TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Doldenberg Archive

View 1 posts and 299 comments by Doldenberg 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)
3

Doldenberg/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 04:18 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

How dare I give women the right to decide whether they want to have sex or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 07:37 PM
0

Sure. When have you stopped beating yours?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 06:54 PM
0

I call bullshit. If it's abuse when husband applies pressure because he wants sex; then it's abusive for a wife to apply pressure through denial of sex. In fact, a wife's denial of sex is akin to torture and torment. That's a total non sequitur.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 06:06 PM
0

It isn't "okay", because it still points at a deeply dysfunctional relationship. But it's not abuse, unlike pressuring someone into sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 05:00 PM
1

Dude, if you try to quote mine second wave feminists, at least do so thoroughly enough to not fall for one of the most well known falsely attributed quotes ever. It has been said before, it's really easy to to find dumb things said by second wave feminists. It's strange that anti-feminists somehow still have to resort to falsely attributed ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 04:33 PM
0

Do they pressure them into sex with that? Then it's abuse too.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 04:22 PM
-1

I'm sorry, I can't find that in the feminist bible. Is it before or after the chapter on ritual castration?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 04:12 PM
0

I think the only person far gone are here because you evidently believe that "wanting" and "pressuring" are the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 04:10 PM
-1

Again, the important part here is that he wants sex, not that he wants anything in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 03:59 PM
-1

But those aren't feminist ideas, that's the fucking point. The whole "never leave a relationship" is the epitome of traditional upbringing. It was feminists that made no fault divorce possible, that lifted the taboo on sex outside marriage, and so on and so forth. And that's what I don't get here. Lots of Terpers have evidently been brought up in very strict, traditional households. And now they follow a philosophy that, well, just does the same thing again, just even more strict. How can you se…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 03:57 PM
-1

Nope. A virgin is someone who hasn't had sex. An incel is someone who can't have sex. ...wherein "not being able to have sex" is defined by not having had sex so far, as in, being a virgin. It's like calling yourself immortal because you haven't died so far. That's what pseudo-incel women do and yes, those always have options. On the other hand, it's completely unfair to say that incel men are discounting some options. Maybe a few of them are, but most men are honest about what they can get and …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:28 PM
0

How exactly has society taught you the opposite of all the stuff above?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:08 PM
0

I think it depends. Is any denial of sex abuse? No, in the same way that breaking up the relationship is not abuse. The problematic part is threatening something to pressure people into doing something. But I think not even that is strictly abuse by itself, although it is not a sign that the relationship is going well either. For example, if someone threatened to leave an alcoholic if they don't seek therapy for their addiction, I wouldn't call it abusive. What I do specifically consider abusive…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:07 PM
0

Mind to elaborate?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:01 PM
0

Have you ever noticed that TRP theory essentially boils down to assuming that the rest of the world consists of utter idiots when it comes to relationships and that no one ever gives any of that great advice? I mean, seriously, "don't be needy". "Don't think that she's the only one who will ever love you". "Get out of bad relationships". This isn't some huge fucking revelation. Society doesn't keep that a secret from people - you'll have a hard time finding someone who was genuinely taught throu…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:52 AM
1

I'm not making the "appeal to prostitutes". I'm not talking about "would". I'm talking about a man who OP explicitly tells us has had sex and somehow can still be considered incel because, well, fuck if I knew. (I also still don't see what is the "meaningful context" for incel here. Again, it's literally just "being a virgin while not having sworn sexual abstinence".)
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:48 AM
1

If you think that dread game is nothing but trying to be more attractive, why do you think TRP needs to establish it as a distinct concept with a specific definition going beyond "being attractive" and, most obviously, that particular name?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:25 AM
3

Well the traditional marriages answer was "Just rape her and don't give a fuck what she thinks" so I don't see how modern marriage can be any worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:23 AM
2

The point isn't the attractiveness though, it's the "hitting on other women and outright threatening to leave her" part. Simply leaving her is your personal decision. Threatening "Have sex with me or I'll leave you" is abusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 01:01 AM
3

I once got served at a bar later, privilege don't real. Seriously guys, you're your own parody by now.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 12:56 AM
-2

Actually, it's only fair trade tea and we mumble.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 12:52 AM
1

The problem with dread game is that it is not about actual choice though. "I choose to leave the relationship" isn't the primary goal, and "she might feel pressured to have more sex" isn't the side effect, it's actually the other way round. The explicit goal is to put pressure on your current partner, and that's the abusive part.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 12:48 AM
4

Would you not rather prefer for your wife to actually be into having sex with you and not merely go along with it due to fear of losing you?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 12:44 AM
-1

As someone has already replied to the post you linked to: Those are all reposted MRA talking points that have been sufficiently addressed a thousand times, I don't see why I need to do it another time. I agree with that poster: You just repost the same stuff over and over again like a creationist, sure that no one has ever found an answer to compelling criticism like "but the second law of thermodynamics".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 12:39 AM
0

Depends on how you define privilege. As I have pointed out in other threads, the third wave feminist definition of privilege increasingly acknowledges that privilege also means that one particular person can not fully understand the experiences another person makes due to their circumstances - so in that sense, privilege does actually go both ways. Apart from that though, it's still acknowledged that there is an established hierarchy - whites are privileged over blacks, able-bodied over disabled…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/15 12:33 AM
2

So, obviously, let her go on the fucking trip. I mean, asking her to cancel it or you will end it? Don't be a dick. Apart from that, as others have said, have a serious conversation about it. Long distance, breaking up? Whatever you want. Getting back together afterwards? Again, your choice. I don't know what I'd do because it very much depends on individual circumstances and I haven't be in such a situation myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 10:49 PM
1

Because every single human civilization had some sort of speech before it became that culturally distinct civilization. People didn't just emigrate from Africa still all grunting and then suddenly developed languages completely independently. Languages evolved from one another.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:19 PM
0

No no no, descriptor of ever single man as a privilege is ascribing attributes to AWALT as an individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:17 PM
8

Cis people have their own privilege, men have their own privilege, heterosexual people have their own privilege, white people have their own privilege. Combined, they have all those kinds of privileges, which is why we say that cis white heterosexual men are privileged - race, sexuality and gender are often combined like that because there are vast interactions between them, and because the people in power are often intersections of all of those things. I don't exactly see what racist or sexist …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:16 PM
1

The definition of "speaking" normally presumes the presence of languages though. Otherwise it's as you said, just vocal communication in general. No one answers "Yeah she cries" to "Does she speak yet?" when asked about their baby.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:11 PM
1

You seriously don't get it dude. You just whined that the only option for Asian men is "an autistic HB4 with busted teeth and face". And you wonder why women are repulsed by you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:06 PM
2

Speaking actually isn't biological. Making some kind of noise is, but the concept of languages is cultural.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:04 PM
4

Oh, pop music. The true mirror to the human mind. Just remember the rallying cry of Terpers around the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 09:02 PM
3

"Privilege" is a descriptor of men as a class, their status. "AWALT" is ascribing certain behavior to every single woman as an individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 08:50 PM
1

With that said, I think we can all agree that the term SMV (Sexual Market Value) is a bit retarded; like most PUA/TRP terms, it represents a very simple and obvious social reality. The problem is that all of PUA/TRP terms, it tries to package that very simple and obvious as some weirdly complex game. But the "sexual market" doesn't consist of carefully weighing how "Alpha" your personal manbeef is. It consists of "Do I want to fuck this dude or not?" The whole concept of "SMV" essentially presum…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 08:42 PM
2

Not only that, with TRP, you will also only have sex if you're Alpha, so everyone who has sex must be an Alpha. That's why whenever they hear of somebody having sex with no connection to TRP, he must be a "natural".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 08:36 PM
4

Women like attractive men? Well stop the presses! Truly, this is the kind of revelation you will only find on TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 08:33 PM
3

How common do you think harem style relationships actually are, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 08:21 PM
1

WHY AM I SINGLE THOUGH IT MUST BE MISANDRY
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 08:15 PM
9

Lets start by pointing out what others have pointed out already: You very clearly hold established, biased views already. Your whole concept of "SJWs" and "radical feminists" already shows that, not to mention how your present your "opponents" positions itself. So please don't mind that people will probably not see any point in trying to set the record straight because you seem very, very convinced of your position. Yet let me try to address some of your points anyway. First, let me say that of …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 07:34 PM
1

Lets start with the fact that the very word incel is very confusing. "Involuntary celibate" is an oxymoron, because celibacy is implicitly voluntary. If you simply don't have sex without having sworn to be celibate, you're merely a virgin. But "I'm a virgin" doesn't carry the same amount of self-pity, and asking "Do virgins exist" would obviously be a very dumb question. But we already know that manospherians and RedPillers love redefining stuff and making up words to support their ideology, so …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 06:08 PM
1

It literally makes getting sex easier... I'm not sure how you can keep saying it doesn't. The more people that are attracted to you means you're in a position to be more picky about the looks and personality of the person you have sex with. Only if you presume that the group of people attracted to you is somehow close to the average population. Yet we know that this is generally not the case with women getting swamped with proposals for sex. Take online dating messaging behavior, which TRP often…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 04:10 PM
1

Okay.. but you did literally just say "yes" that you were previously implying TRP men can't restrain themselves. That was my previous post: You implied RP men can't restrain themselves No. or that TRP says men can't restrain themselves Yes. Restrain themselves from doing what? Anything sexual. Above, it came up in response to my comment of thirst and wanting sex not being equal; so I assume that /u/PemBayliss wanted to imply that in fact, due to male sex drive, for men, not getting sex is indeed…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 03:21 PM
1

If 10 women come up to me and none of them are girls id have personally chosen, there are many benefits to this vs feeling invisible, starting with nothing, and having to initiate myself. The most major factor is that I know I am desired. This is flattering in itself. Yes, but "flattering" doesn't do anything for your options to have sex. It's also subjective, because while you may be flattered by being approached by random people, others may not. I know if I want to lower my standards I have ea…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 03:11 PM
1

I do see the difference, I'm asking why you think that all women fall into the "extremely popular" spectrum while men supposedly do not.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 02:59 PM
1

I don't think that the men at TRP can't restrain themselves. I've said that people on TRP will repeatedly make an argument that boils down to "men can't restrain themselves". I do not know why you try to pressure me into explaining an allegation I have never made.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 02:58 PM
1

That doesn't answer my question in any way. To say it with your words, so far, TRPs argument was always that women as a whole are like Brad Pitt, while men will have a much harder time to get sex. So far, no one has provided a single concise argument that this is actually the case; just more assertions how easy woman have it to get sex - which, as we have concluded now, have all been hyperbole.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 12:34 PM
1

You implied RP men can't restrain themselves No. or that TRP says men can't restrain themselves Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 12:30 PM
1

I don't believe you're so callous and heartless to actually follow through and be consistent with your logic, I assume you are just selectively applying it to sex for the sake of this argument No, I'm actually following through with that logic, as you might have noticed if you had actually read the argument. Whether you call it enjoyment or human contact, it remains a fact that those things can only have a positive effect when they're positive experiences by themselves; while with drinking, no m…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 12:28 PM
1

Okay. So again, women get turned down, men get turned down. Men can't have whatever sex they want, women can't. So can someone finally, clearly, and without hyperbole, explain what the huge difference between men and women is when it comes to looking for sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 01:53 AM
1

Nowhere, because I didn't say anything like that. I said that this is what the "sex drive" argument boils down to. I have no idea whether /u/PemBayliss has the sex drive he ascribes to all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 01:51 AM
1

Also, it was an analogy. The point of the comparison wasn't about life and death. You ignored the actual point I was making, which I even wrote out at the end if somehow it wasn't obvious No, I told you that the point you were making was idiotic exactly for the reason apparent in your comparison. Again, sex is purely for enjoyment. Which means that it is only good when you actually enjoy it. If you're at risk of dehydration, you will drink whatever is available, because whatever is available wil…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 01:48 AM
2

Yeah, sure, remember how former slaves said "Oh, I'm still oppressed but at least it isn't slavery, so I won't bother complaining"? That's probably why there was never another movement for civil rights. Because everyone was so thankful that at least slavery was over.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 12:55 AM
1

This article tells me that this particular woman has lots of sex. Good for her. I don't see how this is in any way relevant for the discussion though? Seriously, I just don't get RedPill logic. You set up some ridiculous absolute statement - no woman will ever go sexless - someone asks you for proof, you post an article "this woman has had sex". That's your proof. You think this is an argument supporting your position. You're so very sure of this being a compelling argument that you assume that …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 12:49 AM
1

"Male sex drive" is TRPs to-go excuse for everything. But somehow, men in the real world manage to restrain this supposedly insatiable hunger for sex. This whole "Oh, men are animals because testosterone" is the real misandry here.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 07:19 PM
0

Women get rejected too; but they are rejected far, far less often than men are. Yes, because our society traditionally expects men to do the asking, which means that obviously, they'll be rejected more often than women. And most women have more and better options than most men. Most men have few to no dating/sexual options. Since you asked me for sources for the claims you assumed I made, you can hopefully source those claims here that you actually made.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 07:16 PM
1

Okay, so either I take that as "Women get rejected too", in which case I might ask, how are they any different from men then; or I latch onto the "wait a few minutes" part, assume it to be your literal belief and can only ask, what the fuck is wrong with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 05:30 PM
1

The comparison primarily doesn't work because thirst and wanting sex are two vastly different things. If you don't drink, you die. If that's what's at stake, you will drink something even if you don't like the taste. Sex on the other hand isn't necessary to survive. No one ever got so horny that they fucked someone they didn't actually want to fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 05:28 PM
0

Okay. Please tell me how I am supposed to address such an utterly ridiculous belief. You honestly think no above average looking woman was ever rejected?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 05:06 PM
0

That people are interested in sex with you does not automatically mean that you're interested in sex with them, I really don't know whats so hard to understand about that. If people you aren't interested in are interested in you, it doesn't make getting sex any easier.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 05:04 PM
2

The original post literally includes this: to choose who to marry and who to have sex with ...and defends it. Do you seriously want to argue that the comparison is oh so very far fetched?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 11:17 AM
0

More like you have run out of arguments, but I look forward to you using the exact same argument in discussion with someone else as if it was never disputed. Goodbye.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 11:14 AM
2

First, I really don't know how often we need to point this out: You can't take "people are interested in sex with you" as "you have it easy to get sex". Second, do we somehow see this supposed fact, taken from online dating, mirrored in real life? Are 80% of men somehow single?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 11:13 AM
1

Okay, first let me say that your guess was false, second, let me reword it because you're technically right: It's not that I think that it's improbable that such a small percentage of the population - which I simply copied from the previous comment - might be "complete and utter romantic rejects". I think it's improbable that there is a major difference between the amount of men and women who are such.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 11:11 AM
4

They are saying there are literally tens of thousands of women who cannot generate any interest at all. None. Nada. I don't see anyone saying that - people say that many women can not actually find someone THEY want to have sex with who also wants to have sex with THEM. But there aren't tens of thousands of men generating zero interest either, so I don't see the point of the whole argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 02:01 AM
21

Do any black people feel distressed by the thought that abolition essentially lead to the destruction and the unhappiness of several white people? With civil rights and the black liberation, blacks were able to achieve certain "rights" (or whatever you call them) like being able to be politically active, to choose who to work for, to own property etc. but this essentially means that a significant amount of whites lost their primary source of income. In other words blacks don't have to depend on …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 01:46 AM
0

Okay, so now you're back at "there are people who want sex with women, therefore women have it easy getting sex". At which point we're back to "so do men". So if you can't finally show me proof that any woman can have sex with any man she wants to have sex with, I don't see what that great difference between men and women looking for sex is.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 12:42 AM
0

you clearly don't understand what incel means. Okay. Then define Incel and tell me why a woman can never be Incel. yes, the only thing stopping women from getting laid is high standards and competition from other women. put any man in a room with any woman who does not have a visible defect, and he will fuck her. That is a no, not a yes. You proclaimed that every woman can easily get fucked, now you proclaim that actually, there is a shitload of cases where she won't. its called prison So your I…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 09:37 PM
0

women can easily get laid by not being fat or old and wearing makeup. So then your claim that there are no incel women is evidently wrong. I might will also, just to be sure, ask: You genuinely believe that every woman can fuck every man she wants as long as she fits the criteria laid out above? seems like you don't understand testosterone. If testosterone was even half as strong as TRP pretends, we'd need to keep men in cattle pens because they'd be unable to operate in civilized society. not t…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 08:31 PM
0

not at all. she needs to be there, not be fat or old, and wear makeup. so many will be disappointed. Okay. So just you said that women have no problem getting sex, now suddenly they do. What's true? only for LTRs You want to tell me that the epitome of male attractiveness, the kind of person every Terper aims to be, will literally fuck anything with a vagina? That actually explains so much... boys play cops and robbers, girls play house. when boys change rules in cops and robbers, they make simp…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 08:04 PM
0

same thing. it takes 2 to tango. there are no involuntary celibate women. Okay. So you actually believe that every woman can have sex with any man she wants to have sex with? they get plenty of sex from them How? Don't Alphas have standards? nope. girls play "house" and boys hate this game. Okay, I can actually give you that, which is why I said "largely". But I don't see how playing "house" could be defined as manipulative, complex and with ever-changing rules. By that logic, every childrens ga…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 12:29 PM
1

men have much higher T, and thus are the ones who are "demanding" more sex while women "supply" it. on any given night, any woman who does not have a visible defect can go into a bar and get laid, guaranteed. That does still not say how women get sex easier, it simply says that men supposedly want sex more. It seems that your whole argument here is based on merely looking at how easy it would be to get sex with anyone, instead of how easy it is to get sex with a person you're actually attracted …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 12:21 AM
0

the vagina has to do with women being the bottleneck for reproduction, which causes society to create the pussy pass. That doesn't explain how women have it easier to get sex, that just tells us that women have slightly more control over reproduction. the history of emotional chess can never come from men, men are generally to direct and consistent. it comes from the incredibly toxic environment of young girls interacting with one another. You base that assumption on...?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 12:20 PM
0

Yes, we're on a debate board. And on this very board, you have just written a rant about "Marxist subversion" and "leftism" while accusing me of using "buzzwords". You have essentially said "studies don't count because people lie". You have written a ton of text about "emotional weaponry", "cognitive dissonance" and "solidifying power back into mens hands". By doing so, you have effectively repeated the argument brought forth by OP - "people hate us because we're right." You have done all this t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 10:53 PM
1

More like clashed. You seem to do this thing I've often seen when someone antropomorphizes an entire society and treats conflicting ideas within as hypocritical or paradoxical. ...how am I "anthropomorphizing" here? I have literally no idea what you mean here, sorry. doesn't mean that "civilization is good" and "civilization is bad" were somehow complementary ideas. What YOU are doing here is reducing complex ideas ad absurdum as to pretend that they're completely contradictory, and therefore ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 10:28 PM
0

They made the choice to reply with just a sassy condescending comment. Don't try to make it out like the OP is somehow not conducive to conversation and debate. But he is, that's the point. You say the argument here is "That TRP is generally despised by BP women because it allows men to play the relationship game at their level and strips them of the only real power they've had over men in relationships." That assertion is unfounded, so without that foundation, what the hell are you supposed to …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 09:19 PM
0

Aren't those completely opposite ideas? Also, Wikipedia says they did, in fact, appear one after the other. They overlapped to some extent. The important thing to consider here is that what we now consider to be certain "concepts" weren't suddenly invented - people just started naming existing societal trends. (Which didn't just suddenly stop to exist when some new trend was introduced; they often mixed.) So it is true that there were periods were there was more focus on glorifying primitivism, …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 07:49 PM
0

I never understood how people can be proud of ignoring what someone says simply because they use phrases you don't like.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 07:03 PM
1

Whether this is a "fact" and whether she pedestals men that way, depends on what exactly she means. Does she point out a mere empirical observation? Then no, she does not. Does she say "and therefore, men should do all the hard work"? Yeah, then she does pedestal them. Mind though that since pedestaling interacts with oppression dynamics, it's not actually that easy to define it equally for both sides. For example, if a black person says "Oh, those white people are so civilized!", they're not ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 06:56 PM
1

What would your idea of it be?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 01:20 PM
1

A woman has natural advantages that start with a vagina and history of playing emotional chess that men don't get until they are involved with women. So, would you mind explaining those two? For the first, obviously, how a vagina is an advantage when it comes to looking for sex. The second, how do women develop this sense if not through interacting with men?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 11:39 AM
1

If it was incorrect ineffective, TRP would have died a long time ago. Tell that to climate change deniers, anti-vaxxers, creationists and homeopaths.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 11:29 AM
1

The original argument is literally just an assertion of "our critics hate us because they're right". What, literally what could we possibly say to that except "no we don't". Consider that, if we do actually make an argument - for example, "no, we do not, we criticize TRP because it is literally misogynistic, as you can see in almost every post ever made on it" - the counterargument will only be "you're lying, to divert from the fact that I'm right about everything". Imagine if I said "TRP says e…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 11:27 AM
1

Yes, "We are proud of childishly ignoring criticism" seems like a good tenant for a self-improvement philosophy. What could be more manly than putting your fingers in your ears and screaming "LALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU".
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 11:18 AM
-3

Of course it is. People often mistake "pedestalizing" as "M'lady, what can I do for you?" and then acting like a total doormat. But that's not the only form of pedestalization; in fact, oppression generally goes hand in hand with pedestalization. Mind how the concept of the "noble savage" and "the white mans burden" happened around the same time, not after one another. In the same way, the oppression of women goes hand in hand with their pedestalization. Look at how aristocrats, and later the bo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/15 11:16 AM
1

Lets guess what those very women affected by this "problem" are probably thinking right now: Is it "Oh, my feeble female mind be damned, those whiny dudes on the Internet WERE right all along! I shouldn't have gotten that degree!"? I dare to say it's not. You see, when some people are confronted with having a hard time dating, they turn frenzied, and then turn to some weird online cult promising them easy solutions. Others, meanwhile, think "Meh, it will probably work out some way".
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 10:25 PM
0

Wah wah wah I don't know why people ask me to look up pretentious in the dictionary wah wah wah.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:41 PM
-1

I know it's in the bible, but that doesn't mean its part of what we normally call "hardline conservative Christianity". Why? There's no point debating with bigots. Oh aren't you fucking adorable. I love it when Terpers try showing their dominant site and end up looking like every other 14 year old debating on the Internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 02:31 PM
-1

Ah yes, because hardline conservative Christianity is all about doing that. Try harder.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 01:25 PM
-1

not in any way espouse hardline conservative Christianity Just, you know, the exact same standards for a marriage. Not because of the bible though! Just because of general idiocy! Totally different.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 12:33 AM
7

Every person will rationally with respect to their position in that evolutionary market and their OWN interests. That isn't even an actual sentence! There's no predicate in there!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 12:22 AM
3

The problems with subjective happiness ratings are well known. They're always distorted by relativism. For example, religious fundamentalists - especially women - rate their happiness higher then the general population. When leaving their communities though, they say that in retrospect, they weren't as happy as they say. Considering that traditional marriages are most prevalent in those communities, it isn't all that surprising that they state high subjective happiness. This is actually a genera…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/15 02:07 PM
1

...you know that "I don't think so, so you're wrong" isn't an actual argument, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/15 12:05 AM
2

Do you have any alternative explanation? Yes. SMV = Deciding whom to fuck. Hypergamy = Deciding whom to fuck. branch swinging = DECIDING WHOM TO FUCK. Sorry, this makes no sense. Oh no, reality doesn't confirm to my expectations! Betrayal!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/15 12:04 AM
2

...how about starting by not taking elements of RP ideology for granted here. You're talking about "SMV", "hypergamy" and "branch swinging" as if those were established facts of dating culture accept by everyone. b) Young people in general: Over half of the 18-30 market engages in hook-up culture. This would at least fit the AF model for 18-24s perfectly. Young people do engage in hookup culture, yes. That's the exact reason they normally don't use online dating, because this is centered around …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 08:40 PM
2

You're interpreting this from fem-centric frame where every man is Schrodinger's Rapist until her friends vet them out. No, I'm interpreting that from the frame centered around established sociological knowledge which tells us that young people value friendships more than relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 08:35 PM
1

Oh GOD YES, please. I'd especially like to see: Women only go for the top 20% of men, 80% of men are only good as Beta providers. The often claimed incredibly sluttiness of women. The prevalence of false rape accusations.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 02:34 AM
0

Has feminism every suggested that men want to be raped by high value women? No? Well, case closed I'd say.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 02:30 AM
10

Divorces were barely a thing in the 50's. Oh not this again. Divorces weren't rarer because everyone was so goddamn happy with their marriages. They were rarer because divorced women were shunned by society and economically bound to their men by the newly established single income household. This is a common talking point of reactionaries. So is "rape was rarer back then". It was likely not, it was simply underreported, and not legally recognized anyway. Marital rape has only been illegal since …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 02:23 AM
3

You will not believe it, but yeah, we actually got that, thank you for your concern. I mean, you can never know for sure with a man who has openly admitted that he is a rapist, but yeah, we got the general gist that there certainly was SOME part of satire here. We get it that a fair share of Roosh's users and authors are hateful pricks who like to act all edgy but probably don't pose such a great danger to society. Although, again, if any of them actually have sex, I don't doubt that they'd happ…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 02:05 AM
2

The exact term is "their friends would approve of". This implies general compatibility, not specifically the ability to "show off"; likely because at that age, friends are generally considered more important than romantic partners. Meaning that they wouldn't want their friends leaving them because they don't like their romantic partner. Also please stop the whole "mens extraordinary sex drive makes them do this and that".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 01:55 AM
2

The research in match.com's annual LoveGeist report sigh People, for the last time. Yes, actual statistics are better than pulling statistics completely out of your ass. But please, always, always, look out for the source and the demographic looked at. This statistic may give us a comparably broad outlook, but it is still limited to people dating online, specifically on match.com Same applies for the just as often shared statistics from OKCupidBlog, which, unsurprisingly, apply to users of OKCup…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 01:52 AM
1

I'm doing my best.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 01:45 AM
4

Roman/Christian chivalric patriarchy with enforced male resource monogamy has NO relationship to middle eastern mascularchies. That is so much implied /r/badhistory from the name alone, I don't even know whether I want to read the whole idiotic explanation of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/15 01:38 AM
10

I take it you don't see my two scenarios, the one involving Jim the unpaid worker, and Jim the unsexed pre-TRP'er, as analogous then? Yeah, I think you're slowly getting to the point I meant. They are actually analogous, but only with the right presumptions. Lets maybe get back to the key/lock analogy commonly used by TRP to illustrate that a man gains value from having sex with many women ("the key opening every lock") while a woman loses value ("the lock opened by every key"). This is a good a…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/15 08:36 PM
9

What? Just fucking what? I have so far not said a single word about the content of the analogy. I've only talked about the value of analogies as argumentative devices. Are you sure you replied to the correct post?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/15 08:01 PM
5

Ugh, you seem to have a really hard time understanding what I'm saying. I'm giving you a hint, the problem starts here: Given that the scenario is nearly a perfect parallel [...] Then to better explain it, lets make up my own analogy: "It is generally agreed that mosquitos are parasites. They leech the blood of other species, spread disease and don't contribute anything necessary to the greater eco-system. At the same time, everyone agrees that they are a less highly developed species than human…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/15 07:59 PM
8

Yes, I see that parallel. You know, I'm not a total idiot. I've understood what your analogies points at. How exactly does this address my point that an analogy doesn't have argumentative power on its own?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/15 07:40 PM
10

See, the problem of your "argument" is that there isn't one. You've set up an analogy and called it a day. An analogy is an illustration of what you believe. It holds no argumentative value. That's why, whenever someone brings up the key and lock analogy, we bring up the pencil and pencil sharpener analogy. Both are valid. Yet both are also merely analogies. They aren't arguments for or against the stance they illustrate. In other words, hey, of course I can sympathize with Jim here. But what ex…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/15 07:25 PM
3

You know, the original post is already deleted anyway, Terpers are already invading the comment section with "GOTCHA TOLD YOU SO"'s, and now that I have seen the archived version of the original post AND the post linked in it, I have to say that it is as pathetic as EVERY OTHER "I'm a nice guy why do feminists hate me" post but sure, I'll bite. So lets make it quick and boil it down to a few points: If you consider yourself a nice guy, you're already an asshole. This is a very simple fact that "…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/15 12:54 AM
2

Well if a kid can't be trusted to maintain personal hygiene at all, then smegma specifically will be the least of their worries.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/15 11:00 PM
1

Not fully, as in, completely behind the glans. Which is, again, the reason why it gets dirty in the first place. When kids are able to shower by themselves and the foreskin is fully retractable, they will automatically pull it back during showering (at least if they wash down there at all).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/15 12:11 PM
1

This is different, as a baby might be equally hers and yours. At the same time, a pregnancy occurs inside a woman's body - something a man will never have experience of. And it's women who should have final say over their bodies. I personally am looking forward to good male contraception, and a world where we no longer need abortion. No, that's what I meant. Of course I will respect her personal decision not to have an abortion. But as I said, I wouldn't let the argument stand on political level…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 10:04 PM
1

Male, blue. Should be as close as close to equal as possible. At the same time, I think attraction is more complicated than "I'm x% into him/her". I mean, people don't just go "Oh, I love my partner but I think this one is slightly more hot so I will immediately dump them". You either love someone or you don't. Someone you love more than one person, but I doubt anyone ranks how much they love people.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 03:35 PM
1

Third, MDIT does not mean men are hypocrites for calling out women's bad behavior. There is men's bad behavior; and there is women's bad behavior. Two different things, two different standards. You do not get to deflect the conversation from women's iniquities by saying that men engage in similar iniquities. That's your problem and that's why you don't understand the argument. MDIT is brought up because Terpers will often claim that women are like X and Men are like Y. So someone say, actually, …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 03:31 PM
0

Yes, leftist is defined, but it's still a buzzword. Even here, you're jumping to "communism" and make your opinion about it very clear. In other words, you're using it to demonize. To get back to extremists, a common definition would be that extremists are militant. At the same time, it is obvious that what is considered extremist changes through time. What was considered normal a thousand years ago is easily considered extremist by current standards. Yet we have to stay aware to not delve into …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 03:27 PM
1

False. Gender roles are simply constructed in such a way that women are granted more freedom to "listen to their emotions" while men are expected to make "rational" decisions. When then looking at those actual decisions, we notice that the rational ones are often just as clearly influenced by emotions, they are just labeled as rational.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 03:17 PM
2

...how can you know whether their foreskin gets dirty. The foreskin doesn't retract at the age where you'd commonly bathe kids. (that's one of the reasons why it gets filthy in the first place)
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 03:04 PM
2

As others have said, some men get circumcised later in life. Apart from that, I find this "Who would they know that it affects pleasure?" to be a profoundly naive question. It's like asking someone with only one arm "How do you know that another arm might have been useful? You can't know, because you never had it! So our conclusion is that your lack of a second arm doesn't affect your life at all!"
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 02:59 PM
2

Somewhat off topic, but regarding your post: I generally find it very admirable when women want to leave topics to men if they do not and cannot personally have the experience to form the same sort of opinion that a man might form. It would be great if men would generally put the same amount of thought into discussing problems primarily concerning women. On the other hand, I think that there is such a thing as a right answer to the question. I mean, if I encountered a woman who was vehemently pr…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 02:56 PM
3

...how is your overuse of "leftist" not exactly the same?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/15 02:43 PM
0

Okay, let me tell you something: I actually don't believe you. I don't believe that at any point, you genuinely considered yourself feminist. You've always had the mindset of a douchebag, which is why the only kinds of feminism you know about are the extreme ones that you can point your finger at. Nice try trolling though.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 06:24 PM
1

Suuuuure...So reading and interacting with mainstream feminists is some "bullshit strawman." Please show me the "mainstream feminist" who has said that asking for blowjobs is rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 07:34 AM
2

Dude, and more generally: dudes, stop this whole "I was indoctrinated by feminism" bullshit. You were not. You were indoctrinated by some bullshit strawman version of feminism. You were indoctrinated by your own damn paranoia. You have always been idiots and now TRP simply gives you a reason to act all smug about it because you can sprout the same old bullshit with different words and call it "unplugging". You didn't act "feminist" in any way because a feminist man is not driven solely by the co…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 11:14 PM
0

Huh.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/15 07:45 AM
0

Yes, because TRPs "practice" is always ridiculously overblown and everyone insists that it LITERALLY THE ONLY WAY you can make theory into practice. Not to mention that often enough TRP will already overblow the theory itself. Theory might be "Women have sexual fantasies", TRP will make it into "Women want to be raped SMV Alpha Beta Gamma Omega yadda yadda reprehensible bullshit".
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 11:27 PM
1

Considering that some very prominent TRP users advocate taking steroids, I assume that some might get very close to that stereotype.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 03:38 PM
2

Everyone you know who is in a relationship is a muscular Alpha dude, while everyone who is not is an untouched virgin?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 01:56 PM
3

Seriously. Fucking seriously. There are silly wine glasses on Etsy. Guys, we can all go home now; TRP was right all along.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 11:02 AM
2

Okay, lets set aside the fact that no matter how ridiculous a suggestion, someone might make it; can you show me where more than those few people would possibly advocate for being a fucking doormat?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 10:34 AM
7

To me, she's not pure anymore and has become impure by another man's touch. I'm very sad that I have to inform you that even virgins will likely not spend their days hermetically sealed away from men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 09:53 AM
1

The reason RP says "go lift" aside from the health benefits is because (short of professional juicing bodybuilders) no woman has ever complained about too much muscle. ...in what fucking fantasy world do you even live. I've not met a single woman who didn't say "Well, I'm all for a little muscle but this bodybuilder style looks ridiculous."
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 09:50 AM
1

Yes. Who the hell doesn't? A former good friend of mine - we don't talk much these days - was very successful with women, in his teens already. Very thin, unmuscular dude, biggest hobby is/was dancing, makes those pseudo-deep, emotional Facebook posts, still has this stupid stereotypical emo haircut covering one eye. Has had more girlfriends then anyone else I know and they all broke if of amicably.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 09:46 AM
1

There is no "Blue Pill" model for relationships because there is no BluePill. BluePill is commonly used in two contexts: Either by TRP-users to describe everyone but them - in which case it should be obvious that the entire rest of the world does not solely engage in open marriages - or a self-description of people explicitly mocking TRP. In the latter case, their answer, including mine, would likely be: "It's fine if you do, it's fine if you don't; I personally would/would not do it."
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 09:34 AM
1

I more or less see those three kinds of posts on /r/thankTRP : "Success" stories where I immediately think "Oh boy, this won't end well" Stories where people thank TRP for not acting like a fucking doormat anymore - and as we have repeatedly said, that is the point that BP has never disagreed with because NO ONE disagrees with that. Stories where I don't even see what the success is supposed to be, like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/15 09:27 AM
3

and charm Which somehow is ENTIRELY different from intelligence and personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/15 08:01 PM
1

No, it does not, because it's not an answer. If TRP is supposedly such a well-thought theory, why do people like you always resort to childish "I don't have to explain it, because it's obvious, you must be delusional if you think otherwise"? Give an actual explanation or stop wasting my time.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/15 01:17 PM
1

Okay, and this is bullshit because...?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/15 11:06 PM
1

but those messages are often embedded within promotions of societal BS. For example? This means that I think boys should be able to feel fully masculine. And what exactly does that entail that they can only get from a male role model?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/15 09:47 AM
1

In my opinion, if a guy wants to spin plates, he should be able to do so without ridicule. The question is, why would he need RP for that. I mean, lets add the most important part beforehand, what we have said often enough: "BP" isn't a "philosophy" comparable to RP, it's mostly just not-doing-the-shitty-parts-of-RP. Then, if we consider "not-doing-the-shitty-parts-of-RP" a philosophy anyway, for simplicity, how do you get the idea that this would only work for marriage or LTRs in general? When …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/15 11:14 PM
1

You know, this is probably the part about "Eternal Hellfire" where people might then slam the door.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/15 10:55 PM
1

Cool, let's have all the kids over to the hip parents' house at night, so they can learn the way the world works. Sounds like a brilliant plan. Well, what is your plan? Taking the bullshit you already believe and putting another steaming pile on it? Just as brilliant. You claim to be a self-improvement movement, yet here you ridicule my suggestion of yes, actually improving society, actually questioning established ideas; while pretending for yourself that by simply taking your personal delusion…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/15 10:07 PM
0

Men have been hearing all their lives that women love romantic gestures and look forward to meeting that Great Guy. You might have but no, not all guys have grown up in such a conservative household where they are taught that women can't be shallow and lust for a total asshole. Accordingly, they have also never grown up with the idea that "Women want nice boyfriend" and "Women sometimes fuck bad men" are mutually exclusive truths. TRP isn't a huge fucking revelation, it's just another spin you p…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/15 09:19 PM
2

Wait a diddly darn minute, so the huge revelation that TRP can give us is that some women might be shallow enough to fuck men with questionable morals if they're attractive? Which is somehow to be expected because, duh, some men do so as well? Well, that's a bit underwhelming.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/15 12:09 AM
2

Read the entire pargraph. He meant "rape" in the context of S&M play, specifically consensual non-consent. Some women and men both enjoy BDSM play and that involves, at times, acts of "consensual non-consent". He is saying that people who do have these fantasies or enjoy these type of play only enjoy it with people they are attracted to. IE: I enjoy being a submissive during sex. That doesn't mean I want just any person forcing me down, but a person who I know, trust and am attracted to. Not som…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/15 09:15 PM
2

You're already pointing out the problem here without knowing it: There's no consensus on what a BluePiller is. TRP will say "A BluePiller is everyone who isn't a RedPiller". Meanwhile, the people identifying as BluePill do so as a joke, they don't buy into the whole narrative of there being "pills" at all. In that sense, yes, self-identified BluePillers are simply against TRP and therefore mock it. (The rabbit hole goes even deeper because TRP believes that everyone but them is "BluePill", but a…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/14 11:51 PM
3

In my personal experience, Purple Pillers are either perfectly normal people who have a terrible straw-mannish perception of the dreaded Blue Pill (tip: it doesn't exist.); or they are Red Pillers who don't want to carry the stigma.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/14 03:56 PM
1

I'm not generalizing teens, I have said that before. Yet, as I have said as well, when we use such a metaphor - "women are teens" - we do so because we are aware of the common stereotypical characteristics linked to the word; because, as said, otherwise we would fail to communicate the idea we want to communicate. Accordingly, when TRP says that women are teenagers, they want to evoke the picture of women as immature, child-like and irresponsible; recognizing the meaning, the intention of saying…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 09:47 PM
1

So, then again, I get back to that: Why do you consider it okay for a woman to be childish, but not for a man?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 09:13 PM
1

Why on earth would you come to that conclusion? Well, the whole argument started here with "Is it only bad to call women childish when when we consider childishness bad". Which means that if we propose that "Women are teenagers" is a neutral statement and not a dismissive one that we tolerate the aforementioned childishness. What do you think? I think that childishness, as in, general obnoxiousness, is a bad trait in all adult human beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 08:38 PM
1

So women are inherently inclined to childishness, or at least, their childishness shouldn't be considered a problem; but if a man is childish, he is automatically weak/not a real man?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 05:29 PM
3

By keeping the idea that a Woman at her core is essentially immature we are able to nip any unadult-like behavior before it gets out of hand. The fact that they are an adult does not give precedence to get away with acting like a child. So, until you see a woman reverting to this state of mind you can treat her like any other person. When you do see the spoiled responsibility dodging brat rear its head, you see it for what it is and treat it as such. If your entire logic boils down to "lets assu…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 11:29 AM
10

You're going in circles here. You specifically use the word teenager to describe women. I very much doubt that you're doing that for jolly good fun; you must have a reason for it, and we'd like to know that reason. Seriously, you're using one of the oldest and most basic trolling techniques imaginable. If you actually want a debate, as per the sub-title, then please do so by telling us what reason you would have to call women teenagers if not to somehow set them apart from "adults". Then we can …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/14 09:00 PM
16

I know, you try to weasel yourself out and make it about OUR supposedly skewed view of it. This is essentially as if you called someone a retard and then, when people call you out for it, you ask them whether they think that disabled people are somehow inferior.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/14 04:16 PM
14

No, he didn't. He said that to assume that calling someone a teenager is an insult, one has to consider teenagers inferior. Okay. If so, that means, if teenagers and adults are evidently equal, why explicitly call women teenagers?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/14 10:41 AM
11

but men owe women time and attention I don't see anyone saying that. Basic human decency? Yes. But that's expected from women as well. Actually, even more than from men, because "boys will be boys", and so society will tolerate a lack thereof way more than when it comes from women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/14 11:38 PM
1

Even ignoring your incredibly biased setup here that a RedPiller is automatically fit and disciplined and ONLY sexist and anti-feminist; while the nice guy is automatically unfit (in reality, there's a huge overlap between those two camps), I'd still say the RedPiller. I think that as bad as the "Nice Guy" is, he can still be granted the benefit of doubt; one can certainly imagine him to simply have had bad experiences and drawn the wrong conclusions. The RedPiller on the other hand is willfully…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/14 11:31 PM
2

It's certainly not surprising that the answer of an anti-feminist when it comes to equality is not "make it equally nice for everyone" but "make it equally shitty for everyone". That's actually what you'll see a lot in MRA circles as well. You see them endlessly complaining about the "disadvantages" of men, but never see them doing anything about it. Instead of questioning why men are the majority of workplace deaths, and trying to lesser that number, they'll hold it up as a defense: "Well, we h…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/14 11:22 PM
0

You're ignoring that those two are used in entirely different contexts. "Not all men" is used by men infiltrating feminist discussion to disprove an accusation that was never made. A feminist might say "There seems to be problem with sexual assault", and then some dude will chime in "But not all men are rapists!". Yeah, sure bro, but the feminist never said so, why do you think you need to clarify that? Do you honestly think that adds anything to the discussion? Meanwhile, "Not all women" is use…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/14 11:15 PM
7

Seriously. You believe that you, a Red Piller, will found the next big subreddit that can TRULY discuss equal rights?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/14 09:31 PM
1

If you look at Muslim countries [...] I always find it incredibly amusing that people like you, who often come from the right wing political spectrum love talking about how "hysteric" feminists are and how hyperbolic their choice of words is; yet on the other hand you love throwing around "socialism", "communism" and "cultural marxism" like you have any idea what that even means. I literally saw women accusing the police of contributing to "The Patriarchy" at Occupy Wall Street in Zuccotti Park,…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/14 12:07 AM
2

Homosexuality is in general biological; albeit influenced by cultural aspects. For example, it's empirically proven that many women discover their sexual attraction for other women only later in life, after already having gone through multiple relationships with men. Considering the complicated stance on bisexuality in general, and that today, sexuality is not longer simply seen as homo-, hetero-, bi-, but as a sliding scale, I feel safe to say that while sexuality is biological and you can't "t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/14 12:01 PM
3

Yes, "biotroofs" is clearly the superior model to patriarchal structures which can be seen and proven in countless systems of power and oppression.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/14 12:22 AM
3

I think every man can somehow change himself in such a way that he appears attractive to women - and especially here, most of the problems seem to be incredibly obvious. Problem is that some men absolutely REFUSE to change, and that other men want to take the easy path of "be a Alpha, women love Alphas", just changing into a different kind of prick instead of trying to stop being a prick. So, to answer your question whether he can be saved, depends on how stubborn he is; what beliefs he personal…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/14 10:59 PM
5

It's already there. It's called feminism. People will now jump in with some talk along the line of "WHY ISN'T IT CALLED EGALITARIANISM THEN?" I would like to explain; but that would mean that you need to accept the reality of patriarchal structures; which you don't; which means that you can't accept the only viable explanation for gender inequality itself. Which means you can't fight gender inequality. Others will jump in to explain how feminism totally isn't about equality, because if it was, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/14 06:51 PM
6

Maybe you should stop taking imaginary colored pills and continue taking your real ones. I heard they help.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/14 06:09 PM
7

How dare humans to establish this construct that we call society and that every single scientist and philosopher thinks is what makes us human!
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/14 06:09 PM
2

You're aware that you can't make coherent arguments by just throwing around buzzword, right? So just because you cry "Straw man! Hipocrisy! Fallacy!" that's not suddenly a fully fledged argument, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/14 01:01 PM
6

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/06/the-montana-judge-who-blamed-a-14-year-old-for-her-own-rape-will-be-censured/372185/ Yellowstone County District Court Judge G. Todd Baugh became famous after he sentenced a teacher who raped one of his teenaged students to just 30 days in jail, because he believed the victim "seemed older than her chronological age" and was "as much in control of the situation" as her rapist. The victim later committed suicide. http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/05/justice/te…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/14 05:53 PM
3

So, I don't see what this has to do with "PurplePillDEBATE"? Because you're just going on and on to assure your own, and others, beliefs? The only question is at the end, and it's a farce, because it's both a straw man and a silly excuse to post your rant here. So I'll try to address your points instead: Fat acceptance types believe that poor health should be accepted and encouraged to suit them. Accept =|= Encourage. Most feminists don't adhere to typical fat-apologia ("being overweight isn't u…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/14 03:37 PM
2

I don't know why this is getting downvoted. That is the exact definition TRP uses: Everyone who isn't RedPill must be BluePill. Which I find especially interesting for the people here who identify as PurplePill, because for hardcore RedPillers, YOU DON'T EXIST. RedPill is an ideology that you have to accept as a whole or not at all. There is no middle ground for a RedPiller (that's what we've been criticizing them for on TBP forever: They base all their arguments on some sort of fantasy land whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/14 11:48 PM
2

No, I can honestly not. I can think of reasons that are harmful by themselves LEADING to promiscuity, but not the other way round. I can think of things promiscuity MIGHT lead to, but nothing that it inevitably WILL lead to.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/14 03:00 PM
6

Yes, that's my honest question, and I'd like to see a honest answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 10:48 PM
11

Actions have consequences. What consequence does promiscuity have?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 08:36 PM
4

How is this the motto of liberalism. What the heck do you even mean with liberalism. Remember, in every country but the US, liberalism is considered a policy at the right of center, not the left. If I had to name a motto for what you call "liberalism", two would spring to my mind: "Safe, sane and consensual" and "Freedom is worthless without opportunity".
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 08:35 PM
7

Lets boil this down to the core of it: If a man forcefully, digitally penetrates a womans vagina without her consent; and then inserts his penis afterwards, again, without having obtained her consent, is that rape? Yes. Yes, it is. That's the exact fucking definition of rape. What do we even have to discuss here? Where the hell do you think this wasn't rape? The fact that they were boyfriend and girlfriend (sort of)? The fact that they slept in the same house and bed? The fact that they spooned?…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/14 09:11 PM
1

I identify as Blue Pill, but since TRP often seems to assume this: No, I don't mean "the exact opposite of TRP", I mean "non-TRP", meaning "The parts of TRP that you can literally everywhere else are okay but all the stuff they add and that defines TRP-ideology is huge bullshit". On to the question: I have about 2 to 3 women that I would consider very close friends. Meaning we can and do talk about more or less anything, share similar interests, discuss politics, philosophy, private life and so …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/14 12:32 PM
4

With that being the case, he is more likely to find people who share his special interest if he expands his conventional appeal. And as I have said in an example before, simply increasing the size of the dating pool instead of modifying the ratios of the dating pool is an incredibly wasteful strategy. If you have 100 people interested in you, and one of them is interested in post-Impressionism, your chances aren't any better then when you have 1000 people interested in you and 10 of them are int…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 08:48 PM
1

You're still defining sexual market value as determined by demand and supply; meaning that the most desired person is the most valuable. And I'm still asking what the actual worth of that value is for your success on that market. That's more or less it, everything else is semantics and nitpicking.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 08:44 PM
0

Correct, but a labour or services market will for most people still have the ultimate goal of the highest paying job/best price for the service they offer. It is certainly MORE applicable because there can be certain idealists who take a lower paid job or give a lower price on their service because they like the job or the customer. My point here is essentially that if there is a dating market, everyone is such an idealist and there's no point in being the "most wanted" anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 08:38 PM
4

You don't think there's any possibility that finding a suitable partner is easier when you expand the number of interested partners? I think that considering how human dating behavior works, both yes and no. On the one hand, with a bigger choice, you evidently have a bigger chance by just guessing blindly to hit the "jackpot". On the other hand, as I said here as well, I also believe that "success" in dating is determined by compatibility in the most specific traits and beliefs. So for example, …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 08:34 PM
1

Not just the "sexual market", but the market in general. That's the point here, I don't think the classic market model can be applied at all. Because in such a model, obviously being desired by many means being able to raise the market price, so we can call that high value. The goal is to fetch the highest profit. No matter whether we have currency or not, because even bartering knows the concept of getting the best deal out of it. Compare my other comment chain with /u/Agartha10 . I think it mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 08:24 PM
3

But because the pool of women who are attracted to him is so much smaller, it greatly increases the chances that he will be attracted to none of the women theoretically available to him. The problem is a bit deeper though. For example, Sheemar Moore is a Hollywood star. Generic neckbeard here isn't. Which sure isn't meant to say that the ratio of people attracted to them/people personally knowing them wouldn't still differ but I find that SMV in general can't work when using absolute numbers of …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 08:05 PM
0

Which still doesn't answer the question "Why is being desired by many women considered worth". There is no currency, so there is no market price that can be raised with market value. Do we assume that a man desired by many woman will be even more attractive, leading to sort of an avalanche effect? But still, if so, what is the ultimate goal of that?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 07:33 PM
3

They don't appear to want to provide a meaningful distinction between lust and objectification - only in saying that the former is morally okay and the latter is not. Sexual objectification means the disregard and/or disinterest for something other than a womans sexual attributes; while lust is simply neutral towards it. I also wonder how you can even compare the two since one is DONE TO a woman, while the other is FELT TOWARD a woman. Which means that you can just feel lust for a woman, just ob…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 07:29 PM
1

That doesn't actually make sense at all. The market value of the frame you're talking about is measured in currency, so yes, it is different from the personal value. But the sexual market has no currency. Which would either mean that SMV IS personal value or that SMV is completely useless and personal value is a second value determining actual success on the market. I'm genuinely confused here.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 07:09 PM
2

The point here is both the attempt and the scientific soundness. The difference is that by saying "positing [...] is morally wrong", you're implying that every hypothesis is morally wrong, whether it turns out correct or wrong. Which isn't really the case. I don't see the issue of morality here at all, at least as long as it doesn't come to extreme "men are biologically inclined to rape"-statements which are evidently harmful. Meanwhile, what people really oppose is making up often very simplist…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 07:01 PM
1

That is admittedly a explanation I hear quite often, so maybe let me reframe my thoughts into a question to make it clear what I'm trying to get at: Considering we call it value, we have to assume that essentially high value = better than low value, correct? If so, why do we determine high value by being physically attractive to lots of people of your preferred gender instead of being attractive to a particular person, or kind of person, that you're attracted to as well? So for example, Shemar M…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 05:39 PM
6

It is morally wrong to posit a hypothesis on what most people of either gender find sexually attractive. Disagree. From what I see on /r/TheBluePill , morality is very rarely talked about; more or less just when it comes to abusive behavior, violations of consent, etc. If I had to reframe it, it'd probably be this: Most attempts to posit a hypothesis on what most people of either gender find sexually attractive are scientifically unsound and ultimately of little concern for successful dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 05:28 PM
2

Also, if you haven't flaired yourself, make it clear in the post which side you identify with to avoid confusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 05:25 PM
6

So, I'll begin with my example from above: TRP believes in the sexual market and that everyone has a sexual market value that can in some way be generalized
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/14 04:20 PM
0

Well first, the most person most often cited when it comes to the "kill 90% of men" claim is Youtuber The Femitheist, a woman who doesn't identify as a feminist at all. So in that case, it's a quite obvious example of calling people feminist when they don't even do so themselves; simply to declare the greater cause of feminism hateful because that one person allegedly identifies with it. Second, YES OF COURSE PEOPLE WILL CALL OUT ANTI-FEMINIST PEOPLE DESCRIBING THEMSELVES AS FEMINISTS. Like, ser…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/14 07:18 PM
0

Well, so instead you choose to define feminism as "everything that I don't like and that seems remotely supportive of women and/or was said by a woman". Because if we're honestly arguing with the assumption that euthanasia is somehow part of the feminist agenda, I literally see no point in arguing with you. You behave like the guy hearing "healthcare" and crying "Stalin".
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/14 03:23 PM
3

So... sources? Or just "a woman once said and we all know all women are feminist"? Because, for the umpteenth time: Feminism is about equality. It's right there in the fucking definition. It's like saying "I once heard a civil rights supporter say that black people are better". You're not X if you disagree with the most basic premise of X.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/14 09:53 PM
2

Guys, I really think we have to make something clear here: You argue against a straw man. You're essentially putting all the stuff remotely reeking of dominance and confidence on the "Red Pill" side and all the stuff that is "weak" on the "Blue Pill" side. So OP evidently expects that "Blue Pillers" either defend utter subservience to his evidently dysfunctional girlfriend, thereby proving that we're all pathetic spineless losers; or tell him to just walk out, thereby proving that TRP is actuall…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/14 09:49 PM
2

How come when a man is emotionally abused its his job to 'man up' and leave the relationship, but when it's a woman being abused, she isn't told to leave the relationship? Have you ever seen an actual feminist use the term "man up"? Or even imply something similar? EDIT 2: I can see why I'm having a disconnect with people on TBP. I'm advocating for women to not dress proactively at night, and you guys are advocating for rapists to not rape. The problem is, rapists don't care what you think and a…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/14 09:36 PM
1

I've said it already, I think there is exactly one situation where not intervening or even actively helping a suicide is okay: and that is a terminally ill person. That, and only that. And even then studies have shown that many terminally ill people lose their death wish after getting better palliative treatment/and or more contact to not grow lonely, and thus, depressed. Then, and ONLY then do I find assisted or tolerated suicide justifiable. So for your question of whether I would tell those m…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/14 05:44 PM
1

For example: Is it abused against opposing opinions, or is there a lot of offensive/triggering/hateful stuff? Troll-posts/throwaways, or regulars? Are there particular topics that quickly derail? Is the report function in general overused or is the amount of reports you get justified?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/14 04:21 PM
1

Yes, yes I do, at least in the context of people who aren't terminally ill and suffering. And even then I think the issue is much harder than let them do it. Suicide isn't an issue of choice or dominion over ones body. At the core of that, there's sanity. Suicide isn't a sane choice, so it's perfectly valid to keep people safe from themselves, even against their own disturbed will.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/14 04:07 PM
2

Oh, just the people who are ACTUALLY suicidal. They probably go to the same club as the women who are ACTUALLY raped, aren't they. I simply can't imagine how someone can not see the incredible hypocrisy of straight out saying that he can look into the heads of a giant group of individual people, yet calls others narcissists. Oh wait, I forgot. You proudly call yourself a narcissist after all. The rest of the world calls you pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/14 04:04 PM
1

Do you see the double standard: a man should not respond in kind, but the line for a woman is : a woman should not escalate No, no one should respond in kind, and no one should escalate, if it isn't actually necessary. That's the point here. And the next point is that you evidently see the beating of Cristy Mack as an example of "violence that was probably in kind". Did she provoke him? I don't fucking care. If you think that ANY kind of provocation even makes this SLIGHTLY justified, I know all…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/14 04:00 PM
1

Any possibility of getting a statistic about which posts get reported?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 10:05 PM
10

No, they don't because they know crying or other people won't leaviate the pain and they are to self absorbed to even be close to understanding the emptiness. Thank you, brave person who can look into the head of literally everyone who is suicidal.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 09:27 PM
2

No, no one attacking you can be unnecessarily hit. I wouldn't advocate a woman knocking out a guy and trampling on him just because he grabbed her either. because nobody will believe she had a knife (Cristy mack) Cristy Mack. We all saw the photos. We know what the dude does for a living. Do we really discuss who was the more dangerous of the two?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 08:42 PM
1

I've had mostly female friends for the majority of my life, and a single mom. I didn't turn gay, I never missed any male role models, I'm sexually dominant and kinky, but I wouldn't want a relationship that I have to lead all the time. I never really hated other men - it's just that the only people sharing my interests and values happened to be women. Having female friends that I'm fairly open with means two things: First, it quickly dispels the "female mystique" when they openly talk about thei…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 08:37 PM
6

does advocating that a guy hit a agresive and physically abusive spouse fall under that category? It's just another example of TRP users black and white thinking that the only answer to getting attacked is to hit back. No one is arguing against defending yourself, but if you can't defend yourself without doing the exact same thing as your attacker, something went wrong. And that's not even an issue of training, because most people will naturally react in such a way instead of going the "hit back…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 08:07 PM
12

You're a TRP user telling us that you know more about suicidal persons than those suicidal persons themselves, and you think you can tell us about narcissists? Jesus.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 08:02 PM
5

And you believe women don't have to deal with emotional shit from men? What do you believe we are? Robots? "BEEP BOOP I WON'T LOAD EMOTIONAL SHIT ON YOU DEAR LADYFRIEND I'M 100% RATIONAL AND I STEM. BEEP BOOP" "Oh thank you MAN-TRON 3000, you're making me all wet in the panties!"
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/14 06:55 PM
5

Because men manage a womans emotions. Women basically just stand there and demand shit. A man with a lot of previous partners knows how to manage most shit a woman can trow at him, a woman just has higher and higher expectations. The only thing I can answer to that is literally "Keep telling yourself that." Also, how the hell is having sex with lots of women a form of self-improvement?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/14 04:33 PM
6

You never stop being an addict, you can control your behavior and not use, but your personality type if that of an addict, something will be missing: male validation is a highly addictive. Wait, so you seriously think that the simple fact that you have more than the official number of sexual partners the brave men of TRP allow you to have, you're an addict? Then tell me why TRP men are encouraged to have as many women as possible. Shouldn't this be highly dangerous behavior directly contradictor…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/14 03:30 PM
5

I do think there are blue pill ideologies, even though TBP is flagrantly against establishing such a thing. Because in order to criticize TRP, one must have their own ideas with which to contrast TRP with. I personally like advancing the idea that there are blue pill ideologies, at least on this sub. Makes things interesting. You're right; the point is that TRP is constantly twisting it as if "Blue Pillers" were an extreme in the opposite direction of TRP instead of simply "not TRP". TRP says wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/14 03:58 PM
3

Considering that rape roleplay relies on consent and communication, while TRP relies on "overcoming last minute resistance" and "not asking as to not kill the mood", I can definitely see how one would find the combination worrying.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/14 03:54 PM
1

it looks like something where you started with a premise and went looking for something to support it. You have started with a premise and have yet to find anything to support it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:23 PM
1

...my point is that TRP-users evidently ARE needy, otherwise they wouldn't talk about how to get laid all day. Which you would have noticed if you started reading what I write and trying to make an argument why I'm wrong instead of repeatedly asserting that I'm wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:10 PM
1

TRP is labeled "sexual strategy" right there in the sidebar. Every single technique TRP offers has the goal of improving your chances of getting laid. There are countless field reports about getting laid. Every single discussion is about getting laid, improving your chances to get laid of why evil women keep you from getting laid. There just literally isn't anything else. There are no field reports about pursuing your awesome hobbies all by yourself. Every single post about things that aren't so…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 04:53 PM
2

No it doesn't. Literally nothing on TRP is about actually improving yourself for the sake of improving yourself. It's about learning techniques to get laid, improving "SMV" (which supposedly helps you get laid) and discussing why men don't get laid while women supposedly just have to lie there waiting for a wanton dick to fill her up. Just look at every single thread about LTR where people start advocating "Get some plates", completely missing the point and just proving that TRP isn't about bein…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 02:34 PM
2

EDIT: * I just remembered, one of these was quoted by a BPer on PPD yesterday. Here you go See, this is why no one can take you serious. Even your mods outright reveal that yes, you are full of hate, no matter what you call it. And you don't even see any problem posting this because it seems completely normal and moderate to you. Women are inferior to men in almost all aspects which is why society expects infinitely less from them than it does men. We are sexist because we identify the significa…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 10:32 PM
2

...that still doesn't explain how this is related to self-improvement, no matter whether OC or repost. To go with your analogy: TRP is about self-improvement. The Battlefield 3 sub is about Battlefield 3. Everyone would be very confused if the majority of content on /r/battlefield3 was related to Call of Duty. So why is it considered normal that the majority of content on TRP isn't related to self-improvement but to bashing women?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 09:22 PM
3

Most people don't rely on the news feed of RP. So, okay, /r/TheRedPill is a sub for news. Okay. Now how are the average news we see on TRP related to self-improvement?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 11:10 AM
3

Do you honestly believe he is wrong about every teacher? Do you honestly believe, even though its stated in your quote, he believes this about all of them? No, where did you even get that idea. But what is this stupid attitude that generalizations are perfectly fine because they still allow exceptions; and they might not even talk the majority of a group, but hell, it's a generalization, haters gonna hate! "Men are pigs, but there might be some exceptions." Is this somehow a good statement to ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 09:45 AM
2

The point is that you can't simply claim that a community is somehow good because it has a decent part to it when the majority of all the content in that community is NOT decent, and completely deviates from that original point. And right now, "it's all about self-improvement" is simply a ridiculous assertion, because everyone can clearly see that the majority of content on TRP is NOT about self-improvement. So nothing will ever justify the existence of the sub, simply because someone thinks the…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 12:18 AM
4

I am a grown woman, in my fourth decade of life, and yet never have I seen this stuff mentioned in sex-specific contexts anywhere else. Just to make this clear, what are we even talking about here anymore. Because one of the biggest hipocrisies of TRP is that they absolutely don't understand self-improvement. Everything they do has the ultimate goal of getting laid. They'll talk about being independent from women all the time, and then spend all day "improving themselves" to appeal to women. So …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 10:58 PM
5

This is a dynamic my parents had, unfortunately, and yet nowhere did I see it ever addressed except on "red pill" sites. See guys, this is why we simply can't take you seriously. You are a subreddit, on the Internet, and you're honestly claiming that you could find "hey, self improvement is kinda cool" and "don't be a fucking doormat" on any site outside the manosphere. Thats... come on, where the fuck do you even live! You can't honestly pretend that every single person you ever met in flesh to…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 10:32 PM
9

Okay. If I only take what I need of TRP, I got "self improvement", which TRP only pretends to address and "don't be a total doormat". I think neither are exclusive nor central to TRPs average content submission. So why exactly do we need TRP if we have to cut out about 99% of the content to get to the juicy bits that we can find anywhere else, and much easier?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 09:10 PM
8

Wait, the guy claiming all "women hate each other, passionately" is somehow uncontroversial? Or stuff like: Don't get me started on teachers. While a few of them are actually good with kids, teachers are some of the worst, trashiest people I know. They make next to no income, making them absolutely reliant on their men, they gather at their local drinking spots every weekend to complain about how much they hate their students, their bosses, their men, and any members of their social circle not c…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 09:06 PM
2

So, I'm technically still a young person. I'm also evidently the whizziest whizkid and every person I know is that as well because I have never actually met anyone who interpreted "Just be yourself" as "Give up improving because you're already perfect". To be perfectly honest, I have never actually heard it in any context that wasn't an answer to "What do I have to change about my character?" I think what a lot of people miss is that if a girl gives you advice on how to attract girls, it's not n…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/14 11:24 AM
1

That current form being?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/14 06:08 PM
2

This. Having preferences is okay. Saying "I wouldn't date someone who is x, because that makes them a horrible/untrustworthy/low-standard/etc. person" is not. And to answer your question, yes, jumping to the conclusion of social awkwardness could be considered a poor assumption. But the difference is that with the socially awkward person, she doesn't say it's a horrible person, or that that person will be untrustworthy, or that this person can't have a relationship. She just says she doesn't wan…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 08:29 PM
10

No, she's telling you that she wouldn't want to date a socially awkward person, no matter whether it's a virgin or not. It's just more likely that a socially awkward person is a virgin and the other way round.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 11:24 AM
1

how are those redpill? They are RedPill in that they make up a majority of the opinions in the sub? For more "stuff that actually isn't RP", yet is said from everyone from Endorsed Contributor to outright Mod of TRP, look here. all i've read on redpill is basically 1. dont put women on a pedistal, 2. people dont consciously choose who they're attracted to. 3. hypergamy. Then we're evidently not reading the same sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/14 01:16 PM
5

Where have I ever even implied that there are no differences between men and women, or even their behavior? Why does this always have to boil down to a "do you believe x or do you believe the opposite of x"? Everyone can see that women and men aren't anatomically and genetically identical. I therefore think that there are behavioral differences as well. The point is that those differences are still researched and no one is really sure how strong, or even what exactly, they are. I also say that a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/14 12:24 AM
9

Yes. That's it women are quality control for mankind. Men are the sec drive that keeps mankind going. Okay, first: Please stop trying to apply evolutionary reproductive urges when we're talking about recreational sex. That's what we're telling people again and again: Evolutionary psychology isn't complete bullshit, but the whole reason we're not living on trees anymore is that the human brain evolved to consciously decide against simple urges. We might still see them, and they might still influe…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/14 12:08 AM
3

So what exactly is your argument, that women have higher standards for sex, and thus... Well yes, thus what? And I don't even dare to ask it, but: sources?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 11:23 PM
5

Women on the other hand, want it when there's a guy they want to fuck or after its been a few weeks. Okay, what is this even supposed to mean. It's not like men think all women are equally beautiful and would have sex with absolutely any woman. Both sexes only want to fuck with the people they want to fuck with. That's so tautological, I don't even know why it should be questioned.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:54 PM
3

News flash: TRP has never really understood how averages work. Or statistics in general. (See: average age of loss of virginity, average number of lifetime sexual partners, the assumption that 80% of women have sex with 20% of men, etc.)
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:51 PM
5

Treat women like children; I can't relate to women intellectually; women don't have any agency and will just run for the guy who's more of an Alpha; women can't love like men do, can't have friendships like men do, can't achieve anything like men do, can't.... Do I need to go on?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:47 PM
2

The two aren't the same at all, but to pretend you can't compare them is equally ridiculous. Nine months of pregnancy and the trauma of giving birth in relation to garnishing your pay check for 18-21 years and putting you in prison if you lose your job and can't pay. These two things, although completely different, have a major impact upon an individuals life. As for which has a greater impact, that is arguably subjective. This highlights the problem of talking about being pro-life when opposing…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:44 PM
5

No it isn't, because that never actually was the original argument. The original argument was "If you don't want kids, use whatever means necessary to keep you from having them (that do not inflict the bodily autonomy of someone else)" That has nothing to do with "keep your legs closed". That would be one possibility, but there are many others. Men can't abort. Women can. Abortion is a reproductive choice just like contraception. Abandoning a child that was actually born is not.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:38 PM
1

Okay, please define what you actually mean here. If you mean "Everyone has to get a paternity test, even if neither of the parents wants it.": The state should pay, because they're the ones demanding it. We're a capitalist society though, so they'll force people to pay for it. In that case, it'll be up to the parents to decide who pays or whether to split the bill. If you mean "The father can demand it and the woman can't do anything about it.", the father of course. He's the one demanding the t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:31 PM
2

Will we see a "So if it's her fault when she drinks and gives birth to a deformed baby, why isn't it her fault when she drinks and gets raped?"-analogy? Will we? Will we? Of course we will!
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:22 PM
4

You mean this one? And I honestly don't know what you're trying to say about the Männerbund here. First, the word originated to describe structures in East Africa, second, it mostly existed in the late German Empire and older monarchic structures, and Nazi-Germany. Todays remnants of it, so called "Burschenschaften" are regarded as far right, heavily conservative minorities without much support from the majority of the population. Männerbunde aren't a time-honored tradition, they're archaic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/14 12:18 PM
5

I don't even know what you expect us to say "Yeah, that's just what that cis white male scum deserved!" What happened here is obviously shitty lawmaking, what is there even to discuss?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/14 07:24 PM
1

Yes, that's what I actually wanted to say with the last part: The only people who think that Fifty Shades of Grey is what real BDSM looks like and what all BDSM-enthusiasts fap to are the people who have absolutely no idea how BDSM works. Meanwhile, TRP, which is quite vanilla when it comes to sex, is absolutely OBSESSED with that book and try to point it out as evidence that all women secretly long for their Alpha CocksTM .
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/14 06:58 PM
10

Guys. Guys. Slow now. You're sure gerbiling hard here. First, since so many BPers are actually men, I have to point out how incredibly gay we evidently are. But I find it great that you show such great admiration for your gay fanboys. I'll actually propose posting more homoerotic fan-fiction on TBP now. I'm sure you'll love it. Second, isn't it an incredible joke that the whole BDSM-community actually despises TRP with it's pseudo-dominant super-Alphas? You're the ones talking about dominating i…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/14 09:00 PM
3

"I wouldn't want her to burn herself while making the salad, but how dare that stupid bitch to want the qualification to do an actual job!"
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/14 08:33 PM
1

Physical attractiveness is certainly important for me. I couldn't be with someone I don't find attractive, actually, to consider dating someone they would have to appear very attractive to me. The reason is that I could just be friends with a woman if I'm not not sexually interested in her, yet I couldn't be in a relationship with someone I feel barely any sexual attraction to. On the other hand, I couldn't be with someone who I only feel sexually attracted to. I value humor very highly, both in…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/14 08:31 PM
12

That, again, is based on faulty logic. People simply take the number of divorces and the number of marriages and conclude that there are half as many divorces as there are marriages, therefore the total chance for a marriage to fail must be 50%. This is faulty since it ignores that the people divorcing and marrying in that year aren't necessarily the same, and that there is a giant pool of people who are already married. If you look back at my article, you'll see the problem. In 1981, there were…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/14 07:13 PM
10

85% of married couples in 1980 are still together? And you somehow apply that across the board? I hope you realize this is grasping at straws, since the stats show the divorce rate today around 50%. Actually, the statistic about 50% divorce rate is ridiculously flawed. Yet, there is an interesting correlation: The younger both partners are when marrying, the higher is the risk of divorcing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/14 06:22 PM
1

I think most TRPers actually misunderstand what "Just be yourself" means. It doesn't mean "Just do the same shit over and over again". That's isn't really helpful. No, of course "Just be yourself" assumes that you, yourself, are not a completely horrible or boring person. For example, we wouldn't really tell a serial rapist to "just be yourself". It does mean that you have to be special in some way that you, yourself like, and that comes naturally to you. Faking a personality doesn't help. But t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/14 05:25 AM
-1

We have a classic chicken or egg problem. Do you think places like trp or the mrm are an inevitable result of very real issues that rarely get addressed, or that it's all just a blight that need to be eradicated, censored, and shamed into oblivion? MRM actually has legitimate origins, yet, in it's current form, has lost its former purpose and should be torn down and redone from a feminist starting point. TRP is merely a counter-progressive movement.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/14 05:15 AM
1

Huh, I actually put that in to show that the whole "We read what we like" part is flawed from the beginning. For example, I began reading Fifty Shades to see how bad it is. A friend of mine also started but then stopped because she found it completely unerotic and Anas character way to naive and obnoxious. So I wanted to show that it would be just as idiotic to assume that all the people who bought The Hobbit dreamed of living in a fantasy world as it would be to say that so many bought Fifty Sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 08:31 PM
1

Well, of course that was a bit sarcastic. And of course erotica is a bit different from the rest of literature when it comes to fantasies. The second point still stands though: Even if we say that they have those fantasies, what this actually means for what they want to do in real life isn't determined by that. Seriously, there are so many dark and twisted fantasies a person can have, yet they never actually want to act those out in reality. Most of the people with fetishes know that. I know it …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 08:11 PM
1

Come on, you're clearly more intelligent than that. Are you suggesting that if he didn't see them getting with white girls, then he wouldn't hate them? He already considered them inferior, which is why he was so offended by the sight of PoC with white girls. No, I'm suggesting that just because he hated humanity in general, the reason for killing them wasn't simply that they were humans. But that's what this argument is often used for: See, he hated men as well, so it can't be misogyny and has n…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 07:51 PM
0

I'm sure he'd have been a TBP mod if he'd have known enough about the place. Seriously. So we do straw-TBP-members now? I mean, it's not really hard for you to look up what attitudes TBP-users actually express. The fact that you didn't and just threw a "Yeah, I guess they must be EXACTLY like that guy because reasons" just show me you aren't actually interested in discussing what influenced him, but just shifting the responsibility to the first strawman you find. He was also a massive racist, so…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 05:57 PM
1

Do you think that if religion never existed, people would never bomb buses? Seriously, there are countless factors contributing to a spree killing. Gun culture, the American view of "justice", education and career perspectives, alternative sources of information and influence, social attitudes towards sex and life goals, availability of psychological help, ... Speculating about some what-if scenario is entirely pointless to do. Yes, he might have shot a banker for evicting him from his house fiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 04:45 PM
1

I'm sure that the Aspergers/autism-community will be very happy to hear that you think they are just one step away from being spree killers. Seriously, if he had heard voices and had hallucinations, your point might be remotely valid. But "he might have had Aspergers" - yes, that wasn't sure, and for a member of a community that, rightly so, complains about the overly high diagnosing rate of ADHD you seem very keen to easily jump to mental illness as an explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 04:20 PM
5

I've said it before, it would be false to say that Elliot Rodger was TRP, or a MRA, or whatever. He was part of the manosphere though. And that means, while there are certain beliefs at the core of the manosphere, the individual branches come to vastly different conclusions. For example, the whole manosphere complains about those evil sluts having sex with men (that are not the person currently complaining). MRAs will see a horribly distorted social model and fear that those sluts will one day s…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 02:41 AM
2

There is a sexual market in so far as that there are multiple parties that try to find a good "offer" - that is, another person they feel attracted to. That sexual market is vastly distinct from a normal market scheme in that both parties try to find a good offer. There are no objects to sell, but people who try to get together. This actually makes the concept of SMV itself pointless already, because it is clear that neither a man nor a woman will be interested in being as attractive as possible…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/14 02:18 AM
1

See, the normal response to someone trying to manipulate you would be saying "Sorry, but I honestly think this can't work out, because I find your behavior manipulative/think you're unable of having an actual conversation/etc." TRP isn't really about "How to avoid those horrible women?" It's about how to fuck those horrible women anyway. That's the main point people criticize about TRP as well. Half the time they're complaining how horrible women are, the rest of the time they try to somehow "ta…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/14 12:05 AM
1

So, I consider myself BluePill, and my position is that a lot of what TRP says is bullshit. For example the 80/20 rule, that women are uncapable of higher thought, have to be treated like children, can't be friend with men, will abandon their partner for the first "Alpha" who comes their way, that lifting solves absolutely everything, from depression to cancer, etc, etc. I don't really know why I should propose a counter-theory that says the exact opposite of that. There really isn't one. Someti…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/14 10:42 PM
3

Heh why do you assume TRP is about "cheap tricks" and that game is manipulative? Isn't it obvious some guys are better with women than others. Those guys have "game." Because it is. Seriously, just look at Dread game. The entire definition of that is "manipulate her". Or take "overcoming last minute resistance". The definition there is "manipulate her to have sex with you despite not wanting to". Really, it's not that hard to find manipulative behavior on TRP. Even "maintaining frame" is essenti…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/14 10:37 PM
2

So this post inspired me to look up the best selling books. What we see there, according to Wikipedia, is: A Tale of Two Cities The Lord of the Rings Le Petit Prince Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone And Then There Were None Dream of the Red Chamber The Hobbit She: A History of Adventure So evidently, people fantasize about being a Wizard Student in a world populated by dwarfs and Hobbits, solving crimes and living on a tiny asteroid... during the French revolution. Maybe for some it's a f…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/14 10:32 PM
3

That perfectly sums up the whole issue, maybe even feminism itself. Feminism doesn't say "Don't do x", it says "Don't do x without asking first".
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/14 10:25 PM
1

In what sense do you use TBP? As in, the subreddit that is purely for satire? Or the common RedPill-definition of "everything that isn't us"? Because that will change a lot about how one has to answer your question.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/14 10:19 PM
1

that even not having sex isn't a perfect defense against that sort of thing. And as I said in my other post, the amount of men who will get falsely accused of rape during their lifetime is incredibly low. And no one is saying that this doesn't happen at all - but when you talk about it here, it sounds like it's the most pressing issue of Mens Rights ever. It isn't. And it will certainly not be solved by crying about the horrible legislation where you can't even have sex with a unconsenting woman…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/14 12:11 AM
1

You're wrong. Children can sign contracts and then break them without penalty. They're not breaking them, because the contract was never concluded. As a child, you may consent, as in, say that you agree to the terms. Yet, your expression of consent is then made meaningless by law since they weren't able to - on the basis of being uninformed. "Can't" isn't a word with any meaning for the law. You "can" do everything, but legality of what you did is a completely different matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/14 12:07 AM
1

because that's how the legal bias is, and that's how Mary Koss (who had heavy influence on the CDC's definition of rape) thinks. Rape is something a man does to a woman. Flip the genders and it's literally comedy. You're aware that men were included in the definition of rape in the same change that also included non-forcible and non-vaginal rape, right? They're both really fucking drunk and fucking. what's the verdict? ...nothing, as I said. Again, when talking about getting raped while drunk, p…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/14 11:49 PM
1

but not sex. You completely misunderstood what I said. I meant "Children can consent to anything, but in some cases, it will be annulled." The point of the law isn't so say "Children can't consent", it's to say "When children consent, it's meaningless since their choice was uninformed". I'm not from the natively Anglophone world, so I can't tell you a specific case for such a jurisdiction. Where I live, that's definitely the case, and looking at the articles I found, while there seems to be much…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/14 11:36 PM
1

And some innocent man now sits in jail because of that, despite everyone knowing that the claim was false? If not: What exactly did you want to prove with that story?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/14 11:19 PM
1

nah, let's make her wasted, but still perfectly capable of grabbing a dick. She finds some other dude and has sex. what's that? Huh. Define "perfectly capable of grabbing a dick". I've pointed out a few indicators of rape in another post here, you might read into that: That should answer your question, shouldn't it? She was enthusiastic, she initiated, she didn't loose consciousness during or before having sex with you, I assume; nor did she seem close to passing out; and she didn't express that…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/14 11:17 PM
1

...and the definition of legal consent is informed consent. What did you think it meant? Whenever children say yes to something, that actually didn't happen? Children are able to consent something, just like a very drunk person might be able to seemingly consent to something. The point is that consent by both of these persons will be legally annulled since they weren't informed (meaning unable to fully grasp the consequences and backgrounds of their actions). That's why you get a lower for penal…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/14 11:03 PM
2

So a woman who remembers nothing from the night before but initiated the sex was not raped? Yes, this is what I'm saying. What you miss here is that this is NOT how the majority of rapes, or rape accusations, happens. You won't read "I woke up to this guy and I couldn't remember going home with him RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE" as the common narrative. The majority of victims will remember getting raped. Otherwise they couldn't even make accusations, because the very definition of an accusation is "…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/14 11:41 AM
2

That should answer your question, shouldn't it? She was enthusiastic, she initiated, she didn't loose consciousness during or before having sex with you, I assume; nor did she seem close to passing out; and she didn't express that she doesn't want to have sex with you before or during the sex, or before getting drunk; she lead the act as in, didn't just suddenly stop participating/seemed to "not be there"? Then no, it wasn't rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/14 10:25 PM
2

I think someone on AskFeminists answered this quite well: Would you sell the person a car? If not, you shouldn't have sex with them either. Of course, this assumes you have the courtesy that you don't sell a car to a person who you perceive as dead-out drunk... See, the real problem I have with this argument is that for some reason, the majority of men seems to be able to discern whether a a woman might be able to consent or not. For some reason, the majority of men seems to have enough empathy …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/14 10:21 PM
1

It's not rape, according to the legal definition, and most people's definition. Just like that Girls epiosde, it's bad sex, but it's not rape. And you justification for saying so is that: What's interesting is that while it might start as unenthusiastic, you often get a bit more enthusiastic as you go on. Yeah, just have sex with him on the chance that he might be into it! Totally not rape. Seriously, that's what I meant. You're so concerned with rape that you're essentially assuming that every …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/14 10:14 PM
1

You just contradicted yourself. No, I didn't. I said might have, and I didn't say all, I simply said "for some specific case evolutionary urges MIGHT not be relevant any more". One does not instantly lead to the other. Okay, let's look at this again for a moment. You originally implied that this behavior is based on evolutionary urges because... well because. Now you tell me it isn't. When I then say that, since it has to come from somewhere, it will likely be anchored in cultural conditioning y…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/14 01:26 AM
1

Again, you're not even bothering to read what I write, and I have to make my points again and again: I never claimed that I believe evolutionary urges are completely suppressed. I'm saying they are suppressed to such a level that they can't influence long term behavior and beliefs, since they are by their very definition only seen in impulsive patterns of behavior anymore; and that they're not some form of determination. For example, as you said, fight of flight behavior: We don't see people aut…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/14 12:13 AM
1

Because men are more expendable within a society. Well, that's what I'm assuming here. Now I ask you how this explains why men are not helped. See, when you say "A women is more valuable, so we help her to survive." that's by itself a very logical argument. There's a clear biological incentive here to protect her. "A man is less valuable, so we don't help him" is not logical, since there is no biological incentive to not help a man. Again, if this was a "Who do you help, the man or the woman?"-s…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 09:53 PM
1

Then telling a woman who's injured "Suck it up and walk it off." would be a perfectly rational response for anyone, with that logic. I'm not attempting to make a straw man in any way by noticing this. Your argument is completely pointless since it would be just as logical to apply the same care and support you already lend women to a man. It is thus a straw man, since right now you're arguing that I could have said or meant x when I clearly said something else. You can easily look it up above. T…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 09:11 PM
1

No, I'm not. You are seeing what you would like to believe instead of actually listening to what I am trying to say, Your logic here is "you're wrong because I'm right", you're aware of that? I'm listening to you, and then I'm telling you why what you say is incorrect, so we can come to a new conclusion. That's how fact-based discussions work. And fight or flight response is not. And I never said so. I used your example as a direct counterexample to show that the multitude of human behavior isn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 08:34 PM
1

And I believe you underestimate evolutionary instincts. Have you ever noticed how some people run from the cops even if they are doing nothing wrong, and when questioned they reply "I got scared"? See, again, you're mixing up cultural upbringing and evolutionary urges. You sound like the guys talking about models of society, like monogamy, which appeared after the agricultural revolution being evolutionary anchored into the human psyche when this societal change didn't even happen long enough ag…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 07:56 PM
1

Thousands of years worth of evolutionary survival instinct don't just go away overnight (or in a couple centuries even) because you drop a species in to a "civilized" society. Of course they don't, but as so often, I see a overestimation of the influence of evolutionary instincts. The frontal cortex of the brain itself has developed in such a way that it can specifically suppress evolutionary urges. They do exist, that's not what we discuss here, evolutionary psychology has a factual basis, but …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 06:27 PM
2

Didn't someone in this thread, or perhaps the previous one, say that it's rape unless there is "enthusiastic consent?" In some cases, they demand "enthusiastic verbal consent." Okay, okay, okay. Let's stop here for a minute and talk about actual examples instead of just concepts. You evidently think that non-enthusiastic and non-informed consent should be perfectly fine do define the legal status of a sexual act (obvious trigger warning from here on). First, let's imagine a woman wanting to have…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 01:22 PM
1

Nope, sorry, but informed consent doesn't mean whatever you want it to mean. For example, these would only be considered rape by a incredibly small minority of feminists: I read an article by a nutjob feminists suggesting that her husband was raping her when she willingly had sex with him, because she didn't know he had cheated on her in the past. There are actual issues about information as conditional to sex. For example, when you ask "Are you on birth control?" before sex and she lies, has sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 01:03 PM
1

I understand your point, but my disagreement lies in choice. When a person chooses to over drink, they know what they're doing, the inhibition lowering effects of alcohol are well documented and known to even children. So a person chooses to intoxicate themselves with full knowledge of it's effects. Correct, they choose to get drunk. They did not automatically choose to accept the risk of someone raping them. And since I already expect to hear the age old "If you leave your car open, you have to…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 12:48 PM
4

Okay, let's go this through step by step. First situation, a drunk woman is so drunk that she can't say no or show physical resistance. Not necessarily unconscious though. If a man now starts penetrating her I find it safe to assume that he was still sober enough to consent if he was still sober enough to initiate the physical encounter. The same would apply for a woman raping a man unable of resisting or saying no, or a man raping a man, or... In short, if both were too drunk to resist, both mu…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 12:30 PM
0

About the point "doing something you normally wouldn't"-point, you're missing that even when you wouldn't do something, you evidently still desire to do it. In other words, when a woman has sex with a stranger while drunk, yet her actions while sober afterwards indicate that she didn't want to, how can you assume that she did want to before? The point is that you essentially assume "well MAYBE some people want x / do x", so we can just discard the majority of cases. If people are so obsessed wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 12:06 PM
6

If so, how can you oppose sex with children, theoretically? Because the entire reason that we assume children can't consent to sex is that they are unable of INFORMED consent. If you say informed consent doesn't exist, there is no more moral reason not to have sex with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 11:51 AM
1

What you say is correct in a tribal context. Sadly, or luckily, depending on your personal politics, we don't live in a tribal society though. And trying to assert "worth" or "value" in a general sense instead of just a reproductive sense from that is idiotic anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/14 11:17 AM
5

Because, as said, it encapsulates the multitude of facts that make it impossible for science to separate any sub-species in the species of homo sapiens sapiens (which is by itself a sub species of homo sapiens, and so on and so forth). Because, as I said, science can't just name things without standards. That was the whole problem with the word "race". Biologists started running around and called anything a "race" because there was no strict standard for what constitutes a race. So they started …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 11:30 PM
3

Well surprise, guys, life isn't a game. You can't just roll for charisma to get a woman to suck your d12. And I won't even respond to a paragraph that uses "Cultural Marxism" in a non-ironic way.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 11:04 PM
3

Clearly, "value" in this case is the sum of what everyone thinks. Well, but that's the problem with your concept of SMV. To begin, a woman is not an object, but a human being with agency. Yet you define high SMV as "many people desire the woman". In a marketplace-scenario, this would work well if the woman was an object without agency and a third party tried to sell her. The third party will be interested in many people wanting the object, because that means it can raise the price/is likely to s…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 10:54 PM
5

Yeah, race is a charged term so I get why we'd decide to stop using it. Race wasn't simply abolished as an biological term for being politically incorrect - but for not longer being able to keep up with the standards of physics. Today, race is rarely, if ever used when it comes to a biologic context - scientists prefer "sub-species", which has, compared to "race" stricter and more precise requirements for classification. It's more or less just used when talking about selective breeding. Now that…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 10:25 PM
7

Aw, sorry man, the comment chain confused me because you answered to my post and not his. :D Sorry to you as well. Well, I guess we've both lost frame so hard now we should just dispose of ourselves, due to our horribly low value.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 03:57 AM
7

Did you just say there are no genetic differences between races??? Dude, are you seriously discussing with me right now whether "black people" are a separate "race" from "white people" and "Asian people"? I remember that argument and I don't remember losing it. I've been banned from TBP anyway. Im looking at it right now and can't see these several sources I was provided... Are you even aware what sources are? mentalfork gave you four actual documents in that single post already. I linked that o…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 03:51 AM
4

So, again your only argument is "You're wrong because you're wrong"? Come on guys, you're better than that. You have scientific evidence for your beliefs? Then show it instead of just dodging around the need to provide proof if you want to call something proven. You came to your conclusions through a logical line of thought? Then show it instead of just endlessly reciting the conclusions themselves. That's the simple request that people who oppose TRP have done again and again: If you can prove …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 02:35 AM
19

So I started to write this answer by saying that blue pillers don't actually say all evolutionary psychology is bullshit, but that is falsely interpreted and that just the popular parts are used by TRP-users. Then I continued by saying that people who have actually studied evolutionary psychology and similar topics have often enough called out the faulty methods and conclusions that TRP uses and comes to. So then I proceeded to look for that on TBP. That's when I noticed you already posted on ou…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 01:01 AM
15

Women are more valuable than men, at least based off their gender. I think this is a statement many red pill men would agree with. A man can have 100 children in his life time while a women, before modern medicine, would be fortunate to have 3 or more. Women are inherently more "precious" and must be preserved, while men can be discarded without much concern. I hope you're aware that you still marginalizing them by pedestalizing them. Most men are still left in the dust though. I hope you're als…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/14 11:14 PM
7

A hot blonde chicks has more sexual value then a fat ugly one. For someone who is more attracted to the hot blonde chick instead of the fat ugly one, correct. See the blue pill denies that there even is a sexual market place. First, as said countless times, there is no blue bill ideology. So "the blue pill" doesn't deny anything. Second, what those who oppose TRP deny is not a sexual market place in the context of "people try to find a suitable mate", but the concept of sexual market value, that…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/14 11:02 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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