TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Findol272 Archive

View 0 posts and 746 comments by Findol272 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-1

That is literally a meaningless virtue signal. Are you an individual with something to say? Do you have anything to contribute other than "men complaining is why women chose to stay single!!!!?!!" I'm not even redpill and this type of behaviour disgusts me. Literal thought-terminating brainless dribble. If you think OP is wrong, how about you say how and why? Modern literacy is dead and buried.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 10:05 AM
-6

If it wasn't what he meant then why did he say it. He didn't "say it". Him using the word "equal" at the end of a sentence doesn't mean the whole post is OP saying women "just wanting to be equal". That's not even the meaning of that single sentence. I took his words and re-stated them So no, you didn't. I don't even agree fully with OP, but the dishonest nonsense in the comments need to be studied.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 09:51 AM
-8

Yeah you just took a small part of a sentence and extrapolated it as it replacing the meaning of the whole post. Do you care about being honest? Read the sentence again. In what world could you honestly represent the post as OP saying women just "wanting to be equal". You don't have to agree with OP but basic intellectual honesty goes a long way.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 09:48 AM
-4

I don't think that's remotely close to what the post is saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 09:42 AM
17

The idea that people want to be in a relationships only with people they're maximally attracted to sexually is nonsense, and quite obviously so. You can see or meet people who you find very sexually attractive but that you would never pursue for obvious reasons like different lifestyles, values, age differences etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 12:42 PM
6

That was an obvious joke. You always seem to be confused by the fact that people who are in relationships and who are looking for relationships do have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 05:45 PM
4

Read my comment, I already addressed it
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 05:40 PM
9

You didn’t. I actually read your post. Pretending you addressed it and then spamming "pls read the post" just doesn't work as well as you'd like to pretend it does.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 05:07 PM
9

Stop spamming nonsense and actually say something.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 04:46 PM
–

Another day, another post by Lilith not understanding that sex and attraction is still an important factor in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 03:28 PM
3

It doesn't disprove OP. Describing something isn’t condoning it. Of course it isn’t. But you didn't just "describe" something. You used an example in context, in a way that sounds like you're excusing women insulting men because one of the worst person alive today also uses insults. By quoting Trump you're not condoning Trump, but you're implicitly condoning women insulting men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 09:27 AM
0

I'm saying "should" because the obvious sexism showed by women in this thread is actually not acceptable and other groups don't get away with the same level of bigoted reactions. But, for the sake of argument, does it matter to you if women blame men in the past (i.e. the "patriarchy") Women don't blame men in the past at all. Feminism is based on the assumption that patriarchy exists today not a 1000 years ago or whatever. The saying is "we live under a patriarchy" not "we used to live under a …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 06:05 PM
9

The thread is about women using insults towards men. You brought Trump up as an example to show how the "other side" meaning men uses those insults, to justify women using the same type of insults in return.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 05:54 PM
-1

Yeah just to be clear, when you said you'd be happy to listen, support and be kind, we agree that that's not true right? Yes sometimes you listen to your friends, that's how it goes, and I'm willing to bet you've listened to way more female friends confiding in you than male friends. I don’t have a lot of single friends anymore. Doesn't matter. The point wasn't that you were or not actually doing it, but that you said you can't or couldn't. We're not talking purely about what is actually the cas…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:38 PM
0

A lot of women’s and men’s issues stem from patriarchy. Says you and feminists. The patriarchy is a shortcut to say "men" without feeling like too much of an asshole. It's basically like when nazis talk about "jewry" instead of Jewish people. It's so they can have an out saying "oh, no we don't mean you! We just mean...you know. gestures towards everything." But we all know what that means, and same for feminists. (Funny how some feminists also propose male genocide as a way to "fix" the world) …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:27 PM
0

True, but also they likely agree with it and don't really question what they're being told about it. That's how most people go through life. And the fact that feminism is now going on the defensive is proof that even that is not working anymore. I don't agree. Feminism is showing cracks because they have for too long insisted on dehumanising men and the number of disenfranchised men has been steadily growing to a point where it doesn't work. The majority of men still are for gender equality, jus…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:14 PM
1

No, they don't. The majority of men support feminism or equality between men and women. If what you say were to be true, there should be an almost categorical opposition to women's rights from men which just isn't the case. Nice justification of bigotry though.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 12:13 PM
1

Okay, so you think it's valid then for men to have inverse empathy for women who blame their issues on men or the patriarchy? (In the case of feminism) What a great world we're building.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 12:10 PM
10

Hard disagree. But if you meant "they claim to have a quasi monopoly on victimhood", agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 09:01 AM
-2

Hard disagree on the "emasculating". It's just a sexist notion to dismiss men. I’ve encountered many, many men who end up trauma dumping to me Women do this weaponising of pseudo-psychological terms to shame others. Them opening up to you isn't "trauma dumping". Just admit you actually don't care and that your empathy was just performative and move on. simply because I’m someone who will listen and not tell them to man up and get through it. I mean you are doing that, although in a cowardly way.…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 09:01 AM
-5

Should men have inverse empathy for women who blame men for their woes?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 08:50 AM
10

So you're happy to be on Trump's level? One of the worst politician of the modern era, a fascist, rapist and pedophile (defender at least, if not full blown). This is the league of character you want to be in?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:26 AM
17

But that doesn't excuse racism for example, or types of language that hurt and dehumanise vast swathes of the population. Women don't have a monopoly on being hurt.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:19 AM
–

Yes because being filthy rich tends to render other factors irrelevant? Are women attracted to money OR to looks? Can we stop pretending it's not common knowledge that very rich people don't play by the same rules in almost all things of life?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 12:55 PM
1

What is enough? I don't know what is enough. Do you? And is it that because we don't know where this line is, that there is no responsibility at all? At what point are you allowed to wash your hands of it? I'm not sure that you should be 100%. Maybe you are incapable of inacting change, but that small part of responsibility is still there. Were the Germans in 1945 allowed to wash their hands of it? Even if they voted correctly, or felt they could have done nothing? Do you expect people to sacrif…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/01/26 08:58 AM
0

suffering tremendously are responsible for their own suffering? In some ways yes. Maybe not directly. Maybe the older generations are responsible and now the responsibility on younger generation is not as strong because they had no agency in making that political system what it is. But yes, ultimately a nation is responsible for itself. Who else's responsibility would it be? Can you realistically expect North Koreans to topple their own government? No, probably not. Are they suffering tremendous…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates23/01/26 07:42 AM
-1

It depends. If they elected the dictator and ignored when the elected representative was slowly eroding democratic institutions and didn't really care when they consolidated all powers around themselves, who else is responsible? Yes, citizens have a responsibility to keep their governments in check. It's uncontroversial. I disagree with your reductionist argument. It's the opposite of reductionist. I detest this modern notion that "oh if you voted you did your best, what else can you do?" "No, n…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 08:05 PM
2

I agree with you. Estonia shouldn't feel morally obligated to accept Russian immigrants, especially when Russia has used multiple times the strategy of pushing a lot of Russian population in areas, an then using these pockets of population as justification for annexation and war.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 05:39 PM
1

Your collectivizing blame on identity groups is absolutely how you get genocides. My guy, if you can't differentiate between hold the nazis accountable for their crimes and the victims of the Holocaust, I don't know how to help you. they are both to blame for alligator Alcatraz and the bombing of country of the week? You are so lacking of nuance that you think all types of responsibility are equal and that everybody is equally to blame. I don't know how to talk to you. No, a regular American is …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 05:36 PM
0

Collective responsibility implies every individual is responsible, even those who voted "correctly". Yes, because just voting is sometimes not enough. Are you implying that Germans who voted against Hitler and just did what they were told afterwards were innocent? It is a fascist principle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_responsibility Did you read the article? I made it clear I wasn't talking about collective punishment but about responsibility and what the article describes as fascis…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 01:54 PM
-1

Nope. Collective punishment for perceived collective responsibility is fascistic. Saying that democracy is not just a right, but a responsibility for all citizens isn't fascistic at all. It's what actually stops fascism. I'm so tired of people pretending like voting isn't a responsibility and of people washing their hands of their governments because they're not doing the atrocities themselves. You are partly responsible for this. And your country needs to take responsibility for these atrocitie…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 01:37 PM
0

Collectivizing blame on a group is how you get to “they all deserve this” Not at all. I'm only putting the blame they deserve. What you're pointing out is putting undeserved blame to justify horrible treatment, when that's not at all what I'm talking about but you don't seem capable of nuance in this conversation. Please answer this for me: Who was responsible for the holocaust? Have the Germans who elected Hitler and enabled these atrocities any blame or are they fully innocent? people being pi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 12:05 PM
0

No, it isn't at all. Please tell me how citizens being responsible for their countries' actions means killing babies is acceptable? Do better than half-baked stupid catch phrases.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 11:47 AM
1

Exactly. You got it. I'm not sure what you struggle to understand. The blame is on all citizens. Individual citizens only have part of the blame, not the whole of it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 10:55 AM
-2

Not victim blaming individuals, but attributing collective responsibility to a nation. Were germans in the 40s not responsible for what their government did?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 10:48 AM
-5

I won't tell you but I'm quite aware. Voting is a big responsibility. It's not a mundane thing. There is a lot of consequences for who you vote for. People have taken this idea for granted and are now seemingly shocked when bad voting decisions and political apathy have disastrous consequences.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 09:50 AM
-4

Yes. That's how democracy works. Your vote has power because you need to accept the power of the vote of your neighbour. You cannot wash your hands of the system because the result doesn't suit you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 09:37 AM
-4

She's absolutely correct. Citizens are ultimately responsible for their country.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/01/26 07:57 AM
–

The ideology is this weird modern feminist misandry, where the vast majority of men are horrible and where if a man cannot have sex, it means they're an incel misogynist. Something like that. I don't know, just like all type of extremism, it's quite absurd and nonsensical.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 02:46 PM
–

They seem to be completely ideologically captured unfortunately. They unironically commented this: Easy - men who are ugly, short, poor, disabled, unemployed etc get laid. Men who are those things and also misogynists do not get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 02:35 PM
–

Nope, I said 99% of men who can't get laid are misogynistic bigots Right, and that's straight bigotry coming right out of your ass. Funny how people like you don't even try to make your hate scenario believable. "The Jews control every and all the banks and all institutions!" "99% of black people are horrible criminals who should be deported!" "99% of men who don't have sex are misogynistic bigots who are only getting what they deserve!". This is pathetic. And obviously wrong to anybody not boug…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:48 PM
–

but men who can't get sex are 99% deserving of what women say about them Why? You're making a huge leap in logic here, thinking that men who can't get sex are misogynists or deserving of contempt or something. This is obviously untrue and nonsensical. Misogynists get more sex than non misogynists. "what women say" is important because that's always relied upon as justification for why men can't get laid. It isn't? It's obvious to almost everybody that what people say and what people do is differ…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 10:46 AM
–

Actually a study showed that misogynists had more sex than non misogynists... It's also not very surprising.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 10:52 PM
–

What hypocrisy? What's contradicting? I've discussed this at length in some other comment, but basically someone who isn't particularly attractive and doesn't take care of themselves at all, claiming none of the men were attractive can be seen as hypocritical. Just like when conservatards claim they're only attracted to virgin tradwives, when they're themselves just deranged gooners who can't start a fire or fix anything. There's a level of hypocrisy where one proclaims certain standards only to…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 06:46 PM
–

How about you read your own definition: behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel That's it. It's not controversial. So please look deeper in your definitions before being an ass about it and being wrong. How someone looks has nothing to do with what sexually arouses them. No, but it could be hypocritical. For example, if you are only attracted to people who are very well groomed and who put a lot of effort in their appearance but aren't well groomed yourself or don't put any …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 06:24 PM
–

Right. At least present honestly the argument. You don't win a prize for lying about what's in the post. Idk why y'all struggle with that concept so much. Nobody is struggling with that at all. You also don't win a prize for lying about that either. She's not "obligated" to do anything, but one could call out her hypocrisy, or standards or whatever else (if this wasn't a fictive account). This isn't contradictory at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 06:06 PM
–

Hypocrisy involves conscious behavior. No, it doesn't. I assume most hypocrisy comes from biases and incapacity of people to have an accurate self-perception. Attraction is an involuntary response. While that may be the case, declarations of attractions are also mostly socially performative and might be informed by social biases and prejudices, that can still be called out and brought into the sphere of morality. Calling someone a "hypocrite" for what does or doesn't arouse them is fundamentally…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 05:45 PM
–

I don't know why you think I'm OP. I simply rephrased what seemed obviously to be OP's point. But if I were to try to answer you honestly, I think it's more natural to have "realistic" expectations and behaviours. Someone who isn't "attractive" but doesn't find anyone attractive seems a bit hypocritical, like they have too high standards, when they wouldn't pass their own standards. It's like when cringe conservatards demand a tradwife virgin but are themselves degenerate gooners who can't chang…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 05:03 PM
–

Don't "y'all" me. I'm not OP nor do I necessarily agree. women aren't attracted to every single man they see? The post makes it clear that the issue isn't being attracted to "every man" but that the example given was attracted to none of the men she was presented with. There is a big difference but, it seems obvious you're not willing to engage honestly with what the post is presenting if you have to strawman this hard.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 04:52 PM
2

do you not know what the word "just" means int hat sentence? It's a strawman. Just like I've never seen any man say they think women should date them JUST because they're nice. It's a dishonest framing, and you're aware of that. They dont constantly bitch about what undesirable women do. So most women are undesirable according to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 04:48 PM
–

More like "why aren't women, despite not being stellar, attracted to anyone?"
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 03:44 PM
2

You linked just 1 study that you were directly referencing the exact number from. So, yep
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 04:33 PM
2

I used "blackpilling" interchangeably with "highly discouraging" because it's an online term that people usually understand. especially when they themselves known they would never date a female just because she's a good person. "They" are just a strawman in your head. There are millions of men who would date a "female" (weird term for women) who is a good person. Most men actually prefer dating "good" women rather than "violent and sexist" women. This is uncontroversial. Normal men move the fuck…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 09:46 AM
6

Okay so you changed the stats now it went from 33% to between 6 and 15%? And I looked at the study, it's 197 American college students asked, and the "a third admit to sexual assault" includes since the age of 14 any unwanted touch. Meaning that a 14 year old touching their classmates shoulder would count as "sexual assault". The study even distinguishes between "normal" sexual assault and the "worst" kind (sexual in nature) and it's 16.8%, not 33%. So no, just because a handful (literally) of y…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 09:12 AM
4

So they don't admit to rape?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 07:20 AM
1

As I said, I agree with you 100%. Some activists online might disagree, afaik
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 05:37 PM
3

Trans advocates say that this is transphobia btw. But I agree with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 05:31 PM
2

Do trans advocates accept the "if they can prove it causes them depression & anxiety" part? Otherwise, I agree with you fully.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 01:24 PM
2

How is that a pivot? I responded to almost every sentence in your response? normal stable people dont think like that Normal people can't think "Damn some of these women really are throwing themselves at these horrible men..."? Men regularly call out blackpillers as dangerous, weird, creepy, and mentally unstable. Dude, if the word "blackpilling" triggered you, change it to "discouraging" so you don't overly obsess over it. "Some men find it very discouraging how a lot of women just pursue horri…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:59 AM
7

Punishing crime is necessary, but not necessarily effective on its own to deter crime. But I see you're stuck in bad faith mode, so it's no use discussing anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:40 AM
8

Because the manosphere and nice guys are misogynists who only see women as holes. Do you think all men who aren't violent asshole misogynists are in the manosphere or misogynists? If she has a pussy, she should be letting the 'nice guy' fuck it for being on his best behavior. How about all the other normal people who are just looking for a nice and stable partner? They don't exist in your strawman I guess. Because to blackpillers, women are not people with their own standards and shortcomings. S…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:38 AM
7

Is that what I said?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:33 AM
8

Yeah, and negative reinforcement does absolutely nothing to stop or manage those behaviours.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:22 AM
13

Do you think the guy in the video is a "pussy nerdy nice guy"? Yes, a lot of men notice women are attracted to men who are objectively horrible (violent, criminally inclined, rapists etc.) and that's pretty blackpilling when they see that being a good person and a normal person is absolutely not attractive to women in the slightest in a lot of cases. This is also made worse by the constant deluge of complaints from women and society in general about these specific bad men that are made to be "al…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:21 AM
8

Negative reinforcement is garbage and doesn't work, look at prisons overflowing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:11 AM
8

Some people will not date trans people. You can't really force that on anyone. That said, it's still very rude behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:09 AM
5

Representation is voted for. Women's vote for representation counts the same as men and more women vote than men. Representative democracy is elected, this is the representation. The lack of faith in democratic representation is already abysmal but that would tank it completely. How would it even work? Each party need to propose 2 candidates of each gender with exactly the same platforms, strengths, personalities etc., and when the party is elected the one gender needed for parity is selected? I…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 01:52 PM
1

What are you pointing out?
/r/MensRights03/01/26 04:51 PM
1

Can you at least say something? Pretending to leave "the data tell the story" is nonsense. You picked the data and chose to present it this way. Have the courage to make an actual point because what are we supposed to get from this? That women shouldn't be CEO or something? Why? Because your reading of the data show that in some cases businesses lose value after their introduction? How many businesses lose value that have male CEOs? I know of a few cases where women CEO were appointed when a com…
/r/MensRights03/01/26 04:47 PM
7

Would you base the worth of all men based on how an extremely small minorities respond to some of your comments? (You don't actually know who downvotes you btw, it's an open site)
/r/MensRights31/12/25 06:45 AM
3

The whole disconnect is that it seems that you want someone "perfect" and to find someone who find you the most "perfect" person instead of finding someone perfect for you and being perfect for someone. This obsession of being on top of looks, money and all of these nonsense standards is the issue. The goal shouldn't be to find the statistical impossibilities but to find the perfect partner FOR YOU someone who you can feel very attracted to, who's very attracted to you. Someone who you have a gr…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 06:33 PM
1

Yes. LTR. Purplepilled.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 12:45 PM
2

You could have phrased it as a negative correlation yes, which would have cleared up potential misunderstandings.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 03:46 PM
2

Then you might want to be careful how you express your ideas. It sounds like your saying access to abortion = crime.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 03:29 PM
2

It sounds like you're saying giving women access to abortion is what is causing crime...
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 03:07 PM
1

Statistics don't mean anything, they're just numbers. Just say what you want to say or what you think the numbers are showing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 03:04 PM
17

The gender empathy gap is literally everywhere you look in society. Whether it's harsher prison sentences for men than women, universal focus on women's issues and purposeful derision of men's issues, the villification and scapegoating of "incels", the waving off of men's suicide and much more, I do not believe that the majority of women think of men as human beings at all (or at least not as equal as women). Just because you're hyper-focusing on some women's issues around victimisation doesn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 02:54 PM
1

No they didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 08:30 PM
1

Then why ask it? If you don't believe it's even remotely the case why manufacture this strawman as the only explanation as to why one would care about this issue?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 05:34 PM
3

Do you believe that the elites are secretly meeting and, between plotting to push down wages and raise living costs, have a few breakout sessions on… snipping foreskins? Do you believe this applies to any issue ever? It overlwhelmingly never does for anything ever. Which doesn't mean there aren't issues worth addressing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 01:34 PM
1

It does. What does? by men’s reasoning Care to actually say something you believe? Instead of this weird strawman of what "men" think.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 08:17 PM
6

Men dont need to try to attract most women all the time. They don't. Men need to maximally attract one woman each time. Sure. And they maximally repulse the vast majority of women each time. Which makes it, as I've said, statistically, a suicide of your romantic life.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 06:53 PM
1

Personality includes beliefs and standards Sure, but what actual "belief" are you getting when the only thing you know is that the woman expects you to pay for the first date? It's an extremely common expectation and doesn't tell you much about the woman actually. expecting a man to pay is bad Sure, I guess so. It depends on the reason why actually. I see a difference between a woman just stringing a guy along and using him as for free meals, and a woman who just expects the guy to pay the first…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 06:50 PM
2

Okay, people are weird in this comment section so I wasn't sure. Thanks for the clarification.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 06:09 PM
3

a horrible woman I don't think the majority of women who expect the man to pay for the first date are "horrible". They just expect it because they don't really think about it much and it's expected socialy. Or they think it shows the man's interest and readiness to be generous and blablabla. Sounds like you don’t care much about any except sex ? Where does my comment even slightly lead you to this conclusion? I don't care about personality because...what?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 06:08 PM
3

may be in your best interests. Not really. Or only if you want people that are ideologically opposed to paying on the first date or something and would absolutely hate being with anyone else. Everyone else should avoid those women Nah. A lot of men don't particularly like paying, but they do it, because it shows them in a nicer light and shows their interest and it's somewhat expected of them. Also, "those women" just mean the vast majority of women who think it shows interest and that it's just…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 05:58 PM
4

It doesn't what? The rest of what you say just goes along with everything I've said.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 04:32 PM
3

Bro, I'm not a woman, I don't care about raccooning your scraps. If you feel better about yourself this way, go for it. I'm sure this will help your dating life!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 04:31 PM
12

"We"? There is no "we". Maybe you will stop paying for dinners, yes, but that will probably drop your chances to find a relationship. I'm not sure it will make any difference for women. Maybe there will be one less sucker for free meals, but it will not change what types of men they're attracted to, nor the fact that money and status will remain an important factor for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 02:59 PM
21

Add this to the pile of worthless sentiments like: "Nobody forces anyone to wear makeup or to shave." "You don't have to wear trendy clothes." "You don't need a good job and an occupation" Technically nobody has to do anything. But that's ignoring social and societal pressures. If someone doesn't pay for dates they are drastically reducing the pool of potential romantic prospects and realistically tanking their chances at a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 02:19 PM
1

Why is segregation your first thought? The difference that you don't seem to see is that, while some women and feminists like to make crime a gender essentialist issue, by framing these issues simply as men attacking women, men in general don't have this "us against them" mentality when it comes to these issues. As men, we know good people in our lives, men and women, can be great people and that some people in the world can hurt us, both men and women. We don't have the simplistic "men bad, wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 02:24 PM
2

I do know that. But the absence of graphic depictions of sex (or smut) doesn't mean that the romance isn't about desire. You're just arguing about how graphic or not the book is, as if that had any bearing on what romance actually is.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 08:34 PM
1

I have close friends who I love and cherish dearly. Not that I want to live with them necessarily. I much prefer to live with a life partner that I love and that I am in a committed and exclusive sexual relationship with. I don't want to maybe raise a family with them or comingle finances. Yes because this is usually done with the one you have the family with. Since usually, the one you raise children with is, well the one you conceive the children (sexually) with, and likewise for finances, hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 08:32 PM
1

but that isn’t what distinguishes romantic relationships from platonic relationships, etc. It is, for most people. If sex were the defining feature of romantic relationships then friends with benefits, escort-client relationships, casual hookups, and polysexual friendships would also count. No. Why do you say that, that makes no sense. "Casual hookups" and most of those are just casual sexual relationships with no commitment and they're not what most people would describe as normal romantic rela…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 08:16 PM
3

The "romantic aspect" includes sexual attraction or sex for the majority of people. Guess what you can find in "romance" books.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 07:11 PM
1

If my partner and I stopped having sex And that implies that you have or are having sex with your partner. So are you just lying or what?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 06:19 PM
2

Probably because you already entered a commited monogamous sexual relationship with your partner. Sex isn't a "constant". I think you understand that and are just being bad faith on purpose.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 06:14 PM
2

Hard disagree. Why avoiding the discussion with those vague "only X people would understand" and "if you can't enjoy a relationship without sex it's on you" No, you can have deep, emotional and meaningful relationships without sex. But, in general, romantic relationships do include an exclusive sexual relationship component. That's usually the specific difference that defines real romantic relationships as opposed to friendships.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 06:12 PM
4

Isn't sex the major difference between friendships and relationships?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 05:14 PM
1

Literally all I've said is feminism. Feminists don’t want to take down men. Actually a lot, if not the vast majority of feminists do. Feminism currently sees men as an oppressor class that needs to be taken down. This is completely uncontroversial. Sorry you feel victimized by the fact that girls do better in school when not told that boys are smarter I'm not feeling particularly victimised. Nor am I upset if girls are doing well in school. I actually want both men and women to do well, at least…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 10:01 PM
0

women being autonomous humans This is the typical Motte and Bailey of feminism. Any criticism of feminism is responded by "well, I like being an autonomous human with the rights to vote". As if that's an answer to all the other fucked up things that feminism is doing, like staunchlt advocating against men having access to victim support, removing men from legal definition of potential rape victims, defunding research and advocacy for male issues etc. Criticism of feminism, an ideology which has …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:01 PM
-3

Nobody even remotely serious wants to take away rights to vote and to own bank accounts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 06:49 PM
1

I guess fair enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 06:47 PM
1

Political and philosophical ideals can change with material conditions. Shocker.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 06:44 PM
1

we generally don't have to worry about our sons being raped, abused Just because you don't worry, doesn't mean that you shouldn't worry about these things happening to your child. But yes, you're correct, women face different levels of risks than men for these issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 05:52 PM
1

No, you said women lie The framing is a lie. Yes, we all agree. I would have to say choosing a partner based on safety is certainly more logical Right exactly. Women seem to value the material status more and men seem to value beauty more. That choice is the difference between living in the slums on section 8 forever and living a comfortable life in the suburbs. Yes. Those are material conditions. What you're talking about is exactly materialistic. Men want children just as much if not more than…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 04:22 PM
1

I know what you meant and it's still not a reward. Okay, do you think socialisation doesn't exist? Or that there aren't some behaviours that are either positively or negatively reinforced in society? Social pressures don't exist? (I'm avoiding the word "reward" since even if "apparently" you knew what I meant, it seems to have been a big issue for you). It's a bullshit get out of jail free card for people to behave badly and not take accountability. It's both. They get socially validated (avoide…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 04:12 PM
1

I've said multiple times other groups face much worse discrimination and victimisation. So why are you lying now?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:58 PM
0

So, did I say that? Toxic behaviour should always be called out. The calling out might not have much impact though, if the toxic behaviour js culturally and socially validated.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:55 PM
0

Women dating and having sex with men is not a reward. I meant "reward" as in "rewarding certain behaviour". Which is when you give positive reinforcement to specific behaviour. This just means that those behaviour are socially reinforced by social "success". Not that somebody is getting candy for doing this or that. A reward implies the person receiving it is the only person who benefits. That's obviously wrong, but it's neither here nor there. I've never heard of giving someone a reward where t…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:47 PM
1

You just don't like how they frame it. Yes, that's literally what I said. The disagreement is usually on how women want to present their "preferences" as morally good and virtuous, while deciding men for having superficial preferences. I personally think that's fine for women to chose the "safer bet". Instead of listening to that men just get mad. Eh. That may be the case sometimes, but I'm pretty sure it's usually not that simple. Why is it that people can never seem to understand that other pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:27 PM
2

No group of humans have had more privilege in all of history as the cis white man. And that's irrelevant. Something bad doesn't become good because you do it to privileged people. You're weird and immoral. Black people have zero privilege. It depends. Please Google intersectionality. You're comparing apples and oranges. Apples and oranges are both fruits. Just like misandry and racism are both forms of bigotry. One is worse than the other, sure, but they're both bad. equate racism to women being…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:22 PM
2

But, do women also have to warn their sons? They should. But they probably have internalised this idea that men are strong and that whatever happens to them is a result of their own actions. There's a reason fathers are protective of their daughters in a much more extreme and visible way than mothers are protective of their sons. Yes, there are reasons for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:19 PM
-2

No, you're probably called a misandrist because you're a misandrist. Not because you don't reward toxic behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 11:56 AM
0

They can choose to not reward said behaviour. Otherwise I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 11:41 AM
2

It doesn't matter. Bigotry isn’t only bad when it's systematic. It's always bad. It's worse when it's systematic. Just like bullying. It's always bad. But it's worse when it's done about immutable characteristics. Honestly, it's not that hard.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 11:37 AM
2

It’s a poor analogy. It isn't. You just don't like it because you know racism is bad, but you can't rationalise that misandry is also bad so you find it uncomfortable. Women don’t talk about how men are violent towards women in order to oppress men or be bigoted towards them It doesn't have to be that you're talking about this in order to be bigoted but that the way you talk about it in a way that is bigoted. Just like people usually (not always) say stuff about safety not just to be racist or b…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 11:19 AM
0

An insulting meta comment instead of addressing the actual topic? How surprising. Why even interact here, if all you're looking to do is shit on men in an echo chamber?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 10:51 AM
2

Cis men are not systematically oppressed in the same way black people are. I didn't say they were oppressed in the same way. I didn't say they were "equivalent". Do you know what an analogy is? I ask you again, how should I mitigate the risk then? By being careful and cautious? I'm not sure what you want from me. I'm not a security consultant. And I will say it again, you don't need to be sexist to keep yourself safe, just like you don't need to be racist to keep yourself safe. I know safety is …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 10:49 AM
0

The problem here, that people like you want to always obfuscate the point in these discussions. Yes women do reward toxic masculinity and incentivize toxic male behaviour by reward. Men (me included) do call out aggressive or toxic behaviour but it doesn't matter if the dating market makes people displaying these behaviours successful. That's what can be understood when "why would i want to blame him, he gets what he wants, it's working" I don't agree with the first part of "not blaming" the per…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 10:39 AM
2

No, you're called a misandrist when you make sexist statements about men or broad negative generalisations about men. You can mitigate risks however you want. Some types of risk mitigation will make you look bigoted though. If you cross the street every time you see a black person, yes, people will call you racist.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 10:26 AM
2

Conservatives love doing general "scare tactics". They say these things not because they believe them 100% but because they think saying these things will make people behave more conservatively, which is what they want. They do the same with immigration and a bunch of other things too.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 09:23 AM
1

Men seem pretty offended Not really. During meta conversations about dating, some men might bring up the hypocrisy of women who pretend to be highly moral in their dating choices when they're actually just being materialistic and superficial. If you marry rich because it's safer, just say so, don't pretend it's for the rich guy's "personality" or whatever nonsense is commonly said.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 09:09 AM
3

Firstly, not all men are bad. That's a fact and it's hinestly a bit weird how you brought that up as if the fact that "not all men are bad" is just empty conservative rhetoric. Men are human beings and yes, not all of them are "bad". Secondly, while conservatives are pretty weird about sex and being overly protective of women's sexuality, there is absolutely no contradiction with what you pointed out. Mitigating risks by certain behaviour doesn't have to mean you think most people are bad. I don…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 07:20 AM
–

Are you serious? Of course the people with high body count would be more incensed about people criticising high body count.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 09:42 AM
–

No one’s really looking for a guy with a great job, ambitious, someone I can bring home to mama, etc when theyre just trying to fuck around, Either women are looking for great ambitious guys they can bring home to mama, or they aren't. The Schrödinger's fuckboi should have no impact on that. because they’re not being honest Right, which was my initial disagreement. Most guys are looking for a respectful and loving partner to build their lives with. You keep pretending that men are just lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 04:23 PM
–

A main point of your post is that men aren't honest and are just looking for hookups. This shouldn't really have any impact on the actual quality of the advice, but hey, that's your own logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 02:38 PM
–

The majority of men just want to find a nice partner that they can build a life with. You're just absolutely dishonest in your presentation. And yes, women, do lie to men when they give "advice".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 02:23 PM
-3

You're just completely ignoring the fact that gender (and its norms) is mostly a mating strategy. Just because you think you made most of your life decisions with very little thought of your dating prospects, doesn't mean that social and gendered pressures don't exist. That's wild.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 07:52 PM
-22

Good comment, but with a reminder that the right-wing is not "self-preservation" for men and that conservatives aren't going to improve anything for men, on the contrary.
/r/MensRights10/11/25 07:22 PM
0

People that hate men don't overwhelmingly pick men over women as leaders. Why not? You just assert this as if it makes sense. Does the KKK mostly pick black leaders? No, but also we're talking about group that intellectualises that hate while also being composed in large part by the hated group itself. Also most people on the left still act with sexist presumptions, which ironically, is the theoretical basis for the misandry they talk about. Does the KKK mostly pick black leaders? No, because th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 09:17 PM
2

Abortion isn't "mass infanticide". Not my fault if you're struggling to even understand the basic scope of what it is. women's best interest. You seem perfectly fine with watching women die in agonising pain, bleeding out like pigs due to ectopic pregnancies that wouldn't be viable. Or to listen to women dying from sepsis with a dead fetus in the womb rotting them from the inside begging and begging to be saved while people like you smugly assert "abortion is bad". If you ever voted against abor…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 07:16 PM
2

You're just mindlessly repeating MAGA talking points. Nope. I hate MAGA. The fact that you think that you really see this as a partisan thing of "MAGA vs the left". The "left" overwhelmingly votes for male politicians. And that's supposed to prove something? Some left-wing academic men have discussed the idea of male genocide for example. the modern Republican Party, which is essentially a Christian fascist organization at this point. I agree, even though it's not really relevant to the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 07:05 PM
1

The left believes that men and women should have equal rights No it doesn't. The left thinks we live in a patriarchy with men as an oppressor class and women as an oppressed class. This is definitionally incompatible with equal rights. Men on the right are scared of a world in which women have equal rights That is true. I prefer a party that is apathetic to men's issues over one that attempts to make things better for men by taking rights away from women. I also prefer it, but you will not see m…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 03:35 PM
2

men always say that they are the more logical No they don't. A fringe of "redpill" grifters maybe do, like Sneako or Fresh & Fit, but that's hardly representative of half of the population.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 10:49 AM
1

Outside of disinformation campaign, the left is apathetic to men's issues, if not outwarldy aggressively misandrist at times. It's not just about purely cynical social media metrics but also what the messaging is and what the left has been saying to men for decades.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 10:47 AM
3

I would say they are left leaning in spite of the general messaging on the left. I'm broadly "on the left" but readily admit that the general messaging from the left concerning men is disastrous if not borderline hateful.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 10:41 AM
5

How is that relevant? Women are much more impacted by abortion rights for example, and yet conservative women have much stronger anti abortion views than even conservative men. Yes some groups vote and advocate against their best interests.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 10:37 AM
63

It's the just world fallacy. "Good things aren't happening to you? It must be because of a fault of your character"
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/11/25 09:48 PM
6

I think it looks different at the extremes and what parts of the romances are more appealing but in general, I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 04:29 PM
11

Yeah, men are into romance, it's just bullshit to be able to say "men are beasts who only care about sex"
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:13 PM
5

Unilateral work, is the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 02:33 PM
2

They're just moving the goalpost. "Men are losers who stay inside playing video games." "Oh really? I see a lot of guys doing outside activities?" "Why aren't they working instead? Men are such losers." Whatever scenario they will move the goalpost.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 08:15 AM
1

Can you please explain what you want people do to to "address" the abusive men? We already arrest men barely on suspicion of domestic abuse. What else do you want? Abusers are people, and yeah, they're bad, what do you expect us to do about it?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 03:14 PM
1

I didn't say it was morally bankrupt to base your opinion on real life experience, but that it's morally bankrupt to base your opinion/beliefs on personal convenience and what "works" for you personally. It's not a controversial take.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/25 10:03 AM
1

Why? If you think about it for more than 2 seconds you can find plenty of reasons why taking up ideologies and beliefs out of personal convenience is a bad idea. Blue pill is the one saying “be polite to people, work on yourself and don’t prioritize sex over other things in life, learn to be fun and friendly, work on your trauma and don’t put the expectation on your partner to “fix” you etc. It's the image Blue Pill try to give itself sure. Just like the Red Pill will say "we're the ones saying …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/25 10:00 AM
2

?? What’s amoral about Blue Pill?? First of all, amoral is not the same as immoral. Secondly, I didn't say the Blue Pill is immoral, I said "choosing" one's belief or ideas based on personal convenience is. It’s not that he “believes” in Blue Pill. He identifies as "Blue Pill". Simply "acting Blue Pill" makes no sense at all. Blue Pill, Red Pill, Black Pill etc. are sets of belief about the world and specifically dating dynamics. Why do you think being Red Pill, which self-describes as “enjoy th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 05:11 PM
0

It's not confusing, it's bizarre and I would consider it, if not unethical at least somewhat morally bankrupt. I don't base my beliefs and opinions on convenience or personal utility. This is what I find bizarre.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 03:29 PM
1

Yes, and I was simply commenting on the fact that your answer ("because it works for me") is bizarre to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 03:25 PM
10

You're using terms like "incels" and "redpill" more like insults and slurs rather than actual descriptors or groups. so far being a normie has had no discernible negative effect on my life. You seem perfectly unbothered by any truth claim analysis of the positions and to have just a utilitarian "if it doesn't concern me, I don't care" mentality. Which seems a bit dubious in all honesty.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 03:04 PM
5

The video is AI garbage, sure, but how is it hate speech? I had a brief listen to it and it seems just bland discussion on how women centric social-media tend to be performatively misandrist, which, I think is much better to be performatively hateful than genuinely hateful. So what is it? You want men to think women are genuinely hateful instead of performatively hateful? Or what is it that you're calling out?
/r/MensRights03/11/25 10:51 AM
1

I quoted what you said like you requested Yes, again after you changed what you claimed it said and now can use this to dismiss everything else. Good job! Protests have demands. Okay, so formulate in good faith a demand that men could make in such a protest, in a way that you think would drive general mainstream support. Demonstrations spread awareness. Awareness is not needed. You're aware, you just don't care. Apathy is the issue. Apathy is widespread and is used to ridicule men on a broader s…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:59 PM
0

Slow down and read it. Slowly. I'm clearly saying You're basically the kind of person who says: Which means what's about to follow is not something that I think, but that it's something that YOU might say. The quotation marks also reinforce this in the following statement. That’s your example I’m referring to. Wow. Short memory. Yeah so it's clearly not "my example", it's not something that I believe. I don't know how else to explain basic literacy to you. I mean at this point, it's just clear y…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:25 PM
4

Your ‘example’ (I’m convinced the only reason women want men to care about women’s issues is because they don’t care about other women) said the opposite. You're so dishonest. Please do quote when I wrote that. Funny how you exclude the quotation marks and when I clearly stated that this is what YOU would say according to your own logic and not at all my own opinion. Why lie so much? It doesn’t make sense as a comparison to my title because women have proven en masse that they do care about othe…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 11:47 AM
9

Women go above and beyond for one another. EVERYONE acknowledges this. Did I say the opposite? How convenient is it that women do something they're heavily socialised towards doing and are socially celebrated for. So, even if (some) women want men to support their cause, women still put in the work Sure women put in the work that is, as I said, doing something socially celebrated and promoted, meanwhile dehumanising men for their vital support about those issues. whether men participate in doing…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 10:38 AM
9

You're basically the kind of person who says: "I'm convinced the only reason women want men to care about women's issues is because they don't care about other women." Women greatly benefit and are the primary enforcers of the current masculine socialisation that is the cause of this "loneliness epidemic". Women have participated in greatly reinforcing masculine gender norms and making them tighter and more restrictive than ever while slowly being liberated from their own in the last decades wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 09:26 AM
3

Men confuse "i won't have sex with you to solve your loneliness" with "i don't care about men's problems." Yes, because it's a strawman you're using to dismiss the issue altogether, as if anyone had ever proposed thay woemne should "have sex" with lonely men. You know it's a lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:32 PM
–

I never wrote "all sex is good", so again, what are you answering to?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 07:47 PM
–

Why shouldn't they? I'm confused about how your response is even remotely connected to what I wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 06:54 PM
–

You can only dodge a bullet if the bullet was going to hit you. It's not dodging the bullet if the woman was never going to give you the time of day. It's simply a cope that people who wouldn't have a shot tell themselves. It's the same thing as when guys are super salty and say "Well, you're too ugly anyway" when they get rejected.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 06:39 PM
1

I'm asking what else do you evaluate from someone that you see outside if you can only judge their appearance. Aren't you "reducing" them to their appearance if it's the only thing you can judge?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 09:45 AM
1

This makes absolutely no sense. If you look at someone in the street and recognise them as attractive, what else are you thinking of about them so that it's not objectifying? You have nothing but appearance to judge or "recognise" their attractiveness and you're thus slowly thinking of them in terms of attraction which would meet your criteria for objectification.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 07:54 AM
5

I wrote social pressures. Do you not believe those to exist? Having income is bare minimum Obviously, for survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 08:52 PM
8

Do social pressures not exist?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 08:26 PM
6

Expanding a definition to encompass more cases that weren't included before necessarily means that the definition is becoming "more lax".
/r/MensRights22/10/25 11:59 AM
28

Yup, it's very well documented that conservative women have much stronger views on being anti abortion than even conservative men do.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/10/25 06:06 AM
1

No. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. Everything in life is more nuanced. There are some "standards" that still probably need to be met, like finding someone attractive and sociable, but the laundry list of factors one has to meet is usually misguided and counterproductive. No, you don't "need" someone who works in finance.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/25 06:00 AM
51

That's also why becoming a father isn't so attractive nowadays. There are so many people out there already gloating at your struggle through fatherhood as "payback" for the thousands of years of women doing more childcare work. They don't care about equality or helping parents. They think revenge on innocents today for iniquities of the past is good and just.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/10/25 05:57 AM
-1

Every moment I'm wasting on them is a moment I could be with someone who DOES meet my standards. Yes, but you're not.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:45 PM
-3

You don't know if you do or not. Your artifically inflated standards are preventing you from making this judgement.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:25 PM
-2

Opportunity cost. You're losing on a lot of potential benefits for your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:23 PM
3

Who is mad here? But millionaires telling people living in poverty that money isn't that great is insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 12:30 PM
23

You can Google "fear of crime gender paradox". It's a well-known phenomenon that women, despite being less likely to be victims of violent crimes, have much higher fear levels of these crimes. Just being afraid doesn’t justify dehumanising men. People instinctively understand this for other topics like racism. Just because you had some bad experiences with other ethnicities doesn't mean you are justified in dehumanising said group. But when it comes to men, all of this goes out of the window, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 09:13 AM
6

I guess you're not capable of understanding my point and derailed it by focusing on water. The point was that it's easy for someone that has abundant access to X, to say that X isn't all that great, to someone who has no access to X at all. The person with no access to X doesn't have the luxury to reject X based on taste or experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 07:02 AM
10

Right. Then, framing it as simply "being used" is dishonest. That's my point. And that's a framing that women constantly use to paint sex as something bad that man is doing to the woman instead of a consensual activity.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:58 AM
10

My genuine view is sex is using another person And you said "being used" not "using another person" when describing sex earlier. It's either both or not at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:56 AM
2

Are you capable of understanding that I'm not saying that sex and water are the same and to actually engage with the point made?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:54 AM
24

I don't see why it would be such a good thing to be seen as only deserving of having your body used with no emotional connection It's like you purposefully refuse to empathise with the actual argument. It's like saying "tap water doesn't taste that great actually" to someone one with no access to clean water. And sex is not simply about being "used". It's just a dishonest framing women like to use in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 06:32 AM
1

So do you mean the real world or a freeer fantasy world?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 03:10 PM
81

Plausible deniability. At every turn. That's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 01:37 PM
1

Maybe. You will never ever catch me saying anything close to that about my friends and my loved ones. And it's weird to be shocked by such a mundane social norm and to call it "ultra right wing". Like I'm sorry, can we be honest here for a moment? I'm bad faith because I find this weird? And how about actually talking substantially about the arguments levied instead of staying in the meta of accusing me of bad faith? That's not bad faith?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 12:55 PM
1

I'm not the one who wanted to slap their friend because they thought their wife didn't desire them because they weren't providing enough, nor am I the one crying about misogyny. All I'm doing is questioning the insane logic of OP. If nobody wants to actually engage in the arguments, that's not a "debate" in any shape or form.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 12:47 PM
1

Exactly, so it's the opposite of what OP is saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 12:19 PM
2

OP was answering previously, I didn't notice it was now another person, sorry. The same arguments still work, though. I'm agreeing with the OP that thinking women need or want to have a provider is misogynistic. Yeah and you haven't explained how. A woman desiring a "provider" says nothing about their abilities. And it's not misogynistic. The specific scenarios of the post also are specifically not misogynistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 12:15 PM
4

No, it's you who's either full of prejudice of intentionally lying. If someone says that women are unable or unwilling to provide for themselves This isn't part of what you describe in your post at all. What you describe is women telling men they should provide to them fully. Nothing about women being able to provide for themselves or not. Even the way you described what you friend said goes in this direction. You didn't say that your friend considered his wife incapable of providing for herself…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:59 AM
-1

Telling women to dress sexy is misandry? I think you have everything backwards.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:25 AM
-1

Okay, so if men were to say something like "We want women to dress all sexy for us so we feel special at all times" you would consider it misandry? Did I get this right?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:23 AM
0

This is quite unhinged. I nearly slapped him for having viewpoints I would have always considered ultra right wing and misogynistic You wanted to slap your friend? And thinking skme women want men to be providers is "ultra right wing" and "misogynistic"? What? It's such a mundane and uncontroversial fact that I struggle to understand even how you could come to that conclusion. And it's misogynistic? Wouldn't it be the opposite of misogyny? They all claim to come from a feminist lens. The justifi…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:16 AM
6

And what have men done for male victims? So you agree there hasn't been a gender equality movement then? And that its everyone for themselves? Or what's the narrative there? Some men have organised advocacy movements, that are constantly attacked by feminists and feminist organisations. Most men have even more worse attitudes regarding mne who are victims calling them gay, pssy, idiots etc. Yes, men are still socialised with much heavier gender norms than women. This is a problem to solve. A pro…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 08:10 AM
14

Probably has nothing to do with the century-long gender equality movement There is no gender equality movement, though. Feminists have spent decades successfully campaigning to remove men from studies on sexual violence and domestic violence studies and havr successfully refunded and crushed many resources that included male victims.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 06:26 AM
–

I don't even think the manosphere necessarily gets all those men, but a lot just feel pushed away from the current left and progressive movement that even if they don't go to the manosohere, they don't go to progressives either.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 08:52 PM
1

Sure they do, especially online Right... I'm sure niche subreddits are good representations of the general population... Porn shows what men like and want to do, not what they actually do, of course. Because a lot of what they want to do is illegal or disliked by women. Rape fantasy pornography is very popular with women. Should we make the same assumptions from that fact as you're trying to do here for men? Obviously not, it's nonsense. And lots of women have experienced and complain about unpl…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 02:28 PM
1

Porn is real life now? And most men don't "throw insults" at women. This is absurd.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 02:15 PM
1

Lots of reports? Must be true then! There are lots of men complaining about "starfishing" as well. Female sexuality might be more complicated but it's not fucking rocket science and a woman who isn't completely inexperienced can usually tell you what she needs if you care to listen. It doesn't have to be rocket science for substantial differences to explain the gap. The fact that you say that women would need to explain how they could be brought to orgasm shows that it's potentially more complic…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 01:13 PM
0

Are you familiar with the fact that men and women are different? And that the level of "skill" or efforts required for a man to make a woman orgasm are quite different than those required for a woman to make a man orgasm? Just because an orgasm gap exists tells you nothing about the actual efforts of the partner, especially when you know that female sexuality is more complex than the male's. If men and women had similar pathways to orgasm then the orgasm gap would be easier to explain. But it is…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 06:05 AM
1

What you’ve heard or not is irrelevant, you are not a slut, Only "sluts" can comment on this, I wonder? So why is your opinion here is important i have no idea. It's not really. Neither is your niche opinion. I'm giving my more or less "normal" experience. If you want to see something you can start reading n count threads. Why would I want to do that? And do you really think that just because you can find threads on Reddit with a dozen commenters about something, that it means that it's somehow …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 05:58 AM
-1

No, it's not.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 05:31 AM
1

I disagree on the narrative. I think male desire is seen that way. The point of men being selfish in bed is also I think a weird narrative on how men are judged on their sexual success / prowess when for women, just being there is enough and any talk of "skill" on the part of women comes with a lot of screeching and people saying you shouldn't be entitled to women blablabla.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 09:19 PM
0

But men say that's exactly what they are doing. No...? Pumping and dumping, using for sex. Outside of Fresh and Fit of whatever cringe podcasters who larp as sexually successful, I've never heard anyone do this. Yes, men do have casual sex, just like women do. If both partners want sex and nothing comes after that, it's not really fair to characterise it as if the man used the person for sex. If that's the case, everyone is using each other for all kinds of things. And they call women all those …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 07:28 PM
2

So you're claiming it's not a narrative then, and a fact. We obviously disagree on that. I don't think it's even remotely true that men don't care for or like women's pleasure.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 07:22 PM
-4

Literally all her content for years has been nothing but nonsense "redpill" grifting, sucking up to Andrew Tate for clout, going on podcasts to talk shit and bully women on how they should be more feminine and take more care of themselves while she herself, as common with these grifters, is a forever single wretched unkempt goblin. She has been saying that she thinks women shouldn't have the right to vote and bunch of other crazy stuff while trying to claw her way back to the crumbs of popularit…
/r/MensRights07/10/25 07:18 PM
1

Welcome to social/societal narratives. It's always good to question those and not blindly follow them!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 07:09 PM
3

Maybe it could change if the narrative wasn't that male desire is solely about using women as OP pointed out.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 06:35 PM
17

Anything touched by JustPearlyThings will be absolute garbage. Such a shame to see her use "men's rights" as a grift.
/r/MensRights07/10/25 03:17 PM
0

Firstly, prostitution is illegal or at least criminalised in a lot of "western" countries. Secondly, countries decide to subsidise certain industries to keep numerous jobs in said industries. Subsidising agricultural industries (and the meat industry) contribute greatly to the economy and also have positive impact and externalities on other industries, like distribution, logistics, etc. These subsidies are a great way to support employment and the consumer economy of the country. Fourthly, prost…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 01:32 PM
1

I'm sure you will be able to aptly detect that I said relationships were transactional, not feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 03:32 PM
1

Meh. All relationships are transactional anyway. I don't think we would say all relationships are prostitution. We're just diluting the meaning of prostitution at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 03:22 PM
3

I see arranged marriage similarly to prostitution. In a vacuum, I don't have an issue with the principle of it. But with the world that we live in, I don't see a way that it's not perfect ground for abuse, coercion, and just bad outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 05:12 PM
5

If you rephrase everything that's "critical" of women in the redpill, it's mainstream feminism. "Women have to select top men in the patriarchy in order to survive and not be victimised, raped and killed by the majority of average and subpar men due to misogyny inherent in the patriarchy."
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 09:51 AM
111

Men are seen as inherently politically problematic. Maleness and being a man has been fully politicised at this point. To be accepted as "leftist", you have to first denounce your own "evil" nature by reciting some misandrist mantras, and by fully accepting whatever flavour of feminism is being talked about. Otherwise, you will be called a right wing extremist that dreams of enslaving women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates29/09/25 09:47 AM
26

Hard disagree. First of all, it's very weird to say "we can't allow" people we don't like to make good arguments. You should want everyone to use good arguments. If conservatives would use these arguments, the world would probably be a better place. Second of all, feminists literally claim and celebrate feminists who outwardly call for male genocide and insane rhetorics, I think it's okay if these arguments are repeated by cringe idiots who repeat "women are hypergamous" and "nobody wants to be …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/09/25 07:32 AM
–

I never said men were not capable of hating women they find attractive. I just don't think men hate promiscuous women.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 08:28 PM
–

I don't think it is even remotely true. I would suspect most men find "sluts" attractive actually. And I dont think men care much about it. In my experience, other women are always extremely judgemental and talking about other women in very judgemental ways, while I've never ever in my life heard a man talk to me about a woman being "a slut".
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 01:25 PM
5

The book seems to be only available to purchase in Spanish, though, but it sounds very interesting, thank you for sharing.
/r/MensRights25/09/25 08:56 PM
11

Dude, what? Most women I know have very complicated relationships with their moms. This sounds like a recipe for disaster.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/25 11:29 AM
–

Child support is (mostly) fine. I wasn't talking about "societal cost", I was talking about initiatives only benefitting women. It's you who decided it all had to be some weird incel thing for no reason and shifted the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/25 05:29 AM
2

Stop projecting please. All that was said was "women get special initiatives from taxes" all the rest is you fighting ghosts. The previous commenter thinks that food in prison is "special tax benefit". What is wrong with you guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 08:48 PM
2

A lot of women (people) are just bad friends and hold contempt for the men they don't consider dateable.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 07:58 PM
3

Did I say initiatives are bad? Or that the American carceral system anything but a corporate-fuelled nightmare? Men commit most crimes all over the world. Look it up. How novel. I wonder if you can answer this. Is gender or social class the highest predictor for crime? Feel free to look it up. The cool thing is that I don't need to make the point that one gender is ontologically evil to support my argument, where it seems the be the crux of yours. Yes, crime is bad. How remedial.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 04:12 PM
11

It depends on the country. Some countries have dedicated ministries for women. Usually, countries have, for example, research funds dedicated to female researchers or to topics covering women. There are some special funds to access education, if you're a woman looking to get an education in a field, you can apply for special funds that exist to promote women's education. In a lot of fields, there are also organisations to help women, like for women in tech, in science, etc. If a woman wants to s…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 04:08 PM
0

women are moving on their own accord. That's basically meaningless. Everybody acts according to their material conditions. In the modern world, women can have the illusion of maximal free will due to all the advantage they get. They get social support, support for finding work, and can easily find partners. Men live in a different situation. Pretending that if the base material of men or women would change, the results wouldn't change is almost by definition nonsensical. Shame is tied to culture…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 01:43 PM
45

"Bro, don't you feel so fulfilled being able to enjoy public roads and lampposts? Doesn't your life feel meaningful now? Anyway, we're raising your taxes to 75% to fund the gazillions initiatives for women. Better go back to 65h a week to afford survival! If you feel down, just look at how nice this little lamppost is. Isn't it all worth it? And by the way, better not complain much, the women might get very upset and we wouldn't want them to be upset now, would we? I know they same women have sp…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 01:31 PM
1

Sure, if things were different, they wouldn't be different.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 12:45 PM
1

Of course not, as long as women don't pretend to have the moral high ground with their dating choices and that their reasons are moral and elevated.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 12:32 PM
2

What is most validating is what people lack most in their lives. For most guys, it will be sexual interest. If you tell someone they're husband material but not hookup material, basically what you're telling them is that they're not sexually attractive, but that they could be a reliable paypig and give comfort and safety. If they're not hookup material, it means the marriage will not be sexually active anyway, the marriage partner will then be the typical boomer married guy who hasn't be touched…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 08:49 AM
–

Funny quip, to avoid the point made.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 06:21 PM
–

One. How many times do you have to kill to be considered a serial killer? Being a "chaser" isn't just a one time thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 05:11 PM
–

Somebody sleeping one time with an overweight girl doesn't make them a "chubby chaser".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 04:46 PM
1

“a small minority of people who have some characteristics you incidentally share have repeatedly thrown out hateful insults and blanked negative generalizations about men, so I will also throw out stupid negative generalizations about women while also advocating to abuse all women. You’re welcome, you horrible females.” Feminism is not "a small minority of people", hateful narratives towards men are endemic to feminism. Refusing to support feminism for these reasons is also not "advocating to ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/25 01:04 AM
2

Yes.
/r/MensRights14/09/25 07:25 AM
–

Another day, another confusion of the descriptive vs. prescriptive claims. (Yes, some redpill people also make the same mistake)
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 03:51 PM
3

I personally think any argument based on the bible is an exercise in futility. Christians' worldviews are cherry-picked anyway and aren't based on the bible almost ever. Maybe they use a passage they like here and there to feel good about what they already agree with but that's the extent of it. In any case, being "pro-life" has never made any sense and has never been consistent or sensical in the least. It's just a reaction to the fact that our current medical understanding has taken away some …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 02:00 PM
1

Men can talk about fucking 50 chicks and it's seemed as normal and masculine. No, they can't. This is not normal for men. The majority of men also will not be "fucking 50 chicks" in their lifetimes, the median is around 6 lifetime partner. So this is obviously not normal at all. Nor is "bragging" about sexual prowesses seen as masculine at all. Since when was male sexuality seen as bad and women good ? Probably since the last century or so. That's also the main feminist narrative, so I'm honestl…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 03:01 PM
1

My bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 12:40 PM
2

How so? Do you think feminism is a conspiracy?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 12:00 PM
5

Where is the conspiracy here exactly? Are you telling me it's a conspiracy to say "the male gaze is seen negatively and the female gaze is seen positively"?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 10:54 AM
8

It's because women like to project this lie that everything they do or choose is "morally good" and that everything men do is "morally abhorent". Thus, male sexuality and male desire is portrayed as "degrading" and "disgusting", while female desire is "beautiful" and "elevated". The male gaze is "objectifying" while the female gaze is "edifying". The female romance and sexuality has to be in all things described as virtuous, moral and complex when the male's is morally reprehensible, threatening…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 10:24 AM
15

Would you say then that women's issues should only be tackled by women and that men should completely stay away? Why couldn't women fix their own issues? Why is it that women's issues should be tackled by everyone and treated as major societal issues, but men's should be pushed down to the personal and to remain discreetly to men to solve? Are women only part of society when it suits them?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:26 AM
12

I'm pretty sure women hate male insecurities because they're a mirror to women's shallowness, and their strict gender expectations. Feminists know this very well since they have been calling out (in a lot of cases rightly so) how a lot of women's insecurities come from destructive gender roles imposed on women that can be very damaging for women. This analysis disappears when talking about men, though. Gender is only for women to critique and free themselves from or to happily embrace. Because i…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:23 AM
11

Gender roles? Not so much in 2025 when everyone’s working. Gender roles don't exist anymore because... people work? That’s just code fir men not stepping up in regards to domestic work snd childcare. Aren't domestic work and childcare part of gender roles? I thought they were irrelevant now that people work? So women want to shed their gender roles, but men wanting the same, must be code for the thing that women csre about actually? because heaven forbid, a man might need to take some personal r…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:16 AM
8

Prostate cancer is obviously because men are too busy oppressing women and forcing women to care about men's health instead of caring about it themselves. It's men's incompetence that causes all these prostate cancers, and because these cancers are on the rise, it's taking away funds and medical resources away from suffering women who could have been treated instead for real medical issues. (Or something like that, obvious /s)
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 08:07 AM
1

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Sure, parents probably warn against unwanted pregnancies both boys and girls, and yes, there are abortions. Are you saying fathers warn against pregnancy and pregnancies still occur and get terminated? I mean, sure, parents warn their kids against alcohol, drugs, flunking school etc. and a lot of kids will still drink, take drugs, have unprotected sex and be truants. But I can also say that sometimes parents are overly protective and controlling to their c…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/25 03:39 PM
2

This again. This is clearly a misunderstanding or a willing conflation between advice on risk management and victim blaming. Victim blaming is putting the responsibility on the victim for being victimised by pointing out risky behaviour. Advice is telling someone they should avoid risky behaviour to maximise their chances of avoiding being victimised. Advice in no way puts blame on the victimised, just way to potentially diminish risk. Also, being careful and risk adverse, doesn’t mean believing…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/25 02:28 PM
9

The problem that a lot of commenters seem to avoid, is that the majority of women will stay in a vague area of plausible deniability, to be able to save face whatever happens. The same luxury isn't afforded to men, who, at some point, are expected to make a move. When you make a move, there is very little space for plausible deniability. So whatever the situation, a woman can be both showing clear signs and take the credit if the relationship is successful "I gave him a lot of signs haha" or con…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/25 01:44 PM
2

These are facts. Cold, hard facts. What's a fact, is that men died for those cause. Those are well known historical facts. Dehumanising men is not "scholarly". The sheer fact that you refuse to answer my question Your previous comment had literally no question in it. So who's really dishonest? If you actually ask a question, I will answer it. When in American history, have men not acted in their own self-interest? I've given you multiple historical examples already. The only way this question ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/25 01:33 PM
3

No man has fought against slavery? Advocated for women's rights? Died fighting against nazism and fascism? None of that is true? Is that what you're saying? No man has ever died for something greater than themselves? Or for the sake of others? If that is really your belief, then you're absolutely morally bankrupt.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/25 12:27 PM
3

When they fought and died against slavery, fascism, nazism, voted for women's rights, advocated for minorities and women. And much more.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/25 10:36 AM
–

It's not odd at all. Just like I'm not claiming the achievements of your great grandad to aggrandise myself, please don't use the suffering and achievements of my great grandma for your own aggrandisement. than men don’t give them credit for lol Both men and women contribute and are essential to society. Just don't pretend you care about contribution to society and about being fair about personal merit.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 06:37 PM
–

While women have faced great iniquities in the past, and still face some issues today, why should that equate to unearned merit to you today?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 06:21 PM
–

Did I say anything to the contrary? "lmao"
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 06:16 PM
–

Everybody made society. Society is made of people. My grandpa didn't make society any more than my grandma did, nor did my dad any more than my mom. And I'm not "making" society anymore than my girlfriend is. Also, society wasn't "created", reality isn’t the Bible.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 06:02 PM
–

Yes, you're right. It still manages to surprise me at how inane this retort is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 10:23 AM
–

you clearly hate women in general and are just looking to make up personal attacks. Why refuse to engage and engage in thought terminating cliché? And you talk about personal attacks when your comment is purely character attacks "you clearly hate women", "men like you". It's baffling.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 09:05 AM
–

It always boils down to this: If a woman fails, society and systems have failed her. If a woman succeeds, she has great personal and moral merits. If a man fails, he has great personal and moral failings. If a man succeeds, society and systems have pushed him forward.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 08:59 AM
29

Most of the articles I've read on the topic spend most of the articles speaking about misogyny and the risks for women. Most articles also mention incels or Andrew Tate in some fashion and zero articles actually discuss depression or interview actual men or try to take the male perspective seriously.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/09/25 08:57 AM
6

If you have a female adult and a male child, in your mind the child is more responsible than the adult? Did I get that right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 05:55 AM
5

I am baffled how the comments seem to mainly say "stop talking to them" as if that had any impact on the actual behaviour, and as if being socially ostracised and isolated helped people act in more socially acceptable ways instead of the opposite...
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 03:27 PM
1

I don't think that's true. That's a weird way to see it, in my opinion. Just because potentially and hypothetically, there is someone out there marginally better than your current partner doesn't mean that you're "settling" at all. A committed relationship, is just that: a commitment, a conscious decision. Relationships also aren't purely about absolute metrics of attractiveness, although they are a major factor. I think some people "settle" meaning that they actually don't like or respect their…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:49 PM
1

I'm not redpill so they're not "my methods" and no, I don't think the redpill's methods is to take advantage of women as much as possible. Some of the most deplorable "redpill" gurus maybe, but in general, I think that this is quite a stretch. I think it's mostly about dating strategies and a focus on being "masculine" and different dating nonsense bullshit like texting meta and a whole lot of other stuff that, yes, some of it, I find to be absolutely nonsense, but calling it "using women" is a …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:43 PM
1

I disagree. It just means that if they could choose, sure they would choose the 9 or 10, but their level of want will probably be somewhat equivalent. Maybe the level of willingness of efforts put in the relationship will vary, I can give you that.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 12:32 PM
-1

You could have said anything substantial, but again, choose vague meta irony nonsense instead. So you just confirmed my point. Why even pretend you're interested in discussion?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 10:45 AM
-3

No, it isn't really. If you want to twist men having romantic success in the worst possible interpretation, sure, but it's clear to everyone that you're not an honest person.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 06:55 AM
0

I'm not saying the resentment isn't justified, but maturing also means managing your own resentment so it doesn’t govern your life. If you cannot go past this resentment, that's also being stuck at a certain stage.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 06:35 AM
1

"manosphere" is a meaningless term. The vast majority of MRAs are not "traditionalists", and I would argue the redpill isn't as "prescriptivist" as people think. What you mean by "manosphere" is probably a handful of "problematic" content creators who haven't been relevant in years but that keep being propped up everytime any conversation about men happens. Like it's seemingly impossible to have an article about men without mentioning Andrew Tate who hasn't been relevant in maybe years at this p…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 05:08 AM
10

To be fair, a lot of guys also carry resentment or their whole personality directly from high-school their entire life.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/25 06:34 PM
24

Hmm. I think it's just a genuine experience that a lot of guys have. I don't get the whole "punishing" thing. Men having negative experiences with women and expressing it isn't such a "punishment". Men are living their whole lives under a barrage of "men are violent and dangerous rapists" messaging but the minute a man shows his disappointment in dating it's "punishing women". It's a revenge fantasy How is it a "revenge fantasy" to be bitter about behaviour you've experienced? This makes no sens…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/25 05:33 PM
40

Also, to address a bigger part of your post, I don't think men are "punishing" women by bringing this up. A lot of guys are bitter and feel like the last resort or the "safe choice" for women who want to settle. This is especially true if they know that the women had her "fun" in her younger years and is now less "enthusiastic" with them. So they feel like they're being used for women who are now only looking for a safe and stable partner for funding a family, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/25 03:22 PM
58

This mostly comes from school/high-school/university experience. It's quite common to have a group of friends and be friends with girls, but they all date older guys or fawn over a handful of the most attracted guys in school/uni. It's not absolute, but it's a general trend that I would assume a lot of guys can see. There might also be some cases where a guy who has a deeper emotional connection with a girl is rejected for an attractive asshole, and it hurts and blackpills a lot of guys. They re…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/25 02:47 PM
2

This post just shows typical nonsense. "All men are dangerous and violent." "You deserve better queen."
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/25 08:26 AM
7

It’s not true because i said so This would apply to you as well, wouldn't it? when he said x he didn’t actually mean x he meant b” Yes, because it's obvious you're dishonestly interpreting the post. But your response shows that you're not an intellectually honest person anyway. Shame.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 08:31 PM
10

They argued men can benefit from feminism. Yes, but this is applied on a more absolute level. The narratives and ideology of feminism aren't just talking ablut women but about everyone. It's even more clear when you get to intersectional feminism and gender analysis. Feminists talk about gender in general, not just simply women. So it creates this weird dissonance where they pretend to describe society holistically, but then people like you will insist it's not about men. It allows feminist to d…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 08:26 PM
11

Dishonesty doesn't befit you. I've been a feminist since I was born, and not only mainstream feminists make that claim, but feminist writers also do. (I'm pretty sure Bell Hooks and de Beauvoir both wrote something to that effect).
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 07:19 PM
8

Pride doesn't pretend to be universal or all-encompassing. It's not pretending to be for everyone. It has a clear and narrow focus. Feminism does claim to be for everyone and for men as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 07:09 PM
0

Yes...? But mostly nowadays is globally a celebration of LGBTQ communities and not just about the commemoration of Stonewall.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 06:50 PM
17

That's obviously false. You can pretend that there isn't an "official" feminist stance on it, but it's such a prevalent and ubiquitous insult that it's disengenuous to pretend that feminists don't overwhelmingly use lack of sexual success as a way to insult and dismiss men. (Incel is such a prevalent insult nowadays, used both to shame men and to accuse them of misogyny.) Feminism heavily criticises "dating preferences" and beauty standards. This is such a basic feminist stance, that it seems di…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 06:41 PM
2

...no? Pride is just a celebration of LGBTQ people, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 06:22 PM
21

The queen of nonsense strawman arguments is back! calling it “being a dance monkey” because they have to actually impress a person instead of merely existing Yeah…”having to “impress” someone continuously is what being a “dance monkey” is… Thinking about relationships as if it were about “impressing” the other is just very weird and childish. beta bucks seems to be being upset what women want out of relationships is different from what women want from hookups (Alpha Fucks) They’re not upset that…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 05:21 PM
10

I think ideally, the burdens of parenthood are reduced by society to the point where the opportunity cost of having children isn't as high as it is today, so that people who might have decided to have children if it was cheaper for example or if they could realistically take enough time off from work for it etc. would be more likely to willingly have children.
/r/MensRights03/09/25 06:28 PM
3

I don't. I speak for me and the men I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 05:54 PM
7

Neither. It's stating something which is just untrue, and a generalisation to shit on men. Not hard to understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 02:15 PM
4

If you just said "a lot of men just want sex" I would have agreed with you. It's not what you wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 02:15 PM
7

Did you just write "a lot of" or did you write "a lot of guys are confused about what women want"? For the latter, that implies that all men confused about what women want want "just sex".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 01:16 PM
15

What? Do you not know how one can use brackets? Can you please tell me what I'm missing here, instead of going straight for self victimisation and dismissal? The whole title is : A lot of guys are confused about what women want because they're not honest about whay they themselves want (which is just sex). Here's the whole title. Now what? I still disagree that guys want "just sex".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 12:48 PM
22

[men] are not honest about what they themselves want (which is just sex). This is in the title.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 12:39 PM
6

Saying men "just want sex" is criticism? It's just blatantly untrue and make all guys just roll their eyes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 12:36 PM
4

She posts things like this shitting on men often.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 12:33 PM
21

No, men don't want "just sex". They want companionship, emotional connection, and intimacy. Yes, they want sex, it's a major driving force for them, but it's not the only thing they're looking for.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 12:33 PM
53

This was quite sad to read. I think it's would be helpful for you to "decenter" from those women in your life. You don't have to live your life for them or for a hypothetical woman who might be out there. Just live for yourself for a bit. Feminists narratives and guilt around being a man can be extremely toxic, and it can be helpful to step back for a bit from those spaces to give your psyche a bit of a break from all these heavy discussions. There are great people out there to meet. And althoug…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/09/25 12:57 PM
0

Can you at least not pretend that men from one country are the same group as men from another country trying to invade yours? This is just obviously bullshit and bad faith. And no, I think it's fine to celebrate the accomplishments of the majority without always focusing on the crimes of the minority. The fact that you guys are so gleeful in bringing crimes to bring men down is a bit disgusting. Yes, the vast majority of men work, more hours than women, and contribute to society. So no, I won't …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 07:21 AM
2

Stopping crime isn't "funding men". 🙄
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 09:11 PM
2

Yes, it was. The post list positive things that men do, pay more taxes, taking on dangerous jobs etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 08:47 PM
6

Maybe bad faith and disgusting are more appropriate words. Let me make a direct analogy with a different immutable characteristic so that you might understand. Do you think it's good faith and honest when somebody brings up positive things done by black people and you say "Well, they still commit a disproportionate amount of crime." ? If you can't understand why 4chan racists memes are bad, though, I can't help you.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 08:34 PM
8

"A lot of men are doing dangerous jobs to keep others safe!" "Oh, you mean safe from OTHER MEN criminals!! Men still suck!!" Yeah, this kind of thing is dishonest and disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 07:22 PM
11

Yes and he was voted for by millions of women as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 07:07 PM
9

From other men. This is the most dishonest sleight of hand constantly done by feminists to group up men to either dismiss a good that's done or to vilify the whole.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 07:04 PM
1

Actually, this is exactly what being masculine is. This is how "masculine" friendships are socially defined and enforced. I could try and make small changes on my own, but friendship is not something you do alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/25 06:34 AM
44

A lot of people seem to think that misandry either doesn't exist, or that it is morally good. They think that anyone who calls out misandry must be some kind of right wing or incel/red pill guy. Thus, it is morally good to engage in behaviour that "triggers" incel nazis. Since that behaviour is propagating misandrist narratives and statements, they think it's literally a good thing to promote.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/08/25 02:26 PM
7

That's your view because you're a woman and friendships between women is much deeper than what is culturally acceptable for men. The expectation for men is to have their deeper emotional friendship with their romantic partner only.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/25 12:07 PM
52

I've never understood this. Some women I've known would get genuinely angry at me because I wouldn't be willing to risk my life going fighting some random guys who insulted me outside at 3 in the morning. I was insulted, why do I have to risk my safety because of it? No wonder "men" are so violent, the expectations around violence for no reason are so insanely high.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/08/25 09:31 AM
6

Is that supposed to be bad?
/r/MensRights23/08/25 08:56 AM
4

Probably because there are a lot of normative pressures around getting married for women, and it's a culturally more important moment for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 12:55 PM
2

We all know that bad things only happen to bad people. If something bad happens to someone, it must mean that they were bad themselves. /s
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 10:03 AM
6

They're not telling them only lust matters. Just that to get with someone who wants an active sex life when you're not very sexually attracted to them is bad, and probably morally wrong. Just like getting with someone who wants a lot of emotional support when you know you have no interest in emotionally supporting the person is probably not a good idea or can be seen as morally wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 09:48 AM
3

I don't think a woman is entitled to the same lifestyle. Living with someone is what makes the lifestyle the same. If you leave someone, you leave the lifestyle too. 1M$ is more than enough for half of the support the child is supposed to get, you haven't really explained why it shouldn't be allowed.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 03:02 PM
4

You don't seem to live in reality.. "Just make more money"
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 09:21 AM
18

Men also be sick of hearing continuously about women's issues while always being blamed. I would wager more women are anti abortion than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 10:18 AM
3

Are you saying Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 10:16 AM
1

Okay, that's not the hypothesis, but whatever, moving on
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 08:31 PM
0

Have people provided proof for this hypothesis?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/08/25 08:05 PM
4

Right. Good job on the tautologies, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 03:36 PM
7

Men are attracted to criminals?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 02:35 PM
11

It's conditional on them having very specific traits and behaviour they find attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 02:26 PM
9

I disagree. And it's the typical "well you must know a crazy person", no not really. It's just so ubiquitous people don't see it, or don't care.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 12:15 PM
8

For some people maybe
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 10:04 AM
19

It's not that women can't love men, it's that they only do so extremely conditionally. You can never show a crack in your masculinity, you have to constantly provide entertainment, value, social validation, etc. They can act fickle, mercurial, temperamental, and demanding because it's socially acceptable, whereas the man has to always be in full control of himself.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 07:23 AM
2

This whole thing boils down to : you think it's evolution so it's true because evolution is true. I think evolution is true, but I don't this weird evo-psych hypothesis is true. all the things I'm explaining to you are really elementary. Actually, they're not elementary at all. Most people don't talk about their beliefs in probabilistic/bayesian terms. And all of it sounds like you're trying to say that because it's consistent with evolution, it's more likely to be true in a probalistic sense. I…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/25 10:45 PM
6

These "theories" have nothing to do with evolution. The fact that they don't contradict evolution is a given to be even remotely convincing to anyone. Heinlein is not a scientist, but a science fiction writer. Claiming that something that is well thought out by people smarter than you "is a load of nonsense" requires at least some reasoning. Wrong. Disbelief doesn't require specific "reasoning", it's the basic position. We should give credence to the predictions of really good theories, given th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/25 09:19 PM
2

On the grounds that I'm not convinced by it at all. Just because the theory is thought out and correlates with real facts doesn't make it true.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/25 08:53 PM
44

I think the whole tribe thing where women are needed, so men go to die is a load of nonsense. I think it's more likely that men historically undertook/undertake much more physical labour and the fighting. Which just means that men dying is just an occupational hazard of their condition rather than a reproductive necessity. Rebranding the whole thing as noble sacrifice sounds much better, though.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/08/25 09:29 AM
3

A general statement doesn't mean it's absolute...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/25 01:59 PM
5

You can check the data tables yourself and you can see the traits with the biggest discrepancies betweent stated and revealed preferences. and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. This doesn't really say much of anything. The study states clearly that while ideals have predictive power, "the results were highly dependent on whether preference-matching was conceptualized as a normative match, idiosyncratic or distinctive match." When you look into th…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/25 11:39 AM
6

It doesn't. If you were fishing for a gotcha, sure I guess you could. Otherwise, you could read it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/25 11:21 AM
5

Yes, this one. Feel free to read through it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/25 11:20 AM
12

There are many studies showing discrepancies between stated and revealed preferences. It's a mundane topic that is used in multiple industries. You could also check : (2024). A Worldwide Test of the Predictive Validity of Ideal Partner Preference-Matching. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 128. 10.1037 (list of authors is too long for a Reddit comment but I trust you can easily find the study online). we did not find much evidence that certain people or certain populations were espec…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/25 11:16 AM
22

Stated preferences and actual behaviours are different. Anybody can figure this out.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/25 10:53 AM
1

I didn't say I did.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 01:37 PM
2

Again, see "fear of crime gender paradox". It's because men are expected to take on more risks in general and people literally care less for harm that befalls men than for harm that befalls women. Harm that befalls women is constantly discussed, presented as a great cause to champion and to rally under while male victimisation is stuck being unchanging gender norms reinforced by feminist rhetoric. Risk also influences guys for dating, but men usually don't have so many options in general and the…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 12:42 PM
2

Why would I care who the violence comes from? Women and feminists have an obsession with these categories because they create easy and compelling narratives. Do you worry about it with women? Yes, I do. The level of violence is potentially not the same, but to counterbalance that violence from women is literally invisible. I could get punched by a woman in a crowded room, and nothing would happen. If no then it’s not exactly the same (i’m not saying it’s better or worse, just not same struggles)…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 12:20 PM
7

I mean women are less dangerous than men in general for sure. And men are more afraid of physical violence and women are more afraid of sexual violence in general I think is a fair statement. On average, there are 400k to 500k sexual assaults per year in the US, and between 4 and 5 million violent assaults. It's also clear that men are more likely to be victims of crimes in general, and also that they're more likely to be victims of more serious forms of physical assaults. And the double proport…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 11:36 AM
5

Yes, I've been assaulted multiple times.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 11:19 AM
11

Except that the argument is never simply about "worrying about one's safety". It's usually to paint all men as inherent monsters, due to those worries and that men don't have the same worries about safety at all (because men are oppressive monsters and women are oppressed victims.)
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 11:13 AM
3

No, it's a chadduendo
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 05:42 AM
0

It is. We differentiate it from other types of violence, though, don't we?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 10:16 PM
1

No to what? Why not actually say something substantial?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 01:34 PM
1

I do understand that. It's literally the argument I laid out before. Women don't really value violence that greatly because it's not part of what they consider likely, or is preferable to the actual crimes that they fear more (which also they are more victimised by). There's no contradiction there. You're just pretending like my point somehow ignores women's fears when it just contextualises why both genders view violence and assess risks differently.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 01:30 PM
2

I don't think so. I think women in general distrust men. And I think the "men over bear" debate actually shows this perfectly well. It shows that women are more afraid of sexual victimisation than violence. It shows that women are more afraid of potential sexual violence than real existing violence that men have to manage for on a daily basis. Men have to evaluate and scan for this risk because the risk is always present. Men live in a state of balance where violence is basically almost always o…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 11:47 AM
0

Probably. I think men tend to be a bit more aware of dangers from men than women are. I think mostly because women largely don't expect violence because they are mostly excluded from violence. ("You don't hit women"). Because of this, I think men are trained to get a feel for other men and to gauge risks better. I also assume that it would be easier for me to evaluate "men" hobbies and occupations to see if they were red flags or not. So, a woman might write off all of "playing video games" as a…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 10:34 AM
40

I would say to take care of yourself first. Advocacy should come second after your basic health needs. These topics are overall not very popular or culturally relevant (apart from disphoria, maybe), so advocacy for those can mostly feel like swimming against the current. So if you feel like you're drowning, it's fine to get your head out of the water for a while and to breath and rest before diving in again.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/08/25 08:31 AM
–

I think women have a very distorted view of what it means to be human. As they receive more empathy and are seen as more important and are socialised to develop better friendships, their view of what being "people" is quite different. The fact also that women are seen as generally completely harmless and nonthreatening must also drastically change one's experience. For a man, existence is pretty much that nobody cares, you're on your own, and people see you as a threat as a baseline. Being close…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 06:35 AM
–

It is highly debated if free will even exists...
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 05:47 AM
–

Yes, I commented normally first before I saw the flair. I hope the moderators will be clement.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 07:03 PM
–

I am telling you I am picking up after my partner, not that I am doing these things myself. I am okay with doing it for multiple reasons. Workload and different standards on cleanliness are the top reasons for me. I accept this fact. The day I don't want to pick up after them anymore, I will let them know and stop.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 06:37 PM
–

There is no reason to pick up. There are. If your partner has a lot of work, you can pick up the slack to make sure both of you keep living in a clean and clutter free space. That's what I do. But to each their own and it highly depends on what you agree to.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 06:27 PM
–

6 hours /week for cleaning is a bit overkill imo, depending on how big the living space is. As long as everyone in the household cleans up as they go, It depends on work, schedules, and lifestyles. It's fine to pick up after someone else, as long as the partners are clear about the expectations.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 04:46 PM
–

It highly depends on the actual living surface, if kids or not and on the "clean" standards. A few minutes a day can be enough, as long as a deeper clean is done in the weekend or something. I find it actually much better and faster to clean things up in the week and to make sure things are nice and wipe the surfaces etc. But it depends on other factors like laundry, food etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 04:26 PM
–

I didn't even see this was tagged as a question for women... The expectation is that men don't care about it or something, I presume?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 03:38 PM
3

you guys sometimes have trouble maintaining the detached objectivity that we should be coming to the table with. Why? I think this is the reality lopsidedness here. Women and discussions of feminism are hyperbolic, generalise and full of subjective emotionally driven arguments, but men should only talk about their issues or ideas with "detached objectivity"? I feel like you're perpetuating sexist stereotypes of hypo and hyperagency. Women can't "help themselves" but be emotional and hyperbolic, …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/08/25 03:39 PM
73

So, it's the same gendered expectations of competence, utility, and financial assets. They constantly ask if men consider women human beings while describing "desirable" men as these perfect utilitarian homonculi who are judged purely on the utility they provide to women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/08/25 11:05 AM
–

Right. I think the majority of people don't have the luxury of growing up with their partner and need to perform and adhere to adult expectations. Most people take what they can get, it has nothing to do with "priorities". It's like saying "a job that pays 6 figures and with flexible schedule that feels fulfilling and meaningful, yes this is just a question of priorities" no it's not, it's simply that most people don't have access to it. "You have to prioritise love and acceptance etc." No. Ever…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 08:55 AM
3

And why not the female ones? You're weird.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 09:42 PM
9

You seem to have been unable to read my previous comments. Nothing I said precludes a relationship at all. Nor does it have anything to do with "liking" women at all. It's just how things are. And men still like and are in relationships with women. What a bizarre comment, but it lines up with the typical "if a man says anything I disagree with, he must be an incel or a virgin" which ironically enough is exactly the type of mentality that fuels the most toxic parts of the red pill ideology. Good …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 03:27 PM
4

Not likely. It's a culturally endemic issue. And the risks are too high. And people like you just see it as a personality quirk instead of societal problem, so it's unlikely to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 03:12 PM
5

There is no "person" to be found. It's endemic.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 02:48 PM
8

It doesn't depend on priorities at all. You can be dating the most blue pill feminist and they will still find it abnormal, "ick" inducing or lose respect if you actually show your emotions. The only solution, irregardless of priorities, is to cater your external emotional self to the female gaze. You need to look sensitive enough to be attractive and not look completely closed off, but not emotional in "cringe" ways. So, probably never cry outside of family members dying (and can't be too exten…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 02:36 PM
-1

I agree that women only spaces are needed. The issue is that any man only spaces (even for victims or vulnerability) are systematically attacked and destroyed, and also simply illegal in some countries. I would agree that it would probably be better to say both men and women should have private spaces, but this might have some problematic consequences, meaning that you are recreating gendered segregation, that some women might be excluded from some groups and men from others. This might increase…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 09:26 AM
–

No problem. I hope you can rest nicely.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:20 AM
–

That's my question, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:01 AM
–

Which means they're not victims? People keep thinking men have like this brotherhood butterfly feeling for other men and that they're all connected somehow. This is very weird.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:49 AM
11

Who cares. You're just using the word "eugenics" to emotionally charge the subject when reproducing with someone you like is the most mundane thing of all time and you have to really stretch your definitions and squint your eyes to barely make your premise work.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 01:21 PM
1

The racist system didn’t collapse under itself. Black people did have to have to march and fight for their rights and along the way a lot of black peopel did get hurt, especially vulnerable black people. Exactly, and you're against that! I'm for it, you're against it. You're against iterative progress and an accelerationist. Youre exactly against this. But you’re telling me that the civil rights movement shouldn’t have happened because people got hurt? No, I'm not saying this dumbfuck. Civil rig…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 11:42 AM
1

There are ex slaves who starved after slavery when they couldn’t find work. So, would you argue that civil rights were a mistake? That racists should have won so that the system would be allowed to accelerate into collapse under brutal white supremacy? Can you please contend with the actual point of accelerationism instead of vague nonsense? The fascism I’d already present. Millions are already dying and have been for decades. Yes, and people like you support that and actively try to make it wor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 11:38 AM
1

It's okay to be wrong my guy. insult people for wanting real change, you’re being counter revolutionary. "Real change" meaning destroying the system. Meaning you will destroy the vulnerable people who rely on that system to survive or to be safe. Accelerationism is a gateway to fascism and millions of deaths. It’s like if someone in the civil rights era pointed to an increased number of lynchings as reason enough to stop the protest It's the opposite. It's saying "No, no, don't vote for civil ri…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 10:25 AM
0

Is that remotely close to what I wrote? Democratic countries make grave mistakes. Fascist countries make worse mistakes. If you don't see this, I can't help you.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 08:34 AM
0

I suppose you think uncivil fascism is better?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 06:38 AM
1

PS : Also, surrogacy is immoral and illegal in most countries due to the fact that it commodifies women's bodies and turns pregnancy into employment.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 05:11 PM
3

Jesus, you can't read. Yes, you can adopt if you don't want to or aren't able to conceive yourself. As I said, all those are relevant if you want a child that is biologically yours. Pregnancy is WORK Good job at being dishonest and bad faith. Let me make it very clear to you. Pregnancy is not EMPLOYMENT. It's a biological process. It's like saying that puberty is work. Yes it has a big impact on the person and can potentially go very wrong. But it's not EMPLOYMENT that is gendered and that can b…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 05:10 PM
4

No. How is that relevant to the point? Do you think giving birth is just "work" that you can opt out of if you want a child that's biologically yours? It's as absurd as a man wanting children but absolutely refusing to contribute his semen to the process. That's just the mechanics of the process.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 04:38 PM
9

Good job being illiterate. Having kids creates reproductive labour, which is traditionally enforced gender norms. Women can want to have kids without taking on most of the domestic labour. But otherwise, yes, they will have to "perform" their biological functions needed for the child to exist. You seem incapable of understanding the difference between carrying and delivering a child (which can only be done by women) and taking care of the child and the accompanying labour (which can be done by a…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 02:55 PM
10

4 out of 6 of those are "I decided to be a mother" and have nothing to do with "traditional gender roles". The traditional gender roles are in homemaking and domestic labour. You could have made a point around women having to perform more domestic labour while working full time, but you decided to make it about...carrying a child? And... checks notes...breastfeeding?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 01:24 PM
4

I will actually reject your claim that most men on this confrontational sub largely believe what you claim (systemic subjugation of women, rape, pedophilia etc.) I think you've seen a few extreme comments, framed them as bad as possible and then extrapolated these extreme framings of fringe positions to all men. Also, I don't think men are just dismissing women's opinions of men because they're online. They're dismissing them because... what else should they do? Likely, they have been hearing st…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 03:36 PM
5

Whoever they deem best out of the pile of people available to them I suppose?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 06:06 PM
6

But at least they get to have sex I suppose. If you're shames either way, it's better for it to be for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 05:56 PM
–

I absolutely agree. Despite some physical differences, the vast majority of our behaviours are informed by primary and secondary socialisation.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:15 PM
2

I never particularly identified as a man. I actually have a problem with the whole concept of "identity" in the way people use it today. I've always been more reserved, abhorred violence of any kind, and never had any interest in sports. I guess I like some more masculine things like fantasy and sci-fi books and video games, etc. I don't "identify" as a man. I am a man. This is just how i was born and the cards that I've been dealt, like my name and my family. This has brought difficulties in my…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/07/25 06:05 PM
–

Women are allowed to be emotional, and the empathy gender gap hits boys hard starting in early childhood. So it's not surprising. Women are already spamming statistics in the comments to prove how men are inherently emotionally stupid, like racists spamming FBI stats on 4chan 10 years ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 03:38 PM
1

She does none of it? And you plan to keep it that way forever? Basically, yes, cleaning, laundry, cooking, grocery shopping. Maybe not 100% but 90% for sure. This won't necessarily be forever. Career paths go up and down, and maybe in some years, I will be the one with a very demanding professional project, and the roles will change.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 01:39 PM
0

If it’s not real labor, then why don’t men like you do all of it? I do all of it while working full time to allow my partner to pursue her professional aspirations. With no children, though. What now?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 01:26 PM
1

Yes, it's not really labour because it's not necessarily comparable to a job. If children are involved it's a bit different, but yes, otherwise it's not the same. People who clean or cook for a living have to clean like 5 houses in the same day or cook hundreds of meal portions per shifts. It's obvious that having to take care of your own home isn't the same as working. Working people also have to take care of their homes.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 01:12 PM
1

A lot do.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 12:44 PM
1

What you said is unclear. Your point is unclear. So I couldn't really day what truth I'm supposed to comment on. Sure, there are some guys who claim to be "nice" guys, who actually really aren't and use the facade of being social and amicable to hide other unsavoury parts of their character. I also think there are other guys who are actually nice, and who don't understand that being nice, amicable and respectful is not enough to get into a relationship, and that in some cases, those qualities or…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 03:58 PM
3

I'm sure you are able to read my flair. However, you resorting to gender insults instead of saying anything substantial may make me question if you can even read.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 03:38 PM
3

The confusion comes from your lack of clarity, contradictory statements and lack of coherent point. You start by saying that guys who label themselves as nice are actually not nice but something else (oblivious and insecure), but afterwards, you say that being nice is actually a problem and you conflated being nice with having no boundaries (I guess??). At best, it's a rehashed opinion seen a million times being poorly worded. At worst, it's a weird argument where you're trying to say that being…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 03:32 PM
3

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 03:23 PM
4

You could have focused on how people who claim to be "nice guys" actually aren't. (Which is like beating a horse that died 50 years ago already) Instead, you wrote some of the most confusing and unhinged statements possible. I wouldn't be surprised if your next post reads : "I'm attracted to evil people"
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 01:54 PM
–

Least misandrist Reddit user.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 08:42 PM
–

that is the situation now — men nagging for sex in relationships, women being annoyed by it, and nobody happy. I don't think it's that simple. It might be true for some people, but there are a lot of different people out there and many different relationship dynamics. How do you resolve that little pickle? It's weird that you expect me to give you an answer to solve complex gender issues. But I would say that there are a lot of norms around masculine behaviour that have yet to be discussed more …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 04:46 PM
–

Yeah, that's if you think men being "well" only means satisfying every single one of their sexual impulses. This is like a child's understanding of what being an adult means. Being a fulfilled adult doesn't mean fulfilling all of your impulses. Let's make it simple: Man = libido lv8 Man alone = 0 sex Man meets nice woman Woman = libido lv5 Man and woman enter a relationship. Man and woman have sex lv5. 5>0 Man and woman continuously communicate their needs and feelings to each other to make sure…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 04:12 PM
–

Men “doing well” means women having to fuck them when they don’t want to, due to the libido disparity What...? Men doing well means women will be forced to have sex? Are you okay? Yes, libido disparity is a thing. A lot of couples make it work successfully and with respect to their partners. Why can't it be the case if men are "doing well"? This is honestly a deranged line of argumentation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 02:57 PM
–

So, in summary - guys need to practice their social skills. No, not really, practicing "social skills" doesn't replace primary socialisation. But practicing social skills can't hurt. The solution is not to tell women that they need to be there for lonely men. Yeah, this keeps being brought up. I don't think this is something that anybody is saying, it's a strawman used to dismiss the discussions altogether and that keeps being brought up for some reason. Another commenter brought up the comparis…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 02:17 PM
–

The reason sympathy gets a hit is that men blame women for doing badly, when it’s clear that much of their gripes are with our unrestrained capitalistic system I'm not sure what this is in reference to. I do agree that some people play into the "gender wars" as a proxy for what should be in actually, political disagreements. And I agree that a lot of current gendered issues have roots in current economical issues (difficulty with finding stable employment, explosion of housing costs etc.). they …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 01:54 PM
–

I think it's gendered because it might affect gender differently. Boys and girls are socialised different and these early normative socialisation behaviour create different ways of relationships and friendships with other people. Boys tend to be socialised to suppress and hide their emotions, and the gender empathy gap contribute to that effect. Girls and women might tend to be better socialised with getting their emotional needs met with friendships, whereas men could have higher expectations o…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 01:19 PM
–

Nobody's asking OP to do anything. Can we please retire this dishonest strawman argument. OP is saying that homelessness is not a problem. And people like you or OP clamour loudly "Nobody should be forced to host homeless people!!" Yeah. Nobody is saying that. Good job. You don't even have to care about homelessness. Just don't actively try to say it's not a thing or that people experiencing homelessness are wrong and crazy for feeling that being homeless is a problem for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 12:23 PM
36

It's just completely asymmetrical. Yes, there are general societal pressures on women, and some of those concern having children. However, the army will not show up on your doorstep because you've been selected as a conscripted birth mother and force you to birth children under the threat of extreme consequences. It's about state power and individual agency. Not about cultural and societal pressures.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/25 09:44 AM
6

I agree with you that some societies were pretty much patriarchal in the past, Rome is a good example, but in later periods, I think this tended to not be as patriarchal. I think being part of the nobility class or not was basically the most important factor in your life. I completely disagree with the notion that you keep repeating that women doing reproductive labour is patriarchal. That's not what patriarchal means. I think women were expected to be homemakers for practical purposes, even if …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/07/25 08:00 AM
–

This type of post baffles me. Just the lack of empathy and humanity of it. You talk about women having the right to choose who they want to date or not, but somehow, men don't have the right to be unhappy about being single or to think it's a problem for them. I just don't get it. I've always thought, "If women are doing well, men will be doing well too, and if men are doing well, women will be doing well too." Both genders need to pull each other up for the best of everyone instead of pushing e…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 06:26 AM
9

“does the patriarchy exist?” I would say something along the lines of “In a sense, sure” because in modern day America “patriarchal” ideals and expectations are still very much unfairly placed on men. But patriarchy doesn't mean "ideals and expectations unfairly placed on men". It would mean a society where men are the powerful/oppressor class and women are the powerless/oppressed class. So I don't really know where to go if your examples are where men are obviously not the oppressor class. Part…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 07:38 PM
11

it's not just for boys It's not just for boys, but it almost exclusively talks about boys and has a heavy focus on incels. It feels a bit like a technicality since most of the cultural focus seems to be on incels and radicalised young men, and almost always portrays women and girls as victims and men and boys as dangerous risk factors to be managed. has lead to real world violence (Elliot Rogers) Elliot Rogers happened in 2014 and has been used ever since to justify the hyper vigilance around in…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 04:07 PM
3

I mean, I'm not required to provide an alternative or be precluded from critiquing the status quo. But anyway. I think this pre-criminalisation is very detrimental and can only make things work and force boys to hide their feelings even more than they already do. Forcing kids into conversations they don't want to have and that highly miss the mark are not the way to go. Improving schools and school socialisation would probably be infinitely better to curtail radicalisation than these weird effor…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 03:39 PM
13

Patriarchy and traditional gender roles absolutely can and does generate misandry. Yeah, sure about the traditional gender roles, but the patriarchy has to exist, to generate anything. I’m really surprised that scrolling through this sub alot of people reject the concept of patriarchy as a whole. That shouldn't be a surprise to you at all. This is a left wing sub, not a radical feminist sub, so it shouldn't be surprising to you that people's framework of understanding society is rooted more on c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 03:20 PM
13

It's anti-male because it's "pre-criminalising" boys specifically. And it is thoughtcrime because it's saying that boys/men having/expressing these thoughts should be "screened" for risk. It's like having a metal detector at school and only having boys go through it. Sure, you're not directly putting people in prison, they just have to go through the check, but the fact that this happens and is targeting boys specifically is a problem.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 09:01 AM
16

The problem is that incels and boys are unfairly targeted and demonised. Studies and numbers show that incels lean slightly left in general and that they don't have a higher levels of justification for violence than the general UK population. Prevent is just that - it is a pre-criminal space So basically, you're creating thought-crime and pre-crime for boys. You can't expect boys and men to open up and discuss when general negative views of relationship when just having these thoughts or express…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 08:54 AM
25

Some person a few days ago in a comment thread was straight up saying misandry wasn't a thing. Basically, it's the same as "you can't be racist towards white people" but for sexism. I'm pretty sure it's baked in the ideology/narrative that the patriarchy creates and enforces misogyny. But why would there be misandry in a patriarchy? It doesn't make sense. Thus, claims of "misandry" must be to distract from misogyny and must be considered as tools of the patriarchy used to distract away from miso…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/07/25 08:38 AM
1

No he's saying the lack of those traits is correlated with unattractiveness, and presence of these traits is not correlated particularly to attractiveness. Just read what he's saying with an ounce of honesty, at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/25 02:36 PM
2

Is this just a tautological circlejerk about how unsuccessful are pathetic because they're unsuccessful? If you're successful yourself, why worry about the unsuccessful people? I don't get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/25 02:30 PM
2

Do you mean in this post or in politics in general?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/07/25 01:52 PM
1

I mean, you're the one justifying it in a way, so it's quite a strange thing to say.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/07/25 01:09 PM
8

Accelerationism is unironically the reason why the US is now slipping towards a modern fascist and authoritarian hellhole.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/07/25 08:16 AM
4

I would agree with you if reality wasn't so starkly different. I would assume that most sexual situations have actually zero actual verbal consent and that most of these interactions just follow contextual and non verbal consent. I don't mind promoting verbal consent, but this is not representing the real world or how people interact.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 08:40 AM
1

Fair enough if that's what you think, but it's interesting that you also have a personal line in the sand. You consider grief acceptable, but what kind of grief, grief for what, how close to the person you lose do you have to be. There will always be judgement on behaviours that are too extra, but it's interesting how men's expression of feelings are so closely normatively observed.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 07:37 AM
14

I've been back and forth on this position a few times myself. The thing to understand about feminism is that it's not about equality. It's an advocacy movement for women based on the framework that women are an oppressed class and that men are the oppressor class. They try to destroy everything that opposes this narrative. You can read about what happened with domestic violence shelters in the UK and what feminists did. You can read about studies on intimate interpersonal violence that feminists…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/07/25 06:29 AM
1

I am aware of the stated reasons why whining is unattractive to women. The post seems to imply that OP means whining in general about dating or lack of sex, not in the context of 1 on 1 conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/25 02:16 PM
2

If you don't see the point, don't do it, all the best to you. If others want to do it and see the point, all the best to them. It's just shouting into the void. Maybe it's not about expecting women to change but finding companionship and acceptance by finding others who feel or think similarly? There could be lots of reason to discuss food and restaurants online. It could be purely intellectual curiosity, it could be to find others that are interested in the topic, it could be to find advice on …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 09:23 PM
3

Is it a modern dynamic that women find men who complain "unattractive"? This sounds extremely ignorant of history. Both things can be bad, by the way, women having to filter through liars and men having to hide what they think or feel. These things are in a mutual causality sort of dynamic and don't cancel out each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 04:13 PM
2

I think people get very caught up on the redpill vs bluepill war and misunderstanding can arise between if someone is being descriptive or prescriptive etc. So I don't think we necessarily disagree on a lot. Keep on playing, player.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 04:04 PM
10

No amount of whining is gonna make you(royal) attractive. Did anyone ever say: "the more you whine, the more attractive you become!" ? It seems like it's just a nonsense strawman to shit on men because they share their thoughts and feelings. In fact it will actually make you less attractive to most women because you'll also be less masculine. I don't disagree, I just think it's garbage nonsense. Again, because men's entire existences shouldn't just revolve around how attractive women find everyt…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 03:36 PM
13

I just have no idea what you were trying to say or how it related to my previous comment. So it's actually quite inconvenient. You could have clarified what you meant instead of this weird passive-aggressive jab.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 03:33 PM
5

I'm not surprised at all. I'm against OP's thesis and general sentiment that men's existence should solely revolve around what women find attractive. So swallowing a little discontent for the sake of seeming more emotionally grounded is nothing. According to you it's not "a little discontent" but am extreme part of men's life. Having to go to such lengths is not just "a little didcontent". It's a quite strange thing to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 03:31 PM
10

According to OP is what you mean. And if men are saying that, which is quite cynical, they're kinda proven right by OP. OP is basically proving the pathetic and unhealthy point of OP. This while post is basically proving the redpill stuff. And it's kinda cringe.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 03:22 PM
22

So, because men do some things to be attractive to women (or broadly more socially accepted) means that everything they do is to be attractive to women? I'm a bit unsure of what your point is or how it's refuting my point at all. Yes, men do display normative behaviours to please women and improve their social standing. I'm not sure how that's a contradiction to what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 02:59 PM
13

I have no idea what you're talking about, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 02:24 PM
19

That's what OP seems to imply. It is unattractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 02:16 PM
30

Being attractive to the other sex should never be 100% of your goals that it overrides every facet of your life. It's actually insane that you would pretend that this is reasonable in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 02:11 PM
33

That's because it's not an argument. It's a strawman. They're talking specifically about the whining and complaining about women part, not every single feeling or thought. Exactly, how is whining and complaining related to what women find attractive exactly? Why would men need to stop complaining and whining ever? This only makes sense if you assume that men should only discuss things that make them attractive to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 01:47 PM
113

The idea that men's expression of feelings or thoughts should only be reserved to what is attractive to women, or should somehow only have the goal to maximise their chances at sex or relationship, is absolutely wild.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/25 12:25 PM
-1

You think your life is not worth less than that of a child but also say stuff like this. Yes. I think adults have a moral compulsion to help children as children are vulnerable and not full moral agents. It has nothing to do with the "worth" of life. If two lives are equal, then why would sacrificing one for the other be "moral or virtuous" according to you. Obviously, here, the sacrifice would be with consent, but yes it would be moral, not because "lives are equal", but because children aren't…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/25 08:34 AM
0

I don't think my life is worth less, I think that I, as an adult, have a moral duty to protect a child, if faced with such a situation. Children are vulnerable and need adults to protect them. It's kind of a base moral value, so I'm not sure I could ever realistically convince anyone of this.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/25 07:46 AM
-1

Because it comes from different places. You sacrifice yourself for woman and child because it's chivalrous and virtuous to die to protect the young and weak. You die to protect the royalty because of fealty, "oaths" and honour. It's the same for dying for a God. You don't do it because God is weak but because there is honour and salvation in doing so. Women were just considered weaker than men and in need of protecting, also maybe because they were more in the sphere of the domestic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/06/25 06:12 AM
-1

I don't think so. I think it's accidentally misandrist kind of. It's just reinforcing the idea that men should sacrifice themselves for women and children. I would say that it is moral to sacrifice adults for children, I think that's probably virtuous. And then for women, you could say that general misogyny and lack of consideration for the capacities of women mean that people had "low expectations" on women and are basically treating them like children. If I think about it this way, the base of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/06/25 08:16 PM
2

What you linked doesn't support what you wrote. Just because there are like a few horrible crimes done by "supposed" incels. Doesn't mean that incels are more likely to be violent than femcels. If anything, being a right-wing neo nazi weirdo might be a bigger predictor. Incels are on average slightly left of the center politically. "incel ideology [is] only weakly correlated with radicalisation, and most incels in the study rejected violence". And "incel report of violence seems comparable to re…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 01:49 PM
8

Women think men who aren't fitting to their vision of masculinity are weak and pathetic. That's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 11:58 AM
4

Yes. Since you can't understand my comment. The answer is obviously yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 11:10 AM
2

These men complain in echo chambers because it's literally not allowed to do it anywhere else. "Kill all men" is a genuinely mainstream sentiment and can be seen in the open on social media. So I'm honestly not super receptive to the female pearl clutching about uncel misogyny. "Oh no, the undesirables whose feelings we've outlawed are getting radicalised in the online ghettos we've forced them into!" Whatever are we going to do?" if you’ve never thought about it you’d never post about it. Yeah,…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 11:07 AM
3

Desire is highly contextual and psychological. If you don't know this, I'm honestly not even sure what I could ever say to you. Yes, people like and desire what is socially and societally enforced. People like popular people. It's why you have swathes of young women and young men pining for stars and celebrities, although their bodies and looks can be just as banal as your neighbours sometimes. Some traits are "socially" desirable and impact how people see and desire others. Because people like …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 09:00 AM
6

Society defines what is socially desirable and what is socially undesirable. So, your statement is just blatantly and obviously untrue. Pretending that people are completely disconnected from societal norms and love and desire separately from these norms is obviously nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 08:06 AM
5

These posts are always dishonest. They always pretend that women don't want sex ever and that they men wanting sex with women means they dream of raping unconsenting women. Incels don't want to rape women, they want someone to desire them. They wish society was such that they had a chance and that someone might realistically want to engage romantically and sexually with them. They hate societal norms that brands them as "undesirable" and that judges them harshly for being "undesirable". Nobody i…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 07:47 AM
52

It's honestly the same for all the relationship advice subs, its always "you deserve better". If the guy in the story has made the unfortunate decision to say something mean or to raise his voice it's basically all determined as "abuse" and there's never really any nuance nor are the men in these stories really considered like human beings at all.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/06/25 01:20 PM
2

Everybody's in agreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 03:54 PM
11

You don't "have to" do anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 03:43 PM
9

Somebody not appreciating your constant efforts to unilaterally "coach" them is not them "not liking you".
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 03:39 PM
1

Toxic gender norms is more general, so I think it works well. I'm actually still not sure if we don't need a higher level of abstraction to define what is actually the cause of these norms, just like feminism usually just points at the patriarchy, but I don't know for sure. Saying "we live in a society" is also an asinine tautology, so I'm not quite sure honestly what even would make the most sense while actually being substantial.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 01:30 PM
1

I mean, if that means that OP thinks wars shouldn't exist as a "normative view" it's fine also a bit meaningless. And sure, you can call out "unjustified conflicts" but these wars are basically the political will of the people enacted through their elected representatives, so the issue lies elsewhere rather than in the conscription itself. But maybe I'm missing the point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/06/25 01:21 PM
1

I disagree against "anti-conscription" as an absolute, although gender based conscription is obviously wrong. So it's a bit confusing exactly what you're talking about here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/06/25 07:51 AM
0

I think people will say: "Oh no women really do believe that raping men is bad!" but only a few countries have laws concerning rape really being about consent. For the most part, it's either only rape when perpetrated towards women, doesn't include being made to penetrate, and sometimes is only counted if it's "sexual violence against women and girls". It's not that women don't think raping men is bad, they just don't think it's happening or that it's even possible. Then they will say: "Oh, but …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 05:48 AM
2

Thank you for the nice reading material. It's crazy that the term was first weaponised by conservatives and then feminists. It's quite a sad state of affairs. Some people absolutely use it as a “well, men are toxic, so fuck them and whatever happens to them” excuse. For what it’s worth, fuck them. True, but that's not my biggest issue. Yes, those people exist but they're easily dismissable. For me it's more difficult to engage with people who believe deeply that that this is a good model to see …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/25 12:03 PM
3

I mean we're talking about what's mentioned in the post. And yes of course sometimes it's fair to say "go to therapy", but here for this post, it's used for dismissal.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/25 06:35 AM
5

Yes and no. It's not simply semantic if that's what people actually believe when they use it. It's not just the history of how it was used, it's the present of it too. but you're doing yourself a disservice by taking personal offense at a systemic concept. I'm not taking it personally? It's not taking it personally to discuss how this term is used, systematically, to redirect blame to men individually. It's like if a woman is talking to me about misogyny, I would never just say "Nothing personal…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 07:43 PM
3

Yes, they don't want you to care about them, they want society to care about men. It's nice of you to offer and stuff but it just sounds a but disengenuous. But "society" also isn't going to produce a fix that doesn't involve you going out and changing things for yourself anytime soon. Sure, but that doesn't mean that the discussion should be handwaved by "Just go to therapy bro".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 07:35 PM
6

Please keep your condescension. I've made it clear the point is not the therapy, it's actual bigger issues on a societal level. Yes I know how therapy works, thank you, I've done it in the past. But at a really core level, this is something you have to do for yourselves. At the core level, you missed the point completely. Telling people that all their issues are something they have to do for themselves and just not discuss the bigger societal implications of is honestly a bit disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 07:01 PM
1

I do think it's a catch 22 in a sense. A lot of women do get turned off or think it's weird to be asked directly and verbally for consent, and think you should basically read body language. I think this is the most common way. It is quite tricky and risky to engage with, as misreading clues and body language could have dire consequences (also since current discourse says that a woman can never be expected to say "no" and will freeze as a trauma response if somebody makes a move). The other way, …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 03:56 PM
7

The societal pressures that men face are an outcome of the expectations placed on women. This seems really far-fetched. Isn't it more likely that men also face normative expectations that puts pressure on them? it’s not blaming men, It is because masculinity is behaviour generally associated with men. So if you say "this is due to masculinity", you're basically saying "men's behaviour is the reason for this". Thus blaming men directly. it promotes a toxic, violent version of masculinity that soc…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 02:13 PM
–

Yes, I agree with you, I think most people wouldn't call someone "weird" or "creepy", the majority of the time, they would just do their best to avoid you in the future, block you etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 01:30 PM
3

You cant be isolated and alienated when you have a fuckton of friends. Wrong. What a bizarre thing to say. How many times must the same discussion happen? As many times as it needs to, for society to gain broader awareness around these issues for change to happen. Please see and read about any other societal issues ever. America has regularly broadcasted how obesity kills and how eating unhealthy causes Obesity. America even has a successfil series about this called MY 600LB LIFE. America "broad…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 01:12 PM
6

OP showed men are just as likely to have over dozen friends as they are to have no friends. Both of them are at 15% and Women are both at 10% How is that relevant to what I said? How does any of that argue against; If the guy is consistently having a mental crisis in his daily, yes he should have therapy as basic support. You're refusing to read and engage with what I said. Yes, if you're depressed and suicidal you should look into treatment and professional help. But you shouldn't just tell som…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 12:38 PM
2

Because their complaint is typically oppression and abuse. OP is talking about mental health. The post is about how men are alienated and isolated by society as a whole, mental health is a consequence and a symptom of that. Just like in the past, women's "hysterias" were pathologised and needlessly medicalised to avoid questioning the broader societal issues on how women were treated, infantilised, brutalised and robbed of agency. You're basically doing the same thing to men now. No, it's not th…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 11:48 AM
14

Yes, I mean you repeat what your "understanding" of it is, but I'm talking about why is it called "masculinity" the fact that society pressures men to not cry or to not appear feminine? We don't call pressures on women to conform to societal norms "toxic femininity," we call it misogyny, rape culture, patriarchy, etc. all of these are exogenous to women. For men, it's the opposite. The bad societal pressures and outcomes are "toxic masculinity," and the fault is redirected to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 10:55 AM
7

I mean everything you write just reinforces that perspective. It can help someone become mentally healthier so they can get better friends. Women know this because they look into therapy and see how its helped women with trauma and mental illnesses. Yes, but that's not the point. We don't tell women who are talking about generally how society is treating to "go see a therapist". We used to do that in the past, by the way. "Susan? Oh yeah, she's crazy, I hear she's talking to one of those psycho …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 10:28 AM
15

but the quest to make that more pithy made it divisive. I agree with what you said until this part. I think it's not just meant to be a snappy but gauche slogan or term, I think it's used exactly the way it's used exactly to attribute fault and responsibility on men. "Masculinity" is used because it's just attributes of behaviours generally attributed with men. It's not a coincidence. I think it's because it perpetuates the narrative that women are an oppressed class and that men are an oppresso…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 09:45 AM
16

Please think about it for 5 minutes. Therapy will not change society and will not give you a social network. It just won't. Your friends and partners are supposed to support and hear you out also. This "just go to therapy" is just a way to say "not my problem". You see societal issues and, just assume they cannot apply to men and that it must be individual failures on their part that they need to individually solve. It's basically a way to say "society doesn't and shouldn't care about men, they …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 09:22 AM
29

I think the question was, how is this due to "masculinity" in any way if it's just systemic societal pressure? Just like we don't call slut shaming "toxic femininity", it makes little sense to say men are shamed for crying due to "toxic masculinity".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 09:13 AM
53

"Men like that are everywhere" If think she could have had a nice point but it's just unfortunate that she seems to generalise this one experience, where it was actually more about the system around the guy, rather than the guy being bigger, that was the problem. The parents were defending him aggressively, everyone was vouching for his character etc. The same thing happens also when it's a woman perpetrator. "A woman wouldn't do this" "She was always a nice girl, she probably didn't mean anythi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/06/25 07:16 AM
3

Yes, that's because most people cannot directly drink from the tit. Milk is harvested and stored and then distributed to be drunk. Contact with particles in the air is what causes bacteria to grow in milk, and why pasteurisation was a huge progress to allow people to safely drink milk, because most people don't have a cow at home to drink from directly.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/25 08:11 AM
4

Congrats, you discovered that words can have multiple definitions. You use the word manipulate in the sense of "handle or control (a tool, mechanism, information, etc.) In a skillful manner." Also, what's up with people being obsessed with raw milk, Pasteur must be turning in his grave.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/25 06:13 AM
4

And, as someone said already, manipulation takes malice, and in general, just "don't manipulate your friends" is a good rule to live by anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/25 05:33 AM
7

What a mess of a question. No, befriending a man doesn't guarantee his having feelings to you down the line. The problem is that sometimes, women treat their male friends more like boyfriends (without the sex) rather than just friends. They get really emotionally close to you, cuddle you, joke about potentially marrying you one day etc. This can be really confusing and can last months and one day, they talk about the guy they just met and had sex with the night before and it can potentially mess…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/25 05:31 AM
1

That's because women expect the 10/10 treatment to be pure materialist millionaire garbage.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 07:03 PM
9

I'm sure men are happy to settle for the normal restaurant with a woman in their leagues. That's the whole point. Being treated like a partner and a human being is not "Chad treatment".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 03:23 PM
12

Yes, most men cannot "provide" very high amount of money for a potential partner. So yes, a Michelin star meal on top of the Burj Khalifa is not something that a lot of men can't "provide". Most normal women should "settle" for normal restaurants. This is what is meant.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 02:51 PM
13

There are a lot of guys who say here that if a woman is a 5 she should expect to get treated like a 5. I think people just say that the 5 should probably expect to be with another 5 and not to expect to be "treated" like a 10 when matching up romantically, and to meet guys where's they're at instead of expecting to be treated like you're a millionaire 15/10 princess.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 01:33 PM
2

No one said that women can't get pleasure from sex. You heavily implied it with statements such as : for your pleasure just for men's pleasure Women don't just have sex for "my" pleasure or for men's pleasure, but for their own as well. And the reality is many men, maybe to include you want women to relax that standard and agree to "date" sex. The three date rule etc. Jessie, what the hell are you talking about? First of all, there's not "one standard" everybody is different, and a lot of dating…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 09:36 PM
5

men are trying to pressure women for sex You know that some women consent to sex and even...gasp like sex right? You do realize that you are contradicting yourself? No, not really. You just don't seem to understand anything about people and men, especially. Men don't just look for pure sexual gratification. But men, and I mean people in general look for connection and intimacy. Sex is actually not just about sex but also highly psychological and social. You cannot claim as a need, the use of som…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 05:22 PM
5

I think we men did this. More specifically, the most privileged men of the boomer generation. Right, so "we" didn't really do it. More like a handful of tycoons, CEOs and politicians is hardly a "we". But yes, there is this "great man theory" which is both false and true, in my opinion, as it's just a reflection of people's yearning for messianic figures that tends to backfire.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 04:34 PM
7

Everything is systemic and results from general social and societal pressures. But not for men (white and heterosexual too). Men are considered like agents of hyperagency. They just live on their own decisions 100% of the time, and they're basically like main characters that can just do whatever they want. The corollary is that if anything bad happens to a man, or if a man is not doing well, it's seen as a "skill issue" or bad decisions. It's not that something bad can happen to a man, it's that…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 10:04 AM
1

No? In my experience, men don't talk about their preferences so much. They just kind of allude to maybe being into this person, and you're like, "I hope it works out!". One time, a female friend asked me pointedly why I didn't want to date this very fat girl who was obviously into me at the time and I answered it was because she was constantly interrupting me when I was talking to other people and drunkenly slapped me as a joke in front of a group of friends. The being fat was not even a factor.…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 09:36 AM
18

Because they want sex with a real woman instead of on their own. You should try to answer your own questions sometimes. And no, sex is not a "need." Yes sex is a need. Just because you don't die when you don't have it doesn't make it not a need. Yes, some people don't have sexual needs. Most people do.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 09:40 PM
24

And men have a better chance of getting pleasure from themselves than from some random woman as well, that's not really a point at all. Sex is not a survival need, but needs aren't wholly about survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 09:12 PM
0

Being tall is a typical masculine quality. I was not speaking strictly about "traditionalism". The most successful men are likely to partner with women in his own social and socioeconomic class. That's true. I didn't claim that what I said was descriptive of reality. Just that women in general do have these "demands" or "standards" not that they end up fully materialising in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 05:36 PM
-2

Actually, I would argue that the opposite is more prevalent. Women demand men to be masculine, tall, to be successful etc. but have no intention of being "traditionally feminine" at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 05:18 PM
1

I don't think women buying sex work is very common, but in any case it's not seen the same. They don't really see male objectification as a thing, or if it is, women have it worse, so who cares, basically. If something bad is not part of the gender narrative that women are oppressed by men it's basically either to be derided (men who suffer bad things are losers because they let themselves be victimised), or it's described as an attempt at minimising women's suffering, so there is literally no p…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 11:27 AM
47

I think it's pretty much proven that women can get more pleasure from sex and achieve multiple consecutive orgasms etc. But yes, basically, I think men in general struggle to fulfil their sexual needs, I think it's very much unlikely that a man will get his needs met, and even in relationships and marriages, the question of sexual intimacy can strain or even destroy the relationships. I think men are jealous for multiple reasons: firstly, that sex doesn't seem to have as a strong a power on wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 07:21 AM
7

Because it's just how reality works? Guys who are more empathetic to women's comfort and boundaries lose out, while guys who are misogynistic win or have higher chances. Misogyny = bad So "bad men get rewarded" literally. I'm not saying it's a justification, but it's a fact. Sometimes, being morally superior does cost you. Just like giving back a wallet to someone who dropped it makes you "lose out" on the money from that wallet. But that's just how life is.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 04:42 PM
11

The point is that they don't care about making women uncomfortable and will push boundaries because they don't care about women and want sex. Guys who might actually be considerate of not making women uncomfortable will, by default, lose out. Hence, why being misogynistic helps guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 04:33 PM
2

People (yes, men are people) want an exciting and fulfilling sex life with their long-term partner. Somebody who's just having casual sex left and right will not be seen positively by someone looking for a long-term partner. "Body count" isn't even about having sex or the frequency of it. It's about the number of different partners. Someone could have a low body count but have had sex every single day for the past decade.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/25 02:25 PM
136

a mostly female world would be more peaceful and better run. They're saying the quiet part out loud. Interesting article despite the heavy slant.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/06/25 05:50 PM
2

As I said, if it's just for friends regardless of gender and just a friendship hospitality thing and that the friends do reciprocate, I think it's different. If a guy just pays for all his female friends, he might also be planting seeds. He might be interested in one or two of his female friends and try to appear more gentlemanly or whatever it means to pay for everything a woman wants, while still having the plausible deniability of saying "Oh no I pay for all my female friends, it's fine". In …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 05:50 PM
1

This has to be bait. There is no way this is a real question or a real thing. Between friends you might invite and pay for each other in turns, as in "I got you this time, it's on me" but in no way is it a man/woman thing. If your "platonic" friend pays for you everytime, you can be sure 100% they're not seeing it as platonic and the guy is planting seeds to see if this could eventually develop beyond being "platonic" 100%.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 04:52 PM
6

I don't agree. I don't think there is a chance a man would be more violent than in the past. Especially with all the spotlight on bad dating behaviour in the past decades. I think the risk is actually lower today than it was 15-20 years ago, it's just that people are obsessed with incels, when the majority of incels would kill themselves much sooner than being violent to anyone else. Also, the "being hateful" part is again something that's only seen as bad when men do it. Mainstream media is inu…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 02:38 PM
6

That risk just isn't there. And it doesn't matter anyway. Men have always been morally judged for their lack of romantic success.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 06:47 AM
–

I've seen men, some from my own family, make the kind of assumptions People making sexist assumptions doesn't mean they "care" about women being independent. There's a difference there. Anything that is necessary just to protect you from an unfair assumption is, ultimately, quite sad. I don't think you can "protect" yourself from unfair assumptions. How should I protect myself from the unfair assumptions that come with my sex and gender? Not much, all I can do is live my life honestly and morall…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 10:02 AM
–

Exactly. This is exactly the type of people I'm talking about. Unpleasant, always talking about their "businesses" and their "stock" while pretending to be better than everyone. Same with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 09:57 AM
–

No, we were talking about men caring about women being independent. If we're broke, we're more likely to date a broke man. Yes, it's called a social class. Good job on basic societal understanding. That's why men don't like women that have money. People generally dating in the same social class means that men don't like women that have money? That actually goes against your point. Men who have money also want to date women in their social class. You're just purposely not understanding because as…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 09:47 AM
–

First of all, I never ever whined about that, but go off queen. Women not wanting to date broke men has literally zero to do with women being independent. If anything, dependant women would want a broke man even less, since they would need a man to provide. You're just saying absolute nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 09:38 AM
–

But men do care though. No they don't. as soon as a woman is shown buying or owning anything luxury men assume a man must've bought it or she dates rich guys. There is a (stereo)type of woman that just values luxury and will use partners or other means to get it. People who actually work for their money are not the same. That's why women always say they're independent. Good for them I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 09:31 AM
–

It's not what it means, but it's what people mean. Nobody cares if a woman is independent or not, it's just that usually women that either self-describe as such or whose friends describe as such are just mean and rude and just not pleasant to be around.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 09:11 AM
1

Nice bad faith. Yes, it's feminists who push these ideas and narratives. Feminists even openly talk about disrupting and opposing the "myth" of the gender symmetry in published papers like "The Feminist Case for Acknowledging Women's Acts of Violence" Abrams, Jamie R. 2016 that describes exactly that. That the "domestic violence movement" was a feminist movement that did it best to push it's narrative and to oppose any counter narrative. It's called the "strategy of containment". It's not hidden…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 05:16 PM
1

Everybody is controlled by lust, but cheating takes a conscious decision. Women are always horrible at discern men's character. Women always struggle with acceptance and intimacy. I think cheating comes from moral failing and factors of dissatisfaction in the relationship. The focus of this post is more that shaming women for ending up w bad men makes no sense because we aren't psychic, and there's no way of knowing it'll happen. I don't think women put much effort into understanding men at all,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 07:07 AM
5

Women do the same, they shirk the responsibility for their cheating 100% of the time and the man is always responsible for some reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 07:00 AM
4

Yes, they were victimised because their research went against the feminist narrative. I'm sorry I can't give you the name and manifesto of multiple anonymous bomb threats perpetrators. That's actually not how harassment and bullying works.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 09:18 PM
4

Suzanne Steinmetz was bullied and received many death threats and bomb threats for publishing a study in the 70s about male victims of domestic violence. That's one example. I think Murray Straus is another one. Feel free to look up for yourself, it's not uncommon now to have feminists destroy researches and research on "gendered" topics have become heavily politicised by feminists. It's not new.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 08:54 PM
1

It depends what you mean, you just listed a bunch of vague things. Black rights doesn't really mean anything, there are some advocacy movements to fight against racism and to advocate for the black community. Some of these movements are better than others. Same for LGBT rights, there's a very varied landscape of advocacy for LGBTQ people. Lesbian and gay advocacy is usually more focused on getting similar rights to gay couples to the rights that straight couples have. In this sense they have a c…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 08:42 PM
6

Feminists actively pressure against and the advocacy of men's issue. They don't want men to advocate for other men, they want men to be feminists, which is why they say that "feminism is for men too".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 08:30 PM
2

No, the entire point is: "Men are the oppressor class, women are the oppressed class." There can be no equality. It runs contrary to the main narrative. How can they be equality between the oppressor and the oppressed?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 05:19 PM
3

Yup. Yes, I also agree with my point. Yes it can No, it can't.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 05:16 PM
11

Right, so that's exactly my point. It's only an advocacy movement for women. Which means that every fact or idea that contradicts the idea that women are unequal or that men may be facing issues has to be erased or discredited. It's a narrative based on women being the "oppressed" class and men being the "oppressor" class. By definition, it can not have equality as a goal.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 05:07 PM
11

One-sided equality is... not equality. Newsflash.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 05:03 PM
10

Feminism is not about equality. It's an advocacy movement for women. In theory, there's nothing wrong with that, but it claims to be about "equality" and to be for everyone to be able to suppress any attempt at advocating for men or at bringing up men's issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 04:57 PM
4

This is just you exposing your misandry rather than a cogent point. "Men are just immoral, actually, and women are better." Also, how do you know what men "want" women to do. Most men just want to find a good partner that treats them well that they can maybe start a family with. Most men are not weird christian nationalists who want a domestic slave.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 07:47 AM
7

The thing is when women ask men „in what scenario would you pay for a womans dinner“ They usually answear they would if he was really into her/if he really liked her. So to women it‘s seems like you are not actually into her if you don‘t want to pay her dinner. This is somewhat the same as when women say "I never sleep with a guy on a first date, or only if I really really like him". That's kind of the same thing. Does that mean that if someone doesn't sleep with you right away, you should give …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/25 06:12 AM
–

I personally read it more as: "Strippers are hot, and I still cheated on one, so I would cheat on any woman." So it's a bit worse than just disregarding strippers maybe.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 10:46 AM
–

I don't judge people morally for the way they look mostly, and it's a bit strange that you would put this next to "cheating". Cheating is bad, not looking good enough for you, isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 10:41 AM
–

Pretty cringe to just admit to your morally disgusting actions, but I guess it's better to warn everybody else about what kind of person you are.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 10:21 AM
–

In your example, it's a guy just saying something. In the post, it's more about the leopards' eating your face scenario. It's basically: "Oh no, I voted for Trump, but I didn't think he would deport my uncle Rodriguo!" So it's more about your own message coming back to bite you in the ass than just a random person just saying something.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/25 10:07 AM
0

Since forever. The only thing a woman want is to figure out how to manipulate a man into doing whatever she wants. Both men and women want what they want and both apply some kind of pressure (consciously or not) to get what they want. People want what they want. It's almost tautological.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/25 10:43 AM
7

I don't think either AI or so-called "sex robots" will ever be able to replace women. The point of a girlfriend is not just sex, it's romance, friendship, companionship, having shared life projects etc. But if the sex robot is what you want, you do you, no judgement will come from me.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 09:57 PM
7

Women are replacing men with friendships and with other interests, like romance novels etc. And let me assure you, those are as cringe as the ai girlfriends the guys you call losers have. Women actually are being independent. How is a man not independent is he's living his life with his friends and is sometimes talking to a chatbot? You just have this weird sexist double standard, but that says more about you than anything else to be honest.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 09:54 PM
1

Talking about being overpowered by a female soldier makes you sound like one of the "woke" people who claim patriarchy is real. OK? I sound "woke" because an armed woman could obviously overpower me? Please tell me you're not one of those Americans brainbroken about "woke" and "anti-woke" nonsense. I'm "obsessed" because cops and military literally hold society together and enforce everything. They don't. You might say the military act as a "deterrent" against foreign forces but that doesn't mea…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 04:32 PM
1

False equivalence. You don't know what that means. I'm not saying women = Belgians... I'm not saying those things are equivalent. God this is stupid. Once again, male cops and male soldiers have authority that women don't, and it's the most important kind. You're really obsessed with cops and soldiers... how often do you see these people. You do know that a lot of women are cops too right? And soldiers too? (Althought probably not a majority). Being a police officer is like a menial social job. …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 02:11 PM
1

No, I'm saying those men being in the position to take away women's rights by force (and ignoring what elected officials want) makes it a patriarchy. Yes, so that's exactly what it is. You think just because a military "coup" is theoretically possible, that means it's a patriarchy. So it's not a patriarchy, but because, theoretically, a group of men could theoretically take power and oppress, that means that the patriarchy is real? Theoretically, my country could be invaded by Belgians and i cou…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 01:51 PM
1

A baseless assertion is a baseless assertion. Most people who control all the heavy machinery and military/police grade weapons that keep the masses in line are male. Most of the police and military is male. This is comically stupid. When I see a police officer I don't think to myself "Oh boy, I better uphold the patriarchy really quick! Let me catcall a women quickly before I get shot!" It's absurd and you know it. those same men can theoretically snatch it away if they want. How is that not pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 11:45 AM
6

Your definition is flawed. Masculinity isn't just "duties" it's just a shorthand to say what men are and what should do. It would serve your argument better to actually say what you're against instead of this vaguery. As for the mechanisms, there are things like: shaming men for not being "real men", slurs like: soyboy, sissy, gay, mangina, pussy, often ostracism and even physical violence towards men not perceived as masculine. Then why not talk about those instead of this insubstantial talk ab…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 09:53 AM
46

When women do it, it's "decentering from men" and "looking for fulfilment on their own". When men do it, they're apparently virgin loser freaks. What the fuck is wrong with you? Men hear all the time they need to go to therapy and talk about their feelings. Now that some of them talk to AI for acceptance and emotional support, you're screeching like an 80's movie high school bully. "You're not even having sex with real women you fucking loser" Get a grip and lose the toxicity.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 09:12 AM
2

No worries, the OP aggravated me a bit earlier, but I have no problem with you or with the discussion.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 09:01 AM
3

Yes, of course, that's how people talk. "French people eat baguettes" is fine to say. Yes, you might know a French guy who akchtually is allergic to gluten or doesn't like bread. Generalisations are bad when they're used for bad purposes, like discrimination, disparagement etc. So for your example of "men love watching sports". first off, can you prove this tendency isn't a product of socialization? I'm personally convinced it's mostly due to socialisation, I don't see how that enters in the con…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 08:59 AM
1

Then do it. Be a lazy at home husband. I doubt you're in Ukraine or Syria, or another country actually at war so you're just virtue signalling. You're not dying in war anytime soon buddy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 08:39 AM
5

First of all, what is masculinity? You're just using vagueness to smuggle your argument. It would be great if you would actually articulate what part of "masculinity" for whatever that means, shames men, what mechanisms actually push men to work too much? You're just using the undefined "masculinity" concept as a scapegoat, so you don't have to think about it and actually articulate the things that are having a negative impact towards men.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 08:24 AM
-2

Replace "work" and "war" with "home", and you got it. Also, if you're not in the army or in a country at war with active mandatory conscription I don't want to hear about "dying in war". You're just virtue signaling.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 08:19 AM
5

I absolutely disagree. I have no issue saying "men love watching sports", when I have absolutely no interests in professional sports of any kind and never have. I don't feel a prescriptive weight on me to conform to that. Generalisarion implies exceptions. I think it should be fine for everyone to understand "masculine" and "feminine" to mean "generally done by men/women". That shouldn't be an issue. Issues only come if you force srtict conformity to gender rules. If "men have to be masculine al…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 08:15 AM
8

You didn't. I read the post.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 08:05 AM
10

Then, use a different term but actually say something substantial please.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 07:30 AM
13

Childcare and homecare are not nothing, so first falsehood. Those are labour, since people literally are paid for that. Second falsehood.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 07:29 AM
11

Yes, I agree, but OP is saying "masculinity" is an "anti-male" concept and doesn't explain what the fuck he means by that. Of course, there is a prescriptive part of gender performance, but nothing was stated here. It is masculine to take your daughter on a bike ride on the weekend, but how is that anti male? What the fuck is he talking about is my point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 07:28 AM
1

It's a stereotype that women or crazy blue pill men keep harping on about. And yes, absolutely some stereotypes persist, when one group has a good reason to push the stereotype. (See racists, sexists, and more since the dawn of time)
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 07:25 AM
6

You're right, they're unhinged "Chilcare and homecare is nothing. It's not labor."
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 07:23 AM
21

Then talk about "toxic masculinity" or actually verbalise the prescriptions you don't like. This vaguery about masculinity is cringe on all sides.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 07:19 AM
1

Who said making sure you'll "never" get hurt. Why can't you just have a normal fucking take instead of always going for the absolutes. Nope, you shouldn't associate with people who seek to exploit or ridicule vulnerability. Then, good job, you got it. That's the point, but you can't just throw yourself being vulnerable and figure out afterwards what kind of people you're dealing with. But again, that is never suggested by red pillers. What is never suggested by red-pillers? I think they would ag…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 07:16 AM
3

Saying "I want to get married in the future but not now" is not dishonest in the slightest. It's just inconvenient for the woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 05:48 AM
107

Masculinity: qualities or attributes regarded as characteristic of men or boys. masculinity is anti-male. I think you got lost somewhere. Masculinity is just the term to refer to what men do. The idea that masculinity is inherently bad just means that men are inherently bad, and I think that's quite toxic.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates26/05/25 05:29 AM
7

I feel like you're missing a big point here. men should be vulnerable anyway because it's healthy to be vulnerable Being vulnerable means you can get hurt. It's not healthy to be vulnerable with people that will weaponise it and hurt you. There's nothing healthy about that either. I feel like you're kind of forgetting what the word is even supposed to mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/25 08:28 PM
9

The "men don't go deep in their friendships" trope is a toxic stereotype created by women. Men don't ask too many pointed questions because we don't "dig" for information and what the other person to freely offer the information they feel comfortable sharing . Men also tend to not have these crazy blowup fights as they just slowly fade out of a friendship if they don't like it anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/25 08:25 PM
3

Patriarchy doesn't exist and whatever toxic parts of culture exists is upheld by women as much as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/25 07:17 AM
1

Having testosterone is not a choice. I don't know what to tell you. Poverty is a higher predictor of violence anyway. Those who have the self control of beasts should be treated like so. Your rhetoric was used to oppress women for centuries as well as a justification for countless genocides. I think you're a morally repugnant person.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/25 03:24 PM
1

They can, most men control themselves. The fact that you're using dehumasing language like this just shows you're a piece of shit, I don't know what else to say to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/25 03:14 PM
1

Do you know when the holocaust happened? That's right, during the second world war you ignorant idiot.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 10:57 PM
1

so it’s going against your point. No, it's not. You're just incapable of understanding the point. you pigs I'm sure not sure hate will help you feel at peace or serve you in your life, but you seem to have chosen that direction, so there's nothing really to say to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 10:55 PM
1

I mean yes. Saying : What trauma do men have from world wars lmfaooo is both evil and ignorant. What's next, you're going to say the holocaust didn't happen? You're just obviously unhinged, there's no point talking to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 10:52 PM
-1

What trauma do men have from world wars lmfaooo most of those men died and if they didn’t their children surely didn’t go on to inherit PTSD or as a matter of fact any ailment from war that’s just not how that works at all. Yeah. This tells me anything I should know about the kind of character you are. The truth of the matter is the misogyny women have experienced for literal decades is far more influential and important than you care to acknowledge. You don't even know what I acknowledge or not…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 07:39 PM
1

Okay, here's my response to your points. You validate the experience that many men report of being rejected and treated differently when they display vulnerability or emotion---but when it comes to women also telling their experiences you don't extend the same kindness, or even reject them. It's an obvious double-standard. There's no double standards. When women tell me they are affected by sexual violence and their behaviour is a testimony to that, I listen and try to understand. I understand (…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 07:36 PM
0

why women should be afraid of them? It's irrelevant because, as you say, women are not the most at risk, so it's not relevant. There was a claim made, the claim was false, and now you're pivoting to "Oh see, men are victimised by other men, which means my misandry is justified!" All this proves even more is that yes women should absolutely fear men. Then live in fear, I guess. If you insist men are horrible monsters who should be feared, then sure, prostrate yourself in a corner and cower while …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 07:18 PM
3

And likewise for you. Thank you for implying I "peddle" misogyny just because I don't parrot every talking point you would want me to parrot. You’re all responsible. As much as you. When I was born I had as much responsibility as you for happened in the past. Do you not understand generational trauma? Also funny for you to imply that men have no generational trauma after two world wars. You're unhinged.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 06:16 PM
1

My God, you're dense and annoying. tl;dr : generalisations bad we got it Now, care to actually contribute to the conversation? You're just being intentionally obtuse and combative for no reason. Super cringe.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 06:13 PM
1

from OTHER men. That's IRRELEVANT. That just goes to show you that even men should be afraid of other men. As long as we agree that men are more likely to be recipient of violence, since that was the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:49 PM
3

You're unhinged. There's nothing "tribalistic" about sharing your experience. Just like I don't call women "tribalistic shit heads" when they share about their bad experiences with men. The reality is that a lot of men are emotionally stunted/dysfunctional due to primary socialisation and bad experiences (with women), and there's nothing to admit being "wrong" about that. It's a fact I'm convinced of. You can argue the degree to which and how and how much women participate in this issue, but it'…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 02:32 PM
0

Men are more likely to be both victims and perpetrators of violence, so that's not even true. For domestic violence or IPV, both genders commit violence at the same rate, impact of violence does differ though.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 06:27 AM
-3

Then it's not really a choice I suppose.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 06:19 AM
6

Current living men are not responsible for the past centuries. That should be the first clue that your mindset is wrong. Men today didn't "subject" you to anything for centuries, and you weren't even alive..
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:55 AM
9

Men still make a 3rd of deaths from domestic violence despite being much stronger physically. And women beat their partners at generally similar rates than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:50 AM
8

It's not even true. Gender symmetry in domestic violence is a known, although purposely obfuscated, fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:48 AM
1

I think the same thing that men like in women: an ideal.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:41 AM
2

Mine as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:38 AM
9

Or because their own experience tells them the opposite and believing you instead of their personal experience seems risky.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 05:35 AM
15

Neo-masculinity reform movement: Section 1 : trans women. Are you kidding me...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/05/25 06:49 AM
1

First of all, it depends on the job. And a man who likes you might have some difficult days at work when they cannot meet for a fre days. A woman who likes you would be able to wait a day or two to meet.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 08:43 PM
1

No, he didn't. You can keep saying that, but he objectively didn't. He simply rejected the proposed dates because he was busy. He didn't reject her. It's just the ego and immaturity showing.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 08:09 PM
1

You're just immature. It's fine to be, but let's not pretend otherwise. And yes if you feel like the guy is not invested but if someone cannot see you over a few days due to work or personal stuff, it's perfectly normal. Sure, find someone else who doesn't have a job.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 08:08 PM
2

Right, she doesn't owe him anything. And she's not obligated to hold off at any times. But the cope around "you rejected me by not being able to meet for a few days!!!" is highly immature. And the "we're done, I'm going on Tinder" is also super petty and well, immature.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 08:03 PM
2

I guess my opinion would highly depend on how much time passed and when we're those messages sent. I suspect this is probably a short amount of time, otherwise the story would heavily feature the long response time. I think most people who responded to this are quite obviously immature.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:12 PM
1

An unemployed man who's into you will find the time I'm sure. Adults have jobs and responsibilities. A few days of heat at work is normal and might happen in the early days of dating. It doesn't sound like he shirked for weeks but for a day or two.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:06 PM
-1

That's not what the post is saying. The post is saying that after he declined to meet due to being too busy she told him she wasn't interested anymore and was going on Tinder. That's not waiting a day or two. It sounds like her ego got stung because he wasn't available 24/7 for her, so rejected him and announced it theatrically without waiting a single bit or giving a bit of leeway to a busy working adult. It's childish behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:05 PM
0

Right, my point is that, at this point, you wait a few days to see if the person comes around. And I agree sending a lot of messages unresponded can make you look desperate, but it's definitely not "harassment". Just wait it out for a bit and then move on. It's super simple. People do this all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 02:57 PM
1

I didn't say she should ask him out again if you read my comment carefully. I said that if she gave him the time to see the heat die down on his side, he probably would have come back to her. Also, following up on a meetup proposal is not harassment. Nice nonsense to paint the situation as if the woman wasn't absolutely unreasonable, when all I see from this post is a guy having a tough time for like max 48h. Crazy stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 02:45 PM
-7

The guy was overwhelmed with work according to what you described. The woman could have waited like a day or two for him to reach out again after the heat dies down. Being busy a day or two is not "rejection". It's just you inventing justification for a bruised ego because the whole world doesn't revolve around this woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 02:35 PM
-5

If the woman "gave up" for not being able to meet short notice a few days, then it's not reasonable, especially if the guy was so communicative. If the guy is an adult, he probably has work and has adult responsibilities, so expecting short notice meetups over a 1-2 day period is just not realistic. I'm sure the unemployed League of Legends player who still lives at his parents' would have time, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 02:26 PM
1

Yes. My point is that people in general think that men are solely responsible for their feelings anyway. So there is not really any need for "plausible deniability".
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 04:56 PM
2

Right, so my comment was not about you. It doesn't have to be so extreme. Sometimes it'd not done fully consciously, but you should be mindful. Sometimes it's really egregious. I've never known a guy to be manipulated that obviously either. Manipulation is typically subtle and allows for plausible deniability Yeah, guys in love aren't the brightest, let's just say that. And deniability is there. You're denying it's a thing altogether.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 03:31 PM
2

Only if you make it gender specific, which you shouldn't. I don't. They are doing it. They are specifically pointing out men being "friendzoned" by women. And although some people in the comments correctly pointed out that women get friendzoned too, the friendzone is usually discussed culturally as happening mainly to men. and some of them wanted to remain friends after I said no. Yes, in this situation you're not manipulating your friends then were you? The person who's not getting what they wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 02:19 PM
20

I think people tend to overlook how a lot of women know that a man they are "friends" with likes or loves them and sometimes manipulates them to keep the current status quo because it benefits the woman. I've had to call friends out on this behaviour in the past. This type of rhetoric only works because everybody assumes women are just weeny teeny women who have no agency, and men are solely responsible for everything that happens to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 05:48 AM
2

I think it goes both ways. Women's bodies are also moralised in weird ways (abortion, pressure to have children etc.)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/25 01:52 PM
2

Could be, I'm not saying this is definitely the case in all cases where this "pattern" happens. But the moralising of men's time and even biology is absolutely a thing. expecting to have leisure time I'm not sure "expecting" is appropriate. But in this situation, the times are balanced out anyway. The woman sleeps 2h more, the man has 2 hours more "leisure time" but sleeps 2h less. So where is the extra work? (Exactly in this hypothetical, I'm not saying men and women always put the same amount …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/25 01:14 PM
2

While I suspect that, yes, women put more work into childcare, especially in the first month year, the discrepancy in descriptions is because women's biology is seen as needs that need to be accommodated by everyone while men's are viewed in a moralistic lense (leisure is morally wrong in relation to women for example here)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/25 10:29 AM
–

It shouldn't? I'm also not proposing a centrally planned economy that "provides" access to food or commodities. Currently, the (almost) only way to get food is to enter voluntary exchanges with other people, sex is also something that can only occur from voluntary and consensual interaction between people. (BTW I was just making an analogy to show how stupidly people engage with this topic, but everyone, you included, seem to not understand the point at all)
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 05:17 PM
–

I don't know what to respond to you. Do you actually believe that my point was to say that people literally are objects? Also sex is not an object. And sex is not strictly "possession" in the same sense of ownership rights. So even your misunderstanding of my point doesn't make sense. Btw, you're not entitled to other people's things or to things in general either. Stealing is bad, I can't believe you would imply theft is fine /s
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 05:14 PM
–

Who asked for sexual access to people's bodies? Just curious where you get your eye-rollingly stupid aphorisms.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 04:40 PM
–

This is the equivalent of someone complaining about purchasing power and the conversation always being derailed by some people saying: "Nobody owes you any food, just work for your food! Or go forage or start your own farm with your non food-havers" "People used to work 80h a week for gruel, starvers feel so entitled to proper nutrition nowadays. You're lucky if you ever able to even eat meat once!" These conversations always miss the point. They take the personal to be societal and bring the so…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/25 01:53 PM
3

How is it "dominance" to give 300$ at a first date? What's the dominance part? "Bro, I felt really dominated by you giving me loads of money for just showing up to a date, your balls must be huge."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 09:16 AM
36

"The only reason a man might not want to have sex with me right this moment must be that he is indeed gay."
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/25 01:01 PM
1

Imagine they took your brain out of your body and put it into a robot so you could have immortality. Okay.. Your choice is made for you and you're put into the opposite robot of what you identify as. I don't really get the "you identify as". I don't identify as my body or as my sex. I am used to my body and my sex and it for sure influences and informs my Would you identify as the robots sex, or would you identify as your brain's gender? But what does that even mean? That's my question. I would …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/04/25 07:25 PM
36

You're mixing up multiple things. God, I hate this trans topic so much. You're mixing up conservatives who hate trans people because they're gender non-conforming and hate everything they consider abnormal with gender critical TERFs who think redefining gender/sex with self-identification threatens the safety of vulnerable cis-women. Conservatives are evil and should be opposed in wherever possible. I think there should be at least an attempt to answer the worries of gender critical Terfs in goo…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/04/25 09:47 AM
5

I agree. I still don't think feminism is right-wing or linked to conservatism at all.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 12:08 PM
1

I agree they shouldn't get a "free pass". But that doesn't mean they're right-wing. I think we can accurately call out feminism's flaws and major mistakes without equating them to bigoted conservatives. I love Le Guin, so I will look up the story and read it, thank you. I see your point, but I still think that men's rights activists or whatever non-controverdial name we want to give them should ally with feminists over opposing conservatives. We should agree with feminists against conservatism a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 12:06 PM
-2

That's not an advocacy movement, that's a "crush any dissent and any consideration that men can be oppressed" movement. I mean, I think it's both. It's an advocacy movement, but it does try to crush any consideration that men can be oppressed because their core framework is flawed. It is still an advocacy movement for women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 11:36 AM
-5

I mean I see things you pointed as problems but the problem here is conflating an advocacy movement as "bigoted" in the same way that conservatives are bigoted. Advocacy movements are, by definition, exclusionary. That's just how it works. But it's not the same "exclusion" as when conservatives push for policies to exclude immigrants from public life or to limit voting rights to target some demographics. I think we need to be very clear about the difference and avoid becoming a "white lives matt…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 10:36 AM
18

Some of the posts posted over the weekend seemed to disagree with you. They were arguing that feminists are right wing and that they're bigoted in the same way that rightwingers are bigoted.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/04/25 09:12 AM
0

every bigot thinks it's different when they do it. Then the word becomes meaningless, I suppose. Good job. Almost no bigot is just like: "yeah fuck this group in particular idk I just feel like it", they all have some kind of excuse Right, and you need to actually look at the stated reason, the ideology and the underlying facts to decide if its actually bigoted or not. Otherwise, you have literally no way to comment on anything. I am not a feminist as I'm not really convinced by the patriarchy, …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 03:45 PM
2

What part of TERFS fearmongering about trans women being deviant males and degenerate sex pests is about material conditions again? The part that they think women spaces should be for biological females because biological females have been oppressed for centuries, and that's the material conditions. They think women's spaces are there to protect women and girls and that the threshold to access these spaces should be higher than self-identification. You can disagree, but it is about women's mater…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 02:27 PM
2

No, feminism is not a right-wing movement at all. Although I have my issues with feminism this is obviously wrong. Right-wing politics view "certain social orders and hierarchies as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable, typically supporting this position based on natural law, economics, authority, property, religion, or tradition." Feminism by definition, is antithetical to this. Feminism questions the "natural" order and place of women in society by doing basically a class analysis of wome…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates13/04/25 07:42 AM
-2

Yes. It's called an analogy. I am comparing the entitlement the other guy is expressing towards women's bodies, just like incels express entitlement towards women's bodies, but for sex. Both incels and the other commenter are equally unhinged.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 08:33 PM
0

Surrogacy is a normal practice and works perfectly well for all sides in many jurisdictions That may be. However, saying this doesn't erase the potential ethical issues with it. But surrophobes aka homophobes You have to be a troll right? That's why opposition to surrogacy is a form of homophobia. They don't want gay men to have kids. Being against surrogacy has nothing to do with gay people, as I said before, as heterosexual couples are also concerned by surrogacy. You keep asserting this witho…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 05:17 PM
1

I mentioned homophobic opposition to surrogacy to reply the question about their homophobia and then I saw multiple numerous deplorable mantras feminazis usually use. No, you didn't "mention" anything. You asserted that to be opposed to surrogacy is homophobia. Which is absurd on its face. The ethics of surrogacy are complex and apply equally to heterosexual and homosexual couples. Stop thinking about "mantras" and "buzz words" and actually talk about the substance of the ideas. They proclaim th…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 03:36 PM
6

Exactly. War economy literally put women to work. But I'm not sure they understand that. This is more about the aesthetic of masculinity rather than anything realistically material.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 03:26 PM
1

used the same delusional mantras Funny how you didn't respond to anything I said and just called me a moron and accused me of using "buzzy words" and "mantras" and then follow me to another post to continue berating me when you're incapable of engaging in good faith with any of the points. My dude, it's not hard, I said multiple times that you can disagree with feminists arguments against surrogacy but with actual arguments. You're just screeching about "feminazis" "hysterics" and "reich" when y…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 03:08 PM
2

Are you okay? Are you following me around now because I think surrogacy is different than sperm donation? What does your comment have anything to do with my comment? I disagree with the conservative talking point that masculinity should be linked with hard physical labour.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 02:32 PM
15

Masculinity is when men go destroy their bodies in manufacturing factories, nothing else, apparently.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 11:32 AM
-2

I don't know how to explain this to you in simpler terms. Feminists care about women. Feminists don't care about men. Lesbians are women, feminists care about them. Gay men are men, feminists don't care about them. This also has zero to do with surrogacy. Feminists view surrogacy about an issue with women's body. (Because it is) I don't need an approval of any homophobic and pro-feminazi pig though. I assume you mean me? I'm not even a feminist, but I just dislike people who lie and misrepresent…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 08:41 AM
-1

feminazis shouldn't comsider lgbtq organizations as their property I've never seen or heard this before. Opposition to surrogcay is a form of homophobia. Opposition to surrogacy is absolutely NOT a form of homophobia, you're just wrong. People and women specifically are allowed to have opinions on how women's bodies are legislated. Arguing against the commodification of women's bodies has nothing to do in principle with gay people at all. It proves they understand that biological parenthood matt…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 08:31 AM
1

No idea. LGBTQ organisations are not just gay men neither just gay women so I don't know. I agree with you there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 08:25 AM
-1

Stop using buzzy words. These myths were debunked Dude, how much of an MRA stereotype can you be. I'm not using "buzzy words." But radfems just don't want gay men (i.e. men) to have kids. This is homophobia. Even if surrogacy was made illegal, gay men would still be able to adopt. The feminist opposition to surrogacy has nothing to do with gay men and everything to do with women's bodies (the surrogates). It's not hard to understand and has nothing to do with homophobia You can disagree, but the…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 08:17 AM
-1

I would agree with most of that, but gay men are still men, and they're not women, so it's not surprising that feminists are not considering gay men as women. I'm not sure what your point is.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 07:52 AM
-2

Well yes? If they don't advocate for men, and gay men are men. This all follows quite nicely doesn't it?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 06:31 AM
-1

How is it lunacy? Any occupation can be proclaimed like exploitation, slavery .... Yes and no, women and especially vulnerable women can be pushed into sex work and some are even trafficked into sex work in a way that is much more exploitative than working a normal job. That's just a fact. And the same for surrogacy, pregnancy is a very crazy thing to sell and I can understand how feminist see it as a dangerous step towards reproductive subjugation of women. Cannibalism and other buzzy words.. g…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 06:28 AM
3

It reads to me that he agrees with the title. Meaning feminists do claim to be for men's rights but ignore them.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 06:15 AM
6

Gay men are still men, so it would make sense?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 06:08 AM
1

Some feminists are against surrogacy because they see it as the ultimate commodification of women's body and that women are forced by their material condition into basically relinquish their body for reproductive exploitation. Also, some feminists are gender critical and don't agree with the modern gender ideology because they are more focused on women's material (and biological condition). The more left (and communist) you go, the more you see this focus on material conditiion being front and c…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/04/25 06:05 AM
4

Old enough to not be susceptible to such strong external pressures? I'm not sure. But it's fair to hate him.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/25 07:02 PM
11

I have to say one thing the left needs to do better with is not completely destroy and cancel someone who's reasonable although slightly off centered from the progressive line. I feel like Peterson started quite reasonable but his brain go progressively more and more broken and now he's just completely nuts. I see an alternate universe where progressives didn't attack him so much and where he became a centrist self-help psychology guy instead of this insane far right harpy he's become.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/04/25 06:20 PM
–

Go to the "Man or Bear" Wikipedia page. It also shows what feminists journalists have commented about the trend and what the general rhetoric around the trend was. Like it's not a secret. Yes social media trends spark bigger societal debates and talking points. It's not that hard to understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:00 PM
0

It was literally mainstream and viral. That's literally how social media works.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 09:24 PM
-1

It's kind of too easy to just say "my advocacy movement is not selling anything" when feminism in the past years has been all about "choose the bear", "yes all men" "kill all men" etc. And yes, of course, any advocacy movement is "selling" its ideas to the public. That's what advocacy is.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 08:57 PM
0

Consent to sex, and ejaculation is not consent to pregnancy. This goes for both men and women. Hope this helps!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 01:57 PM
0

I just googled "birth control" and Plan B/Emergency Contraception is listed there. We both know you're wrong. Just because it's not foolproof, doesn't make it not birth control or contraception. He's an adult and knew what could happen He gave consent to sex with birth control. Just because birth control is fallible doesn't mean it's the same as consenting to sex with no birth control. He made a bad choice. Doesn't make him a victim expect of his own poor judgment. Except his bad choice is to ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 12:05 PM
0

From what I can read, he gave consent to ejaculate inside her if she took birth control. "I consent to sleep with you if you wear a condom" "I consent to sleep with you if you are taking birth control" This is how consent is supposed to work. Otherwise does that mean that ejaculation is consent? Is an erection consent? Is vaginally lubrication consent? Wow.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 11:50 AM
0

Can consent be conditional? If it can, why is not a victim? Wow.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 11:44 AM
-3

That is fine advice. It's, however, not useful when something bad has happened. Just like saying "Don't walk alone at night in dark alleyways". That's fine advice but is completely unhelpful to discuss the aftermath of a robbery. The responsibility shouldn't be on the victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 11:09 AM
-2

How is he evil at all? He was given wrong information and misled in the middle of the act and is somehow "evil" for it?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 10:33 AM
-2

I find it interesting how the discourse around men's responsibility and women's responsibility is so different. The man is considered somehow ultimately responsible of his emissions. The context is apparently irrelevant. Men are expected to be in absolute control over their own ejaculations. Even raped teenagers are forced to pay child support if their rapist get pregnant. The comments seem to overwhelmingly say "Well, he shouldn't have ejaculated in her". This is a bit strange to me when premat…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 10:28 AM
-2

If he was under the impression that she would take/is taking birth control, then not really. If stealthing is a form of rape, this is the same thing here.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 09:54 AM
–

“Im tired of doing the dishes myself” multiple times and he doesnt offer to help, he’s selfish Yes. That's my point. But if you just ask a few times "Can you do the dishes?" And the guy does them, how is he supposed to know that it's a deeper and systemic issue. You pretend that saying those two things are the same, when they're not. If someone is complaining over and over and over about the same thing, Making requests are not complaints. You just don't seem to understand that. "Can you do the d…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/25 08:15 AM
2

Fair enough. Sorry I got frustrated there.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 09:45 PM
1

Never said super crazy details need to be given. It's a simple thing. I want people to realise when they say "Can you do the dishes?" they're actually expressing a deeper need and to make the effort to formulate that need properly. It shouldn't be only on one side to interpret everything. Both parties should do their best to understand the other as well as doing their best to be open and honest about their needs and wants. Just do the thing. I promise that once you do the thing, the partner will…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 08:08 PM
0

So there was a complaint: DO THE CHORES. Yeah.. asking "Can you do the dishes?" is not a complaint. I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding how healthy communication looks like. “Do the dishes” and “im tired of doing the dishes by myself” is not hidden expectations Both of those are VERY different statements are they not? "Do the dishes" is a simple request, "I'm tired of doing the dishes myself" communicates a deeper problem with the way that the chores are divided and asking for a more s…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 08:03 PM
1

Nah. This kind of miscommunication leads to women complaining about "the bare minimum". It might be just as simple as "they just wanted the dishes done now". Usually, there is more. But then you need to directly communicate that. That was my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 04:31 PM
1

Blowjobs are not domestic chores that need to be clearly divided fairly to avoid any extra stress on one person. "Can you give me a blowjob" actually might not be a simple as it seems, as it might hide somebody actually asking for more intimacy or trying to express some deeper sexual dissatisfaction etc. But I still stand that asking to do the dishes is deeper than the blowjob.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 04:29 PM
1

Why are you assuming that? My experience living with a partner. It also applies to me. Sometimes it's also a hidden "I wish you could support me more right now, I'm struggling, please take over the chores more please". If he doesnt ask these questions and doesnt do the dishes, the lack of communication is on him. No, if those are hidden expectations, it's on the person making the request to make sure their request is clear, so they're not disappointed with the result. That's extremely basic. Any…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 03:46 PM
0

What I see as common miscommunication is that someone asks "Can you do the dishes?" But there are usually hidden factors, when does it need to be done? Just today? Right now, because it's blocking someone else from cooking? How should the dishes be done specifically? Does the person asking have another way of doing the dishes? The question "Can you do the dishes?" is actually rife for miscommunication and frustration. "You don't make me feel like a priority" is also almost nonsensical. It's not …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 02:46 PM
0

Also, having to hold a man’s hand through understanding the obvious is like raising a child. Most women dont want to raise a man unless it’s her son. I mean you're just admitting here that you don't want to communicate clearly, and that what you want should be "obvious", which is exactly what the complaint you strawman is about. Women who "nag" and complain without making clear demands or communicating clearly because: "iT sHoUlD bE oBvIoUs".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 12:23 PM
1

Marriage rates were significantly higher back then, so that doesn't really say anything about if these people were socially ostracised or not. The people who called them social deviants were people from the press who didn’t know them personally. Exactly, the mainstream were calling early feminists social deviants and "wild". Just like right now, feminism is mainstream and you are calling members of the manosphere "social rejects". I'm not saying the claims of feminism and the manosphere are of s…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/25 11:17 AM
3

Early feminists were absolutely called social deviants and "wild women" that's just factually correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/25 06:04 AM
-1

Feminists were originally social rejects. I don't like the manosphere, but this appeal to what's "cool" is just weird. If you were single and socially ostracised, would that have any impact on the validity of feminism?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 07:49 PM
2

Some other people have brought up some issues in the comments already. But for me, I see mostly sexual violence, bodily autonomy, and reproductive rights. Also sexual slavery, human trafficking and coercion into sex work should absolutely be eradicated. Etc. There are probably more issues. Those are the main ones that I would consider obviously wrong and that need tackling.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/25 11:19 AM
1

No, Russia invading Ukraine, raping ukrainian women, and killing ukrainian children is to blame for martial law in Ukraine and for the male draft. Hope this helps!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 11:29 AM
–

The end result from AI would then be more relatable to people, fostering more engagement. Not really. I saw your post and knowing that you got it from Chat GPT, why would I engage with it? Why I would I put more time wording out an answer if you only wrote a prompt and didn't put more effort than that? I also think that because it's so sanitized and inoffensive, there's not really anything to discuss. It's just not saying anything. But that's just my opinion at the end of the day.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 10:43 AM
–

It can be interesting to use Chat GPT, but it's designed to make non offensive corporate statements. I would suggest that you try to engage with these topics critically and with your own words. A lot of these sanitised AI essays are not very engaging and don't really push people to engage with your post.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 09:35 AM
–

I asked Chat GPT what it thinks about your text: "The text offers a thoughtful critique of how modern discussions around masculinity and femininity can oversimplify complex gender dynamics. It highlights a valid concern that the focus on "toxic masculinity" may unintentionally suppress healthy masculine traits, leaving men confused about how to express themselves authentically. The text also points out that this confusion can lead to dissatisfaction in relationships, as both men and women naviga…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 08:51 AM
10

I think there are still many women's issues that deserve to be tackled, even if rights are technically equal. I just wish we could also give room to men's issues, now that the rights have been, well, somewhat righted.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 08:23 AM
1

You have Russia to blame for that. Martial law exists for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 08:19 AM
2

because they think drugs will drive you through a bad path Nah. Conservatives ARE the bad paths. Conservatives literally create bad outcomes out of thin air for people and behaviour they don't like. They don't think drugs are bad because you end up in the streets. They think people who do drugs should end up in the street, shouldn't get any healthcare, and should die in abject conditions. They oppose programs to give healthcare and support for people suffering from addictions at every turn and p…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 09:43 PM
1

Adult human female. Got any other stupid shit for me?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 08:34 PM
1

Okay, so which is it? Should children be well-informed so you can punish them, or kept ignorant, so you can punish them? And no, conservatives are still opposing sex education to this day. How’s that working out for your utopia? It's working great, actually. 50% less likely to get pregnant than those who receive abstinence-only education, 40% delayed sexual initiation, 60% of reduction in unprotected sex, statistically significant decline in teen pregnancy, STIs, HIV etc. It's funny you say "uto…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 08:25 PM
1

You say this like I'm a feminist and like I disagree with you. I'm not, and I don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 08:04 PM
3

the outcomes of their own well-informed actions Oh, you mean how conservatives oppose sexual education everywhere they can? This type of "well informed"? Are the underage rape victims forced to give birth suffering from their well-informed actions? It's funny how you compare women having sex to drunk driving. Your example is literally an example where somebody is punished. You punish people for DUI because it's putting others at risk! And yes, even if you did a DUI, after you are punished for yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 07:54 PM
3

It's literally worse for everyone to punish some people for some bad decisions, especially if it's not criminal behaviour. If, for example, you reduce or take away child benefits for a single mother, that mother might not be able to make sure the child is taken care of when she needs to work, because she potentially cannot pay for a daycare. Because of this, she might not be able to hold a good and steady job, causing her financial instability. Her income would probably decrease, and she will al…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 04:53 PM
4

The solution is to punish people. They think if you don't live a conservative life, anything that happens to you is fair game, and they don't think the government should "bail anyone" out of their mistakes. They don't care if children are affected or if women die of ectopic pregnancies or whatever. They will just say "You shouldn't have had sex"
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 03:47 PM
–

What? Are you serious? How can you be so ignorant and offensive at the same time? Generations of men and women have fought for those rights, and you're just saying : "they did it for sex lol". How moronic.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 05:22 PM
–

Didn't say it wasn't the case. Just wanted to say that what you described was painfully normal for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:51 AM
–

I said you shouldn't so I don't know why you insist.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:49 AM
–

You shouldn't? 😅😅😅🤣🤣🤣😂😇😇😇🫡
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:47 AM
–

Most men don't care about body count, correct, as long as it's not a super crazy high. Bitchy women are not a thing, some people are not pleasant to be around and some of these people are women. Boss babe? Oh you mean female managers? I've had almost only women bosses/managers my entire life, a lot were great managers, some were very poor managers. I'm not sure what you're referring to otherwise. What about fat women? They benefit from mainstream cultural support and a lot of men still are attra…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:45 AM
–

A bit of self-reflection would go a long way. What you described is just perfectly and painfully normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:36 AM
–

Boy, do I have some news for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:31 AM
–

It's not unrelated. It's kind of saying like : "sure you can leave anytime you want, but if you want food, you have to stay". Men are not really allowed to break free from their gender roles if they are socially ostracised for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/25 11:28 AM
19

Women are always considered passive victims and absolved of any responsibilities for their own behaviour. Men are always considered responsible and always in full agency and control of every situation.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 09:03 PM
1

"too" and not "especially", hence my question about the post's title.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/03/25 03:48 PM
17

I'm honestly not sure if it's really true that men are now flocking to the right. It feels like some kind of scapegoating, that these scary young men are being radicalised, blablabla, the typical narrative. I however agree with the increasing segregation of online spaces that can radicalise people.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/03/25 06:00 PM
20

Ironically enough, most of the European's far right parties seem to be headed by women these days.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 10:59 PM
3

Well, it's kind of sexist if it only/mainly targets girls. Sure, you can pretend that boys just dream of wearing crop tops and skirts and so on, but in practice, because of socialisation, those things are in the vast majority worn by girls, and a lot of time those restrictions are placed because of views around sexuality and girls' bodies. It's a bit dishonest to say it's not sexist just because "technically" it's also forbidden for boys.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 08:15 PM
3

I tried to differentiate between legitimate historical concerns and the "anti-woke" people who would have cried about anyway because they cry about every black person in their media. Yes, I agree there's some legitimate concerns about Yasuke. I also think it's actually fine to be annoyed with the game featuring very "western" style minorities in a way that can feel dismissive of the culture it's supposed to represent and honour. I meant a different crowd with my "anti-woke" type of people I desc…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 08:08 PM
-2

While that's true, I also think in the context of school dress codes, girls have been targeted repeatedly by insane "modesty" guidelines so it's a bit of a wash on that issue for me. Specifically in the school context.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 06:56 PM
14

Okay, yes, thank you. I mean the title of the article also say "tomboy" haircuts so it seems like it would be somehow enforced for both MTF and FTM kids, but you're right that conservatives tend to obsess more about MTF trans people. Probably because of their benevolent sexism and their absolute obsession with "manly men".
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 05:06 PM
6

"They" meaning the OP or the conservative law makers? I'm super fucking lost. In any case, the same would apply to FTM trans people no?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 04:58 PM
8

It's just two highly dishonest and ideologically captured minority groups having their culture war online and pretending they speak for the majority. You have your insane Grumz-like weirdos who screech endlessly about DEI and whine if a character is anything else than a sexy woman character who fires the same synapses in their brain that porn does. Everything is a top down conspiracy against gamers to sissify them or something blablabla. On the other side, the r/GamingCirclejerk types screech co…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 04:51 PM
3

What I was wondering was about this part of the title: Men deserve the same degree of freedom of expression as women. Which seemed to imply that there would be some disproportionate effect on men/boys as opposed to girls/women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 04:30 PM
13

Yes, and likewise for girls. It seems like an absurd law cooked up to target trans people with obviously zero afterthought of how it would actually play out. I was just confused by the title and thought I missed something somewhere.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 04:20 PM
18

I'm sorry, what does that have to do with freedom of expression for men? This is just some insane crazy law targeting trans youth.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/03/25 03:32 PM
1

French native living in Germany, so weird mix haha. Nice to see a quebecois!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/03/25 11:09 AM
1

Thanks for the idiom! After a re-read, there are a few issues I noticed here and there. Hopefully not too detrimental to the overall point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/25 08:47 PM
2

Sure, feel free. The writing isn't the best, ESL and all that.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/25 07:04 PM
30

That's an interesting topic, here are my two cents. The name I think first of all, the name of the movement feminism is an issue. It is fem-inism. It is in the name. It's a female supremacy movement. "But it's for everyone! It benefits men, too!" Okay, then why not call it egalitarianism or something like this? Feminism like to claim it benefits men to give itself more credence but it absolutely does not have space for men's issues. Even if someone tries to bring up a men's issues, a million cav…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/03/25 10:14 AM
57

Misandry is culturally omnipresent, and misandrist expressions are usually understood and excused as product of male oppression. On the other hand, misogyny, for example, in the case of incels, is always seen as a conscious moral failing. Misogyny is a view that men actively choose to believe, and it shows their oppressive nature. For someone to be deserving of empathy, they would need to "shed" their conscious misogyny. Men choose to be misogynistic, women have no choice but to become misandris…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/03/25 02:02 PM
27

So basically, the same old same old, with class consciousness on top?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates07/03/25 03:31 PM
1

Well, they're moderate as compared to the extremists who actually do the killing themselves and who do terrorist acts. But they're not moderate in the sense that it can be considered still to be very violent and dangerous ideas. And I agree with the last part. Muslim people need to be treated with decency, even if their ideas should be opposed (in my opinion).
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/25 11:58 AM
7

I would agree with you. Except that moderate muslims also, for example, don't disagree so much with extremists in terms of response to blasphemy, etc. Do moderate muslims extend sympathy for Salman Rushdie or for the victims of Charlie Hebdo? No, the overwhelming sentiment was "They deserve whatever is coming for them." I will treat muslims as a group with the disdain that their dogmas and immoral views deserve, and I will treat individual muslims with the respect that every individual person de…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates25/01/25 09:35 AM
22

I know that Muslims have it hard sometimes with representation and generalisations, but in the end, it's a religion. A religion has dogmas, precepts, and teachings that one can disagree with morally. There's nothing morally to disagree with being male or with being female. What you can discuss is the social expectations and the morality around that, but what can you really disagree with the sexual facts of the world...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates24/01/25 03:45 PM
–

I have a girlfriend now.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/21 08:51 PM
9

Being tired of the friendzone and wanting to get laid doesn't mean that you don't want a true relationship. And even the PUA stuff isn't just about getting laid and that's it. Obviously a lot of guys looked to PUAs because they were frustrated with their lack of success with women and PUAs offered a very result oriented supposed "method" that men could apply in their own lives to become successful. In practice it devolved into crazy weird ideology stuff but there's no doubt in mind as to why it …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/21 06:51 PM
9

People don't get it because the discourse keeps being centered on extremely vague concepts like "masculine energy".
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/21 07:10 AM
1

No, to use someone else's body for your own personal desires should be allowed. With informed and enthusiastic consent. Manipulating people for whatever goal is however, immoral that's true.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/21 10:29 PM
1

You wouldn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/21 05:54 PM
5

Your post is hardly better so I find it baffling that you would make this kind of comment to someone that took the time to engage with your post.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/21 03:59 PM
0

Most people seem to agree that using that word to denigrate black people is not great. The black community having reclaimed the word doesn't really change that. I don't think OP is a sex worker reclaiming the word "whore", but i could be wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 04:40 PM
18

Talks about denigrating men but insists on calling sex workers "whores". You can't invent those posts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 02:39 PM
2

Sure whatever, doesn't matter. Yes I think it's morally wrong to cheat. It's literally useless to call it immoral because what's important is to know why it's immoral. Yes it's immoral. Abuse is immoral too, rape too. But more importantly if it happens it's a sign that you should leave that relationship. If you suspect someone is cheating it's already a big symptom that something is wrong. Either in the relationship or in one of the partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:34 AM
3

Yes, and in that comment they make it very clear that they use those devices NOT to get information on their partner but when they need the device for other things and that it's because they are used to each other after a very long time. And yes, of course you risk infidelity, you take that risk with every relationship. And you know what, you can also control everyday of their life and they can still cheat. You're not risking infidelity for privacy, you're throwing away privacy when the risk of …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:30 AM
3

Yeah of course that's what happens when you learn something you didn't know before. Of course you thought it was going great until you're faced with co trary evidence, so what? You choose the opposite nuclear option of starting from the base assumption that your partner is cheating and asking for evidence to the contrary. Why even start a relationship then since you start convince from the cheating and work it backwards? And yes some people are fucked up and do some crazy shit. That doesn't just…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:10 AM
3

What is there to disagree about? Do you realistically think you can have a sufficient amount of control over someone to remove any sexual temptation from their life? And how incredibly fucked up that would be if it even were possible? Do you want a slave or a partner?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:07 AM
4

I would more or less never ask to see the phone. If I detect dishonesty, lies or inconsistencies over a period of time I will talk to that person. If I sense they're not genuine or that they're not really in the relationship then I will end it. Cheating sucks but it's just a symptom of a relationship not working and someone not valuing you or your trust.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:06 AM
3

Your whole thing about removing temptation doesn't make sense. The problem is not temptation and even if it were you're not all powerful nor all controlling so it's madness and extremely scary that you would enter a relationship with that outlook. Cheating is not about temptation it's about personal agency and choice. People who cheat made the choice to cheat as rational adults. They can as easily choose not to cheat. It's an agency thing not a temptation thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:03 AM
2

It's not unconditionally, it's under the condition that if they break it it's over. That's not unconditional.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 09:00 AM
3

This is madness. If you think your partner is suspicious, don't date them. If my partner would be like "here is my phone, look it's on the table here, wanna have a look?" I'll be like "no thanks". And why would I show them my phone in response to that. That is just bizarre. And yes not wanting someone to invade tour privacy doesn't mean you have something to hide. If my partner would insist on watching me everytime I go to the toilet I would tell them to not fucking do it. That doesn't mean I tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 08:57 AM
32

Hell no. I literally don't care about her phone. I also don't really want her to go on my phone either. If she cheats we're done. If I'm spending my days making sure she doesn't cheat, the relationship is already over at this point, why be in the relationship? I swear stuff like this confuses me.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/21 08:30 AM
1

I'm not really trying though. I just put some effort in safe care and in my body and appearance. It's like saying "You need to drink water to live" and you would retort "Well I threw a glass of water at my dead cat and it didn't live so you're wrong". An element can be necessary but non sufficient for something to work. It is necessary for me to take care of myself if I want a relationship, but it's not sufficient for me to find a relationship as soon as I take care of myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/21 07:54 PM
-2

How does it completely disprove the post?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/21 07:19 PM
0

How would you happen to know that?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/21 04:44 PM
0

Well obviously. It's literally what the whole red pill and everything is about. It is so ubiquitous that being in a relationship is desirable it's almost laughable to claim the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/21 04:43 PM
5

You know what? Fuck it. You're more or less right. Guys are physically more picky than girls. And a lot of guys don't put effort in their hygiene and their physical appearance. And I know that because I notice the difference. I've been taking extra care of myself these past months and it's great. I'm still not seducing anyone and I'm still single but at least now I feel like I have a strong grounding to date and I feel like I value myself more. My self confidence is still pretty much very low be…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/21 04:37 PM
2

A lot of people try to rationalise their bad experiences even if their rationalisations don't make much sense and create cognitive dissonance. It's a defence mechanism to make sense of your own experience (probably negative). I am unfortunately guilty of this sometimes even though not to that extreme. Sometimes bad things just happen, sometimes you meet someone that's abusive or bad things happen. There's not really a lot of sense and meaning to find in those events. Which is why we usually tend…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/21 05:43 PM
1

Can you be more specific? Are there some problems in the porn industry that definitely need to be addressed to keep women from being coerced into it and abused? Yes. Are they women who willingly engage into the creation of pornography ? Also yes. Or are you saying all porn hurts women? If your problem is with ethical consumption of porn, then I can understand, but there are ethical ways to consume porn, for example consuming porn made by productions lead by women or productions that have extra p…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/21 09:18 AM
1

It's great you found someone that makes you happy and that fulfills your standards. I don't know that it validates your weird views of pornography but you're entitled to your opinions. I don't understand why being so mad. Why do you have to say things like "porn sick lovers" "cucks" "pathetic" etc.? Why can't you live your life with your standards and not disparage other people especially since you don't put these people in your life? I don't smoke weed or like weed but I literally never think a…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/21 08:49 AM
2

Yes. This blaming the victim for not having acted a certain way is some of the most fucked up shit. When most of the time people aren't equipped with the tools to even conceptualise and understand what the fuck is happening to them in those situations.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 05:09 PM
1

Except that it's not the experiencing the studying that convinces you, it's the rational examination of the facts. What people usually mean when they say :"in my experience" they mean "my lived experience has lead me to believe this".
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 05:06 PM
1

Did you understand that experience and convictions are different though?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 04:57 PM
1

We disagree, but did you at least get the point about the experience thing? Please I spent like 7 comments trying to explain this to you, can you at least show you understood? And your sentences make no sense. "Her issue is men who lead that". Who lead what? "Church dudes don't" They don't what? They're not sexual deviants? I don't even know what you're saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 04:38 PM
1

That's what you don't understand. I'm going to state it again very clearly. MY EXPERIENCE AGREES WITH YOU In my experience religious people would be less prone to sexual deviance, porn addiction etc. The point you don't understand is that EXPERIENCE IS IRRELEVANT. As I've stated multiple times, my experience with the religious people was great, but after learning about it and thinking about it I changed my mind. I changed my MIND not my EXPERIENCE. "So clearly you don’t think they have more." I …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 04:14 PM
1

Holy shit. I'm literally telling you like 4 times in a row that I have the same experience as you. "BECAUSE you haven’t experienced or observed that" I literally wrote the opposite like 4 times at this point. How can you not get this? I have this experience. My experience with religious people was GREAT meaning NON NEGATIVE. Meaning that I would usually qualify them as having INTEGRITY.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 03:56 PM
1

I think you actually can't read. I told you experience is irrelevant because experience with religious people was GREAT. So was your experience with religious people bad? And someone that means they have integrity? What? This is why I'm saying experience is irrelevant. Now I'm upset damnit.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 03:48 PM
1

Experience doesn't matter but whatever. I told you my experience as a religious person was great so what do you keep going back to "we have different experiences" it's irrelevant. Anyway to each their own I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 03:43 PM
1

"You’re taking offense. Don’t." What? I'm not but okay... There have been studies showing no difference between the ethical behaviour of believers and non-believers. But whatever. Doesn't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 03:21 PM
1

Not really. It's basic logic. We obviously don't agree, but it makes absolutely no logical sense that religious people would have more integrity than the general population. It's actually exactly backwards. And I was raised religious too btw. And I had a great time, no trauma whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 03:05 PM
4

Wow are you okay my dude? You sound super mad, just chill. And sure, if you want to have to choose from a pool of only 5 to 10% of all men just on the basis of porn I don't think you'll have a good time. You seem extremely obsessed with porn and comparing it to a disease or something. If you're happy single, great for you, don't complain about men then. It's funny how usually happy people don't seem to complain but what do I know. You are indeed allowed to date whomever you want, but if you deci…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 03:02 PM
1

No she won't. People who actively participate in a criminal organisation by default have less integrity than people who are the same but who don't participate in a criminal organisation.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 02:48 PM
1

It's full of people who don't reform it and full of people whose beliefs actively hurt others. But anyway. A lot of religious are good people and just ignorant of the consequences of their beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 02:46 PM
12

Men's relationship to physical contact is absolutely fucked up. From early childhood we're told to accept violence, and to disregard it. "Just be a man" "Don't cry" etc. Everyone constantly reinforces the idea that women cannot be violent and that violence from a woman is not violence, and that if you consider it violence it's due to your own weakness, because women cannot be violent. From early childhood men are deprived of physical affection and socially taught that showing affection to your f…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 02:30 PM
0

90% of men should accept they're undateable by women's standard? And any person who unironically uses the word cuck for anything but its actual definition is either brain damaged or just extremely pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 12:11 PM
0

Integrity in the church? Are you drunk on mass wine?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 10:57 AM
2

Can you explain what you mean when you say "porn"? Is watching porn a major problem for you or do you mean porn addiction? Also maybe if you don't like the men you happen to meet or date, maybe try to change your method of meeting guys or dates. If you keep meeting the same kind of people with the same kind of problem I would ask myself : "What is my method in meeting these men and how can I change that method to meet people that meet my criteria" Instead of going on generalities like "What happ…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 10:45 AM
1

As to my plans moving forward, I just moved to a new city a couple of days ago. It's for a new job I'm excited about, after working a hard minimum wage and physical job, so I'm really looking forward to it. I haven't felt this good in years. I feel very confident and happy. I have one friend in the city but it's otherwise a completely blank slate so that's nice. I have contacted the rowing club to do a tryout this week end so I'm really looking forward to it. I'm otherwise looking for jam sessio…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 09:20 AM
2

That's fine, you didn't hurt my feelings or upset me much. It's just kinda eye-rolling to me when people call me an SJW feminist cuck when I say women should be free to engage sexually with whomever they choose whenever and that literally minutes a few minutes later someone compared me to Elliott Rodgers for saying dating as a guy is tough. But that's okay. But anyway, I could not have had my experience and still made valid points so it's kind of irrelevant imo, but I always end up having to rev…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/21 11:06 AM
2

I agree that my parent's generation did choose partners and relationships with friends rather than not. The dating culture has drastically changed since then. "Literally go talk to girls and make friends and if you like one, say so. If she says thanks but no thanks, move on" That's your advice? Invest yourself emotionally in someone for months and then just throw them out when they say no? Most women at this point say no, because they value the friendship, and understandably so. So what, spend m…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/21 09:57 AM
13

"Ofc it's awful..." Hmm sounds reasonable.. "But..." Aaaah there it is. What a surprise.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/21 08:08 AM
2

Yeah I said my friend is blond with blue eyes because those are assets he has that make him pretty, meaning his hair and eyes are beautiful. I could have said just as much : he s a very attractive guy with dark hair and deep brown eyes. Yeah cold approach is weird, online dating is fucked and no, the way you describe relationships is not how it works. Here's how it actually works. You meet a woman you're interested in. If you don't touch her or make it sexual after one or two weeks they stop con…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/21 07:18 AM
2

No, my friends are not overweight nor particularly messy, neither am I. Out of all of them, I am the one complaining about women because it's a subject that interests me and I have a lot of female friends so I see both sides of dating. That's the thing. You assume that something has to be wrong with them. No. That's your misunderstanding. Women just aren't very interested in normal guys. You don't need to be fat, awkward, dirty or anything. Just be a normal guy and you'll be ignored. For example…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/21 05:53 AM
1

Yeah what I meant with the period talk is that it can make some people uncomfortable. ​ sexual or flirtatious or implicitly requesting sexual favors/attention Yeah I'm sorry but no. Me complaining about my lack of sex is not flirtatious at all. Any woman could attest to that,. It's not sexy, it's not flirtation, it's nonsense. It is just sexual because the subject matter is sex but that's it. It's complete lunacy for me to hear you imply that everytime a friend complains about something it's bas…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/21 07:11 AM
7

Most of the men in my life are great people, but women just aren't interested. It's pretty sad, but that's just how it is. I think this sub has made it clear that most women would rather be alone than with an average guy. Unfortunately, by definition, most guys are average.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/21 04:59 AM
1

Sure because that's how friends talk to each other... /eyeroll
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/21 10:07 AM
1

Doesn't sound like a come-on? What does that even mean? And no, you can vent about not having sex without having it be awkward. Have you never had friends? What the fuck. You know women complain about sex sometimes too right? To their male friends as well. And when my friends do it, I'm not in my head thinking like "holy shit she wants to sleep with me". What is wrong with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/21 08:39 AM
7

Don't have female friends at all then? Or just don't talk at all about your personal life to any woman? Why would a woman be uncomfortable by the fact that I don't have sex? It's bizarre. If I can take discussions about menstruation, sex and more with my friends why can't I just vent about my lack of sex life?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/21 05:57 AM
1

No they wouldn't. And even if men just cared about sex as you seem to imply, even if that were the case, simple utilitarianism would still push men towards relationships, because you're more likely to have sex regularly if you commit to a partner rather than taking your chances with casual sex everytime you want sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/21 10:45 PM
1

Nah, just no. Maybe if you offer casual sex with models over a mediocre relatioship with an abusive woman yes, but otherwise no. Literally all the men I know (and me included) just dream of being in a loving relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/21 09:03 PM
1

Hmm, you may say that. But it makes no sense to me. I've never heard about guys becoming depressed because they can't get casual sex. I hear guys (myself included) being depressed about not getting sex at all. Which is very different. And yes mem would go through a lot to get sex, and the vast majority would be absolutely happy if they could get into a committed relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/21 08:49 PM
1

You're confusing the fact that men would do so much to get any sex at all and get depressed when they don't get any sex at all with a preference for a type of sex...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/21 08:09 PM
0

Casual sex would correlate to more options for LTRs if women were okay dating normal guys and not just the top 1%. Women throw themselves at the top 1% guys and then pikachu shock face when he doesn't want to commit to them...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/21 08:00 PM
1

With this kind of mindset you could say everyone uses everyone for their own gain. Do you just use your parents for your own gain? In a sense yeah. Do you just use your friends for your own gain? In a sense yeah. Do you just use partners for your own gain? In a sense yeah. And you know what? Everybody does the same. Girls that have male friends also do it for their own gain. Parents that have kids also do it for their own gain.
/r/seduction15/06/21 08:59 AM
5

I think being friends with women actually makes it worse for dating. Women make great friends but they give the absolute worst dating advice. Listening to their dating stories and witnessing their dating decisions also might completely disillusion you and make you want to give up. Also usually there is a weird dynamic that can happen where the woman will kinda "pretends" the guy friend is her boyfriend and kinda role-plays it but without actually ever happening, which can fuck up the guy. Which …
/r/seduction15/06/21 08:53 AM
3

You understand what the word "poor" means right?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/21 05:44 AM
2

Where do people go?
/r/seduction22/05/21 01:01 PM
1

"Men make God awful friends that put each other down" I'm sorry, how is that me being "triggered" when I say that not liking showers of compliments that may seem fake for some people isn't the same as being god awful friends who put each other down? Can you not conceive that there are genuine and valid criticisms on both styles of friendships and that you don't have to make this a "war". Yes a lot of people see showers of compliment as "fake", and that changes from culture to culture. Fat girls …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/21 10:56 AM
9

Hmm, not giving fake compliments to your friends is "put each other down" now?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/21 04:20 AM
2

I think there is a lot of money to be made selling lost, confused and emotionally vulnerable men stuff. I think we're getting to a point where we really need to critically examine the way we treat men. If you get no validation your whole life and even when the modern narrative sometimes confuses pushing women up with holding men down, when someone comes up and tells you you have value, you buy the snake oil. If it's only about becoming rich, yes I obviously think it's pretty bad. It's a very typ…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/21 04:42 AM
3

There are a lot of bad things that I think are inherent to human beings, selfishness, stupidity, violence, deceit etc. This doesn't mean that I don't want to make genuine human connections. Just like an heterosexual woman may remark that men will probably look to women as a sexual prospect first but still may want to still look for someone to haveba genuine connection with. With all live within our social systems. Just because we don't like parts of that system doesn't mean we throw everyone in …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/21 04:19 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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