TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ILikeBird Archive

View 4 posts and 700 comments by ILikeBird on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
14

Because women do not find 95% of men completely unattractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 01:51 PM
26

Eve was convinced to eat the fruit by an archangel that served as God’s right-hand man. She had about as much chance as an ant does at avoiding a human’s boot. Adam was convinced to eat the fruit by a fellow human. Someone who should have been on equal footing (or even below him, depending on your religious beliefs). He had a chance at avoiding it, but didn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 06:28 PM
0

Probably both. Women don’t have as strong of a sex drive as men and are able to get it easier, giving them less of a “reason” to want to assault someone. Not saying it never happens, just that it’s not going to be as common.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:17 AM
–

Abortion is illegal or restricted in many states.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 05:25 PM
–

Women are typically the ones that hold themselves accountable for bringing a child into this world, whereas men have the privilege to just dip out with very little repercussions.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 05:21 PM
6

Just because something is a consequence of an action does not make it transactional. It is only transactional if you are purposely proving a “payment” for someone’s services. In the example I gave above, she is not purposefully increasing her sex drive as a reward for him helping around the house, it is just an indirect consequence of his actions (he helps more —> she has increased energy —> her natural sex drive increases and they have mutually beneficial sex).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 03:12 PM
11

The context I hear that in is often NOT transaction. An example of this being translational would be “if he helps out around the house more, I will reward him with sex”. However, the context I hear it in is typically “I am so overwhelmed/exhausted doing all this domestic and emotional labor that I don’t have the energy/passion for sex. If he helped out more, it would help me increase my energy and, consequently, sex drive.”
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 04:13 AM
3

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 08:04 PM
7

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 07:56 PM
2

What are the consequences to women reporting that they care about financial status slightly more than men? Also, you are not calmly discussing a topic right now, you are responding very emotionally. Just wanted to let you know in case this is how you typically reply and you’re surprised you get banned from certain places.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 12:05 AM
3

Why is it an important thing to bring up in the feminist sub anyway?? Whether you fully trust OP’s statement or not it’s pretty much useless information.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 09:14 PM
6

Great, I’m just going to assume you realized there is no actual meaning and you’re posting about things that have nothing to do with feminism on r/AskFeminism because you’re bored and like to argue stupid things.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 07:15 PM
11

Why does it even matter? It seems you’re arguing the point just to argue.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 06:34 PM
1

At least you’re consistent with your world view then. Sounds like you think the title of this post could be changed to “People are actually pretty bad at filtering”.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 05:37 PM
5

So you think men as a whole are bad at filtering because some fall for scams?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 04:04 PM
8

“The simple fact is that many men have fallen for scams; sometimes multiple or several, hence we can conclude men are bad at filtering out scams.”
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 03:22 PM
1

You don’t think if a female president was elected she would have military superiority? Theoretically, she could replace top members of the military with women and restrict men’s access to military weapons. This would ultimately give women sole access to the US’s military technology, a lot of which does not require a high number of foot soldiers to operate (such as war drones and fighter jets). Obviously, this is a highly unlikely scenario, but so is one where all men simultaneously decide to str…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 11:03 PM
–

What is your point then? It seemed you were making an argument based on population size rather than power/technology access.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 06:44 PM
19

There is not one universal end goal of human life. “What’s the true purpose of life?” is a philosophical question, not a biological one.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 06:21 PM
–

In our current society, population does not matter as much as technology when it comes to war. Despite having a population that is 4 times larger than that of the US, China’s military power is smaller. This makes Fisher’s principle irrelevant to the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 05:20 PM
–

But in the US if all white people decided to remove the rights of black people, white people would ultimately win as they comprise the majority of our military and police force. So in the US, would you say black people are reliant on white people for their rights?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 03:14 PM
–

Would you make the argument that black people depend on white people for their rights then?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 03:06 AM
1

1) Still has nothing to do with whether women you’ve met on Tinder are representative of the average single woman’s sexual habits. 2) 65% of Tinder users are in some form of a relationship, meaning 65% of users are actively cheating on their partner. 19% of women surveyed in 2011 had at some point cheated on their partner (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21667234/). Once again, showing the women on Tinder have sexual habits that deviate from the norm. 3) I disagree and have provided evidence tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 06:22 PM
0

1) Approximately 10% of partnered Americans have met their partner on a dating app. ~40% of these were on Tinder, making it ~4% of currently partnered Americans that had met on dating apps. However, this does not have anything to do with my original comment, as we are arguing whether Tinder is representative of the sexual habits of single women, most of who do not use Tinder in any given year. 2) If ~50% on Tinder are cheating, that would support my argument that Tinder is not representative of …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 05:51 PM
3

Tinder had 7.8 million users in the US in 2024. 24% of them were women, meaning ~1.8 million women were on Tinder. 31% of all women over the age of 18 are single (not dating, married, or living with a partner), which is ~33.48 million. Of those, 38% say they are looking to date, which would be ~12.72 million. (this data is from 2019). Based on this estimation, of the single women actively trying to date in the US, ~14% use Tinder at least once in a year. This does not even mean that they go on a…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 04:46 PM
3

I’d argue that’s because Tinder draws a certain kind of woman that is not a good representation of the average woman. Back when I was single, I used Tinder very briefly, but quit after I saw what it was like. Most of my friends had very similar experiences to what I described and I think the average woman does not use Tinder, just briefly tried it at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 03:48 PM
5

I think it’s important to both check that the study you are basing your argument on is strong and that, if there are multiple studies on the topic, it fits into the scientific consensus.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/25 06:33 PM
14

I’ve cited studies to support my argument before and it usually just gets ignored or “shut down” by RP commenters (ex. that data isn’t accurate because women aren’t honest with their preferences). On the sample branch, most of the RPers I’ve debated on this sub haven’t provided any studies to support their argument (even if I directly request it). And those that do, tend to draw conclusions far beyond the scope of the study, cite theory as solid proof (most evolution-based arguments), or provide…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/25 11:43 AM
1

Crime records are public records. Why do you think most women (who don’t google the name of a guy they just met) would start looking him up in the app?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/25 02:03 PM
1

Googling someone’s name is super easy and can show any potential criminal charges. Most women don’t do it when meeting someone organically.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 05:09 PM
1

Online background checks and google searches are also incredibly easy to use. What do you think makes the app more unique compared to other “safety checks” that have been around for much longer?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:41 AM
1

Easily accessible online background checks and public crime records have existed for years. It has not become common for people to ask someone’s name prior to talking with them in public to quickly run a background check or google their name. I don’t see why this app would change that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 11:35 PM
-1

I cannot. Nobody does that.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 08:35 PM
5

If you are meeting women in real life (and not online), they won’t have time to look you up on the app before you are able to “get your foot in the door”. Furthermore, most women don’t look into a guy deeply unless there is some sort of red flag. Just make a solid first impression and you’ll be fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 04:56 PM
3

He expressed interest in girl 1, got rejected, then went for girl 2. In this case, it’s very clear girl 1 was his first pick and girl 2 was his second pick. Nobody wants to be the second pick.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 10:02 PM
48

Same reason men get offended at the idea of women having casual sex with “alphas” before eventually settling for a “beta”. Nobody wants to be anyone’s second choice. The only difference is the situation you provided actually happens semi-regularly, the one I compared it to not so much.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 03:16 AM
0

Agreed. Evolutionary arguments are almost always based on correlation or coincidence, but people interpret it like it’s undeniable fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 06:51 PM
2

I don’t feel like being with my boyfriend is exhausting and have not experienced what you are describing. My friends that are in healthy relationships also have no problem “shinning” and have never described any issues like what you are describing (despite us all being very open about our life/relationships with each other). In fact, the only time I’ve heard these complaints are by my friends that say/think their man is “one of the good ones” but constantly have issues with him that prove otherw…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 06:35 PM
0

Tradition gives things symbolic meaning. Proposing on one knees with a ring symbolizes strong love and dedication to a partner. We deal with actions that have symbolic meaning almost constantly (such as waving to say “hi”). Just because there is no concrete reason why the action/tradition/cultural norm matters, does not mean the symbolism behind the action doesn’t matter. For example, waving to someone you know symbolizes you recognize them and consider yourself familiar enough with them to init…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 06:21 PM
-3

No, most women have never engaged in casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 11:56 PM
1

Most men aren’t charismatic or fun either. This is because most people don’t think most people are charismatic/fun. I don’t find going to the club fun, so I don’t think people who enjoy going to the club are fun. However, some people would disagree. Similarly, I find kayaking fun and the therefore find people who enjoy kayaking fun. Because I believe my interests are fun, I tend to make friends with people who also enjoy them and not with people who find these activities boring. This is true of …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/25 09:01 PM
4

When you are buying sex in the US, you are potentially taking advantage of women who are being sex trafficked, abused, or taken advantage of. While it isn’t a guarantee every prostitute you hire is doing so unwillingly, it is a risk you cannot eliminate. This means people who buy sex are willing to risk abusing victims to get their rocks off. Meanwhile, sex workers are not hurting anyone else by providing their services and potentially victims themselves. That’s why buying sex work is significan…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 11:49 PM
4

People who are socially awkward have trouble dating AND making friends (male or female). This is not because women treat friendships and dating the same, but rather because it is harder to make a connection with someone who is not “social”, “charismatic”, or “fun”.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 11:43 PM
1

1) I’ve seen a circumcised penis before and never even noticed the scar, so I’d disagree that it’s super obvious. But even if I did agree it was, a C section scar is wayyy more obvious, larger, and in a place people more commonly see. Also, I’d rather have a small scar in a place people rarely see than chronic pain/incontience. 2) Yes. 3) It may be unfair, but because it does not affect the majority of people I do not think it’s strong enough to support the claim that “women are the privileged g…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/25 02:37 PM
1

1) I’ve seen a circumcised penis before. The scar is not noticeable. Look up a C-section scar, it is very noticeable. So are the purplish stretch marks and saggy skin. Also, I’d much rather have a scar in a location most people never see than chronic pain/incontinence. 2) I disagree with your belief that using the analytical terms for female genitalia is stigmatized. 3) Most people never go to jail, so the discrepancy doesn’t affect the majority of the population. 4) Feminism is focused on women…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/25 01:19 AM
1

1) Forced female birth does leave when with scars (and in the case of a C-section these scars are much more prominent than those from circumcision). There are also permanent stretch marks and saggy skin associated with pregnancy. Additionally, birth leaves women with long-term health issues, such as chronic pain and incontinence, at much higher rates than circumcised men experience. 2) It is socially acceptable for people to talk about female genitalia in certain settings (just as it is for peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 02:35 PM
2

Many women do not have the option of an abortion whether for legal, financial, or religious reasons. Once a kid is born, both parents are reasonable for raising it appropriately. Any parent that does not do so is skirting their responsibility and not holding themselves accountable for their actions (having risky sex). Once again, I’m not asking for the solution to preventing single parents. I’m asking how single parents who have already made the mistake of having a kid can show accountability fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 03:41 AM
3

An abortion means they don’t have a child. But after the child is here, I believe the parents should raise it. However, a lot of men skirt this responsibility. The reason the government “foots the bill” is because the father doesn’t want to contribute his fair share to the child’s expenses. The government is essentially “covering his part.” Single mother homes result in worse outcomes for children. This is because a lot of them are having to raise the child on their own (whereas other households…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 02:25 AM
–

I view men and women equally in terms of accountability. When a mother/father has a child, they should perform 50% or more of the child rearing duties. Unfortunately, men fail to meet this requirement far more often than women. A woman who had sex and got pregnant from a criminal, made a bad decision. In my view, by raising that child, she is taking accountability for that poor action. What do you think “taking accountability” should look like for a woman who made the mistake of getting pregnant…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 10:43 PM
–

The majority of men also have access to contraceptives (condoms). Men can also “throw the odds in their favor” by having sex with women who are willing to get an abortion if they got pregnant. Men and women alike can also practice abstinence if they are unwilling to take the risk of creating life (and many do). Single mothers probably did make a bad decision. But by raising the child, they are taking accountability for the bad decision they made. The same cannot be said for most single fathers. …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 10:16 PM
–

Men who do not raise the children they created absolutely lack accountability. Single mothers who raise the children they created do not lack accountability. That is my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 10:12 PM
2

The comment I was replying to was saying single mothers specially lack accountability for their actions. I was arguing single fathers are more likely to lack accountability for their actions as they are more likely to abandon child-rearing responsibilities.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 10:09 PM
0

No, I’m using a classic redpill argument in reverse. Most promiscuous men are having sex with the same woman (ex. 3 men have sex with 1 woman, and all report using condoms).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 10:08 PM
–

What would you consider showing accountability for creating a child? I would argue raising it is showing accountability (which mainly women do) and abandoning it is showing a lack of accountability (which mainly men do).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 03:45 PM
–

Women in western societies do not have complete control. In the US, many states have outlawed abortion. The financial cost in some areas also limits poorer women from accessing them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 03:44 PM
–

Single mother homes imply that there is a mother but the child is lacking the father. Doesn’t this actually show that men are not holding themselves accountable for taking care of the life they created (whereas women do)?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 02:18 PM
2

That’s the off label use of it. The main purpose is for preventing pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 01:01 PM
10

Condoms are typically used during casual sex to prevent pregnancy AND stds. While in a committed relationship, you only need to prevent pregnancy (which can be done through the pill, iud, hormonal shots, ect.). Since women participate less in casual sex, they are less likely to use condoms and more likely to rely on strictly pregnancy preventative measures.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 03:46 AM
1

Earlier, you said big breast are attractive because it means a woman has fat stores to get through times of nutrient deficiency they may face while pregnant. By this logic, wouldn’t overweight women (who have more fat stores to get through times of nutrient deficiency) also be more attractive than skinny women?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 03:43 AM
1

What do you mean by “off-label reasons”? The main purpose of birth control is to prevent pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 03:40 AM
1

So you really think straight men find overweight women more attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 12:21 AM
1

Could you provide sources for these theories? From my understanding: boob size is not correlated with milk production, poor diet does not cause the presence of facial moles/birthmarks, and eyelashes are not directly related to reproduction at all. Sometimes traits are found “attractive” despite there being no direct reproductive benefit. This has been seen in many bird species (where the colorful males actually increase the amount that die from predators) and in humans (foot binding, facial symm…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 11:26 PM
2

“large breasts store more fat”: by this logic, wouldn’t moderately overweight women be more attractive? If so, why has skinny been the beauty standard? Weird birth marks or a “beauty mark” are not representative of poor health. Similarly, facial symmetry is not representative of good health, despite being one of the main “beauty standards” found across culture. I don’t see what crows feet have to do with winged eyeliner. If anything, winged eyeliner slightly resembles crows feet.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 11:14 PM
9

The size of someone’s butt/boobs, absence of an odd mole on their face, or presence of “wings” on their eyes is not correlated with reproductive success. Yet, many men find these things attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 08:30 PM
7

Men are attracted to women who have tasteful makeup and plastic surgery. I would say that means they like it. Would you say hiding you’ve had braces is a form of fraud? It’s a medical procedure commonly done for cosmetic reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 08:28 PM
12

Most men don’t notice when a woman has had plastic surgery/is wearing makeup (which looks good). You only notice the extreme cases (which look bad), making men think they don’t like plastic surgery/makeup when in actuality they just don’t like botched surgeries/extreme makeup. Women do things to improve their appearance because it improves their self confidence and can give them a way to artistically express themselves (just like some people do with haircuts/dye, clothing choices, and facial hai…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 07:55 PM
1

it’s not a grammar error, it’s a spelling error. if you don’t notice an obvious spelling error in your title before posting, you should expect to be made fun of for it lol
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 05:48 PM
3

I would bring spellcheck.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/25 05:16 PM
2

In court, people who have proof of their partner cheating typically do get more than 50%. You can also have a prenup that includes any specific “vows” as reasons to not split the money evenly.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 02:38 PM
2

What law expressly benefits women over men?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 02:37 PM
2

A summary of our conversation so far. Me: Marriage didn’t always provide equal rights for the wife and the husband. You: Actually, it was equal in the past. And here’s also reasons why it actually shouldn’t be equal, even though it totally was. Me: gives example where it wasn’t equal You: I’m talking about a different time in the past Me: 🤦‍♀️ Men and women who own property have to earn it. As a woman, I can promise the government isn’t handing us free houses. I haven’t had any to fight any home…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:55 AM
1

I do wish there were more recent studies on this topic, but the most applicable is the one from 1990. Given other research as shown “that awards of sole custody to mothers dropped almost in half between 1986 and 2008 (from 80% to 42%)”, I don’t see why the amount of men who fight for custody and get it would have decreased. If anything, I would expect it to increase as the amount of mothers getting sole custody deceased. Though, there is nuance in the situation and it could be possible many men …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:24 AM
2

You said: Women could buy and own property in the past. This is untrue, as seen by the Married Woman’s Property Act. You can look this act up independently to verify. You said: bodily autonomy part. The hell is that? Women lacked the bodily autonomy to say “no” to sexual advances from their husbands in the past until a law was passed in the US in 1993. They also were unable to select their own marital partners. These are both examples of a lack of bodily autonomy related to marriage. You can als…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:05 AM
1

Can you provide any statistical support that men who fight for custody are less likely to get it than women? It seems you’re basing your belief just off your personal experience (where you admit you didn’t fight for custody anyway and therefore don’t know what the outcome would have been for certain).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 12:00 AM
3

“In the United States, married women could not own property in their own name until the mid-1800s, when Married Women's Property Acts started being passed in various states. By 1900, most states had recognized women's right to own property, but full financial equality, including access to credit, came later.” “Marital rape was not illegal in all 50 states until 1993.” “The shift towards women having the freedom to choose their husbands, moving away from arranged marriages, occurred gradually thr…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 10:40 PM
5

I’m sorry you had a bad experience, but statistically when men fight for custody they get it. https://www.divorcenet.com/resources/divorce/for-men/divorce-for-men-why-women-get-child-custody-over-80-time
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 10:17 PM
1

In what ways do you think it isn’t legally equal?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 10:16 PM
3

What legal right do married women have that married men don’t? Vice versa? If you look back to the past you can find quite a few (land ownership, bodily autonomy, ect.) But nowadays, they are legally equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 09:52 PM
9

Marriage does not only benefit the woman. In fact, for most of history women didn’t have a say in marriage. Marriage existed because it gave the man power and control over the woman. Now marriage gives both parties completely equal rights and its cultural significance has persisted.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 02:04 PM
5

If either parent decides to break the vows (which they are both able to do), all marital things are split in half. The wife doesn’t get half of the husband’s things, they both get half of the marital things. This can also be avoided with a prenup if you so desire. Whoever keeps the kids gets child support. I’d argue keeping the kids is a bigger disadvantage than just having to pay part of the child raising expenses (not even the full cost of a kid).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 02:00 PM
10

The woman is also proving herself loyal to the man in this case. Both people are taking vows.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 12:34 PM
16

Getting married before having kids is a social norm. Not doing so, will lead to negative judgement from the public. The same cannot be said about paternity tests. Additionally, I’d argue most marriages don’t happen because the woman “demands” it. It happens because both partners feel they want to spend the rest of their life together, so the man proposes.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 12:33 PM
1

1) RNs aren’t considered mid-levels. PAs, NPs, CRNAs, ect. are. 2) I know nurses that have graduated with no debt because they chose their school wisely. Going to private/out of state college for undergrad is stupid, no matter your major. 3) What blue collar jobs are you specifically talking about? I’d like to look at the BLS data for them. 4) Compare a plumbing business to a private FM, peds, derm, plastic, or psych practice owner. I know which business owner earns more (and it’s not the plumbe…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/25 08:28 PM
1

Interesting you’re trying to compare only the non-physical labor blue collar jobs to that of the lowest paid healthcare workers. Compare both the industries against each other as a whole, and healthcare still comes out on top.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 11:43 PM
1

The average salary for a nurse is higher than the average salary for a plumber, electrician, ect. There is data available on this topic by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 02:57 PM
1

Yeah, exceptions exist. That’s why I said average.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 01:42 PM
3

The comment you originally responded to was talking about the economy and how “it cost money to play the game”. In terms of economic benefit, going into the trades vs healthcare is a disadvantage. Also, the people I’ve met that work in the trades appear just as (if not more) “miserable” than the people I’ve met that work in healthcare. I feel there’s too much focus on “following your passion” these days. Just choose a job you don’t suck at that makes good money and don’t make excuses because you…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 01:39 AM
11

Trades are fine, but the average pay is significantly lower than most healthcare positions (source: i’m in healthcare and my bf is in plumbing).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 01:07 AM
–

No, I would not start dating someone if they were unemployed or trying to start their own business. However, if my boyfriend were to lose his job I wouldn’t break up with him (as long as he tried to find a new one). Similarly, if he was in the financial position to and decided to try starting his own company in the future. I would support him. This is because I already know he has a good work ethic. But it is not worth taking the risk on a rando when you can easily find a guy who does have a job…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 12:16 PM
2

I didn’t say college was a proxy for intelligence. I said educational level is a pretty popular trait valued by women who are dating. The reasoning behind that doesn’t really matter, the fact is it is valued and men are below women in it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/25 01:51 PM
3

Overall, no. If you’re dating above a certain age, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/25 01:48 PM
-4

⁠It is a fact women prefer men at the same educational level or higher, regardless of income. It is also a fact men are less likely to be at the same educational level or higher. I’m not arguing whether or not it’s a good view to have (my boyfriend is at a lower educational level than me). I’m explaining why the average women have trouble finding men at their same “level” in traits they value, and therefore may feel they are “dating down” for the average man. ⁠Men are also more likely to be over…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 10:16 PM
1

1) It is a fact women prefer men at the same educational level or higher, regardless of income. It is also a fact men are less likely to be at the same educational level or higher. I’m not arguing whether or not it’s a good view to have (my boyfriend is at a lower educational level than me). I’m explaining why the average women have trouble finding men at their same “level” in traits they value, and therefore may feel they are “dating down” for the average man. 2) Men are also more likely to be …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 09:33 PM
6

From this subreddit, it seems most men value beauty in a woman. The use of make-up/surgery enhances beauty (when done correctly), therefore improving their relationship “value”. From this subreddit it also seems men aren’t attracted to a woman’s wealth in the way she is attracted to a man’s. Even if they were, you were wrong. Men have higher debt than women in every category expect student loans. If the use of medication is enough to alleviate any symptoms of an illness, I don’t see why using it…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 09:17 PM
2

Yes, your own words are absolute gibberish.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 04:59 PM
-1

The average man is “subpar” to women in a lot of traits women value. - The average woman is more likely to have a college education, a trait many value. This means a lot do women will have to “date down” from an educational stand point. - The average woman spends a lot more time/ money on their appearance. I would argue this means the average woman is more attractive than the average man. Similarly, more men are overweight than women. Meaning a lot of women will have to “date down” from an appea…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 04:58 PM
3

You: First of all, you can make the threat of being """"""""falsely accused"""""""" drop from a fraction of zero to basically impossible by watching the youtube video 'tea and consent'. Takes about 3 minutes. After that, it's basically on the man to not rape, and then there will never, ever be a problem. Ever. Ever. Focusing on the last 3 sentences, you claim if a man does not rape there will “never, ever be a problem. Ever. Ever.” This implies if there is a problem, the man actually did it. I’v…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 04:45 PM
5

I was giving an example of a person behaving (and being) innocent but still being accused and convicted. You were acting as though it was impossible for someone to be accused of rape if they act innocent.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 02:25 PM
3

Innocent people have been accused of rape before. Some have even served jail time because of it. Especially if it’s a minority man in a racist community. Ronnie Long is a great example.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 01:52 PM
1

60K is not less than a normal salary for a plumber. It is the published average.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 10:11 PM
7

We are on a lease together. I helped him submit his pay history. He actually makes even less than that (about $19 an hour) because he is in his apprenticeship still. Plumbing is not as lucrative a job as people outside the field seem to think. It puts food on the table but not much more. Nursing is a completely different career path than becoming a physician. But, for sake of argument, a certified registered nursing anesthesiologist makes an average of $214,000 a year and is primarily female. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 03:38 AM
7

My boyfriend is a plumbing apprentice at a plumbing company. 60k a year is fairly average for the journeyman level plumbers he works with. Working on an oil rig is a lot shitter of a job than nursing and it’s primarily done by men. Honestly, most of the physically demanding, shitty jobs are done by men. Also, your argument is teaching is a shitty job but increasing the pay will draw more men to the field. If nursing is also a “shitty” job (as someone who works with nurses I’d completely disagree…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 03:21 AM
17

Then look at medians. $65k for teachers and 61k for plumbers. You still haven’t commented on the nursing aspect. Nursing is a high salary field (especially if obtaining a nurse-practitioner license) yet even more female-dominated than teaching. If pay will attract men to specific fields, why hasn’t it worked with nursing?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 03:12 AM
18

The average teacher makes $71k a year in the US. The average plumber (a job that deals with literal shit) makes $62k. Men are willing to work shitty jobs, and do so frequently. Teaching was a historically female job, and is still often seen as one, so it makes sense less men go into that field. Similarly, nursing (a fairly high-earning bachelor’s degree) was a historically female job, and still majority female. In fact, less men are in nursing than in teaching despite the higher pay in nursing.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 03:01 AM
2

You argued women who make more money spend more money. The same is true for men. Men who make more money spend a lot of it on stupid stuff (cars, watches, women, boats, ect.). People who make more money tend to spend more money. It’s called lifestyle creep.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/25 04:18 PM
2

Men also flock to women because they add massive value to their lives. I thought there was a whole red pill argument that women are “more in demand” than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/25 03:40 PM
7

You can make this argument about rich men too. Fancy cars, rolex, boats, ect.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/25 07:52 PM
4

What country are you from where it is generally accepted women are bad at loading dishwashers? Frankly, that sounds made up.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/25 05:39 PM
6

Typically a boss oversees a crew of workers, giving them the perception of having more power. In a situation where there is only two people that dynamic isn’t quite the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 06:26 PM
11

Both an employee and a boss can be upset with their other’s behavior and resolve that by quitting/firing them (breaking up). There doesn’t seem to be an important distinction between “complaining” and “reviewing” here. In both cases either person can quit (leave the relationship) or talk to the other about changing their behavior. A boss also picks who works for them. The employee alone cannot decide where to work without getting “approved” (hired) by the boss. I think you are oversimplifying wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 06:00 PM
15

Let me reword what you stated are the abilities of the follow and the leader: Follower 1) Can pick their partner (basically equivalent to 3) 2) Can be annoyed about their partner’s behavior 3) Can leave their partner Leader 1) Can pick their lifestyle 2) Can be annoyed about their partner’s behavior 3) Can leave their partner It seems the only real difference between the two is you think one person should have the option to pick their lifestyle and the other shouldn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 05:49 PM
–

“In Study 2 (N = 152), women rated feminine male profiles as more romantically appealing than masculine ones (d = 0.83)—but less so than profiles possessing a combination of feminine and masculine traits. In Study 3 (N = 153), women perceived feminine male profiles as depicting the best fathers and masculine profiles the worst (d = 1.56).” https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02780-7
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/25 04:48 PM
1

You can still have to pay child support if you aren’t married.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/25 06:43 PM
1

Why do you think women hold all the reproductive power and choice? A lot of states outlaw abortion if that’s what you’re referring to.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 07:48 PM
1

The very first study OP linked to support his argument that women don’t actually want 50/50, despite what they say, was the Valentine’s study I am talking about. The post you are referring to is not a study and not necessarily an “accurate” representation of the average woman. It is fully possible that the women in that thread who claim to want 50/50, genuinely do 50/50. There is no proof to show otherwise, like OP claimed.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 12:47 AM
1

Let me break it down. 1) Study showed men on average spend more on valentines than women. 2) OP used it to argue women say they want 50/50 but don’t actually practice it. Implying the findings of that study support that. 3) I claimed the findings of that study do not support that and are likely skewed by women who do not want 50/50 and do not practice it. Meaning the study doesn’t prove that the women who want 50/50 don’t pay 50/50. As far as I’m aware, there is no proof that study excluded wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 08:12 PM
1

In order to determine if that study can be used as proof women say they want 50/50 but actually don’t, we would need to know how many of those woman want 50/50. If most of them do not, it would not be good proof to use.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/25 11:37 PM
1

Those women were not the sample used in the “Valentine’s Day” sample. That is not proof that the women sampled in that specific study felt the same way.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/25 08:25 PM
2

So… did you read the post? Like literally the first line?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/25 09:01 PM
1

“According to data from Care.com, the average cost of a housekeeper in Silicon Valley, specifically cities like Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, and San Jose, is around $28-30 per hour” You suggested $24, which is below average for a housekeeper. Not to mention the additional services cost even more than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/25 08:57 PM
2

Even if it was just a housekeeping service, your hourly is below the average. Especially considering it’s Silicon Valley. But it’s a housekeeping service +more. The +more aspect of it would cost more than just a plain housekeeping service would.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/25 08:35 PM
7

A housekeeper alone makes more than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/25 05:16 PM
4

Working a normal work week is not “late stage capitalism” it’s called being an adult.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 08:57 PM
3

Work full time in order to not be barely getting by. Work full time (like almost every other person does) to actually contribute to something in life. Work full time to not be lazy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 07:00 PM
2

From my understanding, hypergamy doesn’t have anything to do with physical attraction. It has to do with social/financial status.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 06:25 PM
4

Are women choosing bad men or are they being hypergamous? It doesn’t seem like both can be true at the same time.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 05:36 PM
–

How did you see the post you are referring to if you don’t have TikTok?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 05:12 PM
8

Men: You need to choose better. Women: choose better Men: Quit being hypergamous, we need sex too you whore.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 05:10 PM
9

He could afford to support a family if he actually worked a full work week. To not have a full time job (or even be attempting to get one) at 35 is insane. It’s not hypergamous to not want to date a loser with no drive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 04:51 PM
26

Even if he could survive off of it that lack of drive is extremely unattractive. If he’s ok settling for the bare minimum, that’s fine. But most people want more in their life than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 04:45 PM
6

It’s not necessarily that he doesn’t make much but rather the lack of drive. If my boyfriend only worked 24 hours a week but spent the rest of his time trying to get a (realistic) business plan off the ground, I’d be ok with it. But if he just worked 24 hours a week and spent the rest of his time doing whatever he wanted, I would break up with him. Drive is very important.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 04:44 PM
–

Just because people don’t have kids doesn’t mean they don’t have a future together. They can still get married, build a life together, and grow together. Casual sex implies no emotional connection. People can have an emotional connection without having kids together.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 03:22 AM
1

I wouldn’t necessarily consider myself a feminist. I agree with some parts but not others.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 03:20 AM
–

r/AndThenTheyClapped
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/25 01:02 AM
1

It’s not casual sex if you are in a relationship with someone and have a genuine romantic connection with them. Otherwise, you’re defining any sex without the intent to procreate as casual sex, which is just false.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 11:55 PM
3

It’s too common for parents in general, men and women, to put themselves ahead of their children these days. I disagree with the idea that it’s a gendered problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 09:58 PM
1

People can recover from a vegetative state. Also, if you read the list of needs I stated previously I did include brain function.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 09:36 PM
1

A person who is brain dead is considered legally dead. They are not alive. “For this reason, it’s important to understand that breathing machines are not considered “life support” in a brain dead patient, since the patient’s death has already been pronounced”
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 08:06 PM
1

The 50/50 thing was an example to show how the data set can include a significant amount of women who both want and act 50/50 while still having results that show the average spending is lower among women. The point was to show without knowing more about the beliefs/values of the sample we cannot conclude its proof women who say they want 50/50 are actually lying. I was not claiming that literally 50% of women want 50/50 it was just the easiest math to do for that demonstration of the data might…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 06:44 PM
1

It’s 29-61% depending on which source you look at and how they collected their data/their sample/the year they collected it. That’s why the range I gave previously was so large. Even if you go with the highest number that 61% of women identify somewhat with feminism and assume all of them agree with the 50/50 aspect of feminism, it shows a decent portion of women do not claim to like 50/50. That’s what the point of the range was for. At an absolute minimum, 39% of women do not want 50/50. And th…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 06:12 PM
1

Pew Research: 61% of women say feminism describes them “Very well” or “Somewhat well” YouGov Omnibus: 38% of women describe themselves as feminists National Geographic/Iposos: 29% of American women identify as feminists (I missed this one originally, the range should have been 29-61%) I especially like how the Pew Research calls a distinction between “Very well” (19%), which implies hard-core feminism, and “Somewhat well” (42%), which implies these women support some parts of feminism and not ot…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:47 PM
1

You gave me hypotheticals with no proof that they are widespread or even somewhat common.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:30 PM
–

No worries, I do it too sometimes.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:29 PM
1

Which link? I didn’t see any proof of that in the first link (which is to the data set I’m debating the validity of). I cannot access the second link currently as I need to connect to my campus wifi but can look over it later. If you don’t mind, can you submit a quick quote of the journal showing what percentage of women claim to want 50/50 relationships along with the demographic of the sample? I don’t know how much it would “prove” in regard to the Valentine’s day spending study though without…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:28 PM
–

If you read the comment I was responding to, you can see it was claiming misandry is “actually worse” than racism.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:22 PM
1

I’m asking if you have proof that people who do not identify as feminists actually act as feminists. My personal behaviors/mentally are kind of irrelevant to that point. If anything, you’d be hoping to “support” the idea that women who identify as feminists might not behave as feminists, which is kind of the opposite of what you’re supposed to be showing proof of.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:21 PM
–

In the first paragraph I’m just expressing my surprise at how much people spend as me and my boyfriend are much more frugal. I’m not saying I don’t believe it, just that I’m surprised. In the second paragraph I’m not saying I don’t believe the average amount a man spends is higher than the average a woman does. I’m saying the data is skewed because traditional gender roles are still quite common, meaning plenty of women in more traditional relationships won’t pay at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:14 PM
1

I would disagree. Do you have proof of your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:07 PM
–

There are black people unjustly in jail due to racism as well so your argument, even if believed to be true, doesn’t prove misandry is worse than racism.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:49 PM
1

I’m asking if you have actual support for the argument that a significant portion of women who do not identify as feminists behave like feminists. Not a hypothetical situation you made up.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:45 PM
1

This started because I said 36-61% of women identify as a feminist and you responded some of the women who did not identify as feminists may still practice the tenets of feminism. I do not believe that a significant portion of the 39-64% of women who do NOT identify as feminists are actually practicing all the tenets of feminism. Do you have any actual support to prove otherwise?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:40 PM
1

I think if women pulls the “modern feminist” card then they would report that they are a feminist. The implication here would be they are “fake feminists”. If a woman reports she is NOT a feminist and does follow traditional gender roles I think it is safe to assume she is not a “fake feminist” she’s just not a feminist at all. What you’re describing is a woman who does not claim to be a feminist and does not act like a feminist but for some reason you are labeling her a feminist. It doesn’t rea…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:25 PM
–

OP is claiming all women (or close to all) claim they want 50/50 but then don’t actually do it. He’s defending it using that data. I’m refuting that claim by bringing up a significant portion of women DO want traditional gender roles and do not claim they want 50/50. I showed how it is possible in that study he cited that the women who claim to be 50/50 do behave in a way that is 50/50, and the women who claim to follow traditional gender roles do follow traditional gender roles. Im not arguing …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 03:01 PM
2

OP is using that data to claim it’s proof most women don’t actually want 50/50. I’m showing how the data might not actually prove that. I’m not stating all women want 50/50, I’m stating a significant portion of woman can still want 50/50 but the data will still look like that due to the women who follow traditional gender roles.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 11:42 AM
–

Me and my boyfriend get out for ~$100. Fogo is one of our top choices and it’s about $50 a person in our area.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 11:40 AM
–

I don’t think people who expect traditional gender roles from men are acting like feminists, whether or not they identify as a feminist. I believe rejecting traditional gender roles is like quintessential for acting like a feminist.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 11:38 AM
3

People in romantic relationships can have sex without having children. I never claimed no sex was involved, just that in some relationships both people prefer to remain childless.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 11:32 AM
10

There are benefits to a romantic relationship you don’t have in a friendship (and not just sex). The connection you have with a romantic partner is different from that of a friendship in a way that is hard to explain to someone who has not experienced it. If a man is dating an older woman, he is probably an older man. Most people date people who are similar ages. Older people of both genders are less attractive so it makes sense they’d pair with each other. This dynamic is positive for both wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:24 AM
–

So a woman will say she agrees with feminist ideals, state she’s not a feminist, not act like a feminist, but also want modern feminism? Sorry, but I’m having a really hard time agreeing with your argument. Not trying to be offensive, but it really feels like you’re just making stuff up to fit your argument and the idea you presented doesn’t logically follow. If you have some sort of proof to defend it, I’d love to hear it. Otherwise I’ll quit responding as it really feels like you’re just clump…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:20 AM
13

Some men don’t want or can’t have children. They tend to match up with other women who don’t want or can’t have children either.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:07 AM
–

From my understanding, the original argument is women (feminists) who say they want 50/50, don’t actually act in a way they want 50/50 (which is aligned with feminism), so they aren’t true feminists. But now it sounds like you’re saying women who do not identify as feminists will act as feminists while simultaneously not wanting to pay 50/50 (a feminist ideal), so they are actually secret feminists who don’t act like feminists. Can you give an example of what you’re referring to? It kind of soun…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 05:05 AM
–

Are you saying women who do not identify as feminists act as feminists? If so, that seems to go against the original argument which states women claim to want 50/50 (a feminist ideal) but don’t actually do it in practice.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:50 AM
–

I think you’re misinterpreting the research you provided and overstating the findings.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:37 AM
–

Say the average Valentine’s day cost $500. Half of women pay 50%, which is $250. The other half of women, who are in more traditional gender roles, pay $0. This means the average woman pays ~$125. On the other hand, half of men pay $250 (50%) and the other half pay $500 (100%). This means the average man pays $375. In this case, women would be infinitely more likely than men to spend nothing, men would be twice as likely to spend over $100, and men would spend on average 3x more than women on av…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 04:27 AM
–

I haven’t seen any data that supports that, do you mind providing some? From what I’ve read, it mainly changes depending on how you define feminism and the demographics of your sample.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 03:44 AM
–

Your point about the valentine’s day money thing doesn’t really prove that though. If 50 women expect to split it 50/50 and 50 women expect the man to pay the full amount, of course the average amount a man pays will be higher than the average for women. It doesn’t mean the half that wants to split if 50/50 doesn’t exist. I can’t access the second article as I’m not on my college campus rn but can potentially look through it later to provide my thoughts.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 03:39 AM
–

I genuinely can’t believe people spend that much on Valentine’s day, that’s crazy. But to be fair, not every woman considers herself a feminist. Depending on where you get your number, only 36-61% of women consider themselves feminists. Also, feminists are more likely to be gay and probably more likely to be single. So your data doesn’t really represent that the average feminist expect their men to spend more and is probably skewed by couples that share more traditional gender roles. Kind of lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 03:26 AM
1

The human needs I can think of right now are: water, food, sleep, and brain activity. I’m sure I’m missing quite a few but if someone is on a feeding tube and ventilator without brain activity they are considered brain dead. The effects of solitary confinement I would consider psychological not biological. You technically don’t need human interaction to survive. However, even if you wanted to consider some form of human socialization a need I think total isolation is a lot more severe and not re…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 02:36 AM
1

I don’t think there’s any conclusive evidence that lack of sex has an impact on someone’s lifespan. And if it does, I doubt that impact is significant.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 11:04 PM
1

The average may be slightly lower (though almost impossible to determine if lack of sex is the reason due to numerous confounding variables) but it is still possible between two healthy people, one who has had sex and one who hasn’t, for the one who has not had sex to live longer. The same cannot be said for two otherwise healthy people with one that eats and one that doesn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 08:24 PM
1

You don’t have a main argument. First it was its needed for the survival of the species, then it was it’s a biological drive, then it was Maslow says so. Mine has always been sex is not required for the survival and is therefore not a need. Which you have yet to successfully counter.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 05:42 PM
4

Lmao don’t have sex and you won’t die. But yeah it’s totally as necessary as eating, drinking, and sleeping 😆 “Perhaps the most significant criticism of Maslow’s hierarchy concerns his unscientific approach, use of unreliable samples, and the specific research methods he used to draw conclusions: namely, personal observation and biographical analysis. That is to say, Maslow’s theory of human motivation was not based on any credible empirical research.”
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 05:38 PM
3

You will die if you don’t eat. Eating is a need. You will not die if you don’t have sex. Having sex isn’t a need. A universally evolved instinct is proof of a drive to reproduce, not a need to.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 05:12 PM
3

Once again, sex is necessary for the survival of the species. It is not necessary for the survival of the individual. Therefore, it is not a “need” for any given person. This is basic science 101. People that argue since the survival of the human species relies on sex it must be a biological need for every individual ought to be ridden out on a rail lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 04:46 PM
3

Most people have sex at some point in their life so the species is not going to end anytime soon. This does not mean it is a “need” that the people who haven’t had sex get some.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 04:15 PM
1

People with complex social lives also have mental health disorders. People who eat do not die of starvation. There is a difference between biological needs for survival and psychological needs for wellbeing.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 01:24 PM
1

A person who did not have sex can live as long, or even longer, as a healthy person who has had sex. The same cannot be said for someone who never ate or never drank.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 01:23 PM
1

This is the first argument I’ve seen on it that I think genuinely makes sense. For best practice though I think people should define what sex is a need for when they declare it is a need. I can understand sex is a need for mental wellbeing, but I feel stating it’s a need without declaring what it is needed for gives off a different connotation. I think when something is declared a need without stating what it is a need for though people tend to assume survival, which sex is obviously not a need …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 01:50 AM
2

While typically people experience puberty naturally at some point in their life, the majority of individuals could survive without puberty. Do you mind connecting this back to idea of wants/needs?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 10:39 PM
2

No, once again puberty does not affect the ability for an individual to survive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 10:09 PM
2

No I’m not. By claiming I am, when I’ve directly defined what I consider a “need”, you’re actually using a straw man. “Wanting to be loved is a human” want not need. You can survive without it. It’s not feminism and my argument isn’t coming from a feminist perspective. It’s coming from the perspective of someone who lives in reality and realizes there are differences between needs, required for survival, and wants, desired for personal wellbeing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 10:08 PM
3

No, children who are prepubescent are alive and conditions that prevent/delay puberty (such as Kallman’s) are not typically deadly.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 09:59 PM
3

Puberty is not necessarily necessary for thriving. I think a lot of prepubescent children are thriving despite not having experienced puberty. And I don’t think thriving is a need, it’s a want. Survival is a need.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 09:46 PM
3

I’m not saying love isn’t important and we shouldn’t care if people have it. I’m saying love is not a need and people can survive without it. “Wanting to be loved”, which you said, is exactly that. A want, not a need.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 09:44 PM
–

I do not think touch/affection is as necessary as food and water. A lack of food/water will result in severe physical/cognitive abnormalities and even death. Touch and affection may increase the odds someone will be poor-adjusted but it does not guarantee a bad fate like a lack of food/water will.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 05:52 PM
–

I wouldn’t consider familial love/friendship a need either. Most people who disagree with you do so because they believe needs are things you cannot live without. If you want to classify everything required for “the human experience” as needs, do you believe certain needs are more necessary than others? If so, which ones?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 05:02 PM
–

I’m sure the difference between two different meat-based diets would be less severe than plant-based vs meat-based and there hasn’t even been a difference in lifespan reported between plant-based and meat-based diet. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7842014/ Needs are for survival. Wants are for thriving. There are very few things you truly need, sex is not one of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 04:59 PM
–

There is no proof that feeding fresh meat would allow a cat to live longer. If anything, a raw meat diet can be missing some essential vitamins and carry parasites/bacteria that shorten life. If you want to define “needs” at the species level, that is a completely different argument than “needs” at an individual level. The human species does not require that you have access to water as it will continue without you, however for you individually water is a need. Similarly sex may be a need for the…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 03:10 PM
–

You don’t decide who “needs” to procreate because nobody needs to (you can survive without it). When it comes to the needs of an individual, species wide reproduction is irrelevant. An individual can thrive without the entire species thriving as well (and vice versa).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 03:04 PM
–

It is optimal for everyone that they become a billionaire. Is that a need?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 01:28 PM
–

An individual does not need to pass their genes forward in order to survive. Even if you want to define needs at the level of the species (which is atypical), your argument would only state that sex is necessary as far as reproduction and sex without the intent of reproduction would not be a need.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 01:26 PM
–

It has no impact on an individual’s survival. But if you wanted define to define needs as necessary for the continuation of our species (which would also eliminate needs at the level of an individual), it would only prove sex is necessary in the case of reproduction and sex without the intent of reproduction still wouldn’t be a need.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 01:21 PM
–

You can be “in need” of something without being biological dependent on it but “a need” typically implies you are biologically dependent on it. That’s because the meaning of words tend to vary depending on how they are used. Once again, what is the difference between needs and wants under you definition?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 01:20 PM
–

Based on your logic, what separates a need from a want? The dictionary definition for want is: a : DEFICIENCY, LACK suffers from a want of good sense b : grave and extreme poverty that deprives one of the necessities of life 2 : something wanted : NEED, DESIRE 3 : personal defect : FAULT While “needs” has multiple definitions it seems typical in this context to define “needs” are required for survival whereas “wants” are things desired but not required for survival (you’ll see this if you search…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 04:57 AM
2

People on this subreddit tend to use the all or nothing fallacy. People on this subreddit also tend to use all or nothing language. Both are issues and neither is gendered.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 02:57 AM
1

I don’t see it as a payback because I don’t think internet jokes are even worth a thought. Anyone who gets offended cares too much.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 06:23 PM
1

If someone I know said a sexist joke in front of me, I would be mad. If a ton of random people on the internet did, it wouldn’t bother me. Sexist, racist, other-ist jokes are super common on the internet. It’s important to realize people will act in ways on the internet that they won’t act like in real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 11:14 PM
1

tldr: men = bears = war. sure bro. I wouldn’t feel my skin crawl if men on the internet said they’d rather spend time with a pig than a woman. That’s probably the tamest “sexist joke” I’ve seen today. As far as mainstream comedy the “I hate my wife” thing is pretty mainstream. I think the reason most men take such great offense to the bear/man joke is because it’s one of the first times they’re experiencing a sexist joke that targeted at them. It’s literally one of the tamest things out there.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 10:16 PM
1

And I never endorsed the “bear/man” argument. I always considered it a dumb internet joke as do most women who aren’t in echo chambers. Talk to some people who aren’t on the internet and you’ll see 1) plenty of women don’t support it and 2) plenty of men don’t even know about it. As a woman, I deal with my own fair share of dumb internet jokes (kitchen-related stuff comes to mind). They don’t bother me, some are even funny (tho most aren’t). If that sort of thing bothers you, get off the interne…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 09:27 PM
1

Let’s try using a little something called critical thinking skills. The original post is using the “man/bear” debate as proof that most women are illogical. This debate was controversial among women themselves (so not “EVERY” one) and also only occurred online (so not even everyone in your life!). I have never heard anyone make the argument irl and my boyfriend, who spends very little time on social media, wasn’t even aware of it until I mentioned it to him! So, do you think it’s logical to use …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 08:30 PM
9

As much as we like to think bad people get punished for doing bad things it’s really not true. A lot of people who are very successful are shitty people and will never get caught or face negative repercussions for it. For your own mental health, it’s best to not compare your success to other people. Follow your moral compass because you believe it’s the right thing to do, not in hopes of getting rewarded.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 06:50 PM
4

I’m going to bed soon so going to skip through the next few comments. See below: Comment 1: You stated punishments should be tailored for each gender. Do you think the criminal justice system should use a technique that is most effective or most feared for each gender? If most effective: Corporal punishment isn’t effective for men or women. Therefore it shouldn’t (and as I explained earlier is very rarely) used as a punishment in the US. If most feared: Studies have suggested women fear pain mor…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:48 AM
13

Most women who get abortions do not make videos about it. Once again, plenty of men are shamed of penis size, ability to provide, being cucked, being fat, being ugly, ect. Anyone who attacks with acid goes for the face. Similarly, when men throw punches they usually go for the face. With your logic, since men are more likely to punch each other in the face than women are the must be more likely to punish each other with debeautification. You stated punishments should be tailored for each gender.…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:30 AM
10

Women who wouldn’t be don’t want children can get an abortion, so the women who would likely feel unashamed about abandoning bastard children just abort them. Plenty of men are ashamed of being gay, weak, unable to provide, ugly, cheated on, small penis, ect. Women are just less aggressive than men. It doesn’t mean they don’t fear pain, it means they don’t start fights. I’ve never seen women result to “debeautification”, most just use their words to solve arguments. Can you site some research th…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:12 AM
14

The majority of men would feel shame if people genuinely believed they performed a “shameful” act. Perhaps you wouldn’t, but that definitely doesn’t generalize to the majority of men. Do you have any sources to suggest men respond positively to corporal punishment (and that women don’t)?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 04:52 AM
17

1) The Eighth Amendment prevents cruel and unusual punishment, which it has been legally decided corporal punishment falls under. Correctional officers may use force to maintain order and protect themselves/others but not as a punishment. The Uniform Code of Military Justice also prevents it in all branches of the armed forces. Saying our justice system is built on it when arguably the only legal form of corporal punishment is the death penalty, which is very rarely used and made to be as painle…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 04:38 AM
23

1) What criminal justice system are you referring to? Corporal punishment is specifically banned in US prisons. 2) Women do feel pain 3) Punishment is ineffective for males and females (reinforcement is significantly more effective) 4) Men also care about their reputation. Receiving oral sex wouldn’t damage a man’s reputation while giving oral sex would damage a woman’s reputation, making your story a poor comparison. However, men have gotten into physical fights over being called “gay”, showing…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 04:20 AM
5

I’m confused on your post. Are you arguing women should be subject to arranged marriages or that the age of consent should be removed?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/24 07:42 PM
1

You can find stuff online about the percentage of MMA audience that is male and female. No estimation puts female above 50% (and most are significantly under 50). Wow I didn’t know they were recruiting fairies for the Navy Seals that’s crazy. Especially a fairy that fights with magic, rather than fists. That’s definitely a great and realistic example of why women are attracted to men who get into physical fights 🤦‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/24 02:37 PM
1

Who do you think has been women after them: Islam Makhachev (I had to look him up) or Leonardo di Caprio? One is well known for fighting and the other for acting. When women talk about their celebrity crushes, how often do they mention professional fighters? If all these women who can’t get an MMA fighter are so turned on by watching these guys fight, why don’t they watch MMA at home? Why aren’t they buying MMA merch and getting tickets to the fights? Why isn’t the audience majority female? If r…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/24 03:13 AM
1

The amount of material being written doesn’t necessarily correlate with the popularity of the material (look at how many soundcloud rappers make shit music nobody listens to). If you sort by sales or popularity among romance novels the top hits are not about Navy Seals lol. What you’re not getting is the women waiting for him backstage are the handful. The majority are living their lives without even knowing he exists because they don’t gaf.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 10:55 PM
1

I think women who are promiscuous won’t care and women who aren’t promiscuous will care. While it’s not a dealbreaker, promiscuity can hint toward some negative personality traits. Irl, I think a lot of men think this way too. Though most of the time you probably won’t know if someone had a history of being promiscuous, making it hard to judge.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 07:44 PM
–

I didn’t say anything about it having an impact on me. I just clarified that calling someone a teen doesn’t mean they aren’t an adult.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 07:08 PM
–

18 is both an adult and a teen. You are a teen until you hit 20.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 06:51 PM
1

I’m not saying men (or women) who cheat never get into relationships. I’m saying they are less attractive to the general population than someone who doesn’t cheat, and therefore have fewer options. Promiscuity is different than cheating. I’m not arguing most women care about a history of promiscuity (though quite a few do), I’m arguing most women care about a history of cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 06:48 PM
1

If you look up the best selling romance novels for 2024, they aren’t about Navy Seals or barbarians. They’re about college students, fairies, ect. Also a navy seal, who has been trained to fight and only does so to protect the country, is a lot different than a guy who gets into fights at the bar. One has a purpose and the other is an idiot.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 06:45 PM
0

From my personal life experience, I would disagree. I and my friends have not dated guys because they’ve cheated on past girls. Some don’t care as much if they were promiscuous, but cheating shows a personal quality most girls do not want.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 06:02 PM
0

I don’t know where you heard abort that but most women do care about the past. If they found out a guy cheated on all his exs, they’re not going to want to date him.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 02:36 PM
1

the majority of women are not into combat sports. if watching men fight turned them on, significantly more would be. and most women would not want to sleep with a professional fighter. it’s a loud minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 02:34 PM
1

if look at the comment i replied to, they were specifically talking about admitting.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 02:33 PM
1

The comment you replied to is essentially saying women have always gone for men older than them, it’s not a new thing caused by “degraded young men”.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 04:52 AM
6

No it’s higher for men. Across an entire lifetime 54% of women and 57% of men admit to cheating. For married people 22% of men and 14% of women admit to cheating on their partner. The only age group it’s higher for women is 18-29 with 10% of men and 11% of women admitting to cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 04:49 AM
1

Anyone somewhat famous in any degree will have some women (usually a pretty specific type of girl) chasing after them. This is not proof that the majority of women get turned on watching a man fight, or even that the majority of women would want to sleep with a professional fighter. Otherwise, violent sports would have a way larger female fan base.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 04:33 AM
3

I wouldn’t start a physical fight with a guy. Sure, I’d argue. But the second it starts to turn physical I’d deescalate or leave the situation. If he was attacked unprompted I’d expect him to fight back for his own safety. But I wouldn’t find it attractive or anything. And I carry so if someone attacked me unprompted I have no problem defending myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 03:54 PM
3

This is false. Look it up and there is plenty of information on the topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 03:51 PM
6

I’m responding to the questions posted by OP. They were inspired by the video, not about the video.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 02:24 PM
5

Actions have consequences. If he willingly got into a fight I wouldn’t be as concerned with his safety as I would be with mine because he chose to be in this situation, I didn’t. Nobody looks cool while fighting, that’s a thing men like to see not women. If women truly liked seeing men fight why aren’t they bigger fans of violent sports like boxing?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 02:24 PM
13

No it doesn’t. Fighting, unless absolutely necessary in some obscure circumstance, is a huge turnoff. It shows an inability to control oneself and a lack of care for my own safety. What if the guys friends then jump in and I’m now in danger? Deescalating avoids that and shows you have control over the situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 04:59 AM
–

Most studies do report the majority of people have engaged in hookup culture at some point in their life. If you’re thinking of that 20-30% number that gets thrown around sometimes I want to point out that study was specifically looking at the past month only, not lifetime.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 04:56 AM
67

I’d prefer he do his best to deescalate the situation without violence. Not only is resorting to violence extremely immature and emotional, it also puts me directly in danger.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/24 04:39 AM
16

I think the fact that men took the “man/bear” debate so seriously shows that men are incapable of logic. A stupid internet joke that was controversial among women themselves and already died out shouldn’t be used to defend that women as a whole are overly emotional. The fact that men are more likely to comment violent crimes, which is an emotional act (rage), is way stronger proof that one sex might be more emotional than the other. Personally, I think both sexes tend to be equally emotional and…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 05:15 PM
4

Once the child is born she does not have sole power to keep or dispose of it and the rights are the same. Not everything in life is going to fair or even between the sexes. This is one of those situations where the child’s wellbeing should come before “fairness”.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 11:29 AM
8

If a baby is given up to the state then the father has also abandoned the child. If the man wanted custody of the baby after the mother abandoned it, he could very easily get it and then legally go after the mother for child support. After a child is born both parents are financially responsible for it unless both parents decide (or are forced) to surrender it to the government. One party cannot make that decision alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 03:48 AM
4

If a women is raped and keeps the child she may be forced to share custody of the child with her rapist. Similarly, if a man is raped and a child results from that he may be forced to pay child support for that child. Legally, the courts have determined the child’s needs supersede that of their parents (male or female).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 03:43 AM
9

Where is the father in this scenario? If the father was involved and wanted to keep the child they could very easily keep the child instead and legally go after the mother for child support. If a child is given up to the state, BOTH parents have made a decision to give the child up. And now the child is financially supported by the government.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 03:39 AM
11

A pregnancy does not entitle a woman to a man’s money, that’s why men don’t pay child support until after the child is born. A pregnancy entitles the children to financial support from their parents. Once the child is born the priority is no longer making things “fair” between the sexes, it’s about what is in the child’s best interest. It’s important to note this directly benefits men as ~50% of the children supported through child support are male
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 03:34 AM
–

You also said in your post that women prefer larger ones. So is your argument women prefer larger ones or just size generally matters in an unspecific direction?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/24 06:47 PM
3

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3329016/#:~:text=Worldwide%2C%20sexually%20transmitted%20diseases%20(STDs,affect%20women%20more%20than%20men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/24 10:34 PM
1

Yes, the vets do a full body exam. Also, Mickey hasn’t had any symptoms of animals with visual/auditory issues (such as “getting lost”, ignoring chirps from the other birds, ect. she is always very aware of her surroundings). Socialization and early childhood environment is very important for the development of all animals (especially humans). You should look into the case of “Genie” if you’re interested in seeing how important the early environment is for shaping even universal human behavior (…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/24 02:44 AM
1

Theoretically, an all seed diet is associated with obesity and heart issues in birds, not auditory. But Mickey sees a vet regularly and doesn’t have any health issues whatsoever. Even if she did, the difference would still be due to the environment, not genetics. Which further proves my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/24 02:33 AM
1

Mickey has never eaten meat. She was on an all-seed diet prior to me getting her (which is unhealthy for birds). Eating meat is a very abnormal behavior for birds, likely caused by some weird environmental influences (such as a human offering cooked meat, something that doesn’t naturally occur in the wild). Even if Mickey had eaten meat and that somehow had an effect on her behavior, it would just further support my point about environmental influences (as diet is an environmental influence).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/24 01:59 AM
3

Parrots are herbivores. Feral parrots (like the quakers lose in Chicago) do not eat meat. Mickey was not “fighting with other predators” (parrots aren’t predators anyway). By feral, I mean she was left unhandled in a cage. This means she was not socialized at all (with humans or birds). All of my birds are in great health and see vets regularly. They don’t have any sight, hearing, or other difficulties. The differences are purely due to differences in temperament. Hershey is outgoing, Mickey is …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 02:19 AM
2

Pellets vs seed only. Diet is an important environmental factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 01:55 AM
2

I also have Hershey’s sister. The two are about as different as animals of the same species can be. This is because I got Hershey when she was 5 months old and handled her often. Mickey on the other hand, was kept basically feral for over a year. While Hershey will come cuddle just about anyone, Mickey will barely let people within 5 feet of her. This is because, despite the genetic similarities, the two were raised in drastically different environments which affected their personality. I’m not …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 11:15 PM
3

Parrots aren’t domestic. There are no such thing as “breeds” among them just as there are no such thing as “breeds” among humans. Parrot behavior is very unpredictable and when getting a parrot you pick an individual, not a species. This is because animals who are not domestic (i.e. have not undergone artificial selection) don’t have predictable personalities.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 08:33 PM
2

I’ve got several. Hershey is my oldest.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 08:27 PM
3

Do you understand the difference between artificial selection (what dogs have undergone) and natural selection? While artificial selection has resulted in some conserved behaviors among breeds (not even very successful since 60-70% of dogs bred for service dog training fail out of the program), humans haven’t undergone it. Humans have undergone natural selection (and it’s a very weak form lately due to medical advancements). So not only are you overestimating how effective artificial selection i…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 08:18 PM
1

No, I’ve never had a dog. I’ve only ever owned parrots.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 08:05 PM
3

Environment affects temperament more than genes. If you are then saying temperament affects behavior (voting), you are even further removing the genetic influence. Meaning, that’s a fairly weak argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 07:27 PM
1

If you think the vast majority of people have no clue about fitness, health, ect. then why do you think the average person should comment on another person’s weight? Wouldn’t that just support the idea of leave the weight talk to healthcare professionals unless explicitly asked? I just don’t see how your point defends that it should be normalized for people to comment on a teenage girls weight (which is what this comment thread originated from).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 05:39 PM
4

Being genetically dominant and abused could also cause someone to act more submissive and stay. You can’t tell if the submissive behavior is a genetic or environmental trait.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 12:35 PM
1

Did people telling you that you were fat make you feel better? Did you somehow not know you were fat and should probably lose weight until people told you? Unless either of the above are true, my point still stands. Fat people know they are fat, they know they should lose the weight, telling them what they already know doesn’t benefit them. I’m not saying coddle them, I’m just saying don’t act like they’re stupid and point out stuff they already know. It’s rude.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 12:34 PM
4

If party affiliation is genetic, why do people strategize their campaigns? If the way someone is going to vote is determined at conception, there would be no benefit to changing their mind. People also wouldn’t change how they vote ever.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 12:31 PM
9

That’s really not how genetics works. Do you have any data to suggest what you’re saying?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 04:04 AM
13

Depending on the study, 80-40% of variance on temperament is due to the environment (compared to the 60-20% estimate for genes). Most studies find the environment to have a greater impact on temperament than genetics. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1188235/#:~:text=As%20indicated%20above%2C%20genetic%20factors,is%20very%20important%20to%20temperament. This environmental effect is even more pronounced when looking at specific behaviors (such as voting).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:44 AM
8

Great, if you believe that then just flip the ideas. Both women have the same genetic mental fortitude but due to years of abuse one has significantly lower self-esteem, making them have a stronger tie to the community than the one with normal self-esteem. Either way, you acknowledge there is a strong environmental impact on the decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:41 AM
20

Voting patterns are not hereditary. There is no “gene” that makes someone more likely to be a democrat than a republican. It is a learned behavior influenced by the culture someone grows up in.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:29 AM
9

Or it might be easier for certain people to leave over others. Two people might have the exact same mental fortitude but one might have been horrifically abused by her family (which isn’t unheard of in the community) and therefore had a weaker tie to the community than one who had a great relationship with her family.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:28 AM
9

But unless dominance is also bred out of men, there would continue to be dominant women reintroduced into the population every generation due to this randomly genetic lottery. Hence, dominant women wouldn’t be bred out of the population in a form of “genetic suicide”.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:25 AM
0

There’s a difference between pointing out a problem someone is already aware of (you’re fat/you need to lose weight) and giving specific advice to solve that problem (as long as it isn’t unprompted). For example, if a man is complaining he is unable to find any dating prospects it is completely reasonable to give him helpful advice on how to fix that. Another example, if a woman is complains that she is struggling to lose weight, it is completely reasonable to give her helpful advice on how to l…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:23 AM
13

Except with your logic, the “submissive” women that stayed behind will then breed with “dominant” men meaning they’re just as likely to produce “dominant” daughters, despite the previous “dominant” women being “culled” from the gene pool. The only way this theory would work is if men were becoming increasingly submissive too.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:05 AM
1

Telling a teenager (man or woman) to lose weight is pretty mean. Anyone who is overweight already knows they should lose weight, especially if it’s something they’ve struggled with since childhood. There is zero benefit to telling them that and all it does is hurt their feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/24 03:00 AM
1

It’s not lying if they’re up front about using appearance enhancers.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 11:41 PM
1

Lying outright (about age or height) is worse than lying by omission (which i don’t even believe makeup is). If you can tell a man is wearing lift shoes or a wig (like you can with makeup), then it’s completely fine. It’s when you are unable to tell or it is lied about that it is a problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 05:38 PM
1

It does seem a lot of people on this sub tend to see in black and white. There is almost never going to be a single trait that makes someone date or not date another person (ie. normal people won’t date someone just because they’re tall and normal people won’t refuse to date someone just because they’re short). While a high body count in both men and women can be a red flag, unless it’s followed by other negative traits the average person is not going to care. However, it usually is followed by …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/24 05:46 PM
–

If a guy sees prostitutes he absolutely should not bring that up unprompted. However, if a potential partner starts asking about past relationships or body count it will quickly become obvious. For a man in the dating market, avoiding prostitutes all together is in his best long term interests. Every man I’m spoken to in person can tell when someone has makeup on, so that’s very hard to believe. But some general advice on telling, if someone’s eyelashes look black and/or clumped/thick, they have…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/24 10:01 PM
3

How isn’t it?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/24 08:19 PM
–

For body count, nobody is required to divulge that information unprompted and anyone is able to ask a potential partner. If someone doesn’t want the other person to know, they can (and should) refuse to answer. If they lied about it (male or female) it’s immoral. It is easy to tell when someone is wearing makeup. It’s not deceptive if you know appearance enhancers are being used, but even if you disagree there is a huge difference between lying by omission (not telling them you don’t actually lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/24 07:15 PM
–

You think paying women obscene amounts of money for sex work isn’t encouraging women to become sex workers?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/24 06:57 PM
–

Since you are a male sexuality attracted to women, it makes sense that you would be able to differentiate between a 9 and a 10 more effectively than a woman who is not sexually attracted to women. A lot of the women you listed as 7s I would consider a 10/10. And vice versa, a lot of the men you would consider 10s I might consider 7-9s. This is because you are not sexually attracted to men and therefore less effective at measuring their attractiveness. A lot of the men you would consider 10s woul…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 08:53 PM
–

Honestly, I can’t name very many male 10s from the 1990s and 2000s either. Probably because it was before my time. But looking at the examples you provided, I personally wouldn’t consider George Clooney a 10/10. It’s likely a lot of the men you consider 10s might not be considered 10s by women who are sexually attracted to men (and a lot of the women I might consider a 10 likely wouldn’t be considered a 10 by men sexually attracted to women). I feel scantily clad women are shown off wayyyy more …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 08:50 PM
13

See I’d actually say it’s the opposite. More women stars are top 1% than male stars. I wonder if it’s because you are more able to differentiate differences in attractiveness between the sex you are attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 02:52 PM
2

It seems some redpillers also subscribe to one high value man having multiple women. It might be useful to differentiate between the two (one-sided open relationship vs both sides open relationship).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 03:37 AM
3

Here’s another good read: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/12/04/education-and-marriage/
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 01:13 PM
6

The argument I was responding to is women with an education are more likely to leave their partner (which they believe is because they respect them less). That’s false, college educated women have the highest likelihood of a first marriage lasting 20 years or more, at 78%. Compared to college educated males at 65% and high school educated or less females at 40%.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 01:13 PM
28

The divorce rate for women with a bachelor’s degree is 25.9%, compared to 38.8% for those with a high school diploma and 45.3% for those with less than a high school diploma. The rate of college educated women whose first marriage lasted 20 years is also 78%, compared to only 40% for those with high-school or less. It’s important to point out an individual woman with a high school diploma or less is more likely to initiate divorce than one with a college degree.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 02:11 AM
1

A positive mammogram does not mean there is a disease in the breast. It does not measure breast health and a negative mammogram does not mean the patient is healthy. It can help identify potential illness, just as a paternity test can help identify potential infidelity. Neither are full proof.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 01:49 AM
1

Saying a paternity test does not test for fidelity is like saying a mammogram doesn’t test for breast cancer. Yes, both tests can have “false positives” just like every other diagnostic tool and both test can miss things, just like every diagnostic tool. But for things that can’t be directly tested or measured, like fidelity, we can use these tools for estimates or to generate informed guesses.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 10:55 PM
1

The sample was 18-34 year olds without children. People in those age ranges who already have children wouldn’t be counted. Since the average age of motherhood is ~27 I think it’s fair to say if you included people who already have kids in that “want kids” group the percentage would be significantly higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/24 02:22 AM
1

Completely disagree. Previous rejection will not have an impact on innate attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/24 12:35 PM
2

I didn’t say women find most men attractive. It can be true that two women each only find 2/10 men personally attractive. It can also be true that 1 of those men is objectively attractive (both women find him attractive) and 2 of those men are objectively average but have something one of those women like (each woman finds 1 attractive but would not find the other one attractive despite the other women feeling so).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 07:43 PM
2

So I read through that study and found some interesting stuff about it. 1) Relationship satisfaction was actually a stronger predictor of orgasm than partner attraction. 2) All attraction ratings were done by the woman in the relationship (meaning those with stronger bonds to their partner might have rated him as more attractive regardless of what the public might believe) 3) The difference is average self-reported attraction for orgasm and non-orgasm groups was only 0.37 (7.5 and 7.13 respectiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 07:37 PM
1

Let me simplify it. Objectively = by popular beauty standards Someone can be average by popular beauty standards but attractive to an individual. Acknowledging that isn’t an insult. Average =\= ugly Ugly = Ugly
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 07:08 PM
1

Can you share what data shows that and how they controlled for other factors (such as experience)? My personal opinion is looks don’t matter when it comes to skill in bed. Men who have been in at least one long-term relationship are better at sex than men who haven’t (even if they have a higher body count). That’s because a romantic partner is more willing to give you direction in the bedroom and teach you what is enjoyable than random one-night stands. From red pill beliefs, this would be mainl…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 03:34 PM
3

She didn’t call her partner objectively ugly, she just said he’s not objectively attractive. He can be objectively, based off the true rating scale, average but has traits she personally finds more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/24 03:28 PM
1

Part of maturing/growth is not letting other people’s actions/values change your own. Stick to your true self and stay strong in what matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 04:30 PM
1

Some people are just stupid, men and women. I find when people sleep around like that it’s often a maturity issue and self-destructive behavior. If it’s any consultation, I had an ex-friend that would cheat on everyone. Attraction didn’t matter to her. Just stick to your values and find someone who does the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 03:55 PM
1

Yes, that’s why waiting until commitment is fully confirmed is important. Just because someone says they’re single and see a future with you, doesn’t mean it’s safe to sleep with them. Women should wait until their actions prove so. Just because a woman doesn’t rush into sex, doesn’t mean the man she is seeing is unattractive, she might just be smart.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 03:42 PM
1

The reason to wait is to ensure both parties aren’t seeing anyone else. You can’t tell if someone is serious or pretending to be serious off a few dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 02:56 PM
1

The comment I’m responding to has nothing to do with body count. It was referring to cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 02:54 PM
2

Cheating is different from being promiscuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 12:01 PM
1

Look at the comment I’m responding to.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 12:01 PM
4

That’s not possible to know for sure. A lot of prostitutes as sex trafficked and don’t have much option in it. If someone has paid for sex a lot of times, it’s likely at least one of those girls was a victim of sex trafficking.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 03:05 AM
8

Men that want to cheat and would if possible are bad. Whether they get the opportunity to act on it or not doesn’t matter all that much.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 03:02 AM
1

As I explained above and you previously agreed, a woman might make a man wait regardless of attraction because it’s the logical decision to make. It has nothing to do with the mythical Chad lol. I have the perfect boyfriend that I’m very attracted to. I waited until he quit talking to other girls and showed he was committed before having sex. If we broke up, I’d do the same for all future relationships. It’s logical and in my best interest to secure a relationship before putting out.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 01:41 AM
–

Women not having children isn’t really a solution. And the dangerous/hazardous jobs aren’t the ones men are making a ton in.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 01:35 AM
1

If your options aren’t limited and girls that do that aren’t compatible with you, then sure. It doesn’t harm them to have you self-filter.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 03:04 PM
1

Men wanting to use someone for sex don’t wait long. They quit and move on to someone easier. If you do the bare minimum and move onto other girls, she wont have sex. You’ll be filtered out due to lack of commitment. Either way, her dating strategy is effective at filtering out undesirable men (as girls want a boyfriend that is smitten with her) and women have enough options that losing a few doesn’t matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 12:43 PM
1

Here’s a specific senario to help explain: a A woman sees a man as a long term prospect. For your sake of mind, let’s say he’s attractive. She’s not interested in casual sex (only about 15% are) but he leads her on with the promise of a committed relationship so she sleeps with him. He never delivers on the commitment, so the relationship ends. She decided for the future to never sleep with someone until commitment is confirmed. She now goes on a date with someone who is equally attractive and c…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 12:05 AM
1

Do you mind sharing the studies, I’m interested in reading them? Even if that interpretation of the studies is fully accurate, it doesn’t disprove that a significant subset of women will quit casual sex after a few negative experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:56 PM
1

Here’s what you’re not understanding, that first guy could have been a “nice guy”. He could have been seen as a long term prospect. The second guy could be even more physically attractive but because she got burned before, she’ll be more careful.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 09:14 PM
2

So you do think high body counts is a negative then, right? The girls I’ve known who sleep with a guy quickly get above 12 pretty quick.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 09:13 PM
2

Maybe it’s because I’m from the Midwest, but promiscuity is frowned on for men and women. Nobody cares if someone had sex with an ex-partner or even casual sex a few times, but a lot of casual sex is a negative. Not necessarily a deal breaker on its own, but definitely a red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 09:06 PM
1

if a woman has the self-restraint to not sleep with a guy within one week of knowing him in order to prevent herself from being used like she has in the past, all it shows is she’s got at least half a brain. if all it takes for someone to lose all restraint is being attracted to someone, they lack self control.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 08:29 PM
1

I don’t think it’s quite as common in real life as it is in this subreddit (lots of men claim to care here) but plenty of people do care about it. Most of the people you’re close enough to talk about sexual preferences with are probably similar to you, which is why you feel that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 08:25 PM
1

That’s a great opinion. It doesn’t disprove anything I said. A lot of men think a woman who sleeps around is unattractive, and this was especially true in older generations.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 08:20 PM
0

Not every girl will (or has a desire to) engage in casual sex. Men will oftentimes pretend to be interested in commitment to gain casual sex. Women who realize this (often after being used) will start waiting until commitment is confirmed before engaging in sex. This isn’t dependent on attractiveness and is an effective mating strategy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 08:18 PM
2

“If she’s back in the dating market, obviously that standard hasn’t worked previously. If a woman has previously been strung along for sex, she might decide to make all future partners wait longer to prevent it from occurring again.” That was my previous comment. If a woman is changing her dating strategy because it didn’t work, that’s logical and not due to lack of attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 08:16 PM
1

As long as you acknowledge it’s not always due to lack of attraction, that’s fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 06:06 PM
-2

Women who don’t wait to have sex, have more sex than women who do wait. They also have less stable relationships than their counterpart, meaning they’ll have more of them. Plenty of people view high body counts as unattractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 06:05 PM
-2

Just because a woman doesn’t want to rush into sex doesn’t mean she isn’t attracted to a man. It used to be common (and respected) for women to make a man wait before having sex. Not doing so was seen in a negative light. It’s the new generations that seem to think otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 05:02 PM
2

If she’s back in the dating market, obviously that standard hasn’t worked previously. If a woman has previously been strung alone for sex, she decide to make all future partners wait longer to prevent it from occurring again.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 04:57 PM
2

Everyone has equal opportunity to apply to healthcare resources and will receive them based on an individual’s health, not averages across a population’s gender. When applying, gender is not taken into account. I agree though, the US should provide more in terms of affordable healthcare.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 05:35 PM
3

I tried to post links but the post was removed. You’ll have to just go to the subreddits main page and put the titles into the search bar.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 05:30 PM
3

I did, the posts are the evidence. I’m not going to copy the entire body of text from those posts, just look them up and read them. Then if you have any questions, let me know.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 04:49 PM
3

Look up the posts and read them, it’s very tax-centered.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 04:19 PM
2

When money goes to single mothers, it’s going to children. Children should be prioritized. The government has funded suicide hotlines. Only 20% of men prefer a male therapist and severely depressed men much preferred a female therapist. An internet joke isn’t an example of tax money being used in a way that harms men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 03:06 PM
4

It won’t let me post links. Here are the titles: Debate: Men are forced to support women other than the ones that love them; the opposite is not true. Declining birth rates can’t be solved by government programs because beta males won’t benefit from it You can also look through the comments on this post and see some people arguing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:58 PM
5

There were two posts on the sub regarding it in the last day or so.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:37 PM
4

If you’re against taxes in general, then I guess this post isn’t for you. It specific for people who think men are disadvantaged by taxes while women benefit from them. Personally, I think a government that has social security nets is beneficial to the population (and that requires tax money to do).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:26 PM
4

So you agree with my post and then brought up a separate topic?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:24 PM
0

Single mothers receiving government benefits, benefits men (because some men are the children of single mothers).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:23 PM
3

Money has gone toward mental illness, men are just more susceptible to severe illness in general. Men are more likely to develop/die from cancer and heart disease as well. It’s not because tax money is going to treatments for cancer and heart disease in women only, it’s just because there’s a general difference in health between the sexes (including mental health). Though I agree, more tax money should go to health care. It’s way too expensive in the US and prevents people from receiving treatme…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:22 PM
7

What I’m arguing is taxes aren’t a soft/unwritten social variable disadvantaging men, it’s a side effect of a soft/unwritten benefit men have. I’d much rather pay the majority of the taxes if it meant I made the majority of the income.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 02:13 PM
6

I don’t see what this has to do with my post. Can you connect the thoughts for me?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 01:51 PM
1

Wasn’t aware of this, thanks. I’ll remove that part from the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 01:49 PM
2

Yes, taxes target people who make more because they have more money (a logical decision). That happens to be men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 01:46 PM
3

If nursing is the thing you’re getting hung up on then change it to any of the other good ones. Like engineering.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 01:23 PM
4

Average salary for nurses is $86,000. If you go on to get your masters, median salary is about $120,000. Certain specialties are especially profitable. They also have one of the lowest unemployment rates. Nursing is a great career to go into.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 10:34 AM
0

Then argue taxes need to be reduced in general, not that they’re targeting people who make more money unfairly.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 12:12 AM
1

If you truly want to change your odds in the dating marketplace the only way to do that is to improve the things you can control. Complaining about genetics on the internet does nothing to benefit you. You can say “I want to go back to sleep” but on the same hand you want to stay stuck in place.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 11:54 PM
-1

Once again, never claimed everyone is on “equal footing”. Just that developing skills is more useful and productive than relying on/blaming genetics. I haven’t mentioned anything about sharing or inclusivity. My whole argument is just developing skills is more important than genetics alone. I’ve got a question then. If you’re unable to change things about your genetics, what’s the point in mentioning them? Wouldn’t it be more productive to focus on the skills you can develop to help yourself out…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 09:42 PM
1

Let me simplify it then. If someone makes a willing decision to increase their expenses (such as by having a ton of kids) it doesn’t mean they are unfairly targeted by taxes when compared to someone who makes less but also has lower expenses. You know what you have to pay in taxes based on your income. Keep your expenses within that budget.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 09:33 PM
2

Having kids is a choice and a known expense. If someone chose to get a super expensive car and now their car payment eats up most of their budget, I wouldn’t say it is a problem they are more disadvantaged by taxes than someone who makes less money but smarter financial decisions.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 05:47 PM
-1

The things you’re saying aren’t things anyone argues against. Nobody fully believes the blank slate idea. What people argue about is whether genetics or self-improvement is more important. I personally take the side of self-improvement being more important than genetics. Yeah, you’ll never be the “Micheal Phelps of dating” without some extreme genetic advantages AND skill building but you can absolutely be successful in it. When giving dating advice, instead of focusing on things out of your con…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 05:32 PM
-3

It actually seems you’re strawmannirg the argument. You acknowledged yourself that improving your personality can increase your odds but also act like that advice isn’t useful. Most people don’t suggest cold approaching for anyone, a lot of women actually say it makes them uncomfortable. Most of the advice I see tends to focus on meeting women organically, which is optimal for unattractive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 05:12 PM
-9

If you do everything “as you’re supposed to” there is a strong chance it will work out, not a guarantee. For example, if you get a nursing degree, there is a strong chance you will be relatively successful in life. That’s because you will get pretty good pay, job security, and respect. You are also more likely to meet other people with good pay, job security, and respect. You’re more likely to have a successful partner as well. Nobody promised you’ll go to college and become a millionaire. Nobod…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 04:10 PM
0

Men make more than women on average. People that make more, pay more in taxes. Making more money than someone else doesn’t mean you are “disadvantaged”.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 03:48 PM
–

I think it’s weird these posts are still so common with abortion being illegal in so many states. But the reason is when women choose to abort, that future child is terminated. Once that child is born, their needs supersede that of their parents. The father’s desire to not pay child support doesn’t out weigh the child’s needs for financial support.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 10:27 AM
–

Both parents would have decided. If the father wanted to keep the child he then would have full custody and the mother would pay child support in that senario. By the way infants are the one demographic where there is actually a “shortage” of adoptable children. So if a woman gives up a baby, it will have new parents relatively shortly. And the adoption fees more than cover the cost of the child for that short period.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/24 10:19 AM
2

In the US, castration is chemical so they are not being mutilated. It’s also reserved for child rapists on a case by case basis (typically with multiple convictions). Since sex crimes are one of the hardest crimes to convict someone of and often require DNA, anyone being charged with child rape likely has committed the crime. If the proof has reached the stage the judge feels chemical castration is appropriate, they absolutely have committed the crime. It’s one of the few punishments you won’t b…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/24 02:41 PM
1

Not enjoying how it looks on somebody doesn’t mean it’s deceptive. If you don’t understand the appeal it either means 1) you don’t like how makeup looks on someone (and therefore can tell when they’re wearing it) or 2) you can’t tell but it doesn’t make a huge difference in appearance anyway. Either way, it wouldn’t be deceiving people into thinking they look different than they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/24 09:44 PM
1

It’s impossible to do contour dramatic enough to change your bone shape but light enough people can’t tell. Contour is, by nature, heavy makeup.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/24 06:54 PM
1

How is it deceptive when you can tell it’s been done? Contour in real life is very noticeable, especially from certain angles.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/24 04:44 PM
17

I usually see that in response to men treating or referring to women as objects (lock/key thing comes to mind). Specifying they would prefer to be treated as humans doesn’t necessarily mean they wanted to be treated as a man, just that they don’t want to be treated as an object.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/24 02:53 AM
1

The replication crisis is not unique to psychology and affecting hard sciences too. Out of 112 oncology studies only 5 could be fully reproduced and only 46% met 3/5 of the replication criteria. https://www.science.org/content/article/more-half-high-impact-cancer-lab-studies-could-not-be-replicated-controversial-analysis#:~:text=An%20ambitious%20project%20that%20set,than%20half%20yielded%20similar%20results.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/24 08:00 PM
1

Evolutionary biology is much more concrete than evolutionary psychology. A lot of people like to pretend that arguments based on evopsych are as strong as arguments based on evobio (or act like the two are interchangeable terms) but they definitely are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/24 07:56 PM
1

Clinical psychology also runs parallel to neuroscience which is a hard science. That alone doesn’t make it harder to fumble conclusions. Science is general is having a replication crisis, EP isn’t immune to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/24 07:50 PM
3

All I said is nothing you attached is proof. As someone making a claim the burden of proof falls on you to show otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/24 05:32 AM
5

This goes to a page not found and the screenshot you posted doesn’t even mention cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/24 01:55 AM
–

It’s a nuclear solution for a minor problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/24 10:12 PM
–

Lmao that’s crazy
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/24 09:52 PM
–

James Buchanan was a single president. Though I don’t see what that has to do with women promoting single men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/24 05:49 PM
3

Nobody is perfect. Acknowledging that isn’t an insecurity. With your same logic people who style their hair are insecure bc it isn’t naturally “perfect”. Improving your appearance isn’t insecurity and everyone does it to some extent.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/24 07:38 PM
5

How does the comment imply that? All it spoke about was how a singular man on this subreddit couldn’t tell the difference between with makeup and without. Woman wear makeup to look better. Can this stem from insecurity? Sure. Does it always? No. Unless you want to argue every single this we do to express style and look better makes someone insecure.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/24 05:04 PM
5

No where in that comment does it state why women wear makeup. Just that men are unable to identify when a woman has makeup on and when she doesn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/24 04:21 PM
2

Are some women who wear makeup insecure? Sure. Are some women who wear makeup secure? Sure. Makeup is a way to improve someone’s appearance. Just because someone makes an effort to improve their appearance doesn’t mean they’re insecure. Otherwise brushing our hair, using deodorant, dressing with style, ect. would mean people are insecure too.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/24 04:18 PM
3

No, all that comment does is say men don’t actually know what they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/24 04:12 PM
3

I misunderstood what you were saying. The way you stated “i don’t want to owe him anything so i can jump ship” made me think you’d purposely not have a second date because you wanted someone who felt like they “owed” you.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/24 08:13 PM
3

Do you want a woman to just stay with you because she feels like she owes you something? Wouldn’t it be better to find a woman who stays with you because she likes you?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/24 08:03 PM
0

It’s not real love if it’s one sided. One sided love isn’t desired by people on either side of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/24 11:10 PM
-1

Then why are you saying women are more likely to find real love than men?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/24 06:28 PM
3

For every woman who finds real love, a man finds real love (excluding gay relationships). Otherwise, it’s not true love.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/24 06:23 PM
3

No, most marriages have both people working and contributing financially to the home. Most marriages also have the woman doing the majority of the household work.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/24 08:58 PM
13

As said previously, the women complaining they have to do the majority of the chores are typically working full time too.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/24 05:09 PM
2

Yes the average men who 70% of the time are engaging in regular, healthy sex are going to be more pleasing to a woman than a porn star. The stuff you see in most porn isn’t actually pleasurable for women and not going to be good “practice”.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/24 10:31 AM
3

Yes, there are always exceptions to the rule. But generally people in LTR have sex at the same rate or more than people who have high n counts. Someone you’ve had sex with multiple times is also more likely to give you suggestions on how to improve than someone you’ve had a one night stand with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/24 09:16 PM
2

You didn’t say they were bad either. A better way to phrase it is they think they are scientists but actually don’t follow any of the scientific principles adhered to by actual scientists.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/24 06:40 PM
9

I completely disagree that men with high n counts tend to have better sex skills. Men who have been in at least 1 long term relationship are usually better at sex than men who have had more one night stands. I’d agree the same is probably true for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/24 06:39 PM
1

“relationships at all are rare enough for men that a shared one even with an absolute bottom of the barrel ugly women would be good enough” “just shared interests or hobbies alone for a man is just a grain of sand on the beach of what he needs to have to be considered” That’s my point. Hobbies don’t help women at all because they don’t need it in the slightest. Hobbies help men because it checks off one of the “requirements” for women AND gives them a place to meet girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 11:21 PM
1

You said they’re the lowest in history. If you were meaning world history, obviously it’s not because there are countries with lower ones. If you were meaning American history, obviously it’s not because it’s “the highest it’s been since 2018” (implying it’s been lower in previous years).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 11:19 PM
1

We’re going to disagree on this. Shared interests isn’t a requirement most men have for dating, as long as she is average-semi attractive they usually can care less. Women, who are more selective in partners, will put more emphasis on shared interests than men will. A shared interest allows a man who is less attractive to compete with a more attractive man without that interest. Any situation that allows guys to meet girls genuinely will help the guys because they are the ones struggling to find…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 08:36 PM
1

Can you tell me the name of the stat analysis cited in your search? Almost every one I’ve seen has a number between 40 and 50.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 05:08 PM
2

That proves some preferences are biologically driven. It doesn’t disprove some are cultural.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 05:05 PM
2

Preferences are absolutely affected by cultural and environmental influences as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 04:55 PM
2

Women are not obligated to fuck random men. Control != respectful treatment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 04:50 PM
1

Source? Because depending on where you look 40-50% of first marriages end in divorce. That would mean 50-60% of first marriages never get divorced, making that 33% number seem very low.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 04:36 PM
1

Hobbies don’t make women any more attractive. All of those men would be after her anyway. However, it can make those men more attractive to her, thereby helping them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 12:27 PM
0

Most people in the US don’t get divorced. You can complain the rates are high but calling it impossible is delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 12:26 PM
1

Any situation that causes guys to interact with girls more often is going to be positive for guys. A lot of guys who struggle with dating, struggling with talking to girls. This would give them an opportunity to grow their speaking skills and potentially meet a girl interested in them. Girls aren’t just all automatically attracted to the same “top” guy. It will vary a lot depending on their values. And oftentimes, who they meet first will matter more than who is “better”. Once feelings are devel…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 03:38 AM
5

The marriage rates aren’t the lowest in history. I pointed out multiple countries above that have lower rates. If you’re only talking about in American history, it’s actually increased and reached a peak in 2022 which is the highest it’s been since 2018.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 03:32 AM
1

We’re going to disagree on women only considering the “top of the line” and disregarding personality so I’m not going to continue there. What’s the difference between them desiring the best man in general vs. the best man in competitive gaming? The best man in competitive gaming is going to less desirable than the best man overall so this will give him a chance with a girl he otherwise wouldn’t get.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 01:43 AM
1

Women are already desirable. Sharing a hobby does little to boost their standing. If anything, it gives men they wouldn’t give a second glance to a chance to win them over with their personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 12:23 AM
1

How does women putting themselves in more traditionally male-dominated hobbies harm men? Doesn’t it make it easier for men by providing a way for them to meet “organically”?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/24 12:02 AM
4

You mean the majority?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 11:56 PM
1

“Gender skewed hobbies or overlapping interests making things easier for women therefore harder for men is.” How does overlapping interests make it harder for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 11:35 PM
11

Lowest marriage rates: 1) Qatar, 2) French Guiana, 3) Peru, 4) Venezuela, 5) Uruguay, (US not in list of top 15) The U.S. marriage rate increased in 2022, reaching a rate of 6.2 marriages per 1,000 people, which is the highest it's been since 2018. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/the-states-with-the-highest-marriage-rates#:~:text=Overall%2C%20the%20U.S.%20marriage%20rate,Census%20Bureau's%20American%20Community%20Survey. Highest divorce rates: 1) Maldives, 2) Russia, 3) Georgia,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 11:29 PM
2

It appears OP claimed the 129 million is for single women but when I did it in the same calculator they used I got 59.5 million single women. That’d make the thin/childless top 6% rather than 3%. Definitely an error on OPs part but I think the general idea of their argument still stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 11:06 PM
14

And yet people still manage to do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 10:12 PM
1

Maybe it’s because I won’t pay for the account, but I don’t see anything regarding weight or number of children. Just relationship status.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 10:11 PM
1

Of course no calculation to specific characteristics will be 100% accurate but I think the way OP defined it is more accurate to what they did than the way you redefined.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 10:09 PM
1

If you read that article: 13% are both foreign born only 7% are native-born and foreign-born 40% are from Latin America (not overseas) So only 7% of marriages in the US are between a native-born and foreign-born. This includes native-born men and women so let’s assume 3.5% are men. Out of this 3.5% if men, roughly 40% are from Latin America so we can say about 2.1% are overseas. And, as it states in the article YOU provided, “the number of mixed-nativity married-couple households corresponds wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 10:06 PM
2

Ah yes every man famously hates going on vacation. The only reason they possibly would is so their wife doesn’t leave them or so they can cheat. The only two options.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 09:24 PM
1

Firstly, 50% isn’t a majority. 51% is. Secondary, 75% of men don’t date outside the US. That’s the average man, not the 25% that do. Thirdly, source?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 09:07 PM
1

Idk but you should definitely leave the females alone lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 09:05 PM
3

Men will travel even without women. Some like it, some don’t. Just like women.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 09:02 PM
1

When OP calculated the “rarity” of the women they divided the population of the specific group (thin, childless, and single) by the population of single women in the US. The top 1% is not of all women, it is only out of the single women. Based on the way OP did it, being single alone would put them in the 100% group, which is then narrowed down by the thin and childless criteria. I’m not sure if I explained it well, but let me know if that makes sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:57 PM
23

Minus maintaining a relationship as evident by the “multiple wives”.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:49 PM
1

Ok bro
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:47 PM
1

You say the average man is marrying overseas and in the same sentence claim 25% of men? Which is it, the average or 25%? Also, source?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:45 PM
1

You’re saying men should leave the country for dating purposes. It’s ignoring all of the other reasons people come to the US for. You don’t pick a country based on your best odds of pulling a hot girl. But the most important point which you ignored, this post is regarding the AVERAGE man’s expectations. The average man is not leaving the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:12 PM
2

Women also like men that have an overlapping hobby. For women who ride horses, men who ride horses are extremely desirable (and rarer).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:09 PM
1

Most men aren’t leaving America. When talking about the average man, it’s important to focus on the average (not edge cases). And seeing as the immigration rate to the US is higher than its emigration rate, I think we can assume most people think being in the US is better than out of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 08:08 PM
1

Great. Still makes the men who claim their standards are low delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 07:51 PM
1

What’s wrong with the way OP stated it then?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 07:50 PM
2

Your hopelessness in your it ability to outcompete the “Top 1%” and the weird assumption that girls participating in hobbies are only doing so to make fun of men are setting you up for failure. Give up and get out of the dating market.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 07:48 PM
3

Traveling is not a female-only hobby. Traveling also tends to in conjunction with other hobbies.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 07:42 PM
4

By “single” OP refers to not married. That’s how it is commonly referred to in census data.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 06:13 PM
5

The reason most women aren’t in male dominated hobbies is because they do not enjoy them. You cannot force yourself to have a hobby you don’t like. Overlapping interests don’t make things harder for men. Almost every interest has an overlap with a “female-dominated” hobby. Just focus less on being exactly identical and more so having general similarities between your hobby and people you might date.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 05:56 PM
3

And yet the number of people coming to the US still outnumbers those leaving it. Yeah people complain. But everyone still pays the price. People would think you were crazy if you said “I can never find a gas station with average priced gas! Every place charges more than a dollar!” because we understand what the average is. The point of the post is pointing out that the “average” women isn’t childless and thin like people think and therefore the average men aren’t really in the running for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 05:52 PM
1

The majority of American men aren’t leaving the US. A very small portion of them leave the country for dating reasons. If you are going to remain in the US and date American women, then be realistic about your chances. What you are essentially doing is complaining the value of a dollar went down and stating you should still only have to pay a dollar for gas. That’s not the world we live in, you pay based on supply and demand not your feelings. The supply for thin, childless women is low and the …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 05:36 PM
6

Yeah and the price of a loaf of bread in Africa is way cheaper than in America. But guess what, I’m getting my bread down the street. You can argue that the value of women is greater in another country but the truth is the vast majority of American men will only be dating women in America. So when talking about dating in America, we’re going to focus on Americans.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 04:23 PM
14

You don’t need to find someone who has the exact same hobby (though it is preferred). You need to find someone whose hobby has some overlap. If you enjoy outdoor “country” things (hunting, mudding, dirt bikes, ect.) find a girl who enjoys “country” things (horseback riding, hiking, ect.). If enjoy things on the water (fishing, water sports) find a girl who enjoys things on the water (swimming, surfing, water sports). If you enjoy sports (baseball, basketball, ect.) find a girl who enjoys sports …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 01:50 PM
5

OP isn’t arguing being thin and childless is attractive because it’s rare. He’s arguing men who claim their standards aren’t as high as women because all they want is someone who is thin and childless are lying because thin and childless is actually rarer than they believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 01:34 PM
10

OP specified the women are not married in the first sentence. While they theoretically could be dating someone, I think only including those unmarried is fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 01:31 PM
–

All of that makes a woman more attractive. Even the things are seen so minor (like eyebrow shape) add up and make her more pretty. It’s just these things aren’t so obvious bc you cant visually tell a woman straightened her hair, even tho it makes her more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 10:12 PM
–

Most women absolutely spend more money/time getting their hair done, styling their hair, use good quality shampoo/conditioner/body wash, have better skin care routines, spend more time picking out their outfits, spend time doing nails/getting them done, ect. Shapewear and makeup are a fraction of the things women do to boost their appearance. Hell, when’s the last time you saw a man fuss over his eyebrow shape?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 10:06 PM
–

And because woman spend more money/time getting their hair done, developing a skin care routine, picking outfits, actually doing their hair, buy high quality soaps, do more personal grooming, ect. Even eliminating makeup women on average spend more time and money on their appearance. If someone prioritizes their appearance more, of course they’ll look better.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 10:04 PM
1

Old men who exclusively date 20 years olds seem immoral because it is clear they are only interested in women for sex (i means seriously what do they even talk about). Young women who exclusively date 20 year olds seem immoral because it is clear they are only interested in men for money. It’s not weird to discourage these transactional relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 08:55 PM
–

On average, girls put way more effort into their appearance. It makes sense that a natural 5 who spends more time and money on their appearance would look better than a natural 5 that spends less time on their appearance. This causes the “average attractiveness” for girls to be raised while the “average attractiveness” for guys remains lower. So a girl 5 =/= to a guy 5.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 08:34 PM
–

I’m not arguing the average man is ugly, I’m arguing the average woman is more attractive than the average man. Most girls would be more attractive than most men as girls commonly put way more effort into their physical appearance. very few guys spend $100s of dollars on hair, have multi-step skin care routines, buy high quality soap, ect. i mean, isn’t it a common trope that the girl spends hours getting ready while her boyfriend waits?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 08:31 PM
12

i’d argue the opposite. most irl couples i know the woman is more attractive than the man.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 07:22 PM
18

Yes. You don’t have to have sex with people you aren’t sexually compatible with. If oral is super important to you, then don’t have sex with people who don’t perform it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/24 02:04 AM
2

It’s been evident for a while there are differences between male and female brains. The most basic being the size, densities, and wrinkles. What most people push back on is how big of a difference it makes on male vs female behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 08:57 PM
1

Isn’t the whole purpose of the ML they used that it only identified features that were significantly/consistently different? Of course the study isn’t going to identify features with overlap.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 06:29 PM
1

There isn’t 0 overlap. If the purpose of the study was to only identify structures that are significantly different between men and women, structures that are the same or have a lot of overlap between the sexes wouldn’t be identified. If our brains truly had no overlap, we’d be two different species.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 06:13 PM
3

Personally, I think neurological data is super hard to draw strong conclusions from. We can see differences in structure but it’s almost impossible to say how those specific differences influence behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 06:11 PM
2

It seems like the difference you’re pointing out is cultural, not biological, if women in other parts of the world behave differently.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 06:08 PM
4

The issue is this study doesn’t prove which differences are biological and which are cultural. Some differences are, without a doubt cultural. Hell, even some physical differences in brain structure can be environmental. Most people with a brain understand there are biological differences between men and women. The issue arises when people use these biological differences to try and justify certain behaviors, especially when an argument can be made these behaviors are influenced by cultural diff…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 06:07 PM
1

I understood it as “many people think men are smarter because their brain is bigger but a woman’s brain compensates for the lack of size by having a higher density of wrinkles”. The way I understood it is there isn’t a significant difference in intelligence due to brain differences, just that each brain has different ways to reach the intelligence level humans have.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/24 06:00 PM
1

The only claim I’m making is there isn’t enough evidence to draw causation from the correlation you mentioned. The burden of proof would fall on you to prove otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/24 07:18 PM
1

Do you think anti depressants are always available to women in those countries? Do you think there are huge social repercussions for women who would take anti depressants in those countries? Do you think those women would even have the opportunity to see a doctor for that? You can’t make such strong conclusions when there are so many other factors that affect it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/24 04:52 PM
1

If a woman wants a relationship and has been unable to get one, she will lower her standards until she gets one. Why do you think that’s false?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/24 12:57 PM
1

Do you think most women in the world have the option to be on anti-depressants if they wanted to?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/24 12:56 PM
1

Low divorce rates doesn’t mean a country’s marriages are more loving. There’s so many societal aspects that affect it. It’s impossible and irrational to draw the conclusion that divorce is because people are having more casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 07:59 PM
-1

If someone is looking for a relationship they will find it. Realistically, nobody is single for extended periods of time and maintaining unreasonable standards. Everyone understands the difference between relationship quality and casual sex quality.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 07:56 PM
1

There’s a difference between hooking up and relationships. The difference between the first 50 and 51 will be the bond formed. You can form a bond with someone before ever having sex with them. Sex can strengthen a bond, but it won’t create it. There’s a huge difference between sex with someone you love and sex just for the sake of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 06:34 PM
1

So if someone experiments a lot with sex with one person, will they be more desensitized to sex than someone who has a lot of vanilla sex with multiple people? And do you believe this is only true for women?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 06:30 PM
8

When you plan to hookup with someone the goal is to have sex. The best way to do that, is to have sex. When you plan to date someone the goal is to determine if they actually care about you or just want something (usually sex). The best way to do that is withhold sex for a bit and see if they stick around. Otherwise, you risk getting into a relationship where you really care about him but he’s just using you for sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 03:38 PM
9

How do hookups burn through these dopamine receptors but having the same amount of sex with one person doesn’t?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 03:33 PM
1

If women abort for financial reasons, there is no child formed and, therefore, no child harmed. If men “financially abort” there is a child formed. Since children are expensive to raise, removing financial support from a parent is against that child’s wellbeing. The issue isn’t what is fairest/best for women or men, it’s what is best for that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 01:30 PM
2

Wow you seem to really hate women on here for some reason. I’m going to quit engaging with you now, that’s not something I want to deal with. Take care.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 01:26 PM
2

Mothers can absolutely be forced to pay child support if the father has sole custody. If neither parent wants custody of the child, it is placed for adoption. If the child has been placed for adoption, the government covers the cost of the child (essentially becoming the child support payer). You can argue the government should cover child support for men who want to abandon their kids (though it would never get passed bc no one wants to pay for someone else’s kid), but eliminating child support…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 03:18 AM
2

It hasn’t happened. There isn’t philosophical consensus on whether abortion is murder or not. There have always been people who opposed it and people who supported it. Even now, states can’t decide on whether or not to have it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 03:12 AM
2

If something can be made equal without harming anyone, it should. Any feminist would agree with that. The issue with financial abortion is it would harm someone. The solution to that isn’t to take away someone else’s rights so that it matches your ability.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 02:19 AM
2

A lot of men support abortion because of their girlfriend got pregnant they’d want to option to abort it. And life isn’t equal. The goal should be to give people as many rights as possible without harming other people. The whole “I can’t so you can’t either” thing is a little childish. If you want men to have the option to “financially abort” then argue the government should cover the costs for the men that abandon their kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 01:09 AM
1

That would be putting the parent’s wants before the child’s wellbeing. The law prioritizes the child’s wellbeing over the parent’s wants. It doesn’t matter if it’s “fair”.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 12:32 AM
2

Who made the choice doesn’t matter. What is best for the kid matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 09:44 PM
3

If that could be passed it would pave the way for fathers to “disown” their kids without negatively affecting the kids as badly. However, it would not get wide support in the US. Other people don’t want to pay to raise other people’s kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 09:44 PM
2

If you read the article it says “The study reviewed 2,000 custody cases across the United States.” The law firm reporting on it is from Maryland, but the study was not restricted to Maryland. And of two people want custody of course it’s going to result in a custody battle. Do you think a parent should just be arbitrarily picked rather than fully evaluated?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 09:41 PM
2

There’s no way to reach a consensus on a matter so strongly based on philosophy. When life starts varies so much from an individual’s culture, religion, and opinions. It’s like trying to convince someone else that your religion is the correct one.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 09:38 PM
6

I’m sure that is your anecdotal experience but the data shows otherwise. https://www.marylandlawhelp.com/new-research-shows-fathers-favored-in-child-custody-battles/
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 04:31 PM
1

Then we disagree on what constitutes a child. It’s a philosophical argument and almost impossible to come to a definitive conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 04:30 PM
3

Then we can agree to disagree. Such a philosophical argument is difficult to settle.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 04:29 PM
2

In abortion, there is no child that is born. A child is prevented from forming.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 04:06 PM
5

Custody cases do not favor the mother over the father, fathers are just less likely to fight for the child. In cases where the father does fight heavily for the child, they’re actually more likely to win. If a father has full custody, the mother is responsible for paying child support. And any parent with full custody tends to pay more toward the child. Child support does not fully cover the costs of raising a kid.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 04:01 PM
9

Then what are you arguing against?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 03:45 PM
3

If a woman gives a child up to foster care, the foster parents will then receive monetary support from the government for the child. This can help (not fully) cover essentials necessary for the child’s wellbeing. The child’s needs aren’t neglected. If a woman keeps the child, the man then has the role of the government in providing monetary support. That’s because ensuring the child’s financial needs are met is most important. The child’s needs won’t be neglected in this case. It’s not meant to …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 03:44 PM
5

In the first case, no child will exist. In the second case, a child will exist. When a child exists, the priory then becomes what is best for the child not what is most fair for the parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 03:40 PM
9

It is about the child, not fairness. If a woman is unable to dedicate the time necessary to raise a child, it is in the best interest of the child to be adopted out. If a woman keeps the child, it’s in the best interest of the child to receive financial support from both parents, even though a lot don’t. Fairness doesn’t matter here, the best interest of the child does. Yes, they should be willing to split the check and most people are.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 03:38 PM
10

I’m talking legally, it’s about the child. Of course parents in a messy circumstance are going to argue and not always have the child’s best interest in line. But eliminating any form of child support would not help men in the long term.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 03:31 PM
28

1) Feminism opposes the draft in general. Signing up for it would go against that belief. 2) Once a child is born, their needs supersede the wants of the mother and father. Not having post conception rights for men isn’t about benefiting women, it’s about benefiting the child (which might be part of the next generation of men). 3) What happens to a check when you’re dating should be something both people agree on. If a couple agrees the man will pay I don’t necessarily think the woman can no lon…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/24 02:48 PM
1

I wasn’t using an example. I explained it as literally as possible as the previous commenter was confused from the original example. If you understand examples better than my comment wasn’t meant for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/24 04:22 AM
1

In order to compare it properly you’d have to actually mention what you said at some point. What part of what I said do you disagree with?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/24 02:06 AM
1

If you think that’s untrue then argue with them. If you want to debate with me then comment on what I said, not what others did.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/24 11:54 PM
10

The point is how people in general see sexuality and attraction toward them from a friend they are not attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/24 04:00 PM
1

You can tell how much she looks like her natural face based off of how much makeup she has on. Makeup doesn’t deceive you into thinking she truly looks like that, and you can tell how closely she looks like that by how much she has on. How is makeup “at the expense of men”? Just date a girl that doesn’t wear any/a lot of makeup if it bothers you. Otherwise, it shouldn’t affect you at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 12:20 AM
1

Because if someone is wearing lifts in the shoes, it is not visible they are wearing lifts. It is visible a woman is wearing makeup.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 10:55 PM
1

I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 10:06 PM
0

Your?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:01 PM
1

Behavior isn’t a physical characteristic. You can spot visible physical characteristics almost immediately.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:01 PM
1

But anyone who looks at her is aware her eyes are going to look bigger and more impactful. They’re not deceived into thinking her eyes naturally look like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:44 PM
1

You can definitely tell how much her face is going to change based on how much makeup she has on.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:43 PM
2

No woman is putting on eyeliner with the intent to fool men into thinking that’s what she naturally looks like. Women know it is noticeable when they have makeup on.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:16 PM
1

Did you even read my post? I am a woman defending that makeup isn’t deceptive. I’m not “concerned about banging an ogre”.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:12 PM
1

If you read my post I clearly stated I don’t think it’s deceptive and was wondering for the opinions of other people. How is it a “women dishonest dunk” if I’m a woman defending that makeup is not deceptive?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:10 PM
1

Are you saying it’s deceptive because it makes a woman’s face look better than if it wasn’t used? My argument back would be if you know she has it on and her face is going to look worse without it, how is it deceptive?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:05 PM
1

My argument on the unfair part was more centered on: is it really used to improve a woman’s appearance when it’s somewhat expected sociality? Since makeup is the new norm for professional settings, dates, ect. using it doesn’t increase your attractiveness past what it would be in a world without makeup. However, not using it puts you at a lower attractiveness level than you’d be in a world without it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:02 PM
1

I would disagree that it’s deceptive. Sure, when makeup wasn’t accessible to everyone it could make a 3 into a 5. But now that it’s accessible to everyone and the majority of women use it, a 3 with makeup will still be a 3.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:54 PM
0

I think where I disagree is I don’t think something is deceptive if someone is upfront about using it. Since you can tell someone has makeup on and will look a little different without it, I wouldn’t say makeup is deceptive.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:51 PM
0

How is it deceptive if it is obvious a woman is using it?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:45 PM
2

But if everyone is able to use makeup to raise their attractiveness compared to a world where makeup didn’t exist, does it really change anything? They’ll still be the least attractive person in the room compared to the more attractive people wearing makeup.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:44 PM
5

I understand personal preference is going to vary on how much makeup people like to see on a woman. I’m more focused on is it deceptive to use makeup?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:42 AM
5

So do you think it’s deceptive? My post wasn’t really about whether or not it looks good, more focused on the ethics of using it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:35 AM
9

My personal opinion is as long as you can tell it’s being used, it’s not deceptive. I agree it doesnt matter if it’s something men or women are doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:34 AM
1

Do you think a population that reports being LGBTQ at a higher rate will report having same-sex relationships at a higher rate? I’m not saying that their identity won’t change at all as they age. I’m saying they’re more likely to report having same-sex relationships in the study OP posted.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 03:17 PM
–

The difference is one woman isn’t profiting off the labor of thousands of men. Furthermore, (in a proper marriage) all the reward is split 50/50 (in whatever way the couple sees fit) rather than 99/1.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 03:34 AM
1

Firstly, I didn’t say every girl in Gen Z has dated the same sex. Secondly, bisexual women can be in relationships with other women. Excluding them would be an inaccurate representation of the data. Even if only half of those who report as LGBTQ have, then 15% of girls in Gen Z have been in a same-sex relationship. Whether you think they’re faking it and go back to “dick” doesn’t matter. What matters, is if those “fakers” reported it as relationship experience for the study OP posted. Which they…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 10:47 PM
–

Experimenting with your sexuality definitely includes having same-sex relationships. Do you really think the average guy is more likely to be open to a same-sex relationship than the average woman? I’d disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 09:01 PM
–

My experience in the space says otherwise. Girls are way more likely to experiment with the same sex than guys are, especially at a young age.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 08:38 PM
–

Do you have any data showing that Gen Z men are more likely to have more same-sex dating experience than Gen Z women despite more women identifying as LGBTQ?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 06:18 PM
–

“The group most likely to identify as LGBTQ, by far, was Generation Z women (ages 18 to 26), 28.5% of whom identified as LGBTQ in the survey. The lion’s share of them, of all Gen Z women surveyed, 20.7%, identified as bisexual, followed by 5.4% who identified as lesbians. Gen Z women were nearly three times more likely than Gen Z men to identify as LGBTQ.” https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna143019
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 06:11 PM
–

“American Life found that only 56 percent of Gen Z adults—and 54 percent of Gen Z men—said they were involved in a romantic relationship at any point during their teenage years.” “Forty-four percent of Gen Z men today report having no relationship experience at all during their teen years, double the rate for older men.” Firstly, I’m confused how 54% of men have had some romantic experience at any point in their teenage years and 44% have had no romantic experience at any point in their teenage …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 05:45 PM
–

High value and low value women both want men as well. High value women have to date down if the situation requires it as well. That’s just life.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 02:40 PM
–

Everyone would prefer to date up, not just women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 01:53 PM
2

It doesn’t matter to me. I made the comment independently.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 11:37 AM
1

I didn’t call anyone an incel.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 11:32 AM
0

I didn’t ask anything. I gave my opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 12:25 AM
3

It really doesn’t matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 11:14 PM
24

I’ve never seen a public service announcement or school curriculum telling men to date any type of woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 02:03 PM
2

Most people hang out with people that are similar to them. This means they usually have similar views and can sort of lead to confirmation bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/24 11:46 PM
1

I think you’re basing your understanding of makeup on edited photos and not real life. Makeup is far from acting as a “mask”. And lots of things can make you look different. Why is makeup crossing the line?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 09:21 PM
1

Is wearing clothes inauthentic? You are putting things on to improve your appearance. Is using gel in your hair inauthentic? You’re putting things on to make your hair stay in position in a way it naturally wouldn’t. if your born with a cleft lip, is getting a corrective surgery inauthentic? You wouldn’t naturally look like that. At what point is improving your appearance inauthentic?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 02:34 PM
1

If makeup is inauthentic then everything you do to improve your appearance is inauthentic, which is a stupid take. Most people naturally have a drive to improve their appearance, if anything, ignoring that natural drive would be inauthentic to who someone really is.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 02:07 PM
2

Why wear clothes that hide what your body actually looks like? (because people like to look nice, especially on dates) When you see a woman with makeup are you fooled into thinking that’s what she naturally looks like?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 03:06 AM
2

Clothes hid what your body actually looks like. Beards can hide your actual face shape. Is that fooling someone? And how is it fooling someone when they know that’s not what your face actually looks like?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 10:07 PM
7

Why is dressing nicer not fooling someone but wearing makeup is? And are you honestly not able to tell when a woman has makeup on and when she doesn’t? It’s widely assumed someone knows if you are wearing makeup and not done to “fool” someone into thinking that’s what you look like.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 05:25 PM
2

You’re not born with clothes. It’s something you add to your body to try and look nicer.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 04:36 PM
3

The problem with your argument is nobody is wearing makeup to convince someone else they were born looking that way. You can tell when a woman is wearing makeup vs when she isn’t. Wearing makeup is akin to dressing nicer, it’s improving someone’s appearance but everyone knows they had to put a little effort for it to happen. Nobody looks at a girl with a full face of makeup and thinks it’s natural.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 04:35 PM
14

Is the whole point of wearing a nice dress trying to fool people, people aren’t born in a dress? What about dying your hair purple, is a girl trying to fool people that her natural hair color is purple? People can do things to look nice, it’s not trying to fool people. If you think some women naturally have eyeliner or smokey eyelids, that’s your problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 04:30 PM
–

I think the main problem is people will pull from those studies that say “women find xxx attractive” and try to say why women find that attractive (which the study is not proof of). People will then pull from anecdotes because it’s probably the closest thing you can get to explain why someone feels a certain way. Studies very rarely are able to prove the “why”, only that it happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/24 03:48 PM
–

You won’t end up homeless or starving without sex. You will without money. One is definitely more severe than the other. And, typically, sexual abuse is used to describe forcing someone into having sex, not withholding it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/24 11:21 PM
–

What? In what situation would pulling your pants down be appropriate? If you want to meet women, go to environments where there are women. Talk with them like a normal person, establish common interests, and over time see if it becomes a relationship. If you’re aware of the fact you’re not physically attractive, you need to be comfortable establishing a non-sexual/romantic relationship before moving into a sexual/romantic one.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 09:10 PM
-1

So you haven’t tried it but have the authority to say it wouldn’t work. Got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 05:03 PM
0

Have you been to any or are you just assuming the people are old? I find it very hard to believe there are no free (or <$10) book clubs near you. I also find it hard to believe you’ve thoroughly looked into book clubs in your area, especially after the “in 2024, lmao” comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 02:45 PM
1

Books clubs are full of girls, it’d be a great way to meet some. I don’t know why you’re acting like they don’t exist lmao. It might not be full of the most attractive sorority-type girls but book clubs are like 95% female.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 01:55 PM
1

That’s literally what I said in my comment above I just had to break it down and use direct quotes because you didn’t understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 01:14 PM
7

Then men could take advantage of this by starting sex normally, going too quick/hard (losing virginity is painful), causing the girl to back out. Now she lost her virginity to someone she doesn’t like and didn’t get any money.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 04:41 AM
1

If women are able to notice it and make a decision to not date him off of it, I’d argue it’s obvious. Maybe not to men, but to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 02:53 AM
1

literally in the comments i posted above. “only inexperienced [regarding relationships] people think like this…” —UninterestingFork “…what you’re really saying is ‘only people who have not been an alpha fux think like this’…” — You in response UninterestedFork said only inexperienced people (regarding relationships) think like that and you said that basically means only people who have not been an alpha think like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 02:35 AM
1

“Only inexperienced people think like this, sorry. If you've ever been 10 seconds in a relationship you'd know that it's very easy to love someone who is average.” -UninterestingFork “Empty shame attacks and a lack of empathy, typical. I mean, let’s be real. What you are really saying is “only people who have not been an alpha fux think like this, sorry.” Which is the entire point lol. They do not have experience being the alpha and want the experience. I bet you even understand what I said comp…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 10:20 PM
1

Someone said anyone in a relationship would think a certain way and you said you interpreted it as “only people who have not been an alpha fux think like this”. You put being in a relationship as equivalent to being an alpha, which is a poor take.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 06:38 PM
–

My point was you don’t have to be an “alpha” to have the experience of being in a relationship. Most people in relationships are average.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 05:50 PM
–

Being average in a relationship makes someone an alpha?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 02:10 PM
–

Even if you think the criteria he was unable to fulfill was absurd, being unable to fulfill the criteria is still a reason why nobody wants him.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 02:08 PM
1

But sex and family aren’t the two main reasons for everyone, that’s my point. Some people don’t care if they have sex in a relationship or will have a family. For other people there are other motivators that are way for important. I’d be in a sexless relationship for a set amount of time (such as until marriage). I would not date someone with a dramatically different religious background for any amount of them. That’s because religion is a bigger motivator for me than sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 02:04 PM
3

By that logic, if a man uses protection during sex does that no longer make him a sexual being? Men and women can have sex they do not enjoy to have a child. If someone enjoys sex (whether the end goal is reproduction or not) most people would consider them a sexual being. Most women enjoy orgasming. That’s why a lot of sex toys are geared toward women. While it’s easier for women to have bad sex than for men to have bad sex, it doesn’t mean they don’t desire good sex. If you feel like your girl…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/24 09:04 PM
1

The one’s who value this tend to be “traditional” women. They want to make sure when they quit their job to become homemakers their husbands will provide financially and not “restrict” their access to money as a “punishment” for not doing something they wanted to do (such as sex). In this case, the women provide traditional femininity in the form of child care, home care, cooking, ect. The women who are least likely to care if the man pays for the meal are also the type of women redpill would sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/24 06:50 PM
2

Because it’s a great test to see if a potential partner would see your relationship as transactional. If he spends $50 and doesn’t pressure you for sex, then you’ve found a man who doesn’t think giving someone a gift entitles them to sex. If he spends $50 and pressures you for sex, you know you’ve found someone who would make a poor partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/24 11:51 AM
3

No, but it’s been unattractive and a red flag. If I was talking to someone with the purpose of building a relationship and they were actively sleeping with other people I’d no longer be interested. It shows a lack of interest on their end.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 04:02 AM
2

I don’t want to start a family, so this isn’t a motivator for me. I date people who don’t want to start a family. I do like having sex so this is a slight motivator for me. I date people who do enjoy sex (though I wouldn’t have a problem waiting until marriage if that was something someone else valued). That’s because sexual compatibility is ONE of my motivators (not my primary one). Starting a family is not one of my primary motivators. If you were to ask my asexual friends, one would value sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 03:41 AM
1

Sex and starting a family aren’t the only primary motivators (and arguably sex is one of the less important motivators as people commonly went/go without it while in a relationship). Phrasing it the way you did is disingenuous. Would you have a relationship if the other person wasn’t loyal? What if you had no connection? What if their future plans were completely different from yours? What if you were a strong catholic and they wanted to raise your kid muslim? There are many motivators for a rel…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 01:15 AM
1

Did you read it? It found decreased self esteem in those with fetishes compared to those without fetishes. People willfully engaging in fetishes ARE negatively affected by it, whether they enjoy it or not. Please read this chain back if you’re confused on why I’m focusing on consensual scat. My original comment (and entire argument) is women willingly letting someone shit on them for money have higher self esteem than women doing it for free. That’s all I’m arguing. Bringing up examples of women…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 09:55 PM
–

“Results reveal that fetish subjects showed less prominence in self-esteem, interpersonal relationship, and overall adjustment compared to non-fetish subjects.” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360300116_Psychological_and_social_correlation_of_fetishism_among_young_adults The better comparison is who has more self esteem: 1) a man with a mental disorder causing him to be attracted to shit (which is often paired with feelings of shame) or 2) a man who gets paid an entire salary’s worth to…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 08:33 PM
1

There are multiple motivators you’d have to meet for people to want a relationship. For example, two people can have sex regularly without wanting a relationship. This is because they don’t meet each other’s emotional needs. Any two people can have sex with each other or start a family. If those were the only motivators everyone would be in a relationship. In general, people need to have somewhat similar values, sex drives, and future plans in order for a relationship to work. Alongside an emoti…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 06:58 PM
–

Self worth isn’t dependent on if someone else respects you. Someone who develops a shit fetish (literally) likely has less self respect than someone getting paid the average person’s yearly salary (or more).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 03:49 PM
–

So you think someone getting shit on for free has more self worth than someone getting shit for $$?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 02:59 PM
–

And most women aren’t instagram influencers. Comparing the average woman to an instagram influencer is like comparing the average man to a rich guy in Dubai. Using the actions of a few instagram influencers to argue most women are as desperate (if not more) for sex as men is obviously a bad argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 02:57 PM
1

Brain size isn’t correlated with intelligence or ability to perform certain tasks (such as lying). Real psychopaths aren’t easy to spot (it’s part of what makes them so dangerous). Aliens haven’t been identified, but if they were it is likely we could lie to them (i don’t know why we wouldn’t be able to). And finally, women aren’t toddlers (what a weird comparison).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 10:14 PM
1

that’s not how intelligence or one’s ability to lie works 🤦‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 04:34 AM
6

and i bet a decent portion of those women either retired after paying off their college debt, had scholarships, or their parents paid for it. i highly doubt the majority of their husbands paid all of their college debt.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 04:27 AM
8

i think at least partially it’s due to women being discouraged from participating in sexual activity. there tends to be more shame on women who have sex then men who have sex and masturbation can be seen as a “slippery slope” leading to promiscuous activity.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 04:20 AM
1

Then are you saying a child in the foster system is better off than a child with a single parent? I’m confused on that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/24 10:02 PM
2

My argument is some traits are shared by both masculinity and femininity. In order to reach peak masculinity (or femininity) you need to focus on traits that are shared by both as well. If you only develop the masculine-only traits, you can never reach peak masculinity.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/24 06:38 PM
1

Are you saying single men make better fathers than single women? If so, I’d argue there’s a selection bias problem there.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/24 05:24 PM
2

Think of a ven diagram with masculinity on one side and femininity on the other. While both will have traits specific to one, they will have some overlap. If honestly is a trait shared by both femininity and masculinity, then someone who has all the masculinity only traits plus honestly would be closer to peak masculinity than someone who has all the masculinity only traits and is a liar. In order to achieve peak masculinity you would need all traits specific to masculinity along with all traits…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/24 05:19 PM
–

You think Thai and Filipino women are the only ones that will use you for a passport? Yikes.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/24 02:19 PM
–

You’re basically saying instead of a woman using you for a wallet you should date a woman using you for citizenship. Neither are a great scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/24 01:44 PM
1

Almost nobody likes the physical act of giving oral. The giver receives no physical pleasure from the act. People (men and women) like how their partner reacts/giving them pleasure. That’s why people give oral.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/24 05:34 PM
–

I’m failing to see what the point of the bird study was. Could you clarify that point?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/24 05:26 PM
5

Some people you meet right away and know for sure you DONT want to pursue them but there’s no standard amount of time for how quickly you do want to pursue someone. Obviously you can tell immediately if you’re physically attracted to someone but the amount of time it takes to tell if you’re emotionally attracted to someone can vary drastically.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 08:34 PM
–

So your dating strategy is to date bottom of the barrel losers because you’re so unstable you’ll kill yourself if not in a relationship? And you think that’s a good strategy? And that money would stop your partner from cheating? And that it is a mature way to view relationships? Got it. 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 05:26 PM
–

Men and women can be friends but it takes a level of understanding and maturity some people don’t have. It can be more difficult to maintain purely due to natural differences in male vs female friendships. For most girls, if they got ghosted for 2 months and only hung out twice a year they wouldn’t consider each other friends, just acquaintances at most. Girls tend to put more emotional energy into friendships and it isn’t uncommon to vent about problems, text frequently, get/give free rides, go…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 04:56 PM
1

If you’re not comfortable on your own you’ll rush into relationships that aren’t the best options. Making a decision out of desperation is never good. You’d want someone who dates you because they want a relationship and you were the only option or because they actually enjoy your company? There’s always a better option and you can’t control that. What happens when you get old/ugly? What happens if you lose your job? What happens if you get into an accident and can’t walk anymore? What happens i…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 03:43 PM
6

There’s two main outcomes if someone’s partner broke up with them: 1) You’re sad and feel depressed for a while. Over time you’re able to recover and feel happy again despite not having a partner. This person doesn’t rely on romantic relationships to find happiness and is more mature. 2) You’re sad and fee depressed. You get into another relationship (likely soon after) because you think it’ll make you feel whole again. This person relies on romantic relationships for happiness and is less matur…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 12:37 AM
–

The 14.5M single women are only 18-49 years old. Since women tend to outlive men there will be single moms at 49+ years old (and unfortunately a few under 18). Even if someone isn’t currently raising kids they’re usually considered a mom. Though I agree, the amount of single moms is extremely high.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/24 11:20 PM
7

Happiness shouldn’t rely on a person but a person can bring additional happiness into your life. For example, your mom might bring happiness into your life. She can provide support for you when things get hard. If she passed away, it would be very upsetting but you’d eventually be happy again. In this case your happiness doesn’t rely on purely on your mom but she does bring happiness into your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/24 11:17 PM
52

That’s how most mature people look at dating, men or women. When you’re comfortable being on your own, you date someone who makes your life more complete. You’re dating them because you truly want them specifically, not just because you want a relationship. It’s when people are desperate and feel the need to constantly be in a relationship that you’ll be in competition with other people. To people like that, they don’t feel complete independently and rely on other people for fulfillment. Relatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/24 09:05 PM
7

her argument wasn’t that they’re celebrities. it’s that some men are infatuated with the lives of people they’ve never (and will never) meet too.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/24 01:28 PM
1

Because the libido of the people in the relationship is what matters. If the average man likes to have sex 4 times a week but your boyfriend only wants sex 2 times a week, the average libido doesn’t matter at all. In general, using such broad claims to try and argue relationship dynamics isn’t helpful to anyone actually trying to find a partner. At the end of the day, no person is going to be the average in every single category.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 11:08 PM
1

You’re not understanding or answering what Im saying. I’ll try wording it a new way one more time. In the data set I’m referring to, men could have selected they are purely interested in casual sex, which by your logic most would. But it was an even split of men only interested in casual sex and only interested in relationships. If men are more likely to enter relationships mainly because of sex can you explain why more aren’t choosing casual sex over relationships? Relationships involve more wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 10:59 PM
1

You’re saying bc relationships are the only way to get sex men are more interested in relationships. I’m saying that’s false bc the amount of men interested in relationships is equal to the amount interested in casual sex. A man’s sex drive doesnt affect his odds of obtaining a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 05:18 PM
1

Then how come when dating 22% of men are only open to casual dates compared to 16% of women? And 36% of women only want a committed relationship compared to 22% of men. If LTR is often times the only way to obtain sex and therefore men need them more than women, how come the amount of men interested in committed relationships is equal to the amount of men only interested in casual dates?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 05:01 PM
1

OP mentioned nothing about obtaining relationships in the post. And libido doesn’t have to do with obtaining a relationship, if anything it would with maintaining one. But if the majority of men aren’t having their sexual needs met in a relationship and it’s affecting the ability to maintain one, you’d expect men initiating more breakups.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 04:29 PM
5

What’s confusing you?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 04:24 PM
12

Why would this matter? The average man’s libido and the average woman’s libido would have virtually no impact on a relationship. What would matter is the individual man’s libido and the individual woman’s libido, which isn’t something a study can help you determine.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/24 03:45 PM
1

You’re the one arguing that someone who has never interacted with a woman has make experience than someone who regularly has. Idk why you think everyone who engages in casual sex actually knows nothing about how to interact with women and that someone who only reads studies about women would know more.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 03:44 PM
-2

so someone who engages in hookups/one night stands is now a manipulator and/or rapist? ok buddy.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 03:26 PM
-2

If a man is experienced with women he has successfully seduced women. If the goal is a man that is more effective at seducing women, then the comparison would be a surgeon that has successfully done surgeries.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 02:42 PM
2

So you think someone who has never practiced picking up women would have just as much success at a bar as someone who has because every woman is different? I’d disagree, the one with more experience will have a more refined technique and a better ability to read body language than the one who never has.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 11:32 AM
2

the post doesn’t clarify if he’s talking about relationships or picking up. we have a different interpretation of what “experience” he’s talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 11:22 AM
2

the question was who has more experience with women, not with relationships. the experienced guy would have had to have picked women up successfully to have had experience with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 10:38 AM
3

OP said researching women gives you better knowledge than experience with them. That is actually wrong. Once again, unsure why you are arguing. I think your luck with women has less to do with physical appearance and more to do with how you handle certain situations based off of this conversation. Best of luck to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 04:07 AM
1

He didn’t mention the men with experience have experience with dating and not pickup. It’s up to interpretation on how you take it I guess. But even then, for a man to get into a relationship with a woman he has to have some success with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 04:04 AM
2

I don’t get what you’re trying to argue. I wasn’t providing advice on how to gain experience with women. The question was do men who research women understand them better than men who have lots of experience with them and it’s pretty clearly no.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 04:03 AM
1

so you think researching women extensively but not talking to them will help you improve your skills?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 03:44 AM
1

Then it’s not a great comparison to the original post/comment. The man performing the surgeries without study is comparable to the man that has experience with women. If a man can’t pick up women (or do surgeries somewhat successfully) he wouldn’t be experienced with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 02:45 AM
3

If they were trying to make it an analogy to what was stated above (someone who has had experience with women vs someone who has only done research) you have to assume they’ve been successful. Someone who isn’t successful at picking up women wouldn’t have experience with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 02:43 AM
1

I wasn’t making an analogy, I was responding to someone who said a guy performing surgery without studying was worse than someone who studied it but never did one.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 02:40 AM
21

If my choice was between someone who wasn’t professionally trained but has successfully completed a high amount of surgeries or someone who has extensively studied them individually but has never performed one, I’d go with the first.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 12:11 AM
11

Almost every profession would disagree with you. If reading about a topic was enough to fully understand it, why do universities require labs for STEM courses? Why do doctors need to do rotations? Why do school counselors have to complete practicum? Why do teachers have to complete student teaching? Reading about a topic can only give you so much experience compared to completing a topic. It’s why some people with a lower education but more experience will make more than someone with a higher ed…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/24 12:09 AM
2

as long as the kids are healthy and have no severe disabilities, i’d say providing is harder in that case. any oil rig job is physically demanding and usually over 40 hours a week.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 04:09 PM
3

what specific job? blue collar is a wide range
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 01:23 AM
4

depends on the age/amount of kids and the job
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 12:49 AM
2

the majority of people don’t repetitively test their partners and end a 4 year relationship over losing one “test”. that’s immature and ridiculous. either there was something else going on and the guy blamed it on a test, the story is made up, or it’s a one off scenario with a crazy girl.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/24 09:10 PM
21

Yeah that’s not normal. It’s not really something that can be debated because that’s not how women act, that’s how one random girl acted.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/24 02:44 PM
1

There are some guys that don’t care much if their girlfriend dumps them and will just do whatever they want until they get dumped too. Saying this makes up a good chunk of breakups is absurd.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/24 09:58 PM
1

What do you have to defend that?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/24 01:54 AM
3

Do you think dumping a woman is a rare occurrence in the dating world? That’s the thing I’m arguing right now, not the title. The main point of the post is stupid, anyone with standards and high self esteem would be more likely to dump someone. It’s common sense and not reserved to men. What I’m arguing on is the rarity point.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/24 02:20 PM
2

Read the description. I saw something that I think is clearly false, so I responded to the thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/24 02:10 PM
3

Do you think if the majority of people have done something calling it a rare occurrence is a good description? That’s crazy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/24 02:06 PM
5

That’s exactly what I said. The majority of men have dumped a woman at some point. How is something a rare occurrence if the majority of people have done it? (and marriages is the ONLY category women are more likely to initiate breakup.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/24 02:05 PM
36

Dumping a woman is a rare occurrence in the dating world? In the study you linked 62% of men have dumped a romantic partner. If the majority of people have done it, it’s not a “rare” occurrence.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/24 01:14 AM
1

If a guy thinks he’s being baby trapped into a marriage or going to be used as an ATM, yes he shouldn’t get married to her. A prenup isn’t a solution to a bad marriage. I’m very surprised you disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/24 09:58 PM
1

I can’t emphasize this enough, don’t marry someone who has such different values. Don’t get pressured into sacrificing your values. Don’t have a kid if you are ambivalent, it’s not fair to the kid. Don’t marry someone just because you got her pregnant. It’s fine if you want a prenup, but don’t marry a woman who would be put at risk by doing so. Choose your partner better.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/24 08:36 PM
1

I don’t think you should never marry a woman who doesn’t want her career. I think you should marry someone who shares the same values/plans as you. If a woman thinks it’s important the kids have a strong mother figure to stay home and raise them, which is absolutely an acceptable thing to think, she should marry a man who agrees. That doesn’t mean she views the man as an ATM. It means her and her husband share the same value, that kids should have a parent present to raise them. It’s weird you r…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/24 07:17 PM
2

If you aren’t willing to financially protect her, then you shouldn’t get married. Couples need to be compatible and having her take a huge financial risk shouldn’t be a compromise.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/24 03:14 PM
8

There’s not something inherently wrong with a prenup but they need to protect both parties. For example, say you married a woman and you both planned for her to quit her job and raise the kids. In this case she’s making a sacrifice to her career while you still get to build yours. I think this woman would (and should) be less willing to sign a prenup that would leave her with little to nothing in the case of a divorce. And if she did sign a harsh prenup, she would be more likely to make a “just …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/24 02:45 AM
–

1) Most women don’t know they’re pregnant until their 5th-6th week so having a cut off at 3 weeks is unrealistic. 2) That’s an incredibly selfish way of looking at it. When a child is involved the conversation should no longer be concerned about making things fair for the mother and father, but rather on what is best for the child. It is best if the child has a father figure in their life (even if lots of dads skirt that responsibility) and is economically supported. Child support is not about p…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/24 09:12 PM
1

Some chores take longer than others. If I take out the trash and put away the dishes is that even to my partner that cleans the bathroom and vacuums the house? No. Chores should be split so everyone is doing an equal amount of work, not an equal number of chores. Do you really think the average woman is spending twice the amount of time on chores because she wants to? And that men are just faster at chores?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/24 04:10 PM
1

Hour wise, on average women spend 2x more time on household chores. Do you think that’s an even split? And in both cases the majority of women felt they were doing more in chores.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 11:34 PM
1

Definitely not. If something was a good representation of the average person in our country we would expect the demographic statistics to reflect the United States. The gender ratio on Reddit alone is about 70:30. I imagine in this sub the difference is even more noticeable. A poll asking for sex, age, dating status, race, college education, and income level would be very interesting. And I don’t think the demographics would reflect what we know for the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 05:04 PM
–

I wouldn’t say it’s the majority of lonely men, but lonely men are more likely to act aggressively towards women. There’s been quite a few studies on aggression and loneliness but here is one: https://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/malamuth/pdf/85jspr2.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 04:54 PM
1

As I said in the post, 64% of mothers feel they are doing more. And this is correct because when asked for an hourly breakdown of the week across the board mothers did more work. If housework was split more evenly in a large portion of families mothers wouldn’t be doing 2x as much in most cases. All of this was in my original post, I’d suggest re-reading it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 04:37 PM
1

OP know most women aren’t breadwinners, they were wondering if the current gender roles were reversed, if most men would be ok with it. The article you linked also shows the following: 64% of mothers and 53% of fathers stated the women does more when managing children’s activities. Whereas men were more likely to say the responsibilities were shared equally (41% vs 31%). This suggests more women feel like they are contributing to the bulk amount of work even while men may feel it is split evenly…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 05:15 AM
9

Children born in September are most likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, especially when compared to August. This is because September is the most common cutoff for schools, making those kids the youngest in their grade. Behaviors that would be typical for that age make them seem more “wild” and likely to receive a diagnosis. This was also not observed in states without a September 1st cutoff. Unless you believe children born specifically in September in states with a September cutoff are naturally…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/24 02:24 AM
1

It’s not being “settled for” it just makes it easier to get in the door. You still have to bond and connect on an emotional level. Two men could look the exact same and only one could be someone a girl would date. The difference is casual sex is just based off of looks (average man can’t succeed) and dating is based off of way more (average man can).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/23 05:38 PM
3

Yes that’s what I believe. I’m also not a huge fan of casual sex in general, I always think a healthy relationship is preferable.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 08:46 PM
3

For casual sex average men would have to compete with the more attractive men but since the more attractive men wouldn’t date her it is lowering their competition.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 05:29 AM
5

Lol I’m actually a woman. And statistically less men are having casual sex than women, even though more men want casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 05:15 AM
1

Yeah but the level of attractiveness a woman can have sex at tends to be higher than the level she can date at, opening the opportunity to date to more men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 05:12 AM
3

Yeah I don’t believe multiple girls told you that. Girls very rarely are direct about wanting sex, they’re worried about coming off as a whore. And I’m talking about average men, not ones who are told they’re attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 05:11 AM
0

I stated in the post I understand things need to be taken slow. I’m speaking for building a relationship, not just the first date. I don’t think it’s beneficial to say you’re interested in things you’re not interested in. I do think it’s beneficial to mention things you are interested in. If you spend the majority of your free time doing some activity you should find someone who interests are similar to yours, even if it’s not the exact same. I’m not saying spend the whole time talking about nar…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 05:06 AM
2

When looking for casual sex a woman focuses mainly on looks and a little on charisma, meaning average looking men are out of the running. When looking for a relationship most woman are unable to get men at the same attractiveness level during casual sex. This takes the minimum level of “handsomeness” down. There is also a much larger focus on compatibility and personality. The average man isn’t attractive enough to pull for casual sex but is attractive enough for a relationship, as long as compa…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:58 AM
0

Yeah that’s why I made this. Most advice now seems to focus on following these specific rules/methods to get a girl rather than being authentic and finding someone who likes you for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:54 AM
3

Let’s be honest, most men won’t get casual sex no matter how interesting they appear. Casual sex is based mainly off of looks and charisma secondary. There is no opportunity cost because he wouldn’t get anything anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:53 AM
0

I said the interests don’t have to align 100% but the two people do have to enjoy similar things. For example, maybe she’s never hunted but she enjoys fishing. If you enjoy hunting you’re more likely to get along with her than someone who doesn’t because there is overlap between hunting and fishing. And if you end up on a date with a vegan, it’s better to be honest that you hunt rather than pretend you’re a vegetarian. Even though she’s more likely to date you if you hide it and pretend. It’s be…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:51 AM
2

If it’s generic advice than it wouldn’t be fully redpill or blue pill. It appears in both and is part of both.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:32 AM
2

I understand most men want casual sex but it is unattainable for the majority of men. If advice is meant to actually help men, it should be something most men can actually use. I stated in the original post that certain things need to be taken slow at the start but common interests shouldn’t have to be hidden. My main concern is with men being pressured to pretend to enjoy “cooler” activities (like hiking). Your ideal partner shouldn’t be disinterested because you mentioned an important interest…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:27 AM
2

This post is purely about my beliefs, not what men get accused of by other people. I believe they aren’t picky enough when selecting women in regards to similar values/interests. If you’re relationships are purely based off of sex you’d probably do better in a FWB situation than a relationship. A woman who is a good fit would still be sexually attracted to a man who cried in front of her, settling for less is stupid. If you got cancer or had a heart attack would you rather have your wife of 20 y…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:16 AM
1

I’ve definitely heard redpill talking about working out, increasing earnings, and improving appearance as well. They aren’t traits unique to either side.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 04:09 AM
1

A lot of Redpill tends to talk about self improvement. I was just thinking of the majority of men will never qualify for fast sex, what’s the point in focusing on it? Shouldn’t the self-improvement be focused on something most men can utilize?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:48 AM
2

Like I said, the interests don’t have to match up 100%. But if you spend the majority of your free time playing video games, maybe find a girl friend who likes minecraft or is open to trying fortnite. And if you like to stay active find a girl who goes to the gym or hikes. If you like to hunt then find a girl who rides horses or raises livestock. It’s important you guys are coming from some-what similar worlds. It’s way more of a pipe-dream to believe you’ll build a lasting relationship with a g…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:46 AM
1

Yeah but the amount of people who look into risk analyzer tools before marriage is so minimal the effects on marriages would be negligible.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:29 AM
2

I think it’s great for men to do things for self improvement. I could have stated it better but I more have an issue with men pretending to enjoy things they don’t like to attract women. There seems to be a pressure for men to settle for women that don’t fit their values/interests. While it doesn’t have to be a perfect alignment, I think it’s important for couples to have a decent amount of overlap.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:26 AM
5

I’m not saying girls won’t leave if you’re being emotional in front of her, I’m saying you’re not being picky enough when choosing a mate if she does. A good relationship shouldn’t end at the first sign of hardship and it’s weird that men are being pressured to settle for those types of girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:21 AM
3

100%. Ironic but true that pretending to be masculine is very emasculating.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:19 AM
1

It’s still about 25%. If thinking about it logically a 25% chance you will start to hate the person you marry and lose half your assets would be enough for a purely logical thinker to decide against marriage. Luckily, marriage decisions are heavily influenced by emotions and unlikely to be changed by the opinion of a stranger/demographic data.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:13 AM
2

No, the ones considering to get the insurance would likely be the people who wouldn’t work out or plan to divorce and collect a check. Meaning from an insurer point it wouldn’t make sense to offer. But theoretically if they did, the effect on marriage decisions would be minimal as the majority of marriage decisions are heavily influenced by emotion.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 03:10 AM
1

No. As of right now relationships have about a 50/50 chance of working out and people still get married. Marriage is more of an emotional decision than a logical one. Have you ever tried to convince a friend to leave an unhealthy relationship? It’s really hard and I expect it to be even harder when it’s someone you don’t know closely.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 02:43 AM
1

I think theoretically people could choose whether or not to get the insurance. Kinda like life insurance.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 02:35 AM
7

Yeah but the risk of it happening would be significantly higher because fraud would be harder to prove (divorce is so common and there are many acceptable reasons for it) and it’s much easier for the people committing it (signing a paper > cutting of a hand, burning down your house, dying).
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 02:34 AM
7

In an actual abortion there is no child left to be harmed. In a financial abortion there would be a child experiencing financial hardship and lack of a father figure (which is never preferred). The whole argument basically boils down to who should we protect: the father or the child. And most will always pick the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 02:32 AM
26

The problem is people could get married with the intent to divorce and abuse the system to make money. It’s very rare (though still happens) for someone to get life insurance just to die on purpose because the outcome is way more negative/permanent.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 02:25 AM
6

Neither are women (as this post implies). If you aren’t able to handle generalizations of the two sexes being talked about this probably isn’t the subreddit for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/23 02:18 AM
1

I never stated everyone with a mental health condition needs or should take medication. I said work with a doctor and if a medication is effective at improving their health without side effects that negatively impact their health, they should take it. Life style changes won’t cure the majority of severe mental health conditions. How does that suggest “hide your issues?”
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 03:13 PM
2

Almost any medication can, not just antidepressants. That’s why you work with a doctor to find which medication works best for you with minimal side effects. And not everyone who takes medication will experience the possible side effects. The problem is for some people life style changes aren’t enough and medication is necessary to improve their psychological health. If it is effective (meaning it improves their health without major side effects that would negatively impact their health) they sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 07:17 PM
5

Then you probably didn’t actually need them or needed to switch medications. Misdiagnosis does happen but it isn’t always possible for a healthy diet, good sleep, and exercise to fix faulty receptors, genetics, or severe childhood trauma. If medication “fixes” these problems for people, what’s the harm?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 05:53 PM
1

It’s not about saying the right things to try and win over one specific guy. If you like to sleep on the first date, that’s fine do it. Anyone who wouldn’t date you because of it isn’t someone whose values alone with yours anyway. Don’t worry about getting more dates with people that you wouldn’t be compatible with long term.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:32 AM
1

The same reason people spend $30 on a shirt when they could spend $3. It’s a form of self-expression some people enjoy. We aren’t born with clothes, especially nice looking ones. Is not walking around naked or in a potato sack a pretense? Or is not avoiding things you enjoy because other people might think your insecure a pretense?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/23 04:06 AM
–

Being physically strong doesn't matter in a world where the bad guys have guns. In a gun fight, men and women are equally weak so sheltering only women isn't logical. A person can't be less likely to die and fragiler. It's one or the other. Since men die easier than women, it'd make them more fragile in today's society.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 04:52 AM
1

I'm not using it to create oppression. 'used' and 'broken' are adjectives meant for objects used on women but not men. Since they're made for objects they are, by definition, dehumanizing. Modern women don't objectify themselves, men do. Modern women wear revealing clothes because they like to, men objectify them. Modern women have casual sex because they enjoy it, men objectify them. In the Middle East women are treated like objects, and worse off for it. We used to see this in the US too with …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 01:36 AM
0

And if something cannot occur in lower species than it isn't biologically driven, it would have to be based in human knowledge, which is not genetic and learned from people around you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 01:18 AM
1

If a woman doesn't have offspring there is no 'biological drive' that would prevent a man from mating with her. As long as he is passing on his genes, it wouldn't matter. You can't even know a woman's body count unless she tells you, so how could a man be biologically driven to like something they don't even know is true?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 01:16 AM
0

Our closest biological relatives, chimps and bonobos, are promiscuous no matter the gender. If we are putting value/pressure on one sex to stay virgin it is not natural or biological. There are no other species that will turn down a mate due to 'body count'.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:55 AM
0

Money is completely a social construct meaning any attraction to it has to be learned. It's not an inherit trait that's been around forever like appearance.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:53 AM
1

Dehumanizing takes away human traits. That's the definition, I didn't create it. If a term was created to describe humans it can't be dehumanizing as it is meant for humans. I'm using the word as it was meant to be used. Referring to women in terms used for property is way more dangerous than calling a man an incel. It creates a situation where women are now seen as objects, and we've seen time and time again why dehumanization leads to worse outcomes. Calling someone an incel isn't going to des…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:52 AM
0

Putting up a tree and putting presents under it (commonly referred to is christmas) was started by Christians. it now affects non-christians, showing that religion can affect society large-scale even if the individuals are not religious. If you want to argue participating in Christmas rituals isn't celebrating Christmas feel free but I disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:45 AM
1

Men value money in general. Since women have started working tho they have rated a man's income as less important than before it was commonplace for women to enter the workplace. Meaning that as it becomes less common for women to rely on their husband for financial support it's possible this will continue to decrease.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:43 AM
1

Weird cause 87% (atheists and agnostics) do: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2013/12/23/christmas-also-celebrated-by-many-non-christians/
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:40 AM
1

That's because of values men hold, not women. Men value conquest and money. But virgin women tend to value religion and a man who slept around isn't exactly a virtuous one.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:38 AM
0

Do you know how many atheists still celebrate Christmas? A lot. People don't have to be religious to be affected by the societies they live in, which were built off religion. Religion is inescapable and at the foundation of virtually every country.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:35 AM
1

Yeah women find money valuable. Not conquest.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:34 AM
0

That doesn't inherently increase worth. Not every man can win a world championship in ping pong but no women would gaf if one did.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:18 AM
0

The more ugly traits you stack on a person, the rarer they become too. But they're not more desirable. That's a cross cultural truth. Seeing as most beauty standards aren't held across culture, i don't think it has anything to do with body count. The most popular religions are composed of similar ideals. These religions have impacted culture in virtually every country as a result of colonialism. Since all stem from the same idea they hold a lot of similar rules/values. One of which is 'the virgi…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:16 AM
0

both are more likely to cheat. both are more likely to get divorced in the future. the only difference is for some reason men seem to justify it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/23 12:01 AM
1

A man who sleeps around has a similar personality to a women that does. so yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 11:57 PM
1

Skinny isn't cross-cultural (some african cultures prefer larger women), neither are blue eyes (most asian populations prefer brown), AA is rarer than D and C but D and C are preferred, ancient china preferred small eyes. Symmetry is rare but other attractive traits aren't. And some traits are rare but not attractive. Meaning more has to go into beauty standard than 'being rare'. The chances of unattractive traits being stacked (small boobs, overweight, bad skin, masculine features, ect.) is als…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 11:56 PM
1

Dehumanizing: depriving a person or group of positive human qualities. Just because you're ok with it for some reason doesn't change the definition of 'dehumanizing'. Women punishing her own child is also bad. I never defended it, both sexes can do bad things (like when men murder and rape women which is also worse than dehumanizing) Still don't know of any examples women commonly use to dehumanize men. Women aren't attracted to high body counts. A 10/10 with 1 body is more attractive than a 8/1…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 11:30 PM
1

I'm saying the common nature of a man who slept around is the same as a woman. making the man a hypocrite because he has the same negative traits he's trying to avoid.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 11:11 PM
0

Sry meant 'women' not men. Typo. You've only got one example of a 'rare' beauty standard. Any rational person will tell you one example isn't enough to defend an argument especially when there is proof saying otherwise. Commonplace doesn't mean cross-culturally by actual definition. By your definition most beauty standards you listed aren't attractive cross-culturally. (blonde hair isn't preferred in Japan or China) (neither is a curvy hourglass)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 11:07 PM
–

Kicking and punching doesn't matter when the other person has a gun. That's why i think physical strength is no longer important because of someone is attacking you, chances are they have a weapon.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:57 PM
0

Men who had lots of past partners are more likely to cheat during a marriage, which would lead to loss of resources. Especially if he got her pregnant. There is also a chance he has a child he doesn't know about. What about a woman who slept around but has no children makes her worth lower?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:56 PM
1

If i said don't call people the n-word because it's dehumanizing that's not tone-policing. just like of i say don't call women adjectives meant for objects, it's dehumanizing. If a women didn't want to date a man because he had done years in prison for violent acts i imagine she'd say "i don't want to date a convict, they're dangerous " not "i don't want to date that man, he's damaged because someone other than me got him pregnant"
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:54 PM
0

The first red head one was to show men also find the 'rarest' hair color unattractive. D, which is most attractive to males, is 10% of the population. The much rarer AA (2%) is less attractive showing rarity isn't the factor at hand. Some attractive traits might be rare but rareness isn't what makes them attractive. Facial symmetry alone won't be enough to defend your argument as I have shown many traits that are rare, aren't attractive. There is more at play. You said fatness was never a common…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:51 PM
-1

Sorry I don't know how to do the quote from you thing so i'll type it. Just got back on reddit after a while off it. (No. Just no.) A small amount of men are sleeping with the majority of women, showing that those men don't struggle to do so. They can pick women up at the bar or a party and the women will have spend more time than him to get to that point (she'll start doing hair and makeup at least an hour before). So in the average one-night stand case the women puts in more time than the man.…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:46 PM
1

Verbiage definitely matters when describing people. Generalizing a whole group using terms like 'used' and 'damaged' is dehumanizing because the language used is meant for objects not people. Nobody uses these terms to describe men, only women. Would you agree there is a difference between calling black people the n-word vs black? One is dehumanizing and the other is descriptive. If it's biological than women also have a preference toward men with low body counts. They're less likely to cheat du…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:35 PM
-4

'Incel' and 'Misogynist' are terms meant for people and, while mean, not dehumanizing. you don't call a car an 'incel'. Whereas 'used' and 'damaged' are used for objects, and therefore dehumanizing. If you're having to generalize a group of people i think the least you can do is use a full sentence.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:21 PM
0

Which would show women prefer men with lower body counts. If a man has a high body count there is a chance in a couple years you'll both find out about a surprise kid and now you'll be losing out on resources. Even tho men with higher body counts is rarer.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:17 PM
0

I don't take offense. If you don't want to date a single mom because she won't have time for you, that's not an issue. But anytime you describe a person as 'used' or 'damaged' it's dehumanizing. It's not tone-policing, it's showing men like to treat women as objects.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:14 PM
-1

A man who is attractive enough to sleep around can pull women very easily and would match your 'fat kid in a candy store' example. When a man sleeps around it shows he lacks commitment, he is more likely to cheat, and there is a chance you'll both find out in a couple years he has a surprise kid. Just like you said, if a man has a history of sleeping around, when he wants to settle down you can't trust him. The most attractive men are ones who can sleep around, but don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:12 PM
1

The reasons you have are good reasons to not want to date single mothers. The issue arises when men say they don't want to date them because they are 'used' or 'damaged'. Describing a human with that sort of terminology is dehumanizing and the whole point of the original post.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:07 PM
1

Defining a group of people off of perceived 'vale' you determined yourself is dehumanizing. If you don't want to date a single mother because she doesn't have time for you, that's fine. Not wanting to date her because she's 'used' or 'damaged' is dehumanizing because you're valuing her like a good, not a person. hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. By nature preferences of physical traits can't be hypocritical becaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:06 PM
1

You can not want to date someone without saying the group is 'damaged goods'. It's not manipulative to say 'don't put worth on a group of people.' If you don't want to date a single mom because she doesn't have time for you, that's fine. But saying I don't want to date her because she's 'used' isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 10:01 PM
1

Red head least attractive: https://scholar.utc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=mps#:~:text=A%20Tukey%20test%20was%20applied,red%20as%20the%20least%20attractive. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26477962 2% of the population had AA cups (the smallest size) and some women have boobs even smaller that don't require bras. D cup is 10% and DD is 1%: https://www.breastoptions.com/average.html Men find C and D cups most attractive: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3210352/ Beauty s…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 09:59 PM
0

Women can have more sex without being more attractive due to desperation of men. More than one study supports that red haired women are considered the least attractive by men (and in my opinion red-haired men also tend to be more unattractive despite their rarity). The other end of the things you say (such as small boobs) tend to be just as rare and are considered more unattractive than the most common phenotype despite their rarity. Hourglass/big boobs are cultural. For a long time square bodie…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 09:39 PM
0

I know the theory you're quoting from. It also states that women had a biological incentive to prevent men from sleeping with other women because it limits the amount of time he can spend protecting her, providing emotional support, and the amount of resources he can give on her. You can't believe in only the half of the theory you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 09:22 PM
1

If you think value stems from scarcity than explain why red hair isn't valued and give me an example of something else related to women that is valued due to scarcity. One example of something unrelated to women can't hold an argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 09:11 PM
0

Then women would also value low body counts for men as it would ensure they get a maximum amount of resources. You said women would value higher-body counts in a man because it's rarer.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:58 PM
1

There is a difference between an individual saying 'I'm damaged' and using it to describe a whole group of people for a specific reason you personally don't like. It is true, a quick google search could show you. Scarcity isn't valued, cultural importance is. For example, grass lawns were only kept by the wealthy, poorer people wanted to appear more wealthy, now grass lawns are valuable for properties even though they are the most commonly available option. For people with low body counts, the '…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:52 PM
0

Worth is an inherit positive human quality. Calling someone damaged deprives them of it. So men value scarcity when it comes to body count but not hair color? Obviously scarcity isn't what's being valued. It stems from religion, prior to that body count wasn't important. I stated earlier hypocrisy cannot be used to describe physical traits after you tried to compare a height preference to a body count preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:41 PM
–

It doesn't have anything to do with dating. It has to do with women being overly-sheltered on account of their 'fragility'. I'm just pointing out they aren't as fragile as some people like to believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:30 PM
0

Dehumanizing: depriving a person or group of positive human qualities. People inherently have worth, it is a necessary human quality. By saying a group of people are damaged you are implicitly stating they are worth less than others. Therefore depriving them of worth. Rarity does not add 'worth' most of the time. Red hair is the most rare and consistently ranked as the least attractive by men. Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:28 PM
–

If a woman carries a gun she could also protect herself from both of those. meaning physical strength isn't a necessity to survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:18 PM
–

I'm not claiming physical strength is the same as physical resilience. I think physical resilience is more important in current society, making women more likely to survive then men. I don't think someone who is more likely to survive is more fragile than someone who isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:15 PM
2

Claiming that a specific group of people are worth less and damaged is dehumanizing. In Nazi Germany Jewish people were considered worth less than others and punished for it. Anytime a group of people is generalized to be worth less than another, it is dehumanizing. Rarity doesn't add worth. It is culture that makes something worth more. For a while lobster was seen as pheasant food and now it's a delicacy. Even though diamonds can be man-made and mass produced they are still valuable. That's be…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:14 PM
–

If frail disrupts the argument replace it with fragile. I see frail as more likely to perish, which women are not. I didn't say physical resiliences is equal to physical strength. I was arguing that physical resilience is more useful in today's society than physical strength is. Physical strength doesn't matter for protection as most fight-related deaths are caused by guns. Being physically strong won't protect against bullets. And perceived strengths don't matter if someone is made aware of the…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 08:04 PM
–

I'm just arguing that women are seen as frail (which most women don't appreciate as it causes them to be treated differently) but in current society they actually are more likely to survive illness than men. I see the word frail as more likely to perish but if you replace it with fragile it might help.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:58 PM
5

The word damaged is not meant to be used to describe people, it is meant for objects. By saying 'damaged' you are implicitly claiming she is worth less as damaged objects are as valuable as undamaged ones. That is dehumanizing. Just because something is rare doesn't mean it has higher value. A woman with fragile X is rare, but that doesn't make her more desirable. A double-standard just means that you are setting standards for other people you don't meet yourself. By saying you want a woman with…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:54 PM
–

Women can work as both police officers and construction workers. This is because police officers usually have suspects comply and if they don't they are able to use tasers/guns to level the field. And the majority of construction is done with machinery. While some jobs are male-dominated i'm not aware of any examples that only men are able to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:43 PM
5

saying single mothers are damaged is a common example of dehumanizing and saying you want a woman with a low body count while yours is high is a common example of hypocrisy. both were used in OP's statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:39 PM
–

Look at 2. Easily broken or destroyed. Going off of the top causes of death, women are not as easily destroyed as men. (and for the future Oxford dictionary is the better authority on English language)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:38 PM
1

The argument is choosing preferences that are hypocritical and based off of dehumanizing traits is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:34 PM
5

The issue is the men saying they don't want women with high body counts usually have high body counts themselves. And men with high body counts are also more likely to cheat. (also a lot of times the reason marriages last longer when the women was a virgin is because the couple is religious, not because it's actually a good relationship)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:32 PM
–

Yet they're still surviving at higher rates then men (who are born at slightly higher rates) showing that women are physically more resilient and physical strength no longer matters when it comes to survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:28 PM
–

I'm not arguing women are physically stronger. I'm arguing they are physically more resilient, meaning less likely to die from the common causes of death.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:20 PM
1

If this is true then why are women less likely to leave her husband if he develops cancer? He is unable to work, treatment is extremely expensive, and she has to give up her free time to take care of him. The divorce rate when a man has cancer is only 2.9% Meanwhile, when the wife has cancer the man is more likely to leave her than when she was healthy. When the woman has cancer the divorce rate is 20.8%.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:18 PM
–

A lot of it is likely caused by devout religious people who are waiting until marriage. The average age of marriage for men is 29, putting most men surveyed below that age.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 07:14 PM
2

because if a woman becomes a stay at home mom and her significant other leaves her, financially she is screwed. marriage ensures that if she gives up her career to raise children and her man leaves her, she will receive some money to offset what she lost by pausing her professional growth.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 06:32 PM
1

If monogamy isn't natural, then nature says she's cheating on you too. in nature animals are either monogamous (one life long partner), live in a harem (multiple life long partner), or both sexes "cheat"
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/23 08:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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