TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Kroiike Archive

View 3 posts and 559 comments by Kroiike on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

Without hyperbole, there is not a single man on earth who is more attractive to women than he is to gay men. Even men find men more attractive than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 02:47 PM
1

100%. If she says she's been in a toxic or bad relationship before, MASSIVE RED FLAG. Trash gets with trash, so make sure to stay clean.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 03:20 AM
1

girls girls are often the MOST misogynist lol. Plus you didn't even make a counterargument. Please, I'm begging you to do better. Please educate yourself on misogyny and stop generalizing women. The patriarchy thrives on your lack of education.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 03:41 AM
1

"women actually have hobbies." So not all women, just "women" lol. Women suck. Not all women, just "women." Call it monolithic, whatever bruh, I haven't met a woman who doesn't suck. Look, I'm just trying to educate you on your misogyny. Please do better in the future. Also, again, no hate, but not that nerdy lol. dummy
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 03:32 AM
2

lol, again not my point dummy you said ALL WOMEN (monolith) make sure those aren't their only hobbies, UNLIKE a portion of men who do. You're practically agreeing with dudes who say women aren't real nerds because there are 0 truly nerdy women. Also zelda? animal crossing? gta lol? No hate, all good stuff, but in the modern landscape, most scorsese movies are nerdier than those lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:56 AM
–

There's a lot of that. Tomboys are cool, feminine men are weird and undateable. The beauty industry including all sorts of surgery is normal for women, at most seen as something unfair brought onto them, whereas looksmaxxing is weird, pathetic, insecure, vain, and entirely men's own fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:43 AM
–

Women are just as nerdy as men until it's time to shit on men, and then suddenly even nerdy women start piling on the insults lol. (That kingsman marvel rivals shit was wild) basement-dweller cultural appropriation is real
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:36 AM
2

my arguments weren't about whether or not women do nerdy things in moderation dummy, they were about how you believe women are a monolith who would never be nerdy to the extent that a good portion of the men you whine about are. I suppose you agree that there are no true female nerds in that sense
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:28 AM
4

no, you did lol "except women actually have hobbies that aren’t just for nerds" - a monolithic statement that outright says there exist no predominantly nerdy women, unlike the legion of nerdy men you're whining about "sorry that women don’t like dnd and mtg and board games or fps games every day I guess?" - another monolithic statement that again outright states there are no predominantyl nerdy women like there are men It would be the equivalent of me saying "yeah women can have nerdy interests…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:23 AM
6

well that too, but women don't care about misandry, so why bring it up? Your misogyny is the high distance you put between women and nerdy interests. If a man said what you said, he'd be flamed by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:17 AM
8

I better see some other women on here calling you out for this blatant misogyny lol
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:07 AM
2

Manipulation? Removing desire isn't manipulative, it's basic power dynamics theory in action. Boys only serve to benefit from lessened desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:54 PM
3

It's not really about regaining power "from" women, it's more about not weakening ourselves with desire. 4B would be extremely powerful if they could act upon it because women would lose all need for men, but that doesn't necessarily make men not powerful, just emboldens one's own agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:52 PM
3

You said that like you can't do all of that as well lol. What's the issue with doing all that, and doing what I suggested?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:47 PM
6

Alright then just say that. Remove the "before you can be loved by someone else" part which completely changes the sentence into an untrue platitude. Plus, it's still different because your platitude still engages in some doing something just for others to love you, when I'm saying we need to systematically liberate men from female validation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:45 PM
5

I'm okay with validation in the sense of acknowledging it's real and not feeling ashamed because of it, but boys need to be taught that the more desire they have, the weaker of a position they put themselves in, and from there we need to teach them how to detach from those desires as best as possible, both individually and community-wise.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:40 PM
2

Well I agree, we can't just act like boys won't feel desire, or that they should just stop feeling. The point is seeing how much we can help boys eradicate and manage their own desire by teaching them about their feelings, and emphasizing and teaching how to detach from their desires. Even if a man still wants to date, he's put in an advantageous position the less he wants it and can manage without it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:37 PM
6

I mean of course you should be making good cost-benefit decisions, but the point is men are statistically going to continue making poor ones so long as their desire is higher. The more we eradicate desire, the stronger men become as they can make better decisions and be leveraged less in those decisions. Of course we can't eradicate it fully, but early teachings I believe can make a big impact.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:33 PM
5

Well no. First of all, the statement is complete bullshit. Plenty of self-hating people get partners and get laid. But more importantly, that's not even what I'm saying. I'm saying we need to teach boys ages 5-21 to detach from the desire for female validation, otherwise they put themselves in a weak position where if women for whatever reason aren't interested, he will be extremely unhappy. Men are weak currently because their desires are too high, so we need to systematically attempt to remove…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:30 PM
8

It annoys me how deeply embedded it is. Every time I see that lego batman gif of him fawning over a hot lady or whatever I cringe at how weak of a position we men are in.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:20 PM
–

It pretty much is, because fundamentally that's why women have more power than men currently, so we just need to replicate and go further. Women need and want less from men, and they have a sense of collective sisterhood, and a unified enemy (men). We men have strong desire, and very limited brotherhood despite what people might claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:18 PM
5

Agreed. The only thing I take issue with is a lot of the time "value yourself" is used by a lot of both men and women, as a sort of "just go fix yourself and shut up" type criticism that isn't helpful at all. That and the decentering of women can't be an individual journey, but one we need to collectively instill into male youth.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:15 PM
–

You mansplaining how women feel and think is misogyny. Do better 💅
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:30 AM
–

I assure you, there are plenty of women who would happily disagree lol Misandry has become a badge of honor
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:12 AM
1

Why people care about some alligator when they eat way more animals daily is beyond me.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:19 PM
1

Eh. We can't even argue really when we disagree on such simple things like "patriarchy isn't gendered," which to me is completely ridiculous. It's in the name itself, whether you believe it exists or not. Emotional suppression isn't needed for a job, basic emotional regulation is, not suppression. Institutional power contains massive amounts of female-coded roles since child care and health care are two of the largest government expenditures in today's society. Saying incels suffer from toxic fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 01:07 AM
2

Eh. Agree to disagree then. Emotional suppression only gets you power if people respect it. If they don't, it doesn't get you power, therefore it's passive. You seem to be saying the female gender role cannot have power structurally, but not only do I disagree, but any and all power, female or male, is just people agreeing on respecting it, which can all change if people change. I just don't get how you think emotional supression is different from beauty, when both are completely dependent on pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 12:07 AM
2

I would argue that "valued by others" is the largest form of agency in the real world. And again, beauty can easily be tied to control, dominance, and independence. Many people would call today's male looksmaxxers a prime example of toxic masculinity, where they rank men based on their attractiveness and put the most attractive ones on top, which completely relies on approval from others. Even emotional supression, which offers no actual benefits, is only considered good because other people con…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 10:56 PM
2

Well, again, a big core of my argument is that despite what the dictionary says, the use case is different. But further, those things you listed as high-status vs low-status are completely arbitrary. I could easily argue that being silent, showing no emotion, and accepting punishment is submissive and low-status, while being desirable and beautiful is praised, sought after, and high-status (which they all are). I mean, does it change if the beauty standard is on men? Is men feeling the pressure …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:53 PM
1

The idea the men are strong, and must go to war is equally misandrist. Positive stereotypes are not a privilege, ask asians how they feel about that. And you don't have to be killed explicitly for your gender, for it to be basically your gender. If the government made a law saying anyone who couldn't bench press whatever pounds couldn't vote, we would all see how that is clearly directed at women. And again, you prove my point with each new comment. You believe men basically don't face gendered …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:36 PM
1

Right... Men aren't being killed because they are men, just because they are... what? Seriously, why are only men being sent to die if not sexism? And again, you prove my point when you call Russia "power hungry men" as if women do not contribute to Russian society. You believe women have no power or blame in the world, and that's what I take issue with.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:27 PM
1

Saying "boys don't cry" is a part of the massive socialized context for why we send men to die in war. This toxic standard is enforced so hard that men are forced to go to war. That's not sink or swim, that's the toxic idea that men are warriors being used to put all men into war. There is literally 0 upside to that other than some vague notion of purpose to fill the void of an empty life that men live because of the other standard that men don't show emotions. And the fact that women can gain a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:23 PM
1

Well there you go, I proved you believe men basically don't face gendered problems, and if they do it's their own fault, and men are the problem by which they use their collective power to oppress women, and that women while sometimes complicit, are ultimately powerless and under male coercion, and are the victims of men. It's gendered for two reasons. First, because it's obviously gendered. If you have a female president who makes a law saying women can no longer divorce, you just gonna pretend…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:14 PM
2

Well thanks for hearing me out. But to your point, I would argue that if a woman said to a boy "real men don't cry," many feminists would not call this misandrist, but instead refer to it as instilling toxic masculinity. Thus, if women can engage in toxic masculinity, then so to can men. Therefore, the amount of men within the beauty industry is irrelevant, since they are instilling toxic femininity onto women. And if that sounds ridiculous, that's kinda my point. We would all be kinda weirded o…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:07 PM
1

Male genocide simply refers to the killing of men. The Ukrainian and Russian governments have explicitly killed men by sending them to war because they are men. If you respond "and whose fault it that?" Then that confirms that you believe that men basically don't face gendered problems, and if they do it's their own fault, and men are the problem by which they use their collective power to oppress women, and that women while sometimes complicit, are ultimately powerless and under male coercion, …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 08:42 PM
1

Being a beautiful woman 100% is more of an advantage than being an ugly woman. Ask fat women who have lost the weight on their treatment in society. And you mistakenly believe toxic masculinity always serves to benefit men. When toxic masculinity puts men into wars to die for meaningless objectives, I suppose that's a privilege. Not that this matters because the point is that both enforcement of gender roles are toxic, yet men get told they are at fault, while women are told they are the victims…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 08:38 PM
2

You forgot men as well. A literal male genocide is going on in Russia and Ukraine right now. But again, my problem is that I almost had to fight it out of you to get a "yeah well women do bad stuff too." My point is, people very much hold up the idea that men basically don't face gendered problems, and if they do it's their own fault, and men are the problem by which they use their collective power to oppress women, and that women while sometimes complicit, are ultimately powerless and under mal…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 07:09 PM
2

Well whatever, I'm just saying they stem from ideologies, not ideological themselves to make my point that the same idea "boys shouldn't cry" can stem from multiple different ideologies. Regardless, my main point is that while we should call them out regardless of ideology, there is a discrepancy in how we do so, whether or not the offending individual or industry is male or female. I see this discrepancy as coming from a very common idea that many people have, that is that men (largely as a who…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:58 PM
2

That's simply not true because neither are ideologies. They are toxic behaviors that stem from ideologies, but those ideologies vary. Further, telling boys not to cry, or telling girls to wear makeup, both directly harm the gender they are talking about, but one side gets the soft version where their actions are a result of uprbringing by another force where they are primarily the victim, whilst the other side gets the harsh version where they themselves are the problem that is toxifying our wor…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:49 PM
1

The industry is made up of people who not only follow this toxic behavior, but profit off it. It is 100% accurate to call the female beauty industry a prime example of toxic femininity.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:41 PM
2

The industry is made of people. But anyways, you just agreed that if a woman pushed another woman like that, that would be toxic femininity, to which I agree. Except people don't use that term, especially not feminists, and they would be 100% more likely to call it internalized misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:31 PM
1

Well, I guess that's the end of the discussion because "men can't wear dresses" is the most clear-cut example of toxic masculinity you could ever speak, and it doesn't matter who the speaker is. Go to literally any feminist sub and ask "hey my grandpa just said men shouldn't wear dresses" and they would all say yes. Genuinely go to askfeminism and ask that exact question. It's clear-cut. And also you proved my point when you said "because masculinity is the only thing worth talking about." We do…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 05:14 PM
1

Tbh, I don't even really know what you're arguing about. All I'm asking is, why is a man saying men shouldn't wear dresses a clear-cut example of toxic masculinity, but a woman saying women should wear makeup called internalized misogyny? I say the two differ because one seeks to blame men, and the other seeks to make women the victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:51 PM
–

You're extra dumb lmao. I asked for a response, as in, respond to this obvious example of how our language in analyzing the world is unequal in equal situations. Instead, you chose to respond to these hypothetical individuals by saying they were wrong, which we both already knew. So any response on why one is called toxic masculinity and the other is called internalized misogyny?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:48 PM
1

First of all, I appreciate you trying to bring an academic perspective on this, but my point remains that the dictionary definition is not the same as the use-case definition, and 99% of people using the phrase will not be able to say what you just said. But also, toxic masculinity both harms and benefits men. It harms those who cannot conform, and benefits those who can conform, but in total harms men as it puts unnecessary standards, pressure, and punishment on meaningless things. The same exa…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:44 PM
1

Except, that basically does happen. Not so much for broader violent crime because most victims of violent crime are men, so nobody gives a fuck. But for sexual crime, that absolutely happens. The only difference is that they use different terms like the patriarchy, or just men really. Toxic masculinity is used when a man does something toxic related to masculinity and people want to claim that it's all men basically without outright saying it. Again, it's like the word "thug." Thug isn't used al…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:36 PM
–

You're dumb lol. Those were examples of toxic statements, not my own lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:30 PM
1

Okay fine, change it to the female beauty industry. Is the female beauty industry and its culture an example of toxic femininity, yes or no?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:19 PM
1

The point is the term toxic masculinity has an alternative used definition that is not what the dictionary definition says. The used definition is that men are bad. For example, the beauty industry and culture we have surrounding it is one of the most toxic things currently facing women. Yet if some bloke were to start going on stage and yelling about how bad toxic femininity has become, how ingrained toxic femininity is in women, and how we need to dismantle toxic femininity, he would be consid…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:17 PM
3

The only reason the industry isn't called internalized misogyny is because mainstream theory holds that the beauty industry is run by the patriarchy, of which no women are responsible. The definition of toxic _____inity is simply engaging in toxic words and actions to uphold a sense of gender. The beauty industry engages in toxic beauty standards to uphold a sense of femininity. Both the industy does it, and so do many men and women who pressure women into conforming to feminine beauty standards…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:12 PM
6

Both terms are fine, it's the unequal use of the terms that's the problem. If we're going to use the toxic term, then be consistent and call the beauty industry that pressures women into appearing feminine what it is. Toxic femininity. If we're going to use the internalized term, then be consistent and call the manosphere a large source of internalized misandry for the pressures it puts on men to be more masculine. And regardless, if a man is being misogynistic, he's a misogynist. If a woman is …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:02 PM
2

That's the dictionary definition of toxic masculinity, but you would be unwise to assume all words used by people follow the dictionary definition. The word "thug" has no racial connection in its definition, but we all know how racists actually use the word. The point is, the way it's used is the REAL definition, and the way the term is used is notably different than how we analyze the same exact actions by women. Women get softer and more victimized terms while men get harsher and more blame-wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 03:50 PM
2

Change the analogy. A man says men shouldn't wear dresses, toxic masculinity. A woman says women shouldn't play in the dirt, internalized misogyny. Any response?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 03:41 PM
6

Proof that the phrase "toxic masculinity" is just a more subtle way of blaming men: If a man says real men should fight, he's engaging in toxic masculinity. If a woman says real women should wear makeup, she's not engaging in toxic femininity (a term that has never seen widespread use), no, she's engaging in "internalized misogyny," a term that reads much more passive, blameless, and victimized. If a boy follows toxic gendered advice, he's engaging in and perpetuating toxic masculinity. If a gir…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 03:08 PM
2

Eh. We've gone back and forth, but I guess we just fundamentally disagree, nothing to be done about that. Shy women can have confident women talk to them, and I really don't see why you should care about your grandson like that, you can just talk to him when you want, or if you feel like it give him consent to come talk to you umprompted. But he should wait until he gets your consent. But again, it's your family, so I'm not gonna press further.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 01:00 AM
6

That's fine in my opinion. Just like I'm interacting with you because this is an assumed consenting space, an in-person assumed consenting space would be fine. Men just shouldn't interact first in non-assumed consenting places.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:49 AM
2

Thanks for the compliment. But unfortunately, as much as I would love to live in an equal world, I really don't see it that way, and I'm a pretty strongly ideological person on this. And I really don't think women would be sad not talking to me, especially because some women do, and we have nice chats, but they don't care for more beyond that, and nor should they. I just make sure not to ever interact first. I tend not to talk ideology to children, but I do think young boys should be taught this…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:41 AM
4

Well, a baby doesn't really have agency over its actions so it's not really a problem. And while I think your husband should obtain more consent, I'm not gonna push on your relationship since it's your life, not mine. Regardless, I'm gonna keep speaking my beliefs because I believe they are right, and hopefully more men come aboard.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:19 AM
3

Well actually that is the one flaw in my logic. I do not have an answer for the population decline that would follow. I am vegan though, I just thought both of my takes were morally correct takes very few of the population agree with.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:08 AM
4

I took it seriously in that I believed you were trying to show the holes in my logic by presenting ridiculous scenarios that would be created under my supposed logic. But no, I did not think you really wanted men to become house maids or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:06 AM
3

Again, agree to disagree then. Women really don't need men, and men, despite their protesting, don't need women. Men can listen to women without risking violating their boundaries. And most people roll their eyes at vegans. Doesn't mean they're not right.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:02 AM
3

Over 300 confirmed kills?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:58 PM
4

You set boundaries for your husband to follow, what he is allowed and not allowed to do without asking. Like slapping during sex, that's an extreme risk of violation if not established beforehands, so just follow that logic with everything else. Your brothers can bring up different subjects, you consented to the conversation. The only thing they shouldn't bring up is asking you for more interaction. They should leave that for you to decide, or allow them to ask on their own if you establish that…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:53 PM
6

That's a take created out of toxic masculinity.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:46 PM
2

You can learn without interacting. It's called listening, which men need to do more.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:45 PM
3

Women aren't a prize men "compete for" dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:42 PM
3

I mean duh, I told you directly, of course you can tell lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:36 PM
3

Well, agree to disagree then, I feel like I'm genuinely doing good. But if I will say, if women won't panic about men leaving, then what's the issue with my comments, given the fact you provided no other criticism of it? I agree women won't care, nor should they. The patriarchy has for too long made women put men's issues in front of their own, and that's wrong. But if they don't care, then it's all good so what are we even arguing about?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:35 PM
5

On a non-physical anonymous website, on a subreddit that specifically allows questions from men to women, to which no woman is obligated to respond. I have no problem with interaction in a consenting setting, just like I have no problem interacting with women who come up to me first. I'm just not going to interact in a non-consenting setting first and risk violating her boundaries.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:27 PM
9

The risk is that my mere presence creates the fear of rape, assault, harassment, and murder. These are valid fears that many women have, and I don't blame them for being uncomfortable around men. I mean, I'm a good guy, so obviously I should be allowed in a women's only gym, right? No, obviously. And again, if they're interested in talking to me, they can come up to me, and I'll gladly have a chat. If they're not, me staying away probably saved them a hassle.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:24 PM
0

You don't. Others do. If you have a bag of skittles and the guy tells you if you eat one of those skittles you're gonna make a woman deeply uncomfortable and fearful, you wouldn't eat from those skittles.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:18 PM
5

You can talk to any man you want to, since a woman going up to a man is not the same as the opposite due to the patriarchal society we live under. This is about men's behavior, I have no intention of policing women's behavior. Also, as I said in my post, the only exceptions to this rule are for work needs, so yes, a man can ask a woman a question about work. This solution is perfect too, as it in no way hurts women, it gives women more freedom from men, and only marginally hurts entitled men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:16 PM
6

Well, I assumed a place where you can outright ask women questions without any physical interaction and full anonymity, to which they had no obligation to respond to, had some level of assumed consent. Kinda like dating apps, which have assumed consent to conversation. Anyways, I'm alright with not interacting with women, but it's not about my wants, it's about women's safety. To which you haven't really given a good reason for why men should potentially infringe on women's safety just to have a…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 11:05 PM
3

But the women who want to interact with men can just go up to them. And the bad men filter themselves out heavily as soon as they go up and interact with a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:58 PM
7

I'm trying. I really do think young boys need to get it instilled in their heads not to interact with women. That will produce a better society.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:54 PM
8

I don't really see how I'm being sexist by respecting women's boundaries, but okay. And I do apply it to real scenarios because I live it. And I don't bother any women, so I'm doing pretty good.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:53 PM
6

Well, agree to disagree then. I don't think you can speak for all women overall in terms of their valid fears of men. Regardless, I'm going to keep my stance since I'm not bothered by not interacting with women, I haven't bothered any women, and the few women who have come up to me seem chill, so to me that's a win/win/win.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:51 PM
11

Well, I don't believe you can speak for all women when you say women will not have a problem if a man comes up and interacts with them normally. Most won't, sure, but enough will that it doesn't justify risking violating them. And again, I think everything works out better if men stop interacting, and women make all the first moves. Therefore, all women who want no interaction with men are at peace, and the women who do can pick and choose from the men they trust.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:47 PM
5

I guess we agree to disagree. I think the only people who would suffer are entitled men who feel entitled to interact with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:45 PM
0

Eh. I don't think the spice of life variety in having female friends justifies taking on the risk of interacting with women. Like you said, men rape, assault, harass, and murder women, so I really don't think it's right to invade women's personal space, especially when women can go up to men instead, making the interaction fully consenting and risk-free.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:43 PM
2

But who is harmed if everyone followed this rule? Women benefit completely since all men they are wary of or dislike would not interact, and the men they want to interact with they can just go up to them. And men might lose a couple of interactions, sure, but they should learn how to become socially fulfilled and happy without needing female interaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:37 PM
3

Right, but if they fear and dislike men, what right do I have to potentially risk harming their personal boundary. If they're interested in interacting with me, they can, and if they aren't, that's okay too because I respect their boundaries.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:34 PM
6

I'm not talking about what goes on during the interaction, I'm talking about the baseline justified fear many women have during ANY interaction with men. I think it's right for me to stop interacting with women since the potential upside to interaction isn't worth risking potentially instilling fear and discomfort on a woman, especially when if she's truly interested in interaction she can interact with me first.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:32 PM
3

Well, answer the question then lol. What else is there beyond these 4 for interacting with women or men? Chit-chat, friendship, romance, work. Only work seems to be justified in interacting with women. The others are nice, but don't justify raising women's valid fears of rape, stalking, harassment, and murder.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:24 PM
13

But I agree with you, men should stop interacting with women. I was just wondering if y'all had any objections. Glad we agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:22 PM
6

I do understand. Rape, stalking, harassment, murder. But whether I do understand or don't, we agree that men should stop interacting with women, right? I respect women's valid fears.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:20 PM
3

What? I'm not mad, I'm just wondering if there is any reason to interact with women. Which I guess we both agree there really isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:18 PM
6

Alright, so we agree. I honestly think young boys should be taught at a young age to stop interacting with women, frankly.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:17 PM
4

I said this doesn't apply to work. So what's left? Chit-chit? My logic applies to that aswell.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:16 PM
4

I don't date, or really interact with women at all outside of work and when they approach me first.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 10:15 PM
–

Literally. Just reframe it in female coded language with a little female ego-boosting or shitting on men and suddenly the blackpill has a lot of merit. Same exact thing with the 80/20 rule. Call it 80/20, and it's bullshit. Call it "baddie inflation" about how the amount of cute guys doesn't match the amount of baddies, and suddenly every gen-z woman on the planet agrees.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 03:01 PM
–

https://np.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1rwx0ng/sabrina_carpenter_responds_to_the_misogyny_under/ Lmao. Sabrina Carpenter and all of Fauxmoi repeatedly shit on the entire male gender, especially calling them short, then some Twitter dude quips at them with the same "you're short" insult, and suddenly it's misogyny and the short women are pressed like they don't engage in shitting on short men.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 02:54 PM
–

Fat-phobia in the big 2026? Not very cool. You incels really are something 🥱
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:44 AM
–

There is when you use it as an insult lol. Nothing wrong with being fat either, but if I call you fat as an insult, I'm declaring there's something wrong with it, and something wrong with you because you are it. Unless you're trying to say your earlier comment was just an earnest piece of advice under which you assumed I was interested in men because of an earnest lapse into homonormative thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:25 AM
1

I mean, I guess I see your confusion. But as I see it; She literally can't be unloyal during casual if she sexually desires you. By the time she leaves and goes with another man, the encounter is over, and you're no longer feeding her anything. She can literally fuck a dude an hour from getting it on with you, but that's not cuck stuff since at that point it's no / no. If you return to her, that's a whole new interaction. You've never given her your commitment, and you're not giving her any effo…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:19 AM
–

Homophobia in the big 2026? Not very cool. Also, you didn't have to call this hypothetical boyfriend gay. If he's my boyfriend, then both he and I would necessarily be gay, bi, or pan, and thus under the LGBTQ+ community, thus eligible for anti-LGBTQ+ insult, so no extra context was needed for the insult to be delivered, as the nature of it would be understood without the unnecessary qualifier.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:02 AM
1

No. If you're giving her all that, and she's sexually desiring you and having sex with you, that's a yes / yes so you're not cucked. If you continue giving all that to her and she doesn't have sexual desire for you anymore, or she's with other guys, then yes, you're a cuck. But if you just do it for one night/day and then stop, well she can do whatever she wants because it would then be a no / no which also isn't a cuck since you aren't giving her anything. It has to be a yes / no for cucking.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:56 AM
–

I didn't say men don't have self-control? The point isn't that men might just suddenly lash out. It's that under the patriarchy, women necessarily fear that some of us will. It's about respecting women's justified fears and not intruding in their space. So "natural predator" is too far, you're right, but "current predator" is accurate. And really, I'm using self-control to stop interacting with all women, disproving the idea that men can't act as properly as I do.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:51 AM
–

No. Feeding is not determined by who feeds more, it's simply an action. Even if you're dating a billionaire woman, and all you do is have talk to her in bed while she cooks, cleans, fucks, and pays for whatever you want. If she doesn't want you sexually and gets with other men, with or without your knowledge, you're getting cucked because you are giving her something meaningful beyond what you'd give a platonic friend (emotional discussion in bed) while she sexually desires other men. Now you mi…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:38 AM
–

I don't even know what you just said tbh. You can definitely get cucked in a relationship, where did I say otherwise? Simple rules for me: A) Are you giving her anything meaningful beyond what you'd give a platonic friend? B) Does she sexually desire you and stay loyal? No / No : Not a cuck since you aren't feeding her. Yes / No : Cuck, since you are feeding her while she wants something else. Yes / Yes : Not a cuck since because your feeding is not in vain as she is with you because she desires…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:24 AM
–

Well yeah lol. You don't even have to have sex to get cucked, because getting cucked is about her not sexually desiring you while keeping you feeding her. In casual, you don't feed her anything. No effort, no money, no friendship, no love, while she gives you her sexual desire. That's like, the complete opposite of being a cuck. Now maybe if you have to be friends with her and buy her stuff while she has somewhat non-enthusiastic sex with you, sure, that's cuck stuff. But if you just said hi and…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:11 AM
–

Well of course they'd say no, they're clarifying that the initial statement doesn't apply to casual. I truly don't see many men arguing that having casual sex is getting cucked lol. Maybe I'm wrong lol, but ask around.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:55 AM
–

They'd disagree with you on point 2. Firstly, even the most insane misogynists don't believe casual sex is being cucked lol. They'd just call it using her up or something. But even in a long term relationship, I would imagine a lot of red pillers don't necessarily think it's virgin or the cuck life. Being a cuck is being the beta bux who she's not really attracted to, but she likes your personality enough that she'll stick around for whatever other benefits. But a non-virgin woman who's still cl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:45 AM
1

No, they parrot the lie that women are uncomfortable around socially awkward, ugly nice guys because women are oh so shallow. Women have to fear being RAPED and MURDERED around ALL MEN. Stop making excuses. Shut up. BYE.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:37 AM
1

Yes, of course. Incels are well known for owning up to how misogynistic and harmful to women they are... Men will literally rape women, deny doing it, and get praised for it like that disgusting incel Andrew Tate. Shut the fuck up. BYE.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:30 AM
1

Yes... Most incels tend to say that. Men never have any awareness of women's issues. We get it. There's no helping you. Bye.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:14 AM
–

Just because 1 woman appreciated it doesn't mean it was morally right to do so... You can find women who appreciate being catcalled as well. You are driving 100mph in a school zone and justifying it by saying you didn't hit any kids. If women really wanted to interact with you, they'd do it. Your date most likely would have come up to you and asked to interact without you needing to intrude on a woman's safety, making the risk you took completely unnecessary and wrong. Please do better in the fu…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:05 AM
–

Thank you for not approaching women on the street (absolute bare minimum). But just remember, while being tall and muscular certainly doesn't help, women are afraid of ALL strange men, not just built ones. Please stop approaching women at parties or any location whatsoever. Women's fear unfortunately exists in all spaces of life, but especially in places with alcohol, where women fear being drugged, or where they may be intoxicated, where their ability to verbally defend themselves from men is w…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:48 AM
–

*Sigh* Another entitled male who dismisses women's real and justifiable fear of men. Whether or not you think bears are dangerous isn't the point. The point is, women have made it clear that men are dangerous. Respect that. Women shouldn't have to carry guns everywhere they go to feel safe, and that's completely ignoring the aforementioned social leverage. Incels like you are the reason women can't exist safely anywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:33 AM
–

I'm sure you're a niceguy™ too. Men are significantly stronger than women, and under the patriarchy wield significantly more social leverage as well. Men have shown themselves to be very predatory and dangerous around women, so much so that women will choose to be around bears over men. You may think you are not dangerous, but regardless of the truth, women do not know you aren't dangerous. Please stay away from interacting with any women who do not come up to you first. Educate yourself, and do…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:12 AM
–

Her safety is more important than your desire to be around her. You are not entitled to her time and space. Be better.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 12:31 AM
–

Nor should they. Men are their natural predators. It's just about men understanding and respecting her desire not to be around potential danger.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 12:12 AM
–

Kinda agree. Only interact with women if they come up to you. Otherwise, keep them strangers. But even if they come up to you, keep some distance. No private chats, no asking to hang out later, and certainly no sexual or romantic interaction of any sort.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 12:01 AM
–

They'd respond, "safe from who?" You'll never get them to acknowledge you. Way easier to just accept being the villain in their story. I keep em way safer by refusing interaction lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 11:54 PM
–

Maybe more men should just stop interacting with women completely. We are their natural predators.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 11:47 PM
–

Q4 Bluepill/Women Do you guys really believe women are just as sexually interested in men as gay guys are into men?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 09:52 PM
1

Again, you can't wrap your head around the idea that people are valued for more than 1 thing, ironically. Of course you hear people call Vin Diesel hot more than his sister. I didn't even know he had a sister before I googled her. What a dumbass thing to say lol. And again, his global attractiveness is massively boosted by his status and fame. But this discussion is about looks so stop bringing in all these other things like personality. I'm not denying a good personality help, but it's not the …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 03:26 PM
1

I said that Zack and Rama have the same features, yet Rama is considerably more attractive as proof of the gap in sexual desirability. Poopy tried to argue that that was because Rama had feminine features. Then you said that the men (obviously including me) like to ignore sexual dimorphism. Both your points fail trying to combat the idea that women have greater sexual desirability. She failed because she tried to present reality as if it were equal. As if there are equally as many attractive men…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 03:16 PM
1

I'm sorry, that was a private comment. Please do not reply to my comments without my explicit consent. That will be all bro.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 03:31 AM
0

Sorry for interrupting your private DM's lmao It's Reddit bro. You said something incorrect on a public forum. Someone's gonna come correct it. Go message her privately if you need privacy. Sexual dimorphism exists, it's unequal, and part of that is the fact that women are more visually sexually desirable to men than men are to women. Including the fact that women with masculine traits are not hit as hard as men hit with simply not being born with the correct angles, feminine or masculine.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 11:08 PM
1

Vin Diesel's sister is more sexually visually desirable than him. Take away Diesal's fame and she outdoes him. Also, the "What % of this ~20% would say the exact same thing to any non-fat woman" is kinda the point. A lot of men find a lot of women attractive. That's like, basically my entire point. And of course, it works differently in real life when some other factors can boost your relationship desirability, like money or status. My post has been strictly about visual sexual desirability. And…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:30 PM
1

I'm talking beauty icons. Of course Madison Beer isn't as influential as Oprah. Doesn't mean Oprah looks better than Madison Beer though. Harry styles may be more charismatic, but he's not better looking than Zayn. And I really don't think I'm missing the forest for the trees. I look at Rama and her eye bulges are like, dead obvious to me. Rama does not have as good eyes as Sridevi who just, does not have bulging eyelids. Upper eyelid exposure yes, but no bulging. Again, you can like them person…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:02 PM
2

Those chuds complain about anything that isn't a sex doll though. Something they don't even really keep up in their daily lives either, because sometimes you see their wives and they look just normal women that they find attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:42 PM
2

The main problem is the assumption that sexually dimorphic traits equally affect men and women. Take jawlines, for example. A man with a bad jawline alone is pretty much instantly sent into the "meh" zone for like 90% of women. He basically needs a good jawline to achieve hot status. A woman with a weak jawline can easily be considered hot as long as it's not too recessed, and a strong jawline really isn't a failo on women, and is often still a benefit. And we both know Mya Lesnar is an exceptio…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:32 PM
1

If I had to guess, certain angles just make his jawline look not as recessed, and certain angles don't highlight his upper eyelid exposure. Like in this photo you showed, his camera-left eye looks better than his camera-right eye because the right eye has light highlighting his eyelid. Anyways, I agree aesthetically he's better looking IMO than the lady on the left (kylie?). But that's where my point kinda comes in, that despite being aesthetically on par, his visual sexual value is significantl…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:07 PM
1

Lmao he got you too with the weak jawline. I mean, I saw how bad it was from the side, but it wasn't until I saw the front that it truly hit lmao. I agree his biggest problem is his jawline. And with the nose, I really just mean it's tall. Like, there's too much verticality from the front view. Anyways, with the eye thing, that's fine if you personally think it looks better. Taste is ultimately subjective on these things. But speaking as for what the general population likes is not what Rama or …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:00 PM
1

When men say women are cute, it usually means they actually are pretty good-looking. When women say it, it's like a 50/50 whether that means he's good-looking, or just acceptably non-ugly enough looking to be able to form a romantic connection. I could be wrong, but I assume he's with her because she's hot and has a compatible personality. She's with him because he's acceptably non-ugly and has a compatible personality. Good pull with the siblings on that, she definitely looks worse than them, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 08:37 PM
2

You'd have a point if masculine women were as undesirable as feminine or even just whatever men, but fortunately, they simply aren't. Firstly, masculine jawlines and eyes on women often look quite striking and appealing, and often don't truly impact the actual attraction they receive. A prominent brow ridge on a woman, I agree, is a big one, and that's fair to point out. But with a man, his brow ridge being too feminine OR too masculine can significantly affect his desirability. So when you tall…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 08:03 PM
1

No, I'm talking visual attraction, not whether or not they date hot people or not. Zack Bia outperforms Rama Duwaji 100 to 1 if we're going off dating results, since he's been with Madison Beer and Olivia Rodrigo, two extremely attractive celebrity women. But those women didn't get with him because of how he looks, obviously lol, and I doubt your female friend got with worse-looking Zack Bia because she thought he was hot. My point is that their sexual desirability based on looks is unequal, des…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:20 PM
1

Eh. What can I say other than you're just wrong? If you wanna say she's mid to below average amongst a lineup of other women, that's fair and true. But that's almost my point really. That even as a mid woman with the exact same features as her male counterpart, she's drastically more desired than the male is to the other gender. If you think Zack Bia has equally as many women interested visually as Rama Duwaji does men, I don't know what to tell you. You're just lost.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 06:37 PM
3

They just don't like hearing men say it, cause when men say it, they feel the power goes back to the male side, because it's like men taking agency in the language or whatever. Kinda like most of the blackpill stuff. Rename the "80/20 rule" to "Baddie Inflation" and suddenly all these women agree that there aren't enough good-looking men compared to the number of baddie women. https://www.tiktok.com/@8mochaluver/video/7585018213335846164 One of my favorite TikTok comment sections lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 06:12 PM
3

A lot of people lol. A lot of women: https://np.reddit.com/r/VindictaRateCelebs/comments/1oq18b0/rate_rama_duwaji_she_is_so_effortlessly_cool_and/ https://np.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1le8qa3/rama_duwaji_zohran_mamdanis_wife_going_viral/ https://np.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1ptuy9n/rama_duwaji_new_york_citys_first_lady_covers_the/ And also a lot of men too, though I don't have any threads to back that up, just my personal vision which finds her attractive, my knowledge that similar looki…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:36 PM
1

Idk lol. I kinda get it in like a "oh look the literal hottest woman on the planet has to settle for dating a guy who looks like a rat, what hope is there for the rest of us" kind of way. But it's also like, A) y'all are the ones who said you'll put up with looks, and B) if you don't want to settle lookswise (which you shouldn't unless you inform your partner you are doing so) then keep chasing after Chad or stay single like y'all said you were perfectly content with doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:19 PM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/LAinfluencersnark/comments/1rn0zn7/im_sorry_but_this_photo_of_madison_beer_crashing/ All the women calling Zack Bia ugly in this thread is such proof that male looks are just inherently inferior in the eyes of women compared to women's looks in the eyes of men, and I'll show you why. The man's 3 big failos are a recessed unsharp jaw, an overly long nose, and massive upper eyelid exposure, all of which make him a rodent according to these women. And I understand that a sna…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 04:49 PM
5

Every single user on r/residentevil and various other subs You really have a knack for commenting that you don't know things.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 12:31 AM
3

The eternal debate over Pretty Boy Chad vs Classic Chad. The trend is generally that the younger ages of women will flock more towards pretty boy while the older ages will go towards more classically handsome, more masculine Chad. Either way, broad appeal amongst all ages.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 12:29 AM
2

I literally gave you his name lol, but he's just a very conventionally (chad features) attractive male video game character. My point is the people who would never say they find Chad attractive are obsessed with how hot he is, they just don't realize he's a Chad because in their minds Chad is someone like Ernest Khalimov (male gaze chad) vs an actual chad like Chico Lachowski (female gaze chad).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 12:20 AM
–

I love watching Reddit users who would never ever say out loud they think Chad is hot then go thirst endlessly for 5'11" muscular build with wide shoulders, perfect jawline, low brow ridge, harmonic facial proportions, forward grown maxilla, caucasian, deep set wide blue eyed CHAD Leon Kennedy is hilarious. Then call him a twink like he's some alternative attraction lmao. Chad always wins.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 11:57 PM
1

I unironically believe that if a man and woman are both drunk and have sex, the man is the rapist. Not because it's true, but because men have to accept that, generally speaking, women's ability to consent to sex is untrustworthy, and thus dangerous for both you and her. I wouldn't engage with a woman sexually or romantically whatsoever just for being at a party with alcohol. Gotta be precautious.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 01:03 AM
2

Derail lol. Can't argue, but you must respond, derail every time.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:28 PM
1

You're responding to some bloke on PPD while you're at Mardi Gras? Lmao that's some pathetic shit bro get off the phone lol. Also that was your quote, you're the one saying if no one's left (dead or arrested) it's not a problem. 38,000 men killed by women in 2 decades btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:20 PM
1

yeah you did lol? "Hold up, if no one’s left then why even whine about it? They all gone anyways" also 38,000 men killed by women in 2 decades btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:14 PM
–

Men make up the majority of homicide victims, men also die more from male offenders, but at the same time men's deaths at the hands of female offenders are similar. Saying women have to fear murder because 2,412 died in the US per year at hands of men is valid but men don't have to fear women because only 1,898 men died in the us per year at the hands of women is ridiculous. It's okay to admit men are victims of society which includes both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:12 PM
–

Sorry, that was united states only.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:09 PM
1

No, you said the problems disappear since they get arrested lol, keep up bro. Also, I understand what Mardi Gras and tits are. But if you could, just one more time explain to me why you brought them up. 38,000 men killed by women in 2 decades btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:08 PM
–

Exactly. Certain subjects and people are just going to get completely lobsided criticism because of who they are, rather than the appropriate weight of their actual actions. Very FOX News-like.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 08:01 PM
2

Right, but the "but" is because you and everyone else spend your days talking about incels while 38,000 men have been killed by women in the last 2 decades with nothing said. You need to talk about this crisis more. I still don't get why you are bringing up boobs?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:59 PM
–

But you falsely assume that women hold a monopoly on violence against them. For example, in 2023, 2,412 females were killed by males, and an estimated 1,898 males were killed by females.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:56 PM
3

The incel ideology has killed 100 people in the last 2 decades. Bad, of course, but compared to women's relationship behavior (38,000 killed in 2 decades), it isn't even close. And I still don't get why you brought up tits and Mardi Gras?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:51 PM
5

Ok so if the bar for whether or not something is a prevalent issue is if the offenders get arrested, then neither incels nor murderers are really issues since they get arrested right? Doesn't matter how many they kill (like 38,000 over 2 decades) just so long as they get arrested after it's not a problem right? Also, what's with the comment about men getting shown tits?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:44 PM
–

All the incels either killed themselves or got arrested too lol. What's under the shadows is accountability and change to stop these 38,000 murders from happening in the future. Do you want 38,000 men to continue to die at the hands of women over the next 2 decades or will you speak up about this crisis?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:37 PM
–

Arguably, women are the ones working in the shadows because they've killed 38,000 men in the last 2 decades and nobody has talked about that once. Everybody has talked about incels. When's the last time you brought up female-on-male violence?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:32 PM
–

What? Deaths? Of course all deaths are too many. I'm just saying y'all's focus is skewed. Remember when we talked about the frat boy shit and you said it was no big deal lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:28 PM
–

38,000 is too many. 380 times too many one might say.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:25 PM
–

Another interesting point on how Incels get disproportionately more blame compared to their actual actions, simply because they are more annoying: Estimated total deaths at the hands of incels since 2000 seems to be less than 100, and that's including some male deaths too. Meanwhile, in 2023, 9.3% of homicides were female killers with male victims, which means in 2023 ALONE, roughly 1900 men died at the hands of women. Less than 100 deaths from incels in 2 decades, vs rough estimate 38,000 men k…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 07:22 PM
2

Then you don't understand what toxic femininity or toxic masculinity is. Toxic femininity and masculinity don't mean you are feminine or masculine, nor does it have to do with weaponization. It simply means you are applying a sexist standard based on conceptions of femininity or masculinity onto others or oneself. That is toxic, and it is irrelevant the gender of the enforcer. Internalized misogyny and misandry are subsets of toxic masculinity and femininity, which is defined by when the gender …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 10:21 PM
3

Here, look on this thread for some examples. https://np.reddit.com/r/AskWomenOver30/comments/t6r6m6/what_are_some_signs_that_someone_has_internalized/ For instance, the top comment "Women judging other women for choosing to not have children. Women who support abortion bans.”" These two seem well agreed on to be labeled internalized misogyny. However, if a man judged another man for not having children that would almost universally be labeled toxic masculinity, and not internalized misandry. And…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 06:49 PM
4

When a man does something toxic to try to appeal to his sense of masculinity, it's called toxic masculinity. When a woman does something toxic to try to appeal to her sense of femininity, it's called internalized misogyny. The difference in language between the two is clear. One is very blaming, while the other shifts personal blame onto the larger society. This example is the most obvious showcase of the fundamental doublespeak going on in many feminist communities where stuff like "the patriar…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 05:16 PM
-1

Examples are hard because it's literally just anything, but here's this. Imagine a girl and boy both hit someone to get something they want. Both are likely to be yelled at and told to stop, but among parents, the girl is more likely to receive a discussion about the situation including asking her why she did it, how to better handle it next time, etc. On the other hand, the boy is more likely to receive more discipline such as further yelling, toys taken away, or even physical abuse, but is les…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 01:01 AM
3

Because parents of both genders raise their children differently according to the child's gender. Girls often get a lot more guidance and constructive criticism. Boys, contrary to popular belief, actually get disciplined more than girls both at home and at school (look it up). The difference is that boys don't get constructive criticism, they just get yelled at, things taken away, or hit. But nobody actually helps boys constrtively on how to operate. The whole "boys will be boys" thing isn't par…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 09:15 PM
3

https://np.reddit.com/r/TrollCoping/comments/1r0d310/if_things_dont_change_soon_im_going_to_have_to/ Lmao, it's been going on for a while but I think r/trollcoping has finally reached it's limit on gender posts, and now we usher in either the full-on gender war, or the mod clamp into whichever side they pick. And all that really happened was that the sub got filled with posts from men who criticize the women who SA'd them and the women for enforcing masculine expectations on to them, plus trans …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 09:09 PM
1

For clear sexual interest. Doesn't have to be sex itself but if she's not touching your arm, giving physical compliments, and that sort of stuff by the end of date 3, she's not worth it. Not saying it can't ever workout, but it's like dating a serial killer thinking you'll change them. Not worth it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:18 PM
3

When she's comfortable with it, duh. It's not so much that waiting for sex itself is the issue, but rather how men should not wait for clear sexual interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:15 PM
1

Well like I said, she doesn't actually have to have sex with you, just show clear sexual interest. If you knew she was into you sexually like that but she just wanted to get comfortable first, then you basically followed my advice anyways. It's not about getting sex so much as it is about confirming sexual interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:11 PM
2

It's very easy, actually. If on the first 2 dates she shows little to no sexual interest (flirting, touching, physical compliments, etc) or she has a clearly incompatible personality or lifestyle, then stop going on dates. If she shows passes both, great, now continue to asses your compatibility with her personality and lifestyle as that will take more time, while relaxing in the fact that you know she's sexually interested in you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:08 PM
1

It's not about instant sexual gratification, it's about not wasting time with someone who isn't showing sexual interest. And women who don't show sexual interest at the start carry a fairly high risk of long-term sexual incompatibility to be real with you. It's just not worth it when there are many women with great personalities and interest in a long-term relationship who will be attracted to you within the first few dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:05 PM
1

If they are explicitly wanting sex on the first date, they're probably players who really aren't interested in long-term bonding. It's a separate discussion since their wants are not the same as the guys who want a long-term while confirming sexual attraction. For the second group of guys though you didn't answer my question.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:02 PM
1

Well, I'm glad you said it this time without the pathetic "missing out" remark this time lol. Glad we've come to an agreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:55 PM
1

Firstly, she doesn't have to necessarily be intimate, just show clear sexual attraction. But anyways, my point is a simple question. Why should a man continue dating a woman whose sexual interest in him after 3 dates is questionable vs a woman whose sexual interest in him is clear? (assuming both have passed the personality test)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:54 PM
1

Again, I'm not saying all women will remain at the same sexual level of interest forever, but if she doesn't show clear sexual interest (which doesn't have to be sex), then IMO she's just not worth it. I ask again, why continue dating a woman whose sexual interest is questionable after 3 dates vs the woman who does?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:51 PM
1

Then the inverse. If she shows clear sexual interest, great! Now you gotta make sure she has a good personality, and is interested in bonding with you on a personality-level, and looking to build a long-term relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:49 PM
1

IMO, 3 dates is a perfectly acceptable range to opt out. Why continue spending time with a woman whose sexual interest in you is questionable after 3 dates vs the woman who is clearly sexually interested? It's not so much being bothered by it as it is raising your standards to find someone interested in you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:46 PM
1

Again with the pathetic stuff man, you gotta stop lol. If somebody doesn't want you they are not missing out. They don't want you. And your suggestion is just further proof that you really aren't okay with my standards, you don't like them, and you're trying to get at me under the guise of personal advice. Men ought to raise their standards, not lower them.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:44 PM
1

Over the course of like a couple dates, no real harm. But beyond that, if she's showing no sexual desire it's just not worth it. Just move on to the other women who will show it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:42 PM
2

Because you're not rejecting her because she won't have sex with you, I agree that's usally a pretty big red flag indicative of player behavior. You're rejecting her because she hasn't shown any sexual interest beyond "well I'm here on a date," thus it's not worth the risk. I can love and desire a woman fully, but if she says to me she's not sexually interested, of course I'm gonna look elsewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:39 PM
1

Yeah, and then added "what you’re missing out on" lol Like c'mon man lol that's some pathetic stuff. People have got to stop using that cope when someone tells them they wouldn't date them, it's just laughably embarrassing like bro they don't want you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:35 PM
1

You don't think the guys who start going off about how women are missing out when they reject him are pathetic? It's like the most pathetic shit ever like c'mon bro just accept undesirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:29 PM
1

A lot of guys say that "well you're missing out on a great guy" shit. It's pathetic, you just gotta take it on the chin and accept they don't want you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:21 PM
0

And I'm saying those women aren't worth dating. Nothing wrong with them, they have the right, it's just not worth the risk. Why should a man choose a woman whose sexual desire for him is questionable over a woman who shows clear desire immediately?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:15 PM
3

She may want you, but desire is what's lacking. A lot of women will want to date you for money, loneliness, or just feeling the need to get with somebody to fit in with society, but that doesn't mean they desire you. Even worse are the women who desire romantic love with you, but have little to no sexual desire for you. Men ought to raise their standards, opt only for women who desire them both romantically and sexually.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 04:01 PM
1

A niche look in the >35 range compared to Henry Caville maybe, but literally undeniable chad-tier sex appeal within the <25 range, and still chad-(chad-lite) in the 25-35 range depending on body build. These guys are so powerful amongst the <25 range that they just go on Omegle to record how crazy people go over them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:45 PM
–

Obviously a dude, but the androgynous aspect is a part of what makes him slay with women within the younger <25 demographics (while still doing extremely well with >25 too, so long as he doesn't have a twink body).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:24 PM
–

<image> Imagine looking like this. You could literally never fail.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:03 PM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1qs5u3h/til_over_a_5month_period_in_2020_a_nurse_in_yales/ This story is actually insane. THANK GOD it was a woman doing this because had it been a man, the misandry wouldn't be containable.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 06:24 PM
–

Yup, the temptation to just shit talk freely and offshore all blame and responsibility on "the enemy" is just too great of a reward for a lot of people. Normies too. If it was just Reddit then you could argue that it was just a chronically online thing, but frankly it's even worse on Instagram and TikTok.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 03:20 AM
–

Any sub that allows discussion on gender will inevitably turn into the gender wars. r/hygiene is going through it right now. Just circlejerking using clearly karma farming posts to shit on men, complain about the bar being in hell, complain about incels (despite all the posts being about unhygienic men consistently getting with women). All this despite the fact that, just like things like abortion or conservatism, the actual gap between men and women in hygiene is typically between 5 to10 percen…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 02:24 AM
–

People will unironically argue that male genocide doesn't exist while nearly 1.8 MILLION men have been sent to fight in this completely meaningless war over Russian capitalism. https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1qp90a8/csis_russia_has_lost_12_million_soldiers_twice_as/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 04:32 PM
1

https://preview.redd.it/n6eume7r70dg1.png?width=1664&format=png&auto=webp&s=64f3c75923682e064063643aa7e866fc30434ee6 We need more innocuous, cute, Irasutoya-styled blackpill memes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 11:38 PM
3

Well unfortuanetly, as a group, they are struggling immensely and many are failing. It's why I said you're verging on ableism. Your blanket dismissal of the struggles and failures autistic men face is akin to believing people in wheelchairs can achieve anything with the right attitude, so there's no need to build a ramp next to the stairs. What makes dating so bleak is that there is no ramp you can build for autistic men. Autistic men will suffer and fail at much higher rates in both socializati…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 10:26 PM
2

If it wasn't autism then neurotypical men would have roughly the same rate of singledom as autistic men, but they don't. And you're engaging in a societal/personal fallacy where the problems facing a group of people are treated like an individual failing, as if the group can overcome their own problems by just being better like you would suggest to an individual. That logic is already poor for individuals as many cannot overcome their own problems without external aid, but it becomes a complete …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 10:08 PM
2

40% of autistic men are virgins. I mean, you're almost verging on ableism at this point lol if you can't see how detrimental being autistic is to a man's social and dating life. It's okay to admit that women, by and larg,e do not find autistic men that sexually or romantically viable. Nobody is to blame, but it is what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 09:53 PM
2

Just because you know what the problem is doesn't mean you can fix it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 09:46 PM
3

Doesn't matter how much you know you're ugly and autistic; You're still ugly and autistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 09:39 PM
1

No I was trying to do the np thing but put in no
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 09:10 PM
3

Apparently all of Faux-Moi cause the age gap posts never fail to garner discussion lol
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 09:09 PM
4

Mmmmmmmm 😋 another delicious Faux-Moi age gap post! https://np.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1q5smz1/channing_tatum_45_with_girlfriend_inka_williams/ My favorite comments are the ones that are more honest about the truth about aging non-desireabilitlity like this one: "Another post where people deliberately ignore the fact that the problem with these age gap relationships is that these males will so obviously never date 40yr+ women (women in their very own age group) bc they’re “too old” and the…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 09:00 PM
2

That's my point. Incels are pissed off about not get any, they're told they feel entitled to women's bodies. Women complain about the orgasm gap, they're told it's a valid point and men should be giving women more orgasms. Almost as if they were entitled to it...
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 07:55 PM
3

Professional derailer lol I have never, and I MEAN NEVER, seen you fail to derail a conversation. You should flair yourself that
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 07:48 PM
3

Right, and people call them sexually entitled misogynists? That was basically my point lol?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 07:45 PM
4

The orgasm gap is kind of a crazy term if you actually think about it. Like imagine a bunch of men complaining about an orgasm gap, arguing they aren't getting enough orgasms. They'd be called sexually entitled misogynists right away. Also another reason to avoid relationships where the woman isn't sexually attracted to you, since sex will inevitably, if not immediately, become elevated or non-elevated duty sex, and you'll probably be contributing to (and therefore to blame for) the orgasm gap n…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 07:38 PM
–

Nothing makes me happier than the bi-monthly Fauxmoi age gap post. https://np.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1q1dlyh/tom_brady_48_spotted_dancing_with_influencer_alix/ What's funny is that a lot of the women they're talking about are like 25-28 so they can't even really morally object to it, they just have to sneer calling it predictable or gross lol, as if they have the right to comment on consensual relationships like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 09:00 PM
–

<image> Timothée Chad-lamet really got all the art hoes thirsting over him, thinking he's some hot intellectual indie boy because of the é and dimples, only to rip the fantasy to shreds by being the actual frat boy that he is and dating Kylie Jenner.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 09:42 PM
4

Young women ain't even denying the 80/20 dating scene. https://www.tiktok.com/@8mochaluver/video/7585018213335846164 The next stage of any redpill/blackpill era should just be saying all the shit that's said now, but use female gen z slang and a little female ego boosting language to get them on board. "Baddie inflation" is genuinely so funny because that's just 80/20 phrased so basically all young women will agree. I'm gonna start framing it like that from now on lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:25 PM
–

So you agree it's bad right? Weird that you had to make that second statement as if you feel this is an attack on women that you have to fight back with an attack on men, when you can just be critical of both.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 12:08 AM
–

The video shows a massive difference in exposure and intent. Flashing someone's daughter (also funny that you use daughter to make it worse by flashing a minor) through a window shows clear intent and is deliberately grotesque. In the actual video, he's inside his home with no window open, not moving with his eyes closed, and not showing himself off in grotesque fashion (he was just laying there). The police also found him to be intoxicated. Whether or not she opened his door is still in questio…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 12:05 AM
–

Is that what happened in this situation, or is that a completely different event that you are falsely presenting as analogous?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:48 PM
–

And then uploading it uncensored to TikTok? And supposing the genders were reversed, I assume you would be defending his right to film and upload her nude body as well, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:45 PM
–

Posting a man's nude body while he was in his own home, uncensored on the internet. Really, the whole DoorDash situation shows clearly how bluepillers on here will go to any lengths necessary to obfuscate, deny, and alter the truth when it puts any woman under any criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:43 PM
6

https://np.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1pkehi3/tyler_robinson_who_is_accused_of_killing_charlie/ Such a blackpilling thread lmao. Man shot Charlie Kirk and all he got in return was getting called chopped.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:14 AM
1

lol maybe, but probably not. It's probably an attention high for her
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 06:43 PM
2

Interesting theory, makes sense, but the underlying logic of why seems to date way farther back than humans. They found that male mice have a neural circuit that triggers attraction towards female mice, but that this circuit is not present in female mice. From the research I've done, it seems this circuit is also present in male humans, and present but significantly weaker in women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 06:20 PM
3

By the stats I gave you showing how bad frat guys are. Those stats are specifically for guys in fraternities, but they also apply to guys who share their same underlying causes (sexually entitled party-goers and players). People like Andrew Callaghan (who didn't go to a frat). These are the most problematic group of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 01:18 AM
3

"Frat guys" the archetype. Hope that clears that up. And funny that you have no problem declaring men are the most problematic, but you refuse to specify which ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 01:09 AM
3

I'm glad things are being done at that level, but the mainstream discussion matters a lot. Frat guys are still by far the largest most problematic group of guys when it comes to sexual assault, but the mainstream discussion has completely let them off the hook.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 12:55 AM
3

Weird that you're still trying to subtly deny the reality of the horrible figures for frat guys by questioning the stats. Just look them up, google will show you the links. And it is worth the distinction since incels get 90% of the blame, when it's not incels doing the real damage. Incels get blamed because they complain the most, meanwhile the rape culture amongst the frat boy types has become a non-discussion nowadays because the guys who do it just don't talk about it or complain like incels…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 12:48 AM
2

The three times more likely claim: https://www.cnn.com/2013/10/09/opinion/foubert-fraternities-rape/ 74% more likely claim: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11204108/#:\~:text=Multiple%20studies%20have%20demonstrated%20that,behaviors%20over%20time%20%5B28%5D. Last 2 claims: https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e03021472.pdf Again, pick them apart if needed, but the picture it paints generally is quite clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 12:12 AM
4

You can look them up, sexual assault stats are never going to be super accurate, but stats like these paint a general picture for frat boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:58 PM
3

Who said all rapes happen by frat boys? Don't use your own assault to cover for the high amounts of rape by frat boys. And no, I'm not really moving the goalposts. Actual fraternity boys and house bros are basically identical. One of the Andrew Tate guys I know literally goes to parties frequently and has a girlfriend. He's not in a frat, but I wouldn't hesitate to call him a frat boy because that's basically what it is. You mistakenly believe that Andrew Tate's main audience is incels, when it'…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:53 PM
2

But it's beyond just the name. The frat boy is an archetype that doesn't need to be in a frat to be one. It's literally just the party-going sexually entitled college man, which there are a whole lot of given that 1 in 4 college-aged women experience sexual assault. And I'm not even defending redpill or incel men, I'll agree or criticize their actions if I need to. I'm criticizing the fact that mainstream society has completely glossed over the biggest offending groups just to get at incels beca…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:42 PM
2

Mainstream discussion isn't focusing on them at all. Fraternities are still deeply entrenched in misogyny, entitlement, and rape culture, and their actions continue to run rampant, with punishment still being quite rare. It's one of the worst aspects of our society, yet mainstream discussion has moved entirely onto incels, who are far less dangerous by percentage. Why defend frats?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:33 PM
5

Just because the frat has rules doesn't mean shit when the culture is insanely misogynistic, entitled, and rapey. And I love that comparison, "well losers are just as bad as frat guys because they would rape if they could (completely unproven statement), so let's as a society focus all of our attention on them and not the much more criminally active frat boys." How about we focus on the group of guys mainly responsible for 1 in 4 college-aged women experiencing sexual assault? If you can't see t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 11:21 PM
6

Hardly comparable? What the fuck are you talking about??? Fraternity men are three times more likely to commit rape than their non-affiliated college peers. Women in sororities are 74% more likely to experience rape or sexual assault than other college women. 10% of all campus sexual assaults occur in fraternity houses. Most gang rapes reported on college campuses are tied to fraternities. The only way this is hardly comparable is that frat houses are fucking way more terrible than anything... T…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:55 PM
4

Pill spaces aren't doing anything, but neither are the frat boys. Just because the council is "trying" to hold them accountable doesn't mean the frat boys are now suddenly immune from criticism. And these councils are doing a terrible job at protecting women be for fucking real. And be more for real, if pill communities decided to get a fairly ineffective council to monitor bad behavior you wouldn't suddenly stop yapping about incels. Plus, why should a city of 750 thousand be less open to criti…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:40 PM
6

Lmao "real trouble makers." You mean abusers, rapists, and people who cover up rape? And you should still be criticizing the frat boys anyways as the larger problematic people, even if their councils are "trying" to hold them accountable (who only began working on holding them accountable after decades of rape). What a weird defense of fraternities you pulled out just because you find incels more annoying than you do rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:22 PM
11

It's so odd that incels and the asocial types are the centerpiece for toxic masculinity and misogyny, meanwhile frat houses are literal abuse and rape dens. I feel like they were the center of attention around the Brock Turner case but now they feel largely ignored in favor of shitting on the loser guys who aren't even a fraction as bad. Edit: Thought about it, and actually it's literally just because incels complain more on the internet, that's why they are getting more flak. These misogynistic…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:03 PM
3

It's gonna be amazing when 10 years from now the wage gap favors women. There is literally no benefit to being apart of the higher-paid gender, all it does is get you shit on. Being the lower-paid gender means you get to freely complain.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 04:16 PM
1

Q4All: What's your opinion on AI art? Is it art?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:47 PM
2

I was told by multiple other women on this subreddit that this NEVER happens!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:29 PM
7

It's more so the toxic positivity. Nobody wants to hear "we should all aspire to be kinder to one another ❤️" from someone who would never date their kind in the first place. It would be like hearing words of positive affirmation from Warren Buffett while you're living in a tent. Positivity can hurt a lot more than brutality. Stuff like "you're a great guy, and I empathize with what you go through, but I can never find your type attractive" hurts a lot more than just "yeah, height is a major asp…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 04:33 PM
–

So perfectly valid?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 04:53 AM
–

Exactly, hookup material can always become marriage material ironically by just getting a better personality (or just choosing loyalty at bare minimum tbh), but a marriage material guy can never become hookup material without surgery.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 02:31 AM
–

That would be the case if the men quitting were all universally the unchosen ones. Most men are chosen (note, not desired) at least once in their lives, just look at any of the stats. But if a significant portion of the struggling and mid-tier men drop out, then the amount of chooseable men drops significantly. The balance will then favor men as fewer men are available. People already talk about places like New York as favoring men and it's only like a 5% imbalance. If nationwide 10% of men drop…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 09:41 PM
–

I actually do. Obviously if you ask this question right now when the option doesn't exist and the mentality hasn't formed you'd find support difficult, but all it takes is for the invention to come to light before the fire starts burning larger. I could see like 20% of men quitting once normalized, and I could honestly see more doing it too.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:30 PM
–

That may be true amongst the young guys yeah, so maybe it will happen anyways as guys quit. The only problem I see there is with guys still wanting it. Despite quitting, they still want it and thus men still want it more.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:29 PM
–

There's only 1 actual way out for men. The phrase "the one who cares the least wins" is ultimately the core of the broader gender divide. Men want women more than women want men. Until that reverses, men will always suffer. The only way out is if a large percentage of men hold back, or drop out of the game entirely. While some percentage of men could be convinced to do so simply by ideological drive, the truth is that for meaningful impact, this must be done through medical dismantling of either…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:32 PM
9

Imagine if they said the weird "my son needs a chance" thing, like "please, my daughters need a chance at big tits".
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:00 AM
1

I think they find neither attractive. Concealer and contouring can help a guy go from "ew" to "whatever" if his skin is really bad, but it's not gonna do much else.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 01:30 AM
2

Women always say men can wear makeup too but imo they really can't. With women, 90% of the attractiveness increase comes from eyeliner, lashes, eyeshadow, and eyebrows. The whole glossy contoured smooth skin and blush are a nice bonus but not even necessary unless you have really bad skin, and I don't think lipstick even matters at all. So with guys, there's nothing makeup really does that increases their sexual attractiveness all that much simply because eyeliner, lashes, and eyeshadow don't se…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 01:17 AM
–

First of all, you're assuming that's why they let it happen. The part that's mean is you calling them "the bottom" as feed for the bottom feeders. You're trying to say his success is worthless because he's getting with a bunch of low-quality women, which is not only a mean thing to say, but made worse by the fact that being insecure, neurotic, and low self-esteem does not make you a low-quality partner. The idea of an asshole getting with "high-quality" women is a narrative you don't want to acc…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 11:56 PM
–

Because we're not saying being an asshole gets you dates, we're saying this idea that it stops you from getting dates is not universally true. If you're a hot asshole, sure, some women will be wise and not go for you, but from your perspective there will be a constant healthy supply of those who will. Being an asshole is frankly a low-importance metric on one's resume for dating, even lower if you have the bare minimum skills of hiding it for a couple of months. That being said, don't be an assh…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 11:49 PM
–

Does anyone else find it funny that bluepillers in their infinite empathy, not only assume that any woman who gets with a bad guy is insecure and neurotic, but that those neurotic, insecure, low self-esteem type women are also low-quality women you'd never want to date anyway? Like what a mean thing to say about women who struggle with that stuff lol. Guess they're just worthless trash partners who only bottom-feeder men would date.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 11:40 PM
1

Agreed, but I do believe that an excellent speaker who is right enough on all of their other policies could potentially raise taxes significantly while getting elected to a second term. They'd have to be really good though, and really good at expressing their views that connect on an intellectual and motivational level. Hard, but maybe possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 12:06 AM
2

100% just a guess, but I do like speculating. He's an incel anyway, so no need to have any empathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 11:44 PM
1

Part of them not putting a solution forward is that the reality is that you 100% have to also tax the lower classes, and I say that as a leftist. The rich should pay more taxes too, but the reality is that when you've got, for hypothetical example, 100 million people in the lowest tax bracket, adding even just 100$ to their yearly taxes gets you 10 Billion in added revenue. In reality you have to tax both higher, but that makes for a terrible campaign message so they leave that part quiet. I do …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 11:40 PM
1

Again, not wanting something is not viewing it as inferior generally. And I ask that question because I believe there are more men are like me, but they haven't yet thought about it, merely waddling in some uncomfortable but undefined feelings. I believe a bunch of men are settling for something they don't really want, but due to the cultural standards we have now, they never really press back against their feelings of discontent. It's like the heteronormative dating culture we have now where ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 11:10 PM
1

It's not something I want, how hard is that to understand? You can want it, and that's fine. If I don't want a poly relationship, is that me viewing poly people as inferior?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 10:56 PM
–

There's no problem, unless you don't want that kind of relationship. There's no problem with polyamorous relationships either, unless you don't want that kind of relationship. Me personally, I wouldn't want to be with a woman I had to impress with my personality just for her to find me hot. It worsens when she finds other men hot right off the bat, but she physically settles for me because I have a good personality. I'd rather be with a mutual who we both find hot right off the bat and enjoy eac…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 10:36 PM
–

I didn't say it's not legit, I'm saying men should ask themselves if they want to be in a relationship like that. They can choose to be in those types of relationships, and I have no problem with that. But they may also want a woman who is similar to them in that they both have an on-sight desire for each other, including the many benefits of a mutual on-sight desire relationship. Nothing wrong with a man asking himself what he wants out of a relationship, and nothing wrong with not wanting the …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 10:16 PM
–

There lies the question society isn't ready to ask. Should average men who get no signals put in the effort to date women who would never signal any desire to them in the first place?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 10:08 PM
–

Nah, he probably was just observing the pretty obvious reality that brown guys have a disadvantage in the dating market, mixed with some self-hate from the racism brown people and muslims face. And I hate to say it cause I like the guy, but I kinda feel like he's in a AF/BB marriage. Like it seems like his wife genuinely likes his personality and politics of course, but at the same time he was already a member of New York State Assembly when they matched on Hinge, and he's like 6 years older tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 09:58 PM
–

Zohran "women won't date me because I'm brown" Mamdani <image> What a hateful entitled incel he was.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 09:20 PM
–

Someone should make a Tea app for women, but it's just screenshots of how they interact with Chadfish.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 02:56 PM
–

This is what men actually want to hear when they hear husband material lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 02:48 PM
–

He's pretty ugly to me, but at the very least he's definitely in the "inspires zero sexual thoughts whatsoever" category.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 08:32 PM
1

It's only biological.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 04:09 AM
1

<image> This is the ideal CHAD male side profile. I'm pretty sure I got 99% of what makes a side profile attractive on a structural level (so excluding skin quality, fat, eyebrows). I feel like if you have this side profile, you're almost guaranteed to have a good front as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 03:23 AM
2

well i knew that lol
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 07:11 PM
5

If there's somebody for everybody lookswise, shouldn't it be equally, if not more true, that there is somebody for everybody personality-wise? Where are the women who love autistic incel guys?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 07:06 PM
10

She was sacked because she uploaded his naked body to TikTok, and it went viral. She did not get fired before she posted it online illegally.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:44 PM
9

No, her DoorDash account was deactivated for the video itself after it went viral.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:22 PM
14

Lmao, why even comment if you don't know literally anything lol?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 04:57 PM
13

Uploading the video uncensored to TikTok was protecting herself? Literal criminal behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 04:56 PM
21

Record it if you want, but how her defenders refuse to see that her uploading his body uncensored to TikTok was not a good moral thing to do is beyond me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 04:49 PM
1

Why did you get offended by me assuming you would make a correct argument lol? That's so clearly a misogynistic statement disguised as "just my experience," but I guess keep living in naive land. Like how far can I go with that until you call it out lol? "Every single woman I've met or seen online with a body count more than 1 cheated on their boyfriend. Just my personal experience." Clearly a misogynistic lie. And I'm not talking about initiating. Most men also find a lot of women hot and don't…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 01:47 PM
1

I've literally showed you some of the women I'm basing this off. And I never said your type of attraction is not real or whatever, simply that you are not a monolith, and the type of behavior you are calling abnormal is actually also normal. There's no moral judgment here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 01:38 PM
1

Well, we're not really getting anywhere. Most guys don't dwell, most women don't either but some women dwell. Again speaking for all women. I'm simply stating that there exist women who, exactly like men, find guys sexually attractive on first sight, and would be down to hookup, even if they weren't looking for it in the first place. Again, I'm not saying women become slaves to desire or instantly become wet, I'm saying many women get the same jolt of physical attraction as most men do when view…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:04 AM
2

OH MY GOD GIVE ME A MEDAL
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 04:33 AM
1

Well, they have a hard time because they let the thoughts swirl is what I meant. They don't just see a woman and get hard. I know what it was like being 14, and it's definitely the mental dwelling. And yes, I'm aware they are jokes, but they're not irrelevant to what's actually going on. Men post the same exact types of jokes. And the origin of those jokes is that they find it attractive, obviously. Most people don't watch tiktoks long enough to start any arousal, but if you're trying to tell me…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 03:57 AM
1

Again, you're taking it too extreme. Even the guys obsessed with raw attraction don't really get physical arousal from just seeing a hot woman either. But prolonged viewing and thinking can induce arousal, which indeed will induce physical arousal. That's the exact same with some women. I can link you some thirst traps. There's no story going on really, it's just a hot guy showing his body or pretty face, and then a bunch of women in the comments posting the exact same lip biting or getting wet …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 02:57 AM
1

But you mixed 2 things up. You first say that women don't just see a hot guy and crash out, which is true, but then say that's what men do while describing a completely other thing which is simply arousal. Men don't really see a hot woman and crash out either, nor do they typically flood our minds once you're out of puberty. A man can usually just be walking by, see a hot woman and thinks she's hot, and only if he continues thinking about her body does arousal occur, and even then he's not lost …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 01:58 AM
1

Women definitely have more reserve, but I honestly believe that's only because even a hot guy to them is not as attractive as a pretty girl is to men. But if you've ever seen chadfishing you'd see how REALLY hot guys absolutely do have that effect on a lot of women. Also, imo, it isn't so much about not believing a woman can lust for a man after a while. Some guys believe that, but to me at least it's more so A) I wouldn't want to take a risk on that, and B) I'd rather be with someone who views …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 12:21 AM
1

You are 100% insinuating that all women do not find any men sexually attractive enough right away to be down for a hookup. If I said "me personally, I don't know any woman who isn't a golddigger" you would obviously, and correctly call out that I'm calling all women golddiggers, and not trying to just discuss my personal observations. And you completely misread that last sentence. Outside of genuinely mentally ill people, men don't just lose all control and turn into wolves that just start tryin…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 11:40 PM
2

Yeah, instant attraction would probably be way more brutal tbh. It's why I really think they, as a hard red line, can never allow men to have that standard lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 11:32 PM
2

Thank you lol. I have this suspicion that they don't really want to talk about it because while "getting to know him" attraction can work for a lot more guys, "finds him hot right away like he does" would look a lot closer to 80/20.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 11:25 PM
2

It sounds more like they're saying no woman finds men hot enough to be interested quickly in having sex. "I don't know any woman who's wanted to fuck a man based on looks alone. That's a male thing." That is an absolutely untrue statement. I'm not saying women go lust-crazed, but what I am saying is this idea that ALL WOMEN have no sexual desires for men instantly based on looks is just straight up false, and treating women as a monolith. There are many women who look at some guys they find hot …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 11:14 PM
1

See this entire post from 4 hours ago on this thread lol. https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1p8khee/comment/nr97z02/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button Literally fantasy women according to them. And what men mean by "I couldn’t control myself he was so hot" isn't like a literal absence of self-control. It's more just, "I wanted to fuck him so I made it clear, and then naturally we did pretty quickly" + "losing control" in bed t…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 10:50 PM
–

The women on here's insistence on treating women as a monolith, acting like women can never find a man sexually attractive on first sight, is baffling to me. Like it's so obvious that that happens, and no it doesn't mean they'll start stripping right in front of them, and no it doesn't mean they don't also vet for personality, but just like most men, a lot of women can look at a guy and go "He's fucking hot! I'd date or hookup with him." There's just not that many men who invoke that response.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 10:17 PM
–

I feel like generally, men have a broad sense of what they find attractive, but a narrow sense of what's most attractive. And with women, they have a narrow sense of what they find attractive, but a broad sense of what's most attractive. Speaking only physically.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 08:40 AM
–

Q4All: If the gender war ever ends, how do you think it will end?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:57 PM
2

Yes lmao, that's literally it. People call their political enemies short (even when they're 5'9-5'10), then short guys go "hey I'm honestly really hurt by the continual linking between being short and every negative characteristic under the sun," and then the right goes "fuck you shorty" while the left goes "fuck you shorty, also we're for body positivity, inclusivity, and tearing down negative stereotypes." All it takes for the left to win on this issue is literally go "yeah it's fucked up to c…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:30 AM
3

Bluepillers going so far off the fucking map to defend this shit, now we're saying racial slurs wouldn't hurt LMAO 😭
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:21 AM
1

This is the lowest of hills to die on lmao. Not even a hill, dying in a pit. If my friend called a nazi a "nazi n-word" I would absolutely not start my statement with "well first of all we must condemn nazism in all it's forms..." No he's just saying something fucked up, and it should be called. But if you need it spoonfed to you, yes Nazi's are bad people, and so are the Myron and Fuentes figures.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:19 AM
3

Okay sure he's pissed, I didn't actually watch any clip. But why wouldn't you call him a slant-eyed fascist if he were asian? I'm telling you that would really hurt him lol. Just imagine how demeaning it would be to insult his heritage and worth as a human based on race. That's good ammo, we leftists should do it more.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:14 AM
1

lmao, in your epic desperation to avoid the question because you know your ass wouldn't call him that, you must insist I'm defending nazi's. Like you know those old racist ww2 propaganda posters that we obviously recognize as racist today despite the fact that they were used directly against Nazi's. You know you can acknowledge that the good guys aren't always perfect right?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:11 AM
3

Alright, real talk, if he was Asian, you calling him a "slant-eyed fascist" or what lol? I guarantee you that would hurt him more than calling a 5'9" guy short lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:08 AM
1

Bro, c'mon lol I've had like 50 other discussions on here, a lot of them with you. But also, you didn't answer the question. I don't even like those guys, I'm a hard leftist, but c'mon bro you're really gonna die on calling him a "nazi n-word" 😭
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:00 AM
2

I don't watch those idiots lol. But answer my question bro, if a bunch of us leftists started calling him a "Nazi n-word" are you, or are you not saying anything about that?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:51 AM
2

Well, Myron over there is a black nazi, so you gonna call him the n-word or what lol? Would you defend people calling him a "Nazi n-word"?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:43 AM
2

So you would defend it? That really says a lot about you as a person that you can't handle even the slightest bit of in-group criticism that you'll defend calling someone slant-eyed in any context lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:36 AM
1

Honest question, yes or no. Let's say Nick Fuentes happened to be asian. Would you or would you not defend people calling him a "slant-eyed fascist"?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:24 AM
1

Would you say the same thing about race? Since black and Hispanic people commit more crimes relative to their population numbers, are they casting a terrible light on their communities? Should we not give their communities not only grace, but also active structural aid? Again, feminism doesn't have to do anything, but if they wanted to improve, they can start by reaching out to men. Ironically, here you are talking to me, the feminist, while blurting out a very classic conservative argument that…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:19 AM
1

text And I'm not even a hypocrite. I never said give grace to guys who have proven themselves to be ungraceful, rather, don't immediately jump to conclusions and take any sign of frustration and questioning of what happened as an immediate sign they are entitled or an incel. And yes, you probably don't hate men right off the bat, but it's very obvious to me that you really don't like hearing men complain about the dating scene and the narratives around it, and you immediately assume the worst of…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:02 AM
1

I asked you not to discredit men right off the bat, you said you didn't, I didn't, and really don't believe you, so I told you to "take it up with them" the clear insinuation being I believe you are "them," and then you told me to take it up with men who hurt women. But it seems like we've kinda agreed on the points anyways now so, now I actually gotta go.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:48 PM
1

When did I say no men were responsible for their own failures? I said stop assuming and jumping to the conclusion that they are bad, inept people just for struggling to date. And I agree that there are men who hate women, and influencers who profit off that, no doubt. That doesn't erase the reality though that, yes, men are often cast as losers and bad people when they bring up their struggle to date, regardless of whether or not the claim holds water, and that we would much more easily dismantl…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:38 PM
1

"A lot of men spew hatred for women who also happen to be alone. A lot of men hurt women or worse who also happen to be alone. Take it up with them . A lot of men are in fact terrible people who are alone. Take it up with them." I mean what else could you have meant by that lol? You're literally telling me to take it up (which means criticize) with these bad men who were completely unrelated to the subject at hand. I told you to take it up with the people who criticize men right off the bat, mer…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:27 PM
6

You know it's interesting that a lot of these women very consistently frame it as the quality of the sex. I've noticed that a lot. Like, unless his dick his small, the quality of the sex should be able to be within 95% of anyone else just by communicating well. Which makes it all the more obvious that most of the time "the best sex" was really "the hottest guy" and "the sex is just okay" means "he looks just okay."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:21 PM
1

You laugh, but that's exactly what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that the lie perpetuated that women only really go for nice guys, and that if you as a man struggle to date, you must not be a nice guy, ironically treats women as perfect angels, which is a form of objectification by pedestalization. You simply fail to accept that feminism can have flaws.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:13 PM
1

I said you were obsessed with talking about cocks, and that's cause you brought up cocks when nobody else did lol. And again, while I was criticizing your statements and feminism, you said I should go criticize unrelated bad men. Not that hard to see what you want me to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:10 PM
1

I wouldn't say feminism is at fault for creating incels, I believe that was more the mainstream cultural way we have raised boys. However, the modern narrative on kindness and success peddled by feminists and the mainstream culture encourages and makes worse incel behavior. I'm glad we've finally agreed on my point in the first place that women are human beings. Human beings who may follow human dating patterns such as prioritizing looks, height, status, wealth, etc, very highly. And I'm glad we…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 01:02 PM
1

I highly doubt I'm the more emotional one in this conversation, given the disparity in language. And given that you did not attempt to refute the logic of what I said, I believe this thread has come to a nice conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:49 PM
1

You can ask me literally anything on feminism. Decreasing sexual crimes and harassment, decreasing the pressure felt around gender roles, upholding abortion rights. Ask me anything. I simply also believe that feminism is not without flaws. Did you know that early American feminists, while certainly instrumental to women's progress, were also quite exclusionary to the voices of black women? Feminism is not set in stone, and for it to continue to succeed it must evolve with the times. I see the mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:46 PM
1

You did. You completely derailed the conversation to argue that I should go criticize the men who do unrelated bad things. Why don't you criticize the men who do bad things? You only say that to me because I'm a man and you believe in some collective responsibility based on gender, thus why I believe you are, in essence, saying men are bad and need to shut up. On my side, I merely stated that I'm not inclined to believe you when you say you judge people fairly, since all people say that, and I s…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:41 PM
1

Well, if you read some of my comments, you would have seen that I am a feminist. I just believe feminism has a massive blind spot in this regard. And again, a major part of feminism is about raising our boys better, so it's funny to me that you want me to stop "attacking" feminism while I'm literally advocating informing boys to better understand dating as to not be gaslit and put into frustration, which ultimately makes better the gender dynamic.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:26 PM
2

lmao. See, I think this is what you wanted to say in the first place, and you should have just said it. Men are terrible, so please shut up and never complain. I understand your frustration.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:20 PM
1

You can think that if you want, but tbh you're also doing girls a massive disservice by not raising boys properly. Are you even a feminist by the way? It seems odd that a feminist wouldn't understand that men and women do not live separately from each other, and that the way we raise each gender has massive implications on female/male social dynamics, which by the way, is a centerpiece of feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:08 PM
3

I'd love to believe you, but a lot of the people who make character judgments right off the bat say the exact same thing you do, so take it up with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:08 PM
1

I mean, I'm glad they're saying not to do it. But a lot of them also did it. That's my point. I'm sure a lot of cheaters would advise people to just break up too. And you know you're not betraying the sisterhood by admitting women can do bad things, right? Like, you understand that it's frankly better to acknowledge that women do bad things, as it avoids objectifying women by putting them on a pedestal, right? Like it's okay to acknowledge 11-13% of married women cheat on their partner. We under…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:01 PM
2

Lmao, I see that so often. They don't like thinking it might not be the man's fault, so any perceived flaw within the confines of a Reddit rant is blown up to their entire personality and how they act 24/7 around everyone they meet. They never actually want to give actual concrete advice or just admit it might not work out. Just blame blame blame.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:36 AM
1

You sure do have a weird obsession with talking about cocks... Anyways, a large part of what feminism is about is the dynamics between the genders. This isn't about men getting laid, this is about not lying about the reasons a male might struggle with it. You don't want more incels, right? Well if you don't, it would benefit you and society at large to teach boys at an early age how the fundamental dynamics of dating work so that they become accustomed to it and accept it whether they fail or no…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:22 AM
3

Again, it's not the lack of women that's the issue, it's the gaslighting and moralization of the issue. If you don't believe that a man can struggle in dating for reasons outside of his control, you are wrong, and you contribute to crafting a false harmful reality. If you believe those who struggle or have not partaken in romantic or sexual activities are in any way inferior, you are wrong, and you contribute to a demeaning culture, and frankly, a culture that objectifies women by making a man's…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:22 AM
1

Did you? Did you miss all those personal experiences or what? The literal top comment is about how she did exactly that. Why even go on this weird defense, trying to argue it never happens?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:50 AM
1

I guess it's not society's job to spoon-feed basic manners to children either, but you can see how that might benefit society if we did. Are you politically conservative by any chance? Because that was very pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps thinking. That bootstrap thinking is typically applied by people who don't want to address any actual problems with society, so they insist it's up to the individual to fix it, and that it's their fault, such that they can justify not helping or putting any…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:15 AM
1

Well, other than the fact that you won't believe me when I say that the mainstream narrative 100% says and implies this. How do YOU think young men are getting this belief? And even if you don't comprehend how they came to this conclusion, why don't you make sure anyways to tell them since they're clearly confused and frustrated over it. Why not agree with my point despite you finding it obvious and say something like "That's really obvious, but I agree we should teach this to boys just in case …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:01 AM
1

Well, unless that lower class of conservatives does significantly worse than their counterpart liberals, my argument is still that across the board, they do just as well in dating. I only said conservatives to slightly better on average as a mini-steelman argument to my point, but yes, I wouldn't be surprised if conservatives maybe do slightly worse when limited to the lower class.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:55 AM
1

I don't assume it, but many young boys do because that's exactly what they are told in essence. Not that being kind will get you laid with anyone, but the argument is that if you are kind, you're basically guaranteed to get laid and find love at some point. And the opposite, that if you are a bad person, you're basically guaranteed to never get laid or find love. If you could just admit that some people might have permanently struggling and unfulfilling love lives through no fault of their own, …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:48 AM
1

And this is what I mean, thank you. Honestly, perfect example.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:44 AM
3

If you take "I feel bad about being rejected a lot or getting no attention, and I feel that girls don't really care about my kindness when looking for a partner" as a threat, I don't know what to tell you. Not all strugglers are violent incels, and matter of fact, I'd argue most violent incels started as innocent strugglers. Most of the entitled threatening guys aren't even the strugglers. They are usually the frat guys who do get laid a lot, but also say incredibly misogynistic things, push gir…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:43 AM
1

The shallow reality of dating is the speech for those boys. It's explained in the speech. That being kind is a far second to looks, height, status, extraversion, wealth, etc. The speech just has some added advice on dealing with that reality. Feminists need to recite some form of that to boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:36 AM
1

No it's not. Not in a meaningful way. When mainstream narratives consistently argue that you can find love no matter what you look like, and consistently argue that women aren't as shallow as men, don't care about looks so much, and will surely lose all attraction to guys with terrible personalities, you are 100% sending the message that, in essence, looks don't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:32 AM
2

Lol, okay fine, don't have empathy. But at least stop the gaslighting. And you personally don't have to have empathy for anyone. But if the movement doesn't have empathy for these boys, just don't be surprised when those same boys grow up ambivalent to feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:27 AM
2

This is what feminists have to address. I presumed you were asking what "the shallow reality of dating" is, so I gave it to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:23 AM
2

The problem is you're admitting this. Largely speaking, feminists don't proclaim this like they do their actual points they care about, it has to be admitted after argument. Really, it needs to be outright stated from the get-go.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:20 AM
3

True, but that upper class leans slightly more conservative. Point being, feminist, liberal, and leftist men don't have any sort of advantage in the general dating market that many women on Reddit would like to otherwise claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:17 AM
4

It's not a single rejection, it's the gaslighting and lack of empathy for the struggle. And by the way, a lot of young men are very sensitive in their youth, as all youth are. I don't know why you think it's strategically smart to basically say "fuck you for not immediately being on my side" rather than taking that pain and helping him, which would be 100% more effective at getting boys on board with feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:15 AM
1

I wrote this in another comment before, and I honestly believe all men need to hear this, particularly boys ages 11-16. It's not blackpill stuff, but it's basically "ok, being a kind guy is important no matter what the results are, and it will help sustain a relationship, but to get a relationship, looks, height, status, extraversion, excitement, humor, and wealth play much bigger roles in attracting women, and being kind is more something you need to not fuck up rather than it being an attracti…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:11 AM
3

I'm telling you, feminism has to address the shallow reality of dating, or else this type of stuff is going to happen. That fan fiction I wrote literally could've been me at that age if I cared more about dating women in general, and maybe if I were just slightly less smart or more emotional. Luckily, we all know teens are well known for their independence, rationality, and calm behaviour, so that could never happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:52 AM
1

It's definitely a part of it, though I will say personally growing up, I noticed more so people tended to be the political beliefs their parents had, and just kinda stuck with it. I'm still a feminist because at the end of the day, I agree with them on most of their policies around not forcing people into gender roles, lowering sexual crimes and harassment, and abortion. It's just the cultural side of feminism and how they decide to talk about men and dating with such misandry, unhelpfulness, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:47 AM
2

Seriously, it's brutal. Like I just imagine some poor 15 year old boy who kinda agrees with feminism (simply because he doesn't have much deeper political thoughts) and feels good about himself, believing he's helping women and that girls his age will find that very attractive. Then his heart gets crushed when girls don't give a fuck about that lol when they want to date, and frankly find him inferior dating-wise to the more conservative douchey boys because of looks, height, status, and forward…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:24 AM
6

Damn, lmao, strong feminist woman gets with hot, narcissistic, non-exclusive, gross-house guys. Meanwhile feminist guy gets the settle. This is why I laugh at all the "men are struggling because they're conservative" when it's just not true at all. If anything, conservative guys seem to have an edge due to being more confident, slightly richer, and slightly taller on average. And I say that as a feminist guy myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:09 AM
5

The excuse is already out. "Can't help men who want things therapy can't give them" or something like that. Which I mean is technically true, as I never thought therapy was gonna make a man struggling to date all that self-content, but they'll blame it on men personally, like therapy could work if they weren't so entitled, rather than wondering if there are any other systematic efforts we could be doing to help them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:01 AM
2

Shit. I guess we're both not worthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:42 AM
5

I always know it's a woman doing bad shit on that sub too when none of the comments are shitting on men lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:33 AM
3

No grammar chad would want you anyway. You don't put periods at the end of your sentences.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:31 AM
5

Not all men, but always all... wait. https://np.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1p6uqg4/rb_singer_mario_sexually_assaulted_on_stage_by/ Seriously though, how do people have the confidence for this shit? I struggle going up to people I know like me, meanwhile, these fuckers are groping celebrities on stage.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:28 AM
5

I respect that you and your friends are like that, but I'm telling you there are women who aren't like that. Now I don't think the man needs to be the best, that's unrealistic. But I do think most men should be with women who would categorize him as "one of the really hot ones" if she theoretically broke up with him.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:23 AM
3

Nah, some guy did a YouTube vid on it and found that while some women do get disappointed and drop you, there are a lot of other women who need it for you to get into the door, but once in, they can look over it if you charm them with your personality. Now, whether you want to be in a relationship where you weren't considered good enough for the door in the first place is another thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:13 PM
1

Right, that's kinda why I think it's meaningless. What does it matter if the "real me" with great genetics but car-faced is dying alone, while the inferior genetics plastic man is drowning in sex? Not a very good way to judge ones sense of self imo.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:09 PM
–

Well, I guess agree to disagree because to me it's all shallow. It's not like personality where if she loves the fake you, the real you is suppressed. Lookswise, there is no real you. You could be naturally handsome as hell and then get hit by a car. Is she still supposed to love your "real" genetics underneath? No lmao, you're ugly as fuck now, and that's the real you. Same way in reverse.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 04:31 PM
1

But why use the term give up? And again, I'm talking about what the guy said in how he views the woman's actions, not the woman herself, but why would she have to give up anything? She doesn't want the variety anymore, thus she's not giving up anything. That's like saying the man gave up loneliness for her. Unless she still wants the variety, which opens up its own set of discussions on the relationships. It's just giving this weird "She's doing you a favor" energy to the language when she hasn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 04:24 PM
–

Agreed. It feels awkward for me because I could never be in a relationship like this, but it's also not my place to criticize a consenting relationship. Though I will say, I hope he's not feeling like that hurts him a lot, but is consenting to the relationship through the pain anyways because he loves her and finds her hot, and maybe feels like he has to cling on cause he has no other options or feels like he won't get so lucky again. If he feels that way, he owes both her and himself an honest …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 03:43 PM
–

I mean, it's the difference between "they find me attractive for my bone structure genetics that I had no control over" vs "they find me attractive for my surgeries I got to fix my shit bone structure." Like, the game was already shallow to begin with, you're just on the winning side now, no real difference imo.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 03:34 PM
1

I mean, so is being unattractive lol. Plus don't you think that if there was someone out there for every type of person physically, the same would equally, if not more true for personality? Why aren't the "woe is me" girls getting with these guys? Wouldn't they bond over woeing?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 09:31 PM
1

No, they're just ugly or autistic. The stats on autistic men's dating lives are crazy terrible. No one's fault, just how the universe goes.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 09:27 PM
1

I mean, you could've just agreed to disagree lol. That really hurt my feelings what you said. Regardless, that's not why struggling men are struggling. And better to be single with standards than together and settling, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 09:19 PM
–

I'm not talking about stuff outside of physicality. But if she looks at your body and finds you hot, then yeah. You're physically hot to her. No objective standard on that, however some people and their traits appeal more to the general population of women than others.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 09:13 PM
1

It's not a random sample lol. As a subset of the general population, the people who go on PPD are dramatically different than the general population. Random, as in the people on here are kinda crazy? Sure, but not statistically random from the general population. And well, I disagree that it's a rare phenomenon. And even if it was, it's not like rarity makes fear irrelevant. 1500 women die each year due to partner violence in America. Even if you go for something low like assuming only 40 millio…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 09:09 PM
–

They say that literally just because they don't want the state doing stuff. If the government doing anything is considered socialism, then the USA would be socialist right now. It's just an easy "you're a [insert thing people think is bad]" argument to put down those who want the government more involved, without actually having to delve deeper into the logistics of the argument, because they know the reality is that the government can get involved and succeed as has happened many times.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 08:56 PM
2

But this thread is reality, it's just not a random sample of reality, nor an honest sample, as people act differently in person than how they do online. And people do make up shit, but at the same time, pretending like an entire thread full of women plus all the women who upvoted those comments are just bots is coping. Might as well say incels don't exist either and women are just falling for ragebait (not true obviously).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 08:47 PM
3

You're literally reading a thread of other women saying it does happen??? What do you think happened in there? Do redpillers have an insanely massive bot farm they use to manufacture consent by posing as women giving their life experiences? The top commenter has like a 9 year old account that she's on daily. C'mon, it happens. That's not a knock on women, that's just humans being humans.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 08:38 PM
–

It's not about being a player, it's about giving up hot men in general. Ideally, one would think she hasn't given up anything. She used to hookup with hot men, now she's marrying a hot man. She hasn't given up anything, she's upgraded to sex + a full relationship. Gave up implies a sacrifice. The idea that she's given something up implies she's given up the hot men in general, not the rotation which is the thing she no longer wants anyways. But tbf it's a commenter speaking on her behalf, but I'…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 08:34 PM
–

Guarantee is way too strong of a word lol. Did you read that thread with all those women who got with men they loved but didn't find attractive? It happens. https://np.reddit.com/r/AskWomenOver30/comments/1h7dpt7/women_who_settled_for_a_partner_theyre_not/
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 08:23 PM
–

<image> Accidental omission by the blue pill lol "She gave up her sexual needs for you bro be grateful"
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 08:09 PM
–

I do too. The easiest cope for me is remembering that my feelings are just a series of chemical reactions, so that theoretically I could just be having the chemical reactions that make me not afraid of death, and then boom I wouldn't be afraid of death anymore. If the chemicals were right, I could be anticipating death. So I just imagine taking a pill that makes me excited to die, and that usually makes me laugh enough to move on and forget about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:38 PM
–

It doesn't need to take up real estate in anyone's head, you can know about it while also caring about other things. That's like saying learning a 3rd language is bad because the real estate could be better used on how to make more money. And maybe this is where we disagree. She's not enthusiastically having sex with her man, she's just having sex with him. Most likely 99% of the time because he asked for it. And yes, many men are in these types of relationships who don't really know what enthus…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:15 PM
–

You just ignored the entire rest of my comment which clearly shows how the way she described him fits in line with the common ways of talking about hot (unsafe) guys vs safe (unhot) guys. Of course, she's not going to say out loud she doesn't find him attractive, that's a mean thing to say. Again, we don't know for certain her real feelings, but I'm making a good guess here. And you know exactly what I mean by how certain statements can imply stuff that wasn't necessarily said, don't try and pre…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:02 PM
–

Most guys aren't good-looking enough to have that happen to them, that's why it's not all that relevant. But again, we're not even disagreeing that that's something men should be aware of too, you're just bringing it up to stop talking about what I'm talking about. And I disagree with you that it's so obvious. It's not obvious that a woman can love you and have sex with you, but not find you physically attractive. You're just arguing that it's obvious to justify not talking about it because "it …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:40 PM
–

Because she said she was done with the "rollercoaster of hotties" to use as a comparison to her now boyfriend that she describes as "sweet, calm, reliable, predictable, and loving" notably leaving out any mention of hot, attractive, handsome, or even cute. Add that it's a very well known way of categorizing people: "Hot guys (implication of non-safety)" vs "Safe guys (implication of lack of physical attraction)" and it's not so hard to guess how she might feel about him. Of course no one really …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:17 PM
–

They usually say nice guys finish last, as in they get settled for eventually. Again, I'll try to make this point for you. A lot of women get in relationships where the man is just using her for sex cause she's hot but doesn't love her. Most men do not get in relationships like that. But yes, if they did, that would also be bad, but because it's not common, I don't bring it up so much. Also, I don't get your point at all about not needing to say it out loud. Why would you be against saying thing…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 05:31 PM
–

Maybe not confusing, but hard to grasp for most men, as most men can not love romantically without sexual attraction. And how am I insulted? I'm literally just describing the reality that there are a lot of women who can love a man, but not find him physically attractive. If you want to be in that kind of relationship, that's totally cool. The only problem is that most men wouldn't know if they were in one like that because they have never experienced physical lust, and their partner would obvio…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 05:23 PM
–

Most men will not find themselves in relationships where the woman thinks he's super hot but couldn't care for his personality lol that's why I don't really talk about that. Regardless, if you want to be in a relationship where she loves you but doesn't find you physically attractive, that's totally cool like I said. My point is more about how many men don't realize they are in these kinds of relationships because they have nothing to compare it to, and obviously their girl will never say someth…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:50 AM
35

Yeah, that's the reality. I think women don't approach anyway for a bunch of other stupid reasons, but any man thinking that if women did start, that your Adequate Andy's would suddenly be feeling all that wanted needs to get his head checked.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 04:52 AM
–

This is just one of those confusing realities that more men need to be made aware of. We all know of the woman who is using you for money or kids or whatever, but what men don't realize is that there are many women can actually love you, but not find you attractive. It's hard for men to understand cause nearly all men only love women they also find attractive, but women can and do fall in love with men they don't find physically attractive, either hoping it grows or genuinely being willing to se…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 03:20 AM
2

You don't have to care, but people who have a sense of morality will typically care to respond to moral criticisms. And like I said, I don't think short men should criticize women for height standards, so why would I encourage something I don't even agree with just so you can feel like we're both equally shitty? I feel like you're just deflecting anyways cause the reality of what I'm saying is undeniable. That is that it's considered in the mainstream, okay for women to rage about and criticize …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 02:39 AM
3

I see, well, I wouldn't know personally, as I don't get offended by any of this, but I do laugh and feel a little bad for men who are with partners who clearly do not find them physically attractive but settle for other reasons (financial, loneliness, kids, or even love, as confusing as that is). This is exacerbated when a woman's past is so clearly lust-filled and passionate versus their current man, who is just okay. So me personally, I do not necessarily pity the man whose woman makes him wai…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 10:50 PM
1

Only free to say it in an absolute sense. You're not free to say it where the general consensus is that what you are saying is not criticizeable, and that people who do are the actual criticizeable ones. Short men bitching about women caring about height is absolutely criticized, which makes sense as you can't criticize someone's preference in dating. And women were complaining about body count preferences way before and way harder than short men. My point is, don't you think it's odd that a lot…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 10:18 PM
3

Rejected doesn't mean it affected you. Everybody gets rejected, it's about overall results. Results which don't really affect most women so much, as they can just move on to the next guy. And I agree that men should do that for women, but at least I get why they're complaining since short men's overall results are significantly inferior, to which your personal anecdote is not evidence to the contrary. I'm just saying, if short men are told to shut up and stop whining about all the shit they go t…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 09:53 PM
7

Some men care about making sure the woman they are seeing is not physically settling for him as the "safe but so-so looking" guy after she's had enough of the hot guys. Some men just care about having sexual encounters quickly. Some men care about the actual body count. These are 3 separate standards that a man will either have none, some, or all of.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 09:46 PM
3

That's fine to debate it, I just mean the broader strong distaste amongst women for men's preference on this matter that I often see. I'm not even saying you can't complain about those things, but it's just odd to me that this is such a major topic amongst women, to what ultimately amounts to annoyance. Like I said, short guys get openly shit on and discriminated against by everybody and they just have to suck it up. These guys that care about body count have almost no impact on dating. Just ask…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 09:38 PM
4

I mean, why care about it all? You literally do not have to change your behavior whatsoever, and you'll still have dates. In fact, you have a husband, if I'm not wrong. It would be like caring about the preferences of gay men when they don't want you, you don't want them, and you have a major supply of other options.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 09:02 PM
5

It's funny that some women even care about what men's n count preferences are. Like, you have zero shortage of other options to choose from, and I think all the regular female commenters here have husbands??? Short guys get shit on openly in dating, in general life, friends, family, social media, by our politicians, mainstream media, all since the age of 12, and that's all understood as something that they just gotta take. At least you can hide your n count and slut shamers are shamed themselves…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 08:39 PM
–

It's really simple. They don't like hearing that men's struggles have anything to do with women. They heard guys complaining about not being able to find a date because they were too ugly or short, so to reject the idea, they first claimed that if a man can't date, it must be his fault because his personality was so terrible, basically claiming that if their personality was better, they'd land a date regardless of how they looked. Then they were hit too many times with evidence upon evidence tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:09 AM
2

I mean, I wouldn't want that either. I want a woman who loves my personality enough and feels safe enough around me that she wants to spend her time with me. It's just that I also want her to find me innately hot without having to get to know my personality. I just stress the physical attraction thing because imo, it seems significantly more common for a man to find a woman who likes his personality versus finding him hot on the spot.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:21 AM
2

If you're gonna have an AI boyfriend, why the fuck are you choosing Drake?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:06 AM
1

It's something about the screen for me. Reading physical books feels much more engrossing. Maybe because I've been conditioned to view screens as feeding the content to me effortlessly, rather than paper and ink where I have to be an active mental participant in the content.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:05 AM
1

Didn't expect to be called a little girl lol, I just thought it was a funny insecure event. I don't really think about my manhood when it comes to myself at all really, but I do gotta work on my self-worth though.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 12:59 AM
1

I genuinely thought about seeing the first one in a theater, but I thought about how I'd be sat around a bunch of women and I'd just be a bothersome male presence and ruin the experience for them, so I never saw it lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 12:35 AM
2

Lol, I wish MGTOW actually had the willpower. Until they do, they're never beating the "men sent their own way" allegations. Honestly, I would consider myself MGTOW-lite in that I really have no strong desire to date, I just like having opinions on the scene anyways.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 12:30 AM
3

"All that matters" Hopefully for him too lol...
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 12:25 AM
5

It is kinda funny when some women shit on men and say stuff like "Women are DONE with men. We don't need or want them." And then you look at the stats, and women are dating more than men at all ages until the "outlived the men" ages.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 11:30 PM
1

To each their own, and no shame in that. It's just for me, it would be like if she genuinely found me attractive, but only because she knew I had a lot of money, if that makes my personal perspective any clearer. I want my body to be found attractive on an innate level, as I would find hers attractive on an innate level.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 11:00 PM
2

Sorry if it came off that way. Yes, physical attraction can grow on the basis of emotional connection. I however just would not want to A) risk getting into a relationship where I'm hoping it grows, and B) know in the back of my mind that my body being found attractive is a function of my personality being found attractive, rather than anything innate, like I would feel about her as I find women's bodies and personalities attractive more independently. I would rather be with a woman who, like me…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 10:57 PM
–

I understand it's more than the physical, but just like a woman wouldn't want to be with a man who likes her for just her body but not her personality, I wouldn't want to be with a woman who likes me just for my personality but not my body. Not all sexual attraction is equal to me, and most women would agree just in the opposite direction.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:24 PM
–

I think they do it because these women earnestly view love as the most important part of a relationship, and for them, sex and sexual attraction are not so important, so they don't subconsciously view their actions as potentially doing a major disservice to their partner. They usually keep quiet about this fact because they know consciously it's a very humiliating thing for their man to hear that they don't really arouse them at all. But if it ever comes up, they will try and reassure their part…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:20 PM
–

The real question is, do you as a man want to be with a woman who doesn't find you physically attractive? Personally, I couldn't. I'd feel too undervalued sexually, and I'd want to be with a woman who looks at me the way I look at her.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:53 PM
9

The young adult isn't punished, it's the predatory older person trying to date them who would be. And also they wouldn't be young adults, they would still be some class of children, similar to the 14-17 bracket, as they can not yet be trusted in consenting to dating a person outside of the Romeo and Juliet age ranges. And I just disagree with that stage of life bullshit. I've met some dumbass, unmotivated elders, and some highly mature young adults, and this idea that 2 humans of different ages …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 04:03 PM
0

Lmao. I actually lean towards upping the age of consent to 25. At least 20 imo, but okay now I'm a pedophile lol. If anything, aren't you the weirdo who wants to keep it 18, even as low as 16 in some places?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 03:55 PM
2

I mean, I mostly agree, though a lot are also traumatized by their past relationships with older men. I'm just saying if we raise the age of consent to 25, that would end all discussions on predatory and harmful behavior concerning age, as 25 year old women can absolutely make dating decisions with whoever they choose. Yet every time I see this brought up, they are weirdly against it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 03:52 PM
4

But actually, you do support the government getting involved because you don't allow sports betting and nicotine to be sold and advertised to children. I'm just saying if it's so wrong, let's just outlaw it. Boom, predatory age gaps eliminated, no children ages 0-24 being legally taken advantage of. Further, social shame is a lot easier to enforce when a law is in place, as it sets the cultural starting point.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 03:46 PM
11

I have no idea why women who argue this don't just argue for the age of consent to be raised to 25. Like, if it's so innately predatory and harmful, there's really no reason it shouldn't just be 25 (Romeo and Juliet laws included, obviously). You don't have to raise the age of consent for anything else, just make the dating and sex one 25.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 03:28 PM
1

Uh... no one necessarily, obviously. If a guy is acting crazy, then sure, it's his fault. But if he's just ugly, well, it's not his or her fault, it just is what it is. But let's not deny that the world is how it is. Even things you can technically control I'd argue are not really anybody's fault. Not everyone can make enough income, not everyone can get jacked, not everyone can overcome neurodivergency, not everyone has the time to engage in the numbers game. Why must you insist there be a part…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 03:06 PM
–

Yessss, thank you, these are AMAZING! Need to bring up this folder whenever people go "women would never date a man they didn't find attractive."
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:57 PM
1

So in essence, it's their fault. Who could've guessed that's where this conversation would lead to? Are you gonna apologize for falsely claiming that I said things were easy in the past, though? I believe it's more visibly harder now with the invention of the internet (women have more options, men have more outlets to complain), but I never claimed the past was easy. And you are still gaslighting. You're trying to frame men who can't date as bottom-tier losers, of which it's entirely their fault…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:54 PM
–

Lmao, you should make an online folder for all of these cause they're all great and you've got so many of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:44 PM
–

In totality, probably never. Which is why I never argued men had it easy before, which is funny because you put it in quotes as if I said that. Like I said, the gaslighting is insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:36 PM
–

Well, I disagree. There is a lot of nonsense here, but there's a lot of nonsense on both sides. I just believe at the heart of it, men are having a shit time dating, and the prevailing bluepill theory is basically down to "you all suck, that's why," which I disagree with.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:21 PM
–

Why would the dudes pulling be the ones complaining lol. You don't see Bezos complaining about capitalism either. My point is you're trying to dismiss any and all men who complain about the dating scene as basement bottom dwellers who are 100% responsible for their own misfortune when that's not always true. 1/3rd of UK teen boys believe no one will fall in love with them. 56 percent of UK men believe that it is too difficult to meet a romantic partner these days, and 62 percent believe that wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:13 PM
–

Like I said, the gaslighting is insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:01 PM
–

I'm unironically a feminist in literally everything except for PPD. The misandry and gaslighting that men get when talking about dating is insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:54 PM
1

You don't see the difference between "very muscular" and "Mr. Olympia"? That's kinda weird, most men will understand that difference clearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:30 PM
–

I feel like we need better terminology because this is the kinda stuff that guys get warped on because even the term "overly muscular" often gets interpreted by men to be like 1, 4, 5, and 13 because of the intense effort it takes to get there. It should be terms like "very muscular" and "Mr. Olympia" and guys should strive for very muscular for attracting the most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:25 PM
–

Lol, I agree guys are bullshitting completely on makeup. Every actress, model, and pornstar wears makeup, of course guys love makeup. But no, I don't think you have to accept it. Women certainly don't. They call that shit out every time and rightfully so.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:20 PM
–

I understand that's what they mean, but it isn't true. If guys started calling boobs big starting at H, then said some stuff like "Big boobs are overrated" while consistently preferring double D, would you just accept that?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:07 PM
–

Like I said, you're like a man calling double D's small. Most men if you asked them know just as well that roided out professional bodybuilders are not what women find attractive. But those guys you picked are pretty damn muscular.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:04 PM
–

So when you said that super muscular guys were overrated, that was kinda bullshit, right? That would be like a guy saying he prefers small boobs like double D's over H cups.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:51 PM
–

How? I'm not even making multiple arguments. All I'm saying is that women are not a monolith, as some do not consider safety before anything else, evidenced by attractive men having plenty of options. Therefore, when she said "they need to prove that they are safe before we can consider them," that was incorrectly speaking on behalf of all women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 01:49 AM
–

From that new UK study: "A quarter of men overall believe that no one will ever fall in love with them, a figure that increases to more than a third (36 percent) for men in the youngest cohort. The majority of men surveyed believe that the odds are stacked against them when it comes to relationships, with 56 percent of men believing that it is too difficult to meet a romantic partner these days and 62 percent of men believing that women expect too much of men in relationships these days." Like g…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:04 AM
5

From that new UK study: "A quarter of men overall believe that no one will ever fall in love with them, a figure that increases to more than a third (36 percent) for men in the youngest cohort. The majority of men surveyed believe that the odds are stacked against them when it comes to relationships, with 56 percent of men believing that it is too difficult to meet a romantic partner these days and 62 percent of men believing that women expect too much of men in relationships these days." Like g…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:50 PM
–

Can't stay on Reddit too long lol, gotta stay positive! Have a nice day!
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:21 PM
–

Reading is hard, I understand. Not for everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:12 PM
–

Lol, that's funny, but I didn't even mean that you were abnormal. A lot of women act like you do, but it's just to say, a lot of women also don't act like you do. Point being, women are not monolithic in this regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:07 PM
–

What? I was only criticizing HER statement. I never said all women believe her opinion. Point to where I said all women think like she does.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:53 PM
–

That's fine, I only have a problem with insisting on this narrative that women as a whole need to trust a man firmly before they get with him, when attractive men really don't have this issue, simply because not all women operate like you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:48 PM
–

But they can get near many other women, is the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:43 PM
–

Like I said, you disagree, but from their perspective, they have no shortage of women. So when you said "they need to prove that they are safe before we can consider them," you were falsely speaking on behalf of all women. Women ain't a monolith, you know.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:33 PM
–

*Some men need to prove themselves safe. Other men who are more attractive do not. You, the Reddit woman probably wouldn't get with these men, but from their perspective, they have no shortage of attractive women to be with, so don't speak for all women. And before you say it, no, these women who get with men like that are not all "low-quality damaged crazy women."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:27 PM
–

Most people no matter how dumb or angry have an innate sense of what is "socially punishable" so they just aren't going to say what they say online in person. They likely hint at it through toned-down rhetoric but unless provoked it's gonna be translated into a more socially accepted format or just dropped.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 01:03 AM
–

Yeah I was expecting an image of the degree thing (cause in fairness some IG comment sections are terrible), but this kinda feels like a forced both sides thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 01:00 AM
–

<image> What a favor lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:52 AM
–

It really just comes down to expectations. Women often get their bodies desired for, but their personalities overlooked, so naturally they want to ensure the guy wants her for her personality. Guys often get desired for their personality, but their looks are overlooked, so they wanna ensure women are into them physically.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 02:20 PM
3

I mean to me, if a woman is fucking me, I want to assure myself it's not just slightly elevated duty sex. I want to make sure she finds me very attractive and isn't just settling for a safe but so-so looking guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 05:02 AM
1

I mean, it is a shit test, but you can just bring it up like it's a normal conversation and they should give you an honest answer like "what are you looking for in a man?" And then with like a chuckle and a smile or something slide in a "and how much do you think looks matter?"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 04:58 AM
1

A good question to bring up on a date with a woman is "how much looks in a man matter to you?" If she says they don't matter, red flag, leave. If she says they need to look good, but it's not the most important thing, orange flag, could be settling for you lookswise, but might also think you're very attractive and she's just been raised to say that. If she says they're important, that's a great green flag. Then again, if the vibes are right, you shouldn't even have to ask really.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 04:44 AM
2

All boys ages 11-16 honestly need to be shown video evidence of how a woman will act around men they find actually sexually attractive. Maybe then men could actually raise their standards and either find that kind of woman or stay single instead of being gaslit by their partner and society that they're not being settled for. Feels like a movement like that could actually work too, just collect evidence, then without any hatred towards women, show and explain to boys that this is what they should…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 12:49 AM
1

Why not? 4 billion women on the planet. Women have diverse taste, surely a man can find someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 06:07 PM
1

Well, we really didn't disagree on anything then except, I guess, the rate at which women get into relationships with men they don't really find attractive. I'm not denying that women grow attraction, nor am I saying that women only require looks for good sex, nor am I saying this is any guarantee that she'll think you're hot forever, and I agree that men should work on the other aspects of sexual desire as well. It's literally solely about not wasting your time with a woman who isn't enthusiast…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 04:22 PM
2

Happens a lot really, enough to justify talking about it instead of dismissing it: https://np.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/11t7nqm/married_men_that_came_to_realize_you_were_just/ It's not most men I believe, by most men I was referring to the fact that most men are too desperate for relationships generally, should they theoretically find themselves in a drought. But further, your sex stats aren't totally relevant here since if you actually look through that thread, you don't actually see that ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 03:12 PM
8

Love the two other replies here: RAGEBAIT, and "What's the problem incel? Her not finding you attractive is mature. Grow up."
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:54 PM
1

Well, it's a pretty weird performance to do on her incredibly small TikTok and podcast of which 99% of the rest of it is just boring non-ragebait, all of which didn't even get any reactions until it was retroactively found, all while her husband does none of those jokes himself. But hey, can't prove anything for certain, I guess. Nothing on the internet is real.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:57 PM
1

Well, you took that completely wrong. I didn't mean “shouldn’t bother dating” as in don't engage in the first 2 dates, I meant that as in don't go on a 3rd. There are no games being played. The man engages normally in the first 2 dates, then decides to continue or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:26 PM
1

well you definitely got to work on that then, gonna hurt others and yourself living that way
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:53 PM
1

But she and most people would definitely think it's better
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:51 PM
1

That's what I'm saying though, if you're gonna be an asshole, way better through words than sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:49 PM
1

Well it's way better to have a conversation about it than use her for sex lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:45 PM
1

That is definitely not a confirmed fact lol. When she lied about not having a sexual past, is in her own words "painfully nostalgic for college... popping [her] pussy living [her] best life in these white boy frat houses" (currently with indian partner), makes openly sexual remarks about her best friends husband, says she could never think of her husband when masturbating, and again in her own words says "this is not a two way street... his money is our money and my money is money" ehhhhhhh...
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:41 PM
2

The things she said were pretty brutal, commentary aside.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:35 PM
1

Maybe try just taking your anger out on her in conversation, you don't even have to respond to anything she's saying, best not to frankly, just say how you feel, breakup, leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:13 PM
1

Well, I wouldn't drop to immoral practices just because the other side does it. If you do get to a point where you feel you are attractive I would just look for FWB's or ONS's to practice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:08 PM
1

Good on ya, don't settle and don't risk it with a woman who isn't interested in you from the get-go. Just make sure you're ready to leave if that interest drops within the coming months since some women can fake it for a while (most can't fake it that good, or really even at all though).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:03 PM
2

How is it growing up to get with a partner she does not find physically attractive? That's unfair to herself and unfair to him.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:56 PM
2

That's why you gotta ask yourself after date 2 of meeting her "from the vibes I'm getting from her, if she were the kind of woman who did hookups, would she hookup with me?" And that answer should be a strong probably, if not move on to the next woman who will show you she's extremely attracted to you immediately.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:54 PM
2

An incel wrote and produced those podcasts?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:51 PM
1

That's why you gotta ask yourself after date 2 of meeting her "from the vibes I'm getting from her, if she were the kind of woman who did hookups, would she hookup with me?" And that answer should be a strong probably, if not move on to the next woman who will show you she's extremely attracted to you immediately.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:50 PM
3

She's doing ragebait for a single few segments on episode 7 of her ~10k views podcast? Can't you just admit that a woman getting with a man she does not really want sexually can and does happen?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:45 PM
1

Well, I think you've just added things you want to make it sound weird when I never said any of that. Nowhere did I ever say anything about sitting back and reserving your personality or hiding yourself on the first 2 dates, in fact, in another comment, and the comment you're responding, to I said they should act normally which means dress well, engage in the conversation, take note and engage with her interests, and be openly flirtatious (to the boundary she finds acceptable of course). Is that…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:30 PM
4

I was under the impression that the male loneliness crisis was a result of men being conditioned into not expressing emotion and not having close emotional ties to any family or friends. But answer me, with so many women on the planet, is it unreasonable for a man to set a standard that she must think he's super hot? And a woman can show she's super attracted to him without having sex by doing what normal men and women do when they are physically interested in another person. Do you know what fl…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:21 AM
2

lmao. Like, not even defending the man cause he could definitely be a creep, but her dramatic refusal to realize that posting his naked body on the internet for millions to see was a bad thing was crazy.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 08:34 AM
1

I didn't say it makes her the best partner, the best partner is a combination of looks, personality, and interest back. When women say they won't date assholes, that doesn't automatically make kind guys the best partners. If she doesn't have physical interest back, I say that's a dealbreaker. Nor did I say she at any point had to have sex with him. She can absolutely give the right vibes without engaging sexually whatsoever. And yes, these vibes can be distinguished from bartenders and waiters. …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 08:19 AM
1

Yes, but you did not do those things within the context of a date. And again, there are a myriad of different subtle signs that can clearly distinguish a non-physically interested conversation from an interested one. Are you really trying to tell me you actually cannot distinguish in any conversation whatsoever, flirting from friendly talk? And with the taking you home thing, that's just 1 of the things she can do, she doesn't have to do that, and she can still give off good vibes. And also, thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 07:53 AM
13

Nobody seems to have read the first line of the freaking post that says she does not actually have to hookup with him at any point!!! He just has to be getting the vibes from her that if she were the type of person to do hookups, she would with him. And why would men be lonely? With 4 billion women, surely there are many women attracted to a variety of different men, such that a man can find a woman who is into him.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 07:43 AM
1

No, I disagree that just because she's on a date or even in a relationship with you, that she finds you super attractive. Is Jordon Hudson attracted to Bill Belichick? And it's not really a checklist of signs, but a vibe you will definitely pick up on. Hard eye contact, touching your arm, flirty compliments and jokes, taking you home, lots of things. But you can definitely tell the difference in atmosphere between a woman who is simply enjoying the conversation versus a woman who is already sexu…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 07:25 AM
1

Eye contact is not an interaction lol. If a woman only needs eye contact to be physically attracted to a man, then she would 100% pass the standard of "would she theoretically hookup with me" or "does she find me instantly attractive." If a woman asks what drink the man is having, he answers a cocktail, and she's like "damn, I GOTTA FUCK HIM" that would very much be a woman who would passes the standard because there's no non-attraction there in essence. The kind of woman I'm saying men should p…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:58 AM
8

I know right, they want men to have standards, but not ones that affect any women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:51 AM
1

You've never in your life, ever have seen or even heard of a woman who thought a dude is attractive right off the bat? Not whether she'd hookup with him, (even though many women would also do that), but you've never ever seen a woman think a guy is super hot and made a move on a man? Never?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:44 AM
14

Wise words honestly. Disagree that women can't grow attraction. That definitely happens. It's just not worth it though.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:16 AM
1

Why wouldn't she exist? Women like all sorts of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:15 AM
2

The man is settling because the woman isn't attracted to him at first sights. To me, it's an unnecessary risk for a man to take as she may be just settling for a man she isn't all that into for whatever reason, and it's just not worth being in a relationship with when the man can choose the woman who does find him immediately attractive. Why would a man choose the woman who doesn't find him immediately attractive over the woman who does?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:08 AM
3

There's nothing wrong with that, I'm just saying I don't think most men should settle for that. And I'm talking about demisexual men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:53 AM
3

Well, I don't think most men should settle for that tbh. But there's always demi men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:16 AM
4

*not always true. Definitely true sometimes
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 05:00 AM
2

Again, you don't actually have to hookup with them. I'm just saying, if the man isn't getting the vibe that if she were the type of person to do hookups, he could hookup with her, AKA she finds him instantly attractive, I say it's best to just move on to the next woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:55 AM
1

Actually, you are right, a lot of women do drop the looks standards in their settle for a stable phase. To be more accurate then, women's standards for what they actually want are on the rise, but many still drop them once they realize they can't keep them, settling for men they don't fully want. I think my past comments still make sense even with that added caveat though.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:57 AM
1

If you're trying to say that they drop some of their seemingly important standards like kindness for highly attractive men then I agree with you, but them still only going for what they deem as highly attractive men is itself a high standard. That's what I mean by collectively higher standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:48 AM
1

Fair enough, I can see how my writing comes across that way. I didn't mean to say you definitely wouldn't have a successful marriage. What I meant by not being "that guy" was more so, you don't want to risk becoming that guy by starting a relationship on a lukewarm foot. Not that anything is guaranteed either way, it's just an unnecessary risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:43 AM
3

Many women do, but collectively, their standards are increasing, not decreasing, as their power in the dating market increases. If a bunch of men got together and started a movement for women to lower their standards, only women who already would have even if an individual man asked them would do it. Women as a whole would laugh and mock these men because there is zero reason to ever lower your standards when you have the power. Like height, a bunch of guys are complaining right now, but it seem…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:38 AM
3

I agree, a certain amount of "brutal" reality needs to be given to men, and particularly boys ages 11-16. Not blackpill stuff obviously, but some level of "ok, being kind is important no matter what the results are, and it will help sustain a relationship, but to get a relationship looks, height, status, extraversion, excitement, humor, and wealth play much bigger roles in attracting women, and being nice is more something you need to not fuck up rather than it being an attractive element itself…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:32 AM
3

That's true, but for a lot of guys, most guys I would say, physical attraction is mostly instant. It can grow, but mostly it's whether they want to build something long-term personality-wise that they must assess. And so in my eyes, it is important for a man to have that connection where both he and the woman instantly find each other's bodies attractive, not settling for a partner who is not attracted to their body, and to ensure that whoever they date does, in fact, find them attractive, as re…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:04 AM
2

More compatible in that she thinks he's attractive right away. A physical compatibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:37 AM
4

I'm not trying to deny that, my third paragraph explains this. I'm just saying I don't think it's worth it for a man to get with a woman who is not attracted to him right away. Not worth the risk, and not worth settling for. He can always just go on another date and find someone more compatible.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:16 AM
3

Well, I was more just making a point on the wording of it all. But to actually talk about your point, expectation does not equal entitlement. If a guy grew up hearing that basically all he had to do was be kind and that eventually some girl would want him, and then that ends up not being true, and then he questions why that happens, that doesn't mean he at any point thought he was entitled to women just because he was kind, nor does it mean he faked his kindness to try and get women. He just had…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:13 AM
2

Incredible forward-grown maxilla, great mandible sharpness, perfect eyes with excellent sclera side depth, and no palpebral creases; the only minor flaws are the slightly too projected mandible and too far forward-grown zygomatic bones leaving not enough open space underneath the eyes, though these problems are made nearly irrelevant due to the excellent forward growth of the maxilla.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:04 AM
2

No, sometimes she chooses you for other reasons, don't be so naive. You really think Jordon Hudson is with Bill Belichick cause she loves his body? Or hell, even his personality? And there's a difference between settling with non-perfection and settling for something you don't want. Settling with a woman who is really attractive, but not the most attractive is a good move, realistic, and everybody's happy. Settling with a woman you think is unattractive is unfair to yourself and her. I believe t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:41 AM
9

Okay, but I can almost guarantee you that if guys started complaining that they are kind guys and they get nothing, you'd say there's a difference between being kind and nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:29 AM
4

I mean if they're looking for marriage... No, I see what you mean by moving too fast, but I'm not saying she has to do anything sexual with him, just that if he's not seeing that she's super into him, and answers to himself "probably not" to the question "if she were the kind of woman who does hookups, would she hookup with me?" Then he should just move on to the next woman who actually finds him physically attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:22 AM
1

Not personally, I don't really ask about any of that stuff in my personal life. But I've seen many discussions on wives admitting they never really found the guy attractive, or commenting about how they wish they found their husband attractive, or how she settles for a guy she never really found attractive. And even still, just like men trick women, women can trick men, so that early physical interest you thought you had was really just her investing her early energy into that relationship. So m…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:06 AM
1

What cards is the man holding to his chest? I mean, hopefully, women are doing the same thing, right? Looking for a man who actually wants to be with her both personality and body-wise, right? I guess if the man is really paranoid, doesn't show any emotion, and is just waiting for her to show signs, that would be odd. But if a man is just going on regular dates, being regular, noticing she's not really into him physically, and then moving on to the next woman, that's him being a psycho? That's j…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:00 AM
1

My point is, them finding you physically attractive is a very important part of the relationship. So if they don't find you attractive, move on, you can always continue dating so that you can be with the woman who is into you. Should men just settle for the first woman who is just kinda attracted to them?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:55 AM
1

Not all women who are displaying clear signs of physical interest do fuck me eyes, yes, that's quite obvious. And again, this isn't about guaranteeing any future, it's about just better general investing. Just answer, why should a man get with a woman who while she looks like she's enjoying the conversation, isn't giving any physical interest signs on the first or second date, versus a woman who is?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:46 AM
5

What are you talking about? How is it insecure to actively choose women who are into you rather than the ones who aren't? Is that not way more secure than settling for women who aren't into you because you're desperate for a relationship? And no, just because she chose you does not mean you're the "chosen one" lmao. You can be confident while also filtering out people who you don't think would make a good partner. Would you honestly type any of that to a woman saying she has certain standards to…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:41 AM
1

Handsome, built, fireman with confidence, that's killer dude. Great job!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:32 AM
1

That's true, but there are still a lot of guys in relationships where the attraction from the woman wasn't there at the start, and didn't come later on. And sometimes it's not exactly a dead bedroom, but a certain unfulfilling sex life that doesn't really hit you unless you know better. Duty sex still feels pretty good, so long as you don't know it's duty sex. My advice isn't really a guarantee of anything, more just making sure you get the best of right now and not risking the future unnecessar…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:28 AM
2

Not really, I'm describing a confident woman who is interested in a man she wants. And they definitely exist because the things I wrote aren't even close to sexually depraved, and many women are way more forward than that, even.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 11:57 PM
3

Damn man, sorry about the divorce, but you got a great dating life! The kind of stuff that every man wants. Would you consider yourself extremely attractive? How tall are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 11:51 PM
1

On paper they're the same, but in person subtle difference can distinguish between friendly eyes and fuck me eyes. Same with smiles, same with compliments, the sound of her voice, and especially with touches. It's not really a checklist, more so a vibe that is pretty clear, especially in the context of a date where actions and looks can be safely assumed to have romantic and sexual motivations. Like c'mon, if she's touching your arm, looking right into your eyes with a smile, within the context …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 11:21 PM
0

Well, agree to disagree. I'm not going to criticize short women for not wanting to date short men. You can find it ridiculous or argue they'll have trouble finding what they want with those standards, but in the shallow game that is dating, you are allowed to have any shallow standards you want, and you consent to being valued by others' shallow standards. Also, I wouldn't exactly say my advice is looking for EXTREME lust (I mean if it's there that's good too), but just obvious signs that she fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 10:53 PM
0

Me personally, I don't care about sexual history. Also, again, she doesn't actually have to hookup with the man. She can be a virgin but still be super into him. Regardless, I don't think hypocritical standards even matter. A woman can say only men with 200k yearly income and not make a dime herself and refuse to do chores, and that's totally cool. Same with men wanting a low body count woman while themselves being high body count or only dating her if she puts out date 1. As long as he doesn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 10:41 PM
4

I'm unclear on what you mean. It's not really about her sexual history, that's another standard men can choose to or not to have. I'm mainly focused on making sure men get with a woman who is attracted to him physically and wants him physically, rather than settling and risking it with a woman who is so-so or even not attracted to him physically.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 10:28 PM
3

Heh, I suppose you're right. I think I'd rather men just stay consistent on not criticizing standards since it's ultimately the correct position, and that by staying consistent on standards being uncriticizeable, you protect men's standards while not ultimately conceding anything to the other side, as I believe women collectively will not ever lower their standards no matter if you call out men's so long as the sexual market still favors women by a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 09:29 PM
1

I guess Looks > Personality for those guys I guess lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:38 PM
1

And yet MANY women would absolutely date Brad Pitt right now, knowing everything. He has no shortage of women if he so desires, so to him it doesn't even really matter. And it's not about long-term, for incels, it's about first impression, and the first impression is that they're ugly and thus have a bad personality on account of how ugly they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:25 PM
3

That's extremely good for you and your friends, that's where you want to be. But a lot of guys do, in fact, have to deal with women who want the relationship, but not really him. And it does seem to happen more at the older ages where women are looking to settle down more, and willing to put up with a guy who lookswise is just a "meh" or "alright" to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:18 PM
3

"If a woman goes on multiple dates with you, she is at least a little visibly attracted to you" Well, I disagree with that statement lol. Most of the time, probably, but not always, and not always to the extent that I believe is worth it. Why would a man want to be with a woman who is a little attracted to him, versus one who is really attracted to him? And I'm not saying don't try and impress her, or don't dress well, or purposely nuke the conversation just to test her. I'm just saying you shou…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:15 PM
1

I agree with all that, she does not have to hookup with you, but like you and I said, there are many signs she's really into you. She doesn't have to hookup with you, but if she bites your ear, you are definitely well in the clear. I'm just saying a lot of men settle for women who do not show these signs, pointing more to the idea that she likes the relationship, but she's not physically into you category. That is what men should strive to avoid.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:10 PM
3

Right, which is why it's important to make sure that connection is being sustained when you meet with her. I'm just saying that if her attraction is not there in the first place, then men should just look for a woman whose attraction will be.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:07 PM
2

I mean, I don't. And I don't think men should tbh. Whining that is, they can have whatever standards for sexual history they want. And I'm not saying sexually reserved women are bad, I'm just saying why invest in that kind of woman versus of woman who is actually into you immediately?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:02 PM
6

Personality can ruin a first date, but to try and say that the reason these incels are failing first dates and tinder swipes is because their personality is just so bad right off the gate and that they don't even try to hide it is kinda ridiculous. If incels looked like Brad Pitt, their personality would probably be described by most people as nice, kind, somewhat timid, and maybe even a bit alluring. But they're ugly so it's awkward, reclusive, boring, and somewhat creepy.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:57 PM
2

Yup, confidence multiplier on top of all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:52 PM
17

Again, she doesn't actually have to put out if she doesn't want to. That's why I clarify it's theoretical within the first sentence. She should be giving the vibe though that if she were the kind of person to do hookups, she would with you. AKA just find him super attractive. What's so wrong with men having the standard that his partner should find him extremely attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:49 PM
1

Well, she doesn't have to hookup with you like I said, just be really into you that theoretically she would. And also I don't have a problem with high N women, I just have a problem that men caring about that is viewed as evil.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:47 PM
-3

Nobody said don't care about their personality or disregard any red flags, just do that and follow this advice. Plus, if they find you super attractive, and like talking with you and seem genuinely interested on a personal level as well, why would you take a woman who likes your personality but isn't attracted to your body over that? Of course there's always a risk in dating, but you're making good investments here.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:44 PM
1

But why is it insecure to want to be with a woman who is visibly into you? Isn't it more insecure to just sit there and hope it develops? Having standards is insecure? Not wasting your time is insecure? Men should be confident that they can find a woman who is compatible with them, and be secure that if they don't that they will be happy single and not settling. What problem do you have with men having this standard? Don't you bluepillers constantly say men should have higher standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:38 PM
7

I see what we're disagreeing with. I'm not arguing that any of this advice is a guarantee for anything. Dating a person who hooks up with you is no guarantee. Just that a pretty good line in the sand is do they find me instantly attractive and show it consistently. And for the faking it part, yes, women can fake it, there's no guarantee they won't. But if they seem into you every time you meet, and she's constantly wanting to meet with you and make plans, that's a much better investment than a w…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:35 PM
2

I see, and that's fair. But most men do actually find their partner immediately attractive, and I'm advising those men to not go for a woman who doesn't do the same. Demi men can and should go for women who build attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:30 PM
2

Of course, there's no guarantee, maybe the woman who is super into you starts not caring. Maybe the woman who doesn't find you attractive finds a lifelong spark. Maybe you get hit by a car and she no longer likes how you look. It isn't so much about guarantees as it is taking better investments, and not investing in a woman who doesn't find you attractive. I think men as a whole would be better off if they took this approach. And of course this has nothing to do with personality, if she's super …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:28 PM
8

I agree that men shouldn't really complain about women's looks standards. It's their standards and dating is inherently a shallow game so they can be as shallow as they want, just as men can. I'm just pushing back on the idea that getting with a woman who likes you for your personality is deal that men should be taking. No, she should like you for your personality, AND body.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:23 PM
3

Dating from hookups isn't a bad idea, good one actually. But you can also date a woman who does not want to hookup for whatever reasons (trauma, not her thing), just so long as she has a "I'm really fucking into you" vibe. You're getting too caught up on the hookup part. Do you even disagree with what I'm saying that men should only date women who give off the vibe that they really like them physically?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:16 PM
3

Indiscriminate? With his standard of a woman should be physically into me from the start? How is a standard making him indiscriminate? He's actively discriminating for a particular partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:12 PM
1

What are trying to say here, that women have never ever seen a guy and thought "He's hot I'd be down"? Feels like you are denying female sexuality tbh. When a woman is physically into you it will be clear as day, and YES, it can happen within seconds of meeting you. If she's not, that's fine, nothing wrong with her, just not compatible with what you're looking for.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:10 PM
7

Yeah, well, can't fix that lol. The world will revolutionize once men collectively stop being so desperate, and find peace with singledom.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:04 PM
-1

Like physically, you don't find them attractive before getting to know them? If so, I'm just saying men shouldn't date you then. Not worth the risk, not worth settling for. I don't want to deny how you feel, how you feel is valid, I'm just suggesting standards for how men should approach dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:02 PM
6

No lol. Lots of men fuck this up. And even if it is obvious, why do you have a negative reaction to it? Why don't you just comment something like "Obvious, but good advice"?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:01 PM
4

It's just a slightly provocative title. The obvious intent behind it is that they should be immediately attracted to you on first sights. Otherwise, it's not worth it. Hence the theoretical in the title, as they don't actually have to hookup with you, just be so attracted to you that they probably would personal reasons aside.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:59 PM
2

Right, so they shouldn't date you. No reason to settle and take a risk for a woman who doesn't find you immediately attractive. Move on and find a woman who does.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:57 PM
8

I mean yeah, that's ultimately the issue, most women don't really want most men, and most men aren't strong enough to remain single over finding the right woman. That, or just emotionally detach from others and morality and just have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:56 PM
54

The problem is guys getting into relationships with women who don't really like them physically. Better to not date than be in relationships like that, but most men are too desperate, unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:53 PM
13

Really, it's IMPOSSIBLE to tell if a woman is really physically into you? Hard eye-contact, carrying the conversation, laughing at all the jokes, arm grabbing? Again, she doesn't have to hookup with him, be he should be feeling that theoretically she would because he's just that hot to her.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:50 PM
4

But I'm not saying you actually need to hookup with him, I'm saying there needs to be a vibe in your dates of "I want to fuck you." If you don't have that vibe I don't think men should settle for you since you're not attracted to him. As long as you show you are very physically attracted to him on first sights, it's all good.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:48 PM
8

Bluepillers really do like pretending incels keep getting into like 2-3 month long relationships, then fuck it up cause of their personality. Really, they can't even get past the first date.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:40 PM
7

Except for the studied fact that looks impact how personality is perceived. Good looking people are perceived as more extroverted, emotionally stable, smarter, friendlier, and definitely funnier. Bad looking people, the opposite. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4873083 Personality may ostensibly be what draws you in, but underlying that is the human subconscious associating beauty with positive attributes. Even if you're not attracted to them, better looking people are perceived better.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 06:37 PM
7

Date's wrong men she thinks are attractive, settles for nice guy she doesn't find attractive. A brutal classic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 05:51 PM
5

Kinda a non-answer tbh. The question isn't "would you date a straight man, but maybe he has this or that?" The question is obviously "would him being a straight man be a deal breaker yes or no?" to which presumably the answer is no, so you would in fact date a straight man.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 03:24 AM
0

There's nothing shocking about having different perspectives, but it's just odd how insistent you are that he is definitely not straight, despite what he tells you, just because he experimented. It's like insisting that a lesbian who spent many years with men MUST be secretly bi. Maybe she is, and maybe there's enough evidence to question it, but to insist a sexuality she disagrees with onto her seems odd.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 03:14 AM
1

What do you think of u/ThatBitchA 's comment? "You don't need to "affirm your straight". He's bisexual and that's okay. But he needs to deal with that.I'm not going to deny anything. He's the one in denial."
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 02:36 AM
5

You don't NEED to, but a young man might want to. Is it so ridiculous that a young person may be interested in sexuality and experiment with things they end up not liking? Also you definitely are denying his sexuality lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 02:32 AM
7

But he has come to terms with his sexuality? He tried it, didn't like it, and affirmed he was straight. You really gonna deny his own sexual identity?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 02:19 AM
1

That's fair. Probably a healthier way of using the internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 06:17 PM
6

Both of you are top 1% commenters, you're eventually gonna notice lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 06:07 PM
2

Alright, cool we agree. It's all valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 06:07 PM
6

Lol, no problem I'll get you next time.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 05:59 PM
3

So dumb that it wasn't worth engaging, or too uncomfortable to answer? It's okay to not want to date a bi man or a man that has dated a trans woman. It's also okay to not want to date a high count or low count man or woman. It's all cool.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 05:58 PM
2

Alright, so we agree, that a woman not wanting to date a bi man or a man who has dated trans women is valid, and a man not wanting to date a high body count woman is also valid. I have no problem with women not wanting to date bi men or men who have dated trans women. Glad we agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 05:56 PM
2

I would agree with you. One of the left's fatal flaws is our inability to be cordial and recognize that not all opinions are worth fighting to the death over. My apologies if it came off that way. I was just making a joke about shared views unseriously on a PPD thread, but I also recognize that at the end of our conversations, we do need to come together and focus on what unites us. So I hope that this is that, and you know that I would still be on your side.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:11 PM
1

No, there is not. It's just usually these opinions tend to fall in line. It's funny cause I agree with all the things you agree with except the trans thing. But regardless of our opinions on PPD, I would still support you, and I don't think you're a terrible person for that last opinion. Glad we had this conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:04 PM
3

Well, you did say earlier that these men were, in fact, straight, so this is not about orientation. But I sense that you're going to continue to disagree, so please feel free to.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:59 PM
1

Well, we're not going to get anywhere debating, I think we both know we're at a deadlock, so I'm just ending it. I'm just genuinely interested because I do assume most blue-pillers are at least liberal, and I find it somewhat surprising your stance, given that's not something that would be taken very well even in moderately liberal places. Perhaps I'm wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:56 PM
1

I'm interested, where would you say you fall on the political spectrum? Obviously, I'm calling you MAGA as a cheeky jab, but would you consider yourself a social liberal?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:53 PM
2

Well, I guess that's the end of the conversation because we just disagree, no arguments to be made. I think if a man dates someone whom you couldn't actually discern was amab without medical records, then he's still straight, but whatever. Me, the wider LGTBQ+ community, and the broader left can have our opinions, you can have yours. Lot of bluepillers feeling real MAGA-like in these threads.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:48 PM
2

Lol, my bad, it's pretty small though. I'm just saying a trans woman who identifies as a woman, and has had bottom surgery, and is taking estrogen, and frankly looks and talks like a woman, is a woman (not that she had to do any of that anyways her identity is enough). And so you're still 100% a straight man if you date them. But whatever you need to take that up with the trans community, they'll debate you on it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:36 PM
2

I feel like you gotta white knight a little smarter man. Women don't like MAGA bros. Trans women are women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:31 PM
4

Alright, so we agree, that a woman not wanting to date a man who has dated trans women is valid, and a man not wanting to date a high body count woman is also valid. Funny why you even argued so much given that I made it very explicitly clear that I had no problem with women not wanting to date bi men or men who have dated trans women. I wasn't arguing they couldn't, I was arguing the difference in how preferences are validated. Glad we agree fully that both are valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:27 PM
6

Okay, glad we agree on that. Now, why is women not wanting to date those men valid, but men not wanting to date high body count women invalid? Because, like you said, these men ARE straight, so orientation is not in question here.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:14 PM
1

Men who date trans women are straight.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 03:09 PM
1

Right, I agree not all women are hypocrites, it's why I try to emphasize portions like "a lot" or "some" but we can all fall victim to using "men" or "women" as an easy placeholder for "a lot." But I will also argue that hypocrisy is not a bad thing, so long as you're just limiting it to your dating preferences. If a woman wants to only date a man who makes 100k while she's unemployed, and won't even offer to do housework. Is it hypocritical? Sure, but it's still a valid preference. Same thing w…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:58 PM
2

A lot of women would absolutely justify not dating a bi man, or not dating a man who has dated a trans woman, while simultaneously saying caring about body count is disgusting, sexist, insecure, pathetic, etc. Go ask ThatBitchA and attendquoi their opinion and you'll see two women who fit your exact description.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:38 PM
3

A lot of MAGA blue-pillers I'm finding out lmao!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:34 PM
1

PhD level reply right here.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:33 PM
1

And back to the "it's different because it is" argument. Okay, forget bi men. Why, when women say they don't want to date a man who has ever dated a trans woman in the past, that is valid, but body count isn't. He is straight, isn't he?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:30 PM
9

They'll just keep going on about how the sexual orientation of bi men is different because it just is so shut up. The trans woman argument seemed to shut them up pretty well though, they just downvote and fume silently. Can't wait to see what next pointless distinction ThatBitchA and attendquoi make up.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:27 PM
1

They don't date them because they're men, and you understand that. But again, even if theoretically, men rejected bi men for being bi, that is okay! I am arguing that it is okay to reject them for being bi. Women have the complete, undisputed, valid right to reject men for being bi. I'm questioning why that same validity is not applied to body counts, something you didn't respond to because you want to avoid that discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:20 PM
3

What? Why would straight men defend not dating bi MEN? They'd reject them, sure, but not because they're bi, but because they're men, obviously. The more apt analogy would be if straight men didn't want bi women, yet chastized women for not wanting bi men, which doesn't happen. Regardless, this isn't about bisexual people. I think it's completely valid to reject them on the basis of being bi alone. I have no problem with women doing that. My problem is the disparity in how we treat women's prefe…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:07 PM
5

They're similar because they both don't really change anything about the person in front of you, like if they never told you you'd never know, they're just aspects of people that people find gross in a dating setting. But women finding bi men icky and not wanting to date them is somehow valid but not men finding high count women icky and not wanting to date them. I know you're probably going to insist that sexual orientation is different because it just is, so how about this. A lot of women, fra…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:33 PM
3

I'm not sure what you mean by this comment? All I'm saying is a straight man who has dated a trans woman is still a straight man, because trans women are women. So why would women not want this man? Unless you disagree that trans women are women?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:24 PM
5

Lmao! Man gets with woman. Believe it or not, gay.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 02:20 AM
5

That's an even better point actually. I feel like even more women would not date that man, and you can't even argue it's about orientation without just outright denying trans women's identity.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:59 AM
1

Really? Maybe it's just the online community then.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:32 AM
1

Credit for being consistent on that, honestly. Most of the LGTBQ+ community (which I support) would disagree on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:26 AM
2

Well, whatever you can think what you want, everybody can see there's no actual difference between not liking bi men and not liking high count women. As an aside though, would you consider yourself pro-LGTBQ? Do you agree with their strongly held stance that not dating bi men is biphobic?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:17 AM
1

A distinction without a difference. There is no important difference between saying "A straight woman might not want to date a bisexual man." and "a man might not want to date a high count woman." They are both valid. Why is discounting an orientation valid, but not a lifestyle?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 01:04 AM
9

It's hilarious that a lot of straight women will vehemently defend not dating bi men, or even a man who has ever experimented as a perfectly valid and uncriticizable standard, completely throwing the LGTBQ community's opinion on that, and the left's in general right under the bus. But then on top of that, argue with their chest that if a man cares about a woman's body count he's shallow, insecure, sexist, and that the past shouldn't matter now all of a sudden.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 12:39 AM
12

It's crazy, I've had your exact thoughts on why removing the male sex drive would be the biggest revolution for men. Any man who didn't want to engage in the dating shitshow or porn would be free, the creeps and simps can be put to rest (or at the very least men who have had their drive removed can easily distance themselves socially from their behavior), and the men who remain in the dating market would have more power (depending on how many men leave and their quality). Anyways, if you're inte…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 09:14 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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