TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Livid-Log7463 Archive

View 0 posts and 2,229 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 2,229 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

Because it is overwhelmingly something uniquely given to women, I’d argue men would like it just as much but they just don’t receive it because women are far less willing and open to do so for the overwhelming majority of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/26 01:34 AM
–

It can be both detrimental to her critical thinking skills and a privilege at the same time. If you had a private chef for you your whole life then suddenly didn’t and had to cook your own food, leaving you without the knowledge and ability to make what you want doesn’t mean having a private chef wasn’t a privilege. Adult and older women still get help and certainly still have more access to in the end anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/26 01:31 AM
–

I would argue a lot of that disparity in after break up depression is actually due to men having a much harder time ahead of them to get another relationship while women will have plenty of options at the drop of a hat, yes even if she thinks she’s above them, compare that to men where that could easily be his last and it’s not hard to see why this is the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/26 01:27 AM
–

Over being enslaved as that’s what the situation would have to be in order to get enough monetary incentive out of them for women, not to mention never being able to partner. It would entirely justify violence but I don’t think it would even need to get that far unless the hypothetical just eliminated men’s vote entirely. This argument doesn’t hold because if we are talking about extracting that level of wealth and removing partnering to that degree there would be no army because it would be all…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 05:35 PM
–

And what supports that that would be enough to compel women to want to have children without partnering? the drive to have children in the first place comes out of partnering, maybe the poorest would go for it the same way they do now, not only that but how do you get a monetary incentive that high without the portion of the population your taking it from, who are now more disenfranchised than ever, getting rid of it quickly?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 05:14 PM
–

Right so your argument then is that alternatives to partnering will result in more births and be able to make up for it? An outlandish claim at best. What evidence do you have of women in majority wanting to have children in any capacity without partnering?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 05:03 PM
–

Because partnering results in more fertility than any alternative could, providing more alternatives could only continue to worsen the problem. Partnering itself declining is the cause for decreasing birthrates.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 04:50 PM
–

Not only are men more stigmatized for it but women are more likely to want to be part of such a group in order to virtue signal/receive social bonus points.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 04:40 PM
–

I’m not sure how this gets more women to partner and have children (the cause of the fertility crisis), in fact this might make it worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 04:36 PM
0

In general people shouldn’t be too encouraged to be too independent, humans are inherently dependent on partnering in general and too much of a push to make people too independent is a bad thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 09:01 PM
3

Sure, but this is the same as anything else, women are always given more leeway/forgiveness than men in all aspects of behavior and society.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 08:57 PM
1

The problem it that women inherently have much higher standards for possible attraction to men, so what I’m saying is imagine the situation where they aren’t also handed the relationship, those already higher standards just increase resulting in little to no change.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 05:21 PM
1

While what you are saying does make sense to a degree, the problem is that women are already only open to the exceptional imagine how much higher their standards would be if the men didn’t do everything for them to initiate.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 04:34 PM
4

Not that it’s necessarily virtuous but most men would date most women, you list traits that men generally don’t like and that’s true but in dating men are so disadvantaged that they will absolutely still take that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 03:50 PM
–

I get that, but these descriptions quite literally mean to describe someone more or less so than average.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 10:26 PM
–

I’m not sure that’s the correct use of those descriptors, for instance when describing an average person calling them tall would be incorrect including if the person describing them was shorter, they could say that they are “taller than themselves” but not “tall” same goes for any other descriptors.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 10:15 PM
–

Then the difference is that what you’re describing isn’t someone who is “funny” or “articulate” when using those things to describe someone what they mean is that they are more so than average because if they are averagely funny or articulate they aren’t “funny” or “articulate” they are average.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 09:40 PM
–

Well maybe you and your colleagues are above average, that’s entirely possible, if true this would actually be an example of insecurity because it would be those who feel themselves average when they are actually above.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 09:31 PM
–

Just as long as we are clear as to that actually being insecurity.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:55 PM
–

The point is that security is someone who is below, at or above average to feel as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 06:23 AM
–

I don’t want to play undesirable Olympics and it’s particularly pointless to talk about any specific individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:42 AM
–

I’m not here to play who is less desirable, but all I’ll say is that it isn’t possible for woman as a group to feel attraction towards me, imagine that however you like. What your saying is to actively be insecure, insecurity is not realizing what you have meaning if someone is average to be secure he’d have to feel as such, hence the change that you talk about in your post.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:34 AM
–

Here’s the thing if a person is average feeling like they are or should have experiences outside of average would be insecure, that doesn’t mean you can’t try to make yourself better but until an average person became better feeling anything outside of average would be insecure. Im exceptionally undesirable and it isn’t possible for women to feel a form of attraction but that’s beside the point, I’m not using someone exceptionally undesirable as reference. I’m not necessarily arguing it won’t ev…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:13 AM
–

Here’s the thing if they are especially “funny and articulate” than they aren’t actually average, we live in a time where men are excluded by women outside of their control more than ever before and eventually that is going to readjust what is considered realistic and therefore if your secure that your average you wouldn’t realistically expect to have a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:02 AM
–

It’s actually the opposite it’s secure, we’ve never had this amount of men excluded by women and being it’s so widespread men are being secure in that exclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:52 AM
3

I agree for the most part, but it’s not an easy thing to do, relegating yourself to go without the most inherent and integral drive that a person can have, it’s going to be tough but it will be better that fruitlessly trying your whole life for the same result.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:39 AM
3

The problem is that it relies on people saying they feel lonely and in reality someone can feel lonely but not actually be lonely , so you would have to exclusively use studies that find if people are actually lonely and alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:32 AM
1

Some will some won’t but in the end men are the only ones capable of accepting such a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 02:05 PM
2

If this is supposed to be a equivalent to the question asked a few days ago asking men if they’d date a woman if they could never have sex, then the most equivalent question would be “would you date a man you could never be emotionally connected to”.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 03:23 PM
1

I should’ve added a comma my bad
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 03:05 PM
2

Of course, any guy who is excluded by women would be ecstatic to be able to choose this. Men don’t solely have the desire to have sex with women we have the desire to pair up with them as well and not even with one in particular.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 06:51 AM
1

What do you mean? Are you referring to the part where I refer to a man “impossibly increased in desirability in all areas”.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 06:44 AM
1

The standards held for men are all encompassing, and unless men impossibly increased in desirability in all areas domestic changes would make no difference, as it could only help already very desirable men more desirable which is pointless. Women’s attraction to men if exercised freely without outside influence or pressure exists specifically to select exceptions, men specifically more desirable than most, and is directly opposed to men’s.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:39 PM
1

Since the vast majority of women are only open if men did pay first it’s unfortunately more likely this would just result in no woman ever passing that filter, not to mention the fact that a woman that would pass being more desirable resulting in that woman never being open to any man but the best.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:22 AM
2

The vast majority of men don’t expect very much at all and the next biggest portion don’t expect anything at all. Now a very small portion of the most desirable men might have more similar expectations but unless the majority of women were only trying to interact with them and basing their ideas on them that wouldn’t be an issue…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:14 AM
–

The biggest reason men have been turned off from dating, both irl and online, is that they have already been excluded, in a way it’s the other way around for men it’s trust in the fact that women have already excluded them and proximity to women has decreased because women have removed themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:08 AM
1

Your understanding of the problem it wrong, what happened is that women got what they wanted and men had no problem with it and were no less attracted while on the other hand women remain limited in the way they can be attracted causing anything they gained to collectively rise their standards and obviously reduce the pool of men that are acceptable to them. Of course there can be some niche exceptions but in the end the bottleneck of relationships will always be women’s ability to feel attracti…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:02 AM
1

The only problem is that so many women require it inherently that you can just as easily make the argument that a man reducing his chances to such a degree is also “dumb”.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:51 AM
3

Men who are more desirable than others, specifically women’s attraction itself being predicated on men being more desirable than others, in what partially can vary slightly between women. I think this is especially a major difference considering men don’t require such a thing and in most cases don’t even require particular attention to partner seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:48 AM
3

A few things out of the way, if a woman were as you describe the average guy would be attracted any guy outside of this would be confirmation of an above average one, and as long as we are talking about approaching trying to get someone else to take initiative wouldn’t be approaching just to be clear. So as long as the situation is as outlined then the guy can already be attracted and the best approach would just be any way that is straightforward: directly asking for more contact (number, date …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 03:16 AM
–

It’s all just desirability, guy friend who is much more desirable wanting something more = what women want, equivalent or less desirability guy doing so = dread.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 03:07 AM
1

While logistically true, how would women then receive the pursuit and relationship carrying that they require?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 06:59 AM
–

It’s hard to imagine anyone believing otherwise without just arguing in bad faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 06:57 AM
1

I’m sure very desirable man would but not for average men, in fact it’s an easy way to tell if a woman is always trying with more desirable men is she’s always facing any significant standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 04:33 PM
2

Desirability as in overall ability to garner attraction both physically and emotionally. As far as a minority it depends on what minority, some do better some do worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 03:44 PM
1

I would argue this extends to relationships and marriage as well, most men are not given the options to be with any woman they like in particular, and by extension most women are not partnered long term because their husbands/boyfriend liked her but because she was one of if not the only one willing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 09:45 AM
14

This depends almost entirely on desirability, if a guy is desirable it’s like playing a fair game one where you have a chance and will have some wins but if you aren’t it’s like being forced to play game where you are guaranteed to loose and you have no other choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 09:34 AM
2

The reason they should treat it as an achievement is because women treat it as something to be achieved.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 07:49 AM
–

While I agree the reason is because it’s so popular for women, they do actually believe it as well because of that popularity.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 07:46 AM
4

Go down but only from infinite options to plenty of options.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/26 09:07 AM
9

This doesn’t happen to women, they are never short on options for relationships regardless of how old and how low in desirability.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 07:25 PM
1

The isn’t really a way to, unless you started that way from the beginning, it will always be there. My best advice would just be to distract yourself with whatever possible, as much as possible but in the end it will always be there to torture you no matter what you try.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 07:25 PM
1

What I mean is that unless they were just paid an unrealistic amount or forced there wouldn’t be enough women willing.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 07:20 PM
1

The reason for the birth rate decline is the relationship decline, economics playing far less of a role and being used as a scapegoat for women. Asking anyone to be a single parent is a far cry from a possible solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 09:11 AM
1

Except that there are certainly those that can feel attraction to the physical without any to the emotional and vice versa, now if your someone who can’t that’s one thing but that doesn’t mean others aren’t capable of it. Where your example fails is considering attraction to physical the same as attraction to emotional, you seem to be hung up on assuming because attraction at all is emotional then that means it’s emotional attraction, which is not the topic, we are talking about a person being a…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 07:48 PM
1

Because harassment has a much lower bar than coercion and can even just be defined as essentially just annoying someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 07:39 PM
1

Buy what are you feeling is the entire point, is someone feeling attraction to the physical or the emotional is the entire point. This has less to do with how feeling attracted affects the body but what brings on those feelings of attraction in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 07:06 PM
1

Based on coercion requiring a significant repercussion. HR could define as harassment, not that HR could ever be a good example, just because you may not want to talk to the person and harassment having a much lower standard, but not wanting to be asked anything or the pressure of saying no still remains far too insignificant to be coercion.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 06:59 PM
1

How do you feel tired? Emotionally tired or physically tired? You feel sleepy? Are you lazy or is your body tired? If not defining attraction then of course it’s a combination but when specifically breaking it down by saying physical or emotional attraction you are defining them as mutually exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 06:49 PM
1

Not significant enough for coercion.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 06:43 PM
1

Not to the level required for coercion, it has to be significant not just being asked any number of times.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 08:23 AM
2

Then they are incorrect, coercion can’t include the pressure of simply being asked it has to be significant threat, blackmail etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 08:30 PM
2

Asking multiple times isn’t coercion.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 06:12 PM
2

That’s incorrect, what she says about it is what defines “consent”.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:03 PM
3

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
3

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
1

Consent is quite literally them saying yes, how anyone feels about it is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 09:49 AM
2

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
1

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
1

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
1

Im not sure I follow?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 06:52 AM
1

And that’s the point of view you have to have when looking at things on a large scale. You’d also have to consider the likelihood of ever meeting any individual is extremely low.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 07:55 PM
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
2

The specific average man is above the average man by virtue of statistics, for instance the average man would also be trying to date up is he was only interested in a very specific type of average woman, meaning if someone has a very specific type then even if that person is relatively average you’ve made them more desirable than you in comparison are by virtue of narrowing down those in your range rarity is inherent to desirability, Essentially he may be average but he’s only specific few withi…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 12:47 AM
2

I doesn’t matter what she deems comparable or not only that her equivalent is the average man not a hyper specific one, in fact I wouldn’t argue that she dose consider them compatible that’s my whole point from the beginning.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 12:09 AM
2

Right so it isn’t “lots” but very specific while not being deserving of specific.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 11:54 PM
2

So which one is it “that one guy” or “lots”.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 11:50 PM
2

What you’re missing is that that is a factor as well, the average woman isn’t worth a hyper specific average guy but an average guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 11:40 PM
2

“Female sexual attraction is not the same as male sexual attraction. We (women) do not want to and cannot be attracted to men generally, we have to find that one guy we have the hots for!” So in other words they are not actually attracted to their equivalent they are looking for someone hyper specific even when they themselves are common.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 11:23 PM
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
7

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
-4

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

Because partnering is at minimum a drive on par with self preservation, or sometimes even stronger and more integral.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:16 AM
3

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
2

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
1

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
2

Why? He wasn’t the one not getting the more that he wanted it was her.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:34 PM
2

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

It’s defined that way by being called physical, the wording means that physical and emotional attraction are inherently mutually exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:42 AM
1

The only problem with that is that I’m describing what it has to be in order to be called physical attraction otherwise it can’t be so. Maybe there are just those entirely incapable of physical attraction and instead only feel a sort of physically associated emotional attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:19 AM
2

Put off emotionally doesn’t mean physically, a physical attraction can’t increase only me modified by the physical and emotional vice versa, it can’t increase only obviously diminish overall attraction but not when limiting to physical. Why is it helpful? I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily “helpful” but neither does it need to be, it just outlines how someone may be attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 03:32 AM
1

Because that’s the thread, that’s what we are talking about seeing physical attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 03:20 AM
1

I think they are fairly easy to separate, for instance just imagine how attracted you’d be to someone if you hated their personality and whatever is leftover is the physical attraction, if it’s nothing than there is no physical attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 03:02 AM
1

I’m not disputing that most of the time attraction to someone is mixed. But when in the context of keeping it to physical or emotional each one needs to be separated from one and other, maybe not everyone is capable of doing that, but to use your example if being asked for evaluation of physical attraction you’d then disregard those feeling like “does she look carefree, or adventurous, or remind him of someone else.” Just the same as if asked about the evaluation of emotional attraction that you…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 01:56 AM
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
3

For anyone reading this far down this far down, this is about the sympathetic response women can have.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:57 PM
7

That’s because it’s much worse, they’ve had to live.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:47 PM
7

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
4

No partnership is utmost important, and women have access by default.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:06 PM
5

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
7

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
8

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
10

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
2

It’s easy to fast, it’s hard to starve.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 06:11 PM
1

…..I guess shouldn’t have expected a different response in the end…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 06:06 PM
2

No? I never said they don’t deserve a partner at all, but that essentially their desirability determines the desirable traits they should end up with. So in this case if a woman is looking for a larger man and was less desirable than that should go unfulfilled.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:58 PM
1

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/26 05:53 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

Or just that what I’m explaining is just the truth. The reason, as I explained, is that average men would be instantly rejected while average women wouldn’t be, at least the anywhere near the same rate.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 06:01 PM
1

Remember that I already explained how it’s true for men to be desirable on the show but not necessarily for women because they have lower standards to live up to. Why would he want to be on a very well known YouTube channel?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 05:28 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
1

The researchers is because if they had average men the videos would be 30 seconds long as women pop their balloons instantly, but the same wouldn’t happen to women so they need not be held to any standard. Depends, above average men can just be single by choice and out of having an abundance of options without needing a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:26 AM
-2

You might want to read my comment again.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 08:57 PM
1

How so? I never claimed women were held to any such standard for the show. Ah yes this guy is “you guys”.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 08:22 PM
1

Women also focus attention to the top the only difference being that it’s nearly exclusively so unlike men where the average man will still overwhelmingly include the average woman for relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 07:58 PM
1

Look how many women say they are only open to taller than average men. Ultimately men rate women on a bell curve meaning which is the only possibility correct distribution of attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 07:46 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
1

The proof is that he was able to be on the show and walk in without first being filtered out.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:33 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
1

If you can’t obviously tell that he is then you are not capable of understanding this argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 07:52 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
1

Desirable men are not desperate. A desirable guy “sabotaging” himself to 5 out of the thousands he has makes little difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 09:58 AM
6

Why do you believe this is referring to the average man and woman?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 09:53 AM
1

How so? Exceptionally desirable men are not desperate, and unless they are burning through significant numbers of the population, they still have an abundance of. He need not act desirably to any 7 women, an exceptionally desirable guy has thousands more.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:56 PM
1

An example of someone with exceptional social skill? Introvert vs extrovert certainly plays a role but an example would be someone who is an outlier at social interaction, someone who people are socially drawn to as opposed to neutral or repulsed by.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:51 PM
1

You still don’t seem to understand, he need not have those women interested, he will always have the options he wants. Exceptionally desirable men need not play a numbers game. They can pick and take who they want. Remember that a woman at the same level of desirability would do the same, just not have to go through 2 million first making her less picky.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:34 PM
1

You just saw one already desirable guy, who need not have any of them interested, be in a video specifically to act that way. If men were that desperate a guy who could have nearly any other woman should also be desperate? Them men who struggle are not the men who act like that out of an exceptional abundance of options, they are the ones who have always been excluded before acting any way at all. Using an example of a guy who could have nearly any woman and acting like it here is again not very…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:20 PM
–

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
1

How do I figure what? That some men get excluded? Or that society paints it as a moral failure? As for how a guy can be excluded it’s not being desirable enough. And as for making it a moral failure, the op was already talking about how it always comes back to how a guy bust be a terrible person if he’s excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 05:32 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
1

It objectively does solve loneliness actually, that doesn’t mean you will necessarily like them or like what comes with not being lonely. It isn’t against anyone’s consent as they are not required to know your feelings/reasonings in order to agree to a relationship, specifically including if they don’t like those feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:58 AM
0

That depends, it’s certainly possible, if someone were married but also alone for instance.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:52 AM
0

Perception can only be reality if they are accurately perceiving otherwise it’s just incorrect or delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 11:24 PM
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
1

To a degree they are, if someone feels a way that they aren’t then well they can’t be so and it then must be those feeling that are flawed.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:16 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
0

You’re just describing how someone can feel a way in which they are not, which I didn’t dispute that they could, but the fact would still remain that feeling any way doesn’t make it so.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:13 PM
-7

Unfortunately if you feel a way that you are not then yes your feelings of such are incorrect.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 06:07 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
8

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
–

Yeah this is obvious to anyone forced to be alone, most of the time when people try and argue otherwise it’s from a place of trying not to seem like their lives are as better as they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 04:29 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
1

Doesn’t need to be. You just don’t want to admit that men acting disrespectful as a limiting factor to their dating life is a rare occurrence, and they are largely disqualified for things outside of their control.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:06 PM
1

Not exclusively, not if you want anyone to watch it. And in those situations “brought up” are conflated with bias and misunderstanding, let alone the fact of an outlier being more memorable.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 10:05 PM
1

But it is how making a YouTube video works, you try to find something interesting and exceptional to make the subject of a video, and in order to be evidence to you point you’d have to show that any significant number of men are the same way otherwise yes it’s evidence of four exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 07:07 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
1

Yes something can be likely yet still leave room for possible explanations. The reson they are exceptions is the fact that they were significant enough for someone to make a video about, otherwise it wouldn’t be notable enough to make content about them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 10:28 PM
2

It isn’t impossible but just far more likely, the irony here is that even in your supposed examples the reason they are notable at all is because they are exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 06:38 AM
1

Ahh yes because something surely has happened before it must now be both the average and the cause. The reality is that if a woman was treated in a way she didn’t like at all it’s likely because she was trying way too far up in desirability, the average or below guy can never afford to act in any way that women don’t require them to. The dispute of this is acknowledging only interest in greater than average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 10:16 PM
2

Yes… I’m sure that has happened before at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 10:09 PM
1

“Man acts like an ass and still has better odds than most” I’m not sure if you realize this but balloon popping videos are not how average men are able to date, let alone the fact that they get above average men do do these for the very fact that they would all be 2 seconds long after all the women pop theirs instantly…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:50 PM
2

You are not giving the example you think you are, what you are saying is literally that this guy “destroyed his chances” while having greater odds than most. The only thing you’ve successfully done is exposed that even desirable men live a world a way from what women can imagine let alone experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:42 PM
2

“Destroying” his dating prospects being: having greater odds than most…. A 29% chance is astronomically higher start than what the average guy has if that isn’t obvious to you than it shows how unimaginable the average male experience is to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:36 PM
2

The average guy would have been disqualified from most of the women as soon as he entered the door, long before saying or doing anything. Again you are using an example of an already desirable guy who need not use numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:24 PM
1

The problem here is that you are trying to use an already desirable guy as an example for “numbers game” and while it still applies, a desirable guy need not do such because he can have who he wants particularly.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:14 PM
2

Yes, just the same as any other guy, in the end your chances can just be 0%. What you are still not understanding is that this guy despite acting in a way that disqualifies himself to those women is still having better odds afterwards than most, most will be excluded from far more than 29% from the start with no action at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 08:02 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
1

Like I said if it effects men, for the most part, it’s because it effected women and that effected men, in other words not the women are wonderfully effect but the women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 04:53 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

Incorrect, it specifically cites men being more likely to post “uncivil” comments compared to women, if you can’t interpret your own argument what are we doing here?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 05:03 PM
0

For sex? Men are just as accepting for relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 03:59 PM
0

It’s directly in your link you used, come on try to keep up with your own arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 03:55 PM
1

Women all but unanimously agree that their dating issues all boil down to “men aren’t good enough for me.”
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 03:20 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
0

Men posting more negative comments than women in fact doesn’t equal women receiving more negative comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 03:07 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
1

If you are referring to the second portion of your link it’s referring to men posting more hostile comments than women, which I don’t doubt but that would be against both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 11:27 PM
0

I didn’t say they are victims but that studies try to paint them as such going in. Interesting response to a comment that directly mirrors yours…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 10:36 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

Except that it is within the scope of it you just don’t want it to be or realize that it is, again you are the one that brought up severity of blowback in your response resulting in further arguments about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:52 AM
1

You may not want it to be but it’s certainly one of the main talking points of low birthrates. But you don’t get to determine what is actually relevant to the talking point or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:37 AM
1

Like I said half of them actively blame men for low birthrates. Maybe that’s not what you wanted the focus to be but context is importance and matters significantly, especially when your first reply jumps to the discussion on the severity of the blowback.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:29 AM
1

Talks of birthrates are not exclusive blaming women though are they, in fact a lot of the time widespread discussion on birthrates blame men for not being good enough. Are you trying to argue that the cause of women receiving blowback is irrelevant to a post about women receiving blowback?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:13 AM
1

So much for your last response. Yet again if you are selecting from a group you **are** actively excluding those you didn’t select, all else is incorrect. Probably because that’s the path you took us down, trying to trying to argue women arnt even the cause and that those feeling were illogical. So by arguing those points it was in fact you that brought yourself off of the topic you wanted to stay on. Now the reason your post was taken to mean online spaces is because offline women generally do …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:02 AM
1

Once again, if selecting from a group, the ones not selected are the ones definitionally excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:24 AM
1

They need not act on collective intention, if all individually exclude men, resulting in that collective exclusion. When did I justify any harm? In fact the only things I’ve justified so far is feeling such a way. Your attempt to portray things outside of what they are doesn’t track.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:19 AM
1

If you are selecting from a group, definitionally the ones not selected from that group are excluded, additionally I’m talking about on a macro entire group level not individually. An individual woman may not but if an entire group collectively is than yet it is excluding.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:08 AM
1

Being excluded, not an individual not being attracted to them. They are all obvious enough to most that they are self evident. Of course construction workers don’t generally face mortal danger, they aren’t causing a very severe or profound effect in the case of noise.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 01:08 AM
1

And the majority of people responding emotionally that way would make it the correct emotional response because that’s how you determine it in the first place. Severity will determine the extent of the response. Obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 12:46 AM
1

No, that would depend on the severity of the cause. Like I said if it’s just something like construction sounds that are annoying then obviously not, but if it’s something effecting them far more profoundly than yes, of course the reaction will be more escalated. I’m arguing that becoming angry is the correct response for a humans emotions to take.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 12:37 AM
1

Because it is what everyone does, it may be illogical on a macro level but on a personal level it’s exactly what makes sense, just like how almost everyone would end up upset about the construction, especially online which is fundamentally a place to vent it. This is simply true for everything that the cause will carry the blame regardless of intent, especially if there is no fault to point to.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 12:28 AM
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

If it is a rare occurrence then it is a special thing by definition. Can’t be one of any if she’s on of few or only. Then by this same logic she would be special to him too, the only difference being that he could like far more women in that way than she could men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 09:19 PM
1

They quite literally are special, they are one of the very few who could’ve been open to him. Maybe it doesn’t make you feel special but it would make you special.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:59 PM
1

That doesn’t mean you don’t care about them individually but that you can care about all of them individually, it’s like what you describe for yourself but in reverse where the guys you described as “attractive” are the women that men find their personality’s attractive (just in a bunch higher quantity) and the women who they find physically so are the ones you also get to know (again just in higher quantity). interchangeable means “able to be interchanged” so unless a guy was able do so with an…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:40 PM
1

Like I said before, it’s the personality of nearly all of them that are attractive and looks are the “limiting” factor, as limiting as 80% is.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:23 PM
1

Not if you actively wanted someone from number 3-37.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:20 PM
1

Why do you think that means it would be settling?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:17 PM
1

If you were with someone outside of the 80% then yeah you could certainly call that settling, but not if it was a woman in the 80% or any percentage you wanted.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:12 PM
1

That could only be the case if you **could** date 80% of women, otherwise you’d quite literally not be interchanged and therefore not be interchangeable.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:09 PM
1

Then increase that 1% to however many men you are willing to be in a relationship with currently, and if it reaches a level that qualifies as “interchangeable” then men are just as interchangeable to women and if not, as I imagine it won’t, then it wouldn’t make any sense to feel interchangeable.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:02 PM
1

That would be illogical considering the rarity of a woman being open to a relationship (I’m assuming you’re talking about in regards to a relationship) with any individual man just take your 1% for example. So she should feel like she’s part of that 1% or less, maybe you could then argue interchangeable within that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 07:48 PM
1

What I’m saying is that men are nearly universally attracted to all other traits, that’s why “personality doesn’t matter” because men will be attracted to it anyway, including “raging Cs”. By standard I’m saying that’s the reason men don’t hold a standard for those other traits (barring obvious exceptions)
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 07:35 PM
1

You misunderstand why men “disregard everything else” it’s because they can be attracted to nearly every other trait, so if men can be attracted to every other trait why would it be a standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 07:24 PM
1

Regardless you do hold that as a standard and obviously it needs to be factored in just like any other standard anyone might have.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 07:11 PM
1

But if you say have a requirement of getting to know them then that still has to be factored in for the amount of men you would be willing to engage with. And to be fair if what you are saying is true I think you’d likely be much more open than most women for either category.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 06:55 PM
1

So then the equivalent 80% for men talked about in the post is <1% for you. And the sum of the men you are willing/wanting to have sex with is roughly 35-45%.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 06:41 PM
1

So what percentage of men do you end up wanting to date after getting to know? Because the difference would have to be taken away from that 40-50%
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 06:20 PM
1

Depends, were you asking yourself to report attraction? As for the rest… I’m not sure how that’s even slightly comparable.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 05:31 AM
1

When the context is actively asking for reports of those you feel attraction for, it does ultimately mean you’d have to then feel that attraction…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 05:23 AM
1

Yes, within the context of this thread that is what that would have to mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 05:06 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

Just overall, not exclusively limiting to looks. I wouldn’t include wanting to get to know better only because the thread is talking about the comparison of the percentage of women that men are actively willing to partner with, unless you can consistently come up with a percentage of the men that after getting to know that reliably meet the standard. Because if we are including that then that same number for men would be basically all women baring only the absolute least desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:32 AM
1

The definition of considering someone attractive is objectively if you are attracted to them. But if you are so set in wanting it to be lees, what is the percentage of men you see that you would like to be in a relationship/have sex with? Combined or listed separately either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:28 PM
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
1

…the whole point of contention is whether men are more ok with that treatment or not, so I’m not even sure where you are trying to go with this anymore. But if you really didn’t think gender matters either way then you wouldn’t care if it was included in the equivalence, the reason you don’t want it to be is because it inevitably leads to the conclusion that yes men would be ok with that equivalent treatment and would in fact be an improvement over what most receive.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:21 PM
1

You can just as easily say treatment is less relevant just because you feel so, which is why you need to include all details instead of just the ones you feel are relevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:00 PM
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

Again you are simply ignoring details because it doesn’t suit your argument, if gender isn’t relevant at all to the situation why are you so adamant that it be discounted?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 07:51 PM
1

The only way actively being harmed could be worse is if it simply also came with being excluded for a persons entire life. There is a difference between being excluded and thinking you’re excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 03:07 AM
1

That rare exceptions exist in everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:35 PM
1

Like I said if you want to include those details then sure, but that still means you need to include by the opposite gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:16 PM
1

What does that have to do with the equivalence of the situation? You need not feel any certain way about it, only that it’s the equivalence, in fact you must specifically not include feeling any specific way because someone can feel entirely different either way. If “by the opposite gender” didn’t matter as a detail then you wouldn’t feel so strongly about it being required for an equivalence.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:09 PM
1

So then why does unwanted matter if gender doesn’t? Why does stronger matter? Why does attraction matter? You are excluding things you don’t want to try and argue a different situation which is bad faith, if you want what is equivalent you cannot just exclude details because they don’t suit your argument, you cannot include details like stronger and not attracted to if you’d like but you’d then you also need to include by the opposite gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:00 PM
1

Why do you think so?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:54 PM
1

Yet it isn’t from the opposite sex, so I’ll ask again, is it women that are objectifying women?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:48 PM
2

So then your argument is that because it’s pretty much the only place it happens that it somehow makes it the equivalent?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:39 PM
2

Reality is reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 07:32 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
1

Just using excluded as an example is quite literally the worst existence a person can have, an early death being a much better fate.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:53 PM
2

Because your position is against what is the truth. The only possibility remaining being that you feel incorrectly or identity your feelings incorrectly about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:50 PM
1

Then you don’t even have the capacity to determine even your own feelings of such.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:48 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

What’s fair is to give them objectively the same thing. The outcome is not relevant to fairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:36 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
1

I’m not sure what you mean, he has go for women regardless in order for them to be receptive, regardless if he’s attracted or not. You can only go for who’s receptive, men and women both have exclusive set standards or nobody would partner, essentially if all men went for women who they were particularly attracted to nobody would be here today.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 03:09 AM
–

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
1

Considering what oneself may find desirable is only half of the equation as there is still the other party, that’s why considering equivalence in desirability will give the best chance of a successful relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 04:29 AM
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

Why would someone’s presence not be for the most successful relationship chances they can find? In general I think that’s how most men end up partnering, but personally no, I would date any woman capable of attraction to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 05:11 PM
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
1

What I’m saying is the the alternative is quite simply a life not worth living at all and it would be better to not have existed or to die very young, again to clarify I’m saying that not being able to be attractive has the best case scenario of dying very young so that you don’t have to live the rest of your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:43 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

Obviously not, but the privileges of attraction greatly outweigh even the chances of the worst downsides. What I’m asserting is that one is objectively worse, to the degree that it’s not even worth living a life like that at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:46 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
1

An equal partner doesn’t meant that they are deserving of half the assets, giving up her own career means giving up her own career and she can do so or not that’s her choice but she shouldn’t get to have it both ways as a backup.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:34 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

But it is still the income he earned, and she’s just able to use that portion as long as she’s his wife, essentially her portion for being the wife was already paid during the marriage and not entitling her to 50% of those things afterwards.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:36 AM
1

To explain it more simply, essentially when the non bread winner is married to the bread winner they are entitled to use the assets of their spouse but afterwards they should receive assets equivalent to their value but it shouldn’t be 50% as their worth was not 50% in the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 07:57 AM
1

So this thread is talking about divorce rhetoric, as in the way people talk and think about divorce, not necessarily about current laws or proceedings.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 03:26 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

I’m not talking about men in general but specifically the men you are talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 03:21 AM
1

Some men are going to be inherently unlikable to women, men exist in enough variety and women’s attraction in lack of for that to happen, most of them will not be “terrible people” just not good enough for women, this includes your own opinion of those men being “unlikable dip shits”.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 01:01 AM
1

By saying “admit to wanting shallow women” you are implying that, yes even the guys you are referring to, are trying with an exclusive type of women instead of just women as a group.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 12:32 AM
1

What I was saying there was that identifying “men talking about women in general” is an incorrect identification as opposed to simply correctly talking about them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:50 PM
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

Yes I know that’s how it’s considered but this thread is talking about rhetoric not how it actually is considered right now, in favor of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:02 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
1

It’s not like he’s forcing anyone to do anything, he’s just either going to get what he wants or he isn’t but the woman isn’t worth talking to anymore to him.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 06:56 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

And what incentive do they have to do this? If It only reduces their options to fewer and lesser.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 05:53 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
0

“There is no way for me to have an incorrect estimation of my traits, it must have been through pure effort alone that I overcame insurmountable standards.”
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/26 04:32 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
1

You haven’t actually brought up any evidence only you own self perception that, with how you describe, must have been either underestimated in the beginning or overestimated in the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 09:58 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
1

Because otherwise what you are talking about is impossible therefore the an alternative must be true.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 08:10 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

Then you are severely underestimating your own innate ability and aptitude, or falsely equating a small jump to meet that high threshold in order to qualify as being a “big jump” because of a big jump in results that going from excluding to qualifying brings.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 08:52 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
2

So? People incorrectly identify that all the time, like you are right now. Why do you assume that? Being a man means the chance at being excluded from possible attraction, not just not who you want or even someone you don’t like at all but excluded from all woman’s capacity to feel a form of attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:53 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
1

Sorry to here that, the reason people want to deny this, especially women, is because they want to tie morality to attraction in order to better vindicate themselves of any part they may play in enforcing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 06:57 PM
1

This response doesn’t make very much sense, not only would in not matter why women have more options in order for this criticism to be appropriate, but men do care about quality they just don’t largely get the options to be able to choose it, that’s kinda the whole point.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 06:53 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
1

I don’t see any point in further arguing with someone who is unaware of their own experiences at best or maliciously untruthful at worst. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 05:25 AM
2

Then you are either being disingenuous about your own experience or not a woman at all in the first place. There is no other possibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 04:17 AM
2

No goal posts have been moved as those remain options for every woman. Not men who are below average in all traits, or at least ones relevant here, if a man is below average physically but still able to participate than he is exceptional charismatically, and if he were below average charismatically and still able to than he is exceptional physically, etc. same for all other traits that are required for men to make up for. The men who are not exceptional otherwise to be able to make up for it are…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 04:05 AM
1

The fact of the matter is that undesirable men (as in definitionally unable to be desired) will take any women they can have, in any way she will allow and as long as men like that exist in realistic numbers women of all desirability’s will have enough options to always be “choosing” their partner not just choosing to date.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 03:52 AM
1

Those weren’t the only options you had, and if you think they are then you are not seeing them at best or being untruthful at worst. Women always have options in men even those at the very absolute bottom of desirability (unattractive, disabled, autistic, deformed, abusive, etc.) the men of the same or even better will always be open to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 03:14 AM
0

You don’t have to consider them real for them to still be options, options must include ones you don’t like. Here we get to the crux of the problem, women do not consider their options to actually be so because they are unsatisfactory to them, meanwhile those options they deem unsatisfactory are a rare fantasy for men who overwhelmingly have to partner with women they don’t particularly like to stand a chance at participating at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 03:01 AM
2

Well then if you ever want to know how many options you have just get an app and take 40% of your likes.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 02:47 AM
2

Since you mentioned apps, about 40% of men on them (and I’d be inclined to believe that’s a low ball) want long term relationships, so how many likes have you gotten on apps and 40% of those would be a realistic number of options you have. And let’s say you an extremely rare exception and have far fewer than most women, this would make you akin to the few men who have had options and have chosen poorly in the same way, but since it’s such an overwhelmingly small exception (where even in the exce…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 01:53 AM
2

My point is that, like in your case where the man you yourself have dated have four times less likelihood to be partnered, that at any level of desirability a woman is at, the men at that level have far fewer options. And the vast majority of women have multiple options (for relationships) including those at the very bottom of desirability, they just don’t consider the options they have as “options” because they are unsatisfactory to them. Now even if we are exclusively talking about women as lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 01:07 AM
2

So that means they were exceptionally outgoing as far as autistic men go, they wouldn’t have much experience with women as they are four times less likely to yes. All this seems to just point that they were just above average autistic men. Remember an option for a relationship does not have to be a particularly likable one to the individual but simply someone willing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 12:42 AM
2

Well they were objectively exceptional to be able to be in a relationship while being neurodivergent. Like I said they are four times less likely than women, so there we find your equivalent: a guy four times less likely to be partnered let alone having as many options.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 12:30 AM
2

That can all be so and they can still be desirable for whatever categories they fall in, in fact that is further evidence of such considering how neurodivergent men are something like 4x less likely to be partnered, the ones who are would exclusively need to be exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 11:32 PM
2

I don’t doubt that you would consider them average, but I’m also not exclusively talking about looks I’m talking about desirability (and I am assuming you aren’t exclusively considering looks as desirability).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 11:24 PM
2

Were they? Or was what you believe to be your equivalent man in relationships with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 11:17 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
1

This is the same issue that just because someone is not satisfied (“girlfriend is crazy, fiancé cheated, wife dead bedroom, ex wanted to take all my shit”) that they don’t still have it entirely better, satisfaction is an irrelevant metric to determine who’s better off here.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 07:46 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
1

Yet if you are unable to be desired by women in the first place you mentally will not matter regardless of what it is. No state of mind or effort can make the impossible possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 07:39 AM
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
4

This is just how desirability works, if a guy is undesirable (as in literal definition, unable to be desired) then there will be no partner or experiences for him and no mater how individual people want to believe others are there will always remain men who are definitionally undesirable and collectively so.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 09:40 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

Nat talking about asexual men. If you want to pivot away from physical desirability then it makes no difference, women’s capacity for emotional attraction is just as similar and restrictive.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 10:50 AM
1

What I’m saying here is that both being a monolith isn’t a requirement for having vastly similar attraction. Like I said there are quite a lot of men of equivalent desirability absolutely willing to partner with no sex. This is quite literally lack of accountability for women, how can anyone expect to be desired in the way they want, by the person they want if their only desirable trait is being a woman. Keeping in mind she still has options for equivalent men who are willing to partner even no …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 11:05 PM
1

You don’t have to exclusively be a monolith in order to still have mostly similar traits, especially in regard to possible attraction. If someone try’s to focus on someone they will never encounter its the same thing as giving up on partnering entirely. The observation of men only wanting sex as soon as possible comes from women at the bottom of desirability as the only desirable trait in comparison she has is that she’s a woman, meaning she won’t be excluded but she’s obviously only going to be…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 10:33 PM
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
2

Women are never excluded, unless exclusively by the men who they want. But it doesn’t exclusively mean that “everything comes easy” there is still a huge gap between can’t be excluded and everything comes easy, but it does still mean women cannot be as possibly disadvantaged as men. Even a woman as disadvantaged as she could possibly be could never be excluded.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:37 AM
2

Their comparison is the men who are in the same category, as for race it would be Asian men who are proportionally liked even less by women than black women are my men. A disabled woman’s comparison would be a disabled man who is certainly more disadvantaged. The only one that could come close to an argument would be women who have to date other women, but even here they are more advantaged as they face far fewer competition.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 06:48 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
1

Quite the opposite, you have already expressed how you don’t want to be in this conversation anymore, so if you need to have the last comment after this to feel better be my guest.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 11:25 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

I thought you didn’t want to be here anymore? Go enjoy your weekend.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 08:45 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
1

There base to be equivalence in desirability, equivalence in this context means someone of equal desirability, which obviously exists it would be impossible for it not to. “There is no such thing as deserving” is certainly an interesting position to hold, the world would probably look a lot different if nobody was ever held accountable to anything. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 08:39 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
1

The only thing you’ve done so far is say people don’t always end up with their equivalent, which was always part of my point that people don’t always get what they deserve, and “but they don’t want to/ peoples preferences.” Which also has nothing to do with equivalence or what someone deserves.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 08:27 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
1

How so? What argument is there that someone deserves anything outside of their desirability? Other than “but it’s not what I want.”
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 04:32 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
1

Deserved yes, but only virtue after you started to associate them together by morally equating it to what is deserved.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 10:08 PM
1

Why do you associate wanting something, deserved or not, with virtue? I don’t see where I claimed anyone was being dishonest.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 09:03 PM
1

Considering my point includes that people don’t always end up with what they deserve like in a “Disney movie”, this fact cannot refute my point. You don’t have to end up with something for it to be what you deserve.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 08:47 PM
1

Like I said people don’t always get what they deserve in reality. That depends on how much less desirable being ugly makes that person, if their desirability was less effected or able to be made up for with other traits than it wouldn’t mean they’d deserve “bad” partners. Yes that’s the point, life isn’t like a Disney movie, not everyone is going to get what they deserve, which is exactly why you can’t use what people get around you as reference.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 06:43 PM
1

Because that is their equivalence that that in itself is a far better judge of what someone deserves than anything, especially the individual themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 06:30 PM
1

If those traits make them less desirable then what they deserve would be an equivalently less desirable partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 06:28 PM
1

It’s simply equivalence and it’s objective. Again not moral standard, unless you believe it’s immoral to want more than you deserve.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 04:45 AM
1

Someone getting something doesn’t mean that it’s the equivalent or deserved thing for them to get. There is no morality associated, everyone will try to get as much as they can, better than they deserve or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:46 AM
5

There are far fewer asexuals especially further narrow to those who also want relationships, we are talking less than half a percentage. Of course most men aren’t not the hunchback, but it doesn’t take being the hunchback to be excluded by women, including hideously undesirable women. A quick google search shows men shower slightly more than women do, likely because they work dirtier and more physical jobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 11:09 PM
6

Again, you are confusing choosing not to have sex with being desirable enough to, and if your trying to argue men should just try to partner with asexuals then that’s nonsensical as we are talking about a tiny portion of a tiny portion of options, less than a fraction of a percentage. Do you realize men statistically take more showers than women?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:56 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

There absolutely is a thing as a deserved standard, for instance if someone was average what they deserve is another who is average who treats them as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 09:45 PM
1

Im not sure if you realize but this is using text online, not an offline conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 09:37 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
1

I’m not. When multiple things are said it’s usually a good idea to specify instead of specifically addressing something without context.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 06:09 PM
1

No such thing as what? Online, offline or higher than deserved standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 08:24 PM
1

It’s the online wold that is constantly reinforcing higher than deserved set of standards not offline.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 07:47 PM
1

I disagree, there is always a degree of perceived virtue that comes from pretending they are more accepting than they are, especially over having a narrow and homogeneous set of standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 07:37 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
1

Yep that’s the incorrect part, as it’s the focus of the envy that’s used not just what you want it to be to diminish it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 12:25 AM
1

Unfortunately that’s the logic that your comment has to carry as its envy for relationships. It’s like if you had no legs and envy someone with 2, if that person with 2 legs was abusive that doesn’t make the person without legs envy the abusive person but the person with legs.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 11:52 PM
1

So you are claiming only abusive men are in relationships?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 11:30 PM
1

Incorrect, it’s the envy of anyone able to have relationships. And it remains a contradiction to your first comment because it has nothing to do with what they can get away with as you outlined.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 10:53 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
1

As I said you don’t need physical attractiveness in excess to qualify but you would need to make up for it if there was the absence. But you do require charisma for women to feel emotional attraction. Women are the cause of it but not necessarily at fault willingly, but this does still warrant a level of blame. Can’t be a “victim complex” on the case where it’s done to you, whether knowingly or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 08:38 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

Yeah, it wouldn’t be called an exception if it wasn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/25 09:17 PM
1

And again it is not a positive thing if it includes just as much negative as it has to. Men being more varied ≠ men being superior.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 06:32 PM
1

Again it’s still in fact a neutral thing since they are also inferior more of the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 06:03 PM
1

That doesn’t in fact make it entirely positive on men as they are just as more likely to fall behind in the same ways, making it neutral at best.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 07:44 PM
1

Yeah, being exceptional is being exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 10:55 PM
1

In most cases there was always a choice and even considering arranged marriages usually both had less of a “choice”. If you think I’m arguing for men being superior you have a flawed understanding, being more varied is not a good thing exclusively it just results in some being better but overall I’d say it’s actually worse to be more varied.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 10:12 PM
1

Again by what we’ve previously talked about as defining manipulation it includes all but an infinitesimally small amount of people dating, meaning the same criticism you hold for what trad men want would logically have to apply to the other 99.9% of people dating or looking to.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 10:07 PM
1

You came up with the idea that I suggested “unenforced quota is more powerful than generations of entrenched privilege.”, When the conclusion is that even when women are advantaged it doesn’t change the rate that of men being over represented in the exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 10:04 PM
1

So dating is manipulative then. You can’t logically think this while specifically taking issue here.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 07:56 PM
1

You came up with this not me.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 07:55 PM
1

By our previous definition of manipulation anything portraying yourself in a way you don’t think or are is manipulative and that includes everyone, excluding maybe a tiny handful.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:38 PM
1

By that same argument anyone wanting to find anyone to date are manipulating all the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:06 PM
1

No, not necessarily, a few things here one being that someone being exceptional doesn’t mean another would want to submit to them, another is that plenty of women actually did, and then exceptional still includes exceptionally bad as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 09:59 PM
1

No need for them to be set in stone for them not to be entirely influential and disproportionately advantageous.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 09:54 PM
1

Well you are saying things like “manipulation is a tool for the weak” yet simultaneously acknowledging that manipulation has to be inherent in everyone, meaning you don’t actually have an issue with anything here unless you have an issue with EVERYTHING as it pertains to human interaction in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 09:53 PM
1

Not assuming but knowing as these positions and opportunities are specifically there for women regular.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 10:13 PM
1

Since your manipulation has already been decided as something everyone does it’s like saying we are breathing right now or we are seeing light, so if manipulation is the “tool of the weak” than everyone is weak and it means nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 10:12 PM
1

No, if men were simply de-centered you wouldn’t see women having higher likelihoods of being accepted into colleges and being hired (even specifically in high positions) specifically for being women as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 08:26 AM
1

I’m not sure what you’re trying to refer to, like I said what I’m talking about is neutral, not negative or positive towards women or men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 07:57 AM
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

No I was referring to men stealing those ideas from men. Remember the very act of stealing the credit is exceptional.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 05:29 AM
2

Very few if any, because that would require both a women being exceptional enough in a negative way to do so and being exceptional enough to be in a similar enough field to do so, in other words this takes another few layers of exceptions compared to the reverse, making it exponentially less likely.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:52 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

Then what’s the point in mentioning it, you might as well clarify that we are humans. Something doesn’t necessarily have to be beneficial to the individual in order to be important and honorable, for instance if you said having children wasn’t beneficial to the individual that doesn’t make it any less beneficial or important to the rest of humanity. The average man doesn’t even have the agency to be going through and picking only trad role women anyway. So unless we are talking about women tryin…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 02:36 AM
1

All this means is that everyone is a manipulator to some degree, and sure I’d agree with the logic there but it means that the word manipulation shouldn’t have such a negative connotation. And I feel like I should clarify that I don’t mean that’s what men have to do to get sex but what they need to do to participate in partnering in any way, long term relationships and marriage absolutely included.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 01:42 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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