TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Livid-Log7463 Archive

View 0 posts and 1,683 comments by Livid-Log7463 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,683 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

What this experiment has essentially shown us is that if women are alleviated from any external incentive to partner then they loose all capacity for attraction towards men who aren’t providing them something exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 10:08 AM
–

It’s quite simply because of physical attraction, by definition physical attraction in order to be physical must exist in the absence emotional attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 09:54 AM
–

Consent is quite literally them saying yes, how anyone feels about it is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 09:49 AM
–

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 01:46 AM
1

This might have an argument if feminists didn’t also require men to provide something for them as wall, whether it’s also a paycheck and body guard or multiple times higher equivalent desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 08:08 PM
2

Sure as long as the reasoning is essentially pre selection and closer observation, and not because of listening to her advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 08:02 PM
–

So if someone doesn’t consent 9 times but does on the 10th did they consent……. Yeah quite obviously….
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 07:58 PM
2

Probably won’t ever have any data to prove this unfortunately since the sample size for women will always be so infinitesimally smaller.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 07:55 PM
1

Closer to the latter but only because of similarities not because of proficiency, admiration to a kill or proficiency doesn’t lead to attraction and would probably sooner prevent it for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 07:12 PM
–

If you saying that my point is facilitated through yours by saying that men would “fuck a how bc good fun” then I agree that’s certainly a large factor at play.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 07:20 AM
–

Im not sure I follow?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 06:52 AM
0

Not “as long as she’s moderately attractive” it’s if she’s simply not the absolute bottom of possible desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 09:45 AM
3

There are definitely women out there who instead partner with men who are in other ways exceptional traits like charisma etc. but still no less above herself. And as for looks, it’s most apparent how women either don’t see themselves as average or see men as less when the average woman so often claims she rarely sees men that she feels attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 11:11 PM
2

Not according to how women rate men, for instance a woman in the 40th percentile of looks for woman is equivalent to a man in the 40th percentile of looks for men. And this is just considering looks a man can still be more desirable while being less attractive physically since women don’t put as much priority (not to be confused with standards) on looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 10:52 PM
2

So what your saying is because you could be attracted to what you perceive as your looks match that women are collectively that way? This aside from the fact that what you perceive as your match might not be the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 10:40 PM
4

But that’s the point, men categorizing women this way is the direct result of reducing men to such a small portion. I’m not talking about looks match but overall desirability. That small portion doesn’t need to look the same to be a small portion.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 10:10 PM
2

I don’t think that would be the first thing brought up at all, in fact the first thing brought up, aside from impending extinction, should simply be the logistics of essential jobs now going undone.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 10:04 PM
2

It depends, if we are talking about who they can feel attraction to at all then no, but if we are talking about frivolous standards not innately held then it’s possible. The problem is that a person who has high standards always believes they deserve them no matter what they say, otherwise it wouldn’t be a problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 10:01 PM
6

This is a direct result of women reducing the men they are willing to be involved with in any way down to such a small portion.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 09:56 PM
3

The same is true with all things women do/are vs men do/are, women and what they do are favored, given passes and prioritized universally.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 09:54 PM
–

No everyone wouldn’t get “the same chance” just more people would get a chance, I never mentioned anything about everyone getting the same chance. I’m not even saying they need to be forced to partner, simply having a more accurate representation of what their equivalent is would be beneficial as a whole.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 09:50 PM
3

Unfortunately nobody really wants to make the first move and since no woman has to, unlike men, then they simply won’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 06:49 PM
-3

Unfortunately it just gets worse as when women get into these positions their bias towards other women causes only more women to be prioritized, it’ll take a few generations for the pendulum to swing the other way for men unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 06:47 PM
2

What women bring to the table? Being women What do I wish women bring to the table? Themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 09:13 PM
1

Because overall it’s better for partnering, giving the most people a chance by keeping people from trying to partner too far up in desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 04:43 AM
–

Considering the openness of the relationship, he has no reason to assume that he is the only one she’s “meeting family with or cooking with etc” and therefore no reason to think she would want more than she was getting in the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:53 PM
–

How so? It’s not like we know he was aware she was expecting more and she got the same things out of the relationship as he did.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:44 PM
1

I would agree. It’s more like “alpha” gets everything and “beta” stays alone for their life’s.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:50 PM
0

I actually think arranging marriages would be a better alternative, and work much better to keep people in their place in desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:45 PM
1

Was the female teacher capable of being as assertive or threatening as the male coach? I suspect not. As for celebrities, while I think it’s stupid either way, the fans of a sports superstar are fans because the person is at the pinnacle of human physical ability and that’s where the idolization comes from, so it would make sense not to understand idolization of things outside of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:43 PM
2

Women treat men as if they are on pedestals, so why would it be a surprise when men see them as they treat themselves?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:36 PM
–

Why? He wasn’t the one not getting the more that he wanted it was her.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:34 PM
1

Did he know that she thought it was serious? The fact that the relationship was open is already enough for anyone who expects it to be serious to have the onus of having to ask to find that out. The framing here is wrong, he spent a year getting what he wanted out of the relationship,the same things she got, and if she didn’t get what she wanted then she had a whole year to seek it but didn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 07:38 AM
1

While “too high” may be subjective, I would classify it as have standards for desirability above your percentile, for instance if a man in the 40th percentile of desirability for men held standards for only the 30th percentile and up than they’d be unrealistic and too high.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 06:08 PM
2

The standard you hold is anchored on what is actually out there not your ideal, in other words if your attraction is to few of the opposite gender than your standard is high and if it’s to many of the opposite gender than it’s low and a moderate amount for moderate standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 05:53 PM
1

This is the cast for women as well, the only difference being that they are held to such low standards that it doesn’t make a difference for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 05:49 PM
–

The value is set by the other party, women’s value is determined by men and men’s value is determined by women, so if women start to value men less as they obviously have been than men’s value decreases.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 10:03 AM
3

As long as we are arguing these things in isolation, as a man would likely never be able to partner without these things in reality, I would still argue that partnering is more important.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 09:01 PM
–

Women are socially allowed any preference they want, even the ones you use as examples have criticisms that pale in comparison to men having any form of preference/standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:23 PM
3

So it proves he can see women in a way that you won’t and would want to be seen by him? Seems almost entirely irrelevant…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:22 PM
2

In a vacuum no, but if you are arguing that since a man wouldn’t be able to partner without money anyway then that makes sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:06 PM
1

Yes that’s what physical attraction defines, it can’t be physical attraction if it’s modified by emotional attraction, that’s just emotional attraction neither one can be modified by the other and still be so. If we were just talking about attraction without specifying emotional or physical then they can mix.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 12:50 AM
1

The bar is for being physically attracted though not emotionally. I’m not disputing that women are often emotionally attracted but that the bar for physical attraction high or even impossible in the case of never being able to reach it without emotional. Physical attraction can’t increase or decrease unless the physical changes, all else is another type of attraction, usually emotional.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 12:00 AM
1

Right meaning in that situation you aren’t physically attracted definitionally, in other words the threshold (standard) you have for physical attraction is very high, including impossible. The rest is explaining emotional attraction which is not definitionally part of physical attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:36 PM
–

It’s amazing how many times people legitimately have the “bad thing happens to man, woman most effected” take.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:12 PM
5

That’s because it’s much worse, they’ve had to live.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:47 PM
8

They still receive interest for relationships, I don’t doubt they don’t want them that’s my whole point. For men you don’t even have to be at the bottom to not receive openness from women, let alone interest, for anything at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:29 PM
3

No partnership is utmost important, and women have access by default.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:06 PM
7

An important distinction being how much more important partnering is than wealth, maybe if half the population was wealthy by default your comparison could approach similarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:03 PM
3

We aren’t talking about having to do work to be wealthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:58 PM
6

Even if you go further and look at the forever alone women sub they consistently talk about having interest from men, so yeah even the lowliest of women get by default.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:36 PM
5

No all women are certainly not beautiful, they just don’t have to be, they can be as hideous as they come and could still only ever be single by choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:00 PM
9

I can’t imagine anyone wants to be in a position where they have to put in “work” just to have a chance while the other group gets it by default.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 08:41 PM
1

It wouldn’t be physical attraction for anyone because it isn’t physical attraction, if it requires emotional attraction then that’s what it is, at best it can be called physically associated emotional attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 08:34 PM
1

I don’t doubt that, but it only supports my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 08:32 PM
1

That is how physical attraction works, if it requires emotional then it’s emotional attraction by definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:15 AM
1

Are they great at assessing their worth? Beautiful accomplishment women are at the same worth as beautiful women as they are not prioritized for their accomplishments, so even in the first sentence that’s not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 11:17 PM
2

I didn’t say any of this out loud.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 11:14 PM
2

What does this help though? A mythical angelic girl who is capable of attraction in such a way simply doesn’t exist, so at this point we are just saying: “if men weren’t excluded they’d do better in dating.” So… yeah technically that’s true…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 11:12 PM
3

That’s because it isn’t a result of “women experiencing attraction and treating men differently” it’s women experiencing attraction to a small group and largely incapable otherwise, as opposed to men where collectively no woman is excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 11:07 PM
1

Any time someone is the final say in choosing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 11:04 PM
–

Something everyone often misses here is how significant changes in the dating environment changed how people and especially women date from that generation on, and how influential it was for that to be the case from the very beginning for them. In other words yes those women could also technically still be in the current dating environment but it isn’t the only environment they’ve ever been in nor is it as influential on them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 11:02 PM
1

Then the reason should be clear, since women are doing the majority of the rejecting and rejecting is more negatively looked upon, and women’s attraction is then seen as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 07:21 PM
1

? What I’m saying here is that the amount of replies saying “never” or very few, shows how women’s standards for looks is higher than men’s.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 09:48 AM
1

Important to note is that this is indicative of a physical standard, quite literally disproving any claims that men’s physical standards are higher rather than just physically prioritized.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 08:06 AM
3

This is a strange take because it assumes that the guys take on a woman being out of his league is then not correct, first this would have to be proven incorrect for any of this take to hold any level of validity.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 08:04 AM
1

Are you then trying to argue that the prevalence of rejecting, in an upfront manner, is the same across men and women?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 07:59 AM
1

What I’m getting at is that if you are asking men about it they’d overwhelmingly be happy to have women attracted to them either way, if you talking about rejecting being seen as negative that’s a different matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:31 PM
1

Ask the man she’s attracted to, and in reverse ask the women the average men are attracted to, you’ll quickly find which one is actually seen as negative.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:21 PM
1

People say power imbalances are bad yet women are exclusively open to them, until the day comes where women somehow impossibly become open to dating down overall they do not actually believe power imbalances to be bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:12 PM
2

I think it’s more to do with the simple fact that the more options or perceived options exist the fewer men women see as viable.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:09 PM
0

No but statistic comparability is, if a woman is in the 40th percentile and her standards don’t include a man in the 40th percentile than by definition her standards are high, and specifically regardless of what any complainants may be, because a standard is anchored to what exists not what your ideal is.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 09:48 PM
–

Fasting is a lot easier than starving.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 09:44 PM
1

Predictable how the immediate responses are unable to recognize a level of cleanliness only acknowledging spotless or hell hole, and “but there was an exceptionally desirable guy I dated once who was dirty but could continue to get away with it because of that exceptionality.” A higher standard for what you consider clean equates to statistically more cleaning (housework/domestic labor), and doesn’t require a huge disparity like spotless/hell hole.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 09:41 PM
1

It’s very simply the biological drive to partner, and the vast majority of men have it as a very strong desire at a level somewhere comparable to self preservation itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 09:17 PM
2

The majority of men consider dating to be difficult, especially considering the vast majority have to take what they can get.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 11:08 PM
2

Admit to what? Not looking for a particular type? Here’s the thing women only entertain the men desirable enough to look for a particular type, so when they think that’s the case with any significant amount that tells you the only men they are open to. Most men aren’t looking for casual short term arrangement they are looking for whatever they can get.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 10:24 PM
1

Firstly hardly any women show enough interest in enough men for this to come up and secondly women are given more leeway/grace in all other ways, why would this not be included.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 09:08 PM
0

The vast majority men aren’t looking for any particular type of woman they do not have the options to realistically find that in their lifetimes, so using any guy that is as an example can’t be representative of any significant portion.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 09:02 PM
7

I absolutely would want to, but it wouldn’t eliminate the desire to partner in the end but it at least could eliminate some suffering.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 08:24 PM
1

No, it doesn’t change it for her only him, the reason being that the morality in question in gold digging is wanting someone’s money for themselves not wanting questionable money.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 08:22 PM
–

Unfortunately it’s women’s national inherent attraction to progressively escalate their standards, especially when exposed to more men as we see nowadays, this is just how women’s attraction works similarly to how men include more women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 08:20 PM
1

It’s looking more and more like the future than anything else.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 08:17 PM
2

Because all women inherently have plenty of options, including the least desirable bottom of the barrel women, so a woman not in a relationship is choosing not to and is looked upon as strong by society. A man on the other hand is looked upon negatively because it is understood that most men want to partner and that the entire onus of a relationship is on him making society see it as he failed to measure up. The alternative could simply be that women are nearly always looked at in a positive lig…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 10:21 AM
2

I think this also eventually becomes unsustainable as eventually so many men will be excluded and forced to do so that the women they passport for will just become similarly excluding.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 10:04 AM
1

The thing that changes is they acquire a non zero chance. “In my not-so-humble opinion, unwanted men should embrace radical acceptance and opt out of dating entirely.” While it’s true many won’t ever have a chance, it’s also true that it’s not easy to just consign yourself to the worst single existence a person can have.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 09:54 AM
2

Depends on what we are considering morally superior? Is it conditionality? Value? And what makes possessiveness any less humanizing? You could just as easily argue it to be actively humanizing.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 09:50 AM
3

Anymore there are more men who would marry a woman even if she would never have sex with them than men who are anything like what you describe, wonder if there is a correlation with the men you are trying to describe and the men woman can feel attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 05:35 AM
3

The only argument that men would be creating their own problems would be that they “created it” by not being born tall, wealthy, charismatic enough etc. and for a woman, not a beautiful one.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:52 PM
2

They expect to have all aspects of starting and developing any sort of relationship to be carried by him, same way the attraction itself developed.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:47 PM
–

Simply biologically less efficient at it and physical attraction is a stronger method which women are unable to feel as greatly.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:42 PM
–

It’s far more consequential because partnering is the most integral part of any sort of fulfillment, second only to being alive itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:35 PM
1

Yet not more than women do, with a far more consequential threat of exclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 11:29 PM
1

The reason for that is because they know that being less masculine gets you excluded, if women were more open to different ways a man could act or look it would shape the way men do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 09:00 PM
1

Unfortunately women enforce a far more rigid and similar standard of masculinity then men do, which is why it can’t change, women would have to start having variation in any significant way to allow men to do so without being excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 08:06 PM
9

While I agree women are considered more valuable, the reason is almost solely because they are expected of far less in order to be considered valuable.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 07:55 PM
–

I’m saying this is why it’s a persistent issue, because difficulty in partnering and the desperation from it is also a persistent issue. I didn’t say it wasn’t horrible, I outlined how it was from the morally compromised…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:38 PM
–

This is advice given my men who’s Exceptional desirability is more weighted towards charisma than looks, but no less inherently desirable, and the women who are more attracted to them. Essentially it’s “go to bars, clubs, etc. and be exceptionally charismatic like me/the men I’m attracted to and you’ll do better.”
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:35 PM
–

I think it’s born from desperation, you touch on it yourself “why not be with adults or don’t date at all??” It’s very difficult to not be able to date at all, specially when it’s so integral to you, so the harder it gets the more desperate men will get resulting in the ones who are morally compromised being driven to something they may not otherwise do.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:32 PM
0

I think it is more that the individual woman just isn’t as desirable as she thinks she is, as in yes you are the equivalent of that weird guy, that low effort profile or minimal conversation. Just because you prioritize these things doesn’t mean you match them in what YOU are prioritized in.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:55 PM
2

The reason it comes up less for women is because they are all already guaranteed the opportunity from the very beginning. So it comes as a shock when someone’s goal is something they have guaranteed as an option.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:46 PM
1

Yes that’s correct, women finding shyness to be intolerable in men makes it an intolerable trait. Unfortunately men do not have the freedom to have as many different traits, at least if they want to be able to partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:06 AM
3

I would simply argue that if the other way around then women would be right to be upset at men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 04:19 AM
4

Life doesn’t need to be an RPG with stats in order for desirability to matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 11:31 PM
2

Traits that the average guy doesn’t have the level of to be desirable to women, that’s the above average guy who might as well go for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 09:36 PM
1

Of course that’s the ultimate goal but like I said you can spend year(s) for a chance irl where you’ll likely be rejected or be rejected (filtered out) thousands of times in a short period, it’s simply numbers, a tiny fraction of women are capable of being open to you so the only way to have a chance is to expose yourself to as many as you can, and if you aren’t too undesirable you might get a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 09:34 PM
1

? Not to date but to interact and expose yourself to people in general, because the time it takes to become familiar enough to have a chance at asking someone out the way the average or below guy must, on an app you would have already been exposed to thousands.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:52 PM
0

Sure you could argue that, but that’s essentially like adding 1 to 100,000, yes 100,001 is technically more and but will be obviously less efficient.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:32 PM
3

What I’m talking about is just simple odds, on a dating app you’d will be exposed to many times more women than you ever could in person and by that fact alone, at least for the average or below guy, you have better odds. You may have to have extended range and it’s obviously going to take a while but the chances are better that it might eventually happen vs unlikely to happen at all. I’m also talking about an average guy not someone exceptionally charismatic, he’d be one of the above average gu…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:49 PM
6

If a guy is above average than why not either way will work, but if he isn’t than dating apps are going to be the only way to expose himself to enough women to even have a tiny chance, is it only a tiny chance? Of course but offline he’s unlikely to even meet enough women in his life to find one willing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:36 PM
1

This includes too old of a generation to be representative of the current dating environment, to get an accurate take on whether or not men currently will eventually find someone, with how drastically dating has changed for them, you’d have to wait for men who are younger right now to be at the end of their life, otherwise what you are saying is “surely things will be the same”. It’s not an issue of finding someone though, the issue is that shyness in men is an intolerable trait for women, and o…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:31 PM
1

They glorify handsome actors playing “shy” men. Are you just explaining how it’s disqualifying or agreeing that they’d have to change like I outlined?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:23 PM
2

Important to note that greater male variability cannot be disproven my some exceptions existing, obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:50 AM
1

It’s always lower because in the few examples where it appears that it isn’t are explained by a gap in desirability where the man who is the focus is just that much more desirable, whereas for men the is no such niche focus.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:48 AM
7

The “shy man” wouldn’t eventually find someone because his only chance of eventually finding a woman is if he stops being one in the first place, men can uniquely have collectively undesirable traits, things that disqualify them from all women collectively, the only difference is that being a serial killer or rapist just isn’t one of those traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:45 AM
1

You don’t have to be, like I said the same argument you are making can be made against other factors people consider redistributing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 03:32 AM
2

Defining it as an activity doesn’t make in any less integral, you could say the same with food, eating is an activity so if we just define it that way it ends up the same. And any individual liking something compared to another has no impact either, for instance since someone can not want housing and would rather live in a box down by the river does that then make it of less importance as well?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 09:27 PM
–

An obese woman absolutely will be picked by a great many men, it may not be by the men she’s open to, but there will be quite a few so she was just told incorrectly she has much greater odds/options than average men and certainly greater than a similar man.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 09:05 PM
2

So then yes you do believe bots/accidental likes are options.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 08:24 PM
6

Right so your argument relies on something existing because it must, instead of the reality that even more than 2% are not options because they aren’t actually real at all. Unless you were arguing that a bot is an option all the same or an accident?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 08:17 PM
6

It is when they aren’t actually there, that’s like saying something labeled 1 or 2% must be so despite there being nothing behind that label.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 08:07 PM
1

A woman valuing personality in utmost is still only deserving of a personality on the level of what is desired from her in utmost, otherwise she would be objectively looking for above herself in value.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 07:56 PM
12

1 or 2% is objectively zero in an environment like a dating app where there is a higher percentage of bots and accidental likes than 2%, meaning that only when the number of likes passes the number of likely bots/ accidental likes can it count as even an option. This is not moving any goal posts but realizing how that fractional amount is simply not an option by any definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 07:45 PM
–

The same argument can be said the other way around, that having high standards is because you are just looking for enough boxes to check to appease you and that it’s just about how desirable you can get so they may be even more likely to jump ship when an even more desirable person comes along, the only difference is that standards that high are less likely to surpass for obvious reasons. And you can just as easily argue that low standards is the direct result of few options and coming with it a…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:18 PM
–

Women haven’t ever wanted equal relationships, and this mindset comes from the fact that women inherently see themselves as the prize. And when you see yourself as a prize to be won why would you give any man the satisfaction? He has to beat the competition and win her first.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:06 PM
1

Would it still include images like dating apps do now? If so nothing would really change, maybe even fewer men would be successful because women would just have another number to exclude, but otherwise the same men will be getting to the point where they can converse in the first place. And as for women, nearly nothing would change at all as they aren’t held to any standard for charisma, at least not in any widespread meaningful way.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:00 PM
2

Except that the women actively are wishing to be “exploited” here, in other words unless they are just being kidnapped and held against their will, they still said yes, they still made that choice, and that makes it impossible to be exploitation and specifically regardless of her situation otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 08:54 PM
–

The problem with this is I’d argue you cannot be objectifying someone if you are doing so for their looks, because looks are just as much a part of you as a person as any other trait, So in comparison being used for money is actually objectifying whereas used for something that’s actually a part of you could never be.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:53 AM
1

I would argue that women mock them specifically because they like that those men are collectively removed from partnering and this is just a goal women’s attraction gives them as a group to enforce.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:46 AM
2

Ah yes so that the “sad dejected NEETs” can be excluded from discussion online as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:42 AM
2

Such is true for even the most hideous, lowest desirability women than can exist. An almost unimaginable difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:36 AM
5

Unfortunately there is nothing worse that makes up for the possibility of complete romantic exclusion, something only men have the chance of being cursed with.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:29 AM
1

Likely because it’s the result of constantly vying for exclusively for the best, what could be better than a guy who had to become the best? A guy who didn’t have to become it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:23 AM
1

The feelings of disgust towards improving in order to date likely stems from women’s attraction specifically trying to steer them towards men who are inherently desirable from the beginning, men who never had to “improve” in order to appease them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:19 AM
–

I don’t think you understand how depressing any semi “realistic” depiction of romance is for a guy who is excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 07:22 PM
4

The problem with this idea is that every guy doesn’t want to do all of these things to “level up” but most still want to partner, so in the end how can you are stuck between a rock and a hard place, you want to partner so you have to “level up” but if you can’t do it just to partner then you’re stuck without a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 07:20 PM
1

It’s going to be bad if you aren’t above average, and whether online or offline works better just depends on how, if you are above average looking online will be easier and if you are only above average charismatically then offline will obviously be better.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 02:58 AM
4

It would depend on the desirability as a guy I’d imagine, as for myself I probably would as I am undesirable in the literal sense so for that reason alone it would be worth it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 02:48 AM
1

The answer would be yes, considering she will still have an abundance of choices for relationships and could only be held back by being open exclusively with more desirable men. Yet they still end up having men in their same level of desirability as options, the bar is only high for women if they think themselves more desirable than they are and that their equivalent is higher, obviously if she is average and trying for above the standard is going to be high because she isn’t good enough to begi…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 08:14 PM
2

It’s men collectively include all women not individually, yes it sounds ridiculous when interpreted incorrectly.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 07:22 PM
5

I’m undesirable to women in the literal sense of the word and as a result gave up as a result of exclusion a long time ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 06:13 PM
1

Why is that weird?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:52 PM
-2

How was it vague? Essentially if a woman were low in desirability it isn’t something deserved in the first place to fulfillment in that way shouldn’t be sought out in the first place and if a woman was desirable than she needn’t worry because aside from extreme examples she won’t end up any other way. Of course there might be some small exceptions like with anything but they need not be accounted for.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:22 PM
2

I’m not sure how this is relevant to what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:16 PM
0

To be fulfilled in the way that’s described in your post.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:12 PM
4

This same thing is true for women on the same level, the only difference is that men don’t hold them to any such standard that’s above them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:11 PM
1

Depends on her level of desirability if it’s low she doesn’t deserve that in the first place and if it’s high, well she wouldn’t be in the situation to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:08 PM
4

This says nothing to the fact that this guy in the example was likely still entirely more desirable on a percentile basis than the women he had as matches. The reality is that only men can be considered undesirable and be excluded while there has never been a woman excluded by men collectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:05 PM
1

That doesn’t mean it’s an importance above his wife though.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 04:52 PM
1

Right that’s the point, why are we asking how can men be attracted if we are eliminating ways they are attracted. It’s like saying I want you to buy me a car but I don’t want it to have wheels.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 03:15 AM
1

“Forget the “emotional bond” with “wife goggles”, we are talking about purely male attraction here.” So we are talking about male attraction but excluding that part of it?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 10:47 PM
4

I wouldn’t say they “spend their lives obsessing over women they can’t have” they certainly can’t marry women they are exceptionally attracted to anymore, the vast majority think their gf/wives are average and are averagely attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 10:43 PM
1

Right, so since you couldn’t find it I’ll show you: “So you’re saying if this is the case that women are “emotionally unstable, prone to mental illness, and unable to be accountable or logical.” Then the only way to remain logically consistent is to just let humanity die out?” This part here explains how just abstaining or not being involved at all can’t be an option. “This is also not considering that they may believe motherhood and that family structure to be a grounding point included biologi…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 06:28 AM
-2

You might want to read my comment again.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 08:57 PM
0

So you’re saying if this is the case that women are “emotionally unstable, prone to mental illness, and unable to be accountable or logical.” Then the only way to remain logically consistent is to just let humanity die out? This is also not considering that they may believe motherhood and that family structure to be a grounding point included biologically.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:54 PM
1

Because for a woman if a man is eager most will interpret it as desperation and in her mind why would she ever want a guy that couldn’t get anyone he wanted?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:43 PM
–

This isn’t accurate and is projection from women who so collectively do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:32 PM
1

No, you are omitting details here, if both were average like I had outlined than men will be attracted. Obviously in situations with overwhelming gaps in desirability it can be different. A contradiction here would require me to have included above average men being attracted to women below them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 11:21 PM
3

What I mean is that that comment isn’t referring to average men sleeping with average women they wouldn’t date but men sleeping with below average women they wouldn’t date/above average men sleeping with average women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 07:51 PM
3

This argument acts as if qualifying for even developing an emotional connection to any individual woman isn’t just as rare, most men are not going to be considered good enough for the vast majority of women for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 10:07 AM
7

Considering we would be taking a widely hated character and making them part of a group that is judged more harshly and held to higher standards, yeah there is no doubt that character would be hated far more.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 10:02 AM
6

Why do you believe this is referring to the average man and woman?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 09:53 AM
–

How would he be seen as stupid? It doesn’t matter what he does as he’s already desirable. It is not very smart to use a YouTube video of a guy, especially this one, to try and make a point about any significant portion.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 06:59 PM
–

It meant above what could be considered average, an outlier in a “positive” direction.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 06:53 PM
–

They are “extremely” undesirable because of how they are inherently if they could change themselves meaningfully to be included they would. Ultimately they are at the same level as women are the only difference is that men are accepting of less and women are requiring of more.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 06:50 PM
–

I would still stand by not needing any at all, unless the woman were otherwise extremely undesirable again making it not the norm. Exceptional means anything that is an exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:59 PM
–

Did you not read the op? I see that it’s deleted now but that’s what it was talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:56 PM
–

It’s the norm for men not to require any exceptional level of social skills to be attracted, of course if a guy was exceptional himself it’s possible he might but that would then not be the norm obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:54 PM
–

Women
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:52 PM
20

They may “love intimacy and romance” but not with the average man, the average man on the other hand is attracted to the average woman, hence the overwhelming one sidedness.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:51 PM
1

The thing is that just because more are meeting on apps or that it’s possible to be in proximity to poorer people doesn’t mean it isn’t enough to explain why the majority is in similar tax brackets, not to mention women requiring it and the ones desirable enough to require it in excess being rare enough to not tip the scales. Though you could certainly argue that any woman desirable enough to date a millionaire could probably easily become one herself…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:48 PM
–

I believe partnering for men comes at a much higher priority over almost anything else including self respect.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:37 PM
–

Because they are not required to have social skills in any degree to still be desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:35 PM
–

They both exclude men and make it seem like a moral failing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:34 PM
18

Because women simply have and always will have a far more rigid and strict idea on how a man should act and even look like.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:31 AM
5

Because they simply want what they want and stats are just an obstacle in their way.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:28 AM
3

They mean they are attracted to what causes him to be confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:24 AM
0

Depends on the definition, the man who lies is more desirable while even if morally wrong while the man who pays is less desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:21 AM
0

To be fair possible attraction is valid to include in bare minimum, women just can’t control that their possible attraction requires men to be far more.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:19 AM
–

Unfortunately no matter how much of a need it may be, ultimately men will be excluded and to justify this it is painted as a moral failure as to deflect from any roll women play in it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:17 AM
–

I think you forgot that you put “can” in there.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 10:07 AM
1

The problem is a guy with all of those traits, even if at an average level individually, is not average but far above average, what woman consider a “good man” is inherently above average and obviously there isn’t going to be enough above average men to go around.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/26 06:59 PM
1

“A woman so popular with men, she can get men to jester for her and they’ll just do it instead of vetting her out. You’re not going to make me believe you’ll tolerate being humiliated for mediocre pussy.” This is the average woman, because men like average woman. If your experience is outside of this you are not an average woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/26 06:55 PM
1

It’s pretty laughable considering women are not the group with more social skills but the group requiring more social skills.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/26 06:52 PM
1

They may care if it’s an extreme example but for the most part they don’t, the reason you see relationships in similar tax brackets is because of proximity.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/26 06:49 PM
–

Not just mutually compatible but mutually desirable, but yes both people should feel similarly about each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 02:25 AM
2

So your argument is that both men and women should be seeking those more desirable than themselves? I think the best way to go about it is to try and be with those closest in desirability to yourself for the best chance of relationship success, you’d be setting yourself up for failure if you exclusively were open to someone above in desirability and value.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:52 PM
2

The difference is that even within all negative traits women can have, men’s variance in attraction is enough that there are always enough that are still even specifically attracted, where as the same is not true for women. How would you have a relationship with someone like that? Simple, if someone were at the level of having a relationship like that then they have no other options and by the simple fact that they are open to you makes them an exception rarer than all others, and that fact alon…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:20 PM
1

Men having a preference for women when more desirable doesn’t negate a much greater variance in attraction, even if you were to limit all men’s attraction to younger women they would still remain collectively included while the same could not be said for the other way around. Yet all of these women are still included by men unlike their equivalent less desirable men who are excluded from dating entirely.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:03 PM
4

Men’s attraction has variance that far surpasses women’s, and being poorly adjusted barley effects women’s desirability since the standard they have to live up to is next to nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 04:51 PM
2

Depends on how otherwise desirable a guy is: If otherwise exceptionally desirable nerdy = good If otherwise average to undesirable nerdy = bad
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:14 AM
13

The misunderstanding here is that nobody is claiming all women are “well-adjusted and attractive” certainly not but the big difference is that those women that are just as poor-adjusted and unattractive are not open to men like them as their counterparts are.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:02 AM
18

The bottom line is that as a guy you can be excluded from ever dating at all for reasons beyond your control but as a woman you never could never, so ultimately that that shows who has it easier.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:46 PM
1

The reality it that it’s men expecting women to be capable of attraction with any level of variance like they have as men, then learning that the standard they have to live up to and the variance they can have is far more restrictive and exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:40 PM
4

Care how? I think a great many do care about having far worse opportunities or being entirely excluded, let alone having to watch women have or pass up everything they could want.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:32 PM
–

That would be the cases where they have chemical imbalances quite literally causing them to feel incorrectly. Someone can feel any way about anything that’s why the way they feel about such doesn’t mean much at all in regard to their objective situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 11:07 PM
–

Plenty of people can also feel incorrectly, if your feelings are not in line with what’s actually reality then they are entirely invalid.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 08:09 PM
–

“If they are treated as they are why date?” And if you don’t want to date then you aren’t lonely you’re just secluding yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 07:44 PM
–

Being alone is exclusively inherent to being lonely, you can only feel incorrectly alone while not being so. Because like I said the men who can already do, but not all men can, for most who are undesirable enough to be lonely exclusion from partnering is inherent.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 07:40 PM
–

Everyone’s desirability determines how they are treated and worth in their relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:57 PM
–

Lonely men already do solve it, if they have the option to, by partnering with women they aren’t particularly attracted to, that’s what the average guy already has to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:24 PM
–

There exists no woman that has ever not been able to have her equivalent in desirability, at best a woman can only possibly be “lonely” by choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:06 PM
–

If you have those things and feel lonely while not being so then your feelings are wrong as you’re objectively not so, especially when compared to someone who doesn’t have them. A better description would be that someone like that just isn’t fulfilled enough for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:03 PM
–

What you’re missing is that 4/10 includes emotional traits and treatment not just exclusively looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:56 PM
–

She is not lonely. She feels lonely.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:54 PM
–

Unfortunately from your description this would make you a below average woman and as such your equivalent is a below average man, including in your own estimation of desire for him.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 05:53 PM
7

Aside from him still being less picky than any woman that didn’t have to swipe 2 million times, your point is then that because a guy swiped on 2 million women had had them finally had a date that was unsuccessful that men are therefore pickier? Yes this is most women’s opinion: collective become better for us or be gone. The contention is saying that women holding this sentiment are somehow just as picky as men saying “we’ll take anything we can get”.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 11:33 PM
12

So then you are then acknowledging that men are in fact less picky than women? Sure you can argue “just be better for women” that is technically a solution, just as much as just buy a house is a solution to the homeless.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 11:04 PM
-1

To be fair I think this is true both ways, I don’t think attraction in general is all that related to morality, the difference being that men far less often try to relate them to make themselves seem greater.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 10:57 PM
20

The argument your making here is basically: men are picky because they fit so few women’s standards that asking for a woman that wants them is actually a high standard. Now aside from that very logic requiring women to be pickier in the first place, saying it’s born out of desperation is certainly likely the case most of the time but it makes little difference, they would still be less picky regardless of the cause, the same way women’s pickiness is born from privilege and abundance of options.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 10:54 PM
2

If it were that they didn’t want to approach or even that they didn’t want to reply on a dating app than shyness might be the case, but to use shyness as an excuse for a like is certainly deflection.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 08:19 PM
3

They are using “shyness” as an excuse to cover increasingly higher standards than their worth.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 08:10 PM
6

What people are missing here is that men approaching is required for the vast majority of women to feel attraction in the first place, this along with many other ways women require to be treated better.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 08:08 PM
0

Men are too varied in what traits they can find attractive in women, if they were a little more narrow/ only attracted to traits in one direction than, at least at minimum, women could be similarly left out.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 06:02 PM
4

Women must do so otherwise they would have to logically recognize their attraction as immoral
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 05:03 PM
1

The reality is that men are the ones measured, both with how desirable they are and their social value, by their wealth and status so obviously the top would be men in majority.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 04:59 PM
0

Ultimately, with women needing individual men less, they have simply realized that the more they deny men the better they have it, eventually we may just end up at the point where even the most hideously undesirable woman imaginable will be considered lucky to have for even exceptional men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 10:29 AM
–

“Ya can't fight fire with more fire, or else you'll end up burning everything.” If nothing can change for the better, if it’s too far gone then everything should be burned.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 10:14 AM
4

Only the best should get to feel like the best option, an average person deserves to feel like an average option. If an average woman wants to feel like the best option she should be trying to date significantly downward. Men aren’t so dumb as to not realize women require being treated as a better option that they are, that’s why the vast majority have to act like that’s who they have.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 10:05 AM
2

If your trying to make the argument that older women are more single and therefore somehow making up for it then that falls apart when you consider that only happens once women are at the age where men are twice as likely to have died, not to mention that those older women both still have many options and are intolerant to younger men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 11:01 PM
4

I can’t imagine anyone is even seriously arguing “men only pursuing a small group of women” without being in bad faith
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 09:16 PM
2

Why do women virgin-shame? The only difference is that it isn’t so universally excluding to be a “slut”.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 07:04 PM
–

The thing that people are missing when trying to argue that not all men partnered look like that is that this is true for physical attraction, a guy can still end up partnered for emotional attraction, which unfortunately women’s attraction has the same restrictions for.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 08:33 PM
1

Ultimately men’s attention is varied enough to be attracted to women for nearly any way they are, unlike women men are just attracted to women overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 08:37 AM
20

I think the difference here is it isn’t settling but she would consider it settling. The reality is that average people should expect to be averagely attracted to their partner otherwise you are expecting better treatment than their worth.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 08:34 AM
2

These sort of discussions often ignore the fact that this kind of thing is caused by women’s desires and men trying to fit them, it is women that actively want to receive tangible benefits from a relationship, outside of the person themselves, and this is just a way to give women that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:02 AM
–

All that means is that you aren’t as undesirable as you may think.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:31 AM
1

Women aren’t attracted to confidence, they are attracted to men who are confident. Aka exceptionally desirable men because otherwise they wouldn’t be confident, the confidence is just a flag for them for the desirability not the point of attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:31 PM
–

Most of these “strategies” are just getting women to like them….. if that somehow counts as sexual aggression then the vast majority of men and women are “sexual aggressors”.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:24 PM
1

The reason it flips later in age is because by that point men are twice as likely to have died, and increasingly so with age, meaning women being single in later years is most likely because of their husbands/partners dying, not because they struggle at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:16 PM
2

That very, very few men are ever physically desirable to women and even the vast majority that are able to partner are able to do so through emotional attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:11 PM
–

The irony here is that the men who struggle to date will be excluded from relationships and friendships from women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:08 PM
4

The cause is that with women making more money and having more social status there are fewer ways for men to be superior, which would pose no issue if it weren’t for women’s attraction requiring it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:05 PM
1

Using for money is afterwards not before, the whole idea is that she would fall in love in her 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 06:11 PM
1

I would say their attraction would be closer to men’s in that case but that wouldn’t quite be true, it would remain only half as similar as men are can feel attraction in both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 05:59 PM
–

This is just an example of having so many fewer options, most men don’t get much of a choice in who they end up with.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 03:59 AM
1

No the 1 you explained, the difference is that at your same level of desirability as a guy you wouldn’t have ever been able to find even 1.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 06:44 PM
1

Probably can’t be a negative number.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 06:42 PM
3

What you’re missing here is that the gap is so giant that your <5% few likable options remain far more plentiful than what a guy in your shoes would have as an option at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 06:40 PM
1

I didn’t mention anything about men wanting to be a prize or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 06:21 PM
1

Men don’t want women to be a “prize to be won”, women want themselves to be a “prize to be won” and present themselves as such, there exists no other way for their attraction to be met.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:28 PM
1

It’s more so that partnering upwards is an exclusive requirement for woman, and if men aren’t largely making more or sitting higher socially then there becomes fewer and fewer men who are “upward”.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:21 PM
–

Women are largely exclusively capable of being attracted to men they see as superior to themselves, whether they realize that or not, so when men don’t largely make more money and sit higher in social hierarchy women’s attraction plummets.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:17 PM
0

Sure, but the reality is that not every guy is going to possibly have a woman that can be interested right away, it sucks but the reality for those are that they will have to rise her interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 11:30 PM
1

The reason it’s an apt comparison is because the situation would be just as displeasing or even deal breaking to women as the original is to men, regardless of the circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 10:18 PM
1

How I would feel? I don’t care about extravagant gifts or outings or any at all so I’m not sure why you’re asking, I need not do so to draw this comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:55 AM
0

This would be ignoring the possibility that they might realize that she will try to take more from you in the case of a divorce/ likely cheat hence the push for prenup/paternity tests. The push for such would be showing that they aren’t willingly ignorant or ignoring them just recognizing that they are there and doing something about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 10:48 PM
2

“It’s so easy you can just be inherently desirable!” Unfortunately most men aren’t just inherently desirable and women don’t lose access to partnering at any point, the only thing that happens is they loose access to the most desirable men who they are exclusively interested in. Women may have more of their desirability in their looks thats true but the bar for their looks to be attractive to the majority of men is astronomically lower in comparison, only needing to be average looking to be attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 10:41 PM
1

It depends, if a guy wasn’t able to date them when he’s 20 than money while older can make his chances go from zero to above zero, but if you are talking about a guy who can date women the same age at twenty then sure his chances will overall likely decrease.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 10:35 PM
2

Most guys lose more than 71% of their prospects from just having a trait much less doing any action. You’re right to the sense that it would’ve worked better with many more women there, increasing his odds, hence the “numbers game”.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 07:52 PM
2

Yes and despite all of that he ends up with odds greater than the average guy. The “numbers game” is referring to trying with as many women as possible that way, even if you have a trait women find intolerable, you may still have a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 07:37 PM
3

What you’re missing here is that the odds he’s left with is better than what most men have against them so the reality is that he has better odds despite how he acted.* *
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 07:23 PM
6

…of course they are bad odds he’s a man. In a dating environment. Thats how it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 07:16 PM
3

….thats the whole reason for people saying its a numbers game, for example with this ratio if he would have stopped at 5 his chances were 0% but increasing it to 7 made it almost 29%. The vast majority of men will be rejected many times, only exception being the most desirable, so what makes it a “numbers game” is that to rise the probability of partnering you must try with more women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 07:06 PM
0

Anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 06:50 PM
0

Because of the obvious rarity of such a thing, unless you are claiming just as many women are into pegging as men into anal. Yes it does matter, as you can’t be realistically comparing to something that basically doesn’t happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 06:48 PM
2

The problem with this argument is that men are much more likely to be willing to do what the majority of women want them to do, so the situation where the woman had some niche or the man refusing is far more rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 05:47 PM
5

I would agree, but a great deal of women would not.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 05:44 PM
–

The effects this would have on a woman are minor, barely even notable, and like most are entirely negated by dating within your desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 05:01 PM
5

The closest comparison is finding out your partner used to go all out on valentines/birthday with their ex in the past buying expensive gifts and planing extravagant things together, but with you they just give a card or tell you “happy birthday/valentines”
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 04:58 PM
2

While this is true in a sense the only problem is that there are no women that are trying to partner up with men at the same level of desirability, so while this would be true if they were trying to partner with their equal but women are exclusively interested in pairing up with men who have essentially far surpassed her despite her immense image advantages. There exists no woman who wouldn’t be able to partner in any way she wants if she were open to her equivalent, not even the most hideously …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:28 PM
2

Humor and charisma is the only chance they have, and like any other trait not everyone is going to be exceptional at it, the issue it that if otherwise undesirable that charisma has to be many times more exceptional to make up for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:20 PM
-1

You have a group that’s more attracted to the other, has nearly the entire burden of performance, minimum standards being the other party just shows up, and had to go through immeasurably more effort to get there. Compare that to the group less attracted, places entire burden of getting of on the other, has immeasurably higher requirements, and has gone through less than no effort to get there. Why any such gap exists should be painfully obvious to anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:16 PM
1

If a man is interpreting the effects of “women are wonderful” as how it made him feel towards women than that’s the wrong interpretation the ways it would have effected him would have been the ways it effected women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 07:47 PM
1

As long as “women are wonderful effect” is the topic women will overwhelmingly be the cause, anything outside of this is either incorrectly interpreted or simply incorrect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 07:38 PM
4

As long as “women are wonderful effect” is the topic women will overwhelmingly be the cause, anything outside of this is either incorrectly interpreted or simply incorrect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 07:29 PM
1

“Women are wonderful” is the widely held bias that associates more positive traits in women, and is especially pronounced in……women…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 07:18 PM
8

“Women are wonderful” is the widely held bias that associates more positive traits in women, and is especially pronounced in……women…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 06:19 PM
0

For sex? Men are just as accepting for relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 03:59 PM
2

Because women have an extremely high turnover rate over rate, they spend a short amount of time on them and find someone and are gone again.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 03:17 PM
0

I’m not sure this would help men, more likely just end partnering for the most part.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 03:14 PM
1

In this scenario is option A not and couldn’t be a relationship? If so I guess option B but because of the relationship, I’d rather people didn’t think I was having lots of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 11:32 PM
0

“Acknowledging that that your studies were likely trying to paint women as victims and therefore uses biased criteria to find that makes me look bad and invalidates my claims 😤”
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 10:22 PM
1

Either way I would still say the same, that the criteria used is just simply skewing their findings towards women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 10:10 PM
1

I would dispute the criteria of what they would consider a negative comment, for instance more sexual comments that would obviously be sent to women more therefore skewing the already very close percentage towards women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 09:38 PM
1

Except that you can find skews in data on both sides, women are overestimating mean comments they may get online because it’s just about the only place they ever actually receive them, so the only thing disproportionate is women’s reaction to comments online.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 09:08 PM
1

But when there is no fault the blame then goes to the cause, that anger isn’t going to just disappear especially with something so fundamental to a person fulfillment such as this. A better example would be if there was construction on the house next to yours and the noise made you upset, they are allowed to be there and make that noise, they aren’t doing anything wrong so you can argue it’s illogical but it will still be annoying to the vast majority, and I would are to the contrary and say tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 12:18 AM
2

A cause is defined as anything that produces an effect, meaning you need not try to do something or be in control of it to still produce an effect. The vast majority of people, men and women, are drawn to romantically partner in some way, that’s the reason it happens, if you want to diminish this by saying that innate desire is “entitlement” than fine, but that would make it true for both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 11:57 PM
2

You can still be the cause of something even if you aren’t in control of it, it doesn’t mean you are doing anything wrong but you don’t have to be in control or be intentionally doing something to still cause it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 11:49 PM
1

I don’t think that being “pickier” is disputed and if it is it’s entirely ignorant, it’s exclusion that is the point of contention and a valid reason for grief. You don’t understand how someone can be upset or vitriolic against a group that is the cause of that grief, controllable or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 11:45 PM
3

“It’s easy if you are just exceptionally charismatic.” …yeah I’d bet it is….
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 09:37 PM
3

How is this not simply explained by the fact that, aside from cherry picking, anyone who spends a significant time in an online space could decorate their wall with hate messages? People being mean online happens to anyone and everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 09:32 PM
2

In scenario 1. Only the absolute pinnacle <1% of men will ever receive attraction and the human race is gone in a generation. In scenario 2. ….nothing happens and it may even result in lower expectations for men, even if slightly.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 09:25 PM
2

It does happen, it’s just that women’s capacity for that level of attraction to men is so small and restrictive that it isn’t even a noticeable occurrence.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 09:22 PM
2

A “safe space” can’t come from a publicly open thread online, that’s like asking for a place to change your clothes while on the stage of a theater. As for why it may seem disproportionate for the amount of men upset is because ultimately, unlike the other way around, women’s collective breadth of attraction excludes men, obviously resulting in the grief of realizing you will be left out.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 09:20 PM
2

Because it isn’t about being desired or even being with a woman I desire but simply being able to partner at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 08:33 AM
2

If you are otherwise undesirable what other option would a guy have? His only choice is to try and leverage wealth, it’s the only chance he has.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 07:04 PM
8

The only problem here is that being desired emotionally doesn’t happen to men very much either, meaning ultimately women’s fear is being desired for half of themselves at minimum while men’s is more that they don’t get to be desired for anything at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 07:02 PM
–

Ultimately it’s because women only ever approach men far more desirable than themselves, if they are attracted enough to approach a man then it’s nearly a guarantee that this is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 06:44 PM
1

This is just simply not true, men can exist undesirable to all women unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 07:33 AM
1

All nearly all traits women want in men are not possessed by themselves, this is not the exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 04:32 AM
1

While this is true to a degree, it is entirely unrealistic to expect men to not be terrified of being alone, it would be like saying “homeless are so terrified of starving to death that they are willing to tolerate eating out of the garbage.”
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 04:30 AM
1

The world may not be but the word itself does define it, if that person is disqualified from attraction then they are also disqualified from being considered attractive to you, that’s what the word itself entails, especially within the context of this thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 10:48 PM
2

The only difference between the words are specifying someone eliciting so vs someone feeling so, unless you are trying to say that you think they are attractive to others but not yourself. But otherwise in order for someone to be considered attractive to them that person must be attracted to them….. obviously…. Even if you’re trying to say they pass a physical standard but not an emotional that still objectively places someone outside of “attractive” to you unless you feel, well attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 10:23 PM
2

“You can find someone attractive and not be attracted to them.” I’m sorry but this just doesn’t make sense, that feeling of attraction is what makes someone attractive, it doesn’t exclusively need to be physical but in order to be considered “attractive” it quite literally does need to illicit those feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 07:49 PM
2

Then I don’t think you are using “attractive” correctly here even with generality included, you would need to want them in some way in order for attraction to qualify, whether that’s a relationship or casual, so the reality is that you don’t actually find 60% “attractive”.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 07:07 PM
2

The standards he described men having are not just for sex but actively for relationships, the obvious exception being men who are at the pinnacle of desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:53 PM
1

Confidence isn’t the point of desirability and it gets confused because desirable men are obviously confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:47 PM
4

This gets confused often, the reason women’s personalities “don’t matter” isn’t because men don’t care for them at all, it doesn’t matter because no matter the personality a woman has there will always be men attracted to it, in other words it’s such a universally accepted thing for women that it doesn’t matter the type that you have.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:37 PM
–

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:50 PM
2

Tim sure women do consider them terrible, that’s an easy way to write them off and signal that “actually they’re just terrible and shouldn’t ever get to partner”. Which proves my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:49 PM
4

Unfortunately this would take the vast majority of men going most of their lives romantically alone for this sort of change to have any effect, if it even would, and even then it can only result in even fewer men being able to participate because the only men women can be attracted enough to show interest to must be a small fraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 08:54 AM
2

The irony here is that for women to consider them compatible they do have to preform like that. The reality is that the reason men can’t prioritize compatibility is because there aren’t enough women who consider themselves compatible with enough men to facilitate this.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 08:51 AM
2

I mean we already acknowledge that women have an insane in group bias while men have an out group bias, couple that with the simple fact that men simply see far more women as attractive across the board while women can only see a few as attractive and this seems pretty obvious as to why.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 08:47 AM
3

Women are attracted to desirable men, I used abusive because I assumed it would be *considered* intolerable to those who were arguing for the threads point. But yes you’re right being abusive certainly won’t exclude a guy by itself, but just replace that with any other intolerable trait or combination of, for instance just not being exceptionally physically desirable while not being able to make up for it with charisma or wealth.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 04:07 AM
2

So then by definition “be yourself” is bad advice for him because the context of the advice has the goal of partnering.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 11:14 PM
1

Any person with basic self respect would want better for themselves then to end up in the worst existence you can be in which is alone without option.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 06:35 PM
1

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 06:27 PM
1

I explained why, because the alternative is to be alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 05:04 PM
6

So what if someone’s self is something only possibly undesirable? For an extreme example, one that is far from the only way to be excluded, what if someone’s self was abusive in every way? Would that still be the most effective advice for them? And remember that advice within this context must have the end goal of partnering in some way, and cannot include eliminating the advised.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 06:37 AM
–

They would just simply become the only ones getting married.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 06:30 AM
3

Men are not given the choice to be around who they like particularly, and when given the choice of nobody (worst case scenario) or someone you don’t particularly like, the choice is obvious. Men definitely do have the ability to be around those they don’t particularly like as opposed to women in general, because they have to, if they didn’t we wouldn’t be here now.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 06:28 AM
1

The reason is that ultimately it comes down to the fact that women are the bottle neck for romantic partnering of any kind and will always exclude men given no other external motive towards partnering. And this generally paints women in a bad light in the same way eugenics is looked at negatively. Even women who push back the most about deserving their perfect preference deep down understand how it looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 04:45 AM
1

Standing out to any individual woman is also absolutely still getting to the same point.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 04:37 AM
1

That’s incorrect because what I said is that why would something less severe be a priority over something more severe. You could’ve only had a point there if men’s out group bias was just as strong as women’s in group bias, but it obviously isn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 10:42 PM
1

Yeah of course men’s out group bias hurts them, but women’s in group bias is still much stronger than men’s out group bias, it’s like worrying about a broken arm while you are bleeding out, a broken arm is a big deal but not nearly as bad as bleeding to death.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 08:56 PM
–

What’s happening is that for the first time, instead of blaming men for *being* excluded, the realization that problem doesn’t lie with the excluded but the ones doing the exclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 08:52 PM
0

The problem with this is that for every guy there isn’t a woman out there that can possibly be attracted to them, so “don’t try with women who don’t like you” is no different than saying “just resign yourself to being alone forever”. Which of course ultimately is really the only thing they can do in the end, but let’s not act like resigning yourself to the worst existence is an easy thing to accept.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 07:33 PM
1

For men the desire to partner is at minimum on per with self preservation, and for that to be possible to fulfill as a man you need lots of female validation.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 08:45 AM
1

The idea itself is sort of off because you can have “self worth” but it can be lower, accurate or higher than your actual worth which can only be determined by others, essentially self worth is just your own estimation of your worth, which can vary wildly in accuracy.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 08:40 AM
1

Objectification can’t just be reducing someone to only their body because you are no less your body than you are your mind, maybe you could argue if it were 100% focused on a singular trait it could be?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 08:33 AM
2

The purpose isn’t to make women jealous but to have a replacement after being progressively excluded, though it’s hard to imagine far enough into the future where this is possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 08:28 AM
1

They will all share the same high level of desirability though, as it straight up isn’t possible to facilitate otherwise, and examples to the contrary are simply downplaying that desirability for the sake of the argument without exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:54 AM
4

Unfortunately the reason women can have a “way out” is simply because primary desire when it comes to partnering is to exclude men, which provides them the outcome of even not partnering at all to be still partially fulfilling. But as for men it is the opposite as a group it’s to include as many women as possible and ensure the human race keeps going, and it’s this difference that causes such a divide, one that no social system or conditioning can ever meaningfully change.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:50 AM
3

The problem here is that If a woman is even entertaining the thought of dating a man who isn’t her perfect preference then she would have to be very low in desirability meaning that her equivalent guy is the same guys who are intolerable to her. In other words these 2 critiques are for different things the former is for dating exclusively men who are much more relatively desirable while the latter is for putting others in a situation where their partner isn’t attracted to them, and the reason th…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:44 AM
6

A “pick me” is simply a woman that is trying to compete for men in a similar way that men are forced to, the reason women dislike them is because they aren’t falling in line forcing men to compete for women, and the reason that it isn’t as effective as you’d think is because they are still trying to have men much more desirable than themselves pick them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 07:57 PM
1

That rare exceptions exist in everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:35 PM
2

“Unwanted sexual attention from people you aren’t attracted to” is misleading when the reality is “unwanted attention from the opposite sex I’m not attracted to” Someone can feel that something is equivalent when the reality is that it is not, I can feel that paid 100$ the same as someone who did the same thing that I deserve 200$ but that’s not equivalent, meaning if you are objectively and in good faith trying to find what is equivalent you must disregard how anyone may feel about such lest yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:29 PM
1

Incorrect, you are equating feelings to equivalence not objective reality to equivalence.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:18 PM
1

So women are being objectified I’m majority by other women then? Remember it isn’t how you feel about it that determines reality but how it is regardless how you feel about it, meaning it doesn’t matter if they are not attractive to you but the fact that they are the opposite sex that determines the equivalence, so you can try to say women that men are not attracted to but not men, unless women were being objectified by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:16 PM
0

In order for this to be an equivalent it would have both be a man going to a woman’s prison and women being objectified would have to be getting such in prison so yeah, false equivalence.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:10 PM
1

It being a plus or not wasn’t the point…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:56 PM
1

Having an extra finger? I don’t know I wasn’t considering it either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:54 PM
3

Not being invisible being excluded, and all the others I mentioned, all objectively worse than this perceived objectification you just haven’t experienced worse to know, especially if you think you have.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:43 PM
1

That’s precisely why men would be ok with it, because it’s better than what most have to deal with already.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:37 PM
1

Obviously you do considering it’s a worse situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:11 PM
1

There are some born with extra fingers too.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:02 PM
1

Now imagine how dehumanizing it must be to be treated as something not even a part of you, or to be entirely excluded in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 05:58 PM
5

The only choice a guy can make is to just resign himself to be romantically alone for the rest of his life, but generally that is the worst choice you can make and intolerable to most. The closest thing women have is telling them “you can just choose to partner with who you specifically don’t like.”
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 05:56 PM
0

The irony here is that women complaining about “sexual objectification” are simply talking about men being attracted to them physically, which is no less a part of you than your mind. And in the end having someone attracted to you at all, for any reason, is more humanizing than what men deal with as the alternative of nobody attracted, used for money or status etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 05:50 PM
1

In your last comment you argued that it wasn’t fair but it’s objectively fair if both receive the same thing specifically regardless of satisfaction, to your analogy it is still objectively fair for both animals to receive the same thing even if one’s starved because of it. Now if we are just going to say well it isn’t fair and men are going to always have to be treated unfairly that’s just the way it is, than yeah obviously but you can’t simultaneously argue fairness just because women have suc…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 05:42 PM
1

Sure… but it’s a bit like saying every man should be tall, yeah technically that’s true as overall it’s more advantageous in nearly every way not just in dating, but it’s obviously not possible for all.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:06 AM
2

The flaw here is the implication of “what they want” being weighed just the same but the reality is that what men as a group want is so much less, it’s like saying giving 2 different people 100$ isn’t fair because one of them wanted more than 100$. Again it isn’t that women offer more but the lay men are happier with less which is an important distinction, though you do have a point to the fact that it’s impossible for women to be similarly happy with less as men are.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:02 AM
2

Because it means that it doesn’t matter if it’s a tangible value or not because in the end it isn’t that men are “mad that women want tangible value too” but mad that they are required so much more of that tangible value, and what men see as being tangible value is so much less.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:51 PM
2

Yes, but we are not talking about individuals that need not ever improve or possess exceptional skills/traits but an entire group (women), that’s why the difference is important between only ever needing to provide tangible benefits that are inherently a part of you, that have and always would have vs tangible benefits that come from exceptions, developed traits/skills or features outside of yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:15 PM
1

The truth here is that the women themselves, especially those who believe otherwise, are just as low or lower in social proficiency the only difference is that men have no such high standard to hold them to.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:21 AM
4

The things women provide do also have tangible value but the only difference is that they only ever require women to be as they are, never having required to improve or change, provide something outside themselves and/ or develop some exceptional skill/ trait. And what you describe as a comparison is just an example of men simply being attracted to/ excepting of less in comparison to women just needing men to be more than they are required to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:19 AM
1

To be fair women’s standards to feel attraction is so high that for most that might be their best and only chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 10:11 AM
–

The only thing I realized is that women as a group lack the capacity to feel attraction to me, so in the end is it even right to want a relationship? Certainly something I struggle with.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 07:07 AM
–

Except that men are ok with “undesirable” women, only when women are try to be ok with men far more desirable than themselves do they see otherwise, and if that’s at odds with with what she thinks than it’s only showing her how much less desirable she is compared to how she thinks of herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 10:06 PM
–

Not unless it was an equivalently undesirable man, for your comparison to work it would need to be both ways but undesirable women are just as excluding to undesirable men as all other women. I don’t think you understand how badly you’ve evaluated even your own situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:48 PM
–

It would be overestimating other women. Likewise undesirable men actively do.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:38 PM
2

Unfortunately being enough to be desirable as a man is nature not nurture, so it may be good to be some men but overall? no it’s worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:13 PM
–

No, their flaw is only envisioning desirable men and wrongly thinking their preferences are varied.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:08 PM
–

Not necessarily, more so if she feels any pressure to be more than she is or have different traits either emotionally or physically. Unfortunately for those of us near the bottom of desirability our equivalence are going to be those we find just as undesirable as they find us, meaning that you can either be ok with someone you specifically find undesirable for any reason or unfortunately be alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 08:42 PM
–

I’m saying that a woman feeling any pressure to be a certain way or have certain traits is showing that she is trying too far upwards in desirability and that that fact in itself is more reliable than her observation/evaluation of such.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 08:32 PM
–

Yes, that is the reality that’s why most men partnered with women that they don’t particularly like (doesn’t mean they dislike them), like I said the only way to observe otherwise is when there is a significant difference in desirability in fact if this is even happening to a woman than it is the determining factor showing she is much less desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 08:09 PM
–

They get to be chosen and, as long as the woman isn’t exceedingly lower in desirability, it will be more than acceptable. As for who individual men are specifically attracted to, only the men at the very top of desirability get to partner with that, in other words if a woman is even facing pressure to be a certain way than it’s because she’s trying way too far upwards in desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 07:54 PM
2

Women’s advice is always given on the tacit requirement of the guy being desirable to her in the first place, but if a guy is even in need of dating advice then that is pointless because he would have to not be desirable to women to need it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 07:47 PM
–

Men are going to be interested in the women that are attracted to them, and will have no such restrictive standards both physically and emotionally, and only when a woman is extremely lower in desirability can any problem with that even arise.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 07:43 PM
3

Women complain about dating just as much, the only difference is that, unlike men, women have control over dating dynamics and shape the way they function. In other words one is complainants about what they can’t control while the other is complainants about what is entirely within their control.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 06:14 PM
4

The objective answer would be that men are excluded for height more than any other trait as it’s the most correlated to a man’s dating status. Personally I would say it’s simply not being physically attractive enough for a woman (not very uncommon in itself) but also not being charismatic enough for emotional attraction either, and you could include not being exceptionally wealthy enough to make up for both of them technically but that would be exceptionally rare anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:25 AM
1

Not very many women are actually “shallow” by definition because what women require men to be in order to qualify encompasses so many more factors that it could scarcely be considered “shallow”. A good comparison is that men’s attraction may be more commonly “shallow” but the puddle is a mile wide, where as women’s may be “deeper” but it’s only as wide as a pin.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:05 PM
24

“Women peaking in their 20s” isn’t talking about accomplishments or satisfaction though, it’s talking about desirability and physical peaks.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 10:01 PM
2

There hasn’t been, but there has been a rise in women who are intolerant to their opinions, same situation will all women, exposure to more men rises standards and therefore excluding more men, the only difference is that women at the very bottom have risen their standards so far outside of their desirability that very few of those men will entertain them.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 08:26 PM
3

Women widely have such high standards for physical attraction that they need to use emotional and responsive desire as it’s the only other ways to feel attracted, men feel responsive desire too it just isn’t the only thing that can realistically meet their standards for feeling attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:08 PM
2

Women can’t fathom having anything but incredibly high and exclusive standards that’s why they have to excuse trying to date men many times better than themselves with an explanation like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:00 PM
1

Basically but I’m not only considering looks, but overall equivalent in desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 10:40 PM
1

That was my point the ideal would be the closest to equivalent desirability as possible because that has the best chances of working, because if we are disregarding change in traits i would be attracted to, the ideal is to be successful in a relationship not find what is my perfect preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 09:18 PM
1

So than if we are disregarding the change in traits that would be attractive after waking up as a woman, than I would simply go essentially for the the type of guy as close as possible to who I was before changing, valuing similar level of equivalence in desirability above all else including my own attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 06:12 PM
1

This isn’t men forcing the onus on women it’s simply the only way most of the men will even be able to have a match and get to the point where they can even talk, otherwise it would just not happen at all for the vast majority. Most men don’t get to choose in the first place, on or offline, for men it isn’t about trying to sleep with/ date/marry who you particularly like but about being able to at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 08:06 AM
3

The only way this would make sense is if you were making the case that men’s standards were so incredibly low that it would be hard to compromise, for example if a guys standard is be “a woman” than being uncompromising would be not dating men.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 07:58 AM
0

I think you replied to my message on accident, I imagine you were trying to reply to the one above?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 12:12 AM
3

There are always going to be exceptions and those who are exceptionally desirable, especially when we are talking about an account from the group far more included and held to lower standards, just like how even during hard times there are always those who won’t need to worry about money.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 05:04 PM
14

Yeah when one group is excluded/held to highest standards than all recent history while the other is conversely included/held to lowest standards in recent history it’s bound to cause more division.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 05:45 AM
1

They are also “invisible” if they are just so much smaller that they pale in comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 05:40 AM
1

Because the overwhelming amount of men are just happy to have someone at all, this is the way it is fir most things between men and women as well men just happy to be there/included while women unhappy with/refusing all but the exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:18 AM
1

Obviously there could be some exceptions, things like extreme desirability otherwise might allow a guy not to be excluded, but without considering extreme exceptions truthfulness for those men will only result in women ensuring they will never be able to partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 08:55 AM
1

All of this would be solved by simply dating within one own level of desirability, and if they believe they’ve been doing that but still having the same issues than that is evidence that they in fact are not and are still reaching outside their desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:06 PM
1

Unfortunately this would just result in a lot more men being excluded from even the most undesirable women, for example if a man were to disclose inexperience he would be excluded entirely, far more so than any woman with excess experience too.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:03 PM
1

As a general rule “you get what you put in” is objectively true for most things in life, and what you can put in isn’t limited to effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 05:59 PM
1

The whole point is that what men put in for women would make them feel desired if done back to them, making no double standard just one group that expects/requires far more.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 09:42 PM
1

How is what displayed? Being willing? If what he wants is for her to be willing in the same way as himself then all he’s asking for is simply reciprocal. Not to mention the simple fact that he would feel desired if he were treated the same way he treated her while the complaint is simply that that isn’t enough for her, so much so that she thinks it’s “nothing”.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:40 PM
1

Yes, I won’t entertain that having people attracted isn’t a privilege no matter the downside the positive greatly outweighs it, I believe it would be better even if that attraction were to be the guaranteed end of someone much less the chance. Yea I realize why you may want someone attracted to you in the way you want them to be but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s only accepting people to be attracted the way you want them attracted to you. Then all it takes would be clarifying beforehand…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 04:47 PM
1

Well he’s actually putting in sexual attraction and willingness towards her is he not? And isn’t that what you are talking about him wanting back, whether you see it as nothing or not doesn’t make it so.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 04:24 PM
1

So essentially the man in this situation wants what he puts in for her but that isn’t enough for her and she wants more, that isn’t a double standard it’s just one group wanting more than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:37 PM
1

I don’t see what difference it would make whether or not he already believed all women were gold diggers or not, either he’d be pleasantly surprised or wouldn’t so either a positive at best or neutral at worst. As for how to prove it it’d be easy simply never require any form of “payment” whether it was gifts, dates, trips etc. Lastly this part is relevant to why I explained how someone would experience attraction totally different if randomly changed to a woman, because someone being attracted …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:30 PM
2

I’m not surprised.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 08:57 AM
4

Unfortunately the way an analogy works is that it doesn’t have to be the same and in this instance it would have the same effect telling that person in the situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 08:53 AM
3

At that point it’s just a non argument, same as saying to women that they aren’t desirable enough to be in a relationship (exclusively with guys who meet her standards) and that she should just accept hook ups instead.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 08:38 AM
3

usually the answer would be none unfortunately, but if you mean the few that unusually do it would just be women at the bottom of desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 08:35 AM
1

What’s illogical is thinking they’d just give up and abandon it all in the first place as you imply they should do. It’s like saying “if they can’t eat the food they want then they should just not eat at all.”
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 08:30 AM
1

My whole point was that if a man wakes up a woman than his entire ability to be attracted to any given trait would also chance. But if we are talking about how women are generally treated vs men then yeah that would be like an unattainable dream in comparison. Like in your example of dating a man that expects you to be a gold digger would only result in him being pleasantly surprised if she weren’t, unless of course she was one. As for personality or shared interests, I would be thankful to live…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 07:02 AM
1

If men weren’t protectors the human race wouldn’t be here today, we never would have gotten this far, women wouldn’t be capable of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 07:00 PM
3

This idea happens because men are the only ones held to such a high standard of being interesting, unlike women who men can still like or prefer even if they find her “boring”. Just another example of women’s attraction exclusively working in one direction while men’s has no such restriction.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 06:56 PM
-2

Men are protectors, women just destroyed the idea that they deserve to be protected.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 06:52 PM
1

What’s most attractive and what meets a standard is in fact not the same thing, a man be accepting of a standard yet still have traits he is more attracted to and this is how the vast majority of men partner, not with who is most attractive but who meets their standard. If men held standards to what was most attractive in women the same way women do nobody would ever partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 07:49 PM
1

The problem is when women approach they only exclusively do so with who they are utmost attracted to, and unless she’s at the very top of desirability, that guy is going to be massively more desirable than herself. Approaching means doing so close to your own desirability and specifically not who your most attracted to, as long as you aren’t literally the most desirable, which is something women won’t ever be willing to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 07:43 PM
1

Funny because the argument is essentially, “you can’t blame women blame a system that can make people more desirable than others, it’s not like we can help going exclusively for the best.”
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 07:37 PM
1

But if it could be any female body that’s still wanting the body and therefore the person, it just may be more indiscriminate. Again someone’s body is just as much a part of themselves as their mind unlike money that isn’t part of you at all, meaning that exclusively liking the body in any way is objectively more humanizing than it would be with money.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:35 PM
–

Unfortunately Asians are generally smaller people and for men this is universally a negative, excluding only the situations being described, essentially this is just an example of a strict standard to live up to that is much harder and less likely for Asian men to be able to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:51 PM
-1

What you are describing here is still wanting the woman, you are no less your body than you are your mind. The difference is that you actually are less your money than you are your body… unlike with the above.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:40 PM
-2

Depends on what you mean by worse, but a man wanting sex from a woman is still objectively wanting her while wanting money from a man isn’t wanting him so in terms of being dehumanizing it is significantly and objectively less so. And before you think that if a guy wanted sex from any woman makes it more dehumanizing, it doesn’t because it’s still wanting the woman just being less discriminate.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:41 PM
0

The reason age gap relationships happen is because of the few traits women can be attracted to, if they can be developed, it takes many years to do it, so by the time a guy could have developed traits or wealth to the level women require he’s obviously going to be older.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:11 AM
2

The problem is that generalizing a group that is more similar, especially in regard to the ability to feel attraction in all ways, is simply the correct conclusion to come to.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:03 AM
1

Yeah, that’s true and I do believe it. But in a situation where the child would have no chance of having a mother or a sibling(s), as it would be with me, I believe the child could have a better life otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 03:23 AM
1

It isn’t men talking about women in a general way it’s men accurately talking about women, whose attraction is more general.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:25 PM
1

That’s part of my whole point, that it doesn’t take being a “terrible person” to be undesirable to all women and I’m not considering exclusively looks either
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:13 PM
1

Men who aren’t desirable enough for women (collectively) aren’t so because they are terrible people, that idea is exactly what I was referring to.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:51 PM
0

We’re a a guy who could potentially give the child a mother in the future (ignoring the obvious impossibility of impregnating someone in the first place) I’d be more inclined to keep and rise it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 06:49 PM
1

I would have the desire to, but in it would probably be in the best interest of the child to go to a traditional household.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 06:44 PM
1

People usually have children because they want to, typically because of the biological desire to not because of an outside gain for having them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 06:40 PM
1

No giving half after the fact would be retroactive, those things were still earned by the husband she just has access to half, until of course a divorce. The same thing the other way, as she has already received the provision for that time you are referring to in the past. She has already received the provision equivalent to her worth during the marriage and if the assets are his then she’s simply no longer entitled to access half of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 06:38 PM
-2

I’m not saying she isn’t entitled to any of them at all, just no longer half of them, only the portion that the motherhood part of it deserves, that’s why I brought up a quarter.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:32 AM
-7

Ok so I believe that actively being a mother and wife is worth half, but after a divorce the woman would no longer actively be a wife and is then no longer entitled to half, including assets or anything made during the marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:24 AM
1

Women’s attraction specifically scales with exceptionalism, but in a way you are right a woman isn’t going to consider herself compatible with a guy that isn’t the top portion of desirability. So because women have to filter out so many men to find an exceptionally desirable guy, talk about that very thing is pointless?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 09:06 AM
-7

The portion of the payment during the marriage was already paid in the marriage itself so retroactive payment for the wife portion equaling half wouldn’t make sense so the only portion remaining would be the mother portion, so maybe a quarter could be but certainly not half.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:53 AM
1

This explanation seems to be ignoring the obvious, if a woman wanted casual sex and therefore had innumerable options, then she will only exclusively be open the the absolute best of those options which is going to be the same guy that the other women who want casual sex is open to. The amount of options she has is otherwise irrelevant as she’s only ever going to pick the same top of those options that the other women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:45 AM
1

It’s always going to be significantly harder for men to tell simply because of how seldom it actually happens to men, especially compared to women who frequently have men interested, including even the least desirable women and for relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:31 AM
29

It isn’t influencers doing this but simply the natural response to women changing to exclude more men and directly causing men to respond this way, not the other way around.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:25 AM
-7

Depends, because while I agree in a marriage being a mother and wife may be worth half but now she will only be a mother not a wife so expecting to still be deserving of half would be nonsensical.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 08:21 AM
1

Because it’s a comparison, nobody is denying that a guy who is desirable and “good” doesn’t also do well. Women treat being too undesirable and being excluded by them for it as a moral failing, which is far worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:33 PM
1

I agree, but in order for more matches to happen those would also had to have been lowered.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:29 PM
3

The problem with this argument is that the only way men could get more matches is if women had lower standards, meaning they ultimately would have better chances.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 11:27 AM
3

Only to a much smaller degree, if you inherently have a personality that allows it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:05 PM
0

Guys who complain about this are simply men who don’t have enough desirability for women, they are absolutely considering women who “women who actually want good men” but it’s irrelevant because as long as their desirability otherwise remains lower than the “bad boys” then they are obviously going to do worse. Doesn’t matter what kind of women a man goes after if his level of desirability is lower than the threshold women allow then partnering with any of them will not be possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 06:03 PM
4

Complaints about single mothers or women having babies with criminals still require a guy to be desirable either way as those same women still only entertain very desirable men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 03:50 AM
1

If a woman feels that those things are needed for her than she’s trying to date significantly above her desirability, especially if we are just talking earlier stages of dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 08:19 PM
-2

Women will never understand this because their equivalent man’s experiences are so much worse than even their worst nightmares that they can’t even comprehend living in such a way.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 01:28 AM
2

As in unable to tolerate dating them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:52 AM
5

The problem with this question is that there aren’t any women that don’t require the “full girlfriend treatment” so saying he meets her standards at all is already inherently including that for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 09:45 PM
3

Just a simple game of probability, the overwhelming vast majority of women are entirely intolerant to dating men who are younger than themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 09:41 PM
6

There are more men specifically attracted to overweight women than men that go around calling them fat, women can be attractive to men with ANY personality type unlike for men where it’s be confident and outgoing or nothing. Women can only ever see any standard to live up to if she’s trying to date a guy so much more than they are, obviously if you are trying to date someone who all other women are trying to date then you’d have to be the best, in other words in other words women facing “high st…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 07:05 PM
4

That’s what I’m saying, if a guy were to wake up as a woman would he not simply have women’s propensity for attraction or would it be different in this hypothetical?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 01:19 AM
9

Waking up as a woman with all prior experience as a guy? The problem with the question is that if a guy wakes up as a women then he’d no longer experience attraction the same way and would immediately exclude most men, only being capable of attraction to a few traits at a very high degree.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 06:27 PM
1

Why? So that he can limit his options? He may be one of the few exclusively desirables but if he did that he’d likely be limited to women even further below him.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 05:49 PM
1

He’s not there for her feelings, we’ve already established he’s only interested sexually, and if she’s not interested he can just move to the next woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 05:41 PM
1

Why do you believe it’s psychopathic to ask for what you want?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 05:34 PM
1

They are simply asking for what they want out of the exchange.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 10:36 AM
–

Unfortunately women’s attraction works in such a way that it increasingly excludes men over time, so the further in the future the higher women’s standards become and irrespectively so to their own desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 04:37 AM
10

You mentioned it in your first paragraph, about men having to change how they think. The truth is that women have an insanely low standard to meet, so much so that just being a woman meets it, but since women are exclusively trying to partner with the best men they are only going to observe the standards of the best, which the best men are obviously going to require the best women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:39 PM
28

It’s ironic that wile trying to prove men have it easier you’d use the argument of “these men just need to change to have a women attracted to them” something no woman has had to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 08:29 PM
2

That’s because women, and especially women’s attraction, are more general in the first place, In other words it isn’t that women are “generalized” they are just accurately assessed as being more similar, especially in regard to their limited ability for attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 08:24 PM
1

If a guy is asking sexual questions so early it’s because he’s simply asking for what he wants from her, it doesn’t matter if it offends her or puts her off because if he’s doing it in the first place than the guy is very desirable and can have any other woman. In the end this is just another example of women trying to say too far up in desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 08:19 PM
2

The problem is that most men will never have the options to seek things like this, especially not anymore, putting nearly any restrictions at all on who you would date/partner will simply exponentially increase the average mans chances of never partnering/partnering again.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 09:00 AM
1

And I am making the point that possible development is so small that only if just before the threshold will it make a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 11:29 PM
1

I don’t believe you, or most people, can be aware enough to make that conclusion correctly over the self glorifying conclusion of effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 07:15 AM
1

By inherent I mean a trait naturally there. Most people make the same mistake you are by assuming that “they did it” when they are overlooking the fact that they did inherently have those traits just not to the extreme degree required in order to be called “charming” or “funny” etc. especially to the degree required by women, so when that person who already naturally and inherently has those traits then goes and develops them even further to the point that they one makes the conclusion that it w…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 08:11 PM
6

Unfortunately I don’t think there is, women’s attraction exists specifically to collectively exclude men, so as long as it’s being exercised to the fullest there is no way for that to be possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 07:20 PM
3

To be fair that’s just how women’s attraction works in general on a macro level, continually increasing standards with men having to continually be better in total to meet that or be left behind.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 05:38 PM
-1

Not quite as many required for treating someone exceptionally (of course depending on the definition of that), but especially for being “funny and charming” requires exclusively exceptional levels of charisma and humor in order to even facilitate just the development of the level required not to mention, if otherwise undesirable like we are considering, the inherent persistence required to develop it, and I’m sure there are a myriad of other traits required to meet that threshold that I’m missin…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 05:34 PM
0

“If you are otherwise the most desirable guy, one trait missing wont affect that.” This is like saying someone is still going to take their dream car for free even if the color isn’t their favorite.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 05:26 PM
3

Desirability overall will always be the deciding factor, but if a guy were to be just below the threshold where women can be attracted than exceptional treatment could push him up just enough, that is if he has enough inherent qualities to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 05:16 PM
1

It really is, women just never consider the men who want them for relationships, the men who are just as low in desirability as they are, they are constantly and exclusively aiming up and wondering why guys only want sex. Especially true for women that think they don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 07:55 PM
3

This means that you are only considering desirable men, and when thinking of average you are actually considering above that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 11:54 PM
2

For relationships as well, only if a woman is significantly less desirable than she thinks she is would anything other present itself. The ones who are allowed to wait, the men who would be successful regardless, otherwise the men willing to wait are usually excluded by women. They would be glad to if they could, ugly women don’t think they are at the same level as the equivalent less desirable men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 11:53 PM
1

To a certain degree this is true but if all men stopped it would simply result in far fewer men ever dating, most women don’t have the capacity to see herself as anything but a prize to be won over including women who are less desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 06:57 PM
2

Choosing “good” or “bad” is irrelevant, women are choosing the most desirable men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 06:54 PM
1

It simply shows inherent desirability, most of attraction, despite what people want to believe, is inherent both physically and emotionally, some will be desirable and some cannot be.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 06:52 PM
6

The average man expects nothing more than his equivalent average women, most are also fine waiting for sex and below average men would wait indefinitely, if you are seeing anything else than you are not accurately estimating people.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 06:49 PM
1

It’s because that’s the way women’s attraction works, specifically so in order to try and collectively “better”/ refine genetics, while men’s attraction on the other hand has the priority of including women as a group to ensure reproduction happens. This is the reason women’s attraction is so hyper focused on men who are collectively “better” and why women will choose to be alone over not having them and be partially fulfilled because they are still excluding men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 08:28 PM
1

It’s simply inevitable, nobody should honestly expect, despite more men being progressively excluded, that they just roll over and die instead of trying to find some form of replacement to fill that void.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 06:11 PM
2

The reality for the vast majority of men is that you are never likely to meet a woman who you are especially compatible with/attracted to AND open to him at the same time, women ensure that is reserved only for the best.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 06:08 PM
0

Yet women still hold much more similar standards compared to men, this is obviously going to be the case when there attraction quite literally exists to exclude men and essentially try to refine genetics as a group, as opposed to men who’s attraction exists to make sure essentially that women are always included, not individually obviously but collectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:59 PM
0

Women do have much more similar standards. What are you talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:53 PM
1

They will not, maybe if women asked men they exclusively want that might be somewhere along the lines of what they might hear, but the reality is that there is no such similar standards men hold.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:52 PM
10

Yet men’s standards are never so collectively held and homogeneous as women’s are, the women you list are still never excluded like the men that don’t meet those standards. For women it’s standards as a group for men it’s standards as individuals.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:54 AM
1

And?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 08:43 PM
1

Most guys are not doing that regardless. Most men would go indefinitely, only when women are dating the most desirable men or when she’s at the very bottom of desirability and the gap is vastly different between the man that anything other occurs.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 08:15 PM
3

Only very desirable men can even pursue women like that and the majority of men aren’t those very desirable men, not to mention the much smaller fractions of women who exist that you are talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 08:00 PM
3

Yes, date women who exist in much smaller numbers and have much higher standards…. Genius.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 07:47 PM
1

Yes, why would anyone try to make themselves sound better, nobody would lie right? I hope that most are not so naive to such things.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 07:35 PM
-2

What I mean is that they are going to talk about things that make them sound good to like.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 09:25 AM
13

The reason women give responses of seemingly being open to it is because they only consider men they can be attracted to approaching them, ones that they may even think are “average”, that’s why the actual average guys experience is so vastly different.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 05:47 AM
10

The vast majority of the time that sort of question is asked the answer given is going to be a self gratifying and virtue signaling answer, this goes for both men and women, and the more obvious it is so the less people will like the answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 05:39 AM
2

The reason is because where you don’t see any value at that level men still do because they are treated with so much less value than even what you understand as “none”
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 08:55 PM
–

Yeah I was assuming you meant less desirable traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:39 PM
–

Only as proportional to how “odd” the woman is, as a guy that sounds like a fantasy, but I suppose if one were to have been a woman instead it would become intolerable.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 07:10 PM
1

As partners or potential partners in all forms without exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:07 PM
2

Just as long as we are acknowledging that included in that fantasy is that the man who that “mate-bond” is with is always significantly more desirable. The prominent male fantasy is the idea of choice, as opposed the reality of having to take what you can get if any.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:05 PM
2

Because the difference is that women are still actively valued and never excluded, despite being average or below, the reason those criticisms stand out in the first place is because women are almost never treated in that way while her equivalent guy will have always been excluded that’s the comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:01 PM
–

It’s certainly a compelling idea, at least from the standpoint of born from the beginning as a woman, guaranteed chance of partnering and having a family is pretty much without equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:52 PM
45

They are the “romance requiring” gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 09:18 AM
0

Essentially since “dating” itself is something that largely just happens to women it starts to become repetitive to them because of how much they can easily do it, it would be like consuming any kind of content where no matter how interesting it may have been the first few times since they’ve been on the receiving end so many times it becomes routine for them, and since there is almost no back and forth another perspective is never formed.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 11:14 PM
12

Or be a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 11:07 PM
1

Then you haven’t really been alone otherwise that state would never have changed. Simply not being able to have sex in a relationship or feeling alone is nothing compared to actually objectively being so.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 07:49 AM
1

The most telling information coming out of this is how many women don’t even consider their match at all, as in it isn’t even a factor, so it’s no wonder they just reach as far up as they possibly can with little regard for their own less desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 07:24 PM
2

Try being excluded from any form of possible relationship, partnering or attraction for decades. There will be no comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 07:14 PM
1

No problem, happens
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 07:12 PM
1

If you were to accept the consequences of what you want being impossible then in turn you are no longer dating at all and therefore it’s impossible for dating to be about what you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 07:30 PM
1

Because the reason men shouldn’t listen to women is because unlike successful men they don’t understand or even consider what it’s like to be the ones having to overcome excessive exclusion, but on the reverse women don’t have to overcome any exclusion or standards collectively, not only that but advice from men would still be coming from the sole party that has had to overcome exclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 07:26 PM
1

Than like I said if that’s the case we wasn’t an incel. The norm for an incel would be to not have a standard. Otherwise he wouldn’t be one, in fact that’s the determining factor. They want anyone who is willing to partner with them in any way, no sex required as that would be a standard they can’t have. Yes because if that’s true, he then couldn’t have been an “incel”.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:48 PM
0

In order to deflect and absolve women from their exclusionary standards, because otherwise it wouldn’t sound as good for women if their standards were accurately described as homogeneous and eugenic.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:38 PM
1

So? The only thing determining if a man is an “incel” or not is being excluded from possible attraction by women. So if he didn’t fit that then he wasn’t one. “What morals?” You commented about men complaining that rapists could do better than them and my response was that desirability is the determining factor. They are open to any woman so that’s obviously going to include women without morals as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:35 PM
1

As for how many women incorrectly correlate height to genitalia size who knows, but whether they do it because they are looking for that or are exclusively attracted to men who are big it makes little difference in the end. An important difference about men wanting small women is that it’s by no means the exclusive means of attraction like it is for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:27 PM
1

This is an example of less standards and an obvious complaint of undesirability, as they would take any woman yet cannot while someone less moral can still have access to partnering. Because they don’t understand that morality is not desirability and desirability is what determines if a guy is excluded from all women or not regardless of morality.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:21 PM
1

They do not, maybe men that women label as such, but no undesirable guy has any such standards or any in fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:09 PM
1

Not just genitalia but being big/imposing is a collectively held standard in women, and obviously not a collectively held trait in men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:08 PM
2

If a guy has this as a standard in the first place than he’s very desirable at minimum, no average guy has this standard, in fact this is so true that you can use this as an anchoring point for determining what the average or above guy really is.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:06 PM
2

I disagree, I don’t believe that there is any worse possible existence than to be entirely romantically alone for one’s whole life.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 04:32 AM
1

This argument makes no logical sense, the ones who would be the most insightful would be the ones who had to overcome the exclusion not simply the ones enforcing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 05:53 PM
6

Men collectively increasing those standards just means men collectively being alone, most men don’t want to just be alone their entire life’s.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 05:49 PM
10

“Men are interested and attracted to me but I am repulsed.”
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 05:44 PM
1

The answer, just like it is the other way around, is that that individual trait/truth need not be attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 01:26 PM
1

Like I said, the same thing could be said to any guy: “if her lack of desirability is holding her back why would that be attractive to you?” It doesn’t have to be attractive to you but asking for exclusive utmost attention is far more than almost anyone deserves.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 12:30 PM
1

Very true.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:27 PM
2

It could be more productive for them in this way, but only if they are sticking to their men within their own percentile of desirability (not just looks, emotional traits may be reaching for them as well) otherwise the results may be even worse as women tacitly admit.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:57 PM
1

The problem with this argument is that the vast majority of guys never will be desirable enough to “pull a harem” so it’s irrelevant, the reverse is that every woman would only be open to dating the tallest, wealthiest and most charismatic guy if she were attractive enough but she isn’t and won’t be. Yes if given the opportunity people will go for the most desirable thing across the board within all aspects, but it’s precisely because not everyone is the most desirable that this fact is irreleva…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:51 PM
6

There is no convincing either, both are getting what they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:43 PM
–

Women do certainly exist on a spectrum of desirability but it’s also important to realize that none of them “don’t get approached”, the lowest desirability they can exist at is simply not being approached by who they specifically want to be approached by.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 09:40 PM
1

Both looks and social skill/ escalation are majority determined inherently without any major changes being possible, nature > nurture, while exposure has the greatest case to me made in the end exposure matters little if exposed to 100 women that can’t be attracted vs 5 women that can’t be attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 08:28 PM
1

Low body count is still only one aspect of desirability, a woman can still be very low in desirability otherwise and in turn not have much value in a relationship. The difference your seeing isn’t low be high body count but just low vs high desirability (at least as it pertains to results with exclusively desirable men).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 08:22 PM
11

The problem with this argument it that it ignores the possibility that the examples of men you are talking about are simply just correct. If it has already been shown that men favor women and women also favor women in bias that just means examples brought up to the contrary just mean the woman is that much in the wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 08:17 PM
3

The vast majority of young men would never be able to qualify for “going on as many dates as possible” for the vast majority “going on a date with every women who could like them” is a handful in their lifetime. Any experience outside of this is absolutely NOT average.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 08:30 PM
1

The men who end up in that position in the first place are the men that are below what women can be attracted to, so saying “just don’t pay for dates” is the same as saying “just don’t date”. Sort of similar to women who think men just overwhelmingly want sex with them because they are trying to date so far outside their desirability the only difference being that the man who has to be used for money can’t date his equivalent or below without it either.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 08:26 PM
–

Considering men overall objectively don’t have an in group bias and instead it’s actually the other way around, meaning the push back you see that you have incorrectly identified as bias is simply just responses, essentially truth pushing back against a lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 05:49 PM
3

Just go to any space for women who are the bottom of the barrel in desirability and you’ll find that none of them have gone without men being attracted, it’s just men they don’t want. Even the response of “women don’t work that way” comes with the implication that women do always receive attraction, they just don’t want it/not from the men they are exclusively open to. All this is concerning for relationships as well mind you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 06:34 PM
3

No I’m specifically including the absolute bottom percentage of women, as in as low in desirability as women can go. Yes I don’t disagree, it is unrealistic for men to expect to receive anywhere near the same level or variance in attraction that women receive, but the reason is simply because men just have a much greater capacity and variance for such.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 06:05 PM
3

They really do, they may not be desired by the men they exclusively want but that’s no less the case. I understand they “dont work like that” that they don’t care that they remain desired without any effort or expectations, but that doesn’t mean it’s not still the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:56 PM
3

So essentially they want to be desired the way women actively are.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:48 PM
0

Because this is overwhelmingly the exclusive way women are accepting of such, whether they realize it or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:44 PM
2

Yeah even an exaggeratedly worse role reversal of a dating app scenario is significantly better for men, the reality is that even the worst case situation of the least desirable woman is a distant fantasy for the vast majority of men both online and off.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:41 PM
–

The irony here is that plenty of women do absolutely require money, jewelry, expensive gifts, etc. in order for them to love someone. And women are already replaceable to the men they are open to dating because they have such low standards to like up to (yes for relationships) that most other women would qualify.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 08:46 PM
1

It’s all pretty irrelevant because overall is would only matter for the things women can be attracted to men for (charisma, looks, money) so the answer would be whoever haze more of those 3 traits and if they are the same then the answer is they’d both do the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 08:34 PM
3

Unfortunately women’s attraction specifically exists to progressively exclude more men over time, that’s why it can and has only been getting worse for men, and why most will never be able to be authentic and have possible relationships, the ones you are thinking of otherwise are simply men who already were inherently wanting to be what they had to make themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 11:32 AM
4

Doesn’t mean it ms authentic to who he wants to be, irrespective of those results, though does it? Because for some they don’t just start in a rigged game but never get to even start at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 11:14 AM
2

This is assuming the guy has the potential inherently to do that, and authentically wants to have to better himself to the extreme, otherwise it isn’t so. And unfortunately even the least desirable women are not open enough to include all men, even at their best.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 11:03 AM
9

A guy cant “be himself” he has to be the guy women are capable of being attracted to and if that isn’t himself then authenticity and relationships won’t both be possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 10:50 AM
7

The thing is that women don’t say these things because they are capable of attraction to any of them, they say them to virtue signal that they are more accepting than they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 07:28 PM
0

Being ghosted like that is essentially women’s version of being rejected on dating apps, meaning that you are likely aiming too far up in desirability, for better results you’d need to lower the desirability of men you are trying to match with and that would include how much you specifically would desire them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 08:32 PM
–

People don’t generally like when told that they by default have things inherently easier, instead preferring to believe that they’re efforts have made a difference or that they are just so much better. Essentially it just breaks a self aggrandizing belief they had in themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 09:16 AM
1

This would be if you are only considering above average men, anyone below that would gladly take any woman (baring maybe only the most extreme)
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 07:41 PM
2

So it makes this criticism of “choose better” only logically apply to women and appropriately so.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 04:22 PM
2

How would not having your type be your standard be “projecting your time onto other women”?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 04:21 PM
1

Men do have a “type” it’s just that men don’t have the option for their type to be their standard and most men won’t ever be able to date that specific type they like.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 06:33 PM
2

…it’s quite literally the criticism of having an abundance of options, as all women have, and then choosing badly, that’s why, unless men somehow widely gained as many readily available options as women, this just simply doesn’t apply to them logically.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 06:28 PM
3

I have no idea about your desirability, but nobody should ever trust their own estimate of their own desirability much less someone else’s estimate of their own. And like I said, maybe you have had relatively few propositions in comparison to women, but that doesn’t change the fact that the equivalent man has had less if any.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 11:15 PM
0

I don’t believe things can change, and I don’t believe someone should think something should change if it can’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 11:11 PM
4

I never argued you were obese or hideous.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 10:01 PM
1

I wasn’t arguing for a solution at all and neither was this post, it was about women receiving a criticism that men don’t largely receive and I explained how it was apt.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 09:59 PM
3

Obviously there are going to be levels of desirability even in women, but that just means the equivalent man would have far less or no options for either sex or relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 09:56 PM
6

No specifically relationship options are far greater in women, they may receive even more options for sex but that doesn’t negate the choices for relationships specifically.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 09:14 PM
4

Solution for what..? Being scrutinized more?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 09:11 PM
3

Men couldn’t ever have the level of options required, that even the lowest desirability women have, unless you are arguing that celebrity men or someone similar should be receiving the same criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 06:55 PM
5

Remember that it’s specifically having options and choosing badly that women are being scrutinized for, so only a man with the same level of choices would make any sense to do the same. Not only is this not equivalent but it also doesn’t have to be for the analogy to be apt.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 06:46 PM
9

The group with the constant plethora of choices should be scrutinized more than one that has to take what they can get, otherwise it’s like criticizing someone who is starving to death for eating food that’s bad for them vs someone who is well off doing the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 06:33 PM
1

Because all the things you mentioned are not even a drop in an ocean compared to being excluded entirely, even simply having that as a possibility greatly outweighs them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:56 PM
6

This argument doesn’t really work because the women in these relationships don’t do these things either they just require them, meaning they just require more than they themselves are doing. You could just as easily say “less marriages would be sexless if women were capable of feeling attracted without requirements that they themselves don’t meet”.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:51 PM
–

Satisfaction is irrelevant, just because someone may be less satisfied with better doesn’t still mean they are still receiving better treatment, the way they perceive it is just incorrect. Women interested 300 years ago easily, there is no existence that is worse than being entirely romantically excluded, an early death is preferable. Like I said just because someone can be unsatisfied with better treatment doesn’t mean it equates to being worse off.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 12:52 AM
–

The problem with this idea is it’s ignoring the fact that what a group can entirely want more or less than another, therefore what someone wants isn’t a good metric only what someone can have. Equating women not getting what they want to men not getting what they want is like saying it’s the same for a person to not eat because they only accept a Michelin star dish vs not being able to eat because someone has no money and is starving.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 12:23 AM
1

The best way to tell would simply be to evaluate if there is a gap in desirability between the two of you, making sure not to use your own default overestimated evaluation of yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 07:51 PM
2

That quite literally would be preferred over the alternative, but at the same time if the guy cares about sex at all than it isn’t going to be an option, This is akin to saying to someone who wants consistent meals to “just don’t eat, that’s consistent” entirely defeating the purpose of the complaint in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 07:47 PM
1

With the caveat being that now you won’t be allowed to participate. Otherwise it isn’t the “typical male experience”.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 07:39 PM
–

The problem with this argument is that it’s ignoring the fact that women are only “not getting what they want” because they are exclusively wanting men who are far more desirable than themselves, were they to be open to a man relatively close to their level they wouldn’t just have the “upper hand” they’d be able to have the exact relationship they want as easily as someone could possibly have it. Meanwhile it’s the exceptionally desirable men who “just what to fuck” while the rest would gladly b…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 07:36 PM
2

This is like saying the reason someone couldn’t jump to the moon is because they didn’t have the right outlook and should be training their legs more.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 08:56 PM
1

If a woman’s equivalent are losers then yes. Or is anything less than a woman’s perfect upwards ideal a loser to her?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 08:09 PM
2

This could only be relevant if a man was desirable then thought they weren’t, but if a man is actually undesirable (unable to be desired) then his outlook is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 08:06 PM
6

“What he knows” is certainly an interesting claim, are you trying to make the case for charisma in some way? Otherwise I’m not so sure what you mean. If so it wouldn’t be what he knows but an inherent trait. And in the end it will still all pale in comparison to how it is for women where the floor for being desirable is just being one in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 06:30 AM
–

All of this advice your talking about boils down to: don’t date someone too far above your desirability because they won’t value you like you will for them. Which is obviously true. As for the second paragraph, this is exactly the same advice that is given to men extremely commonly, so unless you are arguing that it only applies to men then this is just how people are painted.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:58 AM
–

High standards for desirability doesn’t mean that that guy can’t be relatively “bad” in one individual trait, for instance if a guy was desirable in nearly every way except he doesn’t do anything for Valentine’s Day than the woman’s standards would still very likely be high, same goes for all the other trait’s mentioned. It’s also directly relative to men’s standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:50 AM
3

If a man is inherently undesirable he will remain inherently undesirable, the is no other outcome. What you are referring to is men who are not particularly desirable then can become desirable but that is entirely different. Thinking any sort of way about anything at all if you are impossible to be desirable is a non factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:46 AM
1

Maybe so, but in the situation you described a woman couldn’t then have the complaints that are outlined here because that guy wouldn’t be eliciting them. That’s the point I was making that if a woman has those complaints it’s because they are direct results of attempting to date too far up.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:42 AM
4

Unfortunately this is just your conjecture and is entirely untrue. The facts are that some men are not given the traits that can make them possibly good enough for women collectively. Nature > nurture.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:33 AM
1

He is still going to be desirable in any case, it’s still going to be a desirable provider, especially considering being a provider is a desirable trait in the first place. So if she were to still have the same complaints than it’s the same situation that that provider is to desirable or a provider at all is too desirable for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:26 AM
1

Alternatively women could not pour money into any “preparation” and instead date their actual equivalent.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 05:00 AM
1

Women don’t go on dates with guys who aren’t desirable. In other words women’s accounts of men not being forced to drive the conversation or jump too quickly to sexual topics are simply the direct results of women trying to date too far up, receiving reception that’s essentially a woman’s form of rejection like how their equivalent man is entirely excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:58 AM
8

Unfortunately, unlike women, men can be dealt too few cards to play the game of relationships at all, never enough no matter what they tried to play.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 04:49 AM
1

I’m truly glad you can do that, but unfortunately most guys won’t have the options required to be with someone they particularly like, and most would rather not die alone without ever having a romantic experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:53 AM
2

The reason they are valued in the situation you mentioned is because they were needed to provide for their parents when elderly, this having nothing at all to do with desirability in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 10:22 PM
2

Asking this is like saying “what are born rich millionaires supposed to do if they squander all of their money and are broke by 25?”. Men don’t ever get a period of inherent, automatic desirability like women do, and even then let’s not act like women don’t still have access to men for all things relationships in a greater degree after they are old than most men ever will.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:45 PM
2

Most men will never have the options required to ever date or partner with someone they especially like the company of, that requires having a lot more choices then what most men will ever be able to have. So this fact along with men having to be the driving force behind relationships in general would only make sense why men would have a harder time telling if any individual women liked them to whatever degree.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:39 PM
1

My answer would be “any individual trait” because while whatever that individual trait is may matter quite a lot you still have to have everything else, women have high standards for all traits not just a few.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:30 PM
3

Unfortunately any truthful answer to this question will always come with the caveat of already being inherently desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:08 AM
2

More women may prioritize personality but that doesn’t mean that their standards for such isn’t just as high, exclusive and similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 09:44 PM
0

It would depend on who broke it off, but in general since women objectively decline in desirability more than men it could only stand to reason later partners would be less liked if taken as a snapshot in time.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 05:04 AM
1

Unfortunately the facts are that it only takes a minority of men reproducing in excess to keep us going, so you could say it’s the opposite, men are too good at reproducing too the degree that through supply and demand it becomes valued so little. As for social factors, men’s priority in reproduction is to ensure it happens while women’s is to exclude men first then select for the best, and in a more connected world like we have there is more men to see and therefore more men to exclude.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:57 AM
1

Very simple, exceptional talent or proficiency at something is more useful to the woman in question, whether it’s for provision, protection or simply to gain an upper hand socially.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 08:40 PM
5

People don’t realize that if women did absolutely nothing for their appearance, it would chance nothing as it’s men’s inherent attraction that is more widely accepting of women, regardless of social conditioning.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 08:38 PM
6

It’s the same deal as apps, women that are still on them are incredibly picky and excessively looking to date significantly up.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:57 PM
2

What makes a major difference for anyone no matter what is if they are choosing to be single (specifically having options) or forced to me single (not having any options at all) the former is partially fulfilling even if you don’t like the options but the latter has no worse fate.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:55 PM
1

Rejection probably is hot…. To the woman doing it, women don’t want more men to approach them to be receptive but in order to reject them for an ego boost.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:50 PM
1

What I’m saying is that desirability determines your equivalence in relationships, as in however desirable a person is, less or more, determines what their equivalence is. So if someone was good or nice but otherwise low in desirability their deserved equivalence in a partner wouldn’t necessarily be good or nice they could entirely be “bad”.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 09:02 AM
1

It very much is relevant, because it’s not “good” or “bad” that determines what someone deserves in relationships but desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 05:36 PM
1

When regarding groups “standards” is in relation to what exists, in other words if your claiming that the average guy is so far bellow women’s bar that in and of itself meant women’s standards are high as again, whether you like it or not, it’s in relation to what’s out there. In other words men CANNOT both have low standards to live up to AND be widely bellow women’s “bar”.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:12 AM
1

Desirability determines how “good” or “bad” your options are. Men at the lowest level of desirability are excluded from partnering while women at the lowest level of desirability are never excluded but they are not going to be desirable enough to have what they specifically desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 11:02 AM
1

You don’t have to be addressing guys that are actually nice/good. Harems? What makes you think that? A persons chance of meeting any individual is very low and for men, where they face much higher and more specific standards, they must try to appeal to numbers otherwise it would be trying to appeal to someone you will never meet (or at least have an infinitesimally small chance at meeting 1 in billions). The facts are that women are going to partner with men who are desirable and even if being n…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 10:11 PM
1

Who isn’t actually nice? A person who only has nice as a desirable trait compared to all other traits they have, because that was what my example was. It doesn’t matter what he is to any individual it matters how he’s regarded collectively, anyone can be excluded by an individual for any reason but the context for this comparison is that the former will have nothing and the ladder will have options that do not exclusively consist of other asshole or shallow people. That’s why desirability is wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:56 PM
0

That’s the point, if otherwise undesirable no amount of being nice can make a difference as it’s only one positive trait vs all other negative traits. The same way someone can be the opposite: an asshole but otherwise desirable in every other way makes it 1 negative trait vs all desirable traits (not requiring everyone to prefer that in order to make it more desirable than the former).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:47 PM
0

Simply the sum of all positive traits minus the sum of all negative traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:32 PM
4

Unfortunately what you are asking fore here are contradictory traits, at least overwhelmingly likely contradictory traits, having the personality type to be the masculine provider comes with more hardened/stoic traits in order to facilitate that. Could it be possible? Maybe, but what you’re asking for here is like asking for a drink without the cup to hold it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:27 PM
1

Women here saying muscles and height truly don’t see how wrong they are…..
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:18 PM
0

Desirability trumps all, and while being “nice” may help in some cases it will never mean anything without inherent desirability, for any form of romantic interaction short or long term.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:10 PM
1

Why would you want a man you like to do something he’d never want to have to do?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:05 PM
1

For the same reason men still want women who don’t pull their weight, for the desire to partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 09:21 PM
3

Depends on for who, it’s surely easier than ever for women and very desirable men but also an exclusive endeavor for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 09:16 PM
1

It can’t ever come close enough to labeled as “efficient”, people ultimately are not as individual, ESPECIALLY in regards to romantic preferences, as they would like to believe, So the more individual people act the less efficient dating must become and the worse it will be for the “more individual” people.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 09:22 PM
1

Anyone arguing that has access to something while arguing that someone doesn’t need it can’t understand the value of that thing, regardless how they believe they may feel about it, in other words a woman arguing this is like a billionaire arguing that you don’t need money.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 09:16 PM
1

The difference here is that most men have the genuine desire to partner (not exclusively with their preference) just simply the desire to partner, something women don’t really have, meaning even when partnered with those they don’t particularly like, it’s still genuine desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 09:11 PM
1

People assume that because of the fact that less women on any given time are on a dating app that it’s just an entirely different group of women with entirely different preferences on there, when the reality is that most people both men and women have been on them before with only slight difference between men and women, Not only that but it still exposes you to more women than you will ever meet in person.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 08:57 PM
–

The reason you are seeing more men is just simply because there are far more men disadvantaged or entirely excluded from all forms of romance than women are, it doesn’t make a difference if the space could be off putting to women because if he finds himself there than it’s because he’s already been excluded in the first place. Women may have things that can qualify as struggles as well but none are ever excluded entirely the way men are.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 08:52 PM
–

If a guy has been rejected his whole life it will likely logically result in anger over being rejected his whole life….
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 08:14 PM
1

If he’s on a date then he doesn’t have dating problems, men with dating problems aren’t allowed to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 08:12 PM
–

I’m not saying anyone should date anyone, but regardless if anyone has options it’s always choosing to be single.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 09:45 PM
1

On a large scale it isn’t grate for men to never have spaces between themselves. But on a personal level it’s hard to say as men have always been so much more open towards women and specifically interested when they exist outside of the norm.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 08:43 PM
–

There are no women who are not single by choice, all women have men as options and only when those options are not good enough for them and they choose to be single can they even be so.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 08:32 PM
–

The men we are talking about here are exclusively desirable, the men who are unfortunately undesirable enough to have dating problems don’t get to talk to women or get likes on dating apps much less match. So you’re making the same apex fallacy mistake of saying these men’s problems are less when in reality these aren’t even the men struggling in the slightest.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 06:11 AM
–

Well we are already talking about exclusively desirable men, so you could say exclusively desirable men’s dating problems are self inflicted and that might be mostly true. Only when proportionally more desirable than the woman. Of course they are stupid things to say, they don’t care about the outcome, these are the men who have every other option talking to a low desirability option.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 05:38 AM
–

I’m sure some will obviously these arnt women that they care about being rejected by, in fact it’s more the way desirable men reject women, but we also aren’t seeing the times that they get away with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 04:36 AM
–

All of these are simply obvious examples of far more desirable men either testing what they can get away with or simply trolling women lower in desirability than themselves. Women do this too they just don’t get called creepy for it, as they are held to much lower standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 09:39 PM
14

My point is what I originally commented that its required to be desirable enough to have sex for relationships, so advice to become desirable enough to have sex, if possible, is what would be required for men who are excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:39 PM
15

This is also true for relationships not just sex. Aside from that what’s your point? That men should ensure women are then excluded to the same extent they are?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:32 PM
26

Ahh yes because men just need to not be asexual and bathe more often that will make them desirable enough surely…….
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:24 PM
27

You are confusing choosing not to with can’t have, if any of them are in relationships then they are choosing not to have sex that they could still have if they wanted.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:11 PM
35

Men who can’t have sex also can’t have relationships, a guy has to be desirable for both to be possible whether that’s emotionally or physically, desirability is a prerequisite for both and not every guy is going to be able to possibly improve one or both of those things. Men aren’t like women they can’t have low to no individual desirability and still easily partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:08 PM
1

If that’s the only reality you can experience, as it is for women, then how could they even consider something outside of that may even exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 06:30 PM
1

A more meaningful question would be when have you been without the option? Because even the least desirable women in the world have plenty of options they just don’t like those options and want the same ones that all other women want.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 06:28 PM
17

The only difference here is that men will be forced to do something like this because they will never have another option, while women will choose to do something like this because no option is good enough for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 06:24 PM
3

Being the “prize” or not isn’t possibly determined by believing such, but by how the opposite sex believes you to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 06:18 PM
12

Because there isn’t a possible alternative, unless you were just a man and lying about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 11:59 PM
1

“Sex crazed” isn’t the right term, it would just be “being able to ever partner in any way at all” it isn’t merely sex women treat as a reward to men but any form of relationship, and I certainly wouldn’t call it sex crazed to want to be able to experience a form of romantic relationship, the difference here is women never have to do anything to qualify where as men have to be exceptional enough to be rewarded with qualification.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 10:13 PM
3

Refuse to approach anymore, you can only expect someone to do something detrimental to them so many times before you naturally refuse to do it. A better question to ask would be why have women become so selectively closed off to men that they don’t approach anymore unless obviously exceptional?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 10:01 PM
10

The reason he was successful at all was because he was already exceptional and enough so to make up for being autistic, no matter the traits are exceptionally desirable it was inherently the reason you yourself even considered him.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:55 PM
1

I’m not saying they feel guilt, but they don’t have to feel any guilt to still get pushback from others, and even if not others people, and certainly women, will always try to signal they are better than they truly are and in this context it is generally more favorably looked upon to be less shallow/more open.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:50 PM
4

I think you missed the point, it isn’t about themselves believing they have higher standards than their desirability but judgment from others. For instance it’s much more likely to be perceived as virtuous if you say you rejected someone because you thought they were being fake nice then because they were too short for you to feel attracted, just as an example.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 11:05 PM
3

I’m sure they don’t consider themselves less desirable but they don’t have to in order to be less desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 10:46 PM
3

People are often judged for having high or specific standards, especially in the case where they themselves are much less desirable, so when this is the case obfuscation or misdirection about their standards it the logical path.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 10:41 PM
–

It’s because of the way women’s goal biologically in partnering it to filter in utmost, so if women were to ever suggest that another should improve that would hold the implication that she isn’t on the same level as what she’s filtering for and therefore going against all women’s collective goal of filtering and excluding men in utmost.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 10:38 PM
7

This is just a way women can reject men without seeming like they have incredibly high standards and to attempt to signal that their preferences are virtuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 10:29 PM
0

I am sure about that. That’s the point you were friend zoned by guys you were into, while men similarly outside of their roles never received attraction from any women and never could.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 11:14 PM
1

At the end of the day the rolls men had to fulfill were still much more narrow and strict, a man in a similar position outside his expected gender roll as you would have it much worse. I’m not saying there are no rolls at all but since men have such an immeasurably wider range of attraction there are always a large portion of men attracted to women regardless of the traits she could have outside of her gender rolls or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 10:01 PM
1

To a degree that could also be the case, but objectification is ultimately still the result of having a trait that is desired and it’s very apparent that men have much lower standards for finding traits desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 08:37 PM
10

Women objectify men for their looks in the same way the only difference women’s standards for such are so much higher and narrower that you don’t see it happen as much, objectification of a person is inherently a product of desirability so the reality is that women just objectify men for more than women do, women just have a lower bar for any trait they can be objectified for.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 08:03 AM
3

Yeah I know, if they left out the “and gals” portion I wouldn’t have made that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 07:57 AM
2

The only thing here is that it is exclusively men who are ever excluded from partnering, women don’t have that possibility, unless you are counting them doing so by their own volition.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 10:46 PM
4

I don’t think many people dispute this but the issue comes when “the man the woman wants” is “the man women want” especially to the degree it is now that is so much lower than what standard deviation allows. Mass appeal is the goal because narrowing your desirability down to the few is not effective when dealing with a group with such low variance in attraction, you can try but unless already exceptional you won’t ever even be likely to come in any form of contact with a woman like that. Otherwi…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 07:37 AM
13

The most telling thing about this is how it shows women’s active desire to try and collectively exclude men and prevent them from being able to partner, it isn’t enough for women to just exclude them individually they feel the need to prevent them from partnering entirely and collectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 07:28 AM
5

The problem with this idea is that the reason women have been able to do so is because men have always accepted wider gender roles for women, so it was never anything different men had to do while the other way around has always been more restrictive for men because women have a much more narrow and restrictive view on what they can see as “men”.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 09:38 PM
0

This applies to women just as much here, an average person deserves to be treated averagely and that includes by their partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 09:35 PM
2

This is because if men held out the same way you did they’d never be able to partner, women waiting for their perfect partner can only be born from the fact that all women have an abundance of options, an abundance almost no men have, so instead in order to stand a chance men have to partner with those they find “decent” or “average” while also pretending he thinks she’s perfect.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 06:40 PM
1

Yeah, women don’t really ever face any consequences for both their own choices or being less desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 06:32 PM
2

Unfortunately everyone needs external things to be fulfilled, especially those who believe they don’t. But for what we are talking about here you can even find biological evidence for this as being around women, especially in a romantic sense, actively increase testosterone production in men, I wouldn’t go so far as to say the reason men are lower in testosterone now is because women abandoned more men but it’s certainly an interesting thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 08:12 PM
1

This was from data a couple years ago. The reason we have more men isolating is because they don’t have any hope in the first place, so the obvious outcome is going to be depression and giving up.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 07:51 PM
2

Eventually once the standards required to live up to become too high the only thing you can do about it is give up or complain. I don’t think the average person can be whole at all if never given the chance to partner, that is inherent to fulfillment at the lowest level.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 07:41 PM
1

You can see that everywhere, from what women actively say they require to who they end up with, for instance every inch a guy is shorter than 6’ his chance of partnering drops by 10% (5% for 5’10 and 5’11) and that’s just one physical trait, pile on requirements for the rest including emotional traits and even if a guys lucky enough to possibly qualify a lot will still be discouraged and see no hope. Combine all that with women only ever having to live up to ANY standards if she’s trying to date…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 11:09 AM
1

These SHOULD take away from women’s struggles as women don’t face as difficult or numerous struggles in the dating market, especially considering they are the comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 10:55 AM
3

Because the standard to be considered “strong” is higher than ever before, and once a standard becomes high enough it only serves to discourage even those who might possibly be able to meet it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 10:51 AM
1

Male loneliness is primarily driven by men having to fit much higher standards than the standard deviation allows all of them to meet. And as for women, there are none who can be romantically alone without actively choosing to be so.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 10:48 AM
–

This edit pretty well exemplifies women’s willingness to even consider any form of reflection or awareness.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 07:13 AM
–

That false idea is that men exist to essentially provide or serve you, hence why we get to the main crutch of the issue “asking me to come up with a date or split the bill”… imagine a world where you are treated as an equal and not expected to immediately be worshipped and served on second one, the horror. Yeah you, like the rest of women, usually want out as soon as they are not just expected anything, but not actively treated as someone akin to a king looking for a servant, so much so that eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 11:50 PM
–

All this to essentially just say you aren’t attracted to men, or that there are so few that you rarely see them. Yeah we know women are rarely attracted to a small portion of men this is nothing new, it’s not because they are trying to appeal to women in the wrong way it’s because they cannot appeal to women. And talks of not appealing to a “female gaze” is just simply subterfuge in order to absolve oneself of their inability to feel possible attraction for anyone near average.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 11:06 PM
–

The problem here is that the men not considered haven’t increased their standards they’ve lowered them, even women at the very bottom of desirability still admit to men being attracted to them but still having standards too high, now I don’t doubt that the already desirable men have higher standards as they have even more options as the only men considered. Men’s standards are relative to their options unlike women, so it’s more accurate to evaluate his desirability from his actual standards, at…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 08:41 PM
1

In any situation where men or women are lonely it’s the opposite sex’s fault objectively, regardless of any other factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 08:23 PM
9

The problem here is that because women’s attraction has the goal to filter, if a guy is even needing advice in the first place then to women he’s not supposed to be able to partner at all and they’d unconsciously want to ensure he’s alone. And society is obviously going to coincide with this meaning of course he isn’t going to get any helpful advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 08:19 PM
–

For the men who are able to have options that may be true, but we also have more men now who aren’t able to have any options and their standards have only lowered. It’s just that since they are unacceptable to women their non existent standards are not considered, instead only factoring desirable men who are the only men women can even consider “men”.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 08:14 PM
–

I view them as essentially the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 11:24 AM
1

That’s the whole point, there is only 2 possible large scale situations: women choose who they partner with resulting in men being excluded and rightfully upset about it or women not choosing and men not being excluded with women being rightfully upset about it. Men and women’s attraction is inherently at odds with each other on this scale and there is no mutual solution. But the point I’m making is that being upset about being entirely excluded is no less valid or logical than if women were to …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 12:12 AM
1

No, it doesn’t imply that, there is no conscious drive to do so but biological, in fact consciousness of such would hinder the drive women have to do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 09:34 PM
1

Not just because of access to that but also because women’s attraction exists to exclude men, even in the case where a woman must exclude herself to ensure men are left out, making being single partially fulfilling compared to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 10:30 AM
1

Women have a higher standard for everything now so it stands to reason income will be included there, of course there will be a level of forgiveness for otherwise exceptional traits as always.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 10:27 AM
2

What you are missing is that said men are not mad that women are not “failing to live up to a preconceived purpose” but that they are denied the option of partnering, something that is near universally prioritized within humans, by women. In other words no matter what they or women think it still remains that women are ensuring they are excluded from an inherently integral aspect of human fulfillment (one that most women take for granted as they never have to be excluded) making it illogical NOT…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 10:25 AM
1

Men have such a higher level of variance in their ability to feel attraction that any trait women find universally undesirable can be a point of desirability for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:14 PM
2

There are no women who are “truly romantically lonely” at worst women can be truly overly selective. The women in your example had men interested they were just so unacceptable to her that she doesn’t consider them “suitors” or likely even men at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:10 PM
5

Just people who are low in excitement or in emotional interest, both of what you describe can be entirely true.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 06:01 AM
4

Between being considered boring or not? I already explained how it’s because men have a much lower or nonexistent bar for women to be considered not “boring”. As for why, I’m not sure, why do women require so much more to not consider someone “boring”?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 02:22 AM
5

Women’s standards can’t be lower, at least here, if you hear this complaint from women but don’t from men. And if you think women’s expectations are low in terms of how interesting someone is then consider that men’s is just so much lower and encompassing that they need not have any of the things women require to be considered not “boring”.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 01:37 AM
3

Yeah, that’s the point men of all levels have it worse then women so it’s obviously going to be true at any status.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:38 PM
1

Because dating as a man is not like what you describe here in the slightest, unless maybe the man is at the top of possible desirability, it’s simply closer to a job interview or a test because that’s how women treat it whether they realize it or not, And this is true regardless of friendship status beforehand. Another point is most men will never have the option for someone they especially like the company of, women specifically ensure they never get enough options for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:31 PM
7

This is just true for men and women in general, so obviously it’s going to apply within autistic people as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:24 PM
1

Because her standards and attraction is already implied in the “man” part as women don’t consider someone a man unless already meeting her standards. In other words she’s only capable of considering her standard in the first place so all further consideration is within those standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:22 PM
1

The vast majority of men don’t and never will have the options to facilitate partnering and/ or marrying a women he particularly likes, to the degree that’s it’s entirely expected to end up with someone not particularly special to him, if he can end up with someone at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:20 PM
9

Most men don’t require their partners to be exceptionally entertaining or charismatic like women do, not only that but being “boring” can entirely be a positive to men. Very simply it’s just another trait with a much lower and far more varied requirement for women to live up to, so much so that it’s a nonexistent issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:12 PM
1

The extrovert, but not simply because of more exposure or shared interests but because between the two it’s the one that is exclusively a desirable to women especially including those who themselves are introverted, and the same is true for relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 08:09 AM
10

Women can never be in a situation where they are excluded entirely against their will, so when they imagine someone not being able to date or have options they think of the closest thing they can experience/ what they think is no options which is someone exclusively trying to date up or missing their chance. It’s like trying to tell someone a base color or taste that they’ve never seen or tasted before.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 08:05 AM
2

Seems appropriate to respond in an immature fashion to an immature post which both “women’s frustration in dating” and saying they’d choose the bear are.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 09:52 PM
1

The problem here is that “moderately attractive to them” is how the vast majority of men who are able to partner do so, men don’t have the options to hope for anything better, so someone “moderately attractive to them” and willing would be an unattainable fantasy, even someone not attractive to them and willing would be rare enough that it would be akin to finding a “soul mate” for someone who isn’t forced to be desperate.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 06:44 PM
–

Women’s thoughts on men is always limited to their collective attention to men, that’s why when they try to say “undesirable men treat women badly too” they don’t realize that that wasn’t an undesirable guy it was still a desirable guy who just didn’t have his desirability focused on looks but was no less inherently desirable to women. Essentially women generalize men so much because their attraction to men is so similar to one and other, especially including women that believe otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:21 PM
1

This could only be true if it weren’t for the fact that society treats ALL women like this not just single moms.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:15 PM
2

This just seems to be explaining how women’s ideal men is collectively everyone’s ideal man yet men’s ideal women isn’t everyone’s ideal and doesn’t require you to be better than everyone else as the ideal man has to here.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:12 PM
2

The point is as long as it takes lying to have a chance it’s also “tough shit” for the women who fall for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 07:39 AM
2

The same thing could be said for the women on the other side here “the only relationship you could get into was to a guy that didn’t even like you and just settled for sex? Tough shit.” Which is precisely the problem as long as women collectively exclude men not even just from sex but all forms romantic partnering as a whole then obviously this is going to happen, women’s attraction as a whole could be a little more varied otherwise “tough shit”.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 09:30 PM
1

I mean it’s obviously both attraction and interest (anyone is going to be more romantic for those they feel more romantically attracted to) and at the same time it’s also influenced by relationship stage because men are required to be romantic for a possible relationship in the first place whether it’s genuine or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 05:32 AM
1

Because it benefits women to have a controlling monopoly on partnering, the way women’s attraction works isn’t just date as far up as possible but to specifically exclude the men towards the bottom from partnering with any woman at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 05:27 AM
1

That’s why I said specifically not all aspects of attraction are subjective, you even go on here to mention facial symmetry an objective aspect of attraction. What’s “conventionally” attractive IS what is objectively attractive because that is determined by the group NOT the individual, the individual is only an exception. This goes further than just physical attraction though I am by no means saying that physical attraction is the sole factor men are excluded for.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 11:02 PM
1

Not all aspects of attraction is subjective, especially not when the subject is general groups, will there be exceptions? Of course but those are entirely irrelevant, there are absolutely men who are undesirable to at minimum enough women that meeting one who is attracted to them is statistically impossible, could there be 1 in 8 billion? Maybe but that is effectively none. Unfortunately all forms of romantic desirability regardless of procreation or not stems from the attraction to do so, inclu…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:54 PM
1

The problem here is that women’s attraction in itself includes not partnering as a goal under the conditions that she cannot date far enough up, meaning a guy struggling doesn’t equate to a woman struggling because she’s already met her goal of excluding those struggling men. Highest priority for women is to exclude men, then to partner upwards.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:36 PM
1

Less desirable not ugly, I never mentioned ugly because a man can still be desirable or equivalently more desirable while being ugly.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:31 PM
1

These are just complaints of dating someone far more relatively desirable, if they were men at the same equivalence then they’d be happy to be in a relationship, anything else is an overestimation of self or underestimation of the guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 09:27 PM
2

Men are not as selective as women are because their first biological priority is to ensure the human race continues, while women’s is to try to shape how it continues. Men as a group will never leave any women out no matter how undesirable, and have many times more variance in attraction that’s why it’s immeasurably easier for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 09:17 PM
3

Women’s attraction in itself works in a way that is meant to continually filter and refine what they are collectively attracted to, to the point where in the situation where that becomes impossible (whether due to that attraction getting too high to ever meet a guy desirable enough or too high for that man to partner that low) their attraction then exists to stop them from partnering at all as opposed to men’s.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 09:29 AM
2

Women may say they want to be approached more but they are not open to being receptive more, in other words women want more men to reject for an ego boost and more men far more desirable than herself to approach them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 10:33 PM
5

When women are saying they want to be approached more they are envisioning it being done by men they are attracted to, meaning they aren’t open to the average guy approaching them or at least they are only open to rejecting the average guy for an ego boost.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 10:29 PM
3

It’s objectively envy of relationships. It’s the same idea as a homeless man envying the meals and bed a criminal in prison has, he doesn’t envy the criminal or being the criminal he just envies the next step up from the bottom and anyone with a bed and meals.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 09:25 PM
3

The average man would be happy to have them only very above average men think otherwise but since those are the men that these women were exclusively open to it’s perceived as average men to them. Again it’s incorrect understanding to assume it’s the abusive man they are envious of but the relationship and the fact that even abusive men are treated better than they are despite not being abusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 08:34 AM
1

I’m contradicting your claim that women “past their expiration date” are undesired, as they are still wanted by average men and certainly undesirable men, only ever loosing access to men leaps and bounds more desirable than they are. As for cheating I’m contradicting that men are doing this but anyone who is unable to ever partner with who they like (although the argument can be made that since men are the only ones who can experience such that it is men by default) As for abusive men I’m contra…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 12:39 AM
4

Men who arnt desired are men who haven’t ever had any options and are open to any woman, if he isn’t then he isn’t actually not desired. I don’t claim being unable to cheat is loyalty but pointed out how never being able to partner with who you like obviously makes it more likely, and that isn’t not being able to be with someone more desirable but simply never having options to even make a choice. Envy for relationships, that abusive men are able to have over yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 10:36 PM
3

To make an analogy with a product for sale, men aren’t even desired enough to be given away for free never mind being able to have an expiration date. Almost no men are ever able to date or marry who they particularly like, their type or any woman that particularly stands out to him so obviously anyone with someone that they don’t particularly like above another, when presented with an opportunity, will be more likely to cheat. Men don’t envy abusive men they envy men in relationships. Imagine y…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 10:01 PM
1

There are very few men who are able to date who they want/their preference (perceived or not) so the men that can even possibly encounter this are already going to be very desirable and likely spoiled for choice already.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 11:11 PM
–

Well since I explained how logically it cannot be “all victims complex”, then this is just you unable to except the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 08:21 PM
–

Because all it takes is lack of physical desirability and not enough inherent charisma to make up for it or the reverse and you’ll be excluded from attraction, combined with the fact that women in comparison regardless of their choices always have the option to partner long term regardless of their desirability, which IS the comparison. All this to say that men need not make “bad” choices to be excluded by all women collectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:54 PM
1

This isn’t true, regardless of the choices you make if you are male then you can be excluded from these experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:38 PM
1

This still says nothing to the fact that if experience in the matter never happens growing older is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:35 PM
2

Temporary birth control for men is always going to be a sketchy thing because it’s attempting to get the body to do something that it never stops doing under normal circumstances as opposed to birth control for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:11 PM
1

The premise here is flawed, it isn’t age that matters here but experience and many of these examples for men are because they aren’t able to have the option for different experiences, very few, or even have none at all. It’s like comparing the eating habits of someone who can eat everything vs someone who is allergic to nearly everything and then saying that the latter is picky.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:08 PM
2

Unfortunately even those options require a level of desirability for men, women’s standards don’t go any lower than average regardless of their desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 08:57 PM
2

Irl women are limited in attraction to men relatively more desirable than themselves at the lowest, it’s so apparent that it’s the best way to tell if a guy is more desirable than most is if women are capable of attraction in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 05:37 AM
2

This is why when women are asked about approaching men they complain because if a woman has ever done it before it was to the best of the best, a man so out of her range that it it ridiculous, they don’t have the understanding that they need to match desirability levels or even worse have no idea their or the man’s desirability level.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 09:15 AM
2

Ugly men may still but not undesirable, he will always be vastly making up for whatever perceived desirability he lacks whether it’s through extreme charisma or wealth etc. meaning those “ugly men” are still entirely more desirable without exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 08:52 PM
1

That’s because women are able to have many different opinions and are able to later change their perception because of it, but men on the other hand men actually have the chance of never having another option and therefore it’s impossible to see anything else.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 08:49 PM
4

If a woman even gets to the point of loving the guy it’s because he is so much more desirable than other men and has all other women as options and therefore is obviously less likely to treat any individual woman with much effort especially if she isn’t at least better than most other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 08:38 PM
1

I don’t doubt that that desire can exist but still think most men would overall desire a relationship more, even if it were in reach for most.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:00 AM
2

The problem with this is that you can’t even know you want something if it isn’t something you can ever experience, in other words it can only ever be speculation that men are wanting hookups more than relationships. Ultimately still resulting in wanting relationships more because a want for hookups can’t even possibly develop.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:22 AM
5

I think there are still more men who want to be in relationships rather than have hookups, especially now when men who are even able to be in relationships are being rarer.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:51 PM
17

I would argue that the majority of men don’t want hookups and want a relationship, but since women are almost exclusively open to the men who do want hookups it causes this misconception.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:01 PM
2

It’s always a bad argument to compare animals to humans like this, because whenever it’s done it’s done hyper selectively unless one was arguing that you included all off that natural process and that violence and rape go unpunished or even negatively looked upon.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 08:24 PM
2

Sure, if it meant not being excluded, but that still requires being desirable enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:35 AM
2

To be able to participate in any form.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 09:33 PM
3

Partnering in general must be driven primarily by the need to do so not just the desire to, because if it’s only driven by the desire to do so it just becomes a desirability race obviously excluding men first then inevitably everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 06:03 PM
–

Harmful because it implies you should wait for your perfect preference which is not the case, a more helpful thing would be the acknowledgement that who you end up with and who you deserve is someone your equivalent in both positive and specifically negative ways as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 08:06 PM
1

I believe women are more interested, at least in the idea of monogamy, but the reason that it’s currently flipped the other way currently is that women’s attraction has refined to such a degree that the men who women can collectively feel attracted to are far fewer, and since desirability trumps all for both men and women, it results in that showing less for women since they are no longer capable of attraction to enough men to go around.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 07:57 PM
–

Most guys have this experience/feeling, they just have to change or resort to different thinking in order to ever stand a chance at a form of partnering.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 07:52 PM
5

The only problem is that this still requires being exceptional otherwise it will never go anywhere or even be able to keep contact with a woman, because it isn’t just instant attraction that most men can’t have but simply attraction itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:51 PM
1

The only problem is that it isn’t helping men in the end, if it were actively hurting women and forcing them to be alone at anywhere near the rates men are then it would be good but that isn’t the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:45 PM
1

It’s a combination of women simply wanting to be liked for a part of themselves that isn’t as likable, yet no less them, and only being open to men who are exclusively more desirable, because the fact of the matter is that if a guy could be walking away at all is because he has other/better options, meaning it’s someone who’s unexceptional exclusively wanting to be liked by the exceptional and in the exact way they want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:38 PM
1

I wouldn’t agree that following them meant they were actively perusing a relationship with them. And even if it did it wouldn’t be the maintenance that they liked but simply that they were more attractive regardless of that maintenance.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 08:28 PM
0

As in the individual “valuing” themselves? I don’t believe any “value” and individual puts on themselves to be real it must inherently be put on by others.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 09:18 PM
1

That’s the whole point if an individual is average and finds the average “sexually uninspiring” then that’s exactly standards being too high.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 09:16 PM
0

Value is something objectively given by others valuing you so any individual man would not hold any value at least socially, especially not in comparison to women who, since men place great value on, are so, even most of women’s complaints and issues come from that value.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 09:24 AM
0

We aren’t talking about models or supermodels we are talking about men and women. I never specified that looks had to be the only point of attraction. Average would not appropriately be “sexually uninspiring” but “averagely sexually inspiring” at least to be in line and not have standards being too high. In other words in the case someone does find the average to be “sexually uninspiring” while they are average that is objectively too high a standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 09:15 AM
0

The problem is individual attraction should specifically not be relevant, for instance for standards to be in line an average man should be averagely attractive to the average woman, anything higher or lower would be “too high” or “too low”.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 12:15 AM
1

Of course, the only difference is that it’s a real and it can be a destined outcome compared to women who can only get that outcome by specifically choosing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 11:08 PM
1

This is simply disconnected from reality, there is and for a while has been a push in the workplace, education and just socially to prioritize women and specifically more so than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 07:54 AM
1

This is just simply untrue in fact currently in nearly all western countries women have more access and opportunity for nearly all facets (aside from maybe obviously physical strength demanding jobs for obvious reasons) this is especially true for education.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:46 AM
-1

It’s unpopular because anything that can be perceived as negative towards women in any way, even though this is neutral, is generally not accepted simply for that fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:41 AM
1

Men are still currently more varied, totally disproving this. Unless you are arguing that women are currently “not allowed out of the kitchen”.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 02:38 AM
1

I’m not sure how my explanation can qualify as flattery as flattery still needs to be praise. There will always be people that manipulate others, but that doesn’t still mean that if a guy is with a women he considers average, like the vast majority of men do and are totally happy with that, that he doesn’t still have to make her believe he finds her better than she is in order to even be there.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 01:02 AM
-1

It’s just unpopular to a degree that people would rather believe that women are just as varied, and I wouldn’t even say being more varied is a good thing as it’s just as much a bad thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 12:55 AM
1

It doesn’t mean that men “don’t enjoy women’s company” but rather that they need to flatter women to a higher degree than what is true or what they feel in order to qualify. That is quite literally only focusing on arrangements that fit their needs when possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 12:48 AM
1

The problem here is you are talking about “bottom” as it pertains to circumstance not ability, for instance while women may be more impoverished men who are are more likely to be there, and on the other side of the coin more men in better positions similarly have exceptional and overwhelming ability to be there. Even your example including slavery, since men are going to over represent the exceptional that would include the exceptionally immoral so that would be in line.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:41 PM
1

That is born from the requirement of being exceptional that men need to meet in order to participate in partnering, they are obviously going to try to sound better if that is what’s so exclusively required of them. Only looking for an arrangement that fits their needs is what women have always exclusively done, the only difference was whether it was possible or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:31 PM
1

This still says nothing to the fact that stolen or not men’s greater chances of being exceptional makes them obviously more historically notable. Let’s not pretend that generalizations don’t exist both ways, people generalize negatively about men just as much as women. Even in talking about how those contributions go to men that is a good example of how the exceptional are overwhelmingly men because it applies to what we consider exceptionally bad as well, like those who would take another’s cre…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:27 PM
1

It’s not that no men would be at the bottom but you wouldn’t see men over represented in the bottom and the top consistently historically and remain to today.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:07 PM
0

Not true because the same principle applies in reverse too, as in exceptionally worse, so even if you try to make the argument that men were advantaged then that would mean less would be at the bottom as well which isn’t the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:04 PM
1

The word legacy just means the impact you leave on the world even after death, it entirely refers to a woman’s children as well, I’ve heard it said for both men and women, the reason it might likely be heard more for men is that it’s probably something men are more likely to use for themselves than women are.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 09:21 PM
1

That’s because all of the greatest achievements for men are so exceptional most will never come close. And to be fair “empty flattery” is essentially required for men to be able to participate in partnering in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 09:04 PM
1

You can find plenty of instances of men being behind the scenes or never getting credit as well, others taking credit for things is going to happen unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 09:01 PM
2

Men have done more exceptional things simply because they, overall, are more likely to do more exceptional things. And more men are seen as exceptional because more are exceptional in both positive and negative ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 08:58 PM
1

Nobody in history was remembered for simply being a father either…. In general things are thought about exceptional people and since men are more varied than women the extremely exceptional will almost always be men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 07:28 AM
2

The problem with this is that men can’t be valued for how they inherently are by default by women, so a man’s “prime” is simply if/whenever he can change himself to fit what women are capable of being attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 06:46 PM
9

All of this to essentially say, they simply exist outside of what women are capable of being attracted to in a way that can only happen to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 06:43 PM
1

Men who are even allowed to participate are the best of the best, men able to be with nearly any women within reason, so most wouldn’t go back to the same one unless that women is at least somewhere close to best of the best as they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 08:07 AM
2

What people often misunderstand is that the women are the ones seeking and driving this dynamic. Because ultimately when you have as much attraction to wealth, status and even charisma as women do, someone that much your senior is going to be the only ones that fit the bill.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 07:55 AM
–

By partner I’m just referring to any form of partnering romantically. I think it was the custom flair option? And as long as you put “man” or “woman” I think it lets you respond to the corresponding posts but I’m not super sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 04:55 AM
–

Because men don’t require partnering with someone exceptional or especially desirable to them and partnering in general is the priority before being selective. You could say women have the need to be selective. That is NOT to say that men don’t select at all obviously under the conditions where partnering is secured enough to be a guarantee being selective is the next thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 03:58 AM
–

Women don’t have the NEED to partner inherently as men do, instead just having the desire to. So until women have a similar need to partner, somehow externally since they can’t naturally have it like men, then dating will always remain one sided towards women.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 07:37 PM
38

The problem is that men who are only able to date later were essentially excluded from partnering entirely, only because they eventually had something good enough to use them for was anything possible for them. So unless your point is they men should become millionaires in their teens and 20s so that they can experience any form of partnering, these guys were already excluded from it from the get go.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 07:33 PM
1

Because women can find enough exceptions, due to men having vastly greater range of attraction, to believe it. Women will never know what it’s like to be truly undesirable by definition, men save them from that, they won’t actually feel the consequences like men do, so why would they believe something that none of them could ever experience?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/25 07:19 PM
1

Being constantly validated and positively reinforced, regardless of it being warranted or deserved will eventually do that to anyone, it just doesn’t happen to the vast majority of men in the same way that even the women at the very bottom receive.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/25 07:14 PM
–

Ahh yes murdered something that happens to men 4x more than to women, no it doesn’t matter if it was a partner or not actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 08:15 AM
0

This is simply objectively false, the world would look far different if this was actually the case. In nearly every case women are societally more valued than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/25 08:34 PM
0

This is reversed, men acting and thinking this way is the effect not the cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/25 07:30 PM
1

The exact feeling needs to be shared to count as empathy by definition, so it would be like describing the taste of something you’ve never had.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 08:11 PM
1

What makes things worse form men is that as time goes on women’s attraction to men as a whole decreases becoming more top heavy as time goes on as a result of more perceived options and a more connected world, doing anything for women’s benefit will not change this. The unfortunate truth is that people only get more options as time passes and women having more options can exclusively result in men having less or dropping off entirely.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 03:59 AM
1

I would say men’s standards legitimately change based on their options, of course if your talking about situations where very desirable men are dating significantly down that could be the case born out of the difficulties man have dating all women, but this is no more common than women dating men purely for financial reasons for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 10:35 PM
0

The problem will not change, it can only exclusively get worse for men, so why would men want to make things better for women while they progressively have it worse?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 09:02 PM
2

Empathy requires sharing that emotion by definition, that’s why sympathy is correct here.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 09:00 PM
2

Empathy is defined as understanding and specifically sharing the feelings of another. While sympathy is similar but doesn’t require sharing those feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 08:58 PM
-2

Why would it matter either way, they already aren’t so why would men care? If your point is that it keeps women from having sex/partnering that’s more incentive for men to want this to have more women excluded(even if self imposed) like the men themselves are.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 09:57 AM
8

Empathy is impossible since it requires experiencing or at least having experienced the feelings in the first place, men who struggle wont ever be able to know what it feels like to be desired by default and women will never be able to experience never having an option even just for a time. So sympathy is actually the best it can get either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 09:46 AM
1

The problem is it has no solution, you can’t change women’s attraction and you can’t ensure all men are the same, so even if it’s immeasurably damaging to men it won’t make a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 06:54 PM
7

It doesn’t do either. Because as she confirms she’s only interested in the men who would never have to be lonely approaching her in the first place. Besides it isn’t like she isn’t being approached at all, the only way a woman could never receive any regular approach’s from men would be if she simply never came into contact with one in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 08:39 AM
1

The same with any other trait in men, larger stature being more desirable genetically to women over relatively smaller in all cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 08:32 AM
1

I’m not sure why you are mentioning status? I never mentioned anything about status as it’s only one portion of the equation.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 08:31 AM
1

Aside from a lot of these still including old data, most of them are irrelevant to pay point as they are only even considering potential attraction not who people actually end up with. And even then you would have to measure the charisma of men compared to women as a trait to get a full picture, combined with like you said, 55% of men still needing to make more money on top of it all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 08:27 AM
1

The articles are from this year but the data is not, in fact the first link explicitly states that it is using data from “decades ago” and questions its own relevancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 09:01 PM
1

Unfortunately you are drawing incorrect conclusions from these as they are referencing data both too old that it includes a time where men only exclusively able to partner when making significantly more, instead of just more like it still is now, and some from places were that is still the case. So In reality this points more towards the fact that women are only open to what they consider their “equivalent” when he’s still significantly more.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 08:56 PM
1

Do you believe money as the only defining trait for a person when partnering? Otherwise this is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 08:24 PM
1

Because men don’t get the choice whether or not to do so, holding out for an equivalent woman means never experiencing a romantic interaction and dying alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 07:48 AM
1

The option of having romantic experiences and partnering.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 09:26 AM
3

Nobody’s standards are “bad”. The difference here is no woman is ever excluded from men’s collective attraction, while plenty of men are excluded from women’s collective attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 08:55 AM
7

The only problem with this is that women aren’t capable of ever compromising their standards so in the end all this would do is result in far more men never experiencing a form of romantic interaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 08:51 AM
18

This could only be the case if there weren’t men who no woman could be attracted to but since the bottom percentile of men are undesirable to all women especially the bottom percentile of women this can’t be true.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 11:07 PM
14

It isn’t how I decide if anything is fake it’s the hypothetical that you introduced.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 07:35 PM
16

Nobody complaining about anything makes it fake or not. You could make the argument that shaving or haircuts are fake but even in that situation it results in women gaining immeasurably more from it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 07:18 PM
19

Men complaining about it isn’t required for it to still be something fake.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 07:05 PM
8

Tattoos aren’t saving an undesirable guy, they may be able to make a desirable guy more so to a select few, but ultimately this pales in comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 06:56 PM
62

No I don’t wish there were ways to fake traits to date up, but it would certainly be nice to be able to inherently be attractive to my equivalent percentile woman like how women have it by default.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 06:54 PM
5

Weight would not even be needed to be faked by women considering the amount of men even specifically attracted to women who are overweight, plastic surgery doesn’t do nearly as much for men, and height is still a huge one considering it’s the single most correlated trait to a man’s relationship status and easily the most restrictive trait in dating, dwarfing anything women have to live up to.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 06:51 PM
155

Women tend to have this misconception because they are able to fake most physical characteristics about themselves in order to gain access to men far out of their equivalence and assume the same must work for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 10:38 AM
2

I think they are a lot better than they are made out to be as I believe people should be partnering with their equivalents or close to it and your family while still biased towards you will still be more likely to choose someone close to your level. Though obviously this can’t appeal to women as their entire ability to feel attraction is inherently based on dating more desirable and if that’s not doable then ensuring they don’t partner at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 10:35 AM
1

The worst part is it just compounds the extreme difficulty of dating as a man currently and in the future as that’s just more men who now not only already don’t have a chance but now never will.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 10:30 AM
1

Women’s requirements will always still inherently include being attracted and as the bar for women’s ability to feel attraction continues to rise more and more women will make this complaint more often simply because collectively excluding men from the dating pool results in the obvious less men in it and the few left treating women worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 10:21 AM
4

Women complaining about men’s standards being unrealistic is the height of irony considering it’s coming from the group with inherently much higher standards, and then driven even HIGHER by the internet and a more connected world.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 08:44 AM
13

It’s as simple as men who are “sex material” are physically attractive to women but since women can only collectively consider very few men physically attractive it isn’t possible for all women to end up married to them, at least at any one point in time, and that’s where the “husband material” comes in which are men that women can be emotionally attracted to but not physically, still desirable men, just not physically extremely exceptional as required for women to feel any sort of physical attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/25 07:48 AM
7

Certainly anywhere 6’ and above is but you could probably include even slightly shorter than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/25 02:16 AM
7

I’m sure there is a limit at some point, maybe at 7’+, but that doesn’t mean other taller heights aren’t still exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/25 12:40 AM
10

Aside from the most obvious being exceptional height required for physical attraction, there is exceptional inherent charisma required for women to be emotionally attracted and these are just the baseline requirements to even be considered much less any more individual traits required for possible attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/25 12:23 AM
19

What you are glossing over is that the “I’m attracted to him” is where the incredibly high standard exists, requiring exceptional traits minimum in both the physical and emotional.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 11:51 PM
1

The best analogy would have to imply that the “fish” side will always try to make the fish sound better than they are as an attempt to sound morally superior.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 07:20 PM
1

That just means you only feel emotional attraction and can’t feel physical, or physical attraction is so weak it’s insignificant.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 07:13 PM
20

There certainly has to be more to some degree, but I think there is also a rise in the women who just have standards so incredibly high no men can even meet them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 07:09 PM
1

The problem with asking a question like this is that there is an obvious answer that has more perceived moral high ground, in other words women will overwhelmingly choose the peasant regardless of what they would actually want to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 09:48 AM
–

Mostly the same as dating apps have been influential enough in the dating world to change all women not just the ones she use it, also remember that the reason they show such a big gap between the population of men and women on dating apps is because women are only ever on them for very short amounts of time as long as they are even just below average and not incredibly picky to the utmost degree she’ll have her pick.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 08:38 AM
3

Especially as far as women are concerned, you can’t even be the “best version of yourself” but you must change yourself entirely, that’s why in isn’t within every man’s capabilities to be attractive to a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/25 08:31 PM
3

It could certainly count as underhanded but never as underhanded as taking money from your boyfriend when you leave that’s for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/25 08:29 PM
–

Yeah like I said in the other comment, I’m not claiming it will work only that it is the only “solution” woman can entertain.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 07:58 AM
–

I think you’ve already touched on the reason that no such “acceptance” movement exists for men, because the reason they can exist at all for women is because men were always far more accepting of women just inherently but since women have no such similar widespread attraction as a group towards men no similar movement for men can exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 04:40 AM
–

I’m by no means claiming it’s correct or that it will work, only that it’s the response and really only solution women would be open to.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 04:33 AM
–

Women’s only response to this will be to double down and attempt to exclude even more men in attempts to try to cause their potential sons to be those same desirable men that they were exclusively open to.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 04:10 AM
1

It doesn’t need to stop 100% of men in order to still be an inherently more desirable trait in men overall. I’m not sure what you are trying to say here with your last point, the only strategy men can employ is appealing to the most women possible otherwise they’d never partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/25 06:46 PM
0

I’m not sure how this contradicts everything I said? The ugly man in the relationship can still be exceptionally charismatic and experienced as a result. The idea that “genuine connection” doesn’t still require attraction first and foremost is ridiculous, desirability is still a prerequisite for both.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/25 05:26 PM
2

It isn’t men who simply can’t have regular sex with attractive women that are contributing less/dropping out of society but men who are excluded from sex or relationships at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/25 04:07 PM
1

The problem with this is that experienced men are inherently more desirable to women even if only for that fact, meaning this is asking men to decrease their desirability to women so that they can have even more competition.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/25 04:04 PM
3

This could only hold up if men were forcing women to birth their children and considering that is far from the case, the logic doesn’t hold up.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 09:58 PM
3

If that’s your point then that is objectively the default support in a relationship, women just expecting more than they deserve.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 09:53 PM
1

Sure, the standard relationship portion is a given but any extra for the pregnancy is not as it’s already fulfilled by the payment.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 09:50 PM
1

What I said IS actual 50/50 as he’s already paid for his portion of the pregnancy with what you outlined.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 09:38 PM
3

Only if he is now no longer even expected to give her any emotional or physical support at any point during the pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 08:59 PM
1

They don’t have to be a “reward” in order for it to be the single most important motivator and in many cases required for men. The “delusion” you’re telling men to drop is simply how men work at the most intrinsic of levels regardless of influence.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 08:11 PM
1

I don’t think the vast majority of men need to find their partner funny as a bar for them to partner, not just in favor of looks either but just as a trait not required even for emotional attraction. I think most women would be surprised at how little is expected of them relatively from men, including from their own bf/husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 01:12 AM
1

So what’s your point with 50/50 couples with no kids? Just “women can’t ever have an equal burden that’s unfair to women! It’s the man’s job to do everything!” Is the difference between a relationship and roommates to you really only sex? Or is the difference that he does far more than you do? Because one of these MUST be true to logically hold this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 01:07 AM
4

People commenting saying “this won’t improve things for you” are entirely missing the point, we are already talking about men who are 100% excluded with no other possibility, yes that can happen and no it’s not as uncommon as you think.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 12:59 AM
16

Simply acknowledging that these points are true and are unchangeably inherent I believe IS the whole point of arguing them in the first place as there are a lot of those who would still push back and argue otherwise. Widespread acceptance may not be able to possibly make a change but at least it would be acknowledged as the truth that it is instead of some other likely vilifying facade as a means to absolve women of any collectively effecting roll they play.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 12:43 AM
1

Being strung along is not exclusive to women the only difference being that when it happens to men they are often strung along and used for money, something that isn’t even a part of them, meaning they were both physically and emotionally rejected after being strung along making it a much more complicated rejection than the situation you describe for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 07:31 PM
1

No I haven’t, but I’m not necessarily around gay men very often, and I don’t think very many straight men often hang around gay men?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 07:24 PM
–

The reason is that in order for a man to have lots of sexual encounters he must be exceptionally desirable in some way but in order for women to do the same she only needs to be more indiscriminate, So what’s happening is men being praised/respected for being desirable and women being judged/not respected for being indiscriminate.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 07:18 PM
3

Why do women expect to be treated as Stacy? Why should you be the most attractive woman to your partner when you arnt the most attractive woman? Why do you expect special treatment when you are not special? Essentially what this post is saying is men shouldn’t expect to have the treatment they want only women get to force men to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/25 06:44 PM
1

The reason is simple, it’s physical attraction, we’re women as widely physically attracted to men there wouldn’t be anywhere near this much of a gap. And for those who would try and argue it doesn’t work no matter the attraction, just imagine that attraction was so strong that it did and that’s the reason for the “orgasm gap” which is really an attraction gap.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/25 06:31 PM
2

Well dying alone never to be able to experience a form of relationship is the alternative and that’s a pretty good motivator.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/25 06:25 PM
1

Then this is no different than how things normally are, women simply exclusively being attracted to non pitiable would overlap exactly with the type of men women are exclusively attracted to in the first place. This isn’t true, in fact the vary resin they are pitying themselves in the first place is BECAUSE they are excluded not the other way around, because excluded is the cause and all else is the effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 04:58 PM
1

I would argue that it simply has to do with women gaining a much larger range due to a more connected world causing their already naturally inherent selectiveness to become more selective, What happens when any selector is shown a greater selection? Well they become more selective by rising the standards that they will accept and this isn’t even considering women’s inherent desire to specifically exclude men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 10:25 AM
1

Well this would beg the question: do you like having to be who you aren’t or who you don’t want to be? The only option being essentially be someone else or have no chance isn’t going to feel good.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 09:59 AM
1

But then there is no argument to be made for why women shouldn’t better understand how difficult it is for men because yes pity may kill desire but any man that women could potentially feel any pity for is excluded by them already making that point moot. But in the end women having more understanding for men in this regard is impossible in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 09:53 AM
2

The difference is that the men aren’t putting in as much effort because they are not the ones women desire, collectively not just an individual woman, where as for men all women are collectively included in the group men desire. It isn’t liking men they desire that’s surprising to men both the collective exclusivity of the men women desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/25 05:30 PM
0

You do have one point, most of them probably won’t live out their entire lives, dying by their own hands as a preferable fate.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:35 PM
1

The evidence is literally the men who go their entire lives without women being capable of attraction to them. There are also a lot of people who always have others attracted to them so they can’t imagine an existence otherwise. Women simply don’t collectively have the range of attraction to include all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 07:14 PM
2

By the simple fact that there are men that women collectively cannot be attracted to, Even further add on the men who so few women can be attracted to that they will never encounter each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 06:49 PM
1

I disagree both that there are worse things and that it isn’t a permanent state, I’m not talking about simply being single for a while I’m talking about no one of the opposite sex being capable of attraction, it is very different and not something that can happen to women. Cancer or any other terminal illness is certainly better because at least you likely won’t have to live as long, the only exception being someone that just also causes you to be excluded from possible attraction but at that po…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 06:21 PM
16

For good looking or desirable men it won’t matter either way because they will always be able to partner regardless. I’m not seeing your point? You just don’t like knowing that these men exist? Do you just want them to suffer in silence and disappear? It’s like telling someone who just got their arm ripped off to stop screaming because you don’t want to have to listen to them, you can’t expect someone to just be fine with something so horrible happening to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 02:35 AM
15

Many of the things you mentioned are just simply harsh truths and these men aren’t even given living proof of such. Why would women care in the end? These men are already romantically excluded, do they need to now be excluded from expressing their struggles with such?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 02:23 AM
32

Being excluded from any form of romantic relationships is just about the worst single thing that can happen to a person, so expecting men to not be upset about it or talk about it is pretty unrealistic, and since more men are increasingly excluded more of this should be expected.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 02:12 AM
1

None of that means anything when so many men aren’t even given the chances to partner in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/25 09:58 AM
3

The answer to this question is another question: why are women less open to men’s efforts than ever before? Why would someone do the same thing over and over endlessly without seeing results? Most people aren’t insane so eventually they stop expecting a different result and give up.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 10:55 PM
2

This doesn’t make any sense because the bottleneck starts at women meaning that men can’t do anything about it until women did, unless you were considering men paying women to have a child for them or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 10:48 PM
1

The men who are forced to give up didn’t have a chance in the first place so it doesn’t really make a difference even if this were the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 10:44 PM
2

Women do find different things attractive just a much narrower list of things, just because one women’s infinitesimally small sense of attraction doesn’t overlap with another individual woman doesn’t mean that the total sum doesn’t still result in a small number of men, all that it means is that even within that small number of men women are still picky enough to disagree with each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 02:19 AM
2

Yes, it is. If that were the case there would be no men who are more desirable than others, but since that isn’t the case significant overlap is present half of it at an absolute over generous minimum.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 02:11 AM
2

That’s the point even if you consider less than half overlap in women’s attraction, which is being extremely generous, it would still result in less than half of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 01:32 AM
2

No because the likelihood of any individual encountering another must be factored in, including online, in other words if the rate of women individually being open to men is only 7% than all together it still pales in comparison to how many women men would be open to given their rate of upwards of 60%. And this is setting aside ALL overlap on women’s part too which obviously isn’t true, and would significantly decrease even further.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 06:42 PM
–

I don’t think anyone is shocked at such a revelation, but the fact that women are EXCLUSIVELY attracted to desirable men regardless of their own standing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 05:43 PM
2

Even if most individual women were swiping on a different 7% of men that would still result in a much lower number of men than what the total number of women that men would be open to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 05:41 PM
1

Bi, this is obviously a no brainer but this is just one of the myriad of other things that men are totally fine with/still attracted to compared to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/25 05:35 PM
–

Right now they aren’t correct, but we aren’t talking about right now. The problem is that if you’re arguing that grannies would be more of an option in this situation that would quite literally eventually make them not an option at all as they too would eventually exclude those men. All women over time will exclude more men, so it just has to get far enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 08:03 PM
–

Im not saying all men will be open to single mothers, and regardless of how many there are as long as they are women the amount of men they collectively exclude as options will increase over time.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 07:15 PM
1

I think it will still easily get to the point where enough men will be willing given lack of options especially after the women you mentioned become less of options as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 06:44 AM
1

No, the ways the vast majority of men are attracted to women are actually being attracted to women themselves not status or possessions they have.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 05:53 AM
1

It’s simply because of more options or perceived options, the selector will always be more selective when their selection increases.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 05:48 AM
2

Only until they weren’t able to date any further down in looks, I agree that would happen first but eventually men will have to go even lower.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 05:45 AM
3

Most men are already unable to date their preference or who they particularly like, so if it gets any worse I could definitely see that coming.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/25 11:16 PM
2

A lot of women here don’t understand that even if individual women are attracted to a marginally different tiny portion of men that still collectively results in all women being exclusively attracted to a small number of men combined.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 10:20 AM
1

It’s only ever going to be men jumping through any hoops, save for maybe the pinnacle of desirability, a woman couldn’t consider a form of a relationship any other way regardless of her desirability. So while a guy may go above and beyond for some women over others it’s not the same as increasing the number of hoops or rising them like women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 10:16 AM
2

No it doesn’t, but trying or entering a relationship where you are significantly lower desirability percentile will and when women ask men out they only consider doing so with men vastly more desirable so it causes this misconception.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/25 08:52 PM
–

…the vast majority of men don’t even get to date/partner with their type or a women they are particularly attracted to, it’s laughable to say men never compromise when men never getting their preference at all is closer to the truth. The irony is you can only have this perspective of men never compromising if you only ever interact with the desirable few men who never have to.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/25 08:49 PM
14

There are barely any men who will ever be able to be stay at home fathers, women are almost entirely intolerant of such a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/25 08:45 PM
1

Even if we were extremely generous and counted half of the women who identify as bi as preferring women (which isn’t the case) then it only results in around a 10% discrepancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 06:58 AM
0

They aren’t devaluing friendships, you are just devaluing relationships, it’s conflicting to think that you can fulfilling everything in a romantic relationship (minus sex) with friendship while also belittling it as “just wanting to fuck” unless 1. You didn’t enter romantic relationships at all and didn’t want to. In which case such a person wouldn’t understand the desire to partner in the first place. Or 2. You yourself are only interested in romantic relationships “to fuck” because otherwise …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 06:40 AM
6

Ironically the more submissive and masochistic sexual desires come from women themselves statistically, and as for why there is a focus on piv? That’s because that’s how reproduction happens… you know the very reason humans have attraction to begin with. So with all that said it’s a good thing men exist in such variety in their attraction that they can be attracted to women in any way they could want, if only women weren’t exclusively attracted to men who are so exceptionally desirable that they…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 06:23 AM
2

The thing is that women are only able to “offer more” because men, as a whole, are capable of attraction to them REGARDLESS of how they are in any facet or trait while the reverse is extremely far from the case women requiring far more to simply feel attraction causing women to believe they offer more and hence your perception being the way it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 06:13 AM
2

Is being a woman’s perfect preference not even enough now? Not surprising I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 08:33 AM
16

Women complaining essentially that they are being treated closer to how men are treated their entire life’s, still better mind you but a little closer.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 11:44 PM
1

There will always be “some level of advantages” to everything, but in the end quite simply it’s better to be in the position making the final choice than having to put in the application.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/25 07:47 PM
1

I think it has far less to do with gender expectations and more to do with the fact that women’s inherent ability to feel attraction in the first place is much more limited and exclusive resulting in many more traits being completely excluded from possible attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/25 07:30 PM
4

It’s more like would you rather be the potential employee putting in a job application (men) or the business owner selecting who to employ (women). The one who has the final decision is always at an advantage.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/25 07:24 PM
2

Aside from most of these widely not being true, if these are immeasurably dwarfed by the conditions men need to meet to even, love aside, be considered a potential option.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/25 07:14 AM
1

But are they as minimally attracted to their wife’s as women who “beta bux” because those would be not attracted at all. Essentially what you are saying here is that women have their own version of “beta bux” because more desirable women than themselves exist. But the reality is that most women shouldn’t be the most desirable women to their partner, unless they are the most desirable woman. You do not deserve to be treated as you are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 06:20 PM
–

They must be just as high or higher, considering she would not even victimize anyone if those standards weren’t high, meaning it’s impossible for them not to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 06:46 PM
1

While some of these may be misunderstandings sure they are not what causes men’s disproportionate dating struggles, simply the fact that women’s attraction collectively can only include some men and there will always be men excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 06:42 PM
1

For women personally is no less exclusionary of a trait to be attracted to than looks, if a guy has the wrong personality you can be excluded all the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 09:37 AM
6

It is never confidence itself that’s attractive but what causes the confidence that is attractive, but saying confidence is what someone was attracted to sounds better than, tall, physically attractive, extreme charisma, wealth, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 09:34 AM
17

Women choosing to be single more is due to the way their attraction works, rising their standards as more men are perceived as options, but eventually that reaches the point where what women can be exclusively attracted to is so much further above them that they are unlikely to partner. So while yes they may have access to relationships and handsome men easily they aren’t the BEST possible relationships or the MOST handsome men that women have become exclusively attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 09:29 AM
0

No money is an option as well, although you could argue that isn’t the person necessarily. Attraction to personality itself IS from charisma. Charisma isn’t necessarily confidence although it’s associated as usually someone who is charismatic becomes confident because of how much their charisma is beneficial to them, in the simplest terms charisma is just the ability for someone to like you outside of looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 03:38 AM
1

Someone not having desirability in one area while still being desirable points to having desirable traits in other areas, it isn’t circular reasoning to point that out. I’m not making the claim that you actively carried a threshold for charisma weighing men left and right until one met it, but that you likely just aren’t realizing how charismatic those guys actually were in order to be an option for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/25 10:06 PM
3

The feedback women receive is one o the biggest reasons they are less in touch with their desirability especially considering the current times where it’s only socially acceptable to over validate women to the point where even the rare accurate statement about one would simply be taken as an insult to her, Combine that with men only being able to partner down to compensate for women’s rising exclusionary standards means that the men interacting with them are not good comparisons to draw from.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/25 07:24 PM
6

There is no winning over women as long as women have access to modern and online levels of options their exclusion of men will only increase, the only thing men should be doing is simply no longer supporting and being against any systems that help women, the same way women are towards men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/25 07:45 AM
5

Very simple, even more so than people saying it’s for sex, men overall do not have the option to pick and choose their preference in a woman not for looks, personality, views etc. women’s hyper elevated standards can only get so high before inevitably men are going to take what they can get.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/25 07:34 AM
1

If you never dated an attractive guy than that’s even more reason to believe they were charismatic, confidence isn’t a requirement either it just often time comes with it because of how advantageous being charismatic is to the men who have it but it isn’t exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:07 PM
–

You couldn’t satisfy both men and women’s at the same time because both of what they want are mutually exclusive, men wanting not to get left out and women wanting specifically to leave most men out.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 09:54 AM
2

They are close but charisma goes further than social skills, at least until you get the upper end of social skill that would require charisma.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 08:13 PM
3

I think you are then underestimating their charisma, it doesn’t need to be some coercive and manipulative thing, the fact that someone is funny or in your case fun to be around is proof that they were in fact charismatic. Of course it can also be in combination with looks obviously if a guy is better looking and taller than all the rest he won’t need as much.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 06:09 PM
2

Are you trying to argue women don’t like traits women like?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 05:09 PM
2

In the sum of the traits women are collectively capable of being attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 05:00 PM
1

Women’s prioritizing what’s inside is just as restrictive and excluding as what’s outside, you could even argue more so, it is never just morality women look for inside but inherent charisma, without that women are not capable of any emotional attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 04:57 PM
2

By simply not being better than most men. Most women aren’t so extremely undesirable as to have a majority of men approaching them be even less so.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 04:53 PM
1

The the flaw in women’s vetting for men is in both their inability to correctly judge their own desirability and to try to match that in a partner, having a parter who is much rarer and more desirable is a major incompatibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 04:33 PM
2

They also reject the vast majority of men their age, same shape as them, and respectful men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 04:28 PM
1

The problem with this is that women “aren’t going to like” the lower portion of men regardless, they need not be “homeless people flashing their junk at you” to be disqualified from women’s attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 08:16 AM
0

These are not limited to dating apps but simply the result of trying to date women in a time where their standards have risen and continues to rise past the realm of average.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 08:12 AM
5

Not only do people rarely bring these topics up irl but in order to realize some truths you have to have a certain perspective that facilitates it, and in this case you’d have to first be undesirable in order to realize women do not talk to undesirable men in the first place, the lowest they’d go is average men who they perceive as “undesirable”.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 08:10 AM
1

I’m not so sure, I think the other way around there is always either emotional or at minimum monetary attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/25 06:35 AM
4

Either they are emotionally attracted or they aren’t attracted at all, I think you’d be surprised at how many men are with women they have no/near no attraction to.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 11:55 PM
3

It isn’t circular but it is a bit pointless since obviously women aren’t going to be able to be attracted to any less desirable men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 07:09 PM
4

It is genuine because choosing more desirable IS what results in most of these gripes by women in the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 06:31 PM
5

But those guys were all still more desirable, hence choose better.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 06:27 PM
4

Well considering a guy can still be in the desirable few without looks, albeit with other traits making up for it in an extreme way, this still doesn’t dispute the “choose better” argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 06:18 PM
5

There aren’t enough inherently very desirable men to go around hence the choosing to be single, same thing as exclusively being open to very desirable men. Remember that when regarding looks women’s in groups bias of 5x plays a part in thinking other women look better.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 05:33 AM
1

This would be another by product of chasing much more desirable men, they are the ones that need not reciprocate.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 12:27 AM
1

How one feels about the situation is irrelevant to the equivalence because any individuals feelings can be wrong perceived benefits or not. Things must be compared to their objective equivalence not how someone may feel is their equivalence.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 03:20 AM
1

I think men simply wish women would have appropriate standards, in other words a woman who is undesirable would need to include men who are undesirable including undesirable to HER.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:29 AM
13

The male equivalent of a woman having men who want to sleep with them is simply a man having women who want to sleep with them, it’s not how one feels about the situation that defines it’s equivalence. Also it is always objective more advantageous in dating for the opposite sex to be attracted to you vs not period.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:19 AM
1

This could only possibly be true if you only consider the too percentage of men to be “men”.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 05:10 PM
4

The only thing this app came close to proving was that very undesirable women can’t keep much, much more desirable men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 05:07 PM
1

Most is not in fact all and even in these situations almost nobody is spending the amount of money required to make that not still be the case so this point isn’t very relevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 12:23 AM
1

The only ways men can be desirable to all women is charisma, looks or wealth. So as long as a guy has some combination or an extreme of those he will be desirable regardless and as long as that continues many are going to be spoiled by being the few women are capable of attraction to.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 12:20 AM
1

Yeah, which is why this post and none of my comments refer to having sex with other women than their partners. Inheriting recourses doesn’t mean that 100% of your time and efforts went to your kids, nobody should have 100% of their efforts go to anyone but this is all besides the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 06:32 PM
3

This post isn’t talking about having multiple different children with different women. I don’t think it would be good for any father to give ALL his resources and time to anyone even his children that would be obsessive. And considering we aren’t talking about men going out and having multiple families as that’s very rare I’m not sure what that last parts about.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 06:23 PM
7

Quite the leap in logic, especially considering many of these exact situations they are fathers.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 06:15 PM
5

Partnering is exceedingly difficult for men and only getting more so and as a result it’s going to be extremely rare for any not insanely desirable man to be with anyone near his preference, men have to take what they can get regardless of attraction. So as long as women are only open to dating more and more desirable men this is going to be more prevalent.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 05:35 PM
1

I think celebrity status doesn’t have the same effect on men that it does for women, as in being a celebrity doesn’t massively increase desirability in women, in fact I’d argue in many cases can decrease desirability. Now obviously you could argue she’s still a “celebrity” but obviously not to the same degree so the point still stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 05:31 PM
1

It isn’t limited to looks, desirable men can act and treat women any way because they are the only few all women are open to.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 05:21 PM
2

Any time the selectors, women in this case, have more of a selection they will become more selective and as an obvious result the selected will become fewer. Essentially any time women gain more options men will have fewer options proportionally.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 08:50 AM
2

The fact is that men who are desirable to women will be so regardless of how “bad” they act, this is a byproduct of women reducing the variety of men they are open to down to such a small group.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 08:46 AM
3

Because women trying to shape men away from being “bad” is futile but not for the reasons you think, the men who are able to be “bad” here are the desirable ones (yes even the ones who you don’t want to admit are), the ones that all women are exclusively attracted to and will obviously not be changing because they have all options so the result in women trying to shape men is that they only ever pointlessly influence the men that they exclude.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/25 05:51 PM
2

Unfortunately regardless of how many men she personally dated, women’s attraction rises because of simply exposure to more options and in a more interconnected world this is inevitable.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/25 05:41 PM
7

This isn’t disputing what I said, Only men who can be unchangeably excluded by all women simply for immutable traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 08:17 PM
5

Because it is only men who can be unchangeably excluded by all women simply for immutable traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 07:31 PM
4

Forced to be unable to partner is the worst thing that can happen to a person. And considering that this is literally making the implication that men are worse than ever, women don’t have a point when making that as a counter.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 05:41 PM
10

Nobody is going to remain “good” forever, you can only exclude and torture them for so long until eventually they either push back or their will breaks entirely. And as a side note women are worse than they’ve ever been before but the difference is that men are yet still accepting of them entirely, no not just for sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 05:33 PM
2

These things are a symptom of the increasing difficulty and exclusion of men from being able to partner not the other way around, men are the only ones open to dating down or even capable of attraction to anywhere but up.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 07:16 AM
2

Unfortunately it isn’t only severe conditions that exclude men from possibly partnering, simply not falling under any woman’s most desirable preference is enough to disqualify men entirely.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 07:36 AM
3

Women being able to cope better while “alone” is biological in its entirety.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 07:33 AM
2

Unfortunately the fact remains that the likelihood of the guy all women are exclusively open to is far more likely to value you less than the ones who are excluded (not that it matters since women can’t feel attraction to them anyway).
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:30 AM
2

Undesirable men don’t have the choice of a real relationship, so the choice isn’t fake connection with a prostitute or the real thing it’s fake connection or nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:26 AM
3

Like all other things it just depends on whether the guy is very desirable or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:22 AM
3

Only women who are even less desirable, and even then the guy would still be required to have some trait or combination of that sets him above the rest in some way. I’m not saying women don’t ever lower their standards but when they do it’s lowered to a minimum that is yet still more than themselves, women’s ability to feel any attraction itself is predicated on this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 06:46 PM
1

A cope to have a more acceptable reason to be exclusively attracted to men with larger more imposing statures.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:42 PM
1

I think too many times people will assume, mostly based on looks, that that the woman in the relationship is more desirable or has low standards but in reality the man would always have other traits so much higher that it’s actually the reverse, I have never seen otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:37 PM
3

I would dispute that they are actually “average, everyday” men, some women may be desperate for validation but only from men they are attracted to and that in and of itself will eliminate most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:02 AM
2

Yeah, just as base attraction to one and other.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 07:25 PM
3

That’s because the men who you are most likely to see are going to be over represented by the men who are doing ok, or at least were able to partner, even just the ability to jump from partner to partner is entirely exclusive to very desirable men. It’s just that the men who are the most desirable will be over represented when it comes to anyone’s anecdotes because they are, for obvious reasons, the ones people are both more likely to think about and more likely for more personal to know about o…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 06:59 PM
1

What your asking here is why are very desirable men not marrying less desirable women, rarity is inherent proportionally to desirability and since women’s standards are much more similar and higher than men’s it just compounds the fact that any individual women will only be open to partnering further and further up. So why would anyone not be open to marrying someone much less desirable than themselves?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 05:37 PM
–

Just because some men are exceptionally desirable enough to fool everyone doesn’t still mean that the group who isn’t attracted to men isn’t going to be far less likely to be misdirected by a mask of desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 05:33 PM
2

The reason women can manage feelings of “loneliness” better is simply because the function of women’s attraction is to filter and exclude men so that means in the situation she is alone she is still partially fulfilling the function of excluding, while for men there is no partially fulfilling any function while alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 05:29 PM
2

For a man it would be as soon as someone realizes he isn’t inherently charismatic, physically desirable or likely to make up for it with wealth. Without any form of those three things it isn’t possible to partner as a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 05:25 PM
4

Just because you may not be able to outwardly see that a guy is very desirable doesn’t mean he isn’t, all of the men you see who are able to jump to many relationships are still the inherently desirable few whether it’s extreme charisma or any other not immediately identifiable trait.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 05:21 PM
2

There is no woman that doesn’t get approached at a realistic frequency, only women who consider themselves above the men who approach them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 05:40 PM
1

A lot of women don’t seem to understand how unaccepting women are at becoming even friends with guys that aren’t her dream guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 05:36 PM
2

Women have always done this, that’s what happens when you have an attraction that relies on exclusively partnering up as women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 05:34 PM
2

Women’s attraction is inherently for excluding men, so in any situation where that can happen it’s going to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 05:31 PM
2

They should simply “choose better” by staying within their range, one of the most important compatibility aspects is to be relatively similar in rarity of desirable traits, something often overlooked by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 05:25 PM
1

The same can be said for women believing otherwise, the difference being that the women with options more options including “bad” will always have more good than a man with less or especially no options.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 04:03 AM
1

That’s the reason there is no “bad” option, because a deemed “bad” option is still always positive over none or less, that’s the whole point.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 09:24 PM
1

The point is that it’s always better to have more attention than less no matter how much of it is deemed “bad”, because the positives will always outweigh the negatives including when a women might perceive all attention as negative.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 09:11 PM
3

Unfortunately it isn’t about getting attention you deem bad but if you get it at all, because whether you deem it unwanted or not, it’s still always above not getting any or simply getting less, because it NEVER comes without good opinions.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 06:26 PM
–

I think women do want commitment it just has to be from an extremely exceptional guy, often a guy so much better he’d obviously never do so, and if a women didn’t feel this way it’s more likely her standards are just so astronomically high that she’s never seen one good enough for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 08:13 AM
6

Considering it’s enough to complain about, many times more than the average man. Coming with unwanted attention is an irrelevant point regardless how one might think about it, because no woman only has bad options only options she thinks are bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 08:10 AM
1

The problem here is it’s ignoring the fact that there are just as many women who have these equivalent traits and have absolutely no problem dating, so at that point you are just saying “men as a group just need to do more than women as a group.”
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 07:33 PM
2

In a way this is true but only because they will be even more selective, and more so open exclusively to their betters, than the current generation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 07:25 PM
1

Not for men’s attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 03:31 PM
2

Ironically this is the direct result of women doing nearly exactly what you accuse men of doing, since women sense of attraction itself can only be so for men more than they are, resulting in women only ever interacting with objectivity very desirable men who are obviously going to be wanting a woman somewhere close to his level. All evidence points to women both underestimating men’s looks while overestimating women’s looks collectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 07:51 AM
2

A fetish would have to imply that it’s out of the ordinary so in a way your right for women they may be fetishes but for men it is simply diverse attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 07:32 AM
6

No matter the complaints you hear the reality is that men not only are more excepting of various traits than women are but they are specifically attracted to them and yes that includes being old, skinny, fat, autistic, uncharismatic, unsociable, mean, ugly, tall, short, etc there is no trait or combination of that a realistic number of men aren’t even SPECIFICALLY attracted to let alone exclude.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 07:12 PM
2

Unfortunately men are going to remain human, women would be acting the same way if there were only a small group of women that were ever desirable. It can still be a character flaw but that doesn’t mean it isn’t still an inevitable side effect of women continuing to shrink the number of men they are collectively open to.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 03:24 AM
2

Im not making the claim that women are attracted to these traits but that because of women’s ability to be attracted to men as a whole is so limited it causes those men to act that way, its essentially like a monopoly, a company who has a total monopoly on a product or service would have little inventive to care about any individual customer. This isn’t necessarily blaming women per say, obviously you can’t change inherent attraction, but it is to say it is unchangeable as long as women’s attrac…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 02:28 AM
4

And? Are you trying to argue women don’t make fun of equivalent men? Women make fun of men for plenty of things, being short, being broke, not being charismatic etc, but the difference here being that men don’t collectively exclude them entirely on top like women do to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 11:36 PM
1

This needs the clarification: in order for MEN to be able to date.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 10:31 PM
2

He’s the thing, it’s exhausting to be with the men who women are attracted to, this is a result of that small group of men having virtually all women only open to them causing them to not care as much, why would he he could replace you with any other woman? Women’s much more limited attraction has essentially caused relationships to be unbalanced in any where she is attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 08:37 PM
4

Except that fat, older and single mothers still have plenty of good options attracted to them whether they consider them good options or not, they just are bitter about loosing out on access to the same group of men all women want.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 08:32 PM
-1

Well that depends would we be including men that women can settle for if they are successful enough to essentially pay for it or only including physical and emotional attraction? Because the former would be much higher whereas the latter would be much lower, no higher than half of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 11:29 PM
0

Like I said I’m including emotional desirability as well which I believe women’s attraction feels even more even more similarly than physical.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 10:54 PM
0

A walk outside will confirm this, the group of men women can be attracted to do t need to all LOOK the same they will just all have the required traits physically and emotionally.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 08:59 PM
1

I don’t think of it as one dimensional, quite the opposite, for instance I in no way believe it’s limited to the physical but that but that the required traits for emotional attraction from women is just as limiting.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 08:06 PM
2

Women’s narrow attraction isn’t limited to the physical either, there are only a few personalities and emotional traits women have the capacity to be attracted to as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:48 PM
1

It doesn’t matter the amount of knowledge you have in the end the reality is that not every man can possibly be desirable in any way to a women while all women are at minimum still desirable to a realistic number of men. Knowledge of what they could never be or have only serving to hurt them.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:45 PM
2

It isn’t the wedding ring she’s after it’s just that since women are attracted to such a smaller group of men that the ones who are married are already in that group, or at minimum very likely to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:39 PM
1

“Choose better” when told to women can refer to a mismatch in actual desirability, when considering asking someone out men, if they want to have any degree of success, must consider if they are a close enough match that way even over their own attraction as opposed to women who are overwhelmingly only open to utmost attraction, including emotional. But the argument can be made that without that unbalanced desirability women’s attraction wouldn’t exist at all meaning they can’t choose any better …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:37 PM
1

It isn’t some be all end all, in order to get anywhere near what women could consider a high value man you’d have to be those things while also being better looking than all the other women, this is just a side effect of women only considering the same group of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:22 PM
1

If what you describe about your situations is true you are well above average to be certain, for most men that would be a once in a lifetime experience. As for myself women cannot feel attraction towards me.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 07:56 PM
1

Pretty ironic considering men are not the ones that have a sense of attraction that is predicated on success.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 07:49 PM
0

Yes, that’s exactly why inherent desirability is more than just looks…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 11:33 PM
0

You’d have to be totally oblivious to not see what women not just want but are only open to in men, but men who are desirable, or just people in general, would just like to believe their efforts made more of a difference than they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 11:12 PM
0

Not really relevant considering the importance of unchangeable traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 11:05 PM
1

Even if this were the case, most men will still end up towards the bottom of at least one unchangeable trait.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 11:03 PM
–

Well considering rates of depression are significantly higher in men who are single combined with a much higher rising suicide rate and less likely to be diagnosed, I wouldn’t be so sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 06:33 PM
3

Sure, I think we’d all prefer to be good at everything but unfortunately even being good at most things isn’t possible for most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 08:36 AM
2

Essentially don’t just be good at one thing be good at EVERYTHING! Unfortunately an unsurprising revelation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 07:56 AM
–

It will either kill them or be far worse than if they died.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 07:53 AM
1

Not everyone can change who they are in order to have a desirable personality, especially considering the restrictive nature of women’s attraction to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/25 07:18 PM
2

Women have access to more relationships all the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/25 07:16 PM
1

All she’d need to do to escape abuse in the first place is break up with him, then after that she could find a guy to stay with if she wanted after without even needing an app, but she obviously has to leave first. Not only this but she would likely still find a man willing to do this.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/25 12:22 AM
1

The biggest issue isn’t even that women seldom find men attractive but that the ones they do find attractive are the same men between them collectively, despite their perception of it being otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/25 08:51 PM
1

All of the “problems” women even claim with dating is literally born from dating being so easy for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/25 08:49 PM
–

To a degree, if your someone who’s never put any effort into ever talking to anyone that may be true, but for the most part you’d be able to tell especially considering the heights required to be reached in this context.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/25 07:04 PM
2

The vast majority of traits women find attractive are inherently unchangeable, for example you can’t be physically attractive without being taller than most men and you can’t be emotionally attractive without being more charismatic than most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/25 05:51 PM
4

The upper limit of both of them are fixed. Any potential you could possibly have is set inherently.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/25 01:20 AM
4

Only for the men inherently born with the potential of doing so.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/25 01:19 AM
2

Charisma is similar to intelligence you cannot increase it over what you have inherently. Alcohol would be an example of decreasing inhibition not increasing charisma while simultaneously lowering the threshold required for charisma.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 07:43 PM
2

Because you can still accumulate wealth without inherently having it but you cannot change your inherent personality and your charisma is entirely limited by such. Obviously money won’t make a difference for all men, it isn’t a guarantee and you can always be entirely excluded regardless of any other trait.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 07:27 PM
4

Yeah I’d definitely can but for money it isn’t required unlike for charisma.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 07:18 PM
1

All those examples either still required great success monetarily or are still just as inherent and unchangeable. Nobody is saying money will guarantee anything, of course there is always going to be ways for women to exclude men at all levels of any possible level.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 06:58 PM
10

Any phycological or emotional attraction women can feel requires men to be inherently charismatic (or inherently having the aptitude for charisma), meaning it need not be included all the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 06:54 PM
2

Entirely synonymous with money in this situation, because we have already had to exclude men who would be inherently powerful because they’d need no dating advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/25 06:48 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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