TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

LegitSprouds Archive

View 2 posts and 157 comments by LegitSprouds 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)
1

It literally has nothing to do with what i explained.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 08:51 PM
1

This stupid story has nothing to do with the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 08:34 PM
1

I don't have a source for the 80/20 but that part isn't important in regards to the double standard. Let me sketch a new proposition that doesn't require sources: A girl being able to be a slut doesn't necessarily signal traits that are associated with highly attractive girls. A girl can be average, or ugly, or a literal crack whore, and still get laid a lot. A guy being a slut automatically implies he has a lot of attractive traits, otherwise all of those different women wouldn't fuck him.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 04:04 PM
1

I need to show a source of that men who manage to fuck 10 different girls a week (or are able to) are probably highly attractive social guys? E: holy shit that grammar on my comment was fcked
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 03:48 PM
1

"A guy who does that is by definition a highly attractive and social guy who is chased by many woman." This is the important part. Regardless of whether you think the 80/20 rule is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 03:44 PM
1

A cheating and lying man is by definition high value. A low value man can't cheat
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 11:30 AM
1

For a woman to have sex she doesnt have to be anything special. She can be average and fuck 10 dudes a week. A guy who does that is by definition a highly attractive and social guy who is chased by many woman. It being harder for men to get sex isn't what causes the double standard. Its the fact that men who manage to do this hard thing are men to whom 80% of women are attracted. It doesn't bring negative connotation (quite the opposite) whereas to women it does.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 11:08 AM
2

From what i read you are among the lucky ones
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 10:47 AM
1

Are you okay?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 10:17 AM
15

Holy shit, not to invalidate you, but that story is the incel wet dream.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/21 10:03 AM
2

I didn't actually think that, but I'd like to
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/21 11:55 PM
6

These stories make me sad. I always like to think people are only shallow on short term interaction
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/21 09:34 PM
1

I don't make choices based of myself either when i create a character.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/21 09:32 PM
4

Ok i admit, i think it would be cool to be a hot woman, but then i realise periods exist and i snap out of it
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/21 09:28 PM
5

People want better looking people to see their inner beauty.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/21 09:04 PM
1

Probably because those traits are associated with other desirable traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/21 07:56 AM
1

Yea i was thinking of that as i typed this, but i think that has more to do with being exotic and standing out while still displaying generally attractive traits. Weird hair colours or unique fashion probably does less well for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/21 07:53 AM
1

I don't see how attraction to unique traits is a different kind of attraction than attraction to regular traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/21 07:50 AM
1

And perhaps less competition
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/21 07:47 AM
2

Couldn't their preference for 'career woman', be caused by the fact that they have way more options than the average man? Assuming that it's true that men don't care about career, you could argue that it only becomes a factor when there are multiple options that fulfill the most important priorities, which results in them taking career into consideration as well. That would explain why you observe this trend with high value men. I can't imagine myself caring about the colour of a woman's hair, b…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/21 12:48 AM
3

"Men take pride in their girl being different Women stick with the stereotypical men" According to a studie it turns out that women indeed like men who resemble the mean of the group, and the higher end of the mean will receive most attention. There is a direct correlation there. But this could also be caused by other factors, such as preselection. In a population, most men will logically resemble the mean, so most sexual interactions will be with the mean, and therefore preselection will influe…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/21 12:11 AM
1

Are they valuable?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 01:19 PM
1

Are diamonds beneficial?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 12:23 PM
1

But our genome tells us we have more female ancestors. So they were probably the gate keepers.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 01:11 AM
1

Do you mean that on a societal scale or personal scale? In my experience women weren't any less emphatic than men in person. They are more likely to care about feelings and emotions, which is stuff you can't really discuss with most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 01:00 AM
1

I think biology makes them the gate keepers.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 12:56 AM
3

It's beneficial due to it's desirability or value, like diamonds.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 12:50 AM
0

Jesus Christ
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 12:41 AM
19

"You know that feeling of disgust you get when you see an ugly girl and know deep down you could never get yourself to bang her? That’s how women feel about 80% of men." I m'n high af and i laughed so hard
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/21 12:26 AM
2

Yea it probably doesn't. She seems to be very sensitive to the idea of people talking behind her back, mostly other women. Very often does she tell me that she thinks some woman is talking behind her back because of how she looked at her in the store, or some shit, and I'm like, WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER. But perhaps it's because she is somewhat traumatized by shit in the past. She was probably a bit weird, so it's a possibility. I inherited a lot of the weirdness but I'm a guy
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 10:31 PM
1

Not in domestic violence though, it just isn't taken seriously
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 10:22 PM
2

My mom told me stories that she'd just physically assault other girls if they attempted that shit to make them stop. But she's insanely agressive for a woman and reeeeeally hates gossip.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 10:17 PM
1

Everyone judges. It doesn't matter as long as you realise it as such and are willing to change opinion in the face of new evidence. Also not letting the other person know is important so that nobody loses.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 10:12 PM
2

I hate this shit. My brother is guilty of it and he keeps getting worse because he slays. It's a massive ego inflator.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 10:06 PM
2

High sex drive. If i could delete it without any psychological drawbacks, I'd do it without hesitation.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 02:45 PM
3

Confidence and sexual prowess seems almost intertwined.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/21 02:39 PM
1

Sure they'd be able to cheat, but not have many side chicks and live the player life style so to speak. Not really a blackpill believe. Random average guys just aren't lusted after
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/20 11:47 AM
1

Most men aren't able to do that though, and not all think it's worth the risk or needed.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/20 11:12 AM
2

No problem, this environment is kinda hostile, which causes people to be on their guard all the time, myself included.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/20 09:51 PM
1

"I don’t need to do shit. Try rephrasing your openings in the future." It's not a literal command, I was trying to suggest further elaboration would help uncover your perspective, because people might trip over too short of a statement when there is not enough nuance. People here have a very specific lens at which they view stuff, and that lens can be applied to a variation of phenomenon, such as divorce. That's why i think it's necessary to be explicit on why stuff happens, this leaves as littl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/20 09:38 PM
1

You need to elaborate on why you think these divorces happen, and what that implies about 80% of men. At first glance it looks like 80% of men are unworthy to 80% of women. I have a possible explanation. In the US, divorce is basically financial suicide for the man. Involvement of children makes it more likely that they won't initiate it. In the Netherlands divorces skyrocketed when a new law was introduced. The law reduced alimony, so women divorced before the law was officially introduced. Bas…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/20 01:13 PM
1

This stems from the fact that high value men are awarded female commitment. So if a man is denied that commitment, it's assumed that it's because of something he lacked. Hadn't he lacked, she would've stayed. Women on the other hand are judged for not picking the right guy, or for not leaving a bad one. Their role is to pick and evaluate, while men's role is to get themselves picked. Ofcourse such generalized behavioural principles don't translate well to individual cases. In many cases either t…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/20 12:54 PM
2

No, they are just more likely to be signaled by a short girl because those may feel a stronger emotional impuls from the exaggerated sexual dimorphism in the form of height difference. Compensation could also play a role. Women dislike men shorter than they are. They could project this on other women and thus avoid the risk of producing short male offspring.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/20 12:31 PM
1

But the shift isn't due to genetics it seems. Interesting nontheless
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/20 03:25 AM
1

That's interesting
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/20 08:05 PM
1

From wikipedia: "The natural factors that affect the human sex ratio are an active area of scientific research. Over 1000 articles have been published in various journals. Two of the often cited reviews of scientific studies on human sex ratio are by W. H. James.[28][29] The scientific studies are based on extensive birth and death records in Africa, the Americas, Asia, Australia, and Europe. A few of these studies extend to over 100 years of yearly human sex ratio data for some countries. These…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/20 05:43 PM
1

The ratio changes very rapidly when there has been a war or another catostrophe killing off males. So doesn't seem so roboust after all. It doesn't even matter if a gene is robust to change when there is selection pressure for change. Nucleotides shift randomly every generation, some traits consist of many genes and nucleotides, making a shift often unnoticeable, but that doesn't matter because after a certain amount of time, genes turn off both when there is lack of pressure, or selection press…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/20 05:19 PM
1

Because there is no selection pressure for it, yet
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/20 04:51 PM
1

Yes, and it holds not real basis in biological evolution.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/20 02:32 PM
1

Hardcoded genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/20 02:29 PM
1

You know literally nothing about biological evolution it seems. So this discussion is very lame to have. You use random non-existing terms or terms that literally have nothing to do with the possible direction of evolution.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/20 11:30 AM
1

There is no such thing is hard coded genetics due to previous selection preassure.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 11:12 PM
1

You can hardly speak of a population when humans are mixing worldwide at an increasing rate. I also don't see the logic behind your preassure from an evolutionary and or biological standpoint.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 10:10 PM
1

There is no "preassure against" the ratio shifting. The ratio came to be due to evolution, and it can possibly shift again if it becomes more viable to have women, especially since men don't die as often anymore. Do you even know the mechanism behind the ratio?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 10:04 PM
2

It's not 0.5. it's skewed towards males, probably because they are more likely to die. "It is unlikely to happen genetically." Evolution works through genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 09:34 PM
1

Well i am not completely solo, i live at my moms house. We interact a few times a day. I think being somewhat autistic and introverted helps. I enjoy the low stimulus that solitude brings more than the mixture of positive and negative emotions that other people bring. I also think i am incapeable of falling in love or bonding with someone to the degree that is required if you want to start a family. This could be due to direct brain chemistry, or a psycbological barrier that prevents me from ent…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 06:03 PM
1

Interesting. I think in some time (don't know how long), genes that promote female offspring will become more apparent since having a male becomes increasingly lower value in terms of producing more offspring. Some animals have ratios skewed towards more females.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 02:49 PM
4

Wow, just yesterday i reasoned to myself that probably an increasing number of women choose to be single mothers because the function of the male is absolete due to government support. But i didn't know it was already trending
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 02:35 PM
1

Inaccurate but poetic
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 02:23 PM
2

Holy shit, sounds harsh. Why did the demographic turn out like that? Immigration?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 02:12 PM
1

I just have trouble believing you on your word. Perhaps you are biased against how women look? Is there a study done that confirms your hypothesis? Some statistic on dating behaviour could proof whether it's accurate. The women's median on partner-count should be higher than the men's. I bet this is true all over the west, but it should be particularly true in Scandinavia of what you say is correct
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 01:52 PM
1

Seems like a generic movie for women to me. Nothing too special. That girl is hot AF though, but not hot enough to make me watch this movie for more than 3 seconds.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 01:42 PM
1

I found the hierarchy read pretty interesting. The rest not so much
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 07:54 AM
1

This article brought tears of excitement to my eyes. I don't know how accurate of a description the female hierarchy dynamics in the article is, but i really needed this information. I always wondered how they function among themselves. It explains so much i never understood. I'm gonna test and observe it. On the rest of the article i am not so sure. It seems like a lot of guessing about how the female matrix functions within ancient civilizations.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 07:18 AM
1

It can guard you against similar people.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 06:40 AM
2

Men are probably more often involuntarily isolated, but are on average also less interested in people, so I don't know what the net ratio would be of depressed male and female loners.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 06:35 AM
2

Exactly the same way i am now. Solitary and within my own head 24/7 with 0 fucks given and no romantic interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 06:12 AM
1

I sometimes say it jokingly because during puberty every generation starts to wear less and tighter clothes, and this is stereotypically mildly infuriating to the father, but i don't think I'd really care.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 06:07 AM
2

I expect no response
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 05:58 AM
2

This guy only got 6 months for rape: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/06/06/us/sexual-assault-brock-turner-stanford/index.html So maybe it's something like: Hot famous women > hot famous men, but both are far above anyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/20 05:35 AM
1

"Agreed, but their presence in a 'manosphere' doesn't help them. I see decent looking guys (if only they would put in more effort...!) who are telling other decent looking guys to go hang themselves and to hate women." But on the other end there are also guys who lacked guidance, and were able to utilise it to their benefit. So without statistics, it's hard to guise whether it is a net benefit or not. I think we can completely ignore all of this and go ahead to your last paragraph since the mano…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 01:38 PM
1

Eum wat, ik zeg enkel dat ik die gezegde nooit gehoord heb, niet dat het niet bestaat. Je bent gauw op je tenen getrapt of niet? Geen idee of ik die gezegde juist geformuleerd heb, maar u weet vast wat ik bedoel.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 01:21 PM
2

Sexism, or the unethical or generalising parts of the menosphere do not necessarily make someone unattractive(not sure if you were aiming for that). What makes them unattractive is a combination of a lack of desirable physical traits, status and social skills. And people who frequent those groups are more likely to lack those traits. If a bluepilled autist lacks these attributes he will not be successful, it has nothing to do with perspective perse, though that can be a beneficial or counterprod…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 01:16 PM
1

In informele settings gebruik ik vaak "die" daar waar het niet hoord, evenals het gebruik van Engelse termen. Ik snap nooit waarom sommigen daar een probleem van maken.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 01:04 PM
1

Ik heb die gezegde nooit gehoord, en ik kom uit Drenthe.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 12:59 PM
2

Incels are kinda fucked in how they selfreinforce their busted ideology. But what about incels in the definitive sense; so forever alone guys who are just unattractive due to behavioural and physical traits
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 12:58 PM
1

This can be exaplained by the implicit worth sex has for either gender If a man gets frequent sex with multiple partners, he is most definitely attractive, socially capeable, and high in demand. If a woman gets frequent sex with multiple partners, she isn't any of those things the man is (perse), the implication is actually opposite of that, she is seen as being somewhat low value for how easy she is to obtain for males. So men probably also lose interest because it's likely she will cuck them. …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/20 12:47 PM
1

Because in our species, males are the innitiators
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/20 10:42 PM
4

When i get my degree my face will still be shit. In a way you are actually legitimising what incels complain about. I don't really believe my face is too shit to procreate with though. It's my complete disinterest in changing and sharing my life, while accepting somebody else's.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/20 10:30 PM
31

I don't like the idea of forcefully changing my interests, behaviour, and priorities, just so i can win the approval of a random person who i probably won't like after the hormones subside.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/20 10:45 PM
19

I'm fine with being an unfuckable loser.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/20 09:10 PM
1

I don't agree with your understanding of human hierarchies. It's a complex multitude of systems that serves to create cooperation and fair treatment, it has nothing to do with keeping others down. People who are high on the hierarchy in a nonviolent society have been granted the position. People judge each other's behaviour and it's accordance to the hierarchal ruleset. It's not a tool for domination. I also don't agree with your suggestion that sex deprivation in males is a recent phenomena. Hu…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/20 06:14 PM
1

"The point isn’t to create the best society, happiest society, stablest society or even best society. The point is to create the strongest babies and only that." I know that, but people(social animals) themselves prefer a stable society with minimal conflict. That's why hierarchies exists. Breaking of the rules is not held in good regards, not even by the one breaking them because the brain is attuned to the hierarchy. So if men start to function less well within societal hierarchies as a result…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/20 04:01 PM
1

Your hypothesis is plausibel. But you should also consider that there is a point where the obsession with sex interferes with normal day functioning and healthy brain chemistry. So it is also possible that men who aren't winners will evolve in such a way that they become contented with that fact as a means of preventing depression, toxic behaviour, and reduced rationality. This in turn may boost their chances of reproduction over that of men who are less equiped to deal with lack of intimacy. I …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/20 03:30 PM
1

Human hierarchies are very different from bonobo's, so probably not. It could also be that nothing will really change. Single moms and sexually deprived males aren't unique in nature. Men might evolve in such a way that they become less obsessed with mating. I think that would be a good thing. It would probably stabilise society and gender dynamics. However, this is an unlikely scenario since reproducing individuals dictate the direction of biological evolution. So men may forever be cursed with…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/20 10:24 AM
1

Natural selection filters out non-reproducing individuals. What do you mean with ideology and information.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 10:32 PM
0

Natural selection makes sure of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 09:40 PM
2

I'm fine not trying since the price doesn't enhance my life in any way, maybe that increases my autism and unattractive behaviour. But there are guys even worse than me in my worst.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 04:03 PM
1

Yea, that's why average in the face with decent body automatically makes them high AF smv. I am decently in shape with an average face and my base SMV is like that of a fat chick because it's all i have going on for myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 03:54 PM
3

Nah, some like me are just too autistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 03:52 PM
3

I disagree. Some men are lost causes.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 03:02 PM
2

That's not what doing worse means, you ape.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 02:13 PM
1

You kinda suck at writing i guess. If men would do worse with the SMV of the average woman, than women have lower SMV. That's hard bullshit
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 01:58 PM
1

"they would do worse if they had the SMV of an average woman"
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 01:53 PM
1

Hard to take you serious when you think the average woman has less SMV than the average man. You live in a fairytale. I said "those we care AND are successful", big difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 01:46 PM
1

Men being more interested in casual fucking has nothing to do with the actual ratio in which men and women perform casual fucking. Tinder probably has more men than women who want to casual fuck. Yet only the top 20% there actually manages to be attractive enough to 80% of women there.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 12:52 PM
2

The only men i see who care and are successful at casual sex are high value men chased by multiple women. All the other ones sometimes have casual sex, but are in a relationship most of the time. So i don't really witness what you describe as reality. Sure men are more interested in such things, but that doesn't mean they are remotely successful at obtaining it. They may bang a woman who actually wanted a relationship, causing her to think that that is all what men want, but in reality they just…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 12:16 PM
6

The thing is, is that men are more unattractive than women on average. So a woman rejecting a man happens way more often than vice versa. Its not as 50/50 as you are trying to sketch. Otherwise there wouldn't be many women banged by the same small group of guys
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:30 AM
1

Can't speak for myself. But my brother wouldn't wife an easy chick because he knows these chicks were dozens of other guy's easy chick.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:26 AM
1

Rise of the coomer.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:24 AM
2

I thought it was obvious women are way better at being single.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:20 AM
3

If she is super ugly, then her chances of a quality mate drastically declines because men will put way less effort in chasing. But if she is average, and decently in shape, there will be multiple men interested that she doesn't actually want. The better looking the girl, the higher the chance of her becoming a bangmaid because she starts aiming higher
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:17 AM
3

Women can't and shouldn't care. This is something that will fix itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:12 AM
14

This is kinda false. Women don't want to be a random dude's sweetheart, they want a high value man, and these high value men can EASILY bang other girls. So if women want one of these men they are forced to risk being just another bang maid. Men can choose not to be a creep, but this doesn't ensure they can be someone's sweetheart. Many men just don't have the insane SMV that women automatically have. So that's a false dichotomy
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 11:09 AM
3

Hypergamy is not just for status or resources, they are also hypergamous by chasing the same small group of men. My brother is popular with the girls, and a dozen or so girls chase him in the hopes of locking him down (This fails hard of course) So women today just take turns fucking one of the few desirable guys. My brother is very picky not due to wanting the hottest girl, but because, according to him, all women just take turns being ravaged by him and his other popular friends, and being in …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 04:38 AM
2

I guess i got a 4.5 since mine did have ass on top of all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 04:41 PM
1

I don't visit here often.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 04:30 PM
6

Womens sexual strategy is based of multiple factors though. Including what the man can provide. If his provisions become less necessary, he needs to compensate in other areas. A lot of men don't have enough compensation, and thus men become more unattractive than they have ever been. In the future either men will become more attractive directly, or women will become less hypergamous.(Or a combination)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 04:11 PM
1

On r/incels?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 04:02 PM
1

Never seen such a post after years.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 03:40 PM
1

I'm not so keen on the idea of a patriarchal world. Back then both the average man and woman was fucked. Women were stuck at home, and men were stuck at work. Patriarchy, if it existed to an extend, literally doesn't exist anymore. Men don't get in high positions due to some power imbalance, they get there because they are competent and more willing to do demanding jobs, but that's another discussion. Back then, women picked men so that they could generate an income for resources, it's just anot…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/20 07:07 AM
1

You are the first one here who shares my hypothesis. People here don't really understand the role sexual selection plays in sexual dimorphism it seems.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 08:20 PM
1

But that doesn't really answer the remaining question: Does hierarchial position influence attractiveness in males. It can't be answered from that study
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 09:55 AM
1

It's a possibility, but i am not so convinced. Though women marrying up becomes less of a factor, being as high and the hierarchy as possible could still be more beneficial for men than for women in terms of mate selection. So there should be a study done on the attractiveness hierarchial status brings. Of course it is also entirely possible that female hypergamy in relation to hierarchial status becomes completely obsolete, and that they will select mates based of different attributes, such as …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:28 AM
1

I'm pretty certain you don't know how biological evolution works.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 08:38 PM
1

I don't do pseudoscience, sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 08:10 PM
1

No that's not true evolution doesn't need masses of individuals to do a specific thing. That's not how evolution works.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 05:50 PM
1

Men date down the hierarchy, women don't do this. You don't see rich women picking up male waitresses. It's not an "issue" either.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 11:45 AM
1

Yea but it's funny how often people tell high value men don't care and that slut shaming is incel behaviour, and I'd believe them if my brother wasn't the biggest Tyrone in a 100 km radius.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 09:59 AM
1

That's quite the scary scenario you are describing. They don't necessarily have to be dumb even. They could just evolve a stronger biological urge to shit out children
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 09:56 AM
1

They slay hot girls, very hot ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 09:41 AM
1

Biological evolution can move in the opposite direction of trends. Il use a very extreme example: Let's say all men are conditioned to be very beta all of the sudden and women want this. The world is as left as it can possibly be. But men who have a harder time catering to this trend are reproducing (slightly) more, then evolution will ever so slowly dismantle the trend. Though this example is extreme. It's not like women avoid men who behave like 'extreme men'.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 09:40 AM
1

Not talking about giga chads, just talking about an increase in dominant and competitive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 01:12 AM
1

Behavioural/sociological trends and biological evolution are different things that operate on different mechanics.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 01:11 AM
1

I'm not talking about super short term tho
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 10:05 PM
1

Irrelevant
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 06:43 PM
1

That's the biggest issue i have with my hypothesis. The importance of the hierarchy in regards to mating. As of now i assume that a better position gives you sightly more benefit when it comes to successful reproduction within all hiarchies.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 05:52 PM
1

In the US, yes. But even in the US, a poor chad has beter prospects than a poor incel. A rich chad also better than a rich incel. A chad higher on the hierarchy has better prospects than a chad lower on the hierarchy. So?????
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 05:50 PM
1

"This is not how genetics works. THIS IS NOT HOW GENETICS WORKS. First: Children carry traits from both parents. Male children from mothers, female children from fathers. So there's no guarantee these traits will ever be separated along gender lines - they'd have to be affected by gender-exclusive genetic factors, first, which given the size of the 'shared' genetics compared to the 'exclusive' genetics is vast, is not likely. Possible, but not likely. Further, those exclusive genetics would have…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 05:46 PM
1

"If all males evolve, lets say mentally, there will still be top 20%, lowest 20% and 60% average. Women will still want to get the best out there and those will be again 20%. On the other side, women will most likely evolve too parallel with men. " They might, but this still describes evolution. Whether the top 20% will always be there isn't relevant. "I think its going to be the opposite. Everyone has unchangeable biological traits given at birth. Some men (people), no matter how they like doin…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 04:53 PM
1

There are most definitely genetic traits that contribute to that kind of behaviour. Imagine unattractive women donating thousands to guys behind cams.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 04:46 PM
1

Resources are far easier to obtain now, especially in non-third-world countries like the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 04:38 PM
1

I have, my more facially attractive friends get approached a ton, me rarely. So id figure someone even uglier than me will never get approached.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 04:36 PM
0

Traits that increase your survivability in nature and traits that make you beautiful are both important for reproduction. Evolution doesn't care if the species survives, it's just a mechanism that describes how selective pressure results in changes to the population over time. Fisherian runaway describes how certain traits become viable if they are attractive and not necessarily good for survival. This is why the peacock has big feathers that make it more vulnerable to predators So you have it b…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:53 PM
1

Someone else made the argument of lower classes producing more offspring, but that doesn't mean that the height (so to speak) of the hierarchy declines perse. As long as those low socioeconomic people posses a better position on the dominance hierarchy than 'rivals', those traits for a better position will increase in frequency. The top might thin at first, while the bottom of the hierarchy increases, but i think males specifically will climb as a result of hypergamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:40 PM
-1

The fuck are you talking about. This isn't some argument in favour of the old ways. It's hard to imagine, but some of us like to observe and analyse and make propositions without sneaking our ideology along with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:35 PM
1

You are making an error here by comparing high economic status people with the low ones in terms of how much they reproduce. This is irrelevant because women aim up. As long as women aim up, those traits that make men more likely to he attractive will increase in frequency. It doesn't matter whether trailer trash has 20 kids while elon musk has zero. Trailer trash probably was higher on the hierarchy than the other trailer trash. And economical status is not the only hierarchy that matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:30 PM
1

This is true, i do make the assumption that sexually successful people are ever so slightly more likely to produce offspring, which isn't too far of a leap i think. Genes do get mixed between genders, but males are more likely to deviate further. It's also possible that certain genes are more likely to express to a higher extend in a specific gender. This is what causes sexual dimorphism. Nurture is irrelevant because i am purely discussing changes in biology. Nurture can have a great effect in …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:25 PM
1

This is a good possibility i failed to consider. Nice to read an actual quality comment
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:11 PM
1

https://criticalthinkingacademy.net/index.php/blog/entry/argument-from-popularity#:~:text=Believing%20that%20if%20%22everybody%22%20or,because%20many%20people%20believe%20it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:10 PM
1

Those do not count as evolution but i do agree those factors can shape society.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:09 PM
1

AND those high on the dominance hierarchy. It's observable women aim higher on the hierarchy. So even if you disagree with the word "efficiently", the net result predicted in my hypothesis is still the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:06 PM
1

An argument from popularity, niiiiiice
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:05 PM
1

I didn't say that, i said you could either do that or do a proper breakdown. God damm, wtf is this sub
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:04 PM
0

Strong argument
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 03:00 PM
2

So every personality trait will remain constant among genders in terms of frequency? If you understand how unlikely that is, at least propose an alternative hypothesis or a proper breakdown.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 02:58 PM
3

Wrong, evolution happens constantly. Even micro adjustments are part of evolution, aka, microevolution.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 02:51 PM
-1

I didn't say only the top 20% reproduced, neither did i say simps never reproduce. Holy fuck, can people not critically read on this sub?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 02:50 PM
-1

Didn't say that. I stated that those in the top 20% in terms of looks AND those high on the dominance hierarchy mate the most effectively(e: efficiently)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 02:46 PM
6

Ever heard of sexual dimorphism and other biological differences between genders? It's what i am describing here. Neither did i say they evolve separately, i even stated that they both evolve. Read before making stupid assertions
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 02:36 PM
2

Idk, i know guys who slay, to me they tell me they'd never wife a slut, but not to her
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 12:59 PM
1

Only if you are in the top 20%. So though not rare, it's impossible for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 12:52 PM
1

I can't make sense of anything you are trying to say. Sorry
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 10:30 AM
1

Wtf are you talking about. My hypothesis actually proposes that men will climb the dominance hierarchy even more effectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 10:24 AM
2

Very unlikely due to ethical reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 09:38 AM
1

You can't just 'change' behaviour caused by biological traits without taking away a certain degree of freedom. So you can't change women or men. Men and women can however change due to selection pressure. Those who make more 'viable' life choices will give on more genes to the next generation.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 09:35 AM
9

Why do you engage in these comments, does it make you feel morally superior or something?
/r/PussyPassDenied21/09/20 06:45 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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