TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Intelligent-Insight Archive

View 0 posts and 2,778 comments by Intelligent-Insight on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,778 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-2

And you would be wrong because it's not homophobic. Those same people wouldn't be turned off by or judge women sleeping with women. Sexism yes. It's most likely a case of misandry.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:28 PM
0

It does. How do women know those men are bisexual? They probably told them. Whether they told them they got fucked by men or they told them that they are dreaming about getting fucked by men - the disgust is there. Yes, I'm assuming every bisexual man was (or wanted to be) penetrated. I'm not specifying the orifice. How else did they make another man orgasm? The idea is the same. Pleased another man? Ran through. I guess, maybe they didn't care about another man and solely used them. That would …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:21 PM
–

Wtf you mean how? Statistics show. There's also no rule that the coin toss MUST result in 50% heads and 50% tails. But if you look at big numbers and many tosses - then that's what you will roughly get. And no, women don't prioritize looks slightly more. You should probably look into it before talking as if you knew something. Blah blah blah. Outliers and exceptions. None of that matters, numbers show everything. The features that predict STR success in men are well known.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:16 PM
2

Treating different groups of people differently is not a double standard, I agree. But treating members of the same group differently is a double standard. Like, by definition it would be. Of course, you have different standards for, say, friends and family. But if you have different standards for different friends or for different men/women you are dating (potential partner group) - then that's a double standard. Do you disagree?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:10 PM
-2

Look into hormones. There was a whole explanations with how there are different hormones involved in the process for men and women and how the hormones that are released in men are the ones responsible for pleasure but women's are also responsible for bonding. Something like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:03 PM
3

It explains everything, actually. And it's not bisexuality that triggers it. It's being fucked by a man. Both men and women have that disgust and prefer that their partner is not ran through by other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 03:54 PM
-6

It's not homophobia. it just happens to be homosexual in case of men. But really it's that both men and women don't want their partner to be fucked by other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 03:52 PM
1

It's very simple. Both men and women are turned off by the thought of their partner/potential partner pleasing some men that aren't themselves (if applicable haha).
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 03:52 PM
2

You are interpreting as it as criticism. I'm not giving it any evaluation. I'm just calling it what it is. And no, of course it's not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is when you have different standards for yourself and for others. No, I am not trying to do that at all. Never have I said it's uniquely about women. That's like the third thing you are trying to put in my mouth. Why? We are talking about women because that's what the thread is about. I am specifically commenting on your attempt to pretend tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 11:22 PM
–

Why sell a house for $100k when you know there are couples out there with two full incomes and can therefore afford twice the budget of a single-income household. Exactly. So don't try to frame it as if it's women's fault somehow. Don't forget who is evil here. They don't have to sell the house for more. They are incentivized to do so and choose to do so, but nobody is forcing them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 11:19 PM
2

Nobody is saying it's not normal. They are just double standards, that's all. And yes, there's something wrong IF you also pretend that those friends are equally friends to you when they are obviously not. Not that it's wrong to have friends of different ranks, so to speak. Back to the topic - who said anything was wrong? It was simply pointed out why those men are exalted. They are friends women will lend money to. And yes, he can compare them as if they are the same person because they are. Yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 10:39 PM
1

OK, so 1) Didn't link so can't see where it is. More importantly 2) Nobody called you a misandrist. Or were you replying to some other comment? Because I questioned that you were called misandrist when you say that some women are attractive for sex but not LTR. What you posted doesn't prove it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 10:19 PM
0

Still wouldn't change anything. It's not related to how attractive she finds him. She maybe wouldn't want to have it anymore if she knew in advance it would be bad, too. But that would be seeing future. And your example would be reading minds or - even worse - thought policing.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 10:16 PM
1

Right. So not repulsive, just less attractive. My point holds.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 10:15 PM
1

Of course it does, how doesn't it? Yeah no, that's just denial. If that was true - then how come only certain guys are chosen? Sure, she must be horny first but that doesn't change anything? Many guys are convenient, yet, there are certain qualities that predict sexual success/short-term mating success. Saying that "some" are different does what exactly? Sure, there will be outliers. They are negligible, we are talking statistics and big numbers. It is universal. Again, a few exceptions don't me…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 10:14 PM
2

They are often the same person. For example, the same woman will sleep on the first with some men but not with others. So yes, they will be applying different standards sometimes.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 07:45 PM
1

That's irrelevant since we aren't talking about those men. We are talking about how you are wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:56 PM
1

I don't see why we're talking about those. I didn't get it from the post. The term uggos appears only in tldr and sounds more like a joke. The idea is to not look only for the most attractive women but instead to lower standards a bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:55 PM
1

That's exactly what it means because most guys are not chosen for it. You can disagree with how to describe that level of attraction but the point that only the minority can reach it still holds. That is, for men women need to be more attractive for LTR but for women men need to be more attractive for casual.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:50 PM
1

I guess it's up to interpretation. I see what you mean now.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:39 PM
1

Link the comment where it happened to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:34 PM
2

That's fine, why not. It doesn't change anything, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:33 PM
-4

No clue. Doesn't change anything anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 07:35 PM
1

Link the comment where it happened.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 07:34 PM
1

That's a false dilemma. Nobody is talking about having sex with completely unattractive people. You can be sexually attracted to someone even if you don't want anything other than sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 07:34 PM
0

Very disrespectful. I don't care what he said though, I'm commenting on your comment as a standalone piece. Specifically the first part which is like general statements and questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 07:30 PM
-3

It's not harmless if both get the same thing - which is consensual sex. And no, they are not objects - they are humans with their own preferences and behaviors in sex. And even if they were - the point still holds. You were wrong, they are not unattractive, they are attractive for sex, so nothing desperate in seeking sex with sexually attractive women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 06:33 PM
4

It's only better if being celibate is the choice you make, not the choice made for you. If you could stop being celibate and be with a woman you find attractive any time (reasonably soon), then it's a choice you make.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 06:14 PM
-3

Attraction is a spectrum for men. There exist women that are attractive for sex but not for LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 06:13 PM
1

Because these guys are basically saying that it’s not that hard, it’s a skill issue for a lot of men. Yeah no, you have no argument here. Not after we've all seen Nazi child molester Chad's performance on the apps. You're only proving that it's hard for average men. Now onto the second video where A WOMAN understands the plight of men! She uses the interviewer’s pictures for Tinder to see what happens! Also no argument. Especially the part of imagine they aren't getting no matches but just don't…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 05:37 PM
2

They always have been
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 05:30 PM
1

There's nothing to refute. None of what you said refuted what I said prior. The point holds. Of course he did. He had to compete with more people and get paid less. He now can't afford a house and kids on single income. Yes, sure, interest of liberty for women as a whole. Charity pussy scheme would be for happiness of men as a whole. Wtf you mean "other than him being lonely"? Why would men sacrifice for no reason other than her not being liberated? Why would men's problems be less important tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 12:06 AM
0

Blah blah blah. Point holds. They allowed to increase the supply of labor to help random women. There were other things they gave women or have done for women. Women can do something for them, too. And it's not even about men and women, humans should help humans when they can.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 06:35 PM
2

True, it's the power imbalance. She has a lot more power than him and can replace him on a whim with another 55 year old while he can't necessarily get another 23 yo woman, so he has to keep her happy. That's fertile ground for manipulation and abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 05:52 PM
0

What do you mean by stage of life, though? If that's what it's about, then you can definitely assume that there exist 40 year people that are in the same stage of life as early 20s people, men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 05:51 PM
1

Sure? And doubling the labor force is equivalent to a lot more than a year spent helping a random woman. Now it takes you twice as much to earn what you would earn when the labor supply was two times smaller.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 12:43 AM
1

Right, I showed you that you are wrong when talking about most men who would hit on women there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 12:40 AM
3

That was proven wrong before you even posted. Why not read the sub for a while before talking? Yes, what you said would work - if both men and women evaluated each other the same way. Instead, women see 80% of men as below average, so a 50th percentile woman thinks that a 50th percentile man is not on her level.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 08:14 PM
1

Yes, for people who are looking for that it feels lonely . And yes, sex and kisses. So wtf do you mean "so why be so upset?" That's why. Those things are a huge deal and give life flavor. What's the point without them and when you know there's no hope to get them? Continue with their lives why and for what? The only question then is - school or CEO?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 08:09 PM
1

Nope. That's not what I'm doing. Again - nobody is talking about blindly hitting on women. Get back to the topic, what you are saying now is irrelevant to the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 08:07 PM
1

You can imagine whatever you want. 40k on reddit is not even close to what redpill had 10 years ago and still wasn't considered big or impactful. And weren't there videos or posts from Korean women saying how it's a negligibly small "movement"? Pretty sure there were. Seen them a while ago, though, would need to look for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 07:59 PM
0

That's not what I said and no it's not crazy to say. I deliberately exaggerated to show how it works. If one sex can do something to make lives of the other sex better - when they don't have to - then why shouldn't the other sex do the same? Like yeah, it's not their job so they don't have to. But should they? Yes, why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 07:55 PM
-5

? Why not? People should help each other when they can. Or, idk, why should've man shared civil rights with a woman? Or help in any way at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 05:18 PM
1

I don't see why but if you did and I didn't - that wouldn't be a deal breaker because I would appreciate your perspective and maybe we would learn from each other. And maybe we would end up breaking up and maybe we wouldn't, but definitely wouldn't be a good enough reason to not even go on one date. You love people despite things, not because of them - that would be like picking what's convenient and loving for what they do or how they perform for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 04:36 PM
2

This has nothing to do with the conversation. What they think or feel is on them. It's still not desperate or pathetic to want a partner and do whatever it takes to consensually get them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 04:29 PM
1

As long as all 7 members agree on it, it's all good.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 04:27 PM
1

Tf you mean "so first but now"? It's both and there's no contradiction. Conceptually they are the same. If women have the power to withhold sex - they can exercise that power. If men have the power to withhold whatever they want or to write and enforce laws - then they should be able to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 04:20 PM
1

The situation is even worse in that dating market actually. The ratio of fem dommes to male subs is a lot lower. And you are still supposed to initiate and all to be noticed haha You forgot the main orgasm gap - orgasms per attempt to get an orgasm. Men get their orgasms in like 1 out of 100 attempts. Also, what is "moon"?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 04:15 PM
1

Yeah no these numbers don't reflect what's going on. Fantasy is fantasy and just having a fantasy to do it once is not the same as wanting to do it somewhat regularly. Just go try chyrpe or feeld as a submissive man. Your results won't be much different from tinder.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 04:12 PM
2

Except the quiet part that a lot of women don't want to say out loud is that they're not ATTRACTED to liberal men because they don't look or act as masculine I mean, they often don't even act liberal. Like look at yourself with politics being a deal breaker instead of embracing diversity of thought and points of view (pluralism of opinions).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:17 PM
22

One example of anything doesn't prove anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 05:42 PM
2

As I said, not talking about legal or violent punishment. Also, not fair talking about those anyway. Every sex has its own strengths and weaknesses. Not fair to allow one of them to do what they can do but not the other. Which only proves my original point. You are allowed to exercise your power to withhold sex (which you could give) but men aren't allowed to withhold what they give you? Yeah no.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 05:39 PM
1

That doesn't change anything. You just have different means of enforcing your standards. Conceptually, nothing changes. And nobody is even talking about jail. Even openly refusing to date someone for their weight or sexual past will get you cancelled if you're a man. You'll be called a slut/bodyshamer and a sexist/oppressor.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:43 PM
1

Which joining a hobby or going to an event is not one of.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:40 PM
2

Blindly hitting does a lot of lifting here. There's no contradiction here. One can go somewhere with the sole goal of hitting on women, yet not do it blindly and actually trying to get to know them and to connect.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:38 PM
3

Oh nice, so 3 more women joined?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:39 PM
10

Right, but when men set and enforce their standards on how women should be/behave - that's oppression.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:38 PM
0

It was never about fucking people. It was always about getting fucked by men. That's why men and women view it differently and that's why it would never be the same like in your first sentence. A man mad at woman getting fucked by 1000 men wouldn't also get fucked by 1000 men, so there's no reason he shouldn't be mad (using your logic/terminology) because he hasn't or wouldn't do same.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:36 PM
15

Because it's desperate and pathetic to want a partner. Lmao, if most people think that then most people are braindead and we really need to invest into solving that teacher shortage. Brains don't develop, it's a tragedy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 06:48 PM
3

His profile was shown in the video. In absolutely no way what he said there was screaming "he must be using playtime". There's no biased anything. Just watch the video where he shows his profile.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 03:43 PM
7

Wym? Did he call it playtime in his profile? If not, what sense does your point make? And it's not that he's not everyone's cup of tea - no one is, - it's that he turned out to be nobody's cup of tea. And if it's so bad for him, what chance do most men have?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 05:27 PM
0

That'd be a good point if 1) He used that terminology in his profile; 2) We didn't see all the chadfishing experiments, in one of which the guy was a nazi and convicted child molester - which he reiterated in chat in case they didn't read his profile.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 05:24 PM
–

No, it's not the same thing. Both those categories of women get sex. And the LTR category won't have to wait longer if they'd rather not, won't get less sexually because he doesn't want her to see him that way, etc. The point is, LTR - that is supposed to be better - in this case is indeed better and gets a better deal + gets his sexual best and most enthusiastic.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 12:28 AM
–

Men don't do this. They will hook with women they want a relationship with, too. Many relationships start as hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 12:26 AM
1

That is true. Similarly, the partner of whichever gender/sex happens to be more sexually desirable (who knows which gender will have it easier to get laid years from now) at the time should provide their partner with regular sex since that partner became older and rusty and won't be able to find someone quickly if at all. That is, of course, if the sex of their partner is the one that has to work to get sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 12:15 AM
1

That sounds like you don't love them anymore. And wanting multiple women is not a perversion. It is actually natural. I don't think you understand what the word pervert means.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:45 PM
1

No, that doesn't sound very loving, especially if leaving them is the opposite to what they would prefer. Don't see how this is love. Love is actions, not saying I love you and then doing what you don't want me to do and not doing anything of what you do want me to do. I fail to see how you can love them and leave. If you love them you would want to stay.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:22 PM
1

Correct. That's why we should at least express our resentment and at best try to shame them to discourage them from being like that and to discourage others from becoming like them. And of course, this applies not only to billionaires but to this thread as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 06:25 PM
1

Sure, if you don't love them enough to want to solve the problems and be together. I just didn't include that into what I'd call love, but sure we can just say somewhat love or love not enough instead of saying don't love.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 06:08 PM
1

Unless you are not attracted to one of the protected characteristics. If you aren't attracted to one member of group based on X trait - that's not being attracted, if you aren't attracted to all members of group X or to all people who have some characteristics that group X has or correlate with the X trait - then that's X-ism.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 06:06 PM
0

Yes, they are. You can count how many relationships/sex partners each person gets, then plot it. Which is why it's pointless to then talk about "I can't say I've witnessed women" if you are refusing to witness them. STFU and GTFO with that crap. So then? What are you arguing with? Women do talk shit about men and express their annoyance with what men do or their other qualities when they do something women don't want them to do. Men are allowed to do the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 05:41 PM
1

We do but people want to tax them even more. Which only shows that as long as the distribution is far from even - there's request to even it out more.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 05:53 PM
1

No that sounds like a solution to all the problems you outlined. Sounds like you don't want to solve them, you just want to complain and be a victim. And what you're saying is like saying men value virginity and yet women want to throw it out of the window and have sex before marriage or even without any commitment. Like no. If you love someone you accept them. That's sorta what we decided as the society but weirdly some people only want to apply it to women. Also women can't cuck themselves, si…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 05:48 PM
1

They are distributed mathematically. I'm talking those distributions. Of course. How else do you express that you don't like it AND at the same time do something that would hopefully deter people from doing it? Lmao you must be joking. Plenty of content that is women doing just that. If I find something and show you, will you acknowledge I am right? I'm pretty sure I've seen a tiktok not so long ago where a woman was making vomit sounds talking about being approached by some guy who was older or…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 05:06 PM
1

Omg really? Is that a known thing or just your opinion? You got any studies? It's very alarming if true. The majority of young women are bigots and we aren't discussing it as a society? We need to get on fixing it right away or at least on raising future generations differently. Of course it does make you ageist. Just like not wanting an old man in your employ makes you ageist, or not wanting an old man in your social group makes you ageist etc. If you don't want someone because of their age (or…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 04:27 PM
1

Of course they do, as already explained above. If they didn't care about time with you, then yes they would get a sex toy. But they prefer to spend time with you and have sex with you. That's how you know that it's about time with you and not just about sexual release. And of course they care about more than how you look. Everyone would prefer a woman it's fun to have sex with over a 10/10 who has starfish sex with the lights out and don't want to experiment or try anything. Again, a lot is spec…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 04:04 PM
0

Basically all your points are the same one - one woman cannot quench men's thirst for other women. But you are wrong, of course she can. She just needs to help bring other women sometimes or at least be open to it. Done. That solves all 6 of your issues. And yes, there would be no need to abandon family/leave - why would he? That one woman would be irreplaceable.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 03:26 PM
0

The goal is the same as the goal of taxing the rich - to make the distribution less uneven. And well, to minimize chances of getting someone who's already alpha widowed (I think that's what trp calls it?), I assume. But really for most men doing it's just expressing that they don't like something. It's similar to women talking shit about short/poor/old/fat/balding men, except women have full control over their count.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 02:48 PM
1

It is not impossible that the app never showed him to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:28 PM
1

This is well-known, actually. See Hanlon's Razor.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:32 PM
1

Some apps actually have a way to look for friends, e.g. Facebook dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:25 PM
5

Yes, they do. How can they have sex with you without spending time with you? Having sex is spending time with you. Of course they can't replace you, tf are you talking about? If you don't have a twin sister - they can't replace you. Having sex with someone else will not be the same as having sex with you. Someone else would almost certainly have a different face and voice, could have a very different body, smell, hair color/style, skin color, different moves, taboos, limits etc. It will not be t…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 10:56 PM
2

You think you are arguing but you are actually supporting the OP. Women are attracted to these things. That's just that. That's his point. Women are attracted to the things he has as opposed to being attracted to him/who he is.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 10:37 PM
1

Yes, but she doesn't like most men that much as we know most women don't. So what else can you do? At least you can get something with money and status, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 09:09 PM
1

Talking to women in person doesn't imply nightlife. Yes, nightlife will have men who's done it longer than you and will be dressed and groomed, have more money and know they are entitled to some success (which is why they will be dressed to impress), etc. You can get close to that level if you keep doing it. But who said you need to go out to night clubs? It will have certain men and women for the most part. How about women you meet in school, at work, when you're running errands? How about wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 08:22 PM
0

Are most women ageist? Idk, I wouldn't accuse the entire sex of being prejudiced like that. You shouldn't talk about your experience implying that it's true in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 08:09 PM
1

No, it's not that they think they are desirable, it's that what else will they do? Not hit on women and have zero chance as opposed to 0.1%? The older men get the more they understand that there is no reward for doing your best or being good etc. There's only what you can get if you try to get it. And sometimes there isn't much to lose.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 08:07 PM
8

Yup. Most likely they can't relate and the reason is in your very comment. Being objectified for what you do is a lot worse than being objectified for who you are. Most men dream about being objectified as a sex object instead of a resource object. Treated as a useful sex object means they want to have sex with you - that is they don't want you to do anything for them or give them anything, they just want to spend time with you. That's not the same as when people want nothing to do with you, the…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 08:06 PM
–

That is a bs argument. Those men having gf/wife at some point doesn't prove anything. There are weak and shy men who also have gfs/wives at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 07:58 PM
1

What rights? You have no rights other than the ones that are given to you and enforced. And they aren't given and enforced by vibrators.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 04:31 PM
–

Yes, just like you have zero idea what number you will roll when you roll a die. Yet, the probabilities are different. What do you not understand? No, that's math and stats, not perception. Hooker is fucking a lot more than a stranger statistically. That's all.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 04:26 PM
–

Nope. Categories don't change anything, they just show one's success rate in more detail. That way you can see which category to go for if you want to minmax the odds.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 04:16 PM
-4

The real orgasm gap is that women get orgasms in about 30% of attempts to get them, while men get them in about 1% - most of their attempts don't even result in sex at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/26 03:11 PM
1

Again, 1/20 is not equal to 1/6. Getting an STD from an escort and getting one from a regular stranger are not equally likely. So he is right and you are wrong. No, it's not about perception, it's about math and common sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 04:58 PM
1

Yeah, truly astonishing women aren’t sympathetic to your obsession with making them suffer to stroke your ego. 🙄 Again, can you not read? Nobody wants anyone to suffer. That's the whole point - to see if it feels good with this partner. Cuz she already knows she doesn’t like it. This isn’t complicated. No. She knows she didn't like it with the partner she tried it with. She doesn't know if she likes it with this partner. Again, plenty of examples. Everyone had bad sex, but it's not like they sto…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 04:40 PM
1

Yes, if we cared, we could separate by all sorts of factors. And those two guys are absolutely comparable. That's the whole point - you can see how success rate depends on awkwardness, for example. What you would do with this information is describe reality. Of course, it doesn't predict the result of any specific scenario, but it does predict what you can expect if you do it for a while. It's the same practical value as the value of any statistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 04:12 PM
–

No shit. That doesn't change anything though and this victim blaming is just weird. Of course if someone hurts you in any way, you should speak up or leave. That doesn't change the fact that they shouldn't have hurt you, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 12:10 AM
–

Now that's weird. They claim they love them so they want them to be happy but also expect them to just not have sex? Sounds like they just don't love them and the title then should be women shouldn't marry men they don't love.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 12:09 AM
–

What he said doesn’t matter? I get it, you feel like you can just make up whatever you want in an effort to try to call other people incompetent. Yes, what one person said doesn't matter compared to observations of multiple people and to what they said. You came in trying to smart off at me about basic logic— and you are wrong . I didn’t do the stupid shit you’re blasting me with in your condescending little pictogram meme. Nope. I'm not wrong, if I was - you would be easily able to show me, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 12:04 AM
1

Everyone is tracking their own approaches (or being approached) at least roughly. They have an idea and can give some estimates. Besides, hypothetically if we cared about it - that could be easily studied/surveyed. So in principle, there's absolutely no reason why it can't be measured.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 11:59 PM
–

Because in this scenario it's women who are the bottleneck. It applies to men to in the reverse scenario. Men who won't have regular sex with their wives shouldn't have married them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 11:52 PM
–

That's not the only solution. They could enjoy everything else about the marriage and still want to be married to that man. In that case, they could just outsource and bring in some help.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 11:51 PM
1

How would you even measure that? ?? You count the number of successful approaches and divide it by the total number of approaches.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:41 PM
–

Idk I feel like we could see more shooting-suicides one the generation that live fully when TRP was more or less mainstream starts aging. It's like, if I didn't enjoy my life and think it's someone's fault - would I rather just die and then they win by default or would I at least try to hurt them before I die? Since I'm leaving no kids/legacy - at least I can leave my mark and prove that I was alive this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:38 PM
4

Men aren't happy without consistent sex life. That's why it's not advertised. That's because most of those men are not really happy, since being single for most men means not having sex and not getting dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:32 PM
–

Incorrect, it is applicable here indeed. Regardless of what he said, saying that's not true about men therefore your point is invalid is illogical. See the picture. No, nowhere is he saying anything about all women as in every single woman. He's making a general statement, it is very clearly implied. Nobody thinks that those claims mean every single group member ever. You must be new on the sub if you get triggered by something like that. Yeah you could teach me logic if you were more qualified …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:24 PM
1

Irrelevant. Nobody has any special way of doing vaginal or oral either. Yet, you like those acts with some men but not with others. Same applies here. In fact, here there at least could be some ways - e.g. using more lube or stretching first etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:18 PM
–

What does that have to do with anything? We aren't talking about men, we are talking about women in the sex work. If anything, men have a moral duty to pay for these services if for those workers there's no other choice - otherwise those workers will starve to death.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:17 PM
1

That’s really how you think about it, huh? If she won’t let you inflict pain, discomfort, or even abuse on her, you think that means you’re not just attractive enough. In order for you to feel desired, you need to inflict pain on her. Anything short of her crying and hating every time she fucks you means you won’t like it. That's the only way to see it. And it follows directly from what you said. As I said - great analogy. And appeal to emotion doesn't work here. If she wanted someone else to in…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:16 PM
1

Yes, that she doesn't like it with that partner. That doesn't mean she won't like it with a new partner. Yes, mushrooms can be cooked differently and I might like them. Also, sex is not mushrooms and specifically depends on the partner. That's why, for example, some people are not sexually compatible with some but compatible with other people. They enjoy the same acts with some people but not with other.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 09:04 PM
–

Nope. Not how it works. It's not slaves who benefit from you buying stuff. And if you buy stuff then you support those who exploit those slaves. Is it hypocritical? So you are hypocritical then? Why are you okay with being hypocritical and supporting slave labor financially then? No, the truth is that you don't know what hypocritical and contradictory means. There's nothing contradictory in the original scenario you are describing. Proving demand doesn't mean they have to supply, and if they cho…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:59 PM
–

No, that's not hypocrisy by definition. How is not turning down a fmf threesome while caring that she doesn't sleep with other men is hypocritical? If they didn't turn down a mmf threesome, then maybe you'd have a point worth discussing. But that's not the case. You don't seem to understand what hypocrisy means so I'll remind you. "I think doing A is bad but I do A and expect to not be seen bad" is hypocrisy. That's not the case here. A here is sleeping with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:54 PM
–

<image>
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 08:52 PM
10

Not that he has any stats or numbers, but your argument doesn't invalidate his point (if it was based on something to begin with). <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:51 PM
0

It is not if they are actually LTR + corresponding cool off period (since it was so serious, it's not like she can just hop right back in without some healing). So if she is in some sort of relationship that lasts a few years and with a few years in between those - then it's not like casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:49 PM
2

I said what I said in my comment and it specifically is not about the scenario where they are pushing. My first comment defines what I'm talking about very clearly. And I'm talking about the situation itself (that leads to them pushing - but that's on them. The situation where they are not wanted the same way other men were wanted predates them pushing).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:23 AM
2

I am logical. That's why you still couldn't find any contradictions or logical mistakes. That's because there are none. I get paid for being logical. Not to mention that you are trying to insult/imply stuff about me, which is a classic logical fallacy so how would you even know if I was or wasn't logical when you don't know how it all works? lmao. Focus on the topic at hand, you just don't know enough to be talking about this other topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:17 AM
1

Right, that's why nobody is talking about pushing anyone. You just see if they want something with you that they are historicically known to want with somebody else.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:14 AM
1

Incorrect. Again, sex acts can be bad with some people but good with other (or even with the same people but later or after practice).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:09 AM
2

Of course. That's the whole point. If she said yes and wanted to see if she liked it with one man but doesn't say yes and doesn't want to see if she likes it with another - then you don't want to be another. No, it's not wrong. How would you know how we behave? It's homophobic to assume that lesbians can't be logical.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:09 AM
1

That is irrelevant. Whether it is or isn't meant to be used that way was still true when you tried it with another partner. A mouth also wasn't mean to be used sexually, nor were hands or feet. Yet, people use all of them. The only question is - with whom are they using them. Of course, performing it on a person who doesn't want it is not nice. That's why it's important to see if she wants to try it with you. IF she doesn't want to try it with you to see if she likes it with you but wanted to tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:07 AM
0

I do not, no. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Knowing that the same sex act can be bad with one partner but good with another (which applies to any sex act), giving consent to one partner but not to another to try it (and see if you like it with that partner) is a clear indicator that you are attracted more to the partner that got your consent. Like, it's so obvious, I don't understand why you are in denial and what are you arguing about. If a man went down on one woman but doesn't want t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:17 AM
0

I am not wrong, you still didn't challenge my argument. All you described is already addressed. A bad experience with one partner doesn't mean there can't be a good experience with another. The fact that some things can happen doesn't mean that they will. There can be tearing and infections during other sex acts as well, even your classic vaginal and oral. Yet, people still have those. EVEN after those bad things happening to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:15 AM
3

Because both men and women don't like their partners being fucked or otherwise pleasing other men. Why exactly? Who knows? Might be some instinct and revulsion to your partner sleeping with a member of the impregnating sex? Or just revulsion to men? or to their genitalia? That's a whole different conversation we can have after you acknowledge that most men care. After that, we can see if we can figure out why.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:11 AM
0

We can discuss it after you address my argument or acknowledge that you were wrong (or I was right).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:11 AM
0

You don't know if it hurts when he does if you never let him try it. And whether you are more attracted to him or not, we can't say, since we don't know more details. Maybe you let him do more than you let others do. All we know is that you don't let him do something you let others do, which - without other information - proves your statement wrong so far.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:10 AM
3

Because both men and women don't like their partners being fucked or otherwise pleasing other men. Why exactly? Who knows? Might be some instinct and revulsion to your partner sleeping with a member of the impregnating sex? Or just revulsion to men? or to their genitalia? That's a whole different conversation we can have after you acknowledge that most men care. After that, we can see if we can figure out why.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:08 AM
1

Yes, if she has no other choice, she gotta do what she gotta do. Yes, because now she does have another choice but still chooses that. All workers are exploited. If they are so exploited doing sex work, then they should want to not do sex work as long as it's not a matter of survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:06 AM
4

It's being banged by 2 men, not banging them. And I already answered the question - most men care.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:02 AM
–

And relationships include sex. Therefore, dating is also for sex. That's how most men get sex - from relationships. Because the relationships/marriage club is less exclusive than FWB/casual sex club. There's absolutely no lie. Whenever dating begins that's because a man is sexually attracted to a woman, both participants know this.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:01 AM
3

And you can find it quite easily because you are a woman. You can quite literally put in your bio on feeld/chyrpe/fetlife and there will be plenty of partners to choose from.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:00 AM
3

Again, not liking sex acts with one partner doesn't mean not liking them with another (and vice versa). Plenty of people don't like sex with someone but don't suddenly stop it with another. That applies to any sex act.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:59 AM
-2

That's already addressed. Painful with one partner doesn't mean painful with another. Nothing changed.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:58 AM
-1

? Where am I saying that? Read again what I said. What I said is pointed out the fact that not liking something with one partner doesn't mean not liking it with another. If you didn't enjoy something in the past but wanted to see if you enjoyed but now don't want to see if you enjoy it in the present - then that's your right. Just don't like to the current partner that you are not attracted to them less.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:57 AM
7

There wouldn't be more competition, most men are invisible anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:38 AM
1

That's a great analogy that answers the question perfectly! If she doesn't want to try it with you - you are plain noodles and cottage cheese. That's the thing though, most men don't want to be settled for and to be plain noodles. Also, you are wrong. Experimenting is only held against you if you did it with other men - and especially if you did it with other men but not with me. If you experiment with me - that's not held against you at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:31 AM
4

Which proves the opinion of this sub, pretty much. You like the new man so much less that not only do you not want to see if you like something with him when you wanted to see if you liked that same thing with another, but you will also lie to him while probably telling him how important trust is to you and how relationships should be built on trust. You can't make this up.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:29 AM
2

Great. So she wanted to see if she likes it with him so much that she kept trying, then why wouldn't she want to see if she likes it with you and try as much? Because of course not liking something with one partner doesn't mean that you can't like it with another.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:28 AM
0

That's a perfectly reasonable question, although the answer is obvious. It's well known that not liking something with one partner doesn't mean you won't like it with another. So if she wanted to try something with the first partner to see if she likes it with him, but doesn't want to try and see if she likes it with the second partner, then the answer why not him is pretty obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:26 AM
1

Fr retarded. Thinking that not liking an experience with one person means you can't like it with another person. You absolutely can and there are many example of women not liking sex with one man but liking it with another. And in your scenario the most important thing is that that woman liked the idea of trying it with that man and seeing if she likes it with him, but doesn't like the idea of trying it with you and seeing if she likes it with you. Of course, she doesn't like you like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:25 AM
-1

Non sequitur. Not liking something or having a bad experience with someone doesn't mean one won't like it or have a good experience with someone else. Or even with the same man but another time. E.g. many people don't like the first time they have vaginal sex, but still like it later.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:21 AM
1

They do care if she likes it. If she likes it with them, that is. Whether she liked it with another man is not a predictor of whether she would like it with this man. For example, she likes sex with this man, but probably had experience when she didn't like it with others. She likes giving oral to this man, but probably wouldn't give it to a hobo. Thus, we can see that she liked the idea of trying it with another man and checking if she likes it with him, so why wouldn't she want to see if she l…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:19 AM
1

You could be discussing certain acts or fantasies, then ask if she's done that and/or would do it. Then it comes up. Or it can slip out sometimes.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:17 AM
0

Why? It's average compared to other lengths but small compared to preferred lengths. Think women ranking men in general and how that is not a normal curve centered at 5, so a man can be average (5) but ranked below average (as all men under 8 are ranked).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 02:15 AM
-1

wouldve couldve shouldve. It's not just to punish people for crimes they didn't commit even if they would commit them were they in the same position as the criminals who did. Maybe you would be a maniac if you were raised differently or would be a pedo on an island if you were rich. So should we use that as grounds to have any opinion about you or to punish you?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 01:17 AM
4

It's a huge deal for most men
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 01:03 AM
2

Women can always find the kind of sex they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:54 AM
3

Yes, of course. Celibacy can start at any point of his life.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:53 AM
5

This is a classic mistake many people make here. Being attracted to men doesn't need you have to sleep with multiple men. But also, even if it did, in your scenario women are attracted to men so even ugly men would be able to get sex, therefore a high count might be less of a deal breaker - since everyone has access to sex anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:50 AM
1

No, it is not. Saying that there are some successful OF men and therefore it's available to men is like saying that there were some successful female %insert job title% and so all jobs were available to women. We as society decided long time ago that this is not an argument. Either way, I'm glad that you have nothing to say against my other arguments and the only argument you had I just showed to be wrong. So, we agree on everything now. That's great.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:45 AM
–

Not at all. How is it lying? Sex is part of dating for most people. And again, it doesn't change the fact that that is how most people get sex, so why would they not use dating for it? What should they use instead that works? Until you can answer that, you can keep your "advices" to yourself really, since they aren't useful or helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:34 AM
1

It is that much of a rule, a simple observation of who dates whom or who hooks up with whom will confirm it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:32 AM
1

It is, indeed, irrelevant. You giving support to some industry doesn't contradict you having problems with people benefitting from it. For example, you are typing this from a smartphone or a computer but think that it doesn't contradict the fact that you don't support slave labor, or child labor, or concentration/reeducation camps etc., even though you financially support those things by buying most electronic devices.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 12:25 AM
–

It's not about correlation. Correlation means you have to define attractiveness somehow in a way that's not related to the partner count so you can measure it and have your x-axis. But of course, that is nonsense. The number of partners shows how attractive someone is. It's not the only metric but it's one of the most important ones. One can be delusional and think they are attractive all they want, but if they don't attract partners - then it's all wishful thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 04:26 PM
1

People being liked for who they are? Yes, sounds like a nice thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 04:22 PM
0

Yes, really. See the hierarchy of needs. No, they are not. See the hierarchy of needs. See it again, then you won't make not one, but two false statements in a row like above. It does not, see the hierarchy of needs. Your point doesn't stand, it's shown to be wrong by the hierarchy of needs. It's well established and agreed upon by the society that there are needs other than survival needs. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 04:21 PM
-1

There are needs other than what's needed for survival. Not only survival-related things are needs. See the hierarchy of needs. Sex is basically the same or almost the same level on the pyramid as survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 09:55 PM
1

Fetishisation is biphilia, not biphobia.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 09:26 PM
1

It's not homophobia, both men and women are turned off by their partners sleeping with some men. And what you describe sounds more like biphilia than biphobia btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 09:24 PM
2

Both men and women don't want their partners to be pleasing other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 09:15 PM
0

No, that's not contradictory. Again, how/why is it? There is no contradiction because you aren't shaming them for the behavior you yourself engage in WHILE ALSO expecting to not be shamed. THAT would be contradictory. What you are describing is not that and therefore is not contradictory. Yes, in this scenario I'm not saying that watching it is shameful, only that doing it is - and I'm not doing it. So no contradiction. Whether I'm giving it more views and supporting it is irrelevant - you still…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:04 PM
3

Yes, yes you can. Give me your feeld, chyrpe, tinder profiles and I will do it for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:00 PM
1

Are you replying to some other comment somewhere else? I'm not talking about lying anywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:59 PM
1

And yet, you are just one data point.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:58 PM
0

That has no relation to the comment you are replying to. The point holds and you were wrong/didn't make an argument previously. You have no basis for your claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:57 PM
1

Where did I say that? Please, quote and link the comment. Can add a screenshot, too. Expecting someone to perform while not expecting others to perform is by nature oppressive/preferential. She was always free to sleep with anyone - that doesn't mean she can't require everyone to perform (or not). If you don't understand what I said or meant, then you should ask me to clarify instead of doing whatever this bs is.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:55 PM
1

Huh? I don't know who you are and don't memorize nicknames. I will reply to whatever comment I want to reply to. If you can't debate, this sub might not be for you. Just reply when you have arguments or don't reply or reply with unrelated stuff when you don't have arguments and concede.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:52 PM
1

Huh? How is that "so ..."? That doesn't follow from what I said at all. Nobody owes anyone anything. But if she has double standards for me and for other men, then why wouldn't that mean that what I'm expected to do is performative?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:59 PM
1

How did Ted Mosby not offer anything? He had a good job/mission and was pretty successful at it, he was a pretty thoughtful guy, not a user or anything, family-oriented.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:53 PM
1

How is it contradictory? It is not contradictory as long as you aren't doing that job yourself AND expect to not be shamed for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:46 PM
1

Because they take advantage of sex-starved men and are a clear example of how supposedly important jobs aren't that important (since those people aren't paid as much), which encourages people by example to follow an easier/immoral route. And let's not forget about the sexist nature of it all and that this is not available to men. Either way, that's irrelevant to the main. The main point is that OP was wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:43 PM
3

And if you're a woman - you can easily find that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:40 PM
4

I will repeat. You can literally find exactly what you want online by following what I described above. There will be plenty of men who will do anything you want. You literally just need to advertise for those men. And if your reason is that they are tainted by others, that's kinda on you. It doesn't mean that you can't get exactly what you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:39 PM
1

A man would not be okay with his FWB sleeping with other men either, so I don't see your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:27 PM
1

No, it's not. For that to be true, it needs to be equally easy for men to get either, which is obviously not the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:27 PM
1

Huh? Who are you? No, that's not how debating works. That's one of the main logical fallacies - to debate a person and not an argument. So if you are capable of "debating" at all, then of course you would be debating people regardless of any interactions in the past. And if you aren't - that's simply because you have no arguments and can't debate, so you have to come up with an excuse. It's pretty pathetic, would look a lot more respectable if you admitted you were wrong, which is obvious anyway…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:06 PM
1

That's because for it to be a general rule, it needs to be applied to thousands of people. Most people don't date that many people so nuances are not negligible. But that rules sort of describes the big picture very well. As in, data points can be a little off but the general trade/line of best fit would still be what you'd expect.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:04 PM
1

Obviously it's a horrible advice that doesn't have men's best interests at heart. Even women themselves will often say that being explicit about it is bad and disrespectful and will cost men women that could otherwise be interested. So until women will change how they select for sex, men should not stop using dating to get sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:03 PM
1

Ok? So the point holds. Not shamed just for sex, only for sex with more than 3 men. And no, it's no longer 3, it's more like more than 5 I'd say, considering that the average is 4. And no, sleeping with 20 men is not considered normal and healthy for men. In fact, they would be shamed for more than 3. Often - for more than 0. It's not about the body count, it's about the dick count. And what's the point of your observation anyway? It's men who are considering women and it's women who are conside…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:00 PM
1

It is not oppressive to find it. It is oppressive to be required to find it when others are not required to find it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:57 PM
1

Right. Most peoole dont like casual sex. This is obviously wrong. If that was true, then why would most people have had it or hoped to have it?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:53 PM
1

A probability to get 1 on a twenty-sided die is not the same/not as high as on a six-sided die. How would you know that? You don't know that die or who's throwing it whatsoever. And then gonna be teaching people about debates? Lmao. You can't make this up.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:52 PM
2

Because some men don't have to be those things - and sometimes with the very same women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:48 PM
0

She literally wasn't right in a single post that I've seen. And people keep explaining and she learns nothing and then writes stuff that was already shown to be wrong in the previous posts.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:47 PM
1

Nobody is slut shaming anyone just for sex. It's about sex with men specifically and not just with men but with many men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:38 PM
1

That's great. You found solution for the dating crisis. We simply need to bring those pressures on women back. Great idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:36 PM
1

What should they start using to get sex instead?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:31 PM
0

It's not that simple. That rule is a good general rule, but there are other factors that it can't account for. For example, those men could have something going on in their lives and didn't want to date at the time. Or you weren't their type. Don't overthink it. They could be well within your league and even below, but still not want what you had to offer just because they were looking for something else or not looking at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 03:54 PM
1

For many men is the only reliable sexual outlet and a way to explore things. Women don't need to consume it - they can just go get whatever they want IRL.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 03:49 PM
5

You can literally have sex as good as you want. You can write in your tinder/feeld/etc bio exactly what you want - and there will be men willing to do it. You want x min of foreplay, y min of oral, certain kink? Snap your fingers and you can get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:40 PM
2

Of course it makes sense. Numbers support this very clearly too. Most men are in relationships or married, but not in FWB/regularly hooking up. It's very clear that casual sex is more difficult to get for men than LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:36 PM
2

If that's the only regret - that's the life well lived.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:34 PM
1

More than half had it more than once.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:31 PM
-2

They do, and if nothing else - they say it with their actions. That's why they will withhold sex sometimes, for example, but still expect that the marriage is fine etc. There's a very simple test - ask any woman, would she be okay to take a step back and go casual with her husband or at least that be okay - and stay with him - if he's not exclusive. The answer will be no in most cases. So, some men got sex from her just for who they were, but the husband/bf gets it for what he does - and there a…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:31 PM
4

<image>
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:27 PM
0

Yeah no. Nobody is shaming women for whom it's the last resort. They are talking about women who make $10k+ a month, women who make/made millions. Also, where is the contradiction. If you shame someone for doing something and don't do that same thing - then there's no contradiction.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:48 PM
1

Source for your numbers, first of all. But let's assume they are real. In that case, a man receives 4 orgasms roughly after 90 attempts, while a woman receives one orgasm after 3 attempts. Nothing changes. The gap is still huge and it's men who are behind. You are wrong because you calculate percentage of sex acts, instead of percentage of attempts to get an orgasm (which includes attempts to even have sex in the first place).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:45 PM
1

It's not laser optics. 75% is still pretty close. And we need to know more about those men. Maybe they are very young and didn't have time get more count, maybe they are religious or married early. But as far as single men who are dating go - attractive men are the ones who have higher count. Of course they are - that's how you measure it - and they are the ones who even get dates/matches etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:40 PM
0

That changes nothing? Your comment is irrelevant, since nobody was saying anything about every single person ever. In general, desirable men have higher counts. If it's not high - then there's barely any way to measure their desirability - maybe only count how many women actually proposed sex and got rejected. What you think about your bf is what you think about him, and it absolutely doesn't mean he's desirable to all women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:34 PM
–

No you didn't. You said you don't see what the issue is. And I described what it is above. The ratio is even worse on kink apps, especially if a man is anything but dom.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:32 PM
–

And again, getting sex once a year is not getting laid as a statistic. Once a week is a decent metric, but that's not majority. No, you definitely do have one. What you said and what the original link you posted said demonstrate it clearly. Another proof - still didn't answer the direct question asked in the previous comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:52 PM
1

That's literally what is implied when statements like that are made. Of course, there's some confidence interval that is not 100%. It's pretty close, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:48 PM
0

Indeed, the gap is crazy. Women have an orgasm in something like 30% casual encounters last I heard and a lot more frequently in a relationship I assume, but let's take 30%. They can have sex pretty much in 100% cases when they want it. So they get orgasm in 30% of attempts to get it. Men experience orgasm in, say, 90% of encounters but the success rate is probably 5% give or take (the last study about it the answer was actually 0% women vs 75% men agreeing to just sleep with a stranger). So men…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:38 PM
1

<image>
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:13 PM
2

<image>
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:13 PM
-1

Waiting longer than the guy who waited the least.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:05 PM
1

No, can be pretty secure and have no complaints but still be disgusted.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:04 PM
–

You aren't making much sense there. First of all, where are men even slut shaming? Not wanting to date a slut is not slut shaming. Also, being beautiful and not asexual doesn't mean a woman will have a high count. One can have lots of sex with the same partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:56 PM
0

No, 52 a year is not nothing. But 52 a year is not 75% or a majority. Can you not read? Getting laid weekly is 37% - that's a minority. And counts have nothing to do with it btw - most of that is sex with the same partner in relationships, not sleeping with unique partners. How tf do you read "And if you are getting some once a year, then you are not getting some." And reply "So 52 times a year is nothing?" ?? How is that "so.."? Zero sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:46 PM
–

Again, he doesn't need to ask if other men didn't. If he has to ask - then that proves my point. He doesn't want to ask more than others did. And again - nobody is supposed to verbally ask, even women say that. No, they way men "ask" is by presenting themselves and/or trying to escalate (if she doesn't). And if she is less welcoming to him than to others - then yeah no thanks but no thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:44 PM
1

For both me and her. I don't do double standards and hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:32 PM
–

Again, both men and women have their obligation so even if it's those things - it goes both ways. But more importantly - whatever it is - it proves your title wrong. "No one told men " etc etc is a false statement. You are wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:31 PM
1

No, it doesn't prove that at all. It's not even about that at all. Both men and women have duties. Doesn't matter, though, because even if does prove that, what it for sure does is proves your title wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 04:21 PM
1

Why should she? Is he paying her lots of money Why would she what? The sentences you quoted doesn't say that she should anything. Did he ask for a hookup? Why should he? Did others? He absolutely shouldn't ASK for it, everyone including women agrees that asking for it means not getting it even if otherwise one would.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 04:19 PM
–

No, not a thing, since we are talking about dating, not about committing crime and/or paying. Sex work is illegal in many places and it's prohibitively expensive to do regularly.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 04:17 PM
1

I just explained what the issue is. Worse ratio so it's even more difficult to get matches. Not to mention that on kink apps "findom" is normalized and even if you get matches, a huge chunk of them will be just scams/sex workers/findoms.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:31 PM
–

No, doesn't seem so. It seems like men allow the age gap to be pretty high, unlike women. In your scenario they even ensure the gap increases. But I have never heard about women breaking up with men to go for even older men to increase the age gap.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:24 PM
1

Exactly. And if you are getting some once a year, then you are not getting some. Only 37% are getting some weekly. And even that is a pretty low for most to say I am getting laid (as in consistently and happy with my sex life). And that's lower than it 55% that it used to be 33 years ago. Now, these are facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:22 PM
1

No, this is not my opinion. This is a fact that follows from the nature of this "research". It's a survey. I already answered what's wrong with the methodology. It's a self reported survey, they don't know actual numbers. Only what was reported.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:15 PM
1

Of course they did. The whole premise is that there are "duties" (wifely and husbandly), so of course it is implied that each party performs their duties. And yes, that includes regular sex. And if you think about it in a more "romantic" form, then marriage is all about making your spouse happy, which again will include regular sex for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 05:36 PM
1

As long as those other people are female
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 05:33 PM
1

Omg, how do you still not get it? No, there's no absolute reference like that. They don't want instant gratification in absolute terms. They want to be above HER normal/baseline attraction level. If she never gives instant gratification to anyone then she doesn't and that's the end of it. If she does, though, but not to this man - then yes he will feel a certain way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 05:05 PM
1

Why wrongly? Even if it is wrong, most men see in their own life and in lives of others how women have conditions for men to meet to even start talking to them, let alone to be in a relationship. It seems like that "unconditional" love - even if exists - is an exception and it's best not to expect it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 04:08 PM
1

That's because odds are somebody else didn't have to take it slow with good woman. Men generally don't want to feel like chumps.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 03:23 PM
1

It's onl af/bb if more than one man involved and different men get different treatment. If she always goes for money, for example, regardless of her age and and no man get more sexual enthusiasm or experiments or particular acts that other men don't get, then there's no af/bb because nobody got af treatment in comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:25 PM
1

It doesn't matter. If you are going there because you can't find it on regular apps - you aren't getting matches anyway. And if you are attractive and not kinky, your matches would still probably be pretty happy.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:13 PM
1

Even worse there. The ratio is worse - maybe it's because men are more kinky, but more likely because they are more desperate so you get kinky women only and kinky + not kinky but desperate men. They are also very small. And women who are in it for sex only select for appearance even more so there's not much chance to compensate. Btw another proof that women prefer bigger dicks. They will often have it in their profile (seen multiple X inch minimum but zero Y inc maximum profiles).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:10 PM
3

That's getting laid once a year or more. Getting laid once or even a couple times a year is not getting laid. It's not a flex. The first graph, though, shows that 37% have sex weekly as opposed to 55% 33 years ago. So yeah, the recession is there and only about 40% men are getting laid, which is less than half already - and most of that number comes from LTR/marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:50 PM
2

CDC only knows what was reported. They don't really know anything. This is not the count study, this is analysis or reported counts. The count study would include actually observing and actually counting for some period of time, then maybe extrapolating.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:43 PM
3

No, that's not it. There's literally a study proving what they claimed.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:41 PM
5

That counts people who had it once. That doesn't support your point that men aren't struggling or invalidates the point that they are struggling.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:39 PM
0

Oh damn, so it sounds like women are ageist and men don't care about the age gap and are less bigoted. I'll trust your statistics and won't ask for sources. But actually, of course, you should understand that this is not really what we are talking about. Preference is preference, not a deal breaker. The original comment I replied to framed this as more of a deal breaker. As in they would filter out those men based on age, for example, if they approached or tried something, whereas preference wou…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:29 PM
1

That's exactly my point. You are too dramatic basically saying that they are bigots. I think they are NOT bigots. I guess if there's data showing that they are ageist bigots then I can't argue with that. Men being far worse is not relevant here, nobody is talking about men. I was saying that I don't think we can accuse women of that, I never argued about men. Oh I see, like if some members of a group commit crimes - it's reasonable and not bigoted to judge the entire group based on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 03:36 PM
1

That's not correct. Comments are words. Fat women still get matches and can at the very least get laid, fat men don't and can't (in general and nearly as much anyway). So it's pretty clear who is more judged and hated.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 04:26 PM
1

I don't think all younger women are bigots/ageist. They statistically don't end up with older men, though, because they are usually around younger men and end up with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 03:18 PM
1

<image>
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 06:55 AM
–

Reward is in the eye of the beholder ^ exactly this. Which is why it doesn't matter what you think. If you don't think of it that way , it still is a reward because men do think of it that way because they can't get it easily. They generally need to be valued as men to get it. Or they need to pay.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 06:46 AM
1

Paying for it is illegal in most places + not affordable to do with any satisfying frequency.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:29 AM
1

It feels good and is a good start. Or did they ask to do it until completion, i.e. instead of sex ?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 02:00 PM
0

Umm no, not always. Most men are not 18. And again, the point holds - it's about the feeling/the validation and the corresponding turn on. Rarely do the require a blowjob to completion before going for round 2. Or are you saying that's what's going on?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 01:29 PM
1

No, my tag is accurate, why would I remove it? That's what - whataboutism? What does it have to do with the point? It is dishonorable (or not) regardless of what men do. No, no one is doing anything to women in the scenario we are discussing. Women are making choice to do something here. Of course, if they are trafficked and forced to film porn at gunpoint, then the men doing this are guilty.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 01:12 PM
1

That does not depend on me or on any individual, but what does depend on the individual is whether they do something or not. For example, whether they engage in the sex work or porn.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 01:07 PM
–

That depends. Is she claiming she loves him and wants him happy and he's into that stuff? Then yes. Is she claiming he's the most attractive? Then yes if she's done it before with someone (allegedly less attractive/important to her) and he is interested in doing it. And of course if she's done it before that absolutely means she likes the idea of trying it or wanted to see if she likes it with that partner (unless she was forced, of course). Since it's obvious that not liking something with one …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 04:01 PM
1

It is absolutely horrible that they do that and have better lives that women who do some jobs that are actually important to the society but aren't paid as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:39 PM
0

That's an irrelevant question. Nobody forced supply to meet demand. Not to mention that it's more like an addiction, so it's not even supply/demand and more like a drug dealer/user. And yes, that is cosmically unfair if they get happy ending, doing that type of work when others doing "honest" and supposedly useful work (think teachers or something) struggle.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:38 PM
1

Yeah no, it's wrong. It's like saying that renters are responsible for higher rents/inflation. Of course not, just because the market can bear more doesn't mean you have to charge it that. Whoever sets the prices is responsible 100%.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:35 PM
3

It's not to get off, it's a stimulation to get hard on demand.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:32 PM
1

Being nice is the bare ass minimum, This is obviously false. If that was true, that would mean only nice men would get women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:30 PM
0

That's a no true scotsman argument. You can only tell if they are nice or not if you have an independent definition. And you don't have any definition in the post at all, so what is there to argue about? Also, society mostly agrees that self-proclaimed women are women. So why wouldn't nice guys be nice guys?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:28 PM
1

Can you not read? I did not agree with what you said. What exactly is not clear to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 09:50 PM
1

? can you not read? It can be a hoop if and only if certain conditions are met.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 08:57 PM
1

No, it's only a hoop if some other guy didn't have to say hi. Do you not read before replying or something? The comment was pretty clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 08:04 PM
1

Which is why there are no double standards here. It's like saying, idk, knives should be sharp but weights should be heavy. Two unrelated things, two different standards. No double standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 07:58 PM
1

You are focused on one example, but there's a general rule which includes that example in certain scenarios. And the answer/rule is simple - it's doing more than other guys had to do (or more than you had to do for other women to be even more general, but only few men have options like that). So yes talking can be considered that but it's not always that.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 09:17 PM
1

None of that matters without sexual validation. These things are nice to have in addition to sexual/romantic validation, but not instead. Without that - what self-worth are you talking about? As in, I'm valuable as someone convenient and useful for others, but not as someone who is picked for the process related to passing on his genes? No as someone they want to spend all their time with? Yeah right, not very validating. Like, sure, it's nice to be praised, but it's just lower on the hierarchy …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 09:10 PM
1

? These are two completely unrelated things.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 08:56 PM
1

So that's just useless then and is irrelevant to the conversation. We're talking about the concepts and how it works in general. Not about what made you happier which is completely subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 09:10 PM
1

When you double down on claiming it's pathetic in response to a true statement about it being an instinct. Exactly, we're in a debate sub, so we should follow the rules of debate/logic and not commit fallacies or give value judgements. Of course I proved it. Not me, actually, it's a well-established thing that comes from Freud's times if not earlier. I'm not talking about identity. Of course it shouldn't be the center of your identity. It simply shows how valuable others find you. Again with the…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 09:09 PM
2

There is no such thing as inherent worth. I don't need to ask myself, I already asked the dictionary. It's basically value/importance -things that are by definition determined by others. Saying that you are important to yourself is trivial and useless, and is irrelevant to the conversation, really. You are you, of course you are important in that sense, nobody ever argued otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:16 PM
2

What double standards are there in this scenario?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:11 PM
1

? But they don't become that if they are doing the same, since the same usually includes not sleeping with men. Besides, it's not about the body count, it's about the dick count.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:10 PM
2

I don't think most people are not okay with a woman dating women. They are not okay with her getting ran through by dudes and taking other men's dicks. So yes, usually men are okay with a woman doing the same thing they want to be doing, or at least we have no data showing that they aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:09 PM
1

It makes no sense. How do I matter to you because I gotta live with myself? If I don't and I only matter to myself, that means it's a closed system where I'm irrelevant to others and therefore do not matter. The original comment was about having worth and mattering, that clearly implies others/market. How else is worth defined if not by how much you are valued (i.e. how you're "rewarded") just like the market price is defined by what others are willing to pay?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:54 PM
1

Not mine or anyone else's. Self-worth as a concept is dependent on opinions of others, unless a person is delusional. No, feelings are never a choice. That's why they are feelings. Actions are a choice. I don't choose to feel pain when I get cut. It's already explained above, not sure why you repeat something incorrect after it was already shown to be incorrect. No, that's just your imagination. I'm talking about concepts and feelings, not about actions and/or living my life. I'm not even talkin…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:35 PM
1

You are not criticizing it, you are just calling it bad without any arguments and in complete denial of reality. And calling it unhealthy doesn't magically make it unhealthy. You have to prove it. And the point there was that it's an instinct as in we don't choose it. No, calling something pathetic doesn't magically makes it pathetic. You have to prove it. So far, it's just your opinion - an appeal to emotion and/or denial.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:33 PM
1

There's no helplessness. I'm talking about worth. And not, none of us a worthy, some of us are. Just not by default and not all. Maybe when they are born they are worthy for their potential (isn't that what you are talking about - a chance to turn it all around?), but if it's not realized by a certain age - or if they went the wrong way (murderers etc) - then are they really worthy? I think they demonstrated that they aren't. And besides, it's not up to them to decide. If people don't accept the…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:29 PM
1

Yeah no, that's worth as humans, not as men. And also still need to to prove that all humans matter. I think some don't and I don't see why I'm wrong. Or maybe they do when they are born because of the potential but if potential is not realized by a certain age or they go the wrong way (become criminals or whatever), then they showed that they don't have worth at that point and do not matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:41 PM
1

That's not a choice. We feel what we feel and our instincts are the way they are or the way we evolved. It's not like out of many things we chose sex. No, sex feels good and at the same time indicates your social and genetic value. Of course we want it because it feels good, and we want what it symbolizes so we want it as an indicator/proof that we have that. Yes, some of the great minds of humanity were not valuable as men, even though they were valuable as humans.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:39 PM
3

No, not me. The original commenter who made the claim. Not for you, no, I wasn't asking you. It's for the person who made the claim. I asked to explain it better because I just don't see it. And I'm not the only one. Because self-worth is just your reaction to feedback. You are supposed to have low self-worth/esteem if you see that others don't find you valuable. That's your brain/instinct telling you that you need to improve to be accepted.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:35 PM
1

What is self-esteem if not the reaction to how valuable others deem you? No, feeling any type of way is not a choice. That's how you feel, you can't control it or at least can't be reasonably expected to control it. If you get hurt you feel pain, unless you are some 200 year old Tibetan monk you can't control how you feel.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:30 PM
1

What do you mean what is the difference? What is the difference between a chair and furniture? Man is a subset. Both men and women (of all ages) are humans. Men we are talking about - the ones that don't see their value - are specifically men of reproductive (or near-reproductive) age. No, not all that you are depends on another, but your worth/value is. Supply-demand and all. I don't see how every one of us is a miracle and deserves to be here, though. Some people definitely deserve it more tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:22 PM
1

I matter because I gotta live with myself? Makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:38 PM
1

That's the point. That's why men level up. So saying that self-improvement advice is useless because it's women-centered is delusional. The opposite is true. The advice is useful and is needed because it's women-centered.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:37 PM
1

Nope. Again, the reason those things make life worse is that they are detrimental to getting sex/family. If for whatever reason a man could choose between being broke but somehow having any sex with any women he desired or having money, most would choose the former. It's not pathetic, it's an instinct. What's the point otherwise? To experience and see things except for the thing you want/need the most? To make rich richer? Now that's pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:35 PM
7

No matter what we need to them because sex with a woman/women is impossible without them. And without that many men are just straight up not happy and can't really be happy unless they know they can reliably get it and choose not to. Which, as you know, is not the case for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 07:36 PM
13

How? What is our worth? And how do we know we have it - as men, not humans - if we don't get picked by women? Just hearing it for someone is more annoying than helpful, if it's so vague and so different from what see and experience tbh. No offence, and thanks for kind words either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 07:35 PM
3

Men should improve because being weak, passive, unhealthy, broke, socially isolated, or emotionally dependent makes life worse. That should be enough. Your body matters even when nobody is attracted to it. Your money matters even when nobody is impressed by it. Your confidence matters even when it does not get you laid. Your friendships, hobbies, discipline, health, and peace of mind should not need a female audience to become valuable. Nope. Not enough. And how do you measure the "worse"? Other…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 07:32 PM
3

You might as well tell the whole story and what it was that actually happened.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 08:59 PM
1

That's a useless argument because it's pretty much a textbook example of a no true Scotsman fallacy. No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge. This Scotsman does? Then he's not a true Scotsman. Casual sex is available to any man competent enough. It's not available to this man? Then he's not competent enough. Your mistake is circular logic and that you define a thing that has it's own definition by the outcome only. A Scotsman is a person from Scotland. They may or may not put sugar in their …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 08:56 PM
–

No. I am not sure what you're still not getting. If you read any of the multiple threads on this sub where we're discussing how men can know if women are actually attracted to them (or attracted more than to their previous partners as they often claim). One of the biggest indicators is if she wants to sex with them for them as opposed to having him invest more (time etc). One of the excuses you will see there is that she could be attracted but he just didn't ask, so to speak. So how to eliminate…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 07:38 PM
–

No, I mean consensual encounters. Simply having sex on the first date or something or even ONS/casual.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 04:11 PM
1

Huh? Worse in what sense? He says legit stuff about working hard and not being satisfied etc. Clav is a clown.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 03:53 PM
–

You should do whatever people who get it fast do. If they push, you should push, otherwise you will be told that you just didn't try. It's both - it's a real excuse people often hear when question why she made him wait while having it fast with someone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 03:52 PM
–

How can you assume that? No, it's a smaller pool of women that they like not necessarily that likes them. E.g. I can't match with anyone but I like idk goth girls so I start only going for those. But it is possible that they don't like me while idk comic con girls like me, for example. In that case, I would do better if I went for more girls while if I narrow the pool down I exclude women that actually like me.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 12:26 AM
–

They are upset they can't succeed with women they want. If they can't succeed with women they want, only focusing on their ideal women makes their chances to succeed lower, not higher. So it sounds like a bad advice. It sounds like - if you can't match with women you like on the apps, don't be upset you can't match at all and start swiping only on women you like as opposed to more women. But of course, that doesn't work. That's why men swipe on a wider range of women, some probably even swipe on…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 12:21 AM
-1

What? Here? What are you talking about? Replying to a wrong comment or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 11:51 PM
–

So basically, improve and try your luck every now and then until you find a woman with which you notice everything is very easy? And if it's not easy - back to the gym?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 10:40 PM
1

Exactly, which is not the same. Ass is not the same as vagina, the mouth surrounded by beard or shaved skin is not the same as the mouth surrounded by smooth skin (just like a hairy or shaved ass is not the same as a smooth ass). So yes, your example shows how they are not options and it's not that they are not attracted to - it's that it's a completely different thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 10:29 PM
–

Nah, but then how do they find out if they are the most sexually attractive to her? If they don't push quickly, then later on the excuse that she slept with someone faster than with them because they didn't try/ask is not eliminated. Men must eliminate that excuse. It could be the most common thing, though, because all men must do it, it's just that unsuccessful men are not successful doing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 10:20 PM
0

No, can you not read? Specifically by that logic men are not an option for men. Because it's not that they wouldn't enjoy it, it's that they are not doing the same thing at all. By that logic, men are rocks (not an option) and the food they don't prefer would be unattractive women. No, there's more than not having attraction to both cases. There's still having attraction, in principle, to one group but not another. That is, if you close your eyes - it will still feel good. You are also not attra…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:29 PM
1

No, they are not free. They can't discriminate and not hire or pay less to any groups.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:26 PM
1

Incorrect. Food you don't like is still an option even if you won't enjoy it as much. It's a lot more of an option than rocks which you can't even chew and swallow - and that are not as satisfying as food (or have the same effect at all) even if you managed to eat them somehow.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:20 PM
1

? You were okay forcing men to hire women they didn't want to hire, so why change now?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:19 PM
0

Who is he? He's a man who will be supposed to date/marry a woman who was available like that to another man but not to him.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:04 PM
-1

Lmao are you new here or something? No, the problem is that those women who want something casual only want it with top % of men. And those apps that are out there and well know and it is well know that they don't work for the overwhelming majority of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:03 PM
1

Wait until you find out that spectra can be discreet and even binary.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:59 PM
1

It doesn't show that at all, though, because men are still something you mechanically prefer. Having all the food around which you'd rather not eat is not the same as having rocks around that you would rather not eat.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:58 PM
2

You don't choose what you feel but you do choose what you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:54 PM
1

Yes, that would be correct if what men wanted was casual sex without any clarifications. Of course, that's not the case so your advice doesn't work. They want what they know and see other men can get. They want what they know and see women doing with other men. Especially since later they are supposed to marry some of those women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:53 PM
5

Are those redpillers in the room right now? Never seen them idolized on the trp sub. And clavicular is more of a clown than an idol. Not the same weight class as Tate at all. And drop this bs about what people are saying somehow being wrong because of who they are. That's very illogical (it's a logical fallacy actually) and it's not how the world works. Nazi scientists and eugenicists are not ignored and their research is not suddenly bad/wrong just because of who they were. Many people disagree…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:56 PM
–

^ True, it's because they just can't be or don't want to be friends with men. If a woman asked for advice or said she couldn't get laid, many of her male friends would help the best they can to solve her problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:00 AM
–

How is it not a need? Of course it is. Recognized as one, too. See the hierarchy of needs. Needs aren't just about immediate survival. Hiring a prostitute is illegal or prohibitively expensive in most places. You're not gonna say if food is a need then why won't starving homeless steal or if housing is a need why not squat and/or break in and take over, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:57 AM
0

Of course not. The opposite is true, a woman who actually cares about you is ok with you flirting and/or fucking other women if she knows that makes you happier.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 11:59 PM
1

That's only true when she loves you but doesn't trust you, so she's afraid to lose you. As in you can get too close to somebody else and leave. In that case, of course, she will just want to supervise/participate/watch and in this case you still get variety but only in threesomes. Otherwise, the argument is just almost self-evidently incorrect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 11:56 PM
–

Soldiers. Not men or women. Other countries. Whether those soldiers happen to be men or women is irrelevant. Because they didn't fight for their family and didn't represent it in wars. Again, that's historically speaking. Now, they can do whatever they want. One of my cousin's has his mom's name. I wouldn't mind having it, too, but that's not what I was given. Also, many women are single mothers and do pass on their name. Last I heard something like half or almost half of kids in the US were bor…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:48 PM
–

I'm not believing anything. I'm talking about how things are, not about what I believe in. There's no nuance in dropping your family name. If you drop it - that's because you don't want to be associated with that family name. No, I wouldn't be, since I'm not basing my words on what I feel/think/see. I don't know. Are we? Or do you still not acknowledge that you're wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:42 PM
–

No, it's not just from Titanic. Pretty much every war, men would go fight to protect them. No, it's not killing people. It's getting killed so women can live. Exactly, yes. That's why they want to pass them on. It's their father's name and not it's their name and now as fathers they want to pass it on.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:36 PM
–

Cool, then I guess it's an English/American version of what they do in Mexico. Of course, not. Of course, they are. That's why "women and children" etc. That's why men go/went to war and not women. And stuff like Mulan didn't really happen much. So women were more than happy to not go to wars, then why would they define the name? Yes, that makes their names less important historically. And their names are their fathers' names anyway, so it's like there's men's and women's names. There are just f…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:13 PM
–

Of course not. He didn't tell you and you have no idea what he would tell you if he could, since you can't relate. So listen to men and most alive dads or most dads who were dead and explicitly said what they think about it. It's disrespectful to the family. Why else is that sentiment even famous? It's not new, I didn't make it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:07 PM
–

Not more of an impasse than if you were saying that the earth is flat and refused to hear reason. If it's an impasse, it's only because of you. Again, your own choices are good. Throwing away your family name is not self-respect. It's disrespecting the family. It can be both in one case - if you family was abusive or something and you actually want to disrespect them or cut them off. Then yes, it's also self-respect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:05 PM
–

Of course he didn't because odds are he agrees with me. And even if he doesn't, most dads do.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:01 PM
–

Yeah, I'm not say it's worse, I'm just saying it's disrespectful. And of course it is disrespectful, the fact that some folks are disrespectful and don't do the traditional thing doesn't make it less disrespectful. That's literally either selfish or otherwise signaling that they don't want to be associated with that family.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 06:50 PM
–

Glad you finally understood you were wrong. Takes most people a lot longer. Good job!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 06:41 PM
–

It has everything to do with it. And changing names without parents/family approval is wild. I changed my first name myself because my family told me. Again, it's up to them to name me, so if they decided to change it, it's up to them. I don't just say it, it is what it is. No, people aren't the vehicle, that's why they make their own choices when they decide what to do with their lives. It's just that some of them are disrespectful like changing name, and some are not like not becoming a shoema…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 06:40 PM
–

It feels like you do need to keep hyphenating, since after you do it with two words - they are now one full word, so you can't just drop parts of it. I don't know. They could in a parallel universe where women built the society and men are a weaker and protected sex. Or these days nobody is stopping anyone from taking wife's name or giving kids their mother's name. For example, one of my cousin's has his mom's last name and his brother has his dad's last name.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 06:23 PM
–

Which relationship? A relationship with the family that raised is important, too. Either way, depending on the culture you might have to lose your father's family name anyway if you're a woman. But a man who'd do that? That's very disrespectful to his family and a huge red flag. But if you're into that kind of stuff, you do you, of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 06:20 PM
–

Making up the new name is wild. As if the family name was an accessory lol. So disrespectful to the ancestors/parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 08:21 AM
–

New surname is an interesting idea, I was thinking about it, too. But ultimately decided it would be extremely disrespectful to my father and other ancestors. But I guess if someone hates their father, it's a viable option. Would have pretty much the same line of thought if my children wanted to change the last name to a new one.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 08:18 AM
–

Yes, obviously. One family - one surname (also known as the family name). Hyphenating is kinda stupid, because if everybody was doing it - then last names would become too long after a few generations. Maybe something like what they do in Mexico would make sense, though. As in the mother's last name lasts one more generation and last names don't become too long with every new generation, even though everyone is doing the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 08:15 AM
–

I don't think you understand what an ideal partner is. How is it a perfect female partner if you can't have sex with her or at all? Then what's the point of her being female? And it wouldn't be perfect if you could only have sex with her, but now it's not even with her?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 05:49 PM
2

That's because of how things are now. That's because those men are not needed so women can desire - and use - them for other things and there's no pressure/incentive to really take care of them sexually. That's why casual sex is better. It's better in terms of validation. Of course, in general a relationship where there's no doubt he is desired is better. Why wouldn't it be? Love is a relatively recent invention.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:17 PM
1

Again with the appeal to emotion. How about you make an argument if you have one?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:12 PM
1

Right and desirability can be because the man is great or because he's better than not having one. Sure, then can add some child-free tax. See? You have some good ideas. After all, all the government cares about is birth rate, not happiness and dating for romance and such. That way instead of complaining that they can't afford to have a child, people will complain that they can't afford not to have it. Attraction doesn't have to be just physical or primarily physical like now. When there are inc…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 04:02 AM
0

Just saying it doesn't make it logical or true. WHY is it always more important? The law is not a proof of anything. Slaves was all good according to the law. The law is just a list of things that society enforces for whatever reason. A general/philosophical statement like "x is always more important than y" has to be substantiated logically.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:57 AM
2

Good. So all we need to do is to incentivize them to make the choice that benefits the society. Kinda like we did with affirmative action etc. No, not really prostitution. That's a separate thing but sure why not. Nah, what I'm talking about is creating incentives/pressure to date/marry. That's basically what's going on now. E.g. everything is getting too expensive to survive being single.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 03:44 AM
–

Then there's no such thing as talking someone into hiring someone. But there is. So you're just wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 02:51 AM
–

If it was practical to make people hire you, then it's just as practical to make you want to sleep with someone. Or just to make you sleep with someone, since I don't think they made them want to hire someone, they just made them do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 02:19 AM
1

Almost everyone who works there, of course. We are all pressured to work somewhere, some of us end up there. No, they can't just stop at any time. If they do, they become homeless. Right, great. Now do the same in dating/sex. If housing is a resource, then so is sex/dating. It's really obvious after clowning on the "sex is not a resource" claim. The exact same logic applies to housing and healthcare as shown in the comment you are replying to.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 01:07 AM
0

My point is very simple. You have to prove claims. You can't just say that consent is more important before being horny without any explanation. It could be more important, but it could also be less important or equally as important depending on the circumstances. No idea, but that's why I'm not claiming anything. If you do or agree with the claim - then prove it. Because so far it sounds to me that all you (and the original commented) do is appeal to emotion.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 10:53 PM
–

Mmm no Idk about that. If you can make people that don't want to hire you hire you, then I don't see a problem in making anyone who doesn't want to do something do it. But of course, there's a better solution. Make them want to sleep with you for whatever reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 10:45 PM
1

Oh ok, if you don't like being touched like that in general, then you never tried. Then of course if you did try it then it's not that you don't like the idea, you do but you didn't like it with that partner. So the only question for any current partner after that is - are they attractive enough for you to want to try it with them too to see if you like it with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 07:25 PM
1

Yes, with that partner. That's already covered above. What exactly can't you grasp? Do you need more examples or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 07:23 PM
1

Oof had nothing to parry with but still couldn't acknowledge you lost and posted an insult instead so it got deleted? At least be more sneaky so I can read before it gets deleted and not waste time clicking the notification and finding nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:36 AM
1

Ignoring them won't them go away and let's use correct terminology. You are not ignoring them, you are conceding. It's great that we concluded that part of the debate. Now to the last point. Whether it's real is not important right now. What's important is too see if it's about bodily autonomy or not. If it is, then great. Then we refer back to my previous points that you can't parry. As for men not being responsible for their spawn, that's an issue to solve for sure. If a woman only slept with …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:33 AM
0

Exactly. Because the environment we created is such that that person is either pressured to do it or is compensated enough to do it. Great. So do the same to dating. Make people more likely to choose it. Sure, they won't be forced. They will be strongly encouraged. No one should be forced to work where they don't want (but not IF they don't want, funny how that works huh). They still are pressured to find some job. Ideally, they like it, or at least it pays something.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:09 AM
1

? What? It literally follows from what you said. "People, in general, will pursue what they want." It follows from this that nobody wants men. The steps are explained above. Why are you backtracking?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 12:21 AM
2

Huh? Building a house is not a thing. Giving medical care is not a thing. Insulting is a thing how? It's literally a concept and not a thing. Government prostitutes are great and should be a thing (and already are in Europe somewhere, Netherlands iirc), but nope, not good enough. We need more. We need healthy dating and people pairing up soon enough. So create conditions where they are encouraged to. Or strongly encouraged to. There's no reason why sex should be hoarded by people when others can…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 12:20 AM
3

Right, so the government incentivizes them to share or sell. That's exactly what I'm saying. Then it needs to do something to incentivize dating. Maybe revisit rights or other laws that could improve the situation. No, housing and money are not resources like oil and coal. They are measure of someone's labor, i.e. their bodies. I'm not trying to do anything. I'm looking at options. The only thing I'm doing is showing you that if sex is not a resource, then other things produced by people's bodie…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 12:10 AM
0

Yep, checked above, it says that you are wrong and to see above, where it shows that you are wrong. Thanks for clearing that up. Yes, they do have that right. In fact, we long ago agreed that housing, food, healthcare, etc are human rights. But those things are fruits of someone's labor performed by their body. So people absolutely have the right to use someone's body to survive. Exactly. It doesn't matter how it got there. It is there now. And it is someone's body and can't be killed. Doesn't h…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 12:01 AM
3

But then with that first sentence alone, wouldn't you immediately get that it necessarily means that nobody wants men? As in, otherwise they wouldn't be the ones to approach in more than 50% of cases? Well, they don't think they are unwanted. They know. I mean, why would they think otherwise? That's what they hear and experience most of the time from most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 11:52 PM
4

Yes. So if they are human rights and someone is forced to teach or treat someone they don't want to, then how is dating different? Oh they are not forced? Conditions are created for them to want to do that? Good, then the same approach can be applied to dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 11:51 PM
2

It's about both and if it's many enough, then it doesn't matter who. Or you went too far west and now you are in the east. What you are saying is absolutely not a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 11:49 PM
0

No. Whoosh. But maybe it can help with that for those who want that. Either. Both. There's no "government". People do those things, it's their labor and no one is entitled to it. Government can promise that it will pay such people so that others can always get those services. That doesn't change the principle, though. So government incentivizes someone with the resource to share it or sell it. Same can be done with sex. Pretty simple. Yes, it is. Or other things related to someone's body are als…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 11:49 PM
3

I think you are right though, people are pursued when they are wanted. I wanted to show you that most men are not wanted. That they have to pursue and earn being wanted or get what they want. Just to give you an idea. Yes, you are right and it's good that you are here in good faith. I'm not attacking you or anything, I was just trying to show what follows from what you said. And yes, sure, I believe you know many women who pursued their partners as well. That doesn't contradict what I'm trying t…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 11:13 PM
4

Sure, but not to death. Not having roof over your head might lead to something but not to death too. Not directly. People lived and evolved while being malnourished and having no roofs for thousands of years. If you show me where it is on the pyramid of needs, then we can discuss it. I can show where sex is. It's a lot more basic than many other needs you care about and want to be defined legally.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:58 PM
0

How is what? If the number rounds to double digits rather than to 0, then that's not what most men would call a good girl.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:56 PM
–

So people in general pursue what they want, but people in general don't not pursue what they don't want? Sounds like a cope, tbh. And "it looks like a lot of women won't approach" directly contradicts "people, in general, will pursue what they want" Oh is it super possible? So like, the fact that no one approaches those men doesn't mean that it's super impossible that there are women who want them, but it means that it's super possible that there are those women? Yeah idk about that. Don't you s…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:54 PM
0

No, you are not. See above. No, that's telling her what not to do with another human's body that is inside her body. She could do plenty with her body to not let another body inside. What happens after the body got inside is that it's no longer just about her body. She has the right to remove them if that doesn't lead to their death, sure, because at that point that would be a dead human. So yes, if the baby died/ pregnancy terminated, then she can remove the cells. Of course. Sure, you can take…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:52 PM
2

How is it not as much if you have no numerical estimates? No good girl has the count higher than like 5. But yes a bad girl can be just starting and still have a low count just because you happened to meet her before it went higher. Still, that argument is bad. "Can have" is about possibilities, not probabilities. Outliers don't prove anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:50 PM
2

No, they don't. Only if that lasts very long. People can live years being malnourished. No, I won't be. Doesn't feel the same at all. It's not about an orgasm, it's about the experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:48 PM
1

Again, if it's a new woman they just start dating, then yes a young woman would be preferred. Everything is already explained above. Those men would happily date women older if those women didn't leave them at some point (or they left those women, but most breakups/divorces are initiated by women).
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:47 PM
6

The money needed to become an attractive dating option or to hire a sex worker is also a resource. The law system that makes men attractive options - also a resource, no? Guess, it was figured out in the past when the conditions were made where women needed men. Of course not. It's the result of someone's labor and no one should ever be ok pressured into just giving it to someone. Sex is absolutely a resource and there's plenty to go around. In fact, women rarely run out of it until they reach a…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:45 PM
5

So? You are also not going to die from being hungry and being malnourished. You are not going to die from not having a roof over your head. And yes I definitely do suffer. Or are men's mental health and suicide rates are not important again? Needs are not only survival needs. There are other needs, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:42 PM
1

When women weren't chosen to be hired or to have credit cards by men who had the power to hire or give them bank accounts, they didn't just accept that they aren't hiring-material. Neither should men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:40 PM
2

??? You clearly contradict yourself, don't you see it? If a woman can be ruined by a single man, then clearly a higher count means it is more likely that she encountered such a man. How do you not see it and didn't immediately stop typing after the 3rd sentence?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:30 PM
2

Not being a virgin doesn't mean you are not sexless. Having eaten once, doesn't mean you aren't hungry.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:27 PM
14

Healthcare is not a resource, it's an activity where one party provides service to another that one should ever be ok pressured into. Housing is not a resource, it's an activity where one party builds/sells housing to another that one should ever be ok pressured into.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:27 PM
3

Then how is healthcare a human right? That's also an act between two people, where one provides service to another.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:24 PM
1

Not how it works. Before they have to prove your wrong, you have to carry the burden of proof and provide evidence of your claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:23 PM
4

Why? Saying it as if it was self-evident kinda sounds like the privileged maintaining the status quo where they can still enjoy their privilege.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:22 PM
6

Then is it true to say that if no one pursues you then in general nobody wants you?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:34 PM
4

Woah why would you insult an entire group of women like that? No, not all of them are bigots and ageist and dislike men for something they can't control. Maybe not even most. Seeing people dating people their age doesn't prove your claim. It is simply explained by the fact that people are usually surrounded by people their age, so they end up talking to and dating other people their age.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:24 PM
1

No, if you did it then it doesn't gross you out. You just didn't like it with that partner. Or did like it with that partner, but don't like the idea of trying it with this partner, in which case it's the partner that grosses you out, not the stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:16 PM
1

Again, there's more to attraction. If it's a new woman they don't know, then yes she will statistically be young. Think about it, if a man walks into a room with a bunch of women he doesn't know and approaches them based only on what he sees, then if you do this experiment many times, you will see that yes, they tend to prefer young women. That's simply because they look better. That's true for any man. But then there's more to it than just looks - and that's true for any man, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:15 PM
1

No one is trying to make you do anything. We are talking about the stuff that is proven to not gross you out. If it did, you wouldn't want to try it with another man. So if you did and now don't want to try it with this man, then it's this man that grosses you out, not the stuff. And we just don't want to be that man. We want you to be happy and to be with a man that doesn't gross you out.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:12 PM
0

No, incorrect. You are telling her what to do (not do) with another body that happens to be inside hers. She can do tons of things with her body that would prevent this situation to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:11 PM
–

Just buy a house if you're homeless, never mind that conditions aren't the most conducive. But yeah, how convenient to support the status quo when it benefits you and to make it responsibility of the underprivileged to find a way. Check your privilege.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:05 PM
–

They are because they get what most men can't or usually don't get.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:56 PM
–

Can't claim that without proof. Show your evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:55 PM
–

So then don't have casual sex and you will never have to interact with those guys. Pretty simple, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:53 PM
–

But women don't want those men who do that anyway right? So then what's the problem? Or are you saying that men that women want do that, too? Well, then maybe women should listen if they want those men? I'm confused and fail to see the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:52 PM
1

Nah, that's on them. The empty boat theory
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:48 PM
–

Yes, largely nobody disputes them and those conspiracies are ignored. They are not discussed in media, people talking about them aren't banned from entering Australia, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:36 AM
–

We want to live, not survive.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:34 AM
–

So men couldn't be blamed for not giving women rights etc for a while because if they did then women wouldn't choose men as much (as proven by what's happening now)? In fact, if no one can be blamed for doing what's best for themselves, do you suggest men should backtrack and encourage women to choose them doing whatever it takes?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:23 AM
1

Exactly. If you hate the idea, then you won't even try. But if you don't hate the idea, then you will want to try it with some partners but not others. The only question is which type of partners is the current one.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 07:33 AM
2

I think in this case someone else is telling them what they can't do with a body that is inside theirs, they say nothing about their body.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 01:50 AM
1

Yes, of course. Why would we/they want to see and ignore men who don't match our biases. I think, you don't understand why even pay attention and observe this. It's not about confirming biases, it's about getting laid ourselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 01:31 AM
2

The idea here usually is that yes aging is normal and they just want her to age while being with them. A random new aged woman is not attractive, but an aged woman they've been with for years is still the same woman they love. How does it not make sense?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 12:42 AM
2

Please, provide proof. Most cases I hear about are due to women having lower libido or otherwise not wanting to have sex with their partners, not men.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 12:17 AM
1

It's because genders are equal, but some genders are more equal than others (or rather one gender is more equal than the other one).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 11:46 PM
1

Obviously it's if they know. To know for sure, they could ask. Some thing they can figure out from your stories. Either way, what they can and should expect is that if you are into them more than you were into exes, then you will bring it up yourself. You should if you are into them. Why wouldn't you want to do stuff with them that you wanted to do with others if you are allegedly attracted to them more or as much? Of course you would.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 10:46 PM
1

Ok? So your question about "why blame" is answered. What are you arguing about now? That's the whole point - you think about what's best for you, not what's best for the many or even for the people who are doing the blaming. Of course they would blame you.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 10:38 PM
1

Yes, the first part is true. But the last paragraph is wrong. Men here seem to think if a woman does a sxual act with a man then she should do it with the next guy or she doesn't like him as much as the first guy. However women should then be entitled to sexual equality as well, and compare acts he did with previous women. If he did an act with a previous women he should do it with her too if she wants to. These two go together. But this Women can also expect that men treat them the same or bett…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:29 PM
1

Looks like the comment got removed for some reason without any notification. So have to repost. Good thing I found it happened. ? What? That's not how it goes both ways. They aren't supposed to do what other people did with you. But they are supposed to do what they did with other people. I don't see how fisting their ass applies, though, your fist is not an erogenous zone and fisting somebody doesn't feel sexually good or results in an orgasm. But yes, if you want to compare partners, you can d…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:19 PM
1

You're obviously not a true scotsman if you put sugar in your porridge. Weak argument. Try again. How about you discuss the point instead of trying that weird ad hominem. Yes, of course you would want to get to know someone before playing. No shit. But munches are cringe. Get to know someone one-on-one is reasonable. That's why on the same platform you chat and set up a date/meet. But getting to know someone when there's a crowd of people and the only reason they meet is because they are into ki…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:14 PM
0

Something being rational is not an excuse or a reason to do it. Stealing is rational when someone has something you want, for example. Scabbing/strike breaking is rational. Etc. Things can be rational short-term but irrational long-term or from a different perspective. Or when it comes to how it affects others. In that case, others will blame you. Why wouldn't they?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 07:05 PM
-3

So that's what we need to fix the birth rate crisis if it goes too far. Great idea!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 07:01 PM
1

Nobody is talking about genders. The trait can be gender-neutral, but we are talking about people they date and have sex with. And the sexes are very different. The mechanics of sex is different, the power dynamic is different. If someone is gonna penetrate me and enter my body, they better not let anyone else do that to them. It's very reasonable to have that standard based on what genitalia they have. So no, it's not a double standard. Different standards for different groups dating which is d…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 12:25 AM
1

I'm focusing on what is different because I'm showing that these are different groups. And if they are different groups, then why would they not be held to different standards? Again, I'm not arguing about whether it's hypocritical. I said it in the very first comment. I'm arguing that it's not a double standard. And yes, you don't need to accept the same trait in men and women, since men and women are different.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 11:25 PM
1

No, they are not the same group, though, because if you are dating one of these groups then you suck a dick and if you date the other then you don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:53 PM
1

Of course not, I explained it above. No, as you said yourself - two groups, not one. Bisexual men and bisexual women. Why would two different groups be held to the same standard?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:31 PM
-1

That's not monogamy, that's nulligamy. And indeed that's crazy. That's why relationships should be monoandrous, not monogamous.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:51 AM
–

Why are you typing this after I already explained to you that you were wrong in a comment? Yes, the first part is true. But the last paragraph is wrong. Men here seem to think if a woman does a sxual act with a man then she should do it with the next guy or she doesn't like him as much as the first guy. However women should then be entitled to sexual equality as well, and compare acts he did with previous women. If he did an act with a previous women he should do it with her too if she wants to.…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:46 AM
1

That is correct^ And they only know if they enjoy it with that man after trying it with that man. So if they want to try it with some men but don't want to try it with other men, then you know which of these they find more attractive. Don't be the latter.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:18 AM
1

It's horrible to enter for men. Nobody really wants you there and the only advice is go to munches which is super cringe that they even exist. Let's get together based on nothing but our shared sexual preference but the whole thing is non sexual.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:17 AM
0

Double standard doesn't apply here at all. Like, it's not a part of this conversation. These are different standards for different people. Of course, you won't have teh same standard for yourself and for people you are trying to date. You don't even have the same standards for people you are trying to date and for people you are not trying to date. A double standard would be if you have different standards for different members of the same group. For example, different standard for two different…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 02:44 AM
0

Women are also a part of the same society, so no, then men aren't putting pressure any more than women. Can say that society puts the pressure on women, but not that men do it. And men specifically don't do it. Not when it comes to dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 05:46 AM
–

Yes, that's true. As people frequently acknowledge - there's a huge power gap in such relationships. A younger woman has a lot more power and can easily replace an older man. So of course it's reasonable for him to pay if he doesn't want to be replaced/kicked out. Unfortunately, women coerce vulnerable men all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:15 PM
–

No, that's illogical. It doesn't matter if they are dating and doing it themselves. Even if it works for them that doesn't mean it works in general. They are either right or wrong regardless of whether they are young and whether they are dating. It's funny you mention flat earthers, because that's exactly whom I had in mind. Yes, your logic here is the flat earther's logic. That's how they argue - based on personal observations and experiences. Oh so you didn't go to space and saw the earth isn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:13 PM
2

No, I'm not. I'm simply using the definition of a word. You made it an ideology. Or media or whatever. It's really only about not getting laid. I did. Trump's government is absolutely not a fascist government. It's literally not more fascist than any other government of the last few decades. No, I simply used countries to show that it was worldwide, and not just operation paperclip. You know the Japanese guy who was torturing prisoners in unit 731 or whatever the number was, never got punished, …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:09 PM
2

That's an irrelevant general statement. Men did not pressure women to put into their own looks, and definitely not when they were children.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:04 PM
–

Yes, that happens, too. It's just as frequent and as annoying. Also, it's not about man and woman on the pic. Both men and women try to "debate" like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:03 PM
3

This can never be justified, no. It's not asked in this context, it's always asked to then tell a person they are wrong. As for arguing with boomers, not every boomer is wrong and if they are wrong it's not because they are boomers. If shake a hand doesn't work, then you simply prove it, show studies or whatever. That way you also verify that it doesn't work in general, and not just for your and your friends and/or in your imagination/world view. For all you know it does work. You never tried. O…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 08:53 AM
3

Right, so just strawmanning it is not giving details. No, that's not an ideology. That's just inability to get laid. It's absolutely not inherently misogynistic. Seems like you don't know what it is and are just using buzzwords you heard somewhere. No, at this current stage it is still not fascism. No totalitarian state, no leader cult, no economic control, still democracy. "Attempted to use" implies that the use was not successful which immediately shows that the state is not fascist. Yes, that…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 08:41 AM
3

Doesn't change my point. But makes you look completely silly. You can't claim it's "always" driven without proof. And one example of an incel or a trump supporter not driven by what you say proves you wrong completely. And comparing this government to fascism is wild. You should visit eastern europe some time and see their WW2 museums. Yes, you are doing the same thing. You didn't explain in detail. You might think you did, but what you said is of course wrong because it's based on a claim you h…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 07:41 AM
1

Who pressured them? Not men. Women could always get laid and/or find a date without looksmaxxing. We all know how most women get enough matches on the apps etc while most men don't do well.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 07:19 AM
1

If budgets are separate, then 50/50 obviously. Or, in general, proportional to what you use, but both benefit from rent/bills equally so 50/50. Think about it, if you to a restaurant with a group of friends, do you split the bill proportional to income? No, everyone pays for what they ordered or split equally. Unless, of course, they agreed in advance to cover someone. For example, they didn't want to go because they couldn't afford it or aren't getting paid until next week or something and thei…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 07:15 AM
1

No, that's not what Madonna-Whore complex is. You are trying to project afbb, but it just doesn't work because "whore" doesn't get what "wife" wants and doesn't get. Basically wife is af here which is consistent with what women want. Men aren't settling for wives usually. Wives get everything a mistress would get and more. We don't see wives complaining that a man experimented in the past but won't try something with her.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 07:08 AM
3

No, he's right and you are wrong here. "Often driven" is not an argument. You are doing the same thing as people dismissing opinions of sex workers. And no, sex work is not a profession in the same way as other professions are professions.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 05:35 AM
0

Yes, you are correct. That's a textbook logical fallacy called poisoning the well, it belongs to the ad hominem group of fallacies. Someone's opinion is valid and someone's argument is either good or bad regardless of who they are. It can't be dismissed based on who presented it and if the only argument against it is that, then that's just losing the argument/debate by default.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 05:34 AM
11

This one: <image> Oh, also trying to make it personal. Asking if you are single or how long have you been married or whatever clearly in an attempt to dismiss or discredit the point based on who you are. But that's not gender specific, that's just a classic ad hominem.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 05:19 AM
2

No need to read the post. Just based on the title most people already agree with you. Of course the black blue pill is a solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 05:17 AM
1

No, it's not. It's just being dumb and breeding strawmen. And this particular husband might have more filters, too. Nobody said it was the only filter. And having that filter does not mean that someone is a horrible husband. A good husband can have that filter, too. Some do, some don't. Absolutely no reason to make this statement. It's like true Scotsmen don't put sugar on their porridge. No, they don't. Again, a baseless claim. Most men aren't asking for it to be hard and don't need it to be ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 03:59 AM
1

Nah, that would mean you are kinda dumb if you drop the correct approach just because of the men you personally see or because of your interpretation. And you're probably not dumb. There's literally no reason to think that it's just about competition otherwise. None. No, that's not just to have a prize. That's because they are hotter, that's it. You sound like those women talking about men being intimidate or insecure when those women aren't chosen for being a boss babe or having a hoe phase. Li…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 12:13 AM
–

No need to repeat. That's already one of the reasons men prefer if woman has no sex past.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 02:19 AM
1

? What? That's not how it goes both ways. They aren't supposed to do what other people did with you. But they are supposed to do what they did with other people. I don't see how fisting their ass applies, though, your fist is not an erogenous zone and fisting somebody doesn't feel sexually good or results in an orgasm. But yes, if you want to compare partners, you can do this. Which, of course, applies both ways and he then could request you do something another woman has done with him. It just …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 02:04 AM
1

On what grounds do you claim that what you said is true in general? In general = generally true. Generalizations require evidence, trends, something. You can't just say something in general. It's like, idk, I say if we put 10 cats and 10 dogs on an island, cats will eat dogs. And you say what evidence I have, and I say I'm just talking in general. Makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 12:57 AM
1

Exactly. So not men. So why claim it's just a competition when men don't say that and you have no proof that that's the case? Still no evidence that it's just a competition. All of that is irrelevant. No, why would it mean he's a horrible husband? Non sequitur. Not to mention, that again, nobody is talking about it being the most important thing. You need to look into necessary and sufficient. Wanting a car with wheels, doesn't mean it's just about wheels or that checking if a car has the wheels…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:55 PM
1

Which one and which part exactly. None of the previous responses answer the question or challenge anything in the first paragraph.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:50 PM
1

No, that's not equal opportunity to try it with her, the opportunity she granted somebody else. Of course, we never said that underrepresented groups had equal opportunity in something because they could leave and try something else. That's not how equal opportunity works. Of course, its' about liking it with him. There's no such thing as not liking it in general. Many people don't like sex with some people or wouldn't even try it with some people but like it with others. And that, too. So if yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:49 PM
1

No, it's neither. It's making sure you are not a chump and this is what she says this is. If she says she never loved anyone like that or something of the sort and that you are the best for her etc etc, then there's no reason why she wouldn't want to check if she likes something with you. Or he. Can just ask what they like No. That doesn't answer my question. Answer my question. How is it different?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:41 PM
1

Exactly. So if they don't want to try something they wanted to try with someone else, then they don't like you as much, since they wanted to see if they like something with someone but don't even want to see if they like it with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:39 PM
1

Incorrect. They can't know if they don't like it with you until they try it with you. More importantly, if they liked the idea of trying it with someone else but don't like the idea of trying it with you, then they are showing you what they think about you. Either way, good thing you agree with the other 2 points.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:32 PM
1

And good scotsmen don't put sugar on their porridge. Like no, just because you said that, doesn't mean it's true. Need to prove it. Definition of good men doesn't necessarily include not pushing boundaries. You are confusing it with convenient/non-threatening men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 07:09 PM
1

It's only pushing boundaries if it's pushing further than they have ever been. Otherwise, it's just making sure that boundaries aren't more restrictive for you than for other men. And even if it is pushing them further, it can be argued that he offers you an opportunity to show that you are turned on by him and really want him. Also, the rest is just completely wrong. Wanting to have sex sooner doesn't mean he just wants sex. And no, if he just wants sex he can't just get a hookup. Getting hooku…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 07:05 PM
1

The now flip it part is based on nothing. Like, you just made stuff up and then said it proves your original claim. Or even the first part - why would you assume that no man will try to have more than one model?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 06:57 PM
1

No, not "just". Who said "just"? And no, it doesn't prove that point whatsoever. Even if it was a competition and/or a validation thing, it still wouldn't prove the rest of the point. No, it's not superficial, it's very deep, actually, since it goes in the past and specifically her actions in the past. Yes, they used to and still are. But those women used to not sleep around or even have casual sex, or have children already, etc. Times are different and people are adapting. Of course, they blame…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 03:27 AM
1

No, it's only that if he's getting off to it. It's not that at all if he is collecting the information. Who does that? Anyone who respects himself and wants to maximize chances of getting the same or better treatment, as well wants to choose who they want to be with. Why wouldn't sexual past be something that affects how they see a person? How is it different from any other preference/standard/requirement people can have?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 03:21 AM
1

Dismissed. Low-effort no-argument disagreement is irrelevant. Of course they should, that's the only way she treats the partner (and sometimes supposedly the love of her life etc) fairly, equally and equitably.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 03:18 AM
1

Yes, nobody is wrong. But if they want to try it with someone else to see if they like it with them but don't want to try it with the new guy to see if they like it with him, then he wasn't given equal opportunity to see if she likes this with him.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 03:15 AM
–

Nah, I don't want to. I was just curious to see something. I know that it's not really a serious thing and that Freud just wrote about it based on nothing really. And I also know that it is what you said - the problem to see the same woman/wife as a sexual person due to familiarity and having kids and stuff, - not seeing some women as this and other women as that (like the male version of aff/bb). So as one of the few people who uses the term correctly, I figured maybe you remember some authors/…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 03:13 AM
–

Yeah, maybe rape technically wouldn't apply here, unless it's defined as sex without full/enthusiastic/informed consent or something like that. In this scenario, consent is not informed. I'm also not sure what the legal definitions of fraud or scam are. But I don't see how it doesn't apply here at least in principle. Specifically scam doesn't imply any documents necessarily, like if you get scammed playing thimbles on the street.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 03:08 AM
1

Considering that most men likely never slept with virgins and most women aren't virgins, math isn't mathing here. Virgins definitely go with non virgins.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 05:50 PM
1

Then at least it equals scam. But why not rape though? I mean, aren't we talking about consent to having specific sexual acts freely for an extended period of time (+ more than just sex, but still - sex is included).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 05:47 PM
1

Could you show some studies? Just curious.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 05:46 PM
1

Correct. And in most cases the thought is that it's immoral to sleep around with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:57 PM
2

No need to narrow it down so much. If a man asked a woman if she is a virgin and she lied, then from that point she got consent via dubious method. She is a rapist plain and simple. This applies to sexual past in general. If a man asked about her past and she lied, then she manipulated him to get consent and so he didn't really consent.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:38 PM
2

Nah, they are seeking equality and equal treatment. If someone had an opportunity to try something (especially with a particular woman), then they want that opportunity too.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:08 AM
1

Nah, you are trying to exclude sex and present a false dilemma. The point is not just to get sex, no. But it's also not to get all those others things but not sex. It is to get what one needs which during a large chunk of life includes sex. Again using the word "only". Nobody is entering a relationship only to do it. But you didn't show that there is anything wrong with doing it. It's not about coercing to do something. It's about giving an opportunity to show that she is attracted as much or mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:06 AM
1

This^ Even though women say they value commitment more, as you can clearly see when they choose between hookups with hot guys and commitment from hot guys, they choose the hookups. That's why, OP, don't let anyone tell you that it's just casual and the bar for LTR is higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 11:59 PM
1

Right, maybe I misclicked when I was replying. The original response was to one of the comments saying stuff like "I have to live" or "have to keep going". The question is why?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 09:06 PM
2

Yes, they are also valued as workforce and whatnot. That is included in their value as other things. As a worker, as a human. Just not as a man. Didn't I explain this already? Feels like I did, but maybe it was to somebody else in some other comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 10:04 PM
–

<image> But yeah for casual men's standards are low.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 10:02 PM
–

Yes, both men and women are turned off by their partner having sexual contact with another man.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:47 PM
1

You can. They are basically synonyms, but sexual value doesn't distinguish between men and women. It is less specific. Why not use something more specific?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:39 PM
1

Yes, pretty much. Unless of course you believe that men and women can't be friends. In that case (if you prove they can't) you can argue that men can also have unique value as men since they can be friends/allies with other men. That would be a connection between two men and not just two humans.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:19 PM
0

What's there to hear? A human is valuable as a human for things that are not related to sex. Man/woman dichotomy comes from sexual dimorphism and is related to sex. If women sexually reject a man, then of course he is not valuable as a man. He can still be valuable or have value as a scientist, doctor, father, friend, leader, etc, just not as a man. It's all pretty self-explanatory.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:07 PM
1

He might, but if his total value is the sum of his value to men and to women, then of course the total can't be high if his value to women is low. Really though, one might argue that whatever a man can be to a heterosexual man, a woman can be too. Unless you think that men and women can't be friends, men have no value to men as men because they don't offer anything only a man can offer.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:01 PM
1

Oh, I am not sharing my opinions. I have no opinion about this topic. I simply share what it is based on the definition. No, men don't have value as men simply for being alive. As humans maybe in some philosophical sense. But not as men. And even if they did - even if they did have some value for being alive - their value as men is not equal and sexual success shows very clearly who is high and who is low value. A man is not a high-value man if women don't want to sleep with him and would rather…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 07:53 PM
1

No, it's a correct view of value. How is it incorrect? What defines value? Only how valuable it is for others. Depressing? That's your problem if it's depressing. That's subjective, not objective. Unlike value. Well, I think so, too. Nothing to struggle with. Yet somehow you are still struggling to understand. So what exactly can't you grasp?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 07:38 PM
–

Women are also disgusted when/if they find out their man has been with many men. If everyone is misandrist then maybe no one is? Either way, if being turned off by that is misandry, then what type of hate is it when women are turned off by men being too fat, too short, too bald(ing), too old or too young? Interesting how you are trying to pathologize men's standards as if there was something wrong with having them, but many other standards for you are just preferences? It's almost as if you are …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 07:24 PM
2

It's not a depressing view and it's not a view of men. It's a realistic view of what value means. Any X value is based on how valuable something is when it comes to X. Something can be valuable as X but not valuable as Y or vice versa. What makes a man as opposed to woman? It's all about sexual dimorphism. If women don't want to sleep and procreate with you (instinctively), if they'd rather sexually please others than you, then you might as well be their girlfriend and not a man. It's very simpl…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 07:17 PM
2

The conversation is about the man value, not human value. One can be high-value as a human, but low-value as a man. See Tesla or Newton, for example. Also, tbh would argue about it being intrinsic too. Not all humans are valuable. Why would one be valuable just because they are human?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 07:00 PM
6

They are talking about value as a man, not as a human. In that context yes, it absolutely is tied to sexual success. If women value him as a man and instinctively want his genes and sleep with him - then he's more valuable than if they don't want him.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 06:58 PM
–

No, you don't read. I simply keep it in the topic while you are trying to sidetrack. Exactly. So the bodily autonomy issue is resolved. So now, the baby is handed to a woman. But she can refuse. Will she refuse? If yes, then it was about paternity all along, not about bodily autonomy. You are the one who doesn't seem to understand what it's about. If you don't think this is a perfect solution that resolves the autonomy issue and now men and women are in the same position where it's all about pat…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 06:53 PM
1

Yes, you are. Yes, it is. It is absolutely correct. No, trends don't define anything. They just illustrate what everything is. You are just a data point. Trend simply shows what's true for the majority. They don't control anything, they simply show how things are.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 06:08 PM
–

That's exactly what I'm saying. Can you not read? The problem is simple - imagine the bodily autonomy issue is resolved. The embryo is teleported out and grown separately. When it's all ripe and ready, though, they give it to a woman as if she gave birth. Do women in general think that is a good compromise? Because that's a perfect solution if their problem is bodily autonomy. Except, I'm pretty sure it isn't. It's really about being a parent and they take advantage of the fact that they are the…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 05:43 PM
1

I am not talking about myself, what I am is irrelevant. People in general - both men and women - associated D counts with turn offs. Just like women in general find tall men attractive and short men turn them off. You can be a person all you want. In the end, when everything is averaged out, you are a statistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 05:39 PM
0

That's what you said. She can have sex with every guy that is willing. But she doesn't. It is very rare for a guy to be chosen for this. Which is why the comment you replied to is right and you are wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 05:36 PM
-1

Nobody asked. Do you not understand the difference between one data point and a trend? No, I'm not. There are studies clearly showing it. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence too, for example, on this very site. There are threads where women say it's a turn off for them, both in mainstream subs and here.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:52 AM
1

Which does not contradict my point whatsoever. So like, thanks for sharing your experience I guess? But like, who asked? You literally described how it is all about them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:50 AM
1

Yes it is. No other explanation here. They know in advance that the sex will be bad most likely, just like people playing the lottery know in advance that they will likely lose. Yet they do it. So whatever it is - even if it's not the thrill, it doesn't matter - they get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:49 AM
1

Nope. You can't actually undo abortion, but you can actually undo a paper abortion. It is actually very easy to undo. And no, why would he inform her before sex? Since her bodily autonomy is supposedly more important - she is the one who informs him. Now if she says she will terminate it, it doesn't matter what he says at all. And if she doesn't, then he can respond and then based on his response she can reject and not have sex with him at all. This is obviously the most efficient approach and o…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:45 AM
1

Who said it damages uterus? No it doesn't. It doesn't exist so we can imagine whatever we want. We imagine we doesn't. Or whatever it does - it does less than or as much as abortion. I literally specified it in my comment. So no, the embryo is extracted and is grown artificially in this imaginary scenario. Then a woman proceeds as if she gave birth. How is that not a perfect solution? Nobody's bodily autonomy is violated.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:41 AM
1

And that, again, has no predictive power. I know people who would go out 3 times a week for years and would never have casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:38 AM
1

Which is what my comment was about, so what are you arguing with?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:37 AM
1

Exactly. She can but she doesn't. She chooses only certain guys and it just so happens that the guys women choose overlap too much for it to be a coincidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:36 AM
-1

Right? So therefore they claim if they want to continue being pregnant or not first.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:33 AM
2

Which is why it is about them and getting it shows true desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 07:35 AM
0

Why the obsession with height, full head of hair, income, age, etc that women have? There are just things that are turn ons and things that are turn offs.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 07:33 AM
1

The thrill of it is. Again, otherwise most people wouldn't gamble and most women wouldn't have casual sex. The odds of "winning" are known well in advance.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 07:32 AM
3

Seems like you are homeless because you don't have a house. Don't not have a house. Buy a house.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:41 AM
5

Time is money.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:40 AM
2

No, that's exactly it. She's horny and picked a certain guy. Most guys were never picked. It can't be written off as a coincidence because the trend is pretty clear. If it was not about a man at all, then all men would get roughly the same amount of casual sex, proportional to how much they try, maybe.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:38 AM
2

Yeah yeah yeah, but it was that guy and not some other, and it consistently happens to a minority of guys and most aren't really chosen.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:38 AM
0

That is correct. Only D count matters. It matters to both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:37 AM
2

Oh wow so instead of discriminating and selecting man by income, they now discriminate men based on age. And you are trying to make ageism sound like it's something good.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:52 AM
0

Ah ok, so rules for thee but not for me. No, everyone has consequences in this scenario. And even if not, why would that matter? Either both declare intent or neither. And yes, no take-backs on a paper abortion and therefore no take-backs on intent to abort or not abort. Wym if he signs up? Whether or not he even needs to answer the question/sign up depends on whether she intents to do the abortion. And he has no say over that since it's her body. So of course this question must be answered firs…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:46 AM
1

Of course not what no? And no, a technology that probably extracts/sucks out the egg/early-stage embryo. Or you take a pill and it just leaks out or something. Basically, imagine that the sensations/damage/pain are exactly the same or better than the current abortion technology. Maybe they teleport an embryo out of her, it doesn't matter. Say, it is done. Is that a good compromise between bodily autonomy people and religious don't-kill-babies people? Sounds like a perfect solution, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:43 AM
1

Except they make generalized statement that abuse victims are to blame for being abused. Would need to really prove that it happens often and that it is what you say it is. Because a statement like "you shouldn't have left your money in the open" or "shouldn't have parked in a bad neighborhood" are not blaming victim, they are just saying how something can be avoided. Yet, many people mistakenly call this victim blaming. So you don’t know what good is. See, this is the problem with this sub. It’…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:39 AM
1

No, that's an attempt of a post hoc justification. The entire point is that if they did it, they didn't do it for the benefit. They did for a chance to get the benefit, the thrill of the gamble. And they did get that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:36 AM
0

Sure, and a woman should declare her intent to have or not to have abortion before sexual contact, too. And can't change her mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 06:12 AM
1

So, if there was a technology allowing to extract the egg/embrio and raising it in an artificial womb - so that a woman doesn't have to carry a child and give birth - and then the baby is given to a woman so she can be a mother, then that would be a good compromise?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 05:33 AM
0

Why only paper abortions are agreed on before sex? Then regular abortions should also be called before sex. Let both gamble. Why only men?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 05:31 AM
1

Here's a simple thought experiment. Assume, there exists a way to not kill a baby but a woman doesn't have to give birth. Say, the law is that you can't kill babies but the advances of medicine allow to extract the egg early and then incubate it. Raise it in a tube or an artificial womb. Do you really think women would be okay with that alternative? Do you think it's really about giving birth only and not at all about being a mother?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 05:02 AM
10

You know damn well that if there was a procedure to extract the egg, grow it in a tube, and then the woman still is a mother of a baby (just didn't give birth physically) - they would still not want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 04:59 AM
1

They do, when it's clear that they are victims. Some might not see that they are victims and some might not still understand, no. No, not how it works. You introduce a term "good person" and claim that it does this and that. It's on you to prove it, not on me to disprove it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 02:58 AM
1

Of course, it does. They know the odds and still do it. Yes, it does. They do it for the thrill and for the experience. Nobody is forcing them. No, they can't THINK it because they know the odds. Somebody buying a lottery ticket does not think they will win. They buy it because they want a chance to win, they want to play. They want the thrill they feel when they are checking if they won. No, sounds like it was worth it. You then just say it wasn't because you know how it would look if you didn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 02:50 AM
1

Ability to understand. Just because somebody doesn't understand something now or someone in particular, doesn't mean they have no ability. Also no, these are not necessarily parts of a good person. That's your personal definition made specifically for this thread. Or link the established definition. Also no, "without payment" is completely made up by you. Absolutely nothing wrong with expecting payment. Doctors are considered heroes and good even if they don't work for free.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 02:44 AM
1

No, this works when you imply that something is a part of a definition when it isn't. Putting sugar in the porridge doesn't define a Scotsman, not understanding abuse doesn't define a good man.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 01:14 AM
1

Actual Scotsmen would never put sugar in their porridge.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 09:52 PM
1

Men get more pleasure from casual sex than women do. Research indicates that casual sex (or hookup culture) often results in lower rates of sexual pleasure, satisfaction, and orgasm for women compared to men. Only 30%-40 of women orgasm during casual sex. Approximately 82% to 90% of men report reaching orgasm during casual sex or their most recent hookup. This actually proves your title wrong. It is well know that the orgasm gap is there. I knew about it before I even hit puberty. It's all over …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 09:30 PM
0

For car owners, are front wheels or rear wheels more important?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 08:15 AM
6

Nice try shawty dev team. No, we won't check it out. Or if it's serious, see the hr meme.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 07:49 AM
1

That's not QED. Your claim is that most people find love BECAUSE they do those things. That's what you need to show. Prove causation or gtfo
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 03:01 AM
–

Scotsmen are not true if they put sugar in their porridge
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:52 AM
0

That's an extraordinary claim. Please, show your extraordinary evidence. Show that most people who achieved those things found love because they achieved those things.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:48 AM
–

I am not saying anything that contradicts that. My mind is me. What I do or how I act is not my mind, though. They are just things I do and they depend on the circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 02:29 AM
1

Observation is the only thing that matters. It doesn't matter what they think they want or say they want. The only thing that matters is their actions and what they respond to.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 02:01 AM
3

Me is me. The distinguishable from others me. My body is me, nobody else has the same one, while they can have the same personality. What I think, what I feel, what I do are just functions of my brain. I could choose to do something else, change my mind, or have different feelings, but that would still be me.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 08:52 AM
4

What's left is me. You already asked and I already answered.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 08:30 AM
1

Quick question. Men are expected to marry single moms and become step fathers. So if they would help raise other men's kids, will anyone help raise their kids?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 08:03 AM
1

Ok the stuff about dressing a certain way and not being able to tame the horniness sounds like bs. Is that really how men are? There's no way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 07:12 AM
6

Exactly! What's left is me! I could quit or lose my job tomorrow, but I would still be me.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 02:08 AM
12

Of course. We want to be liked for who we are, not for what we do (or have done in the past, i.e. education, erudition, career, whatever sense of humor and personality we developed etc).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 12:58 AM
1

Beggars need to be choosers.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 11:17 PM
1

The relationships are not about keeping score. But not getting something in life that feels good and the others get/got and then being told to just even stop aspiring to get it - why would anyone do that? Sex feels good. We want more sex. Some people already got lots of it. Why can't we have it too? Maybe, we would consider doing what you say if others were in the same position. But that's not the case. Imagine you say all people should get rid of all their money and not buy anything. Maybe we w…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 07:50 AM
1

No, it's not. It's grounding your argument because you are trying to get into exceptions, while we are talking about generalities. I don't need to read minds to say this at all. If women said it's not true and had an actual explanation of what's going on that agrees with observations, then maybe they wouldn't be dismissed. Yet, they say it's not true and is propaganda, while we keep seeing it again and again how some men are consistently chosen over others and get sex fast while others don't. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 05:02 AM
1

Sure, we are ready to stop chasing more of something once we get as much as others got and if they stop getting more of it, too. Otherwise, it's just losing for what reason exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 04:13 AM
1

Sure, as long as he gets his dick as wet as others were able to. Or should he just minimize his enjoyment while others are/were getting advantage?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 06:37 PM
1

In that case yes, just not in general. Besides, doesn't she herself want a sexual connection? Complications could arise if she establishes that other connection first but then there's no sexual chemistry. It is a black-and-white issue. She either made someone wait longer than others or didn't. All those multiple reasons in the overwhelming majority of cases can be explained by her not being as attracted. There's a very old TRP saying that goes something like - she wouldn't make Brad Pitt wait. N…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 09:46 PM
–

Well, men were told to stop doing what they are biologically programmed to do. It's only fair if the scale is balanced, isn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 09:28 PM
1

It doesn't matter what they feel about it. If they are loved by someone, then they are by definition special to that someone. Cool. So they wanted to try it with those men and it sucked with those men. No reason they wouldn't want to try it with this other man to see if it sucks with him, unless of course they aren't attracted to him as much.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 09:36 PM
1

Yes. How does that contradict what I said? They want to be loved which means they are exceptional for the person that loves them. Which necessarily means special treatment. Of course, I will treat people I love differently from all other people. Why did they do it before? And 66% failure rate is better than 99% failure rate, yet men keep trying so there's absolutely no reason for women not to keep trying. Probably they try because when it's good it's good. Now, if they don't enjoy it all that mu…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:56 PM
1

Doesn't change anything. Only shows how exceptional and rare it is to be chosen for those hookups. No, they want to be in bed. Why would they want to be shitty? Why would what be appealing to women? Why was it appealing to them in the past? It would be appealing for the same reason if they are attracted as much or more. Still didn't link the source for numbers, so we will go ahead and dismiss them.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:51 PM
0

That would not be an assumption for them, especially if your past shows that you did have sex with someone before all that. That would mean that you can be attracted to someone sexually right away. If doesn't show that - then yeah they could assume you have some hang ups and that it could be a dead bedroom red flag. But yes. Win win.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:49 PM
1

If I have any desire for her to be one or any suspicion that she might be one in the future - that's all I need to know in this case. Especially, if in the past I touched someone who did not end up being my gf or stopped being one later.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:47 PM
1

No, they do not. They look at the argument not at who presents it. No, I'm not running away. I literally answered it when the question was directly asked. See previous comment. I will answer real quick after you answer my question. I answered yours after directly asked. I even answered a couple others. You still didn't answer mine that I repeated multiple times already. So, is he right or wrong? Are there any things that women are obligated to do that men aren't?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:45 PM
1

More logically, not narrowly. It's says that very clearly. And that was just one link. I gave you two things to look into, you can find plenty more links. Right, so? More men at the high end = the have higher capacity. The end. Also having more low IQ outliers doesn't change that fact. Either way, point is, it's not based on vibes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:42 PM
1

No, not normal people. Illogical people who don't understand how appeal to authority is a kind of ad hominem fallacy. Once again, Heisenberg fully supported Nazis. The uncertainty principle is still valid. Of course, I can say he is wrong about supporting Hitler. That doesn't change the fact that it's irrelevant to this thread. Whether or not he supports or likes Hitler, his argument about men and women is either valid or not. So, is he right or wrong? Are there any things that women are obligat…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:24 PM
1

Umm yes it is what's being described. How did your changes make it different? Yes, I don't touch people and will have to touch my girlfriend when I meet her (if I'm single at the time of saying it).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:20 PM
1

See male vs female brain type studies. And no, I wasn't talking about capacity. I was talking about actual differences. As in, in real people that are alive. And what brain hemisphere they use more, so to speak. Or you can even look at psychology https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11039442/#:~:text=Females%20are%20holistic%2C%20whereas%20males%20think%20logically&text=A%20mentally%20strong%20female%20can,instead%20believe%20in%20gross%20results But even if you talk about capacity, the IQ c…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:19 PM
1

Of course, all women are interested in that. Which is why those men will be successful with women and will probably consider someone not wanting to have sex with them to be not attracted to them compared to their other options and former experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:15 PM
1

In other words, you have no data and can't be talking about men in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:13 PM
1

Doesn't change anything - only shows how exceptional and rare it is to be chosen for those hookups. Men would rather be one of those hookups than not. And please link the source for the numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:10 PM
1

Idgaf about that. This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Heisenberg was a Nazi. We still don't dismiss the uncertainty principle. So, is he right or wrong? Are there any things that women are obligated to do that men aren't?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:06 PM
1

How is any of that relevant? The point still holds. They don't know that the sex will be subpar until they have it. If they had it with some men who were attractive enough to see if sex with them feels good, then if they don't want to check if it feels good with another man, they are just not attracted to him as much. Huh? No, it's not main character syndrome at all. It's literally being exceptional, if she claims she loves you but not other men. And you need to stop using these numbers if you d…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 08:00 PM
1

That's not catch 22. There's no contradiction and what you said is possible. For example, of course I have a standard to idk not touch people, but I will touch my girlfriend.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:49 PM
1

No, it's based on studies of brains and on what men and women tend to choose. .
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:48 PM
1

That's fine. The point is simply that you need to understand that you are repelling more than you want (and not all of that too anyway).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:45 PM
1

Incorrect. The Matrix is fiction because the story is fiction. Some fights are fiction because special effects are used. But if Neo is walking - he is walking. No effects are used. People can walk just like he does. And if in porn they are fucking - they are fucking. No effects are used and people can do all the same sexual acts and positions just like they do in porn. It's not about recording real people. It's about recording what people really did. If I played Neo, after the movie is done, I'm…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:40 PM
1

So the answer to my question is no? Yeah no, that's a textbook example of bias. You are only observing and dealing with men that are around you and are filtered by you. That's not at all something you should be using to form any opinions. Just ask men. Just see any of the multiple threads about men who go for years without sex. You will see what they are saying. They are not thirsty/desperate after some time. They become resigned
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:38 PM
1

But why is that better than establishing a sexual connection first? Or to develop both parallel? It's not a new concept, no. But men here (and now pretty much everywhere) also understand that the same woman probably didn't establish connection before sex with other men in her past. So why would they want that? They would be okay with that if a woman moved like that. But if she moved differently with others? Don't you see how they would be chumps?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:35 PM
1

And she has almost 100% chance to have that casual sex from any interaction with a man. So 33% of her interactions with men result in an orgasm. Or, in other words, about 33% of her attempts to get an orgasm result in an orgasm. While for men, it's maybe a 1% success rate and even if the orgasm rate is 90%, that's still only about 1% of attempts to get an orgasm resulting in an orgasm. So, the situation is a lot better for women. Either way, however it benefits her, it benefits her enough if she…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:28 PM
3

Both men and women don't like when their partner slept with some random men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 07:16 PM
1

Nobody claims they are logical robots, just that they are more logical than women. Emotional and logical are not mutually exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:54 AM
3

That's not catch 22. The things aren't mutually exclusive/conflicting.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:52 AM
1

What connection? If I'm looking to date/marry, then why would I want connection that is completely platonic? That's how you find friends, not lovers.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:49 AM
2

Not only. You will also repel men who don't like flings but also don't want to know if there's sexual compatibility fast and don't want to wait. Especially, if others didn't have to wait.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:48 AM
2

Do you have experience of being a sex starved men? Because you can trust men when they tell you that after a few years of a dry spell they are very patient - maybe too much - because why risk scaring anything away. If nothing happens again because they were too eager - they would be pretty upset, and if nothing because they weren't - then nothing changes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:47 AM
-1

Porn is not fiction. The plot might be, but other than it's a documentary. They are indeed doing what they are doing. No special effects, they indeed put those body parts in those other body parts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:41 AM
1

Sounds like exceptional treatment, since any given person doesn't love and appreciate most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:32 AM
1

Correct. Only expect exceptional treatment if you are exceptional. For example, if she used to sleep with men without commitment but you are special and not like that, then you are exceptional and can expect exceptional treatment. Or if she otherwise says she loves you - then you are exceptional for her and can expect exceptional treatment from her.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:30 AM
6

Are you stupid or something? Cutting off your nose to spite your face? Why do you care what those men do if they are not the men you want. Just find men that actually want a relationship. Check your friendzone, expand your age range.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:48 AM
1

No, why would they? They would rather make women feel bad about it and/or shamed. Of course. He will only complain if she was instantly naked with somebody else because that would be proof that she is not attracted to him as much. You were explained this so many times by different people in different threads already. You need to stop making threads and take some time to learn from the answers you already got.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:43 AM
1

Yes, that's what I said. It's irrelevant. The OP is about the point they talked about, not about how a girl handled it. She couldn't answer but she's not here. If you can answer for her, then just do that. Again, no matter his age and degrees, he is either right or wrong. So, is he right or wrong? Are there any things that women are obligated to do that men aren't?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:33 AM
1

It doesn't filter it out completely and if this approach becomes wide-spread, women who want to use men for resources can easily adapt and play the long game. Not to mention that there are women who are fine with it already but still have certain expectations when it comes to LTR or marriage. Or is being “used for resources” about time? Because if you find going on dates without the promise of immediate sex is using you, then you might not like women in general. And once again, this depends on h…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 07:53 PM
2

It doesn't matter when the draft actually happened. It's a matter of principle and fairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 11:31 PM
1

That's irrelevant. The OP is about the point they talked about, not about how a girl handled it. She couldn't answer but she's not here. If you can answer for her, then just do that. Is he right or wrong? Are there any things that women are obligated to do that men aren't?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 11:30 PM
–

Huh? What does that have to do with anything? I simply gave a correct answer to the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:33 AM
–

No, sounds like cope and refusing to see reality. In that very place and time there were other people but not all of them were chosen. And as we clearly see now, this process is not random and winner takes all. A minority of men are picked consistently. Most men will almost never do.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:33 AM
–

Non sequitur. That changes nothing. Idiot or not, he is too hot for her to resist.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:30 AM
–

Huh? No, it's not about some abstract dependence. It's really just that to have sex with women one needs women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:30 AM
–

Sounds like cope and convenient excuse. Why would it not be emotionally difficult to share her body with someone she doesn't have feelings for? Makes zero sense. It's very simple, really, she is either attracted enough to do it or not. Her attraction level either overrides all inhibitions or doesn't. You can say that the absolute level is higher but inhibitions are also higher. But that's just the thing - nobody cares about that level, since it can't be measured. The relevant info is the attract…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:29 AM
1

Yes, one is negative and one is neutral. In this case, the reaction is negative, not neutral.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:24 AM
–

First of all, that's just you. But even then - you ended up having sex with some men but not with others, and you can be pretty sure more men who wanted sex with you didn't have it than had it. That's denial. If that was the case, sex would be distributed more or less uniformly, which is not the case. No, not plenty. Statistically, at least. Maybe, but nobody is offering that sex to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:19 AM
1

It’s not just revealing clothes. Men in the west, like yourself, will use anything to call a woman you don’t like a “slut” or a “whore”. Hair, going to college, being outspoken, class identifiers, physical features, rejecting sex, anything. If you want to find strawmen, go do it somewhere in the field, not here. You are making this up and they absolutely won't use "anything". And people calling women sluts to feel morally good have nothing to do with this topic. This discussion is about actual s…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:16 AM
–

That changes nothing. What I said still applies.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:11 AM
–

Then why would they be compared based on details specified? But again, in this case a guy B is desired more by his stalker than a guy A by his wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 08:09 AM
1

But since she's not that desperate for other men and just for him, that proves he's too hot for her to resist. Which is exactly where he wants to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 10:06 PM
1

Precisely! That's why the only way to know that you are desirable and attractive as a man is to get what is not possible for most men. If it's not possible for you, then you are not desirable. Good points. That was a great way to prove the OP right. OP, you should include these arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 09:43 PM
1

You didn't get it. It's not about being valued as a human, it's about being valued as a man. Volunteer work etc is about being a good human. But that's genderless. Sexless. It's not making you or showing that you are a valuable man. Only getting the sex life you want (and being able to get the sex life comparable to the best) shows that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 09:41 PM
0

That's because sex is a lot easier for you to get, so why would it be validating? The only way for a man to get confidence as a man is to get women. Working out doesn't matter, being in a good shape doesn't matter if it doesn't result in being attractive and attracting women. Career doesn't matter. It makes you valuable as a human, not as a man. Having the life men want for themselves does include having regular sex and ideally sexual variety. Most men never get to live that life, so by any crit…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 09:37 PM
1

There are other people in the same place at the same time but they chose you. And you didn't have to do anything to prove yourself/earn anything and she didn't even want to get to know you more - what you were was enough. Sounds like being attracted to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 09:32 PM
1

Yeah that's wrong. It's definitely not obvious and would need to be proven. A woman who wants to sleep with you for nothing much in return is obviously attracted to you more. Will a woman in a relationship still sleep with you if you do nothing else she requires in a relationship? Probably not. So no, she doesn't desire you more sexually. She might desire you more as a whole, i.e. including other things you do for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 09:13 PM
1

As they say, doesn't matter had sex. Why would they care to be good if they can get it with new women? And again, here and in the original comment, the chance was given to attractive men. Which is why the OP is right. Getting that sex and that chance is an indicator that a man is attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 09:07 PM
2

Most men are not getting hit on, so they only way for them to experience being desired is to go and see what they can get if they actively look for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:41 PM
1

Most men are not getting hit on, so they only way for them to experience being desired is to go and see what they can get if they actively look for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:41 PM
2

There's no contradiction between giving and mutual pleasure. It's still giving. And yes, he did conquered you or got you because you are harder to get than him. If someone found a good deal, of course they scored. Even though the transaction was mutual and the seller got what they asked for, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:38 PM
1

They are about equally desirable, the difference is negligible. They are both desired by one woman each. Making some assumptions though, we can imagine that the stalker is stalking regardless of what he's doing while the wife expect that he doesn't sleep with other women, which makes the second guy more desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:33 PM
1

It's always fine to get a girlfriend. And when/if you get one, it doesn't matter if you are attractive to others. What matters is if you are attractive to her. So you just need to make sure that a girlfriend you get would have casual sex/FWB with you. Probably, should only consider being official with someone after being FWB with them for a while. That, or make sure she just never had casual sex and it's just not something she does.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:29 PM
2

It is very common. Plenty of women's accounts and studies clearly show how attractiveness depends on height. Like, it's actually a negative if your height is low enough. Either way, your question is answered. Or are you now arguing that what, height doesn't matter to women?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:26 PM
1

Textbook woosh. Yes, then she would be assumed to be a whore in those parts of the world. Just like police have different uniforms in different parts of the world. In parts of the world I've been to, she wouldn't be assumed to be a whore. What a slut looks like depends on location and of course it's not 100%. The most common things I hear in the west is revealing clothes, tats, piercings + certain behaviors. Now that's a good question. Of course, keep in mind you can't guess the count with 100% …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 08:15 PM
1

Woosh. If a person looks like a member of a certain group, then you will assume they are a member of that group. If there's a fire and you see someone who looks like a fireman, you will run to them for help. Sure, it then might become clear that you made a mistake and they aren't a fireman, but they don't really have a right to be offended for being mistaken for one. Same applies to when someone looks like a slut. Seeing who you described, I wouldn't assume anything at all. Again, you don't get …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 05:59 AM
1

I personally think it's some sort of instinctual response. Like, why do women get an ick if a man is tall? Cause an instinct says they are weak or have bad genes. Similarly, men get an ick because their dna is screaming to avoid potential paternity fraud or std.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 05:37 AM
1

Of course they were. That's how god made them. And if attraction fades, that's why there are vows.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 05:50 AM
1

Because insecurity is rarely a factor. It definitely can be for some men, but it's frequently disgust/ick.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 05:43 AM
1

The title is non sequitur. What does what casual sex is to women have to do with men wanting it, too? And why would they apply the same standards to men? They aren't trying to date men. Obviously, standards for people they are trying to date/are attracted to are going to be different from standards for other people. Why shouldn't they complain if women are still having it just not with them, but then if they want to marry/LTR someone, odds are she had casual sex in the past. Why would anyone hap…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 05:41 AM
1

I don't see it as a game. It's just an analogy to illustrate that you can't use an excuse that it's about experience as if that would be beneficial to future partners, when you are trying many different things instead of practicing one thing many times. There's no contradiction. Yes, people experience sex together. And yes, if you had it with many people, many people experienced you (and you them, but that's irrelevant). One of the most common things you hear from people talking about sexual pas…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 01:34 AM
1

Having had something once is irrelevant. I'm talking about the "club membership". I'm talking about women going out of their way or making it super easy for men, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 01:11 AM
1

And when the majority of sexual assault involving dicks and oral sex will include sucking someone's dick as opposed to making them suck theirs, then maybe it would make sense. But as of right now it sounds that way to you simply because you are in denial.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 01:04 AM
1

The vast majority does go to college. Who doesn't and where would someone who does go to college even run into them? And yes, what I said holds. Not enough for everyone. Not enough for everyone who cares, too. If there was - the topic wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is. And again, 39% is a useless number without a source and knowing who is counted. If it includes old women, then who cares? But even then, the number of men who care about women's past is a lot higher than 40%.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 10:58 PM
1

If someone comes to you in a police uniform, you will assume they are a policeman. Yes, it could be a halloween costume or fake, but the first reaction will be to assume they are from police and in your mind you will refer to them as "that police guy" or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 10:45 PM
4

^ Completing level 1 100 times vs completing level 100 once. That's why people who use experience as an argument pro hookups are full of it. Like, that's not your experience to please your partner, that's you being experienced by others.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:29 AM
0

No, that's not it. The fact that only a few guys do get them makes getting them a proof that you are attractive. Especially, since odds are that you will be expected to do date someone with whom some other men were getting hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:26 AM
1

Why do soccer teams value the world cup so much? Like you will spend all this time and practice just to win one trophy, and that's it, then you will spend time to do it again? And obviously, the great hookups are the ones where men don't spend much time and effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:24 AM
1

Does it include not being able to get them? Cause like, the answer to your question is no. If the experience were guaranteed to be the same as as the typical male experience, then they wouldn't sleep around more
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:22 AM
–

Correct. Not as much as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 03:13 AM
1

MMm yeah no, sounds pretty submissive. Nobody has to be forced/dominated into getting their dick sucked. Of course, there are always exceptions and outliers, but statistically it holds. Taking somebody inside your body for their pleasure? Pretty submissive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 02:52 AM
1

I would be if you could show the same complaint and that it happens often enough in comparison to sub men to be negligible. I saw their complaints and their complaints are mostly about how subs are not good enough, not how they can't find them. Same as vanilla dating. Being picky and wanting more than men have. Most importantly, "there are some" is not an argument. I specifically talk about ratios/numbers/prevalence. The number of those dominant women complaining is negligible compared to the nu…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 02:09 AM
1

It is the same. They are taking a man's dick inside their body. That is factually the same. Prison and legality of this is irrelevant. We are talking about how people view it/feel about it, not governments, religions, and propaganda. Being a ho was also illegal in many places not so long ago and probably still is in the same places where being gay is illegal. But when a person gets an ick when they find out their partner was fucked by men, that has nothing to do with legality.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 02:07 AM
3

First of all, that's less than a half, so what I said holds - not enough for everyone. Second, Idk what this number is and whether it includes women who aged out already anyway. The number I've seen was in a study about college-aged people and it said that 80% had casual sex at least once. Not pressured to marry doesn't mean you don't want to marry a virgin when you do decide you want to marry. And at this point virgin is not even necessarily an actual virgin. You can replace virgin with low d-c…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 01:54 AM
5

Yes, they lie. Even if you vet them, they can lie or dodge the question. When it finally comes up, decisions must be made. That's a big part of when men complain and of the complaints you read. Not that many of those women. It's very unlikely to meet a woman who didn't hook up at party or something in the past. Last I googled, the majority of women have had casual sex. So realistically, it makes sense to relax the requirements and look for those who show with actions that they are attracted to h…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 10:46 PM
1

True, even though he mentioned women helping him, he technically didn't mention any other avenues. But then again, when asked to define everything he posted a definition of everything, and after that I can't assume it was dating apps only. He needs to tell more
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:16 AM
5

It's so weird how women would do all this mental gymnastics just not to admit that maybe women could be the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:52 AM
–

But if they get no chance, what do you think happens next? You understand, that this probably already happened and that's how monogamy got established in the first place? You think attraction can be negotiated or doesn't depend on looks at all? Like, unsuccessful guys aren't unsuccessful due to immutable characteristics but due to how they are raised? I don't understand how you imagine this global polyamory would work. If no one is expected to limit themselves why wouldn't all women just go with…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:51 AM
–

What house chores? Whose house are you talking about if you are with multiple men? Do they come to your house or do you go to theirs to do chores?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:47 AM
–

Yes, that's definitely not swimming. I think, that not having matches/likes is not even 100% due to being unattractive. I think it's largely due to simply not being shown to people. They do want to sell those subs and boosters, after all. But of course, the instinctual response is understandable. Especially from men, when IRL they also get no attention. And then there are other platforms. For example, your unattractive friends could post ads (instead of relying on matches) on dating and r4r type…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:38 AM
–

Same difference. She is willing to do it for companionship. As in she'd rather do it than lose companionship. If she was repulsed by it, she wouldn't want to do it and want that type of companionship. She would just want to be friends and have platonic companionship. The scenario she is describing is clear. Selling consent vs giving consent freely under false pretenses. They are in principle different. To buy consent you need money, to get the second type you need skill, so you do earn/deserve i…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:36 AM
1

Probably because they take or suck dick.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:18 AM
1

No, that's not what I'm trying to disprove. I'm saying that the fact that sub men have more troubles finding anyone confirms the OP. And it's not just some individual submissive men, it's most and practically all submissive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:13 AM
1

It doesn't matter. People don't want to date people who let other men fuck them. That's all there is to it. And it's definitely not a convention for women to be fucked by many men unless she's a sex worker. That's almost as new as accepting bisexuality/homosexuality on the scale of history. And why would someone's sexuality matter unless it excludes yours? A heterosexual person by definition is simply attracted to the opposite sex, so there's absolutely no reason why a straight person can't be w…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 02:10 AM
-1

Sounds like they don't like sex as much as men, then, does it not?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 01:48 AM
10

He literally had 2 women telling him what to do. And women generally agree that OLD sucks, so don't you think doing thing other than apps would be brought up?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 10:06 PM
0

Monogamy will go away when most men are not needed. When AI, robotics, and genetics are developed enough, you can basically control that only the attractive men are born so women can share them, and there are still robots to do all work.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 07:01 PM
3

They can. They are literally the ones who started saying it and analyzing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:56 PM
4

This is wrong. Studies show that objectively there are certain traits that the majority find attractive. The beauty standards are pretty narrow and aren't that different between different groups. For example, tall men are universally attractive. Attraction is only subjective in the sense that it is possible to find two data points where women are attracted to different thing. But if you look at the trend you will see that attraction is very objective.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:55 PM
1

What values don't they have?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:52 PM
1

It's not happening. Nobody will just be happy with the status quo when the status quo is that most women go for the most attractive men and most men are just sitting there hoping for scraps and raising other men's children. Or do you think that if the concept of possession went away hypothetically, then sex would be distributed between men more uniformly? I think it would be even less uniform than now.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:46 PM
2

Words and excuses. You are trying to explain some particular data points. They don't matter. Trends show everything. All you said applies to regular dating, too. The idea is that this irregular dating seems to be even harder, which confirms the OP. Switch men find it hard to find women who want to dom and switch women have no problem finding men who want to dom. In general, women there almost don't complain compared to men, so they do find whatever they want in general. And men don't find what t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 08:04 AM
0

No, I'm talking about the same thing - being fucked by a person with a penis. Sure, some people are homophobic, but that doesn't mean that most people who have a problem with that are homophobic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 08:00 AM
–

Again, saying that something is true in general is a very strong claim and requires evidence. It's not likely that I observe what I observed if the claim was true. And again, weren't you talking about being good academically and in sports? Then why talk about school? Nobody is good there, it's entry level. Obviously nobody is studying 24/7. And of course everyone needs time. That's the point. If you invest less time, you get worse results. If you invest time in A but not in B, you will get good …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 07:58 AM
2

That changes nothing, what I said is still true for non switches. And seems like you are wrong about more women being flexible because sub men can't find doms or switches. Just look into it yourself. You will see who complains more.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 07:47 AM
6

A lot more sub men than dom women. Like, from the stories and the spirit of the posts, dating as a sub man is so much worse than just regular dating as a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 07:46 AM
0

Nope. You are the one not getting it. You can call it whatever you want. Wants or tolerates - she would rather take it than not in case of lying. But she would rather take the money in case of paying. That's right. You are telling me. You still didn't explain how it's flawed and why having a problem with paying means also having a problem with lying. They are completely different. Some men have a problem with one, some with the other, some with both. But a problem with one doesn't necessarily me…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 07:34 AM
5

It doesn't matter if she wants the D absolutely or conditionally. She wants it, and the condition is not giving her money in return. That's why it's very different from paying. But look at you being bothered that he's lying to get sex and not being bothered that she is lying that she wants sex. And not even not being bother, no. Using it as an argument of why him lying about it somehow should be the problem for him if paying is a problem, too. No, it's not. It's not pathetic or embarrassing to s…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 07:07 AM
1

It is what it is. It could be because it sullies them, it could be because it's about submitting, it could be some instinctual response to the fact that men are the impregnating sex, it could be because they are letting those men inside their bodies. Does it really matter? I don't think it matters in this discussion other than that it shows that it's not about homophobia.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:56 AM
1

And if that effects is not pronounced more in either of them, then it doesn't really change anything numerically.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:54 AM
1

And the fact that fewer women want to play doms than men subs and fewer women have troubles finding doms than men subs is a pretty good example of what OP is talking about, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:53 AM
4

Reddit is not like old school forums. Avatars and names are too small to memorize anyone in like almost 100% cases tbh. I reply to comments and to what they say, not to people.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:49 AM
6

Oh okay. Good thing though that in this case since past is what made him who he is today, if she likes him before finding out, finding it won't change anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:47 AM
2

Yeah they do still. If she's not into it, it's not hot. And in drunk hookups that's the case sometimes. And yes, hot ones will require more effort than not hot ones. But yeah, the FWB comparison is better and there all 5 apply, except #5 is kinda - why would she even be FWB to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:43 AM
–

Define not many. I've seen men getting one match a month in like 3-4 months. And as you understand, some of them were bots..
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:13 AM
1

Coming up next: App where women who value men's looks pay for their gym membership and nutrition, and women who care about his education and career pay his tuition and student debt.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:45 AM
1

Lmao this is so stupid. What happens if he deposits money and you don't show up? Oh he takes it back? Ok, then what stops him from taking it back even if you show up? And either way, how will this app work better than others? Men already get no matches and those that do don't need to pay to go on dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:49 AM
1

Only sleeping with the impregnating sex is cheating. Sleeping with women is not. Cheating for men is investing resources in other women to the point where his family suffers. So no, average men should not be allowed to cheat.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:40 AM
7

Why does it bother you? Don't you see that the difference is huge? If he lied she still wants him. The version is made up, but it's about sex, not about marriage and being together long term. She still wants his body and his D. If he paid, she wants the money.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:22 AM
4

Agreed. And pretty much all of it applies to casual partners, too. Actually no, never mind. All of it applies.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:11 AM
11

Shouldn't be a problem since past doesn't matter and it just made him who he is today. So if she likes him right before she finds out, finding out shouldn't change anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:09 AM
17

Shouldn't be a problem since past doesn't matter and it just made him who he is today. So if she likes him right before she finds out, finding out shouldn't change anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:09 AM
0

No, it's not homophobia. It's about getting fucked by men. Women don't like when men are getting fucked by multiple men just like men don't like when women are getting fucked by multiple men (which wouldn't be homosexual), while men don't mind nearly as much if a woman slept with multiple women (which would be a big issue if it was about homophobia). That's why the N count is really the D count.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:02 AM
–

I think it's true. Here's another example, which I think is more obvious, and it doesn't rely on different sexualities (doesn't need to bring in bisexuality to work). If you look at sub-dom ratios in bdsm, it becomes pretty clear. You can read all about it in multiple subs about bdsm or femdom or simply check fetlife.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 03:59 AM
–

That's exactly how it works. If you don't behave like X it doesn't matter what you want. You still don't behave like X and can't be judged as if you were.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 01:46 AM
–

And therefore they aren't like that. And if you want men who don't behave like that, pick the ones that can't behave like that. Pretty simple, really.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 11:46 PM
–

Which is another hint that they are probably not as good academically to begin with. If they were good academically, why would they need to bypass entry requirements? Also, as far as I understand, scholarships are to cover your tuition and such, they don't mean you are just accepted if your test scores are low etc. But I'm only referring to the ones I personally had. I have no idea how they got in, and I didn't participate in admissions. I only really know that they are athletes because they nee…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 11:15 PM
–

No. Quick and casual are not 100% the same. Nobody says to make it casual. Just don't make it slower than what you had before. You can still have feelings, and hope to do it again, and have serious and deep conversations, and not see other people, etc. It's only casual for you if you make it casual. And nobody asks for it to be casual for a woman, or even wants it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 10:24 PM
–

Who's talking about casual sex? It's about being wanted and about quick sex. Whether it ends up being casual depends on how things progress. It is necessary for men to be wanted by a woman in order to have a relationship with her. If they are not wanted (e.g. she doesn't want to have sex with them on the Nth date when she had it on Kth date with other men, where K≤ N), then why would they consider a relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 09:34 PM
1

It seems to be true in general about academics and sports. If you are doing sports, you could be spending that time taking integrals. And vice versa. Most student athletes I had in my classes where pretty bad. The only exception would probably be chess. And most of the good students I had didn't look like they were good in sports (well, maybe they were good in chess or ping pong or something that doesn't affect fitness).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:45 PM
0

Someone with a lot of options will enjoy those options and pick the best one at the end of the day. Which part of this statement is "unethical" and why exactly? Masculinity was never about hedonism. But to answer your question, doing what you describe in this case affects the environment/system in the way different from what many people want it to be. It goes against some of the moral principles. Therefore, it can be argued that it's unethical.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:41 PM
1

Men can be and are loyal to those who invest early. Sure, there are exceptional cases, but men who are loyal are loyal to women who are there for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health. If a woman came into his life when he already achieved something and has stuff, why would he think she's not using him? And then why would he be loyal to her if she's a mercenary and a glory hunter as opposed to someone there for the idea and starting from the bottom?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:34 PM
0

All's fair in love and war
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:20 PM
3

How is it presenting all men in a terrible light? You are literally describing how they present attractive men in bad light only, not all men. It's not a campaign or anything, it's a genuine advice based on what we observe. It's only really given because women were complaining. So men started explaining what is kinda obvious. You are free not to follow it and go for those tall, full head of hair and all-teeth having men :) Just don't complain in that case, that's all.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:18 PM
1

You don't need to interrogate. You just need to ask. Then keep saying every now and again how good it is that your relationship is built on trust and how fucked up it would be if she lied to you. If she lied and not a sociopath, you'll know at some point. If she is a sociopath, you have bigger problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:23 AM
0

No. In what universe? We just keep pointing out that you don't understand what you are talking about. All you say are rants, fantasies, and wishful thinking. And in this particular case, of course you won't consider a relationship if what's necessary isn't met. Only after it's there it makes sense to look at whether the sufficient is there. Read about the concept of necessary and sufficient, educate yourself. Most of what you argue or ask is just ignorance.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:13 AM
1

He doesn't need to. If you make the first claim, you by default must prove it before you can ask him for proof. And no, there are plenty of claims that are not historical facts (which again, prove it's a fact) in your post. For example, this one: "Guys simply can’t get hookups and they’re upset about it. " And that entire paragraph + the next one.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:10 AM
–

Sure, and when they do approach, they still approach basically the same men. The number of women approaching men is greater than the number of men getting approached by women. Not really, not if those women are online. And in most circles there are local chads. It is a rule. Not every single one of them has to do it for it to be a rule. We are talking about big groups of people, so of course when we say they do something, we mean statistically. Most of them have done it. And that's why pizza is …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 08:01 AM
–

No, the cartoon is just that. Cartoon. It's not based on anything. It illustrates things that are not based on anything. The order of levels is not derived, proven, or even observed. The pyramid was just introduced, there are no studies backing it up. Look into it if you don't believe me. I did. In your OP you say that it's more about reproduction and bottom level for me, while it's more about intimacy and lvl 3 for women. But that's not true, on the lowest tier sex is even lower for women as it…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 07:53 AM
1

I know how it is in Europe, too. They don't accept just anyone. To even be allowed to grind you have to be very intelligent. Highly doubt, would need some evidence. Pretty sure they are smarter as a rule/in general, but of course, statistically and not in every single case.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 07:49 AM
2

Hard disagree, in fact most people I dealt with were like that. In practice, I found the opposite more common. Even myself, I'd try anything with one woman but I don't want to do everything with everyone. Either way, being sexually adventurous doesn't mean being a ho. If those women want to sleep around, then they want to sleep around. That's an extra thing. It's not a necessary consequence of being adventurous.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 07:45 AM
–

You got it wrong. Looks matter more than personality but personality still matters. Any study about women's preferences in both LTR and STR will show you that looks matter. And you proved it yourself, too, when you mention that looks fade. Yes, and as people age and their looks fade while their personality stays the same or keeps growing, suddenly nobody wants them as much as younger people? How is that not the evidence that looks matter more than personality?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 04:21 AM
0

A mother of my future children is not getting fucked by some guy other than me without commitment whether she already met me or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 01:35 AM
0

Based on what are you saying that it applies to men asking? I won't question that you can speak for all women, let's say you can and what you said is true. But how can you speak about men? I would say many if not most men would only think about open relationship hoping to get variety. And they would ask for it before doing anything so that nobody could accuse them of being a bad guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 12:35 AM
1

Nope. Still unethical to be not exclusive without letting them know, since that puts their health at risk. Would still have to have the conversation and possibly lose one of the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 11:43 PM
1

It's really dumb of men to open relationships to all possible options. Open it for women only if it has to be open. Not that it's a competition and about who gets a better time.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 11:41 PM
1

The burden of proof is on whoever made first affirmative claim. In this thread that would be you.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:52 AM
1

That question is irrelevant. Did other guys ask for a hook up? Did she ask a special guy to ask for a hook up?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:50 AM
1

Because statistically it's women ripping off men. They initiate the overwhelming majority of divorces.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:23 AM
2

Outliers don't matter. Statistically, those things don't really happen and average guys aren't chosen for no dick appointments and are rarely the most attractive option out of guys who are "there".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:22 AM
3

We already know what women call average looking. The thread about this guy on Tiktok from a few days ago comes to mind. The truth is many guys party and don't get anywhere close to sleeping with you. They can go years without any attention. We've all seen it. If you are honest with yourself, I'm sure you'll recall that you've seen that, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:21 AM
2

Right, because intelligence is not how you even get accepted to a program. Qualifying exams are not a thing, nobody cares about GPA or coursework, and there's no competition. And a first-grader would be able to get all that math and figure out something new that wasn't figured out before. But yeah, physical is the best. Doesn't have to be something fast, though. Bring a girlfriend for your first anniversary or something - and all waiting will be forgiven. Some nonphysical things could work, too,…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:17 AM
1

If a guy feels like she’s less into him than her exes, it’s usually because her behavior doesn’t communicate excitement or investment. Or communicates less excitement or investment than she did for her exes. So simply being a good excited gf doesn't cut it in this context. So what measurable/tangible can she give or do to show she's attracted more or at least not less? I think it's safe to assume that what you listed in the second paragraph is what exes got, too. And who knows if she was or less…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:57 AM
1

Well, since sex is costly, so that would be a good signal, but since you rule it out, let's think. What other things do partners she's into get? Even if not on the first date, the new partner better get all of her enthusiasm and sex acts/moves other partners got. And of course, something that other partners never got. Bringing other women will definitely make her stand out. Most women aren't attracted to men enough to fulfill their fantasies, and threesome is like top 1. If you want to move away…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:52 AM
2

Thats the secondary/optional goal, as I keep saying Repeating it won't make it true. Based on what is it secondary? I know more about my friends I’ve never seen naked than the guy I let finger me one drunken night. What ‘closeness’? Other than alcohol, we only clicked because he liked my jokes and I liked that he watched Robot Chicken. Again, what closeness? Sounds like it was very important to you and that you did get very close. Most likely, you required a lot more from any of your relationshi…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:15 AM
0

So the solution is having a bunch of hookups and not even entertaining the idea of a relationship until that first hurdle is jumped across That sounds very reasonable. You won't really look into a car if you see it has no wheels. You still don't understand necessary and sufficient, do you?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:13 AM
0

Relationships and immediate sex are not mutually exclusive for men. They can hope for one but take the other, they can plan for one but if it turns out there's a connection, go for the other. Why would they say anything that would narrow down the options? And of course we have to try to hook up early so that she can't make excuses later and say that we didn't ask for a hookup if then turns out she had sex with somebody else quickly. But even IF they want a hook up only and not a relationship - w…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 07:53 AM
13

You don't even know if all of those people posting as women are actually women. It's the Internet and you shouldn't make any conclusions about people based on anonymous forums.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 06:42 AM
2

You can be sexually adventurous with one partner. When men like sexually adventurous women, they mean sexually adventurous that benefits him, i.e. down to try stuff. Being available to multiple other men is not the type of sexually adventurous they like. Maybe, open to other women (and him at the same time), but not sleeping around with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 06:32 AM
2

No, to enjoy sex you don't have to turn your body into a petri dish. You can enjoy sex with one partner and don't have to be promiscuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 06:30 AM
1

Incorrect. Objective doesn't mean everything is the same, since we are talking about statistical stuff here and of course there are probabilities. But subjective would mean that the distribution of what people find attractive is almost uniform, but it isn't. And just because quantum particles can be in different states, doesn't mean that their existence or the laws they follow are not objective. It doesn't matter how you describe it. If left overs hurt your feelings, feel free to rephrase it. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 05:49 AM
0

It wouldn't. But them having sex with women could mean it if they decide to do it all together. That was a compromise. The original point is not about having sex together. It's about your point. You said - why can not women have sex with men if he is having sex with women? I assume you were referring to some fairness or double standard type thing. As in if he gets something they should get it too. In that case, why should they have sex with men? He's not having sex with men, so why should they?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 05:26 AM
0

I am in reality. Trying to bring you here, too. Or you think you would be a pedo if you were rich? I know I for sure wouldn't be, but maybe it's just me. Then indeed I would have no argument. But then again, if it's not just me, then you don't have an argument. Although, either way there can be no subjunctive mood in logic and arguments. You judge people for what they do, not for what they would do, and you don't judge people for what they would do if they haven't done it. And the fact that you …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 05:06 AM
–

Why? It only helps those men
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 03:58 AM
1

No, I'm not inventing anything. It is observable reality that most men don't get approached and most men who are approached are conventionally attractive. And yes, attractive men sleep down all the time if they are horny or drunk or whatever and there are no better immediate options. Never heard of booty calls? Of u up texts? Never been to a party? And dating in this conversation is dating for sex. Did you not get it when the comment you are replying to was a reply to a comment about pump and du…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 03:54 AM
1

It follows just fine from your belief that being “first” is best. You’d willingly sacrifice things you actually care about just as long as no other man got it. No, it doesn't. And people in general sacrifice things in order to get things they want more. That's life. It applies to everything. That definitely doesn't mean you will put up with not getting what you want to plant your flag. In this scenario, planting a flag would be what you actually want. You said you’d wait for a virgin and wouldn’…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 03:48 AM
1

I do, the pyramid is not a framework, though. It's just a cartoon. Yah. Compulsorily so. Which is why it feels base-level to them akin to needing air, food, sleep, etc. ? But the lowest level sex is about reproduction, not pleasure. And that's the lowest level of the pyramid and as the study linked above shows, women need it at that level more than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 03:35 AM
1

It is objective. You said it's subjective. That's incorrect. Yes, it is. Those same men are successful IRL. Studies also show that people across cultures agree on what's attractive. The fact that others also get something in the end doesn't contradict it. That's a consequence of monogamy, once the attractive person is taken - they are out of the market for most. So of course less attractive people would get some left overs. And that doesn't change anything. All of that is still objective. Same a…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 03:16 AM
–

lol But did you ask to ask for a hook up?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 02:58 AM
-2

Huh? How does it make sense to you? He's not trying to have sex with other men, why should they? It's probably fine if they have sex with other women like he does, probably even preferred if they do it all together.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 02:14 AM
2

Crossing continents and starting wars.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 10:03 AM
2

They are not mutually exclusive. It can be both and for many men is. No, we can't. Can we assume you would be a pedophile if you were rich? And again, it doesn't matter. What matters is what people actually do. Even if you were a pedo, you aren't now but somebody else is. So we will judge them and wouldn't stop you from judging them just because you would be one if you were rich.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 10:02 AM
1

Nobody is talking about punishment in a legal kind of sense. It's not necessarily a consequence of some actions. The point is, that it's the opposite of rewarding when he's doing his part of the contract that implies taking care of each other sexually (to love and to cherish).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 08:22 AM
2

But they are not given the same opportunity so it's irrelevant what they would do if they were given it. What's relevant is what people who are given this opportunity do with it. And calling it bitterness doesn't change anything. Bitterness or not, it's a completely reasonable and even expected reaction. And you can't just assume what people would do (which is why it's irrelevant). It's not like all liberals or people asking for epstein files would fuck kids if they could. It's not like all anti…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:29 AM
1

Umm yes it kinda does. If you don't like those, then you don't likes sex for what it is. You only like sex in combination with other things. If I like garlic, I like garlic. If I only eat garlic with chicken, then I don't really like garlic. I like chicken with garlic as a spice.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:25 AM
1

Incorrect. Two 9s are better than one 10.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:20 AM
1

That's correct. They key part here is "has to".
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:19 AM
3

Three 6s is better than one 9 very often. And if that 9 will want commitment when he wants sex, he will go for 6. How is it funny or surprising? Yes, they are mad women only approach chads and not all men. That, of course, proves that you were wrong saying that attraction is subjective. Or at the very least shows that women's subjectives overlap almost as if they were a hivemind.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:18 AM
5

There's no reason to believe you when you are just trying to gaslight men. Studies show that beauty standards are pretty much objective. Men's personal experiences and observations show that pretty much the same type of men is successful. Looks predict sexual success (and they wouldn't if it was subjective, then men with all looks would statistically perform about the same).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:16 AM
1

Because someone who is a 6 in one person'd eyes is another person's 9 (as much as I hate this ranking people by number as if they were objects). This is based on nothing. Studies show that beauty standards are pretty much objective.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:15 AM
2

There's nothing subjective about men sleeping with women and not committing. They objectively don't commit.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:14 AM
3

I always see women online say the guys who show up to these are “bottom of barrel” but i know myself and I didn’t see that at the events. I have bad news for you....
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:03 AM
0

That doesn't matter and doesn't even hurt his chances with other women - it advertises him and shows preselection. It's old school trp 101. What she can do is accuse him of rape, now that could be problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:02 AM
0

That's for the women who saved themselves for them, not just for any women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:00 AM
1

Instead of projecting, why not just admit you want women who ignore red flags for intense lust and impulsively chase sex? There's no projecting and nothing to admit. Most women did ignore red flags and chased sex with a guy. Men don't want women who saw some other men as that guy but won't see them that way. It's very simple really. How are you still struggling with this? I’m trying to figure out why that is. You are not trying to figure out anything. You are getting answers to all your posts an…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 04:40 AM
1

No I wasn't. You started replying to me just to rant. And now ranting again in this thread. I simply point out that you're wrong when you are wrong. It's not on me that you won't stop being wrong. It's on you. Just acknowledge you're wrong when you're wrong. Looks a lot better.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:49 AM
0

Many people prefer having a cheap car or using public transport to walking.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:47 AM
1

Who knows? Stability? Fear of loneliness? In many cases settling with someone you find unattractive is better than nothing. Not all people have viable options to choose from. Sure. The logic is very simple. There's no hook up offer to begin with. No explicit offer, anyway. That's one of the main dating advices to men from both men and women - don't ask for sex directly. And the indirect offer is also there when a man is seeking her out for a relationship in most cases. Of course, he's attracted …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:46 AM
–

You don't get it. Stating that something is a certain way is not a moral belief. The emphasis is on something that they think should be done by people. You can't apply your view of the planet's shape IRL. What you can apply is a belief that "people should do X" or "people of group Y should do Z" (if you are a part of that group) etc. So yes, while it's not TECHNICALLY the same thing, that the definition is actually about The argument ends here. Technically correct or incorrect is all that matter…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:42 AM
1

So again, it’s far kore important to you what some other dude got than about what you actually desire. You’d happily put up with not getting what you want for the maybe-chance to plant your flag so you can proclaim “I got the first fucking out of this one”, and don’t respect any other woman as much. No. wtf. That literally doesn't follow from what I said, why would you say "so it's this"?? Do you not understand the concept of necessary and sufficient? So yes, I think it’s quite clear from your a…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:08 AM
1

The pyramid is not a heuristic, it's just a cartoon. It's based on nothing. Compare it to any agreed-upon heuristics. I don't see how it stands. Based on what can you claim that males feel that impulse more than females? That's not what you usually observe. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0020748915001637 In general, females had more negative experiences with infertility than men in most of the domains, including lower levels of identity, self-esteem, and physical health; …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 02:28 AM
1

I'm not fantasizing about anything. I'm telling you how things are or should/shouldn't be. And who's punishing her? This has nothing to do with, nobody is touching her or limiting her. She's the one punishing her man for some reason if she just expects him to not have sex with anyone just because she doesn't want to. As you said, you are not allowed to pressure someone into having sex with the frequency different from what they want. Most importantly, this is not about you or me, stay on topic a…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 10:50 PM
–

Yeah, men also don't complain about SA or DV. Men just don't complain. That shouldn't matter to a movement that's about fairness and equality, though. They should want to fix things that are wrong even if nobody complains.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:49 PM
3

A logical person who complain about “being used”, “she has different standards for men”, “she didn’t make others wait, but making me wait” would just seek out women who actually want hookups. They did seek out that woman. But she had hookups with others and not with him. Guys simply can’t get hookups and they’re upset about it. They are also upset if a woman had hookups with others fast but won't with them. They are just upset that they aren't as attractive and are being settled for. a dream mos…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:17 PM
1

Correct! So if you agreed to be monogamous but wont' sleep with your partner, that means they would become nulligamous and have zero partners unless they sleep with someone else. Nulligamy is not monogamy. And we agree, it's wrong to force non-monogamy on a person who doesn’t want to be non-monogamous (for example, nulligamous). Which is why yes you can't pressure someone to not have less sex than they want to have if you signed up to be their supply of sex. Also, similarly, you can't enforce mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 07:14 AM
0

Lmao, can't argue with definitions so let me go ad hominem and insult someone who never insulted me. Classic. Just acknowledge you're wrong when you're wrong. Looks a lot better.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:54 AM
0

You are not calling anything out. You are projecting and talking about yourself. The thread is supposed to be about generalizations. It's literally about " A woman". Generalizations are good. Of course, there's "normal". Normal is simply where the mean lands. And then there are deviations from normal. Having deviations from normal is normal, but they are deviations from normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 04:25 AM
1

Not even that, strictly speaking. It's not theoretical. Please, see what "theory" is. The pyramid is based on nothing but how that guy felt. There was no discussion, no evidence that something ranks higher than something else, no convention between all researchers in that field. I am not sure that I'm agreeing. I'm definitely disagreeing with the claim that that is the reason for friction. I suggest distinguishing between two aspects of sex and discussing where would each sex place those aspects…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 04:18 AM
1

That was explained ad nauseam. How do you still have these questions? Because we don't care about fast sex to the point where we reject a girl who never has fast sex. We care about fast sex if we want fast sex. If we want something serious then we care about getting the best deal. That's what we actually want! How is that a contradiction to you? We actually want to be the man whom she demonstrated to have the most desire for. That's what we want. Because, as already explained above, if we want t…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 04:14 AM
1

It absolutely does have everything to do with it. If other guys didn't ask for hookup but she hooked up with them then she's more attracted to them. Real intentions are irrelevant, actually. No, we weren't. Since when "so %something that was never said%" is a good argument? That's laughable. No false pretenses here at all. One can want to be in a relationship but they still don't want to be made waiting for sex longer than someone else in her past. If there's a track record of you hooking up ear…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 04:04 AM
1

No, it's not a definition of a hypocrite. QED. Thanks for replying. Maybe look up the definition when you get a minute. Even less. It doesn't take very long. Hypocrisy is about moral beliefs, not about - idk even - following through with something because you believe things are a certain way? Makes no sense. Btw, you believe the Earth is a globe? Go circumnavigate it if you're not a hypocrite. That's how you sound.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 03:03 AM
1

Exactly. It's very easy to understand. You can't just say - you can't sleep with me but also can't sleep with anyone else. We are saying the same thing! Why would you say "nope"? You can't control someone else's body, therefore you are not allowed to pressure someone into have more sex or less sex than they want to have. That would basically holding another person hostage. Like imagine you have a deal that you move in together and only you can clean the apartment. He can't do it and he can't hir…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 02:35 AM
1

But you aren't talking about that person, you are talking about men. Your title literally says "most men". Half of your paragraphs start with men (plural), most men, and many men. Wait, is that your idea of supporting a "most men" argument? Just showing one example?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 02:24 AM
0

So you just turn every thread into a thread about you? He's talking about stuff in general, not asking about personal anecdotes <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 08:31 PM
1

Might as well be. Never forget the law of fuck yes or no aka the fuck yes rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 08:28 PM
-1

It's fun using this pyramid to troll people who say that sex is not a need, but get real. It's based on nothing, the guy just introduced it to described his hypothesis (not even theory strictly speaking) that is also based on nothing. There's no empirical research behind it. There's absolute no reason why different things go on particular levels of the pyramid other than it feels right. But regarding your point - third level is still pretty low so it's surprising that women can't relate. And I w…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:34 PM
-1

That's incorrect on its face. Men literally are saying that consistency includes being made to wait if she's a virgin or makes everyone wait. And no, relationships are not the cost of sex. The problem is not really the cost. The problem is that she was attracted to past men in a way she's not attracted to the current man. Of course, men value if she cares about hobbies etc etc. That doesn't change the fact that they want her to be attracted to them sexually. What don't you understand still? You …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 09:02 PM
-1

Or to pressure someone into have less sex than they want to have.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:58 AM
–

Show what you found then. Show how those guys you listed are successful. If they are not, then the bar is not in hell as you claim. There are plenty of men with those bad profiles and profiles they put a lot of effort in who get nothing. Go to any app subreddit and see how most of the profile review threads start. And notice that some of those profiles are not horrible horrible and all of them are definitely better than what you described.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:54 AM
–

Everyone go home, the same size is n=4. It's all good now. It's representative, too, because they are all content creators.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:48 AM
–

It proves the opposite of what you claim if it proves anything. At the very least it definitely doesn't prove what you claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:47 AM
-1

If your point was that a large subsection of men just like a large subsections of wives will not believe when they are obviously gaslighted, then yes it has been made. Since those women probably gaslight men just like the husband gaslights the wife in the original move I referred to.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:43 AM
1

But you don't get it, they are special and are even more rare than those sizes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:39 AM
2

Yeah, top 0.65% to top 0.01% should be considered large. https://calcsd.info/chart
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:38 AM
1

wait so why and when do you ask for photos? -Hey would you like to have a coffee or to study together? -Send dis dih first thx
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:35 AM
1

Ah ok, you want to have sex with someone but not with someone you supposedly love and want to build a future with. Makes sense
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:12 AM
1

Why is this so hard to understand lmao? Like it's not a blue thing, it seems to be a woman thing. It's only worse treatment if she slept with other dudes super quickly. Worse requires that something better exists. If it doesn't, then it's not worse. If she doesn't sleep with dudes super quickly then it's not worse if she doesn't sleep with you super quickly.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:10 AM
1

Of course she's getting flowers, thoughtful gifts, dates, compliments etc. She gets everything everyone before her got at the very least. She gets the best deal I've ever offered or can think off. But that is of course, if she is genuinely into me and I'm also getting the best deal she's ever offered (at least what everyone got before) or can think off (if it's the first deal). Why not put effort into someone who's genuinely into her?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 07:04 AM
-1

Right, just like there's a large subsection of wives who will not ever believe that a husband is telling the truth that the gaslights are not dimmer.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 04:56 AM
6

No, that's not the only thing it means. It also means there's no preference for shorter dildos or for dildos of any particular length. The point is - they are dildos. They are not used the same way dicks are. 3D models would be a better estimation because of what question was asked. In your link, they didn't ask about the preferred penis size, they asked about the preferred toy's size. The toy is controlled by a woman herself, the toy is not used orally, the toy can vibrate, the toy can be turne…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 04:54 AM
–

Dumb. That's loser behavior. It is a loser behavior to try and offer a worse deal, yet many women do it. Some men do it, too, probably. I can't imagine being insulted because I'm not compatible with someone. It's not about compatibility. If it was about compatibility than physical parameters wouldn't predict dating success or number of sexual partners etc. Nobody is forced to date anyone. Nobody is tricked either. And if you've been dating for "a while", why would you feel upset about something …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 04:05 AM
–

Incorrect. If other men didn't ask for hook up either, then why would they get it and you wouldn't? Of course get to complain. And nobody denied that you should communicate. And you communicate that you want a hook up by kissing, touching, etc. Actually, not even that. You are a man in this scenario. If you talked to her and even went out with her? Then of course you want to hook up and communicated it automatically, and she knows you want to hook up unless you're pretending to be a friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 03:55 AM
1

Are you sure you know the definition of hypocrisy? Because none of what he says fits that definition. You also didn't call him out for being hypocrite to begin with, it only appeared in your last comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 01:20 AM
1

I think you are confused. Direct communication is not about brutal and not nice (or not brutal and nice). Direct communication means you say what you mean. You can still baby and momma somebody and still communicate directly. When they ask you if you are ok and you say "fine" it better mean you're fine. Direct communication = I'm not supposed to read your mind and guess something or be expected to just get it. You know what I mean? If you are rude and an asshole then you are just that. You can s…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 01:18 AM
-2

There's plenty of research proving that the size they prefer is in top 10% or so. And where does your study show any number for the length? It says the insertable length is not a predictor of a toy's popularity. Either way, this is about toy's and so it's not applicable here, since the toy implies that they can/will move it around etc, so the size of it doesn't necessarily mean that's the preferred penis size. That's why you need to look at studies about those, which there are plenty as you your…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 01:12 AM
–

Men want both casual sex and romantic relationships and seek for women for both. They just don't like when a woman who does casual sex with men she's attracted to won't have it with them. If she only does romantic relationships - fine, no problem. If she does casual sex, does it with him, and then it progresses to a romantic relationship - fine, no problem. The problem is when she acts as if she's not attracted to him while claiming that she is (i.e. making wait for sex when she's known not to d…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:12 PM
–

So walk away. Idk why y'all bring this up like you're forced to date that woman They already do walkaway. They will still bring it up because they feel insulted (as they should) that they were offered a worse deal. And often they find out that she applied different standards in the past after already dating her for a while, in which case yeah they were kinda forced to date that woman. Tricked, really, but still they were mislead and didn't make an informed decision. That's actually where most of…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:08 PM
–

Did all people she hooked up with ask for a hookup? If the answer is no (and it is no), then his point stands. Different rules for different men. Different standards for members of the same group = literal double standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:05 PM
–

Women are gatekeepers, not men, so why be mad at men? That being said, they still are mad at men and will happily stub them in the back if the opportunity arises. The point is, it's not about women sleeping with those men, it's about women not sleeping with these guys. If women didn't sleep with those men, they probably still wouldn't sleep with these guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:03 PM
–

A couple things you got wrong (as usual) which makes your entire thing incorrect on its face (as usual). You should really put some time into reading what people say and some thought into analyzing it before jumping to incorrect (as usual) conclusions. guys here and in the red pill blame victims of abuse for not choosing better and how a lot of single moms didn’t choose better. When people say choose better - that's not blaming, that's an actionable advice for the future + what you should have d…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:01 PM
–

That's not a point, that's a question. And the answer is it's a fundamentally different experience. It's being with more than one person as opposed to just one person. You can do things that you can not do with just one person. You still didn't answer my question or make your point. Again, what sexual variety of experiences are you talking about? What variety of experiences do men have in LTR?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 10:45 PM
–

What does it have to do with what I said? I am talking about average price and I'm calculating that at that price one could make 200k casually working, i.e. 1-2 clients/hours a day.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 10:44 PM
–

Lmao the best part is how literally all men who posted agree - red, blue, purple, and black. OP's post addressing men is like CEO explaining how pizza parties are better than raises.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 09:11 AM
–

<image>
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 09:09 AM
–

That's what they think but reality is different. More criteria doesn't mean it's more difficult to meet. They mistakenly think that it's more difficult because they hook up with more men than they date/marry. But it so happens that those men they hook up with overlap. So in the end, more men can marry than consistently hook up. Think 10 men and 10 women, 10 women marry 1 man each and hookup with 3 men each, but if you look at men, 10 of them are married and only 3-4 of them hooked up with all wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 09:08 AM
–

So as you can see there are a lot more criteria for a relationship so being seen as only good for sex is kinda an insult really. At this point you are in denial unless you just joined this sub. Hookup - fewer criteria that are harder to meet because most of them are not under your control, they are immutable/genetic. You have to be born with them or not age out of them. Marriage - more criteria that are easier to achieve and that are in principle achievable. Of course, you added similar criteria…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 09:06 AM
–

If those kids could read they would be very upset
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 06:40 AM
–

Oh if she has no rules, then we have no problem to discuss. Then the average guys won't have to do anything that hot guys didn't have to do and hot guys won't get any treatment or sex/sex acts that average guys won't get. Where am I acting that it's sacred? I'm not talking about that at all. I am talking about other things, about people claim how someone is special etc but de facto acting like somebody else was more special. Cool. Then if she's attracted to the current guy as much as the guy in …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 05:07 AM
1

Step 1 - stop calling it patriarchy and associate it with men as a group/all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 04:46 AM
–

No, I'm not. I am and always was. This entire thread is about having different requirements. My comment you originally responded to was about different requirements. Looks like you are the one trying to go off on a tangent. It doesn't matter what your goal is. What matters is what you do. Some of you do have casual sex. The requirements men need to meet to be picked for casual sex by those of you who have it are a lot higher than the requirements for marriage. Meaning, of course, stuff other tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 01:02 AM
–

Nope. You won't. Only if you go to an actual prostitute and pay. Most men who have sex don't have to directly pay or to tell women that they will give them money. You are the one talking nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 12:56 AM
–

Yeah, no, just being able to set the requirements doesn't mean that things are similar or, as you said, "the same". They absolutely are not the same because requirements are set based on completely different principles. And yes women absolutely have requirements for casual sex and those requirements are higher than requirements for marriage. That's the whole point. Wtf you mean they don't have requirements? If they didn't have requirements then any man could have casual sex with any woman, which…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 12:41 AM
–

No, it's not the same at all. It's the opposite. Casual sex is worse for women than marriage according to women and the requirements for it a lower. A woman meeting requirements for marriage automatically means requirements for casual sex. The same is not true about men. Women have higher requirements for casual sex than for marriage even though they claim they are after marriage, and a man meeting requirements for marriage doesn't necessarily meet requirements for casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 12:11 AM
–

That's incorrect. Plenty of men with money can't get sex. That's how the entire manosphere started. And if they get sex, they see how that sex often is a lot less enthusiastic than with other men who had less money.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 12:09 AM
–

Right, but they do online sex work without going against their sexuality. I already explained it 2 times (3 including the previous sentence, 4 including the next sentence). Women can do sex they would do even for free, men can't. That's a big part of the privilege.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 11:46 PM
–

Why do you think it's a fairy tale? In this very sub, in this very thread actually, you see women saying that they require more from husbands. What would it take for you not to think that it's a fairy tale? If women basically confirming it is not it, if the number of partners distribution among men is not it, if women saying (and stats showing) that they don't find most men attractive is not it, then what would it be?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 11:38 PM
–

It doesn't have to be regular for the point to hold and for the fear to be real. In fact, it could even make it worse. If she had it that one time, then how special is that one guy that she broke her rules for him or decided to experiment with him while claiming to seriously like this new guy, yet not breaking rules for him or feeling the desire to experiment with him.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 11:35 PM
–

If both genders initiate break ups roughly equally often, then indeed it does. Are breakups/divorces equally likely to be initiated by men and by women (50/50 +- 5)?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 11:27 PM
–

Because there's absolutely no guarantee that they will find that woman or that such woman even exists. In the meantime, they aren't getting any younger.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 11:25 PM
1

What rules? They don't set rules. They just see if a woman has record of casual sex - then they give her casual sex, or has record of dating for marriage - then they give her that. They just give women what they need. If it doesn't benefit you, then why do you have it? And if you have it and you know we value it, then why don't you have it with us? Go date men you would have it with and leave us alone. That's the idea. Of course I want to be in a romantic relationship. I don't want to be require…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 09:18 PM
1

How many years? Of course you can't, nobody appreciates people using outdated photos. Either way, dating is definitely harder, not easier, if you have to consider hiring a professional photographer when in the past you didn't need to.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 09:13 PM
–

Oh and if it's hard then you must be neurodivergent. That's a horrible argument. See no true Scotsman.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 09:03 PM
2

Dating is easy bro just hire a professional photographer bro
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 09:02 PM
1

To not do what through OF pages? You're saying men's audience would be gay men, so they would have to do gay sex which is not what they would normally do. Women do the sex they would normally do.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 08:58 PM
1

Wym women don't leave? Don't leave what? I was talking about quitting casual sex if they don't like it. And of course you are wrong that it doesn't feel good. It feels good with a long term partner as most women would agree. And all of it is well know, the orgasm gap, that men don't care as much if it's casual, that it's better in LTR - and women knowing and hearing all that still choose to do casual sex. So of course they do it because they want to. Nope. Most men aren't using any manipulation …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 08:54 PM
1

Why are you lying and changing my words? I didn't say deception, I said cheating. If they're common, if not, why do they always come up to me? Why do I see women complaining all the time? Why don't I want that myself, and why doesn't every woman I know want it either? Why is women's biggest complaint that "men only want to use women's bodies but not long-term relationships"? Why is there a complaint about not being wife material? Men don't have this complaint. Because you are one person who isn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 07:54 PM
1

One-two clients/hours a day is casual compared to 8 hours a day (up to 10 with commute sometimes). What is an average sex worker? I am talking about the average sex worker I see (online) and they pretty much hit the numbers mentioned in the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 07:40 PM
1

How is it the same hole if it's a different person? Of course it's not the same hole. It's literally a different hole. You could have them both in the same room at the same time. You could insert a purple dildo in one and a pink dildo in the other. At the same time. They are different holes. They are on/in different people. It would be absolutely different. It would be a different experience. You were talking about experiences and experiencing sex with two people is definitely a different experi…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 07:38 PM
0

Haha no, I don't have emotions about it. I just focused on it because it feels like it's some sort of gotcha for them (probably cause they think it's gay and should make me change my point). I saw it mentioned by 2-3 separate people in this thread. But no, it doesn't change anything. What I said applies to all acts. Of course I understand how consent works. Maybe you don't? She most likely doesn't. She thinks enthusiasm is binary, so I wouldn't be surprised.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 07:35 PM
1

Not comparable. A woman can make money doing only stuff she likes and would do for free but sometimes with even hotter men. Gay men probably won't pay for straight porn. As for prostitution - they still do what they would normally do just not with their preferred options. Eating broccoli when you prefer an eggplant is not the same as eating rocks when you prefer an eggplant.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 07:02 PM
1

Have that option is a privilege. That's not a stretch. It's like dumbasses going off about male privilege when many (I would even say most) men don't have or don't take advantage of any privileges. As for supply-demand, demand encourages supply but doesn't cause it. Nobody is forced to supply anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 06:57 PM
0

Even more. At that point you become knowledgeable enough about the process to have a consulting company, or to manage younger creators, or to be a producer.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 06:56 PM
4

And does this average OF content creator post good quality content every day or works full time to post something high production value regularly? Do they do customs? Do they promote on other platforms? Because all these stats include people who create an account and quit or create an account and post just a bit for extra cash.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 06:53 PM
-1

It absolutely does. Yes, you can be enthusiastic in everything but not in sex, but this thread is about sexual enthusiasm, so enthusiasm in everything is irrelevant. Yes, if you didn't like anal with this partner then that doesn't mean you are not enthusiastic (unless you liked it with another, of course). If you don't have a desire to find out if you like it with this partner but had desire to find out if you liked it with another - then you are not enthusiastic. No, I'm not sounding rapey just…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 01:10 AM
-1

Yes it does mean that if you are claiming you have sexual enthusiasm for that partner. More precisely, it shows if you have it. Once again, not liking something with one partner doesn't mean you won't like it with another. Wanting to try something with one partner but punishing another partner for not liking something with the first partner is not fair to another partner and definitely shows less enthusiasm. No, it's not abusive thinking, it's logical thinking. If I offer everything (and most me…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:53 AM
1

Again, no. I don't think you are wrong, I know you are wrong and I'm showing where and why you are wrong. No, if someone's body doesn't work - they are dead. Mind doesn't work if brain doesn't work and if heart doesn't work. This is not about getting you to agree, this is about showing that you are wrong. If you change your mind and agree, good, educated one more person today. If not, no biggie indeed. Still showed you were wrong so others won't make the same mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:49 AM
1

Lmao now you will put words in my mouth because you can't find an argument? Laughable. I never said. I said there are only 3 holes, I didn't say sex is only 3 holes. No, I don't need to reread your comment, you need to reread the comment you are replying to. Not only did you misquote me, but also missed the part where I said " if it's about experiences, please show your source." (i.e. I am not talking about partners anymore), and still didn't answer the question - what various experiences are yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:42 AM
1

So? Multiple people agree that the Earth is flat. Multiple people there's no square root of negative numbers. Many people are uneducated, that doesn't mean anything. It absolutely is. That or a very big part of who they are. Not the only part necessarily. It's very easy to test. Remove a person's job/career - it's still them. Make them experience some trauma, get PTSD, and change something in their character - still them. Remove their body - they don't exist anymore. Yes, body changes often, peo…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:37 AM
0

Again, something being painful or not enjoyable with one partner, doesn't mean it's painful or not enjoyable with another. Reluctantly it's just a low level of enthusiastic. Reluctantly is a lot more enthusiastic then "didn't try at all". No you shouldn't be pressured. You should want to try it. That's what enthusiastic means. Yes, men who tried pegging with one woman should be open to trying it with another. Two thing to note though - 1) it's not trying something for her, she has no nervous end…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:22 AM
1

Variety of sexual experiences is a lot less various if it doesn't include variety of partners. And I thought you were talking about stuff from men's POV, as in about something men want - and that would be variety of partners. Anyway, even if it's about experiences, please show your source. You can't just claim it like that when we see stories how women tried something but won't try it again all the time. And there's only 3 holes, you know. It's not like different positions or locations are varie…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:13 AM
1

My vagina is a tiny part of who I am. The quote you are commenting on has nothing about vagina and doesn't have that word at all. Those are the men I've avoided. And thank goodness. If you are into homosexual men more power to you. I did not confirm your argument, no. I showed that it was bad. Accused women of being dumb and wanting something that makes no sense, pretended that physical body is not who people are - you really just have no argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:10 AM
1

Yes, you are obligated to at least try. That being said, one could argue that it's not comparable, since her finger is not her erogenous zone and her fingering you by itself doesn't make her orgasm. She could finger any hole and cum if that was the case. But yes, if you wanted to try with other women but not with her, she would be reasonable in questioning how attracted you are. Not liking something with one partner doesn't mean you wouldn't like it with another. So how come you wanted to see if…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:44 PM
2

No, it's not settling. It's you being consistent. The problem men have is when a woman wants to try stuff with other men but not with them. That is settling.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:39 PM
3

That boring date stuff and relationship stuff that you think is the price of admission for sex? Women do that stuff for you. You don't get the point at all. Relationship stuff is cool. The problem men is when the beginning stage of being with that woman featured her requiring more than what she required with others. Can even forget LTR. Say she has FWB1 and FWB2, but would do more stuff with FWB1 or more often or required less, etc. FWB2 would feel a certain way about it. Now when a man meets a …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:38 PM
4

Because most women want to be wanted for who they are as a person, not because they have a vagina. No, I don't think most women are braindead, you shouldn't accuse them of this braindead take. Most women understand that they are a person with a vagina and that if they had the same quality but no vagina, they wouldn't be wanted by heterosexual men. Their physical body is who they are/a very big part of who they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:31 PM
1

The first sentence implicates how you see things. If you think a low effort, low emotional connection relationship for casual and easy sex is a better deal than someone in a relationship then what you want is a low effort FWB relationship versus a romantic one That's not what is being compared. It's not FWB vs LTR. Of course, LTR is the ultimate goal and is better. It's FWB vs LTR or GTFO (as opposed to developing from FWB) with a woman who didn't mind FWB/hookups with others.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:29 PM
1

Lmao outliers expose trends as bullshit. The education system reform is very much needed and would happen a lot faster if they used some of the things some people are saying to demonstrate its necessity.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:23 PM
2

You think? I don't a guy in LTR is more likely to have more variety. I think on average he will have sex with one partner in many decades. It's a little higher if you include the ones who cheat or the ones whose women are enthusiastic about them and bring other women but it is lower if you include the ones in dead bedrooms (or with low frequency) that sleep with 0 partners for a while. What makes you say they get more variety? Do you have a source for that?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:20 PM
1

She's absolutely not as enthusiastic as with chad if he was enthusiastic to try something with him but not with the current guy. After all, we all know that not liking something with one partner doesn't mean not liking it with another.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:17 PM
–

And still, after reading profiles they still rate most men unattractive, don't they? The dating app stats I've seen were just about "attractive", not "physically attractive" iirc.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:00 PM
–

Hold on. Dating app experiments just show matches and many men swipe right without even looking. So grandmas could get matches but would they actually get a date. And if they did, would they get laid? If your experiments include that and the answer is yes, please share them. I never heard of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:59 PM
–

Hey look the “be a jerk” myth that’s been debunked countless times Show 5 examples of it being debunked (and showing some outliers doesn't debunk anything in case you didn't know) or gtfo
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:53 PM
–

Didn't see that. Yeah, the graph is pretty clear - men are fluctuating around 0-10 con. If anything they became more liberal.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:49 PM
–

Fr if anyone didn't believe there was the education system crisis or a teacher shortage - just read those responses
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:47 PM
–

Lmao the delusion in this thread. An average guy is 50 lbs heavier than him and has no hair.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:43 PM
–

Yeah no this guy is out of touch. Chadfishing experiments proved him wrong long time ago. Women are attracted to good looking men even if they are pedofile nazis. His bs argument that he saw 6 with hot women is canceled by me and many other men seeing 6 go without sex or any attention from women for years.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:42 PM
1

Less anyone cheat than not cheat. According to their self reports, anyway. That's irrelevant. No it wouldn't make a cheating wife more valuable because no one wants a cheating wife. But men do want to be required less or at least not more than others and do want to have sex. So that is more valuable. Do you really have to ask? Like wtf is that question? No, it's not either or. They are not mutually exclusive. I spent two separate comments before this one to explain that FWB material men get both…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 09:11 PM
1

But what if he gives back the oral he received? Wouldn't that just be a refund?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 09:08 PM
6

525 an hour means she would see 400 clients a year, which is about 1 client a day. She's crazy thinking that someone should be making 200k working 1-2 hours a day.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 09:07 PM
1

For starters, you have to prove this claim: sex work is not a viable career path for 95%+ of women simply because it won't be profitable enough Only then can we do the math. A lot of your operating cost items are optional or become a lot more manageable if a woman doesn't operate alone. She can share a place with other workers. That's actually how it mostly works. They rent an apartment or a house together or have like a house/brothel with a madam/manager. Another factor is that current workers …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 09:06 PM
1

Of course it's relevant. It clearly shows which is harder to achieve and therefore giving men which shows that you value/appreciate them more. No, they are not walking dildos to women in general. Maybe to some of those they slept with? Maybe even to all of those they slept with? But they are still not disqualified from dating others and get into LTR/marriages. It's a lot better than not being a walking dildo for anyone and waiting to marry someone, especially if that someone used some walking di…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 08:44 PM
1

That's literally not helping your/her case. Who's whining? We are describing and documenting it, and discussing what's the best thing a man can do in this situation. The only one whining here is the OP and she's whining that men don't accept women settling for them sexually. It could be a win for the one who does want it. But yes, nobody is saying that people should have it before the want. The point is that they should want it with you as much as they have a track record of wanting it in the pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 08:40 PM
–

What does that have to do with what I'm saying? This is not about you so how is that relevant what you would do?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 08:18 PM
0

Nope. No full stop. Me not liking something is not a reason not to do it. And we are talking about not liking, not about disliking. Let's say, my partner enjoys a foot rub or a massage. I don't necessarily like giving it. It does nothing for me. But I would do it for them. Or say, giving oral sex, most people don't get physically stimulated by licking or sucking something. They do it, though, because it turns their partner on - and as a side effect maybe it turns them on to see that they do some…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 11:12 PM
1

That is incorrect. More men are married than hooking up consistently. Hookup material men aren't complaining that nobody will marry him, that's not a thing. Women aren't punishing those men, they aren't refusing to date them. So they get the best of both worlds, while husband material men only get to marry somebody who probably used to sleep with others without commitment but wouldn't sleep with him without commitment. There's no trade off, a man doesn't choose hookup or husband material. The ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 10:02 PM
3

I am not. Where am I antagonistic to relationships? I'm antagonistic to women claiming somebody is the love of their life but giving them a worse deal. If she was attracted to him as much AND for other reasons too (i.e. he's appreciated more), then she wouldn't require more to have sex with him. Of course, she could require more to maintain the relationship. We are talking about the beginning stages of it, though, about how it starts, how first sex happens, etc. Of course they are intertwined, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 09:59 PM
–

Why'd we make those laws? Nobody is talking about the law that you can't become unattractive to men. That's unrealistic, too, since you can become unattractive due to things out of your control. None of what you said is related to the topic. We are talking about slut shaming, so the law would be to allow slut shaming or to punish slutting around. You know, they would be about behaviors and actions that are completely under people's control. Like all laws are.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 09:55 PM
1

Why now? Why not after you? People rarely change, their requirements sure do, though. And why mention casual sex? That's not the scenario we are discussing. We are talking about two people who want to be in a relationship. And one of them has a record of having sex with somebody they are attracted too quickly. She can pursue a relationship with this guy after having sex with him quickly. Supposedly, she is attracted and therefore wants sex with him (and a relationship), so at the very least she …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 09:52 PM
1

Believing that other people want exactly what you want because you want it is solipsistic. Believing women are getting “the best deal” when her husband is cheating on her is peak solipsism, dude. Where do I say anything about what women believe? Can you not read or something? Yes, they are getting the best deal. Most husbands don't cheat, and those who do would cheat on any other woman, too. So again, she gets the best deal they can offer. Yes, I know you think everyone totally wants to enable y…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 10:00 AM
3

Nope. Not a single goalpost move. Literally just responses to what you said and your attempts to goal post. Goalpost move #1 - not a move, I clearly show that most men don't have it below. You still provided no evidence for your affirmative claim and I didn't even need to show anything. My point holds, yours is dismissed until proven. Goalpost move #2 - not a goalpost move at all. It refers to stats that show that only 23% of men or so had casual sex in the last year. Which clearly shows that yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 08:15 AM
2

It's that in general or at least most of it as you can learn from listening to what other women look for in a partner for casual sex, seeing who they swipe on and meet on the apps, seeing what kind of men usually gets casual sex. But of course it's not the only thing. It's all about the result. But I see how it's easy to forget about the big picture when you are distracted by constant threads about height and other physical parameters.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 08:08 AM
0

They knew in advance the stats and that they would be disappointed but did it anyway. So if they report disappointment at that point, that's on them. And they still went for it, so the disappointment was worth it apparently.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 08:01 AM
–

I only say what is so. yeah it's great to gauge their platonic interest. How does talking to them gauge their sexual interest? It doesn't. Yes, that's correct. But it's a forum so I'm replying to incorrect comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 07:30 AM
–

Nope. She is the gatekeeper not him. She can literally enforce a condition that he's tied up or handcuffed during it, for example. Or pull his pants below his knees so it's easy to run away if anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 07:28 AM
0

No, that's a pretty good metric. Absolutely no shaming, too. It's not shameful if they don't want to do it and/or don't love someone. Are you sure you know what shaming is? Again, if there are medical issues and it's painful etc - then that's what I call physically impossible, as I already said earlier. Of course, if the situation is not different (it was just as risky before or as painful), then why wouldn't I want to risk it with someone I claim to love if I risked it with someone I claim not …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 06:58 AM
2

It's irrelevant. The point is, even that minority of women still only picks the same men. If you look at the partner count distribution among men, you will see that it's very top heavy. And if there's fewer men interested in that, it only makes it more obvious how it's more difficult to get picked. But you forgot about the most important thing. We are not talking about women who never had casual sex. Those women are not settling for a husband guy compared to a hook up guy. So why'd you bring the…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 06:32 AM
1

Again, I learned about it 20 years ago without even being a woman. Like it's all over mainstream culture. They can read it before they even hit puberty. They have parents and - again - culture telling them that men want one thing, that they won't care about them etc. So they did hear/read it and learned those stats/facts. And then chose to hook up anyway. Clearly, hookups are either sexually satisfying or are satisfying in other aspects and women aren't looking for sexual satisfaction. After all…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 06:03 AM
1

Sexually is for who they are. As opposed to what they do or how they act or what they learn (career, sense of humor, etc). Take those things away - and you are still you, take your body away - and you don't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 05:58 AM
4

How are you appreciate for more when more men are in relationships than in FWB/hooking up? No, you are appreciated less that's why you need more to make up for not being as attractive. If she was attracted to you enough - she wouldn't require a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 05:57 AM
1

most men have it No they don't. Especially not compared to LTR/marriage. Last I check it was 23% of men or so who had casual sex last year, which includes even men who had it 364 days ago, so definitely less than 25% of men have it with any consistency. About 50% of men are married, so more than 50% men are married or in LTR (iirc the number was like 75%).
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 05:55 AM
1

Then sexual satisfaction is not what women are looking for in hookups. Because those statistics were showing the same thing more than 20 years ago when I first read about it. Yet women still keep hooking up.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 05:41 AM
3

That's what they men mean by attractive in that context. It's what attracts. If it means safe, then safe is included. It's whatever it takes to be allowed into the minority of chosen men who are picked for hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 05:41 AM
4

Men just see the numbers. More men are married or in LTR than in FWB or hooking up. And they how things play out with them and men around them. You can keep pretending you don't understand and try to make it about humor or enthusiasm or whatever over hotness. The thing is though, when men say hot they mean has whatever it takes to be picked. For most women it's physical attractiveness, for you it's enthusiasm or whatever. The point is - same men get picked for hookups. They get to enjoy variety …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 05:39 AM
1

No, the only fantasy here is you thinking a non-monogamous husband is offering a good deal, hahah. Just yuck. That's not my argument. Read before you reply. My argument is that it's the best deal he has to offer. Another woman wouldn't get a better deal. If you don't find it good enough - that's on you, not on him. That's not him settling, that's you having unfair expectations. If she’s gay, she’s way better off just avoiding dating the scum-bag cheating slut man in the first place and dating wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:55 AM
-1

Who's shaming anyone? Nobody would have to shame me into doing something that I've done before. If I love this person as much or more than the ex, then I will want to do everything myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:45 AM
–

I will explain after you google it. Did you google it? Hookup/sex is necessary but not sufficient. That's why they won't ask for it if they want a relationship. They will go for an LTR and note if she is sexually attracted to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:42 AM
–

Then ask for that. Did all those men ask? No they didn't. They were just starting getting physical (a big question who initiated or what her roles was), touching, etc. and she didn't reject their advances and maybe even made advances of her own, but definitely didn't tell them that she's not ready or whatever. Did he ask for a hookup? Yes, if he touched her/kiss her - then he effectively asked for a hookup so if she wasn't enthusiastic to respond, then she said no to his request. In fact, if he …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:30 AM
–

So? What does that change? Sounds like a win-win. He gets to vet and see if she's attracted to him, she gets to vet and see if he respect her boundaries and be appreciative.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:28 AM
–

That's exactly how you get used for money or status or what have you. The fact that they have money and a job doesn't mean they wouldn't want even more money and definitely does nothing to show if they are sexually attracted to you or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:27 AM
–

Sounds like poor vetting. And choosing a broke bitch Rights, that's what he's saying. So how can he vet better to make sure she is attracted to him if not by seeing if she has sex with him early and/or without investment/spending?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:06 AM
–

Finish what you started, you already have the answer to the first scenario right there. Or... ..al sex. Oral sex. The last two scenarios don't change anything, though. So she didn't mind risking that feeling leading her astray with that other guy? So she didn't require any more connection or meaning to let that other guy inside her body? Does she really like this one, then? Facts seem to show otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:02 AM
–

Google "necessary and sufficient"
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 12:50 AM
–

Bruh seriously how are you commenting about what men think and say when you don't read what they say? When women say “we want men who want relationships” they mean men who genuinely want love and intimacy, enjoying romantic gestures because it makes his woman happy and feel loved. For some reason men here think “Men do want relationships” should mean “We tolerated your bullshit and became your dance monkeys, now where’s pussy?!”. They don't mean that. It's the year of our lord 2026. They have se…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 12:46 AM
1

The all are. You just don’t realize it. Men who feel like they are settling will not put in effort and won’t do anything to make her happy. They’ll just do the minimum needed to avoid loosing their boring backup plan. They don’t actually care about her beyond avoiding the annoyance of a divorce. Nope. That's just your fantasy based on nothing. If they all are, then demonstrate it beyond the shadow of a doubt. And I’m telling you that for the overwhelming majority of women, that deal is fucking r…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 08:00 PM
2

It’ll just be different complaints That's not related to settling other than cheating. But, just like porn, that follows from wanting variety and it's completely in her power to give him that variety so he doesn't have to cheat. Most men don't cheat anyway. Stop telling women that they should be happy with what you want them to be happy with. Where did I say that? I didn't. I'm just telling you that it's a fact that she will get the best deal he can offer. Another woman wouldn't get a better dea…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 06:44 PM
–

No, it's not. It's perfectly fine and gets the point across. You just can't parry and try to make it personal. But an appeal to authority (or the opposite) is an old logical fallacy. It doesn't matter how you take me as a person or what kind of person I am. The only thing that matters is the argument. How does analogy work? Fentanyl is not good for them because it's bad for their health. Sex is definitely good for men and it's actually good for their mental health if they could get it, especiall…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 06:13 PM
1

Yeah I know what weaponized incompetence means. And I say that it's bs unless you can prove malicious intent. It's not weaponized incompetence in most cases if you don't how to do something and suggest somebody else who does it better does it instead. For example, cooking. Some people just don't get it. Like, I'm not asking anyone to cook, I cook for myself and been doing it for years but I don't like my cooking and would rather buy food to go. That's just incompetence. It's not like I'm refusin…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 09:43 AM
1

You are right. It doesn't make it impossible or wrong. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You can't just assume things when there are easier/simpler explanations to them. You see what I mean? Say you see that your car got a flat tire. Why would you assume that somebody cut it or an army of gnomes stole the air from it, when you can assume that you ran over a nail. And yes, the fact that the nail explanation is simpler doesn't mean that it's correct. Other two assumptions co…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 09:37 AM
1

I had a problem with the use of the term "weaponized incompetence". Not self regulating emotionally doesn't pass why? That's a decent explanation and it is in principle simpler than assuming that people are deregulated by something external that was stronger than their self-regulation. The first example makes the explanation more complicated, the second doesn't, so why would I have a problem with it? At least I don't see how it makes it more complicated. That doesn't mean that it doesn't, maybe …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 08:57 AM
0

Then why was there pressure to try it with one gf but not the other - am I not afraid to lose her as much as the previous one? Cool, so I wanted to try a few times with a woman in the past, so why wouldn't I try at least as many times with the woman I claim to be attracted to now? Ok, so pegging with her wasn't really for me - that doesn't mean it's not really for me with a current partner and, again, why would I try it once with the past partner but wouldn't try it at least once with the curren…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 07:15 AM
0

Again, why do I not want to do it with/for her but wanted to do it with/for someone else? Then I like her less and it's unfair to her that I'm pretending that I'm so into her when I can literally recall someone who got a better deal from me. Idk if I'd be able to live with this - it's clearly a problem and I can't lie to myself that it isn't or ignore it for very long. He doesn't know if he enjoys them with you until he tries them with you. Again, any sex act you can think of - even basic vagina…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 06:33 AM
1

Of course it's simpler. It doesn't assume anything. It doesn't assume that there is some motivation or hidden agenda or that somebody doesn't want to do what they say they want to do or wants to do what they say they don't want to do. Read about the Occam's razor. Simpler in this context means fewer assumptions or "entities".
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 06:17 AM
-4

As I said, if it's impossible to do it, then it's impossible to do it. Losing the tongue was just an example, unbearable neck pain would also count. Never enjoyed doing it? That's not a reason not to do it. If I never enjoyed doing it that doesn't mean I won't enjoy doing it with another partner. E.g. many women don't enjoy vaginal sex with some partners but don't stop doing it and do it with other partners, or have a bad experience with oral sex (giving or receiving) but don't stop doing it. So…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 06:15 AM
1

No, by Occam's razor I mean Occam's razor. Google it if you don't know what it is. Again, if you gonna come up with motivations or what somebody wants or doesn't want and such to the point where your explanation is not the simplest one (and deviates from they do/want to do exactly what they say), then you better have proof that it's the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 04:54 AM
-2

That was just an example. And it's not about you. Obviously if it's impossible then it's impossible. Like if I went down on all my partners but then lost my tongue then there isn't much I can do. But if it's not impossible, then see the previous comments. Trying to project your own health problems and experiences doesn't change anything. Back before you got your problems you know you didn't do everything with everyone. And if it's not true about you, it's definitely true about the majority, so t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 04:52 AM
0

Not really. Not when it comes to single moms. They don't see you as a mother of their child in that case. As for exploration stopping, a factor to consider is whether they feel safe to suggest something. All men hear is that a lot of stuff they want to try is a turn off and if he suggests I'm out etc. Yeah, that's just your experience. Those things could have happened to you, but that's not the madonna-whore complex. That's just your luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 04:06 AM
1

Yeah, need to know the whole story, but can't just claim that weaponized incompetence is common.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:41 AM
1

Why would it need to be one time? Ideally, it would be semiregular. And if you think that most men would turn down regular threesomes.... And no, no need to maintain anything. Can find a unicorn who's down to do it when contacted, or - since it's not about threesomes but about variety - can hook up with other women if an opportunity presents itself. Most men would not turn down such arrangement. Most men would rather not work to fuck a bunch of women, but if fucking them came easy - most would r…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:39 AM
0

It's not logical, no. It doesn't pass the Occam's razor.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:36 AM
3

Shit like that is why everyone says women aren't logical or BPers aren't logical. Assuming that incompetence is weaponized and not just incompetence is very illogical. Like, it's basic stuff. It fails on its face and gets shaven off by the Occam's razor. As in a person about to say it should immediately detect that it's not worth saying and then they say it anyway. Unbelievable.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:20 AM
-4

Of course. Same or better than anyone in the past. Or at least not worse than the worst treatment anyone else was given. Regarding physical intimacy goes, can't even imagine what kind of person would claim that they love somebody and not even try with them something they were willing to try with others.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:14 AM
1

Nope. You know one guy who told you or is open about it around women. But men know. And if you think that most men would turn down, say, a threesome with his wife and another woman if there was a guarantee she won't be resentful over it, then you must be joking.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:10 AM
–

I'm not talking about myself at all. Why don't you address a point instead of trying to sidetrack and dodge? "X is not Y" is not an argument. It's an analogy/illustration/metaphor. The point holds - you say you have empathy for someone but only for some things that you think are important but not for the things that they think is important. That means you don't have empathy, doesn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 01:37 AM
1

Why did you have sex before attachment with others? Apparently, it's not to solidify feelings in terms of a relationship. It's only that for that one guy. But for some other guys it was for pleasure, validation, etc. Makes no sense. If it's not just sex, then you can get sex PLUS something else. Absolutely no reason to wait for it if you already know that you don't need any attachment to have sex and have a track record of not waiting. That clearly shows that when you want sex - you will have it…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 01:35 AM
3

Having something once does not contradict the fact that someone can't get that thing in general/consistently.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 12:53 AM
3

Nah, pretty good deal for her. Him settling for her doesn't mean she will come to reddit posting how "he made me wait for sex but not another woman in the past" or "he had anal in the past but won't have it with me". He will still do his best and keep up his end of the deal. Besides, in this case it's up to her to decide if he settled or not. She can be okay with him seeing other women and even better bring other women and suddenly without anything else changing he's not settling anymore. Funny …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 12:52 AM
4

And yet most men were available but weren't even in the running
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 12:49 AM
2

It's only better if they are picked by a wife material woman who didn't pick interchangeable hookup guys before him but now suddenly has higher requirements for him. With that particular woman it is better. But it is worse with other women and it is worse in general: he has to go through life looking from the outside how others are getting picked for sex being constantly reminded that he is only wanted for what he can do not for who he is.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 11:44 PM
14

Not a thing for most men. Most women women's preferences for casual sex overlap and the overlap is very narrow. You are lucky to be there, most men have very few hookups if any.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 11:26 PM
1

Your mistake is expecting men and women to be the same and judging them by the same standard. That doesn't work. And to answer your question - a man can still have genuine desire even if he's settled. You don't hear many stories from women saying that his ex would get more than her, do you? Where are all those stories "he made me wait for sex but slept with another woman on the first date" or "He had anal with her but won't have it with me"? They don't really exist. That's because a man will sti…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 10:43 PM
1

Furthermore, vaginal penetration doesn't feel good or pleasurable for most women, which makes meaningless or casual sex pointless. Lmao you are delusional and sex negative. Why would women not quit sex after the first time they tried it then? Whether or not it's pleasurable on its own, there's something in it and they want to do it with some men but not with other men. It's very simple, really. If she wants to try something she never tried or something she didn't like in the past with you, then …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:27 PM
1

Nope, manipulation and cheating are a negligible minority of the cases I described. So you can't think of a scenario where all those accounts are true? It's simple. Math works out very well if you acknowledge that women go for the minority of men (80-20). Ok, so what? Dead bedrooms don't help your argument at all. As I said, we aren't comparing men to women, we are comparing how the same woman is acting with different men. Oh yes women do objectify men. A lot more than the reverse, actually. At …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:25 PM
–

You don't need to hype them up and encourage them to have empathy. But you can't say you have empathy for a group of people when you don't have empathy for the thing that troubles them most. Like, it's 1941 and I have empathy for Slavic/Jewish people dating struggles but not for them being in concentration camps.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:20 PM
0

Right, you see some guys for sex, other guys for sex and then something else, and other guys for everything but sex or everything and some sex if you absolutely have to. And making them wait for sex places them squarely in the former two categories. If I want a long term relationship I wait for sex not because I find him less attractive, but because I find him more attractive in more ways and want to make sure we have an emotional attachment before we have sex This makes zero sense. Why would yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:15 PM
2

You can also see online and in real life a lot of women complaining that men only want sex and that they lie to them to have sex, promising long-term relationships. This is basically a statistic showing how common it is. Yes, I can. And that doesn't contradict what I said about men. Both things are true. Can you think about any scenario where both things could be true? I can. That actually confirms one of the things trp's been saying since the very beginning, doesn't it? Yeah no, that doesn't ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 11:37 AM
2

And that would be fine then. Thing is though, there are studies showing that most women do have casual sex and most of those do it more than once. And that's self-reported by them, so you know it was consensual. Granted, it's women in college, but don't all or most women go to college at some point? What does sex being or not being the goal have to do with anything? Fact is - women can get horny and want sex. Another fact - some of them act on it with some men but not with others. Unless you're …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 10:05 AM
1

I have empathy for this and that but not for the thing I think they care about the most. Lmao, plenty of empathy indeed.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:51 AM
1

Wouldn't know. Don't know any in person. Definitely care myself and only see men saying that they care about it (get off to it even, as in it turns them on if she's having an orgasm - and I agree with them) online. But I guess most of the men who get chosen get chosen consistently even if they don't care so they don't need to care.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:20 AM
1

That is correct because of how he phrased it. If that's how he defines whores, then men are whores, too. Of course, he forgot to mention an important part (and I'm pretty sure he did mean it but forgot to say it, since later one he's talking about "receiving") - they are whores if they have sex with men. Then what you said doesn't apply to most men, and they are not whores.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:18 AM
3

It implies that both things are caused by a common thing. But either way, why would it matter if it's correlation or causation? Correlation has predictive power, too, even if not 100%.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:12 AM
5

If employers came out en masse to say "we like hiring women" but would only hire very few, would it be insane for women to have negative response?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:08 AM
1

It does correlate with your value, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:07 AM
2

Doesn't seem right. Women aren't as easily disposable as men for most men. Most men can't replace women. That's why age gap is such a big deal and comes with the power imbalance. A younger woman has more power than an older man and can easily find another older man or a man her age (which would be her preference anyway), while an older man can't find another younger woman as easily. The fact that superstars and celebrities can replace them doesn't change anything if you look at the big picture.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:05 AM
0

It's definitely a proof of something. If you can get horny and feel good enough about hooking up with one guy but not the other, then it shows pretty well that one of them turns you on enough to not keep your guard up as much with him as with the other one.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 09:01 AM
1

Of course they do. Why are you surprised? They penetrate women for women's pleasure, ideally for mutual pleasure, and women who want to be penetrated want to try and do it for their own pleasure. So of course men who want to be penetrated want to get pleasure. Isn't that what good sex is? When both get pleasure? In this case, it's not even about women's pleasure anyway when they are pegging. Dildos don't have nervous endings, women don't get physical pleasure specifically from pegging - they cou…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 08:57 AM
0

They do. That's what everything is based on. If women are so much more vulnerable and have sex pretty fast with somebody else (maybe even basically a stranger) but not with them, then men rightfully conclude that they are a safe option.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 08:54 AM
1

Finding a guy attractive does not mean women are going to immediately act on lust, especially if she’s on the cautious side when it comes to sleeping with a stranger. That's perfectly fine. The problem begins if she did immediately act on lust with other men. Then it is pretty clear that she was attracted to them more.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 08:52 AM
11

They indeed have almost full control of the outcomes. They can always say no and veto any attempt or they can say yes if the candidate is good enough. The only thing they have no control over is who approaches them. But nothing stops them from approaching themselves - and their success rate would be a lot higher than any man's. So yes, their control is not 100% but it's up there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 08:11 AM
4

Many will argue that a man is actually in the position of power because he chooses which women to court. lmao who will argue that? That'd be such a horrible take. Choosing who to court is not the same thing as choosing who to be with. Who has more power? A person who decided which door to knock on or people behind those doors who decide if they will let them in? The answer is obvious. How can anyone argue with it?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 08:09 AM
1

That's incorrect. Sex is necessary but not sufficient.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 08:02 AM
2

You need to please google "necessary and sufficient"
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 06:00 AM
0

She always knew it was a bad decision. I was 13 or something and nowhere close to even properly making out let alone sex, and already knew that you can get STDs, that there's the orgasm gap, that men can use women for sex and never call them back, etc. It was all over the mainstream culture probably before I was even born.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 05:58 AM
0

Nobody say anything! They're almost there! No hints.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 05:56 AM
8

Like how are you here for so long and still can't get what men are saying here? Wrote an entire essay and it's based on a complete misunderstanding of one of your premises. Imagine trying to shame women for wanting to get to know a man before sleeping with him, and insisting that if she doesn’t want to have sex with a stranger, she must not be attracted to him.Also, that men lack self-respect for sticking around, as if a woman taking time to build trust is some humiliating ordeal for men to endu…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 05:52 AM
0

Obviously, pity sex. Or sympathy sex in this case ig. Men were demanded to be sympathetic and give rights including those that were directly against their interest, such as doubling the supply of labor (i.e. taking huge pay cuts in the long run). So of course if men were (and still are) expected to do stuff they don't really have to (or want to) do for the benefit of women, then it's only fair to expect the same of women. Sharing rights and increasing competition wasn't an attractive option for …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 05:38 AM
6

And like, going to jail is higher risk than admitting they were wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 06:40 AM
14

This study doesn't prove anything, unless they actually had a choice between admitting truth and going to jail and chose to go to jail and actually went or thought they actually would.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 06:25 AM
2

I'm not plugging my ears. I'm literally telling you why it's not real. Did you find where Freud wrote about it? Do you see any references? Numbers? Data? No? Didn't think so. Yes, I absolutely provide a real rejection to it. It's simply rejected because the claim is made and the burden of proof was not carried. Can you provide any proof/evidence that it's not just from some essay by some dead guy? No? Then why are you still talking? Incorrect, my argument literally has more facts than yours. I l…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 03:24 AM
–

Yes, you do. What lead to present and gave potential to the future, if not past? I literally just listed what you/women care about which is present on paper but really is based on past. What is so difficult to grasp? List some specific things you care about and I'll show you how some if not most of them are you caring about past. E.g. how educated he is, career, fitness, confidence - caring about any of these things is caring about his past, and most women care about at least one of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 03:08 AM
2

Of course not, I don't believe in anything. Scientists usually don't. But if we are going to use the term, then we have to use it correctly. And no, it's not a prominent concept, it's barely mentioned. It's more prominent among bloggers and such. I know how to reject it, I just did. It's also not a theory, do you not know what a theory is? I'll be happy to explain or refer to a good source. Either way, it's not what you say it is. And yeah, not a real thing. Please, go ahead and find how Freud i…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:54 AM
–

What jargon? That changes things how? Yeah you care about that stuff. Most of what you care about, therefore, is you caring about men's past. So how are you asking why woman's past would matter? You understand very well how, you care about men's past and what they did with the time they had. You should expect that men will care about what a woman did with her time, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:24 AM
3

Nope. He did not do that. And it doesn't matter either way, since it's based on nothing and is not a real thing. It's just a sentence in his essay. That's the only scenario where TRP - or most men for that matter - care about someone being a single mom. Why wouldn't I talk about it? There's nothing else to talk about. There's no hatred of single moms and you are just talking about stuff that doesn't exist. Your entire post is based on a false premise and then uses a fantasy of some dead dude as …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:22 AM
5

No, I describe what it is. You are trying to flex the definition to serve your point. Ew. That's very intellectually dishonest of you. The whole point is that it's about how men's attitude towards the same partner can change. People colloquially try to talk about what you're talking about cause they can't just accept af/bb, they need to find something similar in men towards women. But it's not a thing in that sense and never was. Btw, madonna-whore complex is not a thing at all. Freud just wrote…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:07 AM
–

Why would what a man did before a woman matter? Yet, they care if he's fit (he would need to build it before meeting her), care about his education (had to study before meeting her), his income/career (had to.. you get the point). What men care about is easier to achieve. Like just don't do something. You just don't like that men draw a line they don't want women to cross, but you don't mind that women draw a line men must cross. But that's kinda on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 01:56 AM
3

That's not what the Maddona-Whore complex is. It's specifically about not being able to see your wife (or gf etc) as sexual after she had your child (and now you see her as a mother of your child). That's not even close to the root of the issue you are trying to discuss. You are talking about women who have children by some other men and then you are expected to plan around them, maybe raise them, but frequently have no authority or any legal connection to them cause you aren't their father and …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 01:49 AM
0

That's a legal thing and has nothing to do with brain development. I know many old people who have less cognitive resources some young people have when they are 14.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 03:27 AM
2

Not to mention, that someone's peak can be a lot lower than somebody else's development pretty far from peak. So then should there be a certain level of intelligence/brain development one should have to be fully developed? Then we'd have to admit that so many people die without ever fully developing..
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 03:25 AM
1

Haha of course not. If brain being fully developed was that important, then nobody should even be allowed to date until it is. There's nothing special about any age, too. The how is 18 yo able to consent but someone who turns 18 tomorrow isn't? That's a legal thing and has nothing to do with biology and brain. People who care about age gaps and reject (or judge) others due to age gap are simply ageist but want to sound righteous and don't to be associated with any -ism. They are enjoying the fac…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 03:23 AM
–

That's not true. In general, people follow incentives. If two people are in a relationship and one of them will lose the relationship (or it will become worse) if they say the truth about something, then they are incentivized to not say the truth. If they are not happy or not sexually fulfilled, their partner would not know. So you can't be claiming what you're claiming. In order for one partner to say that the other partner doesn't need to sleep with other women, he needs to have an opportunity…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 03:09 AM
1

Wym why does it matter? Why does it matter to women that a man is short, poor, bald, fat, eats meat (if she's vegan), etc? It's a turn off, an ick. Why does anything matter? Women don't like short etc men, men don't like fat women, both men and women don't like men or women that took a dick inside.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 02:46 AM
1

Why? Isn't it because you like it and it's satisfying? This is not universal but something subjective. Are you assuming everyone loves grilled chicken more than burgers? You are now stepping into the territory of subjectivity which completely destroys your arguments because you have no objective basis why something is better than the other. Because it's about tasting a certain flavor/dish. How many times do I need to repeat this? No, I'm not assuming everyone loves X more than Y. Those who aren'…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 07:07 AM
1

Right, but as I said, it's not about being hungry. It's about wanting grilled chicken specifically. Do you not read the entire comment before replying? No, hamburger is not equally tasty. It doesn't taste like grilled chicken. It's not about the amplitude of taste, it's about the flavor. Blue laser can be as powerful as red, but the colors are different, and you're craving color/frequency, not power. No, it's not subjective. The sensations are objectively different, the overwhelming majority of …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:48 AM
3

When this is brought up in mixed company women will say there is also a loneliness epidemic for women as well but its not talked about as much. Millionaires also struggle with rent and cant rent all the castles they want, and sometimes there's no caviar they like at the store, but it's not talked about as much.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:34 AM
4

Why do so many people complain about being homeless yet refuse to buy houses?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:30 AM
3

No, it's about being satisfying in a specific way. It's not about starving, it's about craving grilled chicken. Can't replace grilled chicken with nuggets. I'm not assuming it's better. I'm stating the fact that it's different. It's better for me and many others, but the point doesn't rely on that. Simply being different is enough. It is better because it feels better. Or rather different because it feels different. Fucking a piece of rubber is not the same thing, a doll can't give you a proper …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:30 AM
3

Except, again, this is not about feeling horny. Nobody is sitting there already hard and ready to go. Anyway, it is still true that it's worse than sex even with modern technology, a hand still feels different from a mouth or a vagina, or even a stranger's hand. No one is talking about about emotional bonding. Sex physically feels different and better than masturbation. That's a false dilemma, there's an entire spectrum of options, not just a landwhale or a hand. And again, depending on what you…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:14 AM
4

Yeah no, that's way off. Jerking off doesn't help at all, since it's not about libido management (but feel free to prove that claim, so far you provided no evidence). It's not just about the horniness, it's also about the fact that others are living life and having sex etc, and then maybe some of those others would expect you to marry/commit to them, and it will be your problem that you didn't experiment or whatever, and her past is her past etc. Masturbating only makes the feeling worse because…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 04:42 AM
2

What's unclear? Those women are for men who can't get casual sex to marry (love, commit) later.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 04:38 AM
2

Okay you're just arguing in bad faith now. Worn out literally means damaged. No, I'm not. In this context worn out means disgusting. Like others were in it before. Many others. So your metaphor was on point. Okay, let's admit some women gets tear with childbirth, sounds hard to do with a dick though Fun that you think that about STDs. Herpes and HPV are the only STDs that existed before History, and one could argue wouldn't matter much to prehistoric people. Most STDs are way too recent to have …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 03:59 AM
1

So man children. No, so normal humans. It has nothing to with their sex at all. Women should be praised for not doing bad things they are incentivized to do, too. That you guys truly cannot detect rude behavior. So you guys are bad judges of characters, especially to even have the gall to tell women to "choose better". You cant even see most of those women are choosing better. Right, but it has nothing to do with what you claimed. It was rude, but definitely not bigotry, and nobody would blame w…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 03:45 AM
1

Of course, they can. What does it have to do with epstein? It's not about ownership or anything nonconsensual. Their consent is the prize, as well as their time etc. I literally explained in the very sentence a part of which you quoted. Maybe read the entire thing before you reply to whatever thing triggers you first.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 03:42 AM
2

Here: "But if a shoe was tried on by 1000 people - it's a worn out bad shoe." Edit it again to make the word "damage" bold. I still don't see it. Childbirth vaginas are a different thing, and they get loose because of hormones, not the actual baby passing here. STDs can be controlled for. It's both, tears are not cause by hormones. There is physical damage. STDs being controlled for doesn't undo millennia of evolution. I'm pretty sure if the part was "fingers from a lesbian" most people would be…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:25 AM
1

And you don't think there is some sexism / homophobia in this? Sexism maybe, since it's all about sleeping with a certain sex. But probably not, since, again, there's no -ism in refusing to date for any other reason, so why would there be one here? But we are not talking about sexism, that's not what you claimed. If you agree you were wrong, then we can explore if it's sexism. The argument to beat is above. Homophobia, 100% not, I literally explained why in the very sentence you quoted. You aren…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:16 AM
2

No, I don't. Where do I say that? Also, of course it can in principle. You don't know at what critical size vaginas are not as tight as before (which is what happens after child birth for example). We all know how they can get sore and all, too. STDs etc - the more partners, the more likely they are. But that's not the point. It's not about damage. It's about ick and disgust due to taking a part of somebody else's body inside (e.g. another man's dick).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:02 AM
1

Incorrect. I did, in fact, refute them. Everything is explained there step by step, everything is according to all rules of formal logic. You don't have a point. You have a positive claim with no evidence. Yes, I did explain that. See the old comments. You are the one going "nuh uh", not me. Once again, it has nothing to do with homophobia. Both men and women are icked by both men and women (which would be heterophobia, then, not homophobia) sleeping men. This literally has nothing to do with th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:00 AM
2

I didn't disregard them, I refuted them and you found nothing to parry my last comment. It's still there expecting a reply. Either way, other threads are irrelevant. You made a positive claim here, you got called out. Now carry the burden of proof and show evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:17 AM
2

No, it's not. Obviously that never happens, we all tried that many shoes actually by idk mid 30s or something. And we'd never buy a shoe that 1000 people tried. That's why floor models are sold at a discount. We know metaphors have limits. And this is a great metaphor that points out exactly why people are disgusted by high D counts. Something is inserted into you. Ew. No sht people aren't actually shoes, but it's a great metaphor - it has penetration, stretching, and everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:16 AM
1

You are wrong. First of all, yes they should be expecting praise/rewards for not doing bad deeds when there are incentive to be doing them. Second, how is your link showing anything? And how is that bigotry to not want to date a person with a dick when you are not into dicks? It's very consistent with choosing better and in fact shows that women pop their balloons for him choosing better. He got punished for choosing better lol. Of course women are unreasonable in that video, that's because they…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:00 AM
2

More likely to accept it for a while to get more experience, yes. I'd say not more likely to marry her than a man with more experience. Probably, less likely. Tons of stories on reddit where a man finds out they didn't both have 1-2 partners, you can see for yourself how it ends and how it screws with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:53 AM
1

It's just that women can rarely be your friends. Like imagine, your friend has something that you need/want, the thing that is one the Maslow's hierarchy of needs, but won't share it with you/give it to you? For example, respect is on one of the higher levels. If a friend can respect you but doesn't or doesn't want to respect you, then that's not really a friend. Similarly, if you need sex with women and your friend "has" it but won't share, how are they a friend? You know you would share it wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:51 AM
1

Yup. Correct. That's why you know that if she does care about you, she will want less gold and won't make you wait longer or have higher requirements than for anyone in her past.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:48 AM
2

Sure. And that's why you need to make sure that you didn't "pay" more than other clients if you're going for a long-term arrangement. That's how you know that prostitute likes you more than others - she charges you less.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:46 AM
1

A lot of guys today act like planning dates, paying, or “entertaining” women is some kind of feminist psy-op. But that story ignores a reality of why men traditionally court and put effort into dating women, because it produces better results. You show how you are wrong right in the first paragraph. Yes, men traditionally courted women and put effort. But now that women are not traditional, courting is a scam. Imagine, giving her flowers and stuff when she slept with an entire starting roster of…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:45 AM
1

The curse of steak too juicy and the lobster too buttery? GTFO.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:38 AM
1

Of course men can decide to be on their own but why would they prefer that? Sex good, no sex bad. It's very simple. And no, it doesn't rely on women not being people. They can be people and prizes, or rather it's sex and her company/time that is the prize here. Your title is just wrong so far. It's based on nothing but your misunderstanding of the state of things. And it doesn't even rely on anything being a prize. It simply relies on the fact that what women choose is different from what men ad…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:32 AM
3

If they know nice guys and fake nice guys, then they also know bad guys. So whoever agrees with that must also agree with the fact that women aren't used for sex or misled - they can easily tell that type of guy and choose it anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:28 AM
3

Exactly. Trying 1000 pairs of shoes you can find a perfect pair. But if a shoe was tried on by 1000 people - it's a worn out bad shoe.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:24 AM
0

It's not about who is sleeping around. It's about whom they are sleeping around with.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:23 AM
2

No, it's not rooted in homophobia. This is your 3rd chance to provide evidence for this positive claim. You failed twice already that I've personally seen.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:21 AM
3

And for other things, too. Height, weight/fitness, hair, etc. Must be insecure.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 06:18 AM
–

No, both women and men say that they care about the sexual history, only that much is proven by that link. It's possible that not both actually care. But it doesn't matter. One-sided is not an applicable term here, different sexes by default would care about different things in opposite sexes.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 05:17 AM
1

All the time. And why wouldn't you? There are so many dumbasses here who somehow think it's relevant who is posting instead of what they are posting. I change my flairs all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 05:01 AM
1

Excuse me? Me jaywalking or not stopping on red when nobody is there also isn't hurting anybody. Me doing drags is not hurting anybody other than myself etc. Things that aren't hurting anyone but the person doing them can still be illegal. So that's not an argument even if what you said was true. But it's not. Of course it's hurting most men who then have nobody else to marry or date but sluts. And wym men are supported? Supported by whom? Women are supported a lot more. They are encouraged even…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 04:59 AM
1

They are as explicit as they can be without risking anything. It's well known (whether it's true or not) that "woman is always right" and "happy wife happy life". So yeah, because it sounds crass, how can they be more explicit? If nobody is asking them, they won't risk losing what they barely managed to get. We literally just talked about this. This is very consistent with the comments above.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 04:56 AM
1

If you read it as a question about your life, then it makes sense. I read it as a general question that they asked you to answer (i.e. to give advice), that's why I commented. Nvm then :)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 04:52 AM
1

You literally said "My husband didn't marry me for "access to sex". You didn't say "only for", you said he didn't marry you for that, but married you for other things you listed. You are wrong. He married you for those things AND for access to sex. Between the two of us, I am, yes. Yeah, we have no way to know who you're talking to. The only thing that we can say is that we are talking to each other. We don't even know if that husband exists. It's hard to imagine a man who reads what I say and t…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 06:50 AM
1

Yes, of course it's impossible to establish a causal relationship because social "science" is not science. Everybody knows that. But I would take high enough correlation. Since I never said (and you never said) that it's necessarily because of their high counts only. We were always talking about correlation. Even if the data you quoted wasn't garbage, it would still at best show correlation. It just doesn't even do that because it shows what they say, not what they do. Yes, I am talking about th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 06:42 AM
1

Sure, could be. The important part is that we learned and established today that men are already pretty explicit about what treatment is better/more valuable to them and that they can't use it as a standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 06:35 AM
1

Great. Glad we agree that my husband knows more than you. Yes, he does, but you don't. And I'm talking to you, not him. Not in this case. In every case that has to do with how men think/what they feel, so yes, in this case, too. Great. It's irrelevant what you say. Glad we cleared that up. No, it's not irrelevant what I say, because what I said is a clear way to show who's right and who's wrong without relying on what he says. But of course, you know that if you don't sleep with him for 10 years…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 06:33 AM
1

Your advice is bad in general. But ig could be true about you that whoever has higher iq gets better treatment from you in particular.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 06:29 AM
3

You don't need data to back this up until there's data backing up the positive claim that most men are friends with a rapist. Anyway, I don't think it's true either but I wouldn't say no way. I imagine, anyone could be friends with someone who did something in the past or does something in the future when they are drunk or whatever. Also, someone could be friends with multiple rapists (think groups where it's normalized, like some sports teams etc) while most men aren't friends with rapists, so …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 06:18 AM
2

You are right. Why wouldn't they be more content if they know they can stop being sexless/single any time and/or that they can find other options? Most men can't negotiate the treatment they want, for them it's more like take it or leave it. And leaving it is rarely better because it means no other offers for years sometimes.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 12:04 AM
0

But you know better than him? No, only he knows himself. But in general I definitely know better than you. Yup, he says "why would I leave? Sex isn't the reason I stay. Lack of sex wouldn't be reason enough to leave." He then said more things I can't repeat because of the "be civil" rule. Nope. Irrelevant what he says. When I said tell him you wont' sleep with him, I of course meant - and then don't sleep with him. See if he doesn't leave, then talk. Nobody cares what he says, it's only importan…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:57 PM
0

No, I don't know if data exists or not. And even if it didn't, that doesn't mean that it can't be taken, so it still would be possible to prove. Just not for you in this conversation. If I was trying to make your argument, I would see if this data is implied by some tables, e.g. some study about partner count would probably show the relationship status of participants. But luckily it's not my argument so the burden of proof is not on me. I get the easy part - sit, criticize, and question :) It i…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:32 PM
1

No, you don't. You don't read minds and can't relate to another man better than a man. Besides, it's not really about your husband in particular and more so about your husband in general. They absolutely marry you for reasons that include access to sex. Want to prove me wrong? Tell him you won't sleep with him until further notice and update me in 10 years. See if he sticks around. You are just being intellectually dishonest now. Of course, your particular husband could have zero libido or not h…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:22 PM
1

In English-speaking countries I'd suggest English. If you mean how it would be included into a vow, I'd suggest an asterisk and a footnote after "to cherish" that doesn't need to be said out loud. Or can add it after that, as in to love, and to cherish, and to do my best to please/ to give myself to you like to no one before/ etc. Something like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:17 PM
2

Yes, but I think they are pretty explicit. We definitely see where men are in all those hookup vs marriage material talks, we definitely know men don't appreciate it if their woman wanted her ex more or done more with/for him sexually and in general see men caring about her sexual past. But we definitely don't see men complaining that he got no rose petals while some guy in the past did. Yes, you expect the treatment that you won't and don't care how it compares. Men can't afford that. It's not …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:13 PM
1

No idea, I don't see that either. I simply answered your question why it's not exactly the same. Maybe it's compensated by the fact that they have more experience? Either way, I don't hear much about women rejecting men for experience and preferring inexperienced men. I think we can be pretty sure that women don't chase virgins or inexperienced men, and judging by accounts of many men, the more experience and hence confidence they get, the easier it is for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:04 PM
1

Because not both are passed around. Women are passed around, men are passing them around. I.e. higher count for men = was passed around by more men, higher count for men = participated in passing around more women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:33 PM
1

It's not proven wrong. That data only shows what they say they prefer. That doesn't matter. Need evidence that women reject men with more experience and actively go for men with less experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:32 PM
1

That doesn't prove that it's not true. This data simply shows what women say. Not to quote trp but watch what they do not what they say. If you want to prove the point wrong, you need to show that men with higher counts get more rejections when they propose or have harder time finding LTR. What people say they are interested it is irrelevant here and doesn't prove anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:31 PM
0

Because sex good. WTF is this question?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:28 PM
1

Why wouldn't you pretend to be a woman or a transwoman?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:16 PM
3

Then she should go marry/be in LTR with chad. But she doesn't get to say that you're most important person in her life or that she only loves you or whatever but won't do stuff with you that she's done with him.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:08 PM
1

That's why need to discuss marriage vows before marriage and make sure chad treatment is included there, so it's pledged and therefore deserved. Sure, can't get early access like that, but at least can get access to exclusive sexual acts and activities.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:03 PM
2

No, he married you for those things and for access to sex. They are not mutually exclusive. Unless, of course, he has access to sex outside of your marriage and you don't limit it or put conditions on it, which is usually not the case in marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:02 PM
2

Higher IQ predicts being less sexually desirable/having fewer partners. It could work with you but it's a bad advice in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:00 PM
0

It's not a fantasy, I've seen it play out in real life to people I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 09:59 PM
2

Most men would be okay to cook sometimes, or clear, or even have a messy house and to buy food, if in return they are 100% sure they get lusted over and don't have to worry that somebody else experienced their woman more/deeper than them. What's better treatment to you is not necessarily better treatment to men. I'd rather you get rose petals and run a bath for your ex if it means you (ideally) never slept with them or only had like super basic sex, while I got to experiment with you. Pretty sur…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 09:58 PM
1

Most men can't be choosers like that and will take what they can, but often it stops when it comes to pride. As in yeah, whatever he has is better than nothing BUT wtf do you mean she lusted over someone and offered him more? Then she should go with him. Does it make sense? Like, you go the car dealership and they try to sell you something and the price seems good and they went down during the conversation, but you know they gave somebody else a better price?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 09:52 PM
1

Ok? What about not wanting to date someone who eats mean when you're a vegan? What about not wanting to date people with a certain hair color or eye color? What about not wanting to eat an apple that you saw fell into a pile of shit even after it was washed? You just get disgusted by certain things, that's all. And no, you're still wrong. Continuing your logic, being into men (and it's multiple men, not just men) immediately shows everything you listed for sleeping around, but it's also disgusti…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 06:21 AM
1

I meant as an active participant of course Again, refusing to date them is not a phobia. You are just turned off by their political stance. My argument was the following: if you know nothing about them except they're bi, why is it a deal-breaker? Why is it a bad thing? Why is it disturbing you? Why do you think you couldn't be attracted? Why is bi a bad thing for you? If you know nothing about them, except they're fat why is that a deal-breaker? If you know nothing about them, except they eat me…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 06:16 AM
1

It's not about people being attracted to the same sex. It's about people being attracted to men, whether those people are men or women. And refusing to date someone is not a phobia, be it bi- or fat-.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 06:10 AM
1

So? Not all women suck dick, too. We won't be thinking about outliers, we will neglect what's negligible and assume that when people are dating they are pleasing their partners. And you can be a top or a bottom - in 69 you're sucking dick whether you're a 6 or a 9. It's literally all there is to it. They don't want to date people who sleep with the impregnating sex. That's it. I mean, it's feminism and bi men are men. If all men are bad, then why would bi men be an exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 06:01 AM
1

No, it's a turn off because sex with men is disgusting to them. That's not homophobia. Sex with men is only gay if it's a man having it. If it's a woman having it - it's not gay and still a turn off for men. If a woman is having sex with a woman - that's gay sex but it's not a turn off for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 05:49 AM
1

Yeah, you said preferring virgins and refusing to marry. None of that is shaming. Yes, some say that. So? That's not shaming. Or are women shaming short/fat/poor/bald/shy/boring/etc men? Yes, many do. What does that have to do with the topic of shaming? What's the point of the question? I already answered it: why would you expect women to prefer anything similar to what men prefer? It's only logical that different sexes will hold different sexes to different standards. Like there are 4 points wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 05:25 AM
1

What does that have to do with anything? What's not about personality? Why is it relevant when men will put up with more if woman is more attractive? The topic is that you are not forever alone or incel if you are fit and virgin. You don't need to be hot crazy to find a man who wants to have sex with you. Normal women are very shallow still. Ask how well personality works for shy men, short men, bald(ing) men. Omfg you are 17 and will be talking like you are 40-50? "Still a virgin"? Like yeah ok…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 05:19 AM
-1

Seeing has nothing to do with it. It can be something you learn later. For example, they wear loose clothes, then you see them being fat when you're about to sleep with them for the first time. Or see that they have genitalia you don't like, or find out that they eat meat when you are vegan. You can. You can see them suck a dick/kiss a man hypothetically. If it turns you on then, then it's not biphobia? And again, their orientation has nothing to do with it. They can be straight, you still won't…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:14 AM
-3

Nope. Not more than someone's short height being a deal breaker or a turn-off is a achondroplasiaphobia. That's literally not homophobia, unless you can prove otherwise. And it has nothing to do with their orientation or the orientation of their partner. It only has to do with their partner having a penis. "That's literally homophobia" is a false statement. Many men refuse to date heterosexual and bisexual women who slept with many men. Many women refuse to date heterosexual and bisexual men who…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 09:48 AM
1

Yes, I can answer your question and give you the motif. Do you acknowledge that if the motif is not just making them feel bad then this shaming is not wrong (as follows from your original comment)? Yeah, no. The point of using the electric prod here, though, is to get the sheep into the pen, not to hurt them. Hurting them is just a side effect. So if that's your analogy for shaming, then electric prod is not bad because it has a purpose other than hurting them (making them feel bad). Something d…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 09:29 AM
0

What does that have to do with anything? Refusing to marry is not shaming. And why would you expect women to prefer anything similar to what men prefer? It's only logical that different sexes will hold different sexes to different standards. Like there are 4 points where you can expect things to be different in two "sex ->standard->sex" chains (2 per chain).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 09:24 AM
1

From the first sentence of your original comment. No, now you are changing the argument. The argument was that the only purpose is to make other people feel bad. That's clearly not the only purpose of slut shaming. And to answer your question about why my beliefs give me the right to try and change something or make them feel bad? They don't. I already have that right, it's called freedom of speech. And it's given to me by people with guns just like every other right ever given to anyone else. Y…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:14 AM
-6

No, it's not homophobia or biphobia. You didn't prove it last time and you don't get to claim it this time without evidence. It's not more of a phobia than refusing to date any other group of men. It's just a turn off/preference for most women that their man didn't suck a dick. Just like men have preferences about what past their women should have.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:46 AM
1

No, that's not a random ideology at all. They are based on studies/stats which agree very well with personal observations. Yes it is if you are doing anything to get it. You have to put yourself out there though and adjust standards accordingly. Highly doubt you did that. Tell us more about your dating app profiles or send pics and we'll make you a profile and arrange a hookup real fast. No, that's not by my logic. And getting laid by sex worker is not getting laid. It's paying for a service and…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:43 AM
1

It's sexist and ageist.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:35 AM
1

It's usually considered to be good when a law is made to punish something that enough people don't like. Why would this be an exception?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:25 AM
1

So if shaming served some purpose then it wouldn't be wrong? So if we show you that slut shaming serves some purpose (whether or not it's doing it successfully is beside the point) then you will agree that slut shaming is not wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:24 AM
2

What makes something bad? It's literally the fact that the answer is just enough people not liking it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:22 AM
-1

Both men and women are shamed for sleeping with multiple men. Men even more so. It seems like there are more men accepting women sleeping with men than women accepting men sleeping with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:21 AM
0

It doesn't apply to one gender. Both men and women are shamed for sleeping with multiple men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:19 AM
1

The double standard exists for men and women for a reason. For the average guy, hooking up with an average girl is NOT an easy feat, whereas a girl can pretty much hook up with soooo many guys compared to her "looks match". You gotta stop using terms incorrectly. This is not a double standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:17 AM
1

No, you don't understand what it's like. You are talking about being a virgin, not about finding love. You think finding love is easy for men? Same thing you said applies + more (money, success, etc). But being a virgin is your choice, while it's rarely a man's choice to be one. You could literally get laid within days if you wanted to. Many men can't do it for years. You could find a man who "treats you decently" as well. Easily. You could find men who would simp for you, let alone treat you de…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 09:58 PM
7

Unique sets of challenges indeed. Workers can't afford housing, millionaires can't afford yachts.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 07:33 AM
1

wtf not at all. She's literally talking about the man she personally likes.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 10:47 PM
–

Yes there is. Men would be perfectly fine waiting in line while those women go around all men. For most of them, that would be a huge improvement compared to how often they get action right now anyway. No, what he said is right - women don't want to go around all men, they want to go all around a minority of men and that's what they do. They are interested in those men, not in ONS.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 06:37 AM
1

Don't want to have sex with conservative men and say they don't want to have sex with conservative men are two different things. And if they actually don't but conservatism promises changes that lead to them either being more encouraged to do it or even leaving them no choice, then of course it won't die out. Why do you think it's been getting bigger recently?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 06:33 AM
1

I never said frequently? Yes, of course it's rare. Because women have more power in dating. That's why all the people who talk about age gap and power dynamics must agree that if the age gap is small, then that's women manipulating men and having more power, so there must be something else in the relationship to make it fair and more even.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 02:26 AM
2

What happened to people not needlessly dying? And you do understand that an atomic bomb will lead to a proportional response, right? Why can't you just like idk admit that you were wrong/made no sense instead of dodging? Or continue to discuss in good faith? So odd.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 02:10 AM
–

What are you on about? You literally refer to "women around his age " and say "Because an older age man can have it easier with lower aged women", which is obviously false in general. Yes, if he is attractive he will pull but he will have to compete with younger men who are in general more attractive. Which is why this "I was speaking of 35 year old men having a nice advantage, when pursuing younger women, like ones that are 20 or 22 or something." is not correct. They don't have a nice advantag…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 01:58 AM
0

Yeah no, that's not a useful clarification. Suppose there is a country that has those policies and many people enlist. What happens after they run out of volunteers? Also, while you're at it, when volunteers sign up/take contracts, will those countries make sure the army is diverse and all groups are represented (their fraction in the army is roughly equal to their fraction in the population)?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:45 AM
3

In some cases their demands are killing big chunks of population or certain ethnicities, etc. Or taking your land. Or fully annexing you. So then what?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:41 AM
5

Yeah no, that's your choice. If all you wanted was not to be a virgin - that can be arranged within a week if not faster. Pretty sure same can be said about going on dates. Install a dating app and see how many matches you get. Plenty of them will want to meet. Now, try to guess how many matches and unattractive man would get. Your attempt to add unattractive just to make it worse is weird. It's not a competition. And if it was, then you should add the unattractive (un)qualifier to men as well b…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:30 AM
–

I'm not talking about high end. I'm talking google escorts in the name of your town. High end will be in the thousands and not on teh same websites. How else do you think most people will look for prostitutes? They will search online. I didn't find anyone online who was as cheap as a grocery run. And most people wouldn't know where to look for them. And the ones they will find are expensive. Where would they look for clean and cheap prostitutes? Online. And they will see they can't afford it. Wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 03:13 AM
1

? What proof do you want? Above I described what to look for. You can find plenty of stories.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 02:59 AM
3

Why would it be homophobia? If two straight men kiss, it will be just as gross for most people. It has nothing to do with their orientation, it's literally just about the act they are doing. If a heterosexual woman sleeps with another man - that's gross even though there's nothing homosexual going on at all. In fact, it would be less gross if slept with another woman. Actually, it's one of if not the most common fantasy men have - to get her to sleep with another woman and him at the same time. …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 08:18 AM
1

Then why won't you and why did you even start? Nobody forced women to have casual sex. They started doing it themselves because they wanted to. If it wasn't for them, there would be no casual sex or hook up culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 08:10 AM
3

Because dicks of other men are disgusting, probably. Who knows? Why are fat/short/etc men disgusting to women? They just are, that's all that's important in this context where we are examining if it's insecurity or something else. It's something else, clearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 08:08 AM
0

Why? It's just my past and past doesn't matter
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 08:06 AM
5

In some extreme cases maybe it is, but mostly it's a disgust of people who take multiple dicks. Both men and women feel it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 07:57 AM
1

Why tho. I can sleep with 50 people and do threesomes and then change my view on sex and say that now I view sex as expression of love and for LTR only, amirite?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 07:39 AM
2

lol how is that "not pair bonding". That's exactly what it is if that gap leads to (or is correlated with ) the difference in opinions or insecurity that are enough to not form a bond.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 07:38 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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