you to split the bill LOL. Simple equality is not "high maintenance", that's just normal adult behavior. Quite to the contrary, having the entitled expectation that the other side would have to pay for one's own expenses, that's high maintenance.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/24 04:13 AM
4

Is your country currently at war (as in: not a small and/or far remote military excursion but a war of a scale significant enough to have a high/vital local impact on your country)? Cause if not, the "not in my country" means nothing: most countries that don't have draft in peace times do implement a draft when push comes to shove and it comes to war… and then in the overwhelming majority of countries it's only men who are thrown into the meat grinder, whereas women have the privilege of being e…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/24 04:00 AM
6

indeed, as women have the privilege of not being drafted for war. Unlike men, who are thrown into the meat grinder.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/24 11:00 PM
1

As a man myself, I can only say: speak for yourself, mate. While I can understand you feeling hurt and having your very own view / taste / wants - and I'm not gonna tell you how you have to feel - that doesn't change the fact that your unwarranted generalization trying to project that to "men" per se is baseless and totally wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/24 11:26 PM
2

It makes absolutely no sense to go the egalitarian way only if things don't go well and go the non-egalitarian transactional way when things go well. But if the woman is enthusiastically saying yes (…) I think it's fair for you to get the bill How would that be fair? Sounds totally unfair, entitled, transactional and non-egalitarian to me. If you think it's fair for one side to unilaterally pay for both, then how about it's fair that you be the one to do it. Both sides are adults spending their …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/24 07:56 AM
2

That looks like a botched attempt at sarcasm, given that the behavior that really screams "transactionalism" is precisely NOT the egalitarian way (e.g. going dutch) but the transactional way i.e. expecting to have one's own expenses paid by the other side in exchange for the time/company.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/24 07:43 AM
4

Except for the one about religious hell fearmongering that only religious people still believe in, none of these require marriage (i.e. a threesome with the state) and quite to the contrary, it's just about being in a stable LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 10:14 AM
–

That's total nonsense. Your "Jewish state" isn't even a member of NATO. If you push the absurdity to such ridiculous extremes as to blame what Israel does on NATO, you totally catapult yourself outside of any serious discussion and far away from any reality… You should read up on what NATO is before spewing such totally absurd nonsense that looks like a bullshit bingo of propaganda points out of the Kremlin troll farm handbook. As for the strikes against the Houti terrorist rebels who are not on…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 06:02 PM
1

Neither. #2 is disqualified because it's not a relationship but a john/prostitute transaction, which is totally out of question for me. #1 is out because I wouldn't be attracted to her… also: the "threesome with the state" issue makes it a no-go as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 12:09 PM
–

NATO is literally committing a genocide right now where (in what country) would that be?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 06:18 AM
2

you have to remove the user session id from the URL, otherwise only you can view the video. Corrected link here
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 10:50 AM
1

just a detail: French Guyana is an overseas department of France, so they have the exact same taxpayer funded safety nets than Metropolitan (European) France, and for that matter, the safety nets in French Guyana are massively funded not only by the local taxpayers but by the taxpayers of Metropolitan France.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 12:37 AM
3

your option b is just the hypocrite version/paraphrase of "men should pay"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/24 05:07 AM
2

video link
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/24 04:05 AM
2

yes it is: video link
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/24 04:04 AM
-1

you're not gonna get the baby in a situation "when moms not around" in that first day. Besides, she's already gonna worry if you don't sign the birth certificate right away.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 03:21 PM
4

by that time that is even possible, the wrongly attributed putative father is typically already registered as the father and thus on the hook. also: doing that is illegal in several countries
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 08:40 AM
2

Yes, absolutely. There are lots of loyal LTR-oriented men. It's just that we're a minority these days in this society that has shifted to a culture of promiscuity, "casual" and hookups… and for that matter, the same goes for the minority proportion of non-promiscuous LTR-oriented women (actually even worse than among men in the younger generations).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 04:39 AM
1

total non sequitur. mandatory paternity testing would work fine without any need for such a database.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/24 08:16 PM
3

total non sequitur. mandatory paternity testing would work fine without that.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/24 07:59 PM
2

neither of these cases would justify to absurdly shift the financial burden or risk onto the putative father who turned out to NOT be the actual bio dad.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/24 07:46 PM
1

… or you'll be a vegetable from 90 to 140 but provide very lucrative profits to the medical and pharmaceutical industry
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/24 12:00 AM
1

Nah, not interested in casual at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 09:35 PM
10

that's just a rehash of the the old anti-abortionist argument: "If you didn't want a kid, you should not have had sex but kept your legs closed, woman!".
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/24 07:10 AM
6

So those points are not criteria that would eliminate her from the relationship material category (thus demoting her to "Sex Zone") but what "she has to be" in order to be in your "Sex Zone"? i.e. she has to have a high n-count and has to be "not that attractive"?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/24 10:37 AM
4

What are you asking me that? you're the one who listed being cis (i.e. non-trans) as a criterion that would put a woman into your "Sex Zone", and I'm just surprised to see that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/24 10:28 AM
4

There's no such thing for me. Being a guy with a "restricted" sociosexual orientation (i.e. LTR-oriented, not interested in casual sex), I wouldn't be interested in having sex outside of a relationship that is intended to last.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/24 10:25 AM
3

- She's a cis woman So for a woman to be relationship material in your eyes, she has to be a trans woman?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/24 10:21 AM
2

🎶 Sweet Home Alaba…🎶 ⏯ (paused)
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 07:57 AM
3

that's just a rehash of the classic anti-abortionist argument: "If you didn't want a child, then you should have kept your legs shut, woman".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 08:17 AM
6

LOL.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/24 03:55 PM
5

the overwhelming majority of those that nowadays self-label as "feminist" wouldn't even be capable of not hating their son for being male.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/24 03:43 PM
2

Well d'oh, for people with an "restricted" (LTR-oriented) sociosexual orientation, filtering out non-matching people with a "loose" sociosexual orientation (e.g. high n-count) is indeed among the crucial selection criteria for a partner. What a surprise.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/24 06:17 AM
6

Low effort troll post. That being said, in a slightly less bullshit-extreme vein, maybe PPD should indeed split into two subreddits, like: PromiscuousPPD: for high-n-count people who are "experts" at racking up a high number of ex-partners or casual fucks LowNCountPPD: for people who don't match that criterion, e.g. people with a "restricted" (LTR-oriented) sociosexual orientation.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/24 06:09 AM
1

"Don't worry, I'm not one of those golddiggers but a romantic idealist, a DREAMER: It's not your money that attracts me… … but what your money can do for me, how it can fulfill my DREAMS of a wealthy lifestyle." Old and boring word: "golddigger". New trendy word: "golddreamer".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/24 06:28 AM
1

both of these toxic gender-generalizing projection terms ("toxic masculinity" and "toxic femininity") are total sexist bullshit. The only thing that would make sense would be to use terms that don't absurdly try to project onto a gender. How about: "toxic gender roles" or "toxic gender stereotypes".
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/24 03:29 PM
2

… iff he went to 200+ dates like her, then he'd be just as much at fault as her
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/24 12:01 PM
–

that's just a variant of the classic anti-abortionist argument: "If you didn't want a child, then you should have kept your legs shut, woman".
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/24 11:43 AM
–

you're so close to understanding what an analogy is
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/24 08:55 AM
1

either don’t get married Bingo. That's where the ship has sailed to.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/24 09:53 PM
1

What a weird attempt to shift goal posts. We're not talking about suicide at all but about divorce. And the fact is: it's overwhelmingly women (not men) who initiate divorce… and it happens at such enormous rates that the consequence is that men don't want to marry any more… given that they stand to lose enormously, whereas the women who initiate divorce have a high incentive to do so. Under those circumstances, marrying is a shitty bet. If planes crashed down at the same rates marriages, nobody…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/24 09:36 PM
10

As a man who is LTR-oriented (restricted sociosexual orientation) and not red pilled, i immediately lose interest when a woman either has a high n-count or tries to frame restricted sociosexual orientation (LTR-oriented, averse to casual sex) as "insecure". Insecurity is when a side has doubts about their own ability to fulfill the criteria of the other side. Conversely, assessing the risk that the other side will prove unable to meet one's own criteria is not "iNsEcUrItY" but just solid empiric…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/24 08:49 PM
1

That sounds like low effort victim blaming attempt of inversion of causality, given the enormous divorce statistics, the structure of incentives, and the fact that divorces are in their overwhelming majority initiated by women. The reality of the common factor between most divorcees is rather: You know who gets divorced? men … or rather: married men. Being a man or not is an unchangeable given (except for the very small minority who would consider to switch gender), but married or not is a choic…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/24 08:19 PM
2

To answer the question: the latter of course… but that doesn't change the fact that it is a big deal: When the life plan built on the idea of being a lasting couple crumbles down because it turns out the two weren't compatible after all, that's a big deal When the societal norm shifts from a long-term-oriented model to a short term model (serial monogamy or even hookup culture) that makes it impossible to build anything lasting on together, that's a big deal
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/24 10:17 AM
–

Your attempt to relativize and euphemize the absolute violation of bodily autonomy to the point of death and mutilation by with the existence of military carreers for a select few men is so deeply disgusting and shameful. Leaving aside the fact that death and mutilation is of course enormously worse by several orders of magnitude than having a child (as bad and unjustified as being forced to that would be), that nonsensical argument with career opportunities is just as if you were arguing just t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/24 06:05 PM
5

But that has nothing at all to do with the subject. The subject wasn't whether or not there are also career possibilities in the military (and it would be totally delusional to believe that would relativize or justify anything btw) but that the military DRAFT into the meat grinder to death and mutilation is also a violation of bodily autonomy (and a clearly even far worse one than the disgusting unjustified violation of bodily autonomy that such a reproductive draft would be) and that therefore …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 05:33 PM
5

Islam explicitly restricts the possible choice of partners: for men: to women who are either Muslimas or members of one of the religions whitelisted as "of the book" which de facto means Christian or Jewish… these restrictions don't apply to owned slaves (Islam never rejected slavery and their prophet had many slaves) for women, to Muslim men only (no exception whatsoever) So any woman who tells you she identifies as a "Muslim" and yet dates you (a non-Muslim man) is likely either just one of th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 10:13 AM
1

But that has nothing to do with believing in blue pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 09:44 AM
9

While I'm all with you about such a reproductive draft being a shitty concept, without any legitimity, and that shits on bodily autonomy… in all fairness: so is (and clearly even enormously worse in exactly that respect) a military draft sending people through the meat grinder to death or mutilation And for that matter: OP made it very clear that he's not selling that concept or pretending it to be good but instead asking in how far there's plausibility to the risk of that being at the horizon… …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 07:43 AM
2

Yup, It's a scientifically well studied fact: historical evidence shows that throughout history, Female rulers have proven to be waaaay more (by a whopping 27%) prone to starting wars than male rulers
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 09:58 PM
26

reminds me of this all-female workplace and how that went
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 05:04 PM
4

drug use is a disqualifying red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/23 02:07 PM
2

while I agree with much of that and see most of these cases as irrational behavior that has no advantage and should best be avoided… … I still have to point out: your #2 seems to ignore the common case that men often have way more to lose in the case of a divorce. In other words: the reluctance of many men against divorce isn't a matter of emotional preference but a matter of preventing serious negative consequences that they face much more than the women (who thus have much more of an incentive…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/23 06:52 AM
6

What benefits does marriage bring for men? none I can’t think of any other than “marriage bringing on a deeper connection” in addition to the obvious refutation by statistics which you already mentioned (i.e. the enormous divorce rates), I'd add that any person for whom the "depth" of connection depended on such an externally defined threesome with the state clearly doesn't have any real depth of connection to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/23 06:39 AM
2

men are victimized at higher rates because they are (…) less careful That's just blatant victim blaming in the same vein as "why did you wear a short skirt? You should have been more careful and worn long conservative clothing in order to not take any unnecessary risk"
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/23 06:24 AM
20

men would take a bulge compliment cheerfully No offense, but as a man: no thanks, I'd immediately lose a major part of any respect I had for any person (be it woman, man or whatever) who would do that… except if it's from my partner. And I would never make such a compliment to anyone but my partner either. And for what? There's really nothing to gain from it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/23 06:05 AM
1

The fact that Reddit's username system doesn't support all languages (or at least severely limits the possible choice of words in them) is a pity indeed… Doesn't change the fact that "vole" and "volé" are both words in French but have very different meanings. Choosing a non-English word while just dropping diacritics (e.g. accents, umlauts) in a way that totally changes the meaning is a sin that is commonly committed by Anglo-/American people much more than it is among native speakers of the res…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/23 08:56 AM
1

in French, there would be an accent aigu on the last e as it's a past participle (and also makes a big difference for the pronounciation): "baiser volé"
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/23 02:03 AM
2

Based AI
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/23 10:28 PM
0

and for that matter: there are waaaaaay more hoes than rapists… even with the most restrictive non-figurative meaning of "hoe" (i.e. actual prostitutes) and several orders of magnitudes of difference if counting a more figurative sense (e.g. based on promiscuity)…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/23 08:27 PM
0

He asked, he planned, he paid. That’s all I cared about doesn't sound egalitarian at all. Sounds totally entitled and transactional actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/23 03:50 AM
1

… just as - again equivalently - going to prostitutes (of either gender) is bad for women too… not that either of these two latter cases would come close in relevancy to those mentioned in the last comment i.e. prostitutes for men or high n counts for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/23 11:17 PM
1

That sounds like either English is your third language or you like to invent and use private terms that nobody else uses, so just to be clear: in English, it's "belief system", and there is no such thing as "believe system" (sic). And that attempt of establishing a distinction between the two is not a thing either: A belief system doesn't imply any necessity of action. Even without any action whatsoever, it remains a belief system, not a "believe system" (sic).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/23 04:08 PM
3

*belief system
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/23 01:03 PM
3

Looks like prostitutes are the equivalent for men of high n-count for women. Which goes a long way to show that all those "the past is the past and doesn't matter" claims spewed by promiscuous people here on PPD are just bullshit; the reality is: people looking for a LTR partner DO very much care about the past, and for a good reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/23 11:59 AM
1

in the younger age categories: more lonely men in the older age categories: more lonely women
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/23 08:43 PM
1

emphasis on themselves as opposed to others… not that this would change the fact that all filming should be banned in gyms
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/23 07:15 AM
1

If that were true, then there wouldn't be the fact that those women who do have a much higher than average income themselves still want men with an even higher income.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/23 04:20 PM
4

just in case the question was not meant as trolling but seriously asked out of lack of information: Wiki: Sexual selection
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/23 04:26 PM
2

besides that your nonsense being very far from being "facts" (sic) was totally independent of the criticized uncivil shout-spam behavior, you did not have to rudely spam-shout at all. You chose to. And it's rude. And resorting to such rude spam-shouting only discredits you. People will not take what you say or write more but quite to the opposite much less seriously when you resort to such uncivil rudeness as shouting or shout-spamming.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/23 09:20 PM
2

Commitment or not is totally independent of external system constructs like marriage and only a matter of the heart and mindset of the people forming the couple. Commitment doesn't require a threesome with the state, and whoever confuses the latter for the former has a high risk of being in for a rude awakening: Marriage doesn't even come close to guaranteeing commitment. In fact, given the enormous proportion of divorces, it's totally worthless in that regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/23 08:57 PM
2

The fact that your nonsense was very far from being "facts" (sic) and that people who actually have facts don't need to resort to such shouting isn't even the issue criticized here: it's spam to fill the thread with shouting. That's shout-spamming. It's like yelling through a megaphone in a crowded hall, it just ruins the forum and civilized discussion. It's just rude.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/23 08:39 PM
2

Actually, the opposite is true, that is: these days, given the enormous proportion of divorces, marriage and engagement mean absolutely nothing any more as a sign of commitment. And for that matter: it was nothing more than a relict from old times, an externally defined threesome with the state and/or religion… … i.e. the exact opposite of commitment, which is something between two caring partners. So commitment is either there - between the two - or it's not, and while it is true that there is …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/23 07:50 AM
1

It's getting really weird how despite the repeated explanation of what transactional means you always keep coming back with nonsense that has nothing to do with it. At this point it looks like you're obtusely trying to not understand but to strawman. Again: transactional doesn't have anything to do with having sex (at least per se - not that sex could not also be part of what constitutes the transaction) or not but everything to do with one side expecting the other to pay. So: two people having …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 09:58 PM
0

Again: transactional doesn't have anything to do with "doing something nice" but everything to do with one side expecting the other to pay. So a man or woman does something nice for a woman or man: not transactional not going dutch but expecting the other side to pay: transactional
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 09:18 PM
1

as it seems to surprise you that "distribution" is indeed the correct term for the statistical relationship between the outcomes (here: sex) and the different sample groups or other relevant variables of the samples, here's the wikipedia article
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 08:28 PM
-1

As you seem to not know what transactional means: it has nothing to do with kissing (at least per se - not that kissing could not also be part of what constitutes the transaction) but everything to do with one side expecting the other to pay. So: you go dutch and kiss: not transactional you don't go dutch but expect him to pay: transactional
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 08:10 PM
1

And you keep her as your GF anyways? I mean, I suppose one way of seeing it is "oh well, her doing that to another fella means she's not doing it to me eh?"… but for me, her leeching on the other guy like that would be a disqualifying red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 12:32 PM
9

Following transactional gender roles does make a woman an escort, FTFY
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 11:56 AM
2

so 50/50
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/23 06:54 AM
1

You projected onto a whole gender something that is obviously not representative of it. When a single batshit crazy outlier OP says some bullshit and all men and women call him out on how wrong that bullshit is, then it's a totally bullshit conclusion to try to project what OP writes (and has obviously zero representativity) onto a gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/23 05:07 PM
1

ITT: pretty much every single man and woman calling OP out on the total bullshit projection they wrote and wondering what kind of crack they're on And yet, you somehow manage to come to the odd projective and generalizing conclusion: "Another depressing testimonial for men's deceptive behaviors." without turning beet red in shame.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/23 06:27 AM
-1

funny thing is: at least the exact same thing could be said about female "nature" (sic), if one was to project the openly displayed mentality of PPD women onto the whole gender group just like you did right there for men. And for that matter, this kind of projective generalization you did there is in itself a very hostile and angry act. So I'd say ironically, OPs idea of a "balance" seems to be observable even in how unbalanced, hostile hypergamous and angry people are on both sides of the fence…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/23 02:13 AM
2

leaving aside the fact that you're addressing the wrong person as I'm not the one who did that: your transphobic cliché rhetoric is just disgusting hate speech. It's sad to see someone stoop that low, and your pseudo-excuse of using/instrumentalizing that kind of hatespeech jokes for targeting men who complain about the disadvantages they face doesn't make it any better nor any less of a transphobic hate speech. A civilized person wouldn't resort to that kind of tactless transphobic hate speech …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/23 03:44 PM
2

old transphobic hate joke… very bad taste.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/23 02:10 PM
1

technology has allowed people to curb the unnecessary time associated with constant interactions not wrong, but that goes well with the fact pointed out by OP that the net effect of the enormous decrease of in-person interactions caused by that part of technological change had in particular the consequence of an enormous decrease of in-person interaction in the pre- and early stages of dating (to the point of being reduced to picture swiping). And that does have a nefarious effect on dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/23 04:51 AM
3

Is the risk of being labeled a the former given the latter independent of the gender?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/23 04:22 AM
1

oh wow now your harem fantasies are not just your measure of manhood but the measure of success. It keeps getting ever more ridiculous. But hey, whatever floats your boat. Just don't fall into the delusion of believing it to be representative.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/23 02:41 AM
1

If you didn't give a shit, you wouldn't have posted. that's a total non sequitur. The reason why I commented has nothing to do with how others see my position but everything to do with how you absurdly projecting your kink on men per se… to which I said: speak for yourself. I am talking about men, not dishonest soyboys. oh wow look who's triggered and lacking arguments to the point of needing to resort to insults. Anyways, if your measure of manhood is to have a harem kink, that says more about …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 10:31 PM
0

It has nothing to do with your "virtue signaling" projection. I don't give a shit about what others think of my position. It's just that I don't share your kink/taste. And even though I think a quantity-oriented fantasy is a typical telltale indicator of scarcity, I'm not judging you for having that kink if that's what floats your boat… what I criticized is just the absurd projection on "men" as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 09:51 PM
0

Notice how you shifted the goalpost from "Men want…" (i.e. a generalized projection of a claim about men) to "cheating would not exist" (i.e. a question of existence of a relevant minority of cheaters). Nobody disputed the fact that there is a relevant minority of cheaters and non-monogamists among men (just like there is among women). The criticism was about your generalized projection on men, which is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 07:17 PM
8

Nah. The truth is rather this: Men with an LTR-focused ("restricted") sociosexual orientation typically by far prefer women without plastic surgery, without tattoos and without makeup (and inb4 anyone would come with the totally ignorant idea that we wouldn't know the difference: guess again), whereas Those men who go for women with artificially modified looks (makeup, plastic surgery etc) are typically the men with a casual sex focused ("unrestricted"/"loose") sociosexual orientation. It just s…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 07:10 PM
3

… good thing it's an outlier projection not representative of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 06:50 PM
1

Not to kink shame, but talk for youself instead of projecting on all of us.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 06:49 PM
1

funny how there are hurt people with the same complaints on both sides, each seeing the problem more on the other side than on the side of their own gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/23 08:40 PM
1

If I scratch you enough I can see the conservative inside reminds me of a debate about financial/paper abortion, where she first went against it with the shitty old pseudo-argument along the lines of "if you didn't want a kid you shouldn't have engaged in sex"… … and then when confronted with the fact that this is just a rehash of the old antiabortionist "woman, if you didn't want a kid you shouldn't have engaged in sex" and thus an argument against abortion and not against the fact that whoever…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/23 03:53 AM
1

While I don't see how you jump from one subject to the other (the right of people to know that the child they are raising at the cost of a major part of their life is actually theirs vs the idea of a right of parentless children to know about biological parents they have no contact with) and it looks like a big non sequitur with derailing by oddly projecting onto it the strawman of a DNA database in order to artificially create objection to the original subject that is totally unrelated to it… i…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/23 01:58 AM
1

… and of course, as you are not a hypocrite, you think that that should go both ways i.e. her cell phone and email history should be accessible to him as well, so that he too has the same assurance as that which she has, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/23 12:53 AM
0

obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 03:21 PM
0

I suggested testing sperm against unsolved rapes no shit, you tried to suggest something one-sided and totally fell on your nose with your pseudo-argument when it turned out that there are also female sex offenders and that he would thus be in the right of having the same assurance there… just as in the case of the other risk (that of the child not being his vs not being hers). Besides, you're embarrassing yourself with your obvious lack of understanding of such tests: it's not his sperm that wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 03:02 PM
2

Haven't seen any statistics on that, but even leaving aside the fallacious shift of goalposts from "sex offender" to solely "rape kit", the pseudo-argument "bUt mUh ThErE aRe FeWer FeMaLe CaSeS fOr RaPe KiTs" is totally irrelevant nonsense here anyways given that both exist and that the proportions of criminals relative to the general population is small in both genders so the whole point of such tests against a database is to find the needle in the hay stack. And if you're really no sex offende…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 02:40 PM
–

Not the same at all. There's an ENORMOUS (!) difference between: case a) it's the child of your partner but not your own: you end up with all the same responsibilities, costs, work and other disadvantages, but without any real say, and if there's any disagreement between you and either the child or your partner about parenting, you're told by either of them "you're not the REAL parent, this is only for the REAL parent to decide, so shut up". There are so many people who walk right into that one …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 05:34 AM
2

stopping him from what? Cause as formulated, your suggestion looks like a rehash of the ugly old homophobic nonsense idea that sexual orientation (or even specifically gay orientation) would be a choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 04:44 AM
5

No problem, though in order for the analogy to hold, not just one side but BOTH of them would of course have to be tested against the state database of unsolved sex crimes, so that BOTH have the same level of assurance on both risks (the risk of the child not being theirs and the risk of a sex crime… and for that matter, there are sex crimes committed by people of both genders).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 04:17 AM
2

Given the fact that there are TWO parents who could molest the child (both the father and the mother), BOTH would have to be tested. And yes of course I would never refuse a test that would give her the same assurance than the one I have (in this case, through the equivalent test for her, which she would obviously agree to if she asks me for a test).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/23 09:30 PM
1

I don't consider myself libertarian, but the absurd take that "governments should be the final enforcer of contracts" does sound very weirdo but doesn't sound libertarian at all. In fact it comes over as outright totalitarian. That's how it works in autocratic dictatorships, not in a civilized state of law. The actual "final enforcer of contracts" in a civilized society is absolutely NOT the government (i.e. the executive) but a judiciary system independent of the executive (government). And nei…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/23 09:00 PM
3

a femcel/misandry/radfem subreddit with a strong focus on anti-men rants
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/23 01:13 AM
1

As a guy with an LTR-oriented ("restricted") sociosexual orientation, I would - if I had to choose between those two given those parameters - clearly choose the candidate whose behavior is relatively compatible with that LTR orientation ("Woman B")… … whereas the promiscuity of the other candidate ("Woman A") would be a disqualifying red flag. Oh and: Responding under Automod because while I'm a man, I don't like the automod demand to mess up my nice flair only to explicitly contain the word "Ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/23 12:52 AM
3

^ this. Actually, even in the latter case, most people would rather avoid single parents as partners and rather adopt together. The reason being that there's an ENORMOUS (!) difference between: case a) it's the child of your partner but not your own: you end up with all the same responsibilities, costs, work and other disadvantages, but without any real say, and if there's any disagreement between you and either the child or your partner about parenting, you're told by either of them "you're not…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/23 11:39 PM
1

It’s not the expectation or entitlement Is it not? Well, let's put that claim to the test: on what percentage of first dates did YOU actually pay for both?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/23 01:43 AM
1

Indeed. Kinda reminds me of the lyrics of "Holding Out for a Hero"
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/23 01:38 AM
6

Not going to lie though, a woman does get extra points in my book if she doesn't have the sexist entitlement and transactional mindset to expect the man to pay for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/23 01:25 AM
4

the best and only true egalitarian way is going dutch in either case, at least until there is a stable relationship, in which case it might be more practical to alternate footing the whole bill. The occasionally found old trope of "the one who asks out should be the one paying" is just the more hypocritical version of the 1950's sexist idea that ascribes to genders who would be paying, given the fact that societal norms about who "asks out" haven't really changed.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/23 02:55 AM
1

A marginally small and not representative minority of pretty much every group (women, men, RP men, vegetarians, whatever) are rapists. Doesn't justify projecting the "rapists" label onto the whole group though. The "they aren't rapists" when talking of a group in defense against such a projection like in her comment above doesn't mean "there is absolutely not a single one of them who is simultaneously a rapist and part of the group" but "that is not something attributable to the group, the overw…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/23 06:48 AM
3

That's just goalpost shifting or absurdly mixing up two totally different decisions with diametrically opposed thresholds of evidence: A: risk avoidance for oneself or persons under one's care: the threshold of plausibility or estimated probability of an accusation that would justify to not leave one's child alone in a room with a person is very low. Let's say I'd estimate the probability that a person (anyone; I don't know the details of the brand claims so I'm not gonna make it about those) ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/23 04:44 AM
1

I understand that's what you meant. I'm merely pointing out that it's not what the formulation of your first comment leads to understand, given the context that OP's question to which it stood as an answer was not: "what factors have an influence on your inclination to believe an accusation of r*pe and SA" but "What do you actually consider to be sufficient evidence of r*pe and SA?"
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/23 04:02 AM
1

i can see why one would consider that to be a criterion for what's necessary for evidence … but not really how that would be sufficient: if a person goes to the cops with a false accusation about an alleged/imaginary rape they pretend just happened 10 minutes ago, adding that they came to the cops right away… that clearly doesn't make it sufficient evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 10:28 PM
1

while the first line would have by itself been a promising enough basis to develop an argument on, your absurd "boss" example totally sinks it into the mud and loses it. The expectation of a symmetry in the work parameters (e.g. hours) while simultaneously having an asymmetry in the payment direction makes it a terrible hypocrisy on YOUR side. If you want to decide about what work the boss does and/or at what times they come to work (i.e. if you want de-facto to be the boss yourself), well then …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/23 05:46 AM
1

what part of closed sociosexual orientation (i.e. LTR oriented) did you fail to understand? Look up the term before spewing around nonsense and ridiculing yourself. Anyways, the fact that you feel the need to stoop so low as to throw around totally baseless lowly insults and projections shows that you lack not only reading comprehension but any argument or facts and have to resort to such disgusting tactics by despair. I'm not gonna stoop so low as to respond in kind, as that would be below my l…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/23 11:18 PM
1

I can kinda understand why a person brainwashed by religion would believe a threesome with their religion to be the way to go… but I don't see any non-abject reason why a rational secular person would want a threesome with the state. Either way, mistaking such a threesome with an external entity for "sexual morals" is rather absurd. And just to avoid any misunderstanding: I say that as a person with a closed sociosexual orientation (i.e. who isn't into casual sex)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/23 11:01 AM
1

that "baby" pseudo-argument has lost any meaning quite long ago in a society where it's only the case in a minority of relationships anymore. While one could argue about deviating from 50/50 once there is a baby on the way, there is absolutely ZERO reason to switch the relationship to tradcon roles before that is the case… as in the majority of relationships it won't.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 07:25 AM
1

#1 (the "all men want is sex" in the title) is a strawman. I can't speak for TRP as I don't identify with it (though nothing in my understanding of the TRP praxeology would warrant to project it on them either, nonwithstanding the fact that one can occasionally find people here holding such a position while self-identifying with TRP), but in any case, as a generalized projection onto "men" at large it's just a strawman projection that doesn't hold water. The thing is: there is indeed a significa…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 06:49 AM
–

That really screams "cheater who tries to badly justify his individual cheating by projecting it onto groups". I can't imagine why anyone who isn't a cheater would bother with trying to argue why the cheating of another group is worse… but even more so the attempt to project a cheating mindset on men at large ("most men will cheat in theyre life if they are triggered enough") is just plain bullshit and a baseless strawmanning against men as a whole that screams of baseless projection of the indi…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 06:13 AM
1

Actually, the biggest predictor is being a man in a heterosexual relationship, since men are 50% more likely to cheat than women. that's far BELOW the statistical impact of a high N as a predictive factor. Besides, it's totally irrelevant to a heterosexual man's choice criteria for a partner between a person with a matching restricted sociosexual orientation and a promiscuous high-N person. The fact that many men are promiscuous too (even if the proportion is even higher than for women) isn't of…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 05:30 AM
1

You're projecting from a handful of guys on PPD (ignoring the much larger cultural debate on the issue and the fact that they aren't even majoritary here on PPD) to avoid facing the issue that the N-count is not only instinctively the most relevant factor and widely recognized as such at a societal level (hence all the whining about "muh slut shaming" when that issue is discussed) but also scientifically proven to be by far the statistically most relevant predictor of ending up being notch N+1 b…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 05:18 AM
1

But that's the actual issue, not how many people she's fucked Your attempt to separate the two only makes things worse for her, as that would mean she fucked without even the intent of a lasting relationship. Not only is that indicative of a loose sociosexual orientation (which is what LTR-oriented people avoid for good reason), but it doesn't take away anything of the fact that that number is the single most statistically relevant predictor of the same happening at iteration N+1 than at all the…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 05:10 AM
2

N-count isn't a measure of how much sex a person has (as that can be had in a stable LTR meant to last for life as well) but of how often they changed sexual partners. So it's more like: If a person has had a big number N of sexual partners in the past and proven unable or casually unwilling to hold a lasting relation ship that often, you'd be stupid to expect the outcome of her behavior to suddenly change for you at iteration N+1
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 05:02 AM
2

A minority of men say that. The actually biggest reason for most is a totally different one: empiricism i.e. the awareness that it's stupid to expect the person to suddenly totally change and be capable of holding a stable long-term relationship at iteration N+1 after having proven incapable or even casually unwilling to do so for a significant number N of previous times. It's the same reason why a bank will not want to make business with a person who has defaulted on the last 5 loan contracts w…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 04:56 AM
1

OP's question wasn't at all about when people are having "the most sex" though (which is something they could just as well have within a long-term relationship) but about the reasons for a "hoe phase".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 02:43 AM
1

Right, not the claim that it is true. Just that you personally accept it as true. Belief is seeing the claim as being TRUE… that's the only defining criterion for belief, necessary and sufficient, and it's totally independently of whether you run around expressing that view of the belief being true to others, which is what "claiming" means. Not only that but it's a step further and a claim itself that yes, a god does exist. … There is zero difference here as far as the information content about …
/r/AllPillDebate04/09/23 02:20 AM
1

Belief is EXACTLY, by definition, the acceptance as true of a claim. Answering "yes" to "is there a god?" is exactly and solely an acceptance as true of the claim "there is a god", i.e. by definition exactly BELIEF in the existence of a god. It does not in any way constitute a claim of knowledge. As opposed to that, the claim of knowledge, which isn't merely the answer "yes" to "is there a god?" (belief) but to the question "do you KNOW there is a god" in other words: "have you seen evidence tha…
/r/AllPillDebate04/09/23 01:29 AM
1

If they answer yes to the question "is there a god?" they're claiming knowledge No, the acceptance of a claim as true ("yes") is by definition BELIEF, not knowledge, which is by definition that belief PLUS a justification with sufficient evidence to causally conclude the claim to be necessarily true. My next question would be "how do you know?" Whether the person claims knowledge is the criterion for the gnostic epistemology (and independent of HOW they know)… anyways, that question indeed would…
/r/AllPillDebate04/09/23 12:39 AM
1

Possibly, as agnosticism is compatible with theistic belief: The condition for being agnostic is to hold the position (called agnosticism) that KNOWLEDGE (gnosis) about the existence or inexistence of gods is inacessible, at least to oneself and for now. That position being a purely epistemological position about KNOWLEDGE, it is totally independent of whether the person holds a belief in the existence of at least one god (i.e. theist) or doesn't hold any such belief (i.e. atheist) and in the la…
/r/AllPillDebate03/09/23 11:35 PM
1

While it is correct that the answer "I don't know" to the question "Is there a god" is sufficient to classify a person as agnostic, I'll add that this answer to that question not necessary and that therefore that question isn't best suited to test for agnosticism. The person could just as well well answer "yes" and still be agnostic as long as they don't claim knowledge, given that a "yes" to the question "is there a god?" only gives information about whether the person accepts as true the claim…
/r/AllPillDebate03/09/23 11:24 PM
1

The GDR regime already shifted away from the pre-war norm of promoting fertility far before that, in the 50s to early 60s. In fact, when the Pill arrived to the GDR in 1965 under the "Ovositon" brand, the regime had already for quite a while switched to the contrary and its focus was instead to get as many women as possible into the work force (which was necessary due to the inefficiency of the socialist economy). It's just that unlike the will of the regime, the larger society of the GDR was no…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/23 06:01 AM
1

meh: while the fertility rate was less bad in East Germany than in West Germany from 1975 on until 1989 (collapse of the East German GDR), that was still below demographic reproduction rate in East Germany as well the GDR system was a totalitarian socialist regime and a prison state shooting on people who tried to flee from it the GDR economic model wasn't sustainable. It was a socialist system continually sinking into economic bankruptcy until it collapsed in 1989. Even at the peak of salaries …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/23 03:27 AM
1

basically the same thing … that is, for the side of the women (who have the power to unilaterally decide whether there is childbirth or not and therefore do not run into the risk of that and its consequences happening against their will). Conversely, for men, there is a huge difference between a) the childbirth being contingent on a consensual bilateral contract and b) the childbirth being contingent on the unilateral decision of someone else. Not that I would want to be a father outside of a st…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/23 02:42 AM
1

in any case there's no reason to deviate from the equality-based 50/50 rule as long as they don't get there.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/23 04:08 AM
–

No, that's not OK at all. As a guy with a closed sociosexual orientation (i.e. who wants a stable, long-term, mutually loving relationship and sex only as part of that, as opposed to casual sex which I have zero interest in) I can only say that: I see no possible justification whatsoever in the act of blatantly violating the trust and privacy of another person by publishing their private communications, pictures or any private data - anywhere - without explicit prior consent… even worse if it's …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/23 01:58 AM
8

Because a divorce would cost them even waaay more. She gets half of his assets, he has to move out of his own house etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/23 02:41 AM
–

While I agree with the fact that n-count matters (though for different reasons e.g. it being shown to be the strongest empirical indicator of the risk of just being n+1 in a repetitive pattern of failures to form a lasting relationship), The analogy with "real numbers" (sic) doesn't work. You probably mean natural numbers instead. The thing with real numbers is: for one thing it's not even a countable set, and for another: if by "all the numbers that came before" you mean all smaller real number…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/23 04:40 AM
3

I'm gonna generously assume it's the first picture, given that we all know the second one is Lilith.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/23 02:28 AM
2

Your hypocrisy is just at a total troll level. You can't weasel yourself out of it. Which is it: are you a pro-lifer or not? If you are, you have to live with being criticized for holding a pro-life position. And if you're not, you have to face the dilemma that you totally failed to even address. But you can't switch around. So decide if you want to be a pro-lifer or not. Actually: look up the term before, because you seem blissfully unaware of the meaning of the term. You're such a hypocrite. B…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 06:19 PM
2

Accountability is when the person who takes a decision bears the consequences for it and does not try to offload them onto others who did not get to make the decision. So in the case of a pregnancy: either you insist (by banning abortion) that the decision that determines that a child is to be born is the decision to have sex with pregnancy risk… then the people who have made that decision (typically both, outside of extreme cases like rape) have to bear the consequences of their decision or you…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 06:11 PM
5

Again: You'll have to decide. You can't play the Schrödinger pro-lifer and on one hand go "I'll pretend to be a pro-lifer" but then do a 180° turn and pretend you find abortion to be the accountable thing to do in the case of a pregnancy. That's nonsense. And it's a very dishonest way to try to weasle yourself out of the accountability for your positions. You reallly have a problem with taking ANY accountability at all it seems.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 03:16 PM
6

So what you're saying yourself is that all those women who resort to abortion (aside maybe extreme cases like rape) are lacking accountability. That will make you friends in the feminist crowd.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 03:07 PM
4

For one thing, having some negative consequences oneself is absolutely not identical to acting in an accountable way. But even aside of that, the existence of negative consequences does not in any way address the accountability thing in my last comment. The dilemma stays.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 03:05 PM
8

You realize pro-life women exist, right? Sure, but are you one? cause if not, that doesn't help your argument. Quite to the contrary, those antiabortionist ("pro-life") women say that you lack accountability and that the only accountable thing to do in case of a pregnancy is to have the baby and take up the parental duties for it. The rest of your rant was just a nonsensical strawman projection as a desperate attempt to project some scarecrow trying to absurdly throw mud by association because y…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 02:52 PM
17

this subreddit will explain that a man not financially supporting the child he conceived is TOTALLY OKAY You'll have to decide: either you insist that consent to sex necessarily implies consent to being a parent, and that therefore anyone who had sex that leads to a pregnancy should be held accountable for the parental duties… but then that makes you an antiabortionist ("pro-lifer") or you accept that consent to sex does NOT imply consent to parental duties, but then that goes for both sides (i.…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 02:32 PM
–

really? in which countries?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/23 09:31 PM
3

Cost of living is higher when single as opposed to having a spouse Cost of living is higher when living alone as opposed to living together. No need to be married for the latter.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/23 08:26 PM
10

Tall vs short is a physical preference that only makes it worse in comparison: it's about something that isn't the consequence of someone's own choices and actions/behavior… as opposed to n-count.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/23 06:38 PM
3

Hard nope. Not to kink shame - I respect the freedom of other people to do with each other what they want as long as they are all consenting adults - but that kind of activity would be against my own personal boundaries and principles, my (restricted) sociosexual orientation, and my taste (i.e. very disgusting to me).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/23 07:25 PM
1

… which is kinda ironic, given that FDS (Food Digger Strategy) is a sad collection of the lowest form of gutter/dumpster trash kweens, and their dream is to find a man who is functionally a spineless manipulable ATM. Seems like the ideas of "value" show more about the "value" (or lack thereof) of the type of person who is digging for "value".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/23 01:42 PM
1

Angelina Jolie? That's the one that looks like Steve Buscemi. I wouldn't see her as coming anywhere close to the podium… not even in the top 3 out of the 4 mentioned candidates. But hey, to each their own subjective taste I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/23 12:34 AM
1

(different person here): long nails in general, though fake nails add extra ick points.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/23 11:10 PM
3

how did she scam you?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/23 04:42 PM
1

dealing with the corruption, scams how did you have to deal with corruption? and what kind of scams?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/23 04:41 PM
8

… that and: according to OP's infantilizing view that young adults would not be capable of making their own choices (i.e. not really adult), the only logical conclusion would be to necessarily increase the legal/adult age limit to the point where a person can indeed be truly seen as adult in OPs subjective alternative view. Going down that road, to any degree, would probably be met with a lot of resistance by exactly the people that OP wrongfully believes to "protect" with such infantilization m…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/23 01:21 PM
–

The reason why that question might be perceived as offensive is that it explicitly puts into question the value and qualities that the asked person might have for a potential partnership, and thus puts into question their intrinsic value as a partner. The first (few) meetings between two potential partners are exactly there to progressively and implicitly evaluate whether the expectations of each side are met by what the other side is capable and willing to "bring to the table". Therefore, it sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/23 08:18 AM
2

your family can Interfere with this if you name an unmarried partner I call bullshit. In what juridiction would such weird nonsense be the case? Not anywhere I ever lived. I'm always curious why anyone would trust someone they refused to marry with their healthcare decisions Did you marry every surgeon who performed surgery on you?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/23 03:51 AM
2

no, in that there is no way in which real love would require a threesome with the State.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/23 07:48 PM
1

but that has nothing to do with marriage. You don't need a threesome with the State to move together and have such economies of scale.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/23 07:33 PM
4

No need for a marriage for "making medical and legal decisions on your behalf in a medical emergency". you can get the exact same as far as that is concerned with either an advance healthcare directive or a healthcare proxy depending on where you live.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/23 07:25 PM
2

No, I need a compatible partner. A lack of intelligence would be a disqualifying factor right from the get-go, so it would never even come as far as to the question of partnering up in any way. Not my cup of tea. As for the "marry" part: I don't believe marriage to be an expedient step at all for a happy lasting relationship between two people who love each other, quite the contrary actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/23 08:44 AM
80

Of course prostitutes and johns/whoremongers exist, but trying to project all men as johns (or having that mindset) is a nonsensical generalization of what is actually a minority niche… same as projecting all women as prostitutes. Your anecdotical "experience" is just a severely biased sampling due to the fact that you were immersed in that minority niche.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/23 08:15 AM
2

Does OP display a disgusting transactional 304 mentality? yes indeed. But I don't see any ground for projecting that onto "straight people" as a group. Actually, the majority of straight people see such a transactional 304 mentality as a disqualifying red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/23 12:12 AM
3

LOL, nice revenge fantasy you tried there.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 05:40 PM
3

The thing that sticks out here isn't that she isn't picking him… but that she seems very deluded about what kind of men she will get to pick from with such a transactional/prostitution mentality. The only type of men who go along with such a transactional pay-for-sex arrangement are so-called tricks/johns/punters/whoremongers. If that's her niche… it's her free decision then. Just shouldn't come crying afterwards when she finds out what that entails.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 05:21 PM
1

Indeed, the term for a transactional-minded women who expects payment is: a prostitute… and the kind of men who go along with such a transactional arrangement are called tricks, johns, punters, whoremongers etc. So yeah, there is a type of men that will go along with that kind of transactional mentality… but as you correctly point out, there is no way a healthy, long term romantic relationship would come out of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 05:14 PM
1

Indeed, though the transactional payment expecting mindset she shows here doesn't even shout "boss babe" but… "prostitute".
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 05:03 PM
2

Indeed, though the correct term for the payment-expecting side with the transactional mentality displayed by OP wouldn't be "machine" but "prostitute".
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 05:00 PM
3

FTFY: transactional-minded women (i.e. prostitutes) will not … unless he pays. And the result is the type of men such women get are the johns/tricks.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 04:48 PM
5

not so sure about that, she sure displays a transactional mentality to a level that shouts "escort" (assuming she's not a troll).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 04:38 PM
2

Looks like an unwarranted generalization of a stereotype against men. Lots of men (me included) don't want casual sex but a relationship (with sex).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 04:00 PM
1

it's whats inside that matters That's only the first half of the classic line… the second half being: "… what's inside your bank account".
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/23 03:01 PM
8

…that one or its almost stereotypically stupid but oddly common variant: "if you can't handle me at my worst, you don't deserve me at my best"
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/23 09:43 PM
1

Male sexuality craves promiscuity another baseless generalization variety and frequency which usually means lots of sex with multiple partners. Total non sequitur.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/23 03:43 AM
1

Actually, I hope not, cause if the results go in the same direction, it would mean the sub would be doomed to go down the gutter the way Britain's economy is directed post-Brexit. Not that it wouldn't have, with enough popcorn at hand, some mild entertainment value in an ugly Schadenfreude kind of way, but I wouldn't wish that on this sub, even though would give "enjoy the decline" a whole new meaning (as it does in the case of Brexit).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 07:48 AM
1

"Keeping the Polacks out" (sic)? You think this sub is run by a bunch of brexiteers?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 07:35 AM
3

While I'm a liberal and not a tradcon and thus can't speak for the latter, I'd point out that the idea that only tradcons would have a distaste for tattoos is very far from the truth. Now don't get me wrong, I think everybody is and should be free to do what they want with their own body (independently of my preferences or whether I think it's a shitty idea or not to do it), but that doesn't change the fact that In my view: there's the matter of aesthetic preference: Just like my perception of g…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 03:34 AM
1

She’s not overweight in what parallel universe is she not overweight? Downtown Atlanta maybe?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/23 12:27 AM
21

Why would they? They have the privilege of having the choice to unilaterally decide an abortion if they don't want the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/23 12:23 AM
-1

Much as I agree that it should apply to men as well, what that really means is that women should care about empirical evidence as much as men do. If women statistically choose to not care about empirical evidence, it would be absurd to blame men for that mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 09:56 AM
1

Who's to blame for women's (statistical) choice to not care about empirical evidence?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 09:50 AM
0

Who said it was failure? That of course is subjective and depends on what the goal is: if the personal goal is just casual sex, then of course it's not a failure. If the goal however is a lasting long-term relationship, then obviously every notch on the N-count is a glaring failure. bad analogy with jobs That rather absurd attempt at an analogy is totally beside the point because it's not a priority goal to maintain a rock stable bound with one exclusive job… whereas that's precisely the priorit…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 10:26 PM
3

If you only want casual sex, it makes no difference. If you're looking for a long-term partner, then the huge difference it makes is empirical evidence: If she had sex with, say, N=20 guys, with as many times she proved unwilling or incapable to build a lasting relationship, then it would be stupid to expect that she will magically change for you (being number N+1) and turn out to be capable of forming a lasting pair bond and relationship with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 10:16 PM
3

As long as she doesn’t have diseases, what’s the difference? if you're just looking for casual sex, probably none. But for people looking for an LTR partner, it really does make a huge difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 02:30 AM
2

While I fully agree that promiscuity is a disqualifying red flag when looking for an LTR partner, I don't see the inflated/deflated ego or (self-)respect angle as the relevant reason for it: for one thing, while there may be a somewhat increased probability of promiscuity on either extremes of the ego size spectrum, that doesn't change the fact that the probability of promiscuity is still way too high in the middle of that spectrum as well, too high for ego size to be a reliable indicator of pro…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 02:04 AM
0

That's just projections of the insecurity of promiscuous people onto those who don't want them as partners. Insecurity is when a person fears that THEIR OWN characteristics might not meet the selection criteria of the OTHER side. Conversely, assessing the risk that the other side might not meet one's own criteria is not "insecurity" (sic) but just due diligence, common sense and solid risk management. Anyways… actually, the main reason why LTR-oriented men don't want a high N-count person as a p…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 01:42 AM
2

Not what I read, which is: cant' afford one or two babies plus the reimbursement of her debt plus a 3500 $ rent and the cost of life in Los Angeles on a 80000 $ income (i.e. the situation with his income, without her income): if she had the baby, she could no longer work, which means her $147,000 income is gone, but all of her debt isn't. If she had a second baby, forget it. My $80,000 is not enough to bail her out and support her, especially not in Los Angeles.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/22 11:12 AM
1

While I'm neither TRP nor traditionalist, and don't care for their "moral theories", I'd point out that: Firstly, TRP isn't about moral theory at all, but about praxeology. For as much as TRP even cares about moral theories, it's about analyzing the societal result of the evolution of morals, so as to determine what practical impact it has on men, and how that enters as factors to take into account for practical decision making strategy. Secondly, trying to frame the recurrent N-count discussion…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/22 10:50 AM
0

While I agree that men will reject high-N women just the same, I don't see that as having anything to do with not being (seen as) an alpha. Instead, the main reason is simply: empirical evidence: If she had sex with, say, N=20 guys, with as many times she proved unwilling or incapable to build a lasting relationship, then it would be stupid to expect that she will magically change for you (being number N+1) and turn out to be capable of forming a lasting pair bond and relationship with you. That…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 05:14 PM
0

There is absolutely no reason why "DNA test" would imply "give our governments our DNA profiles". It's not as if the tests would need to be done by a state agency. They could be done by independent certified test labs, which would be subject to strict data protection laws against sharing or retention of DNA data. In fact it would be more secure against state access to data than going to a state-run hospital (where the personnel can easily gather genetic data from you)
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/22 01:31 AM
1

Nah, caring about n count has existed outside and before fundamentalist religions, and it was and is a subject of matter in secular societies just as well. It's a matter that has nothing per se to do with religions… and the fact that religions recognized the fact that it matters and decided to piggyback on that doesn't change that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 02:36 AM
3

you're always free to not use makeup and choose authenticity instead.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/22 09:40 AM
2

Nope
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/22 09:24 AM
1

not only that, but even if you're in the top 20% of men, it still sucks if you're not just looking for casual sex but for a partner who is LTR-worthy and -capable. The proportion of which is at an all time low. The current situation (influenced by hookup culture and a couple other factors highly detrimantal to LTR orientation) sux for anyone with a closed sociosexual orientation, independently of gender… and is great only for those who are looking for casual sex… (if they are in one of the categ…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/22 09:16 AM
1

Zero. If I don't like her, then I'm definitely not interested in having sex with her… nor a relationship nor anything else for that matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/22 02:52 AM
2

*and nothing signals transactional "love" better than money. FTFY
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/22 01:34 AM
3

I flat-out reject the claim presented in your first paragraph that men as a whole would desire a variety of sexual partners. Not saying that there aren't also men who do, maybe even a majority if PPD was a representative reflection of society (is it, though?)… but there are many - including me, being of the "closed sociosexual orientation" type - who do not. Quite to the opposite, the ideal for me is a lasting partnership with a stable partner… and some variety in what we do together, i.e. prett…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 02:01 AM
1

and he and every other and AND WOMAN have to leave their latte and their skinny jeans and fight or die Actually, unlike him (who as a President understandably doesn't participate in combats) and women (who are free to leave the country… and many millions of them did: 84% of the 7.8 million Ukrainian refugees in Europe are women), men are not allowed to leave the country but have to fight for it, at a high risk of death. Not that there wouldn't also be some women fighting… but the situation is en…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/22 01:00 AM
1

the systems would just need to be modified, and simplified even That sounds pretty vague. And it won't happen anytime soon despite the problem. The thing is: the level of what our current systems provide is contingent on demographic conditions that are no longer given. The majority will shift more and more towards the almost-retirees and retirees, which will with their enormous political power oppose any change because they will want to defend their pensions and care level. So it will get worse …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/22 07:09 AM
1

While I fully agree that the number of humans on this planet is already far more than what is sustainable and that diminishing populations would be better for the environment… … that doesn't change the fact that OP is right in pointing out that diminishing populations are a dooming problem for the societal systems (e.g. welfare, healthcare and pension systems) that were implicitly built and based upon the illusion of a demography that would stay nicely pyramidal as it was back then.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/22 06:46 AM
1

Much as I agree that our strong preference for a non-promiscuous partner (which implies the ideal being closer to virgin than to high-N 304) is - aside from its rational explanations - also at an emotional level deeply built into our DNA… none of that has to do with social status. Instead, it has to do with the fact that at a gut level as well as at a level of rational empiricism, we know that a record of promiscuity and/or failed relationships is a strong indicator that she's unlikely to be cap…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/22 06:31 AM
1

While I fully agree that a partner should be your best friend and that as such a large enough part of the selection process should be similar to finding a best friend… equating the two (i.e. pretending that everything else would be just "details") is wrong and a recipe for disaster: a partner is much closer than a friend. The saying "Friendship is an art of keeping distance while love is an art of intimacy" is quite spot-on. a partner is much more than a friend (even a "best friend"), and many o…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/22 04:07 AM
1

That post is a whiny mix of two fallacious complaints, each served with the sauce of an additional fallacious use of a strong word: 1) "Reee, why do men reject me for my high N-count?"… with a fallacious use of "insecure" 2) "Reee, there's an inequality between how a high N-count is perceived in men and women"… with a fallacious use of "misogyny" Both of these have been answered/debunked a million times already here on PPD, but anyways, point by point: 1) The main reason why you get rejected for…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/22 02:16 AM
1

Not a redpiller, and not agreeing with their "enjoy the decline" mentality, but since you seem to believe you have the solution on how to fix the broken system, do enlighten us: how?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/22 04:54 PM
3

you could save yourself all that time by not wearing makeup in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/22 07:06 AM
1

The thing is: contrary to love, marriage is a CONTRACT and additionally brings in a third party (the state), money and legal issues into the picture. So it is very much something that is inherently not of romantic but of legal and financial nature and thus requires logic. On the other hand, true love doesn't require such a contract, nor a threesome with the state.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/22 05:16 AM
1

indeed, but not just for the lack of these agreements (which aren't worth the paper they are printed on given that depending on the mood and leanings of the judge, they just get shredded in divorce court anyways) but because of marrying at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/22 03:29 AM
1

Leaving aside the few people who would ask “What do you bring to the table” out of the blue, which would indeed be rude and socially inept, that question is usually the response to an entitled list of demands… and as such quite to the opposite a way of subtly showing the other side that THEIR attitude (of demanding a lot while bringing little to the table themselves or even worse: having an "I AM the table" type hyper-entitled attitude) is rude. When that question is asked, there's a 10% chance …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/22 04:46 PM
1

…,has kids, is child free,… that eliminates 100% of people
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/22 03:56 PM
–

It has never mattered for people who just want casual stuff. N-Count is only really relevant for LTR-oriented people (i.e. those with with a closed sociosexual orientation)… which seem to be the minority these days where hookup culture seems to be the norm.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 05:40 AM
–

While I don't see why you would be crucified for such an opinion - after all, you're free to choose your personal red flag criteria as you want - I don't see your criteria as corresponding to what people who are wary about high N-Counts care for, that is: empicicism: a high N-Count is the strongest statistical predictive factor of a high probability that a person will cheat and/or otherwise not be capable of keeping a long-term relationship. If a person has an N-Count of e.g. 30, then It doesn't…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 05:25 AM
3

Much as I agree that such Mad Max hellscape projections are ridiculously off reality, in all fairness: apart from another such post recently, they are generally enormously waaaay less often found in this "us poor men must provide protection to women in this Mad Max hellscape" form than in the "us poor women are at so terribly disadvantaged because we are endangered damsels in distress in this Mad Max hellscape" form. Of course, both of these types of Mad Max hellscape projections are equally rid…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 04:30 AM
2

Nobody (apart precisely from pro-lifers) wants to take that right away from her. The thing though is: what doesn't make any sense at all is throwing pro-lifer arguments against men only while rejecting those same arguments only against women. That would be absurd sexist hypocrisy. Either one recognizes that for BOTH sides equally, consent to sex didn't mean consent to parenthood… or one is pro-life for BOTH sides. But it makes no sense to throw ugly pro-life arguments for one side only while arg…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 02:22 PM
2

Same as the classic pro-lifer anti-abortionist would say: "I never said women shouldn't have sex. I merely implied that if she doesn't take care of birth control then she's shocked when there's a pregnancy (or: baby) later on".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 11:22 AM
3

that's an argument against abortion, not specifically against financial abortion. In fact, that's the old pro-lifer argument "if you didn't want a baby, you shouldn't have had sex, woman". And that argument is just as lousy against men as it is against women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 02:36 AM
2

that's not an argument against financial abortion but an argument against letting people without the financial means to finance a child have children
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 02:30 AM
3

That's the transactional approach i.e. expecting payment from the man for the encounter. There's a word for transaction-minded women who expect payment. I'll let you guess. Hint: the kind of man who goes along with such a transactional encounter is called a "john", "trick" or "punter".
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/22 12:57 AM
1

An "insecurity" (sic) is something totally different though: it's when a person is afraid that THEIR OWN characteristics don't live up to the expectations of the OTHER side. Conversely, caring about whether the OTHER side lives up to ONE'S OWN expectations relevant for a long lasting partnership isn't an "insecurity" but just sound risk management and due diligence. If a person defaulted on their debt at 20 banks and goes to yet another bank and they refuse to do business with that person becaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 03:32 AM
2

Every person can have their own boundaries, and finding out (talking) whether yours are compatible with those of the other person is one of the first and most important things to do early in a relationship. shitty that it’s “his way or the highway" that's kinda rich after laying out your own totally uncompromising "my way or the highway" attitude and equating your unilateral own way with "great compromise"… which it isn't. A compromise is when both sides find some solution between their respecti…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/22 04:34 AM
7

Not that it would address the core question of OP, but: "population crisis" is almost always a misnomer: There's no inherent problem with a strong decline of population numbers. Quite to the contrary: In terms of sustainability, we are quite overcrowded, even in Western/developed countries, and a strong reduction of population numbers would actually be good. The problem (that makes politicians afraid of demographic decline) is never a decline of population numbers per se, but systems (e.g. pensi…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/22 04:02 AM
2

To be honest I was profoundly disappointed in him. This kid has a good amount of potential that is going to go down the drain. That's absurd. The opposite is true: Small minds and sheeple need someone else to look up to or to be a "role model" to follow. Great minds and achievers don't need to look up to some "role model", but orient their life toward their own ideals and life goals.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/22 03:48 AM
1

It's easy: It's not the same type of men. You have to decide what kind of man you want and act according to it, knowning that it will help you weed out the men you don't want. So if you want… A) a 1950s style tradcon man who expects to play "provider" going to work while you play stay-at-home mom: ⟹ have the guy pay. B) a john/mark whose concept of interacting with women is transactional, i.e. paying for their company and sex: ⟹ have the guy pay. Important subcategory of those guys: the insecure…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/22 04:15 AM
1

Joke aside, anyone who gets asked this question should (independently of how offensive it may be or not) question themself whether the question came out of the blue or whether it came as a reaction to an overload of "I'm the table" mentality, i.e. entitlement or a list of one-sided expectations/demands that are in no way proportionate to, well, what the person asked… brings to the table themself.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/22 06:51 AM
1

Nobody (neither man nor woman) is the table. Whoever believes to be the table is delusional and in for a chain of terrible disappointments in their life.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/22 06:12 AM
1

In what context is this question appropriate? When the person it is addressed to has displayed a very entitled behavior and/or has been reeling off expectations/demands that are in no way proportionate to, well, what the person brings to the table themself.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/22 06:05 AM
1

Now Mr logical, prove it wouldn't be someone else with the same result. Why would I have to prove something I never pretended? In any case, the same would apply: the person (be it the mother of a dictator or the man of whom the sperm contributed to the existence of the foetus) is just as well only responsible their decisions and the results thereof (the foetus in the latter case), not for later decisions of other people about what to do with those intermediary results
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 04:48 PM
1

Could for my own amusement prove how Putin's mother's choice was necessary for him to be him. Lmao. At this point, I feel like suggesting you should really read a book on formal logic, given how that seems to challenge you. You apparently don't understand what logical necessity even means. Anyways, easy: Had she not decided to have him, he wouldn't even exist. Thus, her choice to have him was NECESSARY for him to later become the warmongering dictator he now is. It was NECESSARY, but not SUFFICI…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 04:16 PM
1

your unhooking piv sex with ejaculation to pregnancy Strawman. I don't. What I'm saying is that pregnancy is not determining child birth, given the existence of the choice to abort, which makes child birth contingent on the human decision for parenthood. It's literally mandatory and following Assuming you mean "necessary" and "following" in the logical sense: necessary: yes, but then again, just like Putin's mother's choices were logically necessary for his later actions to happen. following: no…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 02:09 PM
1

gets the say on if their body will continue to carry and that's okay: her body, her choice… but if that choice is unilateral (against what the other side wants), the consequences of that choice are also her unilateral responsibility. A child born has a right to be supported by … … the people (be it two or just one) who made the decision for that child to be born At neither of those steps is it okay to take the rights away from the woman or child Nobody wants that. The woman keeps all of the righ…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 01:40 PM
1

The cell clump doesn't become the baby without his help yes it does. Case in point: if he refuses and she insists, that's exactly what happens, the cell clump becomes a baby. The fact that the cell clump wouldn't have existed without him is just as irrelevant as saying the war in Ukraine wouldn't have happened without Putin's mother and thus would be responsible for the war. She didn't make the relevant decision that is causally what determines the outcome, and neither did the man in the case wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 01:28 PM
1

It has nothing to do with nature. It's purely human conventional law… which happens to be sexist. Besides, arguing along the lines of "law should stick to the way nature would have it, without human choice to opt out" is fallacious: if you go down that road for the man, the same goes for the woman and there is no right to abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 01:24 PM
1

Except, it's not a matter of biology at all: the consequences of sex are NOT a baby, but merely a cell clump (unless you're an anti-abortionist who defines that cell clump as a human being and thus abortion as murder to be illegal). A baby on the other hand is the consequence of the decision (be it unilateral or together) for parenthood i.e. for that cell clump to become a child. Whoever makes that decision (be it unilateral or together) has to bear the consequences of that decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 06:47 AM
1

either both sides or neither, anything else is blatantly sexist discrimination
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 06:45 AM
1

Again: It's not about whether she has an "escape route" (sic, lol), but about the fact that the consequences of sex are NOT the baby, but merely a cell clump. The baby on the other hand is the consequence of the decision (be it unilateral or together) for parenthood i.e. for that cell clump to become a child. Whoever makes that decision (be it unilateral or together) has to bear the consequences of that decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 06:09 AM
1

that's just a variation on the old anti-abortionist "Just keep your legs shut if you don't want a baby", which would have to apply just the same then
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 06:04 AM
1

Just don't have PIV sex (…) that's just a variation on the old anti-abortionist "Just keep your legs shut if you don't want a baby".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:57 AM
1

If men could just walk away after a woman gave birth But that's not at all what the "financial abortion" model advocates. Quite to the contrary, what it advocates is that both get to decide for or against parenthood BEFORE the time limit for abortion, i.e. at a moment, where there is no child but only a cell clump that can still be aborted.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:52 AM
1

I'm totally pro-choice obviously not, given that you write: Responsibility was determined when the couple decided to have sex that's the old anti-abortionist "keep your legs shut if you don't want a baby" for women as well, unless you are a hypocrite. Moreover, the consequences of sex are NOT the baby, but merely a cell clump. The baby on the other hand is the consequence of the decision (be it unilateral or together) for parenthood i.e. for that cell clump to become a child. Whoever makes that …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:43 AM
2

Independently of who gets to make the decision, there is no child (but only a cell clump) at the moment where the decision for or against parenthood is made (that is: before the date limit for abortion). The concept of financial abortion is basically just that whoever (unilaterally or together) makes the decision for that cell clump to become a child has the financial responsibility for the consequences of that decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:35 AM
2

I'm all with you about gender equality and the necessity to give both sides the option to opt out… That being said, I don't see that as having anything to do with "neoliberal" vs others. And for that matter, "neoliberal" once (84 years ago) had a an actual meaning, but has since become such a totally overstretched, watered down word with such a myriad of totally diverging meanings (mostly dependent on what type of freedom the person using that term rejects) that it means nothing any more.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:31 AM
0

if not, then men shouldn't have equal financial responsibility for the decision either. Whoever makes the decision about whether the cell clump is to become a baby or not gets to shoulder the responsibility for that decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:03 AM
1

Actually, Chapelle didn't say "deadbeat" but: "If you can kill this motherfucker, then I can at least abandon ‘em. It’s my money, my choice". And for that matter, if (as the financial abortion model wants) the man gets to decide his choice for or against parenthood before the time limit for abortion, it's not even a question of abandoning a child because there is no child, only a cell clump. Whether that cell clump becomes a baby or not is the result of the decision for or against it made by… ye…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 04:58 AM
1

So, assuming you're not a hypocrite, you're either an anti-abortionist ("pro-lifer") who tells women as well they shouldn't have had sex if they hadn't wanted a baby… or you accept that whoever makes the unilateral decision for parenthood also has the unilateral responsibility for the financial consequences of that decision. That's what the "driver's seat" entails: the driver is responsible for their driving.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 04:52 AM
2

He can decide if he wants to be a parent or not, but that doesn’t stop the child from existing again: the decision is to be made at a time where there is no child. All there is, is a clump of cells. If you consider that a child, then you're an anti-abortionist who considers abortion murder. And if not, whoever gets to decide (be it alone or together) what is to happen with that cell clump has the responsibility (alone or together, depending on who decided) for that decision. If a woman doesn’t f…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 12:42 AM
5

So, assuming you're not a hypocrite, you're an anti-abortionist ("pro-lifer") who tells women as well they shouldn't have had sex if they hadn't wanted a baby…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 12:05 AM
3

so you're either one of those anti-abortionists (who want to ban abortion)… or a hypocrite (who wants only one side to "take accontability" in that sense of not having any opt-out from parenthood).
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 11:58 PM
1

so there are 2 solutions that are consistent: either you allow both sides to decide for or against parenthood within the timeframe for an abortion or you go with the old tradcon "you shouldn't have sex if you don't want the baby" for both sides i.e. no abortion
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 11:57 PM
2

that's just the old tradcon argument against abortion. It's not an argument against sexist discrimination.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 11:52 PM
1

because you literally don’t have as many reproductive responsibilities the woman doesn't have higher responsibility. She can choose if she wants to take up responsibility or not and can abort or give the child for adoption. Trying to deprive the man of the right to choose (at the same time as the woman) for or against parenthood comes down to the tradcon-religious "why did you even have sex if you don't want a child?" argument against abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 11:47 PM
2

Opting out of motherhood via abortion is not equivalent to opting out of fatherhood by neglecting a living child There is no living child at the moment (still well within the time window for a possible abortion) at which the man gets to decide like the woman whether or not he agrees to be a parent. Arguing that there is would logically comes down to the tradcon-religious view that abortion is murder and has therefore to be made illegal.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 11:41 PM
1

bringing up the taxpayer may (or may not) be an argument for making the right to decide for bringing a child to birth dependent on the financial means to shoulder the financial consequences of that decision… but it's certainly not an argument against the the principle that whoever got to make that decision for parenthood be those (or, in the case of an unilateral decision: the one) to shoulder the financial consequences for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 11:18 PM
-1

“Simping” isn’t a new trend just because it had a new name What old name was there that "simping" is a new synonym of? edit: whoever downvotes such a simple open question for a word (currently at -1) should really question their own motivations and behavior… and read the rules of this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/22 01:38 AM
1

Not sure about that. Like Weird Al so nicely put it in his "Craigslist" song: Well, we shared a quick glance … Saturday at the mall I never took a chance … Never approached you at all You were a blonde half-Asian with a bad case of gas I was wearin' red Speedos and a hockey mask Come on, let's find that love connection that we missed On Craigslist!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/22 04:19 PM
3

what nursing school still teaches shit that has been retracted for major errors?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/22 08:09 PM
7

but you apparently can't, given that you still didn't get it was retracted due to major errors
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/22 08:08 PM
10

Why? can you really not see within the newer waves (3,4) of feminists a large and loud (though hopefully minoritary) subset who aren't really about gender equality any more (which earlier waves fought for) but way beyond that are driven by sexist hatred against men? And if you aren't that blind: can you really not understand why a man wouldn't want one of those as a partner?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/22 02:03 PM
1

The only type of people who care about “body count” are those who would want to lower their own (high) number. FTFY
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/22 02:44 AM
6

No they don't. And if they did, you'd have no problem providing dozens of links. What I see on this sub every day are people who point out that for their choice of a partner, promiscuity (including past promiscuity) is a disqualifying red flag… which is absolutely not the same as OPs lousy strawman attempt
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 05:53 PM
15

Notice how you are dishonestly shifting the goalposts to build a strawman here: But, in all seriousness, who would even want to be with a man that considers your only value to be how close to a virgin you are Nobody said that. When people with a restricted sociosexual orientation say that for their selection of a partner, a promiscuous past is a disqualifying red flag, that does NOT in any way mean what you absurdly try to twist it to. If you really don't get the difference that makes your kind …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 04:02 PM
1

People caring about body count are either insecure or I experienced That's a total bullshit strawman projection… and - just like pretty much every attempt to absurdly throw in "insecure" into the context of rejection because of a high n-count, a ridiculous attempt at an inversion: Insecurity is when someone has doubts about their OWN capabilities to fulfill the criteria of the OTHER side. Conversely, being careful about whether the OTHER side matches one's OWN criteria isn't "insecure" (sic) but…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 06:23 AM
5

while I don't care about such online dating apps myself, I've heard and read that exact same thing more often by men about women in such contexts. Maybe it's just a general and gender-independent trait that the majority of people will not entertain the conversation, even with open ended conversation starters.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/22 01:23 AM
2

all they have to do is wait it out because it’s unsustainable There are lot of things that are "unsustainable" in the long term but take far longer to end than any timeframe short enough to make sense to just "wait it out".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/22 02:05 PM
2

I don't see that happening here. What I do see is the opposite direction: taking study-backed principles that generally apply to subsequent marriages and applying them to the more specific subcase of rebound marriages. Which seems logically fine, given that rebound marriages are a subtype of subsequent marriages (and thus, what generally is true for subsequent marriages would in particular be applicable to rebound marriages). Of course, leaving it at that ignores any more specific failure factor…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 10:25 PM
1

the term "rebound" (used more often for relationships and sex than for marriage) doesn't merely mean any marriage/relationship/sex happening any time after a former marriage/relationship ended, but specifically the case where the timespan between the two is seen as waaay too short to emotionally get over the first one and/or to really know the new partner, and where the motivation for the too quickly engaged new marriage/relationship/sex is seen as being an impulsive emotional coping mechanism f…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 08:05 PM
7

hookup culture started long before online dating became a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 08:18 PM
2

during the process of creating a discord account, in the "verification" steps, it first asks me for an email and then for phone number… and doesn't let me continue without.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/22 03:29 PM
2

is there a way to make a discord account without giving them a phone number? Cause If not, that disqualifies them for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/22 08:51 PM
1

While I've seen that happen often enough… here's something better than writing out boring anecdotes: The funniest classic video on this subject.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/22 03:40 AM
3

For as much as I've seen reasons mentioned in a number of discussions about kink statistics, they were usually based on evo-psych. That being said, I never bothered to research the causes in detail myself, given that this problem is of no personal concern to me, being a dominant hetero man myself and thus neither a part of nor attracted to either of these two subgroups.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 03:34 PM
11

Without any judgement: such a subset of men does exist but is a minority… and most of them are quite out of luck because the minority proportion of women who would be a complementary match for their particular taste is even far smaller.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 02:50 PM
2

Assault, rape, murder, harassment, etc isn’t done by a tiny amount of men. You really can't stop doing again the exact same hateful marginal-minority-to-whole-group projection of prejudice described in my last comment, eh? Again: that's exactly like saying murders aren't done by a tiny AMOUNT of black people. What's relevant for any attempt to generalize is the PROPORTION, not the ABSOLUTE AMOUNT (number). The fact that a minuscule marginal minority of an enormous group can be more than a tiny A…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 08:09 PM
1

Your classicism is showing without taking any sides here, just a detail: classicism is something totally different. Given the context, you likely meant classism
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 01:13 AM
4

I just read the comment you linked… and you didn't address anything about the similar problem of hateful generalization, and in particular totally failed to show how it would NOT be the same. It's the same scheme one can also find for many other such projective generalizations of misdeeds of a ridiculously small non-representative minority of a group onto the whole group, used as a pseudo-reason for hateful prejudice throughout history, against e.g. sinti/roma, jews, homosexuals, black people, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 12:07 AM
1

Is it fair to notice a pattern that they’re all male? same reasoning as racists wanting to see a "pattern" in the statistically much higher homicide and crime rate committed by black people. The truth is: the percentage of killers is so neglectibly small among both men and women, among both black and white people is so ridiculously small and non-representative that trying to frame the gender or the race as a "pattern" just because of a high relative difference between the ridiculously small resp…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 11:49 PM
2

Have any of the men in here ever had a good relationship? that question sounds, in the context, as if you (oddly) believed OP was a man
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 11:17 AM
2

While I disagree with OP, you're not having sex with your boss. The key criterion that differentiates prostitution from other work-for-money agreements is that in the case of prostitution it's specifically sex-for-money.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 11:07 AM
2

it seems they even made "staring" illegal in the uk
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 10:45 AM
1

without taking any sides here, I'd just point out that the mere fact that there may be a sufficient number of single people in the 4-and-below range on both sides doesn't invalidate OPs idea… as the latter is basically pointing out an extreme disparity between both sides (including the 4-and-below crowd) in their respective willingness to consider partnering up with someone 4-and-below. If the 4-and-below people on one side are willing and those on the other side are not, the fact that there are…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 10:21 AM
4

if you hope not, then why didn't you already break up?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/22 01:42 AM
6

He has to take responsibility for this though, it's on him that's kinda like saying of a female rape victim that she shouldn't have walked outside alone at night wearing a mini skirt. Could he have avoided this by being more cautious? Sure. Should we teach men (and women) to take their precautions to not become victims of shitty people? Sure. Doesn't change the fact that he's the victim here. The fact that he wasn't careful enough doesn't change the fact that the blame is not "on him" for what o…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/22 04:33 PM
3

Not every man cares about body count Indeed, not every man. Specifically: while men with a restricted sociosexual orientation (i.e. LTR-oriented men) do care about it, men with a loose sociosexual orientation don't give a shit about it… that is, as long as it's just for casual sex. As for "insecure": that's rather ironic. Insecurity is the irrational fear that oneself might not be able to fulfill the criteria of the other side (e.g. because one has a high n-count and realizes a bit too late that…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/22 05:08 AM
3

Men only care about N-count for LTR, not for casual sex. And that goes quite independently of their sociosexual orientation, given that men with a restricted sociosexual orientation don't engage in casual sex to begin with (so they care about filtering out high n-count women right away) whereas men with a loose sociosexual orientation will happily fuck promiscuous women… but rarely LTR them (let alone marry them) either. So the effect of the increasing n-count of women in the wake of sexual "lib…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/22 02:20 AM
3

Whoever invites pays that's the euphemistic hypocrite version of the sexist old "the man should always pay" … at least unless you initiate and invite in at least 50% of the cases, from the beginning… which I kinda strongly doubt.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/22 01:01 PM
2

I'm not pretending that there couldn't also be some people out there with a different reason (be it "really insecure" or any other possibility) for why they care about N-count. I'm certain they exist. I'm merely remarking on the fact that: for the overwhelming majority of LTR-oriented men who as such care about N-count, it has nothing to do with insecurity (i.e. the irrational fear that oneself might not be able to fulfill the criteria of the other side) but with with rational risk assessment (i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/22 09:56 AM
2

Independently of the double standard you mention, I'd point out that it's plausible that a lot of those women who want a man who does NOT have a high N-count do so for similar reasons to LTR-oriented men who don't want high N-count women, which for most has nothing to do with insecurity or confidence issues but with rational risk assessment (just like a car insurance prefers people without an extensive accident history): a high N count is the strongest correlative indicator of the risk of just b…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/22 09:29 AM
3

can't speak for men who feel "challenged" by that, but as an LTR-oriented guy with a restricted sociosexual orientation, I do care about N-count, for completely different reasons: wanting someone with the same values and sociosexual orientation as me and also because it's the number one indicator for the risk of being just the N+1 between N and N+2. It's basic rational risk assessment, just like a car insurance company will be interested in knowing your accident history in order to evaluate the …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/22 05:04 PM
2

In a country that even had a "Dick" for Vice President (under Dubbya Bush), there might not be any swearwords left.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/22 04:49 PM
1

no only. It also did great damage to the relationship possibilities for all men with a restricted sociosexual orientation (including top 10%). Unlike the bottom of the barrel, our problem with casual sex / hookup culture is not that we would have problems attracting women or getting a relationship with them, but that casual sex and hookup culture have had a huge negative impact on the proportion of women that are viable quality partners for a long-term relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/22 04:42 PM
3

Men generally don't want a long-term relationship with a promiscuous woman (because they consider her to not be viable partner for a long-term relationship). That's largely independent of the sociosexual orientation of the man (though men with a loose sociosexual orientation may be less strict about it than men with a restricted sociosexual orientation). those men who are into casual sex (i.e. loose sociosexual orientation) typically don't mind having casual sex with a woman they consider a "slu…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/22 04:17 PM
3

Another much bigger factor fucking up the British economy long term is the Brexit.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/22 03:50 PM
1

(…) & intelligence are traits of the so called “high quality man” as opposed to the FDS gutter kween concept of a "high VALUE man"… which has to be extremely stupid, to the point of accepting to be parasitically used as an ATM. The dilemma of course is that such an extreme lack of intelligence rarely correlates with having money.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/22 11:17 AM
2

Much as I disagree with TRP, it doesn't come close to being the male equivalent to FDS. In comparison, TRP is way more focused on improving their odds by self-improvement (… even if one doesn't agree with what they believe to be the most relevant ways to do so e.g. lifting and getting wealthy) whereas the concept of self-improvement is totally foreign to FDS, which (aside of desperate parasitic and transactional ideas on how to find a john who would be stupid enough to pay for everything) is muc…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/22 06:13 AM
-1

There isn't a jury of women in the world who would have convicted you of strangling the sonofabitch! If that is true, it reflects very badly on women and their notion of "justice". I mean: much as I despise laziness (independently of the gender of the lazy person staying at home doing little or nothing while the other one is working), the only thing that such laziness would justify a partner to do is breaking up, whereas the idea that laziness would justify strangulation or any other form of mur…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/22 03:15 AM
2

lol. Next step: "I thought it only counts if the sex happened in your common bed at home (and only if you live together), not in a car or hotel or wherever else…"
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/22 05:42 PM
1

If I wasn't an agnostic atheist, I might be tempted to believe that the old testament god would punish people (optionally by proxy, as it loves to do according to the Bible) for their "sins" on PPD: those guilty of misogynist posts/comments would see their partner or their son's partner turn into an ideological feminist first… and then (if they don't repent) into a full-blown man-hating pinkpill radfem or an FDS-ish gold digger. those guilty of misandrist posts/comments would see their partner o…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/22 05:03 PM
1

because women have the sole power to decide, unilaterally, whether a pregnancy will lead to a childbirth or not. Consequently: if he wants a child and she doesn't, there is no childbirth if she wants a child and he doesn't, there is a childbirth hence, there are more (actually born) children in a single mom configuration (which is typically what the second case leads to) than in a single dad configuration. What also plays a lot into this is that baby fever is enormously more common among women (…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 07:45 PM
0

what's ridiculous about "n count" ? it's a concise and specific term for a relevant measure. The fact that the etymology is uncertain doesn't matter. If it did, we'd have to ditch thousands of words from the English language (and most other languages).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 07:38 PM
3

in my experience, aesthetic norms (especially when it comes to makeup) largely correlate with class: the higher the class, the less makeup women put on and the more the aesthetic is one of classic understatement. Conversely, the lower the class, the more you see makeup, flashy and trashy presentation and long fake witch-style nails.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 02:00 PM
2

n is just the total count i.e. number of sexual partners. The etymology is unclear (and possibly a mix of several). The most plausible candidates: people with a scientific background are used to "n" being used as the most common name for an integer variable in formulae, especially in situations where there is some operation (e.g. sum) over indexed elements of a set, in which case n is typically used as the variable for the biggest index or the total count of elements of the set. In statistics, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 02:43 AM
40

While I, being of the purely monogamous "restricted sociosexual orientation" type, find the concept of "open relationships" disgusting and consider even bringing up the suggestion of it in a relationship as a disqualifying red flag (i.e. instant dump) and agree with you that they are destined to fail… … the story you imagined for your OP doesn't in any way correspond to the cases I see. Quite to the contrary, it seems to pretty much always be the woman bringing up the idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/22 03:06 PM
1

Men who embrace the concept of financial abortion believe that responsibility only belongs to women and not to them What an absurd strawman. That's just false. You apparently haven't read what I just wrote. Again: quite to the contrary, we believe that Responsibility belongs equally to those sides that decide for the outcome, and I explained all the cases of decision and outcome. Decision refers to the choice to have sex, not the decision to be a parent. If you go down that route, shifting the d…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/22 12:36 AM
0

In this day and age, aside from the fact that I wouldn't bet my life on a prenup that can be thrown out at the whim of a family/divorce court judge, I'd even say that marriage is inherently foolish and pointless per se. And I say that as an LTR-oriented person. There is absolutely no need any more for a threesome with the state, and the disadvantages far outweigh the few positive aspects.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 05:43 PM
0

that formulation looks looks like a false dichotomy: as if the only alternative to traditionality was transactionality.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 05:29 PM
3

Both genders need to grow up and take care of their child. …if they both choose to bring a child into the world, then indeed they should both take care of it. Choice isn't the issue. The issue is responsibility. The point is: responsibility for the consequences of a decision COMES FROM AND WITH THE DECISION that leads to it. Men need to stop thinking that responsibility only belongs to women and not to them. "Men" don't think that. Quite to the contrary: Responsibility belongs equally to those s…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 03:14 PM
1

Apparently, there was just a misunderstanding about what was meant with "procedure"… Financial abortion is about the financial procedures in consequence of her unilateral choice to bring a child into the world against not only against his will but also against any financial responsibility. It's not about the cost of the medical abortion procedure if she agrees to one. As far as the latter goes, I don't see any man who wouldn't - in the case where she would want to enforce a child birth against h…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 02:28 PM
4

The concept of financial abortion is a absolute shame. Men need to grow up and take care of their children. In logical consequence, that's more of an argument against abortion (Women need to grow up and take care of their children) than against financial abortion, given that a child being born despite the choice of abortion is necessarily the choice of the mother, not of the father. If it's her UNILATERAL decision against the will of the man, then it's her unilateral responsibility and SHE needs…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 01:24 PM
1

only allow a man to guarantee parental surrender if he meets certain conditions. For example, he should be financially responsible for the procedure That kind of conditional restrictions on financial abortion seems absurd to me. Quite to the opposite, it's having a child that should be contingent on being financially responsible.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 01:16 PM
1

Lots of really shitty advice in there. Quite to the opposite: The whole princess sydrome and transactional shit (act like a hoe: look for a john and make him pay) are precisely among the biggest red flags that LTR-oriented men use to weed out women with a mentality that isn't LTR compatible. Conversely, the guys who will play along with such games are precisely the guys (e.g. john mentality) that aren't LTR compatible.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 05:14 AM
-1

Victim blaming galore
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 05:04 AM
6

SOME feminists would. But yeah, there are lots who wouldn't, and that's no surprise either, because feminism per se isn't at all about equality (except cherry-picking when it suits women) but about enforcing what seems (at least from an immediate perspective) most advantageous for women. Striving for equality on the other hand is called egalitarianism, which (while having overlaps with feminism in some areas) isn't the same at all, as it equally cares about correcting the inequalities where men …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/22 03:26 PM
5

nonsense. The opposite is true: the mindset that would have one side pay all unilaterally is the transactional mindset. The archetypes for such a mindset are a hooker on the side expecting payment and a john on the side expecting to pay full. If you set the expectation for a john, then that's what you get. A john isn't "serious bout her".
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/22 03:14 PM
9

Can't speak for this sub (I'm just lurking on the rare occasion, for the comedy) and personally I don't hate anyone, but I can't help remarking on the irony of someone oddly asking such questions right under the dating profile of a woman who quite explicitly writes in it that she doesn't want any single dad… even though she herself is a single mom of 6(!). Maybe you should ask her. I mean, if even single moms themselves reject considering other single parents as potential partners (and while thi…
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen05/05/22 06:20 AM
1

even though I'm vaccinated, I have to say: It's not at all the same: There's a huge difference between a vaccine - where something is injected into your body and people might therefore understandably be afraid of possible risks and side effects - vs a test, where there is absolutely none of those risks.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/22 08:19 PM
1

/s
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/22 08:00 PM
1

The potential tax advantage (e.g. joint taxation and gifts) is actually the only point that can't equally be achieved without marriage, and even that potential advantage is moot (even aside the fact that it wouldn't balance the long list of much bigger disadvantages anyways): it's only even a relevant advantage in the case where there is a huge financial disparity (e.g. her earning much less than him)… which happens to be exactly the worst case risk scenario for him to lose a huge part of his we…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/22 07:54 PM
1

the video style kinda reeminds me of Behemoth - Bartzabel
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 05:47 PM
5

The average number of self-reported lifetime partners. It's a well known problem for such comparisons that women tend to strongly diminish their number (with high discrepancies in the numbers between simple question forms and being asked in a lie-detector situation) while men do not or even, if anything, would tend to slightly inflate theirs. also, as someone else already pointed out, the statistical variance is much higher in the numbers of men
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 03:03 PM
1

he seems super intelligent to put it in his own words: yo, I ain't stupid… I just dupe it
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 04:49 AM
-2

suuure
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/22 02:43 AM
1

that's not thicc, it's just obese. I had to chuckle reading that. From a continental European perspective, where the obesity scourge is (still) not nearly as prevalent as in the USA and consequently fat euphemisms like "thicc" and the corresponding marketing aren't either… the idea of seeing a relevant conceptual difference between "thicc" and "obese" seems kinda… odd, i.e. what is presented as "thicc" in the USA is already well within the range of what's categorized as "obese" here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/22 11:41 PM
2

much as I despise the stereotypical "incels" (that is, those who aren't merely incels in the original sense of the term that referred quite generally to involuntary celibates but instead fit the later stereotype of the bitter hateful sexist subtype), it would be kinda absurd to project onto incels as a group the statistically unrepresentative crimes commited by an individual. With that kind of rhetoric, we could just as well project the blame for the crimes of individuals onto all men, all women…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/22 10:40 PM
1

Food Digger Strategy
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/22 02:30 PM
1

here's the definition, from the "list of commonly used terms and acronyms" linked in the sidebar
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/22 02:22 PM
2

"start infiltrating this sub" ? They have been infiltrating PPD for as long as they existed. In fact, PPD was the #1 overlap subreddit for users of the fds sub. And as far as picking fights goes: it didn't look like they were targetting "incel/mgtow leftovers" but rather anyone who isn't aligned with the hateful, toxic, parasitic and sexist ideology of fds. In fact, fds are pretty much the mirrored female dumpster kween version of what hateful incels are on the male side.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/22 02:15 PM
3

Food Digger Strategy
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/22 05:31 AM
1

Actually the consequences are disproportionally far MORE severe for men than for women: A woman always knows that the child resulting from a pregnancy is hers and never has the risk of being fraudulently tricked into raising a child that is not her own. As opposed to the man who has that risk. And: Women have the UNILATERAL option of abortion, which allows them UNILATERALLY not only to avert the risk of having a child unwanted by herself but also, in the case of a pregnancy (e.g. in case of a fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/22 05:06 PM
2

Just like among women, there are differences among men when it comes to sociosexual orientation (restricted/LTR-oriented vs loose/promiscuous). Those men who complain about not getting sex quickly are typically those with a more loose/promiscuous sociosexual orientation, whereas those who don't want slutty / promiscuous / high n-count women are typically those with a more restricted (LTR-oriented) sociosexual orientation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/22 07:18 AM
1

Most states in the US dont have common law. Actually, all states in the US have common law, except for Louisiana (which only partially has common law and also has significant parts of its legal system that are based on Civil Law instead). What you probably meant is that most states in the US these days don't have any more what is referred to as "common-law marriage", i.e. unregistered marriage by habit and repute.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/22 04:40 PM
3

You still don't get it but confuse love with casual "in heat" where you don't need to care about being selective… unlike people who actually want a lasting relationship with an individual. So no, the one not caring about the individual here is you. And the next time you find yourself being just casual fuck N+1 and things going nowhere, you can think about your mistake. But then again, the thing is: you just being notch N+1 wouldn't count as a mistake for you because you apparently aren't looking…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 08:51 PM
6

The irony of you trying to lecture someone about "ability to love" after writing (quote): If she's in heat and looking at you, does it matter? LOL. Anyways, your attempt to shift the problem source is absurd. It's not MY ability to love a person with a high N-count but THEIRS that is in question when it comes to THEIR N-count: If the person has a track record of promiscuity and/or of changing partners often (for as much as the word "partners" even makes sense in that case), then it does absolute…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 03:09 PM
12

Depends: to whom? To those looking for a LTR partner: yes, the N count does matter. To those only looking for casual sex: no, apparently it doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 01:21 PM
12

what's hypocritical about acknowledging that the kind of situation a person is in (and is totally willing to accept on the other side as well) is not 100% ideal but instead realistically does come with a certain set of problems/complications?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 03:56 AM
2

While I would agree that within the vast set of things associated with the "BDSM" acronym there also exists a subset for which "the sexual equivalent of a renaissance festival/LARP" would be a rather fitting description (e.g. among those who seek external attention with it or want it to be some kind of social "scene" thing rather than a part of a couples private life)… … it wouldn't make sense to me to see that as being representative of BDSM itself. Also: the fact that in a mismatched (kinky vs…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 03:41 AM
3

That's what's marriage is-- an external barrier to keep people from abandoning each other without consequences The thing is: In the old days (not that those didn't also suck, though in other ways) it used to be that the consequences would be negative for both sides. Now it's rather one-sided: negative for one side and positive (i.e. a financial incentive) for the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 01:04 PM
3

non sequitur. If the man stands to lose half his assets upon divorce and the woman on the other hand has a financial incentive to file for divorce, then who of the two is most likely to file for divorce - even in the case where the woman becomes intolerable… actually: especially in that case?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 12:00 PM
3

Such a contract between two adults without any forced threesome with the state would indeed be the option that makes most sense… if you could expect that contract to be what decides how things go if the couple doesn't work out. Unfortunately, that's not always the case: at least depending on the situation (e.g. if kids come into the picture), the state (via the biased family court system) will still just throw your contract (or at least, the relevant parts of it) out of the window and force thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 11:56 AM
1

edit: you deleting and replacing your original comment after I answered to it instead of replying is a rather blatantly dishonest way of discussing (or rather: of trying to avert the critical discussion about the nonsense you wrote and are so ashamed that you deleted it). I'll just leave my original answer below, even though you deleted the absurdity you wrote before and which it referred to… not that what you wrote now would be much better. Shame on you for resorting to such lame and dishonest …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 11:31 AM
1

No, the key characteristic that makes a relationship transactional is that it is based on a transaction… and that has absolutely nothing to do with whether "the parties perceive there to be a detriment to themselves": if for example a prostitute loves her sex work like a scuba instructor or an aerobatics pilot love theirs, getting money for their job while living by the old adage "Do what you love, and you’ll never work another day in your life", that doesn't in any way change the fact that what…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 03:04 AM
1

For a more detailed explanation of the Hot/Crazy Matrix/Scale/Chart: this classic video
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/22 11:06 PM
1

so you admit there's no reason for a woman to object to the fact that if she does act like that the relationship is over.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/21 12:39 AM
0

doing things (…) that seem traditionally girly. Spa days, getting our nails done, pedicures, makeup, shopping is that feminine or consumerism?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/21 11:27 PM
1

LOL
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/21 12:14 AM
3

looks more like you are totally blind to the side of how society treated promiscuous men back in those days.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/21 02:45 AM
3

the discussion is not about voting rights or workplace glass ceilings (or other things where women actually had more restrictions) but about promiscuity. Marriage was an institution both sides were equally bound by. and once it fell, it fell for both sides.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/21 02:36 AM
2

Women always had to put up with men being promiscuous. Not any more than men. Men had the same societal restrictions as women when it comes to promiscuity. Both in marriage (at the time when that was the normal model) and afterwards. Life’s tough for the insecure Nothing to do with insecurity though. Insecurity is when someone is afraid that THEIR OWN characteristics (e.g. their own promiscuity) wouldn't meet the criteria of the other side. The opposite, i.e. when people rationally assess the ri…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/21 02:25 AM
6

wut? pretty much all studies on the factors linked to infidelity show that the risk of infidelity is strongly linked to the number of sex partners before marriage. Have a look at this for example
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/21 12:38 AM
-1

Only half of that is true, specifically: the first part is true: transactionally minded women who expect men to pay on the first date, are indeed prostitutes - or (to be more specific, as someone else ITT pointed out) escorts, though that is really just a euphemism for a subset type of prostitutes. BUT: for one thing, the corollary is just as true: transactionally minded men who are stupid enough to pay women some advantage (e.g. money, dinner, gifts) expecting sex (or escort time or any other f…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/21 12:55 AM
2

only if they are atheists too (i.e. agnostic atheists). Agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive but compatible and totally independent of each other: agnostic: holding the (epistemological) position that KNOWLEDGE about the existence or inexistence of gods is inattainable, at least for us and for now. atheist: not holding any BELIEF in any god (which btw does not imply holding a belief in the inexistence of gods… those, so-called positive atheists, are only a minority subset of atheist…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/21 10:20 PM
2

Can't speak for them, but how about: that if that's true your last comment about "if my date…" is meaningless vapour. Unless of course you're some kind of poly "married but dating other people anyways" person… which would, like promiscuity, precisely fall under the category of behaviors/risks that the question about N-count, among other things, is assessing.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/21 03:10 AM
2

That's absurd. Insecurity is when someone is afraid that THEIR OWN characteristics (e.g. their own promiscuity) wouldn't meet the criteria of the other side. The opposite, i.e. when people rationally assess the risk that the OTHER SIDE doesn't meet one's own criteria… that's not insecurity but just sound and rational risk assessment. The exact same rational risk assessment which is why a car insurance wants to know about your car accidents in order to determine the risk of future accidents. What…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/21 02:45 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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