TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

LonelyBayesian Archive

View 0 posts and 86 comments by LonelyBayesian 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yeah, literally this. A gay dude once told me I have a nice figure and I'm still riding that high xD. If a gay dude cold approached me I would be similarly flattered.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 09:18 PM
3

I definitely understand where you're coming from as there's plenty of stuff on reddit to make one feel un-empathized with from women. That said, I'm really confused how you're jumping from some women on reddit, which is not a random sample, to making a general claim that "women lack empathy for male struggles". They definitely exist, they just may not be as loud or as active on reddit or certain subreddits.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 08:48 PM
1

I see, thanks. I agree it seems like it isn't very common for men to be like that, and it's a very odd phenomenon to me. However, while it's not common, to respond to your comment: "If only men could be like that too", we definitely can, since I am like that. But I'm not sure I ever noticed that it's not so hard for me, since things still feel hard on the relationship front.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 08:23 PM
2

To clarify, do you mean no sex but still having a relationship with ur bf?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 05:21 PM
1

That's fair. Personally, I prefer to write comments from an empathetic perspective, even for the statistical outliers, and even in debate subs. A comment like that could affect a person in terms of feeling like they have serious flaws even if they do not, and imo the disutility of that seems to outweigh the utility of it. For example, I wouldn't say anything like "most women who can't find a relationship have serious flaws" even if there was data to support that claim, as it can be hurtful to th…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 11:06 PM
2

For 22 years of my life (23 now) I've never focused on my height at all. And just because I feel down about it nowadays it doesn't mean I've ever mentioned my height as an "excuse", to anyone. I more frequently blame myself than come up with excuses. And I have several hobbies that I'm very passionate about too, but in my experience I never noticed that it was seen as attractive. Edit: I'm ngl, this comment makes me feel down as well, since it sounds a little like "Depressed? Just be happy" and …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 04:04 PM
2

I see. I agree that being single is a variable that can certainly bias the results, although that's not the explanation that makes sense to me, since usually they would ask what they look for in a partner, not what they think others look for in a partner (which is where the blaming others comes in). Regardless, the explanation of why it happens doesn't really matter to me, it is still a non-representative sample and can still cause a bias even if we don't know the explanation, and thus we should…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 03:43 PM
2

Do you believe seeing people "just out and about" is a more reliable epistemology than scientific data?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 03:14 PM
5

What data supports the claim that most women don't care about height?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 02:54 PM
2

Most men who allegedly “can’t get dates” have serious flaws How did you come to that conclusion? If a person (of any gender) who doesn't have any serious flaws, and can't get dates, how do you think a comment like this might make them feel? (That being that most who can't get dates have serious flaws.)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 02:52 PM
1

Yup absolutely! It's an example of sampling bias and speaks only to women who pay for height filters. It doesn't generalize to the rest of women. No external validity.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 11:05 AM
2

Afaik very few women pay for that
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 10:58 AM
3

Yeah there's definitely a huge sampling bias in this data. Although do women get fewer filters than men? I have 2 free filters.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 10:57 AM
2

Short men actually care less about height, afaik. This study found that This also indicates that shorter men and taller women preferred a smaller SDR (ratio of their heights), which ensures that they do not choose a partner outside the typical range of variation in height. Across the height continuum, this pattern can be seen clearly in Fig. 1, where almost all preferred sexual dimorphism values are greater than 1, especially for taller men and shorter women. This is also evident in Fig. 2 when …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/22 07:16 PM
2

To me, this is symptomatic of a larger problem. That is that women clearly are not interested in even attempting to understand what men go through. No? There's literally an entire thread that refutes this. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/w8afcv/question_for_the_women_on_here_i_want_you_to/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/22 05:47 PM
28

The issues I "actually" feel sympathy for, are, like.. all of them? Or all that I'm aware of/remember. I'm not sure which issues I wouldn't feel sympathy for. being taken less seriously (studies show this iirc, and trans people often corroborate this) increased risk of sexual assault being (more often than not, but certainly not always) not as physically strong as men increased risk of abuse in heterosexual relationships pay gap (sometimes) being the only source of emotional support for their bf…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/22 03:00 PM
2

That is in theory the most beneficial but in practice doesn't make much sense. If you're interested in this, look into Nash equilibrium and game theory. www.ncase.me/trust
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/22 02:38 PM
1

Source? I'm not sure what universe you're living in.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/22 08:47 PM
1

No, that doesn't follow at all. Afaik, the study just shows being disabled increases their chances. That's it. Your conclusion assumes the following additional premises. That it increases their chances a lot. That a lot of men know that it increases their chances a lot. That a lot of men value increasing their chances of "getting some" by a lot, more than not being disabled. Edit: not saying the study is good or correct or anything, just that your conclusion doesn't follow.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/22 03:47 PM
1

Sure, I agree, but would it be the same amount of animals being abused? If 99% of people are no longer able to afford meat, would the top 1% compensate by eating 99x more meat?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/22 03:25 PM
8

What exactly is so horrifying about it no longer being cheap to put pigs in gas chambers and shred male newborn chicks?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/22 03:12 PM
1

Oh I see what you mean. Yeah that wasn't statistically significant either.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/22 01:33 PM
1

So if we assume a null hypothesis that lesbian women and heterosexual women equally often had perpetrators that matched the gender they are attracted to, we compare the 98.7% to the 67.4%. As in, the hypothesis that lesbian women had female perpetrators as often as heterosexual women had male perpetrators, the result is highly statistically significant (p<2.2x10-16 ). Lesbian women had perpetrators that did not match the gender they are attracted to more often than heterosexual women did.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/22 01:20 PM
1

There's no reason you can't compare two vastly different sample sizes to see if the difference in proportions is statistically significant. So on page 2 under "Violence by an Intimate Partner" where it says 43.8% of lesbian women (n=9086x0.013) and 35.0% of heterosexual women (n=9086x0.965), you can plug that into R as follows: prop.test( c( 0.438*9086*0.013 , 0.35*9086*0.965) , c(9086*0.013 , 9086*0.965) ) And it was not statistically significant. Doing the same for severe violence (Lesbian wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 11:17 PM
1

Nobody holds them as gospel.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 01:48 PM
1

There's lots of other explanations. Confounding variables, non random samples, as well as chance alone. And no the size of the effect does not show there's no doubt it's not random. Firstly, there's always some doubt. Secondly, this is basically the whole point of inferential statistics. They incorporate the size of the effect as well as the size of the sample to tell you how probable it would be to observe data atleast as extreme as what was observed if it was in fact due to chance alone (p-val…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 01:42 PM
1

I hope you hold medicine with similar skepticism as you do psychology then. It's a similar problem in both fields, as your wikipedia link shows.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 01:16 PM
1

Causation has literally nothing to do with the size of the effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 01:08 PM
1

I don't think that's quite right that smoking only increases your risk of cancer. We can under some conditions infer causation from non-interventional studies, and I believe smoking/cancer is one of those cases. The Book of Why by Judea Pearl is a good resource on this. Also I'm not sure that these are two different things. As far as I'm aware, causation would be defined as a case where the probability of cancer conditional on doing the action of smoking is different from the unconditional proba…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 01:07 PM
1

Just minor point... peer review doesn't actually mean much. There's been a few studies on peer review and results weren't particularly positive. I can find them if you're interested. That said you provided way more and way better sources here lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 12:29 PM
0

If you break it down by race then yes, absolutely white men have it easier than other men. That's not what I was saying, or what those averages I calculated showed. White men have better attractiveness ratings it easier than all other combinations of genders and races. They have higher attractiveness ratings it easier than both women, and all other men. That said as a different user pointed out, attractiveness does not necessarily map perfectly into having it easy or getting responses. Edit: mis…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 07:51 PM
1

How different would you reckon it is from the % of men who only want sex with non-black women?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 04:46 PM
1

I see, fair point. Yeah there's definitely an inexact relationship between getting responses and attractiveness rating.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 04:25 PM
1

So based on the race/attractiveness chart from okCupid, the claim that "dating is more difficult for men" isn't exactly correct. If we take the average of each column, we find the following unweighted average ratings for each race/gender combination. White men: 10.75% Asian women: 7.5% Latina women: 4.25% White women: 1.75% Latina men: 0.25% Asian men: -3.75% Black men: -7% Black women: -13.5% So "dating is more difficult for men" isn't quite right. What would be right, is that dating is easiest…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 02:47 PM
1

I wouldn't think anything of the sort. I prefer women to initiate and wouldn't think of it as desperation. I don't want to speak for all men but I'm pretty sure there's a good chunk of men who don't obey that theory. I lean towards a different theory, that you kinda alluded to already. Most men are never approached, so when it happens, they think it's a joke, or there's a catch. Part of me would think the same, tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 04:33 AM
1

I wouldn't think anything of the sort. I prefer women to initiate and wouldn't think of it as desperation. I don't want to speak for all men but I'm pretty sure there's a good chunk of men who don't obey that theory. I lean towards a different theory, that you kinda alluded to already. Most men are never approached, so when it happens, they think it's a joke, or there's a catch. Part of me would think the same, tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 04:32 AM
1

It's true in that it has an effect on desirability for both tall men and short women. But the size of the effect seems to be greater for short men. See my other comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 10:28 AM
2

No. A speed dating study (Stulp et al., 2013) found that men had a minimally preferred height difference if 0.021cm and women had a minimally preferred difference of 8.3cm. and men were most likely to give a Yes response when the height difference was 7.1cm whereas women were most likely to give a Yes response when the height difference was 25.1cm. The actual height difference in genders was 13.9cm Also, For men, the estimated likelihood of saying ‘Yes’ to a preferred individual with respect to …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 10:22 AM
9

Negotiated attraction? What's that?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 02:13 AM
2

I'm not sure what you mean. Flirting simply can't be "figured out" like math can, regardless of gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/22 11:38 PM
7

Except flirting isn't math. There aren't any formals proofs or algorithms to 100% show the single objectively correct answer to flirting. Two women can do the exact same thing and one woman was flirting and the other woman wasn't. Two women can also type 1+1 in a calculator but the answer will be the same each time.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/22 10:44 PM
2

Idk dude, as a guy, I would love it if someone called me cute and thought of me as a puppy they wanted to pet. I had this phase where I was offended by "cute" and preferred to be called handsome and "manly". Sadly I think I'm neither manly nor a pretty boy :(
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/22 02:46 AM
2

Yeah agreed
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 11:37 PM
1

Generally the research suggests that men care less than women about height.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 10:57 PM
1

That's not a counter argument for why it wouldn't follow in this case. Lmao it's on you to show why it would. Stop trying to shift the burden of proof. I can't enumerate the infinite possible arguments that could exist and show why each of those infinite arguments are unsound. It's not the case that everything follows unless someone has proven that it doesn't (which is impossible as I've explained) Because getting pregnant is a natural consequence of unprotected sex... Okay, let's run with that.…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 09:10 PM
1

Do you usually assume something follows from something else unless there's a reason that it wouldn't? I can say the most obvious statement and you can always respond with "Why wouldn't it?" Alice: Yes, sure, 1+1=2 but from this it wouldn't follow that the earth is flat. Bob: Why wouldn't it? Here's a thought. Maybe it's on the person saying that it does follow to show why it follows.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 08:07 PM
1

Why wouldn't it? But it doesn't follow from this God exists Why wouldn't it? It doesn't follow that the earth is flat Why wouldn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 07:56 PM
1

Accepting the risk that it may happen, sure. But it doesn't follow from this that you now have all the obligations that come with a realization of that risk. Yes, because it is consistent with how parenthood is defined after birth. Is it? You have the option to choose not to be a parent after birth but not before birth. How is that consistent?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 07:06 PM
1

If you actually have a reason besides just stating your opinion that people have this obligation, then lmk. Natural consequence doesn't matter. The natural consequence of walking in a dangerous alleyway could be getting robbed. That doesn't mean you've consented to getting robbed.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:50 PM
1

I was under the impression debating opinions involved arguments as opposed to assertions. If you prefer the latter I don't see the point in continuing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:31 PM
1

The far more absurd conclusion is that personhood continues/doubles when you take a cheek swap and put the cells in a reproductive environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:29 PM
1

You've literally just asserted it. That doesn't make it true.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:26 PM
1

Sure, but the point is that just because you were the one who had unprotected sex and are the biological parent doesn't mean you have automatically consented to be the legal guardian to raise the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:15 PM
1

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:10 PM
3

Okay. Say I take a clump of cells from your cheek and put it in a petri dish and provide nutrients and environment sufficient to make the clump of cells replicate. Are you telling me killing this clump is equivalent to killing a human person? Its met all of your conditions.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:05 PM
4

What does becoming something on its own have to do with anything? A human in a permanent coma won't become anything on their own either under any circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:00 PM
1

I guess putting kids up for adoption doesn't exist then.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:59 PM
2

Taking a risk is not the same as literally injuring the violinist lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:57 PM
3

It's not up to the woman to make the fetus dependent on her. So if it was up to the person to injure the violinist it would no longer be analogous. You've made the analogy worse, not better.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:54 PM
2

A parent or guardian that has chosen to raise the child is legally obligated to house and feed the child. Biological parents don't have this legal obligation until they also accept being the parents to raise the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:52 PM
2

A sperm is also alive and it is of the species homo sapiens. So I don't see how "human life" helps make the position make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:49 PM
5

Also, even if it was a full person there's arguments that it's still should be choice. The violinist Consequentialist analysis
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:48 PM
0

A sperm is also alive, and the species is human. So technically it's killing a human life to kill a sperm. Clearly it's something else that matters that makes killing bad. And it's not that it's alive and has Homo sapiens DNA.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:47 PM
5

I don't understand why people are obsessed with "life". Plants are life. Insects are life. Bacteria are life. We don't care that we kill these. Clearly it's something else we care about, and it's not "life".
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 05:45 PM
0

It sounds like you're overblowing the fear of being hurt by others and are self imposing social isolation because of it. Seeing a therapist might be a good idea. Edit: more friends should also increase the chances of a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 12:30 AM
3

Actually, no, that doesn't follow. You need additional assumptions for that to follow under basically any logic. For instance, in classical logic, you would need a major premise (implication) to follow using one of the valid rules of inference. (Modus ponens, modus tollens) Also, setting that aside, if you want to calculate like that, Expected Value is a better method. An infinitesimally miniscule risk with a large cost can be outweighed by a noticeable benefit from a relationship. Finally, base…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 12:15 AM
2

Lol what? Two questions. Do you need a billion dollars? Do you want a billion dollars?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 12:07 AM
2

Do all your wants have to be needs?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 12:04 AM
2

Feels like there's a middle ground here. My view is that you should be happy and satisfied on your own, but that doesn't mean a relationship can't make you even happier. The key is not to put all the burden of ur happiness the relationship, which is something I'm trying to work on. I guess think of it like stocks. If you put all your eggs in one basket, you're making an extremely risky decision. Diversify.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 12:01 AM
1

There is no assumption here you're avoiding the logical reasoning and arguing in bad faith. Lmao. Is anyone who calls out an assumption bad faith? Books are sold and marketed to women based on sexual fantasies that they would like to live out reading them. This is literally the assumption lol. That they read what they want to live out. Thanks for pointing it out. Making an assumption isn't "logical reasoning". But, regardless of lack of soundness of the first argument, thanks for actually provid…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/22 03:36 PM
2

No, you can't conclude that without some severe assumptions here. For instance, that what people like to read/watch is how they would like/expect real life to be. Please come back when you have empirical data/research.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/22 03:09 PM
1

How did you come to that conclusion?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/22 02:47 AM
2

In my view, by questioning their beliefs critically. Asking stuff like, are you entitled to have someone attracted to you and with you? Do people even have control over who they're attracted to? Should people be forced to be with you even if they're not attracted to you? Would you want someone to be with you if they don't like you at all? Also, I believe men should change the way they go about friendships (with any gender), which should include emotional support and talking about feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 09:55 PM
2

It's not about fucking. Most people are heteroromantic, meaning they are only romantically attracted to the opposite gender. In fact, someone could be asexual and heteroromantic.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 06:45 PM
2

I feel very similarly at times but we just gotta try harder. There's no easy solution, but we'll keep trying anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/22 03:23 AM
1

What do you mean doing it in everyday life? You also genuinely might be missing it. Yeah, it's possible
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 10:03 PM
1

Either I'm oblivious or I'm a counter example. Never noticed any "downward glances" from ladies and I have benched, squatted, and deadlifted more than 100kg. My total is ~415kg at a bodyweight of ~61kg. I mainly get glances and compliments from straight men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 09:51 PM
2

Yeah, with you there. I'll admit though it feels hopeless at times for me. Not something I did some statistical analysis on or anything logical, but I can't help but feel that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 08:06 PM
0

This is not evidence. Evidence is actual data that is collected, not a bunch of novels. Look at the most popular movies. By this logic, women only care about you having superpowers or being a vampire.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 07:25 PM
1

Surely not all people who are raped have their incident verified and go to the authorities. I agree there are some downsides to self report as you suggested, but at the same time there is a benefit. Because not all crime is reported and verified by authorities.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 06:26 PM
1

Haha all good. I appreciate you understanding now. Yes it's absolutely good advice! I'm willing to bet if we took a random sample of the blackpill folks most wouldn't be very strong. I believe it's the biggest factor that is in one's control. Edit: Physical strength/muscularity seems to be the biggest single factor in physical attraction though, whether it matches with personal anecdotes yours/mine or not, it is what it is, and most importantly its something we can influence. I agree the anecdot…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 05:19 PM
-1

Seems like you're rambling about other stuff not really related to my comment. I never said that you were denying height is an advantage. No idea where you got that from. I'm also well aware my insecurity can be more detrimental than my height/jawline etc. Again, no idea where you got this from. Unfortunately, it's not so simple to get over them. I'm also not sure why you're going on about whining and making excuses. I did no such thing, I was just commenting about the study. I've already exhaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 02:59 PM
4

The rated strength, as far as I'm aware, refers to how much absolute strength it looks like the person has. Absolute strength depends on height. In other words, there appear to be cues in the male body that accurately indicate strength (and are detected as such by raters), but nonetheless are neutral or negatively valued when assessing attractiveness. What could these cues be? Weight and height are candi- dates. Weight is well correlated with physical strength in most samples, but can also be in…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 01:42 PM
4

I haven't been on a date but I agree, I don't think I would feel unsafe. Thanks for the clarification, as I have hard time reading between the lines. I thought it could be interpreted as the other thing but I'm a dumbass so I didn't get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 02:20 AM
1

Is the implication that these sorts of things don't occur to men dating women or that it occurs at lower rates?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 02:10 AM
1

Can you elaborate on your last sentence?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 01:05 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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