TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

M0rtAuxRois Archive

View 1 post and 744 comments by M0rtAuxRois on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Why does every country in Scandinavia/Western Europe rate more positive experiences with their healthcare system, then, including your own? That's an article COMPLAINING about the system and even the author has to admit on ALL indexes the Dutch rate the system highly lmao. The Netherlands are much more positive about their healthcare system than Americans. You'd have to explain that. Never said anything about free. Not putting your people into debt is a good start, with exaggerated prices that a…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 08:50 PM
5

Like which issues? I'm from Czech Rep, lived in Los Angeles and PHX, go back to Czechland all the time. Every place I've been to in Europe (dated a German girl, have family in Belgium, love the Netherlands) is significantly better off on the whole than the US. The US healthcare and educational systems are rank disasters, dude. Comparing the lives of the people interpersonally isn't even a contest -- the Europeans are happier and healthier and smarter. And that's discounting the stats, which do i…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 08:13 PM
1

Wait, what? I'm doing what now? I never said anything about those things. I do not think we should have those things. Are you sure you're responding to the right person? I think there should be absolutely zero regulations on dating and or human relationships, period. I'm not sure where you got the idea from my post that I would want those things.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 07:55 PM
4

I don't think anyone is satisfied with its current structure. No one in America. Go look at the stats in other countries and you'd be 100% wrong. The majority of Scandinavia and Canada are happy with their healthcare and education. Why wouldn't they be? They legitimately have systems that help by and large. No one is making a perfect system or claiming to, that's not even impossible. But pretty much every country in western Europe, Scandinavia and Canada have positive healthcare stats (and I thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 06:56 PM
14

Not just Trump supporters, Bush Era tradcons are equivalently retarded, just in a different way. Either way, OP is exactly the type of economically illiterate person who would have been happy paying out his taxes in jet fuel used to bomb Arabs and then complain that "America is too big for social programs! Social programs only work in tiny populations!" Hey I have an idea. How about instead of spending trillions of dollars on foreign wars that were ultimately about oil shales you spend those tri…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 05:36 PM
2

Ok, those things have nothing to do with anything I spoke about whatsoever. You're just bringing up a new argument I didn't make or talk about, and that has no bearing on my argument even a little.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 04:37 PM
6

Because dating comes from underlying physical processes aka attraction. That's why dating happens generally. In sane parts of the world, we have decided that some things ought to be governmentally controlled for the good of the population, and we have decided that some things ought not to be governmentally controlled for the good of the population. We can reliably measure which systems do which things. The decriminalization of drugs in sane parts of the world is an obvious example here (this did…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 04:35 PM
3

What about dating and or attraction is written into law or could even be written into law? Are you people hearing yourselves?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 04:26 PM
12

> It's funny how you assume there is so much structure in economics when it's really just people acting off emotions (just like dating). Except for all the populations and or bloody coups that go into enacting certain economic measures. Look, from a western perspective, today, some countries have some level of democracy that does absolutely 100% decide the economic fortunes of the population at large. It is a group project, even if you think that group is some shadowy cabal or revolutionary guer…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 03:37 PM
20

The issues are not analogues. Economic equality is voted in and written into law. In order for large scale economic changes to occur, broad populations have to agree that they ought to occur. They also have to agree on the specifics down to the letter. How is this an analog to natural systems like attraction? Attraction is a coagulant of some environmental factors, but it's largely biologically hardwired -- it is the result of underlying processes we do not have any control over. We can't just "…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/21 03:15 PM
1

Consuming media is a hobby tho. And a necessary one for pretty much all artists. Kinda directly contradicts your first point.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 11:46 PM
1

never heard of a good artist that wasn't also a veracious reader. never heard of a good filmmaker that didn't sit on their ass for most of their life greedily consuming movies. Literature/reading books (and good movies and games, really all art) can be both active engagement and 'consuming media', and not only that, reading well is kinda necessary for being able to comprehend life on any meaningful level. But it's still just "consumption". I think what you're consuming is a lot more important th…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/21 02:40 PM
2

I am sorry, I have been stressed.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/21 09:02 PM
8

First, your link only provides links to other blogs like business insider, which then links to the actual study, and that study does not come to the conclusions you think it does. And quote: The survey found that levels of happiness reported by those who were married was higher than the unmarried, but only when their spouse was in the room. The study was done by Paul Dolan who used the American Time Use Survey (ATUS) to get his results. That's it. You have one survey, and that's it. And he misin…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/21 07:08 PM
1

It's the game changer. The difference isn't night and day. Being fit is living life on Earth. Being fat is wallowing in hell.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/21 12:27 AM
2

First of all I know karate, I am super tough and cool, second of all I would argue making this phrase a purple flair defeats the purpose of the phrase.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/21 07:29 PM
3

cool flair dawg
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/21 06:11 PM
5

So not Pareto. Got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/21 10:39 PM
7

Your claim: And it doesn't have to be an exact number. Reality: The Pareto principle or "80-20 rule" stating that 80% of outcomes are due to 20% of causes was named in honour of Pareto, but the concepts are distinct, and only Pareto distributions with shape value (α) of log45 ≈ 1.16 precisely reflect it. Hey, I have an idea... why not call it another thing instead of the thing it isn't?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/21 09:04 PM
2

No, I said Personally*. It is literally the first word of the paragraph you attempted to literally quote but are shittily arguing about instead. The word personally means in my own life. I didn't imply anything, except that personally, this is true. That is why I wrote personally. It is also one of the most upvoted comments in the thread. Make of that what you will. I guess I am just ever so fucking persuasive, huh? Don't agree? Guess we disagree about how to use words then. What ever will I do?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/21 12:34 AM
3

I said in my first comment, I know a lot of intelligent attractive people. :) Want to ignore that? Seems like you need to learn to read instead and these kerfuffles wouldnt happen!
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/21 12:14 AM
2

I know a lot of attractive, intelligent people, That is a part of my comment. It is right there, for god sakes. It means what it says it means -- you can interpret it however you want. If you'd like, I disagree with your interpretation of my comment that clearly states I know a lot of attractive, intelligent people.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/21 12:13 AM
3

Nah, you're just ignoring the sentence directly proceeding that and acting as if I didn't say it, even tho it's right there. Nice try, though. If you don't want to read the sentence that says "I know lots of intelligent attractive people" that's not my fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 11:55 PM
2

I love hot people, what the fuck are you talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 11:52 PM
5

If you could read, I said "I know a lot of attractive, intelligent people" ... so yes, I agree, a lot of those exist. I was speaking anecdotally, which is why I started with "personally", which is a synonym of "anecdotally". Everything you said is contained within my first post, if you had the ability to read, which you apparently do not. Sucks to suck, dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 11:52 PM
3

Yes, that is exactly what my last sentence says, thank you for having eyes I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 08:14 PM
1

Don't know why but the dudes I know who get laid the most are far and away AC's, gaffers and electric. These dudes seriously fuck compared to everyone else, even the actors, and you're right, they're pretty much all as jacked as the actors. And overall, that's Hollywoo for ya, when I was there (2013 - 2018), pretty much everyone on sets was hot. But some of the actresses ... like there was this one actress who acted in a short I wrote/produced ... she did a nude scene on Shameless the same year …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 05:42 PM
12

Funny, I worked in film all throughout my 20's and I'd say you're spot on. I met a lot of actors -- there were a couple out of hundreds who were genuinely intelligent, thoughtful people. The rest were nigh unbearable conversationally, not to mention their hotness totally overinflated their egos to astronomical levels. Almost everyone else I met on sets, from DPs to stylists to EPs to PAs, were almost exclusively good people. A shitter here and there, but down to Earth good stuff. Actors and mode…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 05:27 PM
35

It depends entirely on how hot you are. Personally all the purely hottest dudes/women I know are boring as shit, dumb as bricks, and have almost nothing interesting going on in their lives or heads. I know a lot of attractive, intelligent people, but the 1-5% hottest people I know of both genders are retards, full stop. They are all incredibly successful in dating/romance and can fuck nearly anyone they want and their personality has nothin to do with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/21 02:23 PM
3

old people are hilarious.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/21 07:29 PM
11

Michael I don't understand why you write the way you do. What is your fucking issue with paragraphs? Do you just want everyone to see your big huge writing thing? And read all your posts as if they're in some kind of pentameter? About how you are with a rich young beauty -- who you tested? Is there any way, that since 1962, you have ever learned about a paragraph? It is a grammatical structure wherein you smoosh sentences together. You don't have to press enter so much. And that's called a parag…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/21 06:44 PM
1

I didn't underestimate anything -- I said in my comments that men do most of the stuff. Read more than one sentence and then react, maybe? also this doesn't really change the biological reality of women being the protected class because of our birthing process. One man can make a thousand kids -- one women can make like, what, twenty max, if that? Just on this alone, more women would be easier to navigate than more men, especially at the hypothetical numbers I proposed. If you want the human spe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/21 05:30 PM
1

Yes, it was meant to make people chuckle-- a joke, not be taken seriously. But I guess since you're Mr Super Retard, you didn't quite get it. Poor you! :(
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/21 02:47 PM
0

It was a sardonic throwaway comment on an internet message board. Want to take it seriously and/or think it means anything? Kinda retarded, but sure, be my guest.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/21 03:26 AM
1

Your postulations ignored 90% of my words, so yes. When I say "large scale cultural changes" have to occur a thousand times, and then you try to make an argument as if I didn't say that, yes, that's a shitty criticism. When you say "well it would be too hard :(((((" without any elaboration (and ignoring when I said the system WAS NOT PERFECT), yes, that's a shitty criticism. When you admit to not reading the OP and then going 'omg why did you post this', and then me being like 'well the OP asked…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 09:04 PM
1

Sure, you can stand by your bad criticisms that don't make any sense and amount to gibberish, no skin off my back.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 08:58 PM
1

READ the Op. They asked. They literally asked for ' YOUR desired state'. Lmao. So I gave them my desired state. You could have answered all your own shit questions had you actually been able to READ.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 08:41 PM
11

Nah. I'll just keep my standards high and reject former/current promiscuous women from my dating pool. eternal unrelenting loneliness has entered the chat
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 08:40 PM
1

And I disagree with that. Not too much effort, you're just lazy and dumb (and also have never tried it, thus don't even have experiential evidence, thus your word on this doesn't matter, just like if I didn't do XYZ, my word on XYZ wouldn't matter, 'cause that's how stuff works). Cool debate. Anything else?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 08:01 PM
1

"requires large scale cultural changes and education and time" < --- said this so many times including original comment Please learn to read because all you have demonstrated is that you have enormous trouble with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 07:57 PM
1

In my system, those people don't have STD's and aren't retarded. How to select for partners is a part of this. I already explained this. Learn to read or at least stop saying such dumb shit without reading first. Answer to your dumb comment: no, they wouldn't be.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 07:34 PM
1

Why? Theyre present now and ive managed to avoid stds and trash humans for decades and decades. Anyone else could as well. I'm not gonna get blamed because plenty of people already do this and not only that, but relationship systems are already fucked if you hadnt noticed and no one thought those through at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 11:53 AM
1

How are two honest partners going to give you an STD? Again: been with lots of people, diseases have never been a problem. Don't date trash humans. Problem solved. The amount of effort that goes in to deciphering whether or not a chick has an STD, or whether or not the person across from you is a quality person, takes like twenty seconds max. If it takes more, again, that's a YOU problem So you read my proposal for a new type of relationship system, one that includes me saying there has to be a …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/21 12:22 AM
1

It's remarkably easy, trust me. I am not rich, nor particularly resourceful or smart, and my life basically immediately got better when two women were around. Also I admitted it's not a perfect system. But you're being insanely dramatic, especially if you haven't even tried anything remotely similar. Like, oh my god, you have to plan two dinners now instead of one, how fucking logistically impossible! I mean, having two people around that you give some attention to is not even close to a "LOGIST…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/21 11:56 PM
1

Polyamory is an umbrella term that does not mean just one thing. A single other partner isn't polyamory -- it is generally classified as either Monogamy+ or an open relationship. Polyamory is generally classified as either a free for all fuck fest, or where you have multiple romantic and sexual partners at once, sometimes with all of those partners having relationships together. I am not proposing a system anywhere near that liberal or free form, and my system has a strict rule of 'Two is enough…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/21 10:59 PM
1

And thank you for demonstrating your lack of education, nuance or even mild sophistication for the last hour. Not even calling for actual sophisticated arguments, like even halfway would have been nice, but I guess you can't always get what you want. I appreciate it, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 06:12 PM
1

Just because you have a non-ad hominem argument, doesn't mean you are free to then make an ad hominem argument. What? This is gibberish. My comments were not ad hominem lmao. I made an argument, then insulted you -- very decidedly not ad hominem by EVERY definition. Stop being retarded. You are absolutely making "you're stupid" comments to try to win the argument by exhausting me or gaslighting me or both. All of our comments are right there -- it's not POSSIBLE to gaslight you. I just asked to …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 05:59 PM
1

An ad hominem is when you attack the person rather than the argument. Which I didn't do. I told you why your argument was wrong, and then I insulted you. That isn't an ad hominem. I attacked the argument several times. Learn to read. Also sorry for the typo, but I did spell it correctly before spelling it incorrectly. This is called a typo. Have you ever made a mistake before? Contrary to popular belief, merely insulting someone, (unless in certain circumstances - see Poisoning the Well), is not…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 05:44 PM
1

No... that's normal dating. You don't commit to every person you meet. You get to know them and date for awhile first. Normal for FDS buffalo. Not real women. Also that wasn't what I was talking about anyway. Women don't "VET", they just go on dates. You think about "vetting"... you go... "OH GOD I HAVE TO VET HIM" like some kind of autist. Preliminary vetting procedures are NOT par for the course. Most women are much cooler than that, much breezier. Also that's not what an ad hominem is. I alre…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 05:33 PM
1

Specifically what do you think comes with this? Different for different people. I can't tell you what every woman is going to get. Just that most women seem to want this. That's all we know from the available evidence. I think it can be a lot of different things. I think more people is generally better, especially over a long span of time, and there's a reason relationships either fizzle, die, why there are deadbedrooms, etc. It's because of sexual novelty, whether you like it or not. People are…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 05:27 PM
1

They aren't though. Men are getting orgasms and multiple partners with high emotional intelligence. Women are getting another man and everything that comes along with this. Assuming that most women experience sexual novelty (they do, this isn't an assumption, it is statistically true), that means they WANT more than one man. I am literally just looking at what women want statistically. Another man, whether or not he gives her an orgasm, seems to be what they want, and that's perfectly fine. Mayb…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 05:10 PM
1

It benefits women just fine. Everyone is getting an equal shake. There is nothing about the system I proposed that benefits men more than women. Women get multiple partners, men do as well. There's nothing unequal about that. If anything my system benefits women more because they can find partners easier than men can and always have been able to and always will be able to. It will be up to men to deal with their own jealousies and inadequacies about this, which I think should be learned cultural…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:56 PM
1

Using studies to say that most people want sexual novelty is called GATHERING EVIDENCE. It was not my natural conclusion -- my default conclusion was the same as yours, actually, that women would not have as much of a need for sexual novelty as men. But the evidence so far on the subject has pointed in the other direction, so I have changed what I think BASED ON THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE. This is what people are supposed to do. If you don't agree -- NO ONE can help you, you are lost, and you probab…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:55 PM
1

Well, I mean, if you have any contradictory studies, now would be the time. And I don't think self surveys are the end all be all, you're right! But they're certainly more useful than PURE CONJECTURE and ANECDOTES, which is all you've done. I would point you to a very good book on this exact subject (the efficacy of self reports) but you have already illustrated you barely know how to comprehend stuff, so I will refrain.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:52 PM
1

Learn to read statistics and legitimate studies instead of the globalmail lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:44 PM
1

Hahahahahahahahahaahahah what in the fucking fuck are you talking about? That wasn't my opinion, it was a statistic. Sounds like women don't give a fuck about women's pleasure, if anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:42 PM
2

Most women aren't interested in novelty. According to every statistic I have ever read, and the ones I just posted, you're wrong. Try again and say a TRUE thing next time. Again, only 4% of women are going to orgasm with a new guy. What then do you imagine is the motivation to seek out a new guy? This is not relevant to the conversation. I am advocating for ONE more partner than a typical monogmous relationship, and everything that comes with that, not just sex, although I think a partner + a fu…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:39 PM
3

I am not interested in sexual novelty whatsoever. Women have only a 4% chance of cumming with a new partner the first time they have sex. There is quite literally, nothing in it for me. Great, that's you and not most people. I am talking about most people, not YOU. Maybe you ought to start focusing on the broader picture. Most men and women are struck with wanting sexual novelty sometime in their life. You're not? You're a super special anomaly person. What you are describing carries the same ri…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:32 PM
5

Why would that be better than being single for a woman? Because sexual novelty exists for men and women. And exploring your own sexual novelty is largely psychologically good for both sexes. Does that mean bend to every whim and desire? No. Does that mean fuck every single thing you find attractive? No. It means: be honest with what you want sexually, and try to meet those goals without overindulging or losing yourself. It's really not THAT difficult. And again -- it's beneficial because deeply …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 04:19 PM
1

Monogamy+ means a lot of different things, I did not say "share" their partner, and that phrase can mean a bunch of things anyway so your post is a little confusing. Ideally, I guess like everyone having 2 partners I think would work a lot better than monogamy or rampant casual sex. There seems to be no middle road that people are happy with here, and your post is a good example of how people constantly view relationships in a binary. I think women having two nice dudes they like that they can f…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 03:51 PM
5

Difficult to answer a broad question like this, but overall I think we ought to start focusing on a large scale cultural reckoning with sexual novelty and exclusive partnerships. That is to say, I think monogamy+ would be healthier for most people, and I think dealing with our own internal jealousies and insecurities when it comes to relationships is cognitively beneficial. Monogomy has its uses and positives, as does being socially tied to other people, as does learning about another human and …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/21 03:39 PM
3

I'm not worrying about it, and I'm a little confused as to how your comment is relevant to anything I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/21 08:11 PM
5

Everyone dies alone. But it is also possible to die a little less lonely. Some men don't want a relationship, that's true. All I said is that most do, and most, especially as they age, value a solid, not shitty partner over a gazillion Brazilian hookers. All the biggest Casanovas I have ever met settled down eventually, or were relegated to a bachelordom that was, a) awesome, but they're 1%ers, or b) very, very sad (mostly this)
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/21 07:08 PM
11

This may shock you but used up South American guttersluts aren't a good approximation or decent facsimile for women that actually like you The problem isn't sex. The problem is singledom in full. Loneliness -- real being alone -- is the killer. Lack of sex is bad, but lack of romantic attachment in a serious way murders you internally. Someone genuinely liking and respecting you, and you spending earnest, sentimental, goopy ass retarded times together, for most people, is far more psychologicall…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/21 06:39 PM
3

Depends on the fighter, all very based on the individual. I guess I was just surprised that someone would want to look like Borrichina walking around. Not that his body isn't clearly the ideal, but even on PEDs I imagine it would be annoyingly difficult to maintain. You can be in wicked good shape and never even approach the aesthetic of Costa's body. Also this is the most homoerotic, male-figure-focused comment I have ever written. Thank you brother.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/21 01:16 PM
6

You mean... "do lots of steroids and you can look like Paulo Costa"?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/21 12:34 PM
1

I was "owning up to" those jobs being phased out in the next two decades. Nothing to do with coding computers. Whats hard about this? Also very easy to understand except to you I guess Also no. I did not say within twenty years. Everything i wrote is right there and I never said we would have robots that can code in twenty years. If you cant even honestly engage with what's in front of you, then I cant help you or reason with you. I literally told you exactly the words I used and how I didnt exp…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/21 05:10 AM
1

Lmao how has it "regressed", Mr. Expert? "It" being "automation" in general. The empirically correct answer is: it has not and you do not know what you're saying. Your one anecdotal use of a single software says precisely nothing about an entire industry. You are severely underestimating corporations and governments with trillions of dollars at their deposal to build these kinds of systems.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/21 01:46 AM
0

We actually have stats on what experts predict here. AFAIK, it's pretty split down the middle as to when we will get an AGI: https://www.nickbostrom.com/papers/survey.pdf Needless to say, there are thousands of working AI experts who disagree with your assessment (at least about the hundreds of thousands of years thing). So it's all about being in one camp or another. You in the Searle-ish "can't happen" camp? Okay. I'm not. And my friend who works at DeepMind isn't either. Reaaaalllyyy don't kn…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/21 01:16 AM
2

I didn't say that there were... I said there's going to be. "Going to be able" is the exact word usage. Your reading comp needs work, unless you just wanted to tell me a bunch of obvious stuff
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/21 12:44 AM
2

Its a whole bag of worms for sure. UBI aint a terrible start. And I am sure as the decades go on, better ideas will be added to the heap. And I'm inclined to believe that if we ever do get to that point, those coding computers would hopefully be aligned with human values enough to be able to solve abundance or at least resolve it satisfactorily enough. From what I hear, value alignment is definitely one of the more difficult parts of the super nascent research so far. Being able to somehow code …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/21 10:26 PM
2

"Experts" predict all kinds of shit that never manifests. How many AI winters have there been now? I wonder if everyone realizing that a huge amount of ML was essentially a scam will lead to a new one. Ok, and? If an expert and especially a trusted friend expert tells me a thing, I am more inclined to believe him than some rando. As said, will keep deflecting to his personal knowledge rather than laymen conjecture. Don't know what to tell you. Also these are all estimates, I took care to not spe…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/21 05:19 PM
3

As a person who has a degree in a creative field as well as a STEM degree, I would recommend learning an actual technical skill. If I only had my creative writing degree I would be capital F Fucked right now. Even though you're right that creative fields will probably hold on longer, those fields are still ultra saturated and genuinely making a living with creative pursuits is fucking rare and difficult, and really, get ready for a life of poverty my dude. Unless you're going for something techn…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/21 04:33 PM
2

Considering how often I can't see the forest through the trees, I don't blame them. I was lucky enough to grow up with a group of tech savvy friends, some of whom went into AI/deep learning stuff, so I kinda get a steady drip of info most laymen wouldn't receive.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/21 04:15 PM
6

Not really my assumptions -- just a paraphrasing of assumptions of experts who I know personally, so at least very educated guesses. Good friend from high school works at DeepMind and definitely knows more about this than I do, or anyone else here does probably. Gonna' stick with his guesstimates. There's like a few companies right now that use driverless trucks. But even if you don't want to believe that empirical fact about reality, a completely autonomous vehicle probably already exists milit…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/21 03:19 PM
8

All of those jobs you listed will be slowly phased out/hobbled in the next two decades anyway. I'm a programmer with a few friends who work at gigantic tech companies (think actually legit gigantic) -- essentially nobody thinks there's going to be a lot of truck drivers in two decades. Writing on the wall says computers are going to be able to code better than us (and many already can in some ways), and most blue collar jobs will become increasingly automated because hard labor sucks dick. A Roo…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/21 02:17 PM
3

dudes rock
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/21 01:36 AM
3

No thanks go fuck yourself you short pussy
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 09:43 PM
8

Wow someone's an internet tough guy. Talk about the lamest least intimidating shit ever. Also when did I say I feel superior for my height? ... projection my dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 09:40 PM
2

It means every time I see a guy post his height on the internet he's magically 6'2", so I think a lot of those guys are fake and gay. This is why they have to post pics of themselves during purge threads. It's the only way to not be fake and gay.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 09:39 PM
3

I see this a lot, but I'm 6'2" and have only lived in places with giant populations in the last decade and I feel like there's a fuck ton of younger dudes specifically that are taller than me. And I'm not fake gay 6'2', I've posted pics here before, I'm lanky long 6'2" and there's a lot of 18-20 year olds that are just gigantic. Definitely more than 5% around LA and PHX anyway. I haven't read any super up to date stats on height, but there is a general trend of getting taller in westernized coun…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 07:53 PM
4

I agree with this for the most part. I think women go for a variety of body types as well, if* the man is tall or rich. There's always certain conditions. And I still don't think those guys get nearly as much frequent sex as tall muscular guys. Seems super obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 06:57 PM
15

You said: "Does that mean that all women prefer the same 20% of men?" If that's your question, your answer is: they statistically select for height. If you're like 6'1", you're in the top 20% of height, at least in the U.S. So yes, they do statistically, on average, prefer the tall men over the short ones, and do choose those more often. Same goes with muscles, except that we can't measure athleticism in the same way as height because BMI is so fucked up. But if we go with the 60% of Americans a…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 06:34 PM
15

Because the features women sexually select for have been self evidently true for centuries. Contemporary women sexually select for height and strength more than any other two features statistically. If he can't name a place where the inverse happens, he doesn't really have an argument. Thing is: he cannot name a place where the inverse happens. That culture does not exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 06:30 PM
26

Yep, pretty much this. > the average woman's preference for 20% of men means that all women prefer the same 20% of men. If OP thinks this is a case, he needs to name a culture where short obese men are considered the ideal. Cross-culturally, near universally, tall, strong men (muscles and/or skilled) are sexually selected for. This isn't that complicated. Vastly more women prefer these features than the inverse.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/21 06:18 PM
9

Imagine how retarded you have to be to look at yourself and go, "Yeah, I am objectively in the top 20% of all men now because of dating site metrics and 'honest feedback.'" Like, this is just actual insanity/narcissism.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/21 09:35 PM
1

My dad was big into TKD (and a few other karate variations) in a central European formerly Soviet occupied country in the 70's. There just really wasn't a lot around or any reasonably good practitioners around when I was growing up (the 90's) and Czechs are deeply mistrustful of all Russian things, so cool shit like Sambo was out right away (altho I really wish I learned Sambo). So I'm 30 now and probably started getting into MMA around 22-23. By that time, I guess I kinda figured I was a little…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/21 11:13 PM
1

I brought up puncher's chance because most people in street fights aren't trained and cause I've been doing TKD for a long time but I really don't think it would be that much help in a street fight to be honest with you, which is why I always answer these questions with ' I can't fight ' -- BJJ is a totally different story. That can legit help you neutralize threats efficiently and training is really helpful 100%, but I'm not good at BJJ, or even barely competent, so, thus, "I can't fight". Also…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/21 05:25 PM
5

> Most men can pretty accurately be divided into Alpha/Beta You can't "accurately" place people into undefined groups, this is total nonsense. I mean, I am sorry: your statement is literal gibberish gobbledygook. It means nothing. No one who seriously studies human psychology or human biology uses the terms "alpha" and "beta" -- these terms are exclusively used by people who want to view mosaics (human personalities and traits, and all the intricate phenomena therein) as binaries. Thinking these…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/21 03:47 PM
2

If it was obvious to these people that they should be in shape to get pussy I wouldn't have told them. I think we'd both be surprised at how many people this is not obvious to.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 06:28 PM
4

"They can sense it" lmao no they can't and I absolutely do not trust you even a smidgen when it comes to sex and relationships and intergender dynamics. Anecdotally, this has not been true, and I have done much better concerning both quality and quantity than 75% of the guys who can objectively murder me. All because I am tall and in shape. They are also in shape, but they're short. Sucks to fucking suck. Pretty much everything I have ever seen you post is total nonsense, including what you just…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 05:57 PM
4

yeah, so? first off, puncher's chance, anyone in shape enough can kinda knock out anyone else with puncher's chance always being a factor in essentially any fight, height isn't the top factor here. second, i know plenty of 5'8" dudes who can make me tap in less than three minutes, doesn't mean they're not little manlets when it comes to dating and relationships lol. their SMV doesn't raise when we're at the bar together or at a party because women can't magically smell my pathetic taps, but they…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 05:44 PM
5

not sure what your problem is my dude
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 05:09 PM
5

lmao absolutely not, at least not compared to people who legit know how to fight, which is why my brother who has done three tours in Afghanistan taught me how to shoot a gun
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 05:03 PM
3

5'7" and under for men, but I'm 6'2", so you're all short to me for the most part my man. If I see a 5'8 or 5'9" guy he is a manlet to me because God is awesome.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 04:59 PM
14

Early 30's, late 20's, About half are in stable LTR's, 25% are forever or mostly single, 25% can get laid regularly. My friend/acquaintance groups can be divided into thirds (I'm talking about like 30 people max here): 33% liberal academics that have been entrenched in academia for a decade (mostly paired off or going to be), 33% DnD nerds (mostly, but not all, sexless loveable weirdos), and 33% BJJ/TKD guys (mostly, but not all, guys who can murder me and pussy very easily). Unsurprisingly they…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/21 03:50 PM
0

Okay, and that's the opposite of not caring, and also totally NOT stoic, as in, like, stoicism as a philosophy. Go read Seneca and M.A. and tell me what they think about human relationships. Hint: It's NOT to obsess over them incessantly and gossip every.single.day.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 04:57 PM
1

Um, not really, because your comments do not exactly scream visibly calm and collected when facing adversity -- I mean, I can't read your tonality, that's for sure, but I can see that you talk about blackpill philosophy every single day. If I was calm and collected about something, I probably wouldn't be screaming into the void every day about it like you are. I'm assuming you consider the current sexual/dating climate as adverse, and you do not seem visibly calm or collected about it, because, …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 03:38 PM
1

More like: You: Innocuous phrase that is difficult to misinterpret and means what it means Me: You meant the innocuous phrase that is difficult to misinterpret and means what it means You: Ackshually the innocuous phrase is totally difficult to read because of no reason and doesn't mean what it means You are clearly too galaxy brain for this forum my dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 03:21 PM
0

semantics I'm really not. I'm arguing about your level of indifference -- that is to say, you are not even a smidgen indifferent. You care a lot and it shows.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 03:15 PM
0

The analogy you're trying to use is not even close to 1 to 1. You didn't use an exaggerated phrase like "kill for food" or anything even close lmao All you said is "I don't care about bad luck" There's one way to take this phrase. It's not an exaggerated phrase, and does not point to anything else. "Common sense" tells me that most of the time, most people mean what they say when they say it. If you suddenly want to change what you meant despite it NOT being what you wrote, okay, sure, that def …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 03:11 PM
0

Nobody, that's why I don't constantly talk about blackpill nonsense online. If you don't want people to take what you write literally online, maybe try being a little clearer. As far as I can tell, you are obsessed with your bad luck, so when you say you don't care about your bad luck, and then there's a bunch of evidence to the contrary, and nearly all your posts are about your bad luck, well, it kinda makes it difficult to take anything you say seriously after that. Just as a warning.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 03:02 PM
0

You said you "didn't care about your bad luck" -- indifference and apathy both mean "to not care", these are synonyms. Learn words. Also, I'm not angry. You can't read my tone over text. If you "didn't care", if you were actually indifferent, you would not be a part of blackpill, and you would not think about this shit at all. I'm indifferent towards gazelles getting eaten by lions. I think about it precisely never. It does not take up any of my brain space, I do not constantly post about it onl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 02:47 PM
0

What you are describing is that you are not indifferent even in the slightest. Thank you for proving my point with your giant ass rambling monologue.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 02:39 PM
1

How can you be indifferent toward the bad luck you've had and also be part of an internet community that is hyper focused on all the bad genetic/romantic luck they've had? You clearly care a whole bunch about your bad luck or you wouldn't be talking about blackpill stuff at all. You'd just be like, "I don't care that I'm short, or awkward, or that women don't fuck me." Like, that's kind of how apathy works -- not talking and thinking about it is the point. From the looks of things, you talk and …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/21 02:13 PM
1

I like plenty of women as people, thank you very much, AND I like some of them as fuck dolls. And some of the ones I like as fuck dolls I ALSO like as people. They can be both at once. Welcome to dimensionality. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/21 08:15 PM
1

Will do anything for me at a moment's notice, treat me in a stereotypically 'good' SO way as described? LOL Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/21 08:15 PM
1

According to the objective definition of love that you have, I'm sure? Either way, see my other comment that I just posted as to why this is functionally the same thing as love. It is a distinction without a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/21 08:06 PM
1

Because there is no tangible, functional difference between what I'm describing and "love". I will still treat you well and entertain you and buy you shit, I will still do all the things that fill in the spots I have to fill to "be a man" in whoever's eyes. But if you think the large majority of men go to their wives or other female acquaintances for big life moment stuff, for learning stuff, for getting a pinch of wisdom...that's a big no. That's not to say there's not some women I don't both r…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/21 08:04 PM
1

because pretty face + thin + no AIDs or other gross shit are essentially the only three criteria for most men for 'love'. source: am man women are great and I've had a lot of great relationships with women but if I want to have a good conversation I can go to my male friends for that and if I want to actually genuinely learn something about the world I can go to my male friends for that (or my highly skilled also highly unfuckable/lesbian female friends). most women are for fun, fucking and feel…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/21 07:50 PM
15

> , yet working on your appearance at a great level seems to also turn off women A minority. A small, vocal minority. The amount of women attracted to fit and or "naturally handsome" men self-evidently outweighs the women not attracted to these features. If you want to increase your chances of procuring casual sex as a man, looks maxing is advisable, and also necessary. If you want to increase your chances of finding a genuinely attractive LTR, looks maxing is advisable, maybe not necessary, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/21 05:43 PM
2

You write a lot like her, I mistook your post for an Anna tweet. (Oh and Anna is the smart one, Dasha is the hot one, so I def gave you the better compliment)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/21 11:04 PM
5

I can't tell if you're Anna or Dasha. Anna probably.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/21 09:38 PM
4

The percentage of New York State adults who have overweight or obesity increased from 42% in 1997 to 62.7% in 2018. You're right, not 70, but 62% of people in New York are at least fat. Stands to reason neither of those things improves mood.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/21 02:03 PM
11

Wow it's almost as if not all observations turn out to be 100% true 100% of the time and that additional repeatable, peer reviewed context can bolster and invalidate certain suspicions. How dare people conduct careful analysis on certain phenomenology when they could just open their eyes and know the truth! That's def how we have gotten to a civilizational level and been able to maintain civilization, you right, by not studying stuff and like just totally using our eyes and brains man
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/21 07:49 PM
8

Josephine cheated on him, and his 2nd wife Marie Louise had two illegitimate children when he was sent to St Helena. Apocryphally his last words included "Josephine", and he did write both Josephine and Marie Walewska several love letters and seemed to revere them both quite a bit (he insisted that Josephine be taken care of in perpetuity even after the divorce). I think his couple of letters to Walewska prove that he was totes in babyish love with her, and she went on to marry his second cousin…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/21 02:56 PM
1

Right, this is why anecdotes aren't useful. I know plenty of dudes around 5'6 - 5'8" who either have hot SO's or get laid on the reg. Not sure how to combat that with your experience in any useful way. Of course, they've never done better then the tall men, so I know the struggle is real for you guys, but I'm not sure if it's as bad as you're portraying. Really all that leads me to believe you're doing something very wrong, or you are very, very short, or you live in an area where people are sub…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/21 05:11 PM
1

Well, I mean, muscles literally change the shape of your face, so they do something, like, physiologically, so an average guy goes to average+ with muscles from a face-looks perspective. Height is very important, I wasn't really arguing that, I'd say musculature and height are the two most selected for features cross-culturally. Interpersonally, the tall fat guys I know get laid waaaaaay less than the 5'8 ripped guys. WAY less. Not even a competition. And of course, everyone my height and above …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/21 05:04 PM
1

Yes, exactly. I have an ugly EuroJank face, but I'm tall and fit, and that's all I have ever needed, and that's all most men need. If you're not tall, having a good face and being fit really helps, and if you're short and ugly, muscles CLEARLY help. There is no sexual calculus where being in shape is not an immediate and clear benefit. And I'm not even talking about bodybuilding shit -- I am talking about, like, slightly visible six pack + arm muscles = pussy and this has always been true.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/21 03:49 PM
2

So, look, I just posted like a bunch of links that point to the opposite conclusion of everything you said and you didn't care, so maybe if I speak anecdotally you'll suddenly give a fuck: I used to be skinny-fat -- in about a year and a half, I got really fit. No other variable changed. I didn't learn to spit "game" and still have no "game" -- I did not get reconstructive surgery on my face, or dress any differently, and I did not suddenly start earning more money. I got fit and women started w…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/21 03:29 PM
3

The muscles and six pack do more heavy lifting than any of that other bullshit you described by a huge margin Yes, people have individual preferences. Muscles and six packs just happen to be in a huge majority of women's sex preferences because they are indicators of fitness, conditioning and strength -- aka easily the most selected for features in both short and long term mates. omg who would have thot
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/21 02:37 PM
2

Are you a woman? either way, jacked dudes can have baby-faces, so faces aren't a surefire way to tell if someone is fit (although they are a great indicator), and I don't think most women would care about these things suddenly if the guy is 5'4" or fat. I know plenty of short and or fat and or plain average sexless dudes with beautiful eyes beautiful faces beautiful smiles and i'm sure most people do, too and they are still sexless. And my tall, fit friends aren't. Always. In every stage of my l…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 11:02 PM
3

Lucky. I am 30 and feel senile most days. Maybe I should start wearing v necks.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 10:16 PM
2

If they don't know who idris elba is they're dumb and I don't like them
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 10:09 PM
2

I know I was just making the point more salient with proof of his averageness
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 09:56 PM
1

No Kevin costner literally grew up to look like a fat Steve Jobs pedophile Idris Elba exists and that one shirtless picture of Taye Diggs exists and Kevin Costner was so boring when he was younger too, I am not sensitive the other poster is a criminal
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 09:45 PM
4

you know someone is low key racist when they put Kevin fucking Costner on the list of traditionally attractive men over the thousands of other significantly more attractive minority actors that would have been much more sufficient examples
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 09:25 PM
4

I have never worn a V neck or shopped at H&M because I am not a homosexual and take myself halfway seriously as an adult man, but just getting mostly athletic helped me a lot, I will assume your advice is true in any case, I will pass it along, thx
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 09:08 PM
2

Okay, while I can sympathize with some of what you're saying, you have to realize that the majority of the second half of your comment comes from an internally fatalistic attitude that gets you nowhere and manifestly prevents you from getting results. Popularly I believe this is referred to as "being your own worst enemy" what if i dont like the gym? LOL What if I don't like capitalism, and the way America exploits foreign countries, and xyz cry-cry-cry? I don't enjoy like 99% of the material co…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 09:03 PM
3

I don't really think that's true, and even if it was, what kind of activities would steer him in a positive direction? Is it video games and eating Doritos? Is it crying and masturbating? Is it creepily learning how to be a super sick awesome PUA who "negs bitches?" Or is it like obtaining features that probabilistically increase his chances of meeting someone, features, like, say, not being a fat r-word?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 08:39 PM
4

So let's see... who gets more pussy... Average weight schlumpy 5'5" with a pretty face In shape 5'5" with a pretty face There is no calculus you can do here where being in shape doesn't benefit the man in sexual scenarios, so yes, "jUst LiFt bRo" is pertinent advice across the board, pretty face or not
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 08:25 PM
1

"protect"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 01:20 PM
2

Um, look up "what is empirical evidence" That's how you figure out truth claims. You didn't use objective, but the other user did. I didn't notice your usernames until now. Either way, you still made a claim to reproduction being meaningful afaik, and that is not a measurable unit so....
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:02 PM
1

Name me one significant culture that didn't practice genocidal rape during wartime, name me one significant culture where marrying off young women to old men wasn't the norm (this is rape to me), name me one culture where for thousands of years upon their conception men didn't simply say "this one is mine now", which was sanctioned in every religious tradition I can think of -- there are literally statutes in the Torah that talk about how it's okay to take women as captives as long as you intend…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:36 AM
3

That page, which is not a real source, seems to confirm that laborers and the middle class rarely engaged in any sort of casual sex, which is a point I made in another comment, so there's that. Also it's about England, not Europe. Here is an answer by a credited historian with actual citations in the thread. Of course the real answer is: "It varies greatly", so we are both wrong. However, Up until about the 12th century, it was about 12 - 14 for "marriage" in western Europe, which is rape on bot…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:29 AM
1

Considering that most religious traditions sanctioned women as young as like 12 and 13 to be married off to barons + other duke-like sultan-ish douchebags, and that this is a well known fact that does not need citations, and that these acts constitute rape by pretty much all definitions, dare I say read some history? Every time some Earl married off his 14 year old daughter to a 40 year old Duke or whatever, that is rape. Every child born from a child is a child born from rape. In which European…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/20 12:09 AM
1

k
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 11:55 PM
1

Stories of cheating are paltry compared to accounts of rape, and genetic accounts of rape. And tbh, don't really care about natives as they never really amounted to any real civilizational power. So that leaves primarily aristocrats. And rape/prostitution was still more prevalent.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 10:00 PM
3

It's not. Because men of all levels can get casual sex if they stick to their league. This is just not true. Casual sex is not a "league" -- 5 women can fuck 6 - 8 men, and you know that's true. So why would a 5 woman fuck a 5 man, when she can fuck a 6 man just as easy? Every woman I've ever known regardless of looks admits casual sex is easy to procure, and with a guy they find attractive, so if this is the case, you'd have to admit there is disproportionate amount of ugly women getting slight…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 09:37 PM
2

Um, yeah, casual sex being an aristocratic staple makes sense to me, but that doesn't really say anything about the majority of human existence. Like, of course consensual casual sex existed to some degree (especially for the rich), but that doesn't mean it was a primary vehicle in reproduction or sex, and to my knowledge, it was not. It was fairly rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 09:34 PM
1

yeah but we're talking about western Indian guys -- they're not fucking the hot white women, they're just fucking Punjab rats no self appreciating western man would be caught dead with, at least the Indian chicks I fucked in America were civilized and didn't shit in rivers or live in filthy warrens
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 09:32 PM
2

Hahahaha, well, I don't think there's any good stats on it, so I dunno if it's "true", but my goodness there sure are a lot of incel testimonials from Indian guys who despise the evil white she-devils lol, and who despise tall white men for stealing all their mating stock I dated a couple of Indian girls in college as well and afaik they only dated white after me, too, but it's just a small sample size that I wouldn't be comfortable calling it a 'phenomenon' or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 09:27 PM
2

No, they were the PRIMARY ways men got sex, not the only ways. That is kind of not negotiable. The "casual sex" you're referring to did not exist during antiquity, it was prostitution -- do you think chicks in ancient Jerusalem got on their version of Tinder which was actually just rolling through the streets on a carted donkey flashing their tits, waiting for all the eligible bachelors to fuck them? Do you think chicks in Inquisitional Spain were going all out fucking everyone they could even t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 09:24 PM
3

Yo girl, this was in your first comment: Too many men here think it's their looks when it's really their boring introverted personalities. Right off the bat you said it's not about looks when you know damn well for sure it's about looks on average, to the majority of people. So is it about their boring personalities, or is it mostly looks? That is so weird 'cause all the good looking boring guys I know get laid, and the interesting fat ugly ones don't. Huh... that's like the OPPOSITE of what you…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 09:12 PM
4

"Casual sex" means being able to procure sex casually and has nothing to do with being consensual, it simply means how often you get sex, as in, "I can get sex easily/casually". The way to get sex easily/casually "centuries before" was just called rape, or prostitution. That is the correct answer to your question whether you like it or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 08:54 PM
3

If you knew a 5'4" Indian guy who fucks attractive women, you'd be on to something. But you don't even have that. You are all but admitting that looks are the ultimate deciding factor when it comes to selecting sexual partners (also this is true because of evidence, too, we have decades of it at this point, and I could post a lot of it, and have before, many times, all in my comment history, but you ladies very rarely actually change your mind based on the available evidence, you would rather ju…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 08:50 PM
4

Yes, that is not CENTURIES ago. Again, if you spoke clearly from the get-go this wouldn't be an issue, but you decided to use words you didn't actually mean to convey ideas you don't actually understand. This is not surprising to me. I do not know people from centuries ago -- I can only evaluate the available evidence. The available evidence says A LOT about rape in antiquity and very little about lovey dovey casual sex. Wonder why dat is, hm?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 08:47 PM
6

What did men do for centuries before now? That was YOUR question. "CENTURIES AGO", it was still totally more popular to rape, to get a prostitute, to domineer a woman in xyz way to get her to sleep with you than it was to receive "consentual" casual sex. Do you think most marriages in antiquity were like totally out of love? If not, why do you think the casual sex was? "Casual hookup culture" like you and me and this sub talks about it did not really exist in the same way during antiquity. Hones…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 08:42 PM
4

I don't see how Indian guys fucking sewer women is relevant to anything. Most of the people on RP forums and even this forum want to fuck, like, reasonably attractive women, not hideous goo-people. The fact that you think being an aerospace engineer makes a man appealing on the casual sex market proves my point. He's not an aerospace engineer. The fact that you think "working for NASA" automatically makes someone an aerospace engineer is pretty funny -- if you think my reply is somehow correlate…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 07:16 PM
3

Okay, well, anyone can fuck Slartibartfast, it's not a god damned prize. I think everyone already knows short indian dudes can fuck ugly girls and obese hags, that's not really a revelation -- we are talking about casual sex with fuckable women, not whatever Ghoulies try-out you're talking about. That's my point. Being milquetoast vanilla isn't appealing to women in the casual sex market. It sure is if you're tall and fit -- take it from my fittest, tallest friends who aren't particularly intere…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 07:08 PM
1

What sources? I'm agnostic, dude, I am saying we do not have enough information to make an objective statement, and we have no way to empirically measure the claim of: "reproduction is objectively meaningful", which is like the one thing you said that I didn't like. Like all the other shit was just us talking around each other and agreeing.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:49 PM
1

None of these are empirical evidence. It's wikipedia. lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:45 PM
12

Ok, so you have conjured into the ether this mystical 5'4" Indian guy who gets hot ass pussy on the regular, that's all right, I know maybe one or two dudes like this, but have you stopped to imagine the averages of these humans? Like, okay, you know your one 5'4" skinny Indian friend who is soooo good at getting super models to sleep with him (and if he's not sleeping with at least 7's, then his quantity means absolutely dick, just fyi) but how about all the other 5'4" Indian guys who are defin…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:41 PM
5

Rape is probably a lot more popular than you think. The Greeks, the Romans, the Sihks, the Arabs, the Persians -- every culture (outside of like, podunk tribes) that has ever existed started on the basis of men ruling over women sexually and economically. I'm not condoning it, it is an objective fact. Even outside the box of standard contemporary-defined "rape", sexual assault and male domination were 100% the order of the day cross-culturally, everywhere, for most of time. There's a couple of m…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:33 PM
6

Ok, you said "centuries before now", which is hundreds of years, and if we're talking about the WORLD, then RAPE was definitely the most popular and efficient strategy to get a woman. If you were talking about the 20th century, you probably should have said "in the last century" and not "centuries", but eh, fuck being like clear and understandable, right? You mean the opposite of what you meant -- makes total sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:28 PM
1

"probable," "reasonable to assume", "some form of pleasure" -- notice how these are not OBJECTIVE statements? Lol, you are just posting subjective statements that are AGNOSTIC on the issue, just like I am.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:26 PM
10

Rape
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:24 PM
1

It is literally the one and only common thing all the living things have. This has nothing to do with the word "objective" and it does not make anything "meaningful" Maybe you should read less and think more. Spoken like a person who does neither well.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:06 PM
1

I am agnostic on the issue and do not randomly assert knowledge like you do. I don't know, and either do you. I think there could be a huge number of reasons humans have evolved pleasurable sex over, say, cats, who have barbed penises and the female cats definitely DO NOT enjoy reproduction. nyway, My first GUESS**, is that pleasure is a lot more related to brain size/intellectual capacity than it is to reproduction, to even feel what we consider "pleasure" you would need an at least ape-ish pre…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 06:04 PM
1

The fact that humans derive pleasure from sex = not my opinion, its an objective truth. When did I contest this? Some humans do not derive pleasure from sex, so it is not objectively true to say ALL humans derive pleasure from sex. What's hard about this? The fact that the reason humans derive pleasure from sex in order to reward reproduction = not my opinion, its an objective truth. Okay, where is the empirical evidence? I already asked for it, and you provided none. This is a very easy thing t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 05:55 PM
1

What well known fact? What the fuck are you talking about? First of all, this lady starts with what I just said about evolution being indifferent. It is literally how I ended my last comment. Secondly -- she still says absolutely ZERO about objectivity, which is all I'm still talking about. Jfc, I really hope you say something relevant next
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 05:50 PM
1

Humans are programmed to enjoy the process of reproduction. No we are not. Most of our reproduction when we were apes was rape and most of our reproduction when we were still nascent humans was also rape or some variation therein. Rape is an alternative gene promotion strategy and it is only pleasurable for one party. I really doubt women evolved clits in order to make rape feel good lol Sexual organs having certain nerve sensors does not point to those sensors existing BECAUSE OF reproduction, …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 05:43 PM
1

... what does this have to do with this word: objective All I want is for you to explain how it is "objectively meaningful" to reproduce just because we are driven to reproduce? What does instinctual drive have to do with "meaning" or "purpose" or "goodness" or anything at all? This is all I have been saying the entire time if you read back my comments, everything else is tertiary and irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 05:27 PM
1

No, there is no reason for any of it besides, like, the second law of thermodynamics. It seems as though we fundamentally disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 04:59 PM
1

no. you said it was objectively****** meaningful. it's like you've been talking to yourself the whole time. jfc
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 04:58 PM
1

EDIT: Being programmed to do so has nothing to do sex feeling pleasurable BECAUSE OF reproduction lmao Spoiler: all species that exist today are "wired" to do so, I actually just said that in my last comment. You made a claim and it constituted "BECAUSE OF" -- because of means that there is a clear causal link to the pleasure we get from sex and reproduction. Where does your article say this, besides nowhere? How does this make sex "objectively meaningful" again? Jesus you really moved the goalp…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 04:54 PM
1

Can you find me any evidence that sex feels good because of reproduction? I have never seen any evidence for this belief, I have an MS in psychology, I think something like this would come up by now. If nature didn't reward reproduction. Species wouldn't reproduce. What does this even mean, man? Nature doesn't "reward" anything -- species find niches that accelerate their growth or don't. I'm sure you can think of examples where TOO MUCH reproduction would be absolutely fucking terrible, and I'm…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 04:47 PM
1

Why? Because nature rewards you for reproduction. No, absolutely ridiculous. It also rewards just simple sex without reproduction. There are a whole host of cognitive benefits to SEX without reproduction. Sex is good without babies. So no, this untrue right out the gate. It has nothing to do with the babies. Humans have sex for pleasure and so do lots of other species. It is not just reproduction. Also nature does not "reward" reproduction lmao. Did you not see the birth canal bit? I don't think…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 04:22 PM
2

I'm not even sure what to say about that. How can something that is critical to the survival of our species not be objectively meaningful. Because that's not what the word objective means. Something being critical to survival does not mean it is objectively important. There is no empirical basis for the survival of humans being "good", "important" or anything else. I'm not willing anything away. I am talking about the definitions of words. I think it's important because you'll just go around say…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 04:13 PM
1

The reason I say reproduction and survival are the same thing is because YOUR DNA can't survive without reproducing. Your DNA can survive without penis in vagina, 100%. Every living being on the planet gets rewarded for survival and reproduction. Humans are no different. In my view, most humans on Earth get punished for reproduction and marriage, both of which actively ruin or harm human lives every day. If most people tempered their reproductive obsessions, we might be living a much different w…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 03:56 PM
2

Reproduction and survival are not the same, and your weird definition doesn't really change that. You can survive without reproduction. Our body is not "designed to survive" -- we were dying from our teeth rotting our brains for thousands of years, we got frozen into ice blocks, we got eaten by predators for centuries before we figured out how to build fucking teepees. Our bodies are miraculously poorly designed and if anything we are designed to die quite easily. Do you know how shitty the huma…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 03:22 PM
4

It's a well written comment, but the reproduction stuff is just a naturalistic fallacy and it's weird people can't see that. There is no objective "purpose" or "meaning" to anything. It is not a measurable value. That is sort of the point of something being "objective" -- that it can be measured with empirical metrics. "Purpose", "meaning", or whatever other word we don't actually understand you want to use, are non-measurable conceptual phenomena, not concrete calculations. Assigning some kind …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/20 03:09 PM
7

TIL on PurplePillDebate that women are walking Pareto distributions and this generalization of groups without making any reference to intergroup variance definitely makes sense and isn't liable to crumble down into a puddle of dumb logicks the moment I start to think about it even a little
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/20 07:00 PM
8

Like most issues in statistics, context is key. Self reports are not equivalently inaccurate depending on the field of research and the questions being asked. I'll stress that this isn't an issue we can accurately speak about on a forum without missing the meat of the issue -- like a college education's worth of text would have to be produced to understand why self reports are generally accurate. I recommend starting with Statistical and Methodological Myths and Urban Legends: Doctrine, Verity a…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 07:19 PM
2

Most of the ecs have done interviews and have personal sites. They're white dudes lol
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/20 12:31 PM
6

I was mostly talking about entertainment, dating culture and fashion, which probably have nothing to do with American interventionism/imperialism, but sure, probably has a lot to do with the American economy. Also, just like, everyone thinks white girls are the hottest for some reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 08:23 PM
4

I think there's plenty of American dudes on TRP and plenty of stuff to relate to, and I say this as a non-RPer. RP is a flood of bullshit, but I don't buy the all wrong argument. I'm a secular Czech Jew who lives in America and went to middle, high school and eight years of university in America, and even I think there's some useful stuff there every now and then. If you somehow read only the good shit and manage to miss the overwhelming deluge of garbage, TRP can absolutely teach you how to man…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 07:59 PM
2

There are endorsed contributors on TRP who pimp out shit like Julius Evola, who was not only an SS Intelligence Officer but ironically enough also a total retard who said about zero true things throughout his life. He pretty much just came up with lame ass theories that had no scientific credibility, that no one outside of his little cadre of dopes took seriously, and now there's people on TRP who get hundreds of upvotes telling dudes there's going to be some kind of ubermensch patriarchal upris…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 07:45 PM
3

I mean if this is your thinking, then it seems like the only path forward in your view would be to Balkanize the remaining groups of TRP that are easily classified, which is already happening. That's why we have MGTOW, TRP, ASKTRP, all the sub-cats of incels, PurplePill, RPwives, seduction, subs like that. I guess a /r/RedPillEast or /r/WesternExclusionaryRP could work in practice, but even then, just logistically speaking, I think it would be overwhelmed with western themes and logic. Remember …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 07:24 PM
2

No arguments here -- I am a proponent of women sleeping around, lord knows it really helped me out in my 20's. I am not a proponent of sleeping around when it becomes neuro-developmentally odious, however, and that line is very, very murky for a lot a lot of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 06:46 PM
6

I don't necessarily hate the proposal stated in your title, because it is just adding a layer to the conversation, and sub-categorizations can be important for quantifying how cultures deal with different problems concerning relationships. That said, there are some pretty standard universals that exist cross-culturally so I don't really see the reason to nuance the shit out of this -- there are no cultures on Earth where obese toothless swamphags are considered prime mating stock, just like ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 06:44 PM
1

I literally say like one post down that I encourage everyone to find quality partners, and I tell how to get their quality filter in check. I have no idea how you think I made this about quantity, except for saying that if you fuck like a hundred people then MAYBE statistically speaking there is something pathologically wrong there. A hundred partners, hell, even 50 casual sex partners, lets say in your mid 20's, is not about "freedom" -- it is about having an unhealthy relationship with the fee…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 06:37 PM
3

Not sure how I'm being solipsistic -- 99% of the time I've seen that word used on gender dynamics forums, it is being used incorrectly. Nothing about what I wrote is even remotely solipsistic. As for the rest of your statement, you're going to have to extrapolate because I have zero idea how it is even thinly connected to anything I just wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 06:29 PM
1

Fair enough, I think we agree more than we disagree at this point, I'm just so used to talking past people and people talking past me that I don't even know what to do when I mostly agree and just disagree a little. Carry on.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 05:00 PM
6

> But I'm single, so why do I need self control around sex? There's zero reason for me not to enjoy it. I thought we just agreed on this, actually. Because sleeping around with *everyone* you find attractive, and *everyone* you want to fuck, *might not* be the best thing for humans, cognitively speaking. It is literally acting on whims. It is a manic behavior, pathologically speaking. > Sociosexual women who enjoy casual sex don't experience the same mental health implications. lmao that's a big…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 04:38 PM
6

gotta suck some overlord mod girl-cock here, this is a great answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 04:31 PM
8

Guys who get laid don't hang out on TRP. This is just dumb and wrong. While I would agree the majority of dudes on RP subs do not get laid, or are there because they suck as humans in general, there is 100% some minority contingent of men around the manosphere that actually know what the fuck they're talking about. Honestly, most of the time, I think it's fairly simple to discern if someone gets laid simply by their vernacular. 'if you desire to fuck someone, you should fulfil that desire'. Eh, …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/20 04:25 PM
2

And like a ton of other things, you're just kind of a dumb fuck unfortunately
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 07:55 AM
2

um so you just haven't noticed, you know, by virtue of being alive, that certain groups have certain characteristics? like, are you really perplexed that white women have certain facial characteristics compared to black women? I ask once again: are you retarded?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 07:51 AM
2

really? https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/4/391/273534 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3074358/ https://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572011000200007 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698914000984 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103112000443 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-0-387-79098-5_6 https://www.beautyanalysis.com/beauty-and-you/face-variations/face-variations-ethnic-group/ https://…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 07:45 AM
1

eye patch chicks are hot, don't be silly
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 03:28 AM
1

you have a lazy eye (left eye) in this picture, still cute tho
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 03:19 AM
2

you look very much like a young rob huebel
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 03:13 AM
5

chad face as wide as the mariana trench is deep
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 03:12 AM
1

6.5, 7.5 w/ eye patch
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 03:11 AM
6

jesus you look like the alien from Splice
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 03:11 AM
1

i could tell you were a filthy atheist just by the way you posted, hot scum
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 02:51 AM
1

that's very nice of you, 8.5 if you tried a little harder. come sleep with my fiance so i can feel like God exists again
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 02:17 AM
1

well that's fuckin' rude dude how bout you take a chilled pill my man
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 02:16 AM
1

I did, I thought, "Oh shit, she's like the living embodiment of the sexy librarian stereotype" and then I noticed you were only .2% 'broadly Southern European' and it totally killed my boner
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 02:15 AM
1

i creeped your profile and you're hot so your comments actually mean something! cool! thanks!
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 12:40 AM
9

why are you so young, bitch? i've been trying to be nice but your comment triggered me hard, Guy Fawkes mask face lookin motherfucker
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/20 12:03 AM
1

I imagine you're closer to an 8-8.5 all dolled up and shit, keep it up
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 11:55 PM
1

is it easier to get laid up there... because of the implication?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 11:46 PM
1

8 7ish after closer inspection
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 11:46 PM
2

I refuse, and will continue to be lovingly hypnotized without your consent
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 11:30 PM
1

i second _mwk's assessment, facial hair and hair are douchebag central, but it doesn't matter rly
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 11:21 PM
1

yup
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 11:16 PM
2

0_0
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:48 PM
1

kissy face emoji
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:35 PM
2

This makes a lot of sense, by the way your posts are almost always very good. Also I work out and shit, hopefully that's a bit obvious, but I don't know how truly ripped dudes do it. Basically impossible. I'm 30, and I've just never been able to commit like they do. The mindset seems pretty fucking foreign to me. I do agree more muscle would help, tho (obviously)
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:34 PM
1

thanks atlas, you are absolutely the last person i thought i would hear this from.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:32 PM
1

if i say no how many pics will you send
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:32 PM
1

it is
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:31 PM
0

i bet you're good as shit at political science
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:29 PM
1

still cute as shit with a shit eating grin/10 also cat ears aren't really fair as its scientifically proven all men want to fuck women more when they have feline features
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:29 PM
2

i like a lot of your posts/thinking but you weird as fuck my dude lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:27 PM
2

Eric Bana
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:23 PM
1

well that's true but lots of chaddier dudes have posted, i seent it
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:22 PM
3

wait, you've had four fucking kids? MILF/10
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:21 PM
2

i'm trying to be as nice as possible in this thread to everyone but if you're not hot this comment means nothing to me
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:18 PM
1

probs hottest one so far, unless you have cross-eyes or some shit
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:15 PM
3

chaddier dudes have posted, but he has the sculpted chin and shit, i'm sure he's drowning in waps
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:12 PM
5

coward, but i want to believe you're hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 10:11 PM
1

all i do is go to work and sit inside and read! i'm the opposite of fun, floral shirts are deceptive!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:51 PM
1

fuckin hell i don't know how you guys do it. dieting is easy for me and i'm in pretty good shape, but the commitment to lifting is impressive to me. i can pretty much only muster the courage to lift three times a week, and even that is fucking brutal. more power to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:48 PM
3

haha thanks . here's my regimen: don't dress like a goofball lift weights, you know, sometimes and a little run don't eat food that kills you has all worked out pretty well so far
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:46 PM
3

cowardly only posting a mask photo, but would hit on you in a grocery store even with the mask on/10
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:45 PM
2

Cool jacket
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:44 PM
5

your face looks like a create-a-character randomization from a mid2000's video game but everything else about you is pretty clearly designed to fuck as many pussies as possible, good work, and your tattoos don't look like absolute garbage.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:44 PM
3

i am a savior to all women everywhere
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:39 PM
3

you're cute, stop being self conscious
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:38 PM
4

I think she has a point, honestly, this dude does match all the qualifying criteria for 'classically handsome dude'. There's been a couple other jacked dudes that clearly also fit the bill, but it shouldn't be a surprise that the aggregate of dudes of PPD would be average and or middling and or attractive only to small populations of women/not be broadly attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:36 PM
1

This is roughly correct and I will reluctantly accept this view, amen. also thx
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:28 PM
3

reminds me of a younger hotter version of Nellie Bertram
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:15 PM
2

clearly killin' it, my dude, post your regimen
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 09:11 PM
1

haha vry nice of you but are you on prozac, i have never been called 'hunky' in my life and most of my significant others have referred to me as 'ugly-hot' and 'thank god you play guitar well'
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 08:53 PM
4

both of these are new, i get jean ralphio and steve from stranger things regularly irl. i appeal to a very niche market of sometimes attractive women who like emaciated slav-jew looking creatures. i saw your picture, and i think you're nuts. i work out just enough to not be a fat retard, you are like legitimately in shape. i have no idea how people like you have the willpower. maybe i need to get my estrogen/gay levels checked.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 08:53 PM
6

no you are
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 06:47 PM
5

thank god i'm tall i rate myself a very cool 4/10
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/20 06:32 PM
1

You're going to have to extrapolate. I never said don't participate, I said don't be a pussy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/20 04:58 AM
3

You're just distorting my argument, tho. I didn't say they become disgusting troglodytes, I said they become less attractive by a factor of 1 -- an 8 to a 7. So if you're a guy, and you have the ability to fuck 8's, and the ability to fuck the 7's, why wouldn't you fuck the 8's? I mean, fuck both if you can, but if you have to just pick one, it seems like the hotter one would be the better option. I live next to one of the biggest universities in the world in the southwest, so pretty much all my…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:21 PM
4

There are lots of attractivefuckable single women in their 30's. They are significantly less attractive than their 20's counterparts, and besides, I think there are several surveys out there about this, not just one. Regardless of age, men prefer women in their early to mid 20's. A 35 year old man finds a 22 year old girl hotter than a 33 year old and so does a 60 year old man, on average. If she's an 8 when she's 22, she's a 7 or less when she's 33, on average. Also I agree with everything you …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:10 PM
3

You're talking about women in their teens and twenties. Yes, aka high SMV women, aka the women most men want to keep fucking throughout their lives. You don't ACTUALLY become a provider, if you have a good job, I think this is really the thing I take issue with. You say this, but in general men with the kind of setup you're talking about DO become providers and DO get trapped by pussy. I have seen so many good men lost to the pussy trap, my friend -- pussy is literally the most valuable commodit…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:58 PM
0

LONG GAME, in what way? Providers are looking at the 'long game', in a sense, and I think they're bitches in general. You're boring as fuck if you want to fuck only a single pussy for the rest of your life. Can't get behind that idea. An alphas 'long game' is being able to continuously fuck high SMV women well into his 40's and 50's, not necessarily staying with a single woman. Honestly I don't even know if we're disagreeing, just talking past each other. I'm 30, tall and in shape -- I make a sl…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:45 PM
1

Yes, this is what's happening and I said as much.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/20 12:02 PM
1

Last paragraph
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/20 12:01 PM
1

You can't put the genie back in the bottle, dating apps and population statistics have forever tainted the marketplace. There is an inevitability that a huge percentage of people, especially men, are going to die alone and with little sexual experience. I am really not sure if there's any way to make a better system. Women are going to continue to have an overinflated sense of importance and self-worth compared to men, even when they ain't worth shit. Men can continually try to improve themselve…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 08:54 PM
1

Odd how I am the only one to back up my view with evidence -- four times over, and you have provided fuck all. That wasn't my stance anyway. I said it was both objective AND subjective, you just don't know how to read. I also have many more peer reviewed analysis on the subject that I have not posted, since you haven't even bothered to read what I already posted (i.e, the evidence in front of you). What do you have? Some faceless strangers, no experts? Nice. Good work. You just used a bandwagon …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 08:22 PM
3

> By the way, to what extent do you believe that women (i.e. not just the most popular ones) can fuck "hot dudes" anytime they want? If you're a sexually active 7+ woman, you have your pick of the litter. You could just literally walk up to the men you want and say "fuck me now" and they would, most of the time. I also don't "believe" this -- this is a demonstrable fact and I could easily prove it with enough rounds of testing. Anyone could recreate this. I have seen shit like this happen in my …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 08:20 PM
1

Fat people, more often than not, do not get any high quality dick or pussy, because high quality people are repelled by lazy unmotivated retards. Since SMV and attractiveness are all about objective aesthetic criteria, everything you have just written is straight nonsense. thx for playing.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 08:15 PM
1

Don't be fat isn't that high of a standard. It's a bottom of the barrel expectation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 08:07 PM
1

This has nothing to do with what we were talking about, and I am bothered by fat people in general. Fatness is a huge issue, and one of the leading causes of making people ugly in the first place. Obesity is a literal scourge -- your flippantness on the subject is really just an indicator that you do not know how to take care of yourself and are probably a fucking Beluga. Anyway, stay on topic. We were talking about what 'attractive' means, and SMV, and you were being incoherent. Your options ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 08:02 PM
1

Most 'why' questions like that, in my experience, can usually be summed up as a combination of factors, and rarely stem from a singular source. So all of those are pretty good guesses. Dating apps and in person dating probably have slightly different attractiveness requirements, and I'm sure pheromones legitimately do come into play, but I also think apps in general bloat women's standards. Apps just make it so women know there's hot dudes everywhere and they can fuck them anytime they want, whi…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:59 PM
1

Can you read, dude? Attracting high quality people is what matters. It's in the first fucking definition, you illiterate goon. It's about the quality of people you're attracting. Attracting fatties doesn't mean shit. Attracting a single 10/10 is more valuable and more a sign of a high SMV than attracting 300 fat buffalo. Seriously, what is hard about this? And it's not my logic. I just gave you three definitions from three different sites lmao, you have given me fuck all except your shit interpr…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:54 PM
0

Because top-tier women only go for the top 5% of men. Women 7's can fuck Guy 9's. Guy 7's are not the top 5%, so it is probabilistically likely that they will chase after lower SMV chicks once they are routinely rejected by the 7- 9 girls. This is of course not a strict general rule, and as said, I see mismatched couples all the time of both sexes. Also I don't think the numbering system makes a whole lot of sense in general, I am just using it for easy quantifying.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:41 PM
1

SMV is not based on demand and supply. The sexual market value (SMV) is the personal value that everyone has in the sexual market place. High SMV individuals can get high-quality partners and/or can more easily get a high number of partners. Notice how this is about quality and not supply and demand? lmao https://thepowermoves.com/sexual-market-value/ Also this: Sexual Market Value Ones Sexual Market Value can only be found by using this simple easy to use equation. ((Attractiveness) + ((4x)Soca…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:37 PM
1

Fat slobs attracting other fat slobs doesn't make either party suddenly attractive. That's delusional as fuck. There are objective standards for what is and isn't considered attractive. Morbid obesity is NOT included in that list.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:35 PM
1

We just disagree, man. I don't think ugly people wanting to raises your SMV. The only thing that raises your SMV is hot people wanting to fuck you. I don't even include fat and ugly people as part of the Marketplace -- the only people with any functional value on the marketplace are hot people. The SEXUAL Marketplace is for hot people -- ugly and fat people are routinely excised from the Market by people with actual value. Ugly and Fat people are in a market unto themselves that is in no way cor…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 05:10 PM
1

No -- your market value doesn't increase based on the amount of people you don't want to fuck that want to fuck you. I would be okay with an argument that said: Your SMV increases when people you want to fuck also want to fuck you, but more people doesn't mean an increase in value. No one feels more valued because a bunch of fat, ugly people want to fuck them, and if they don't fuck these people, then where is the value? I must be missing how personal SMV increases by NOT fucking people you don'…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 01:23 PM
1

That's not how I've ever looked at smv. Your smv is related to how objectively attractive you are, not how many people want to fuck you. If a thousand fat ugly women flooded my inbox, their thirst wouldn't magically increase MY smv. So I don't buy your argument even a little.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 12:51 PM
1

Maybe it's not about replicating old systems, maybe it's about seeing what all systems do correctly, and then adopting those methods, a synthesis, if you will. There are good and bad things about 'sexual socialism' and good and bad things about a free marketplace. Neither is good or better, just different. Also using micro-penises as your example, a condition like 1% of men have, does not really make your point very salient...
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 11:07 PM
2

That is your opinion, and you can have. I think people should love themselves. Okay, I guess heroin addicts should love themselves because only loving yourself matters. It's called self-improvement. Get a helmet. Being fat is objectively awful for your health and for your SMV. I'm sorry you are sad :( I'm sorry you suck shit at debating when you are on a debate forum, and routinely said untrue shit that I blanketed away with actual research, of which you provided precisely zero point zero of in …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 08:38 PM
2

We is ALL FUCKING PEOPLE I don't think fat people should have a healthy self-esteem. Fat people are disgusting and should improve themselves. They should absolutely feel like shit about themselves until they are not fat, always, full stop. I am criticizing men. Maybe read over my comments, lmao, I literally rail on incels and average men, AND average women. I said in my second comment it's GOOD for women to have high standards and GOOD for men to try to compete. It's called not being a biased pi…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 08:35 PM
3

If a fat girl thinks she's hot shit, goers out and gets paid, how it that infringing on your life in any way? I never said it was infringing on my life, I said it was unfair for the average man, that average women overrate themselves, and that we should be treating average women just like average men (when we clearly are not) -- average women, just like average man, should be seen as gross, ugly and disposable, and in my view, that's exactly what they are. In the view of the prevailing culture, …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 08:29 PM
3

That's fucking ridiculous, beauty standards exist cross-culturally. Beauty is both objective and subjective. To say that fat women are more often cross-culturally referred to as "beautiful" as thin women would be objectively wrong. Very few cultures -- and I mean almost none -- have 'fat' or 'obese' at the top of their standard. In fact almost all standards of female beauty, from Mozambique to South Korea to Canada, include desirable hip to waist ratios and do not include "fat as possible giant …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 08:02 PM
2

That's fair, can't really find any contentions with your logic at the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 07:41 PM
1

I just told you AND posted a study (so go read that) -- fat women think they are hot, they are not, there are plenty of movements supporting these kind of bad lifestyle choices and please don't tell me there aren't. Beliefs turn into action -- these women who are fat and lazy and or just shitty think they are beautiful because of external reinforcement (aka lies), and in turn their dating strategy reflects this, which usually leads to this kind of "why can't I find my Henry Cavill" cryfest I see…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 07:40 PM
0

Luckily I'm a socialist. Free markets don't work for plenty of systems. Tell me how well free markets work for healthcare, plz. Same thing with sexual dynamics. Giant fucking failure.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 07:36 PM
3

The people that raised them, the prevailing cultural narrative of 'any size being beautiful,' the fact that most civilized countries are now filled with obese retards that won't or can't get a fucking helmet. External cultural reinforcement is to blame, and lazy parents/teachers who don't try to improve their children's lives are to blame.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 07:34 PM
1

We're living in a world with a fat acceptance movement, for God sakes, what do you think this is doing to young girl's brains? We're living in a world where criticizing women for essentially anything is becoming increasingly taboo. And there is definitely an underlying culture of telling girls they are "beautiful" and "gorgeous" which are lies on average, as the average** woman is not beautiful or gorgeous, she is average. People still call their obese lazy sausage-y daughters beautiful and that…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 07:32 PM
8

If the 5/10 women are only sleeping with 7's and up (they are, on average) and are routinely mischaracterizing their own SMV, then I'd say there's blame on both sides. I don't mind blaming men for not being good enough, though. We should be actively encouraging fat/effete/incel-y men to be objectively better in order to better suit women's ever-growing list of criteria. This is a raw deal but I don't care 'cause I'm tall and not a fat retard. Also I think most here, even some of the women, seem …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 07:09 PM
8

Like I said, men go for the hotter girls first, of course, but you're delusional if you don't think men settle for uggos and fatties literally all the time. There is okay statistical evidence to support the notion that men overrate themselves, so I'm not really contending that. I am contending the fact that 5(or up)/10 men don't go for 5/10's, which I think is wholly untrue. Once the guys are sex starved enough, once they have had enough of crippling rejection and loneliness, they try to find th…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 06:53 PM
8

I don't really believe in pareto stuff as a universal rule, that'd be like dumb as fuck, so that doesn't really fly with me. As far as I have seen, all the studies we have at the moment show that most men, even the attractive ones (6.5's - 8's), are flooding inboxes of women even if the women are much lower SMV than they are. They are flooding the hot girl's inboxes, too, but she's only replying to the top 5% because she's hot and can fuck anyone she wants. Then they flood the fat, and or ugly, …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 06:34 PM
1

That's because your reading comprehension sucks due to an overload of bullshit like anime and other virgin "nerd" nonsense. No hope for you friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 05:32 PM
1

do you know what quotes are traditionally used for when speaking to other people on the internet? jesus you're dense.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 02:22 PM
1

Why don't you come down to Arizona State University on a Friday night and see for yourself lmao, you will drowned in dumb drunk sluts. also I said 18 - 21, and I didn't say around every corner. You're exaggerating my claim and saying things I didn't say. Are you autistic? Like you said, "I'm angry", so I'm just clarifying, since you seem to think I need to "relax", so I'm just wondering if you're autistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 02:17 PM
1

Lol make sense and stop responding like an old woman with dementia
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 02:01 PM
1

This is what people say when they've said a bunch of pretty dumb things and have nothing else to add except to inappropriately characterize the other person's in-moment emotions, which of course has nothing at all to do with the "argument" at hand. Good work.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 01:52 PM
1

It wasn't an assertion. It was my anecdotal experience and I say that like five times, you just don't understand how to intake information when you read, apparently. What don't you understand about this? Why didn't you give the girl who replied to me shit for her anecdotal experience? Why am I not allowed to give my anecdotal experience, and claim it was indeed an anecdotal experience? Also it's like literally in this thread about the same topic, in this same chain. lmao what a search!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 01:50 PM
1

I never did either. In fact I said the opposite in other posts, and said what you just said like three posts down, to two different users. Your reading comp sucks
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 12:45 PM
1

No, I said I see them routinely looking for older men when I'm around a giant campus and university bars and I do. I also never said my anecdotal experience was true or objective, did I? I said it was my experience. You're arguing with a ghost.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 12:27 PM
1

Sure I do. I'm on the clock when I make 95 percent of my comments. That's getting paid to be on reddit whether you like it or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 11:53 AM
1

I wasn't arguing about whether it not they were more common. I even said one to three year age gaps were the most statistically represented group.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/20 11:52 AM
0

I pop into this sub maybe once or twice a week for giggles. It has been constant regurgitation and or retard nonsense for at least five years. If you find this topic interesting, you're uninteresting, and likely stupid. Seriously, go get some critical thinking, stop believing in fake bullshit, and do something more productive than thinking about your genitals, or asking other men about your genitals. Give me a fucking break.
/r/askTRP23/09/20 11:38 PM
1

I'm a programmer for a data management company, mainly just small website troubleshooting stuff. During most of my eight hour shifts, I finish my "work" in about 2 hours, and read for about the other six. I've read like forty books this year on the clock and shitposted endlessly. Life is good.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 11:09 PM
1

see, i already have read books, which is why i'm not asking retard-tier questions to a forum that won't answer me how many informative answers do you think you're going to get to your insane questions? lmao good luck
/r/askTRP23/09/20 09:37 PM
3

lmao you are asking a forum of neckbeards and sexless men (with the occasional chad) how often they "drain their gonads" -- if you don't see a problem with that, you are out to lunch you should... delete this
/r/askTRP23/09/20 09:34 PM
8

you should focus on more important things than trying to cum without ejaculation. you should also not think 'Chi' is a real thing, because it isn't. anyway this reads like satire. i thought it was fake because i can't believe anyone would willingly think about any of this banal, dumb shit for more than ten seconds. seriously dude, go read a fucking book that's not about how long you can keep cum in your balls. jfc
/r/askTRP23/09/20 09:31 PM
9

is this satire
/r/askTRP23/09/20 09:29 PM
1

I mean, I have already admitted that it is statistically more likely for people to be relationships that have a 1 - 3 year age difference, this is a measurable fact we derive from census data. That all makes sense to me -- it was the other claims the other user was making that I had a contention with. She was talking about the motivations of the men, how "successful" the relationships are, etc, etc. Also she was using words in a way that is, well, it's just dumb, and I don't know how to say that…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 09:05 PM
0

I'm not angry. Your perception of text =/= my actual emotions I know a few sugar babies, too, although I know faaaar more girls your age who just fuck 30 year old guys because they can't stand 18 year old "men", which, honestly, I don't blame them for, since men of your generation are noticeably (and sometimes proudly) effete and faggy.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 09:01 PM
1

Something tells me you are young and don't know that many women. Broaden your social circle. Also my sample size is likely significantly larger than yours because I've lived about a mile away from the biggest university in the U.S. for a decade
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 08:56 PM
1

Sounds about right to me. Only contention is the last part -- having a debate with pretty much anyone here is a fool's errand, and I'm gonna' keep doin' it anyway because I basically get paid to talk shit on reddit these days.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 08:54 PM
1

The stereotype of young women trying to marry rich men does not say anything motivationally, or interpersonally, and does not 'prove' or otherwise bolster any of your above claims. Care to enlighten me on how they're even tangentially related? *Women in general, statistically* **want** to marry rich, so the age thing doesn't really tell us any important information. The stereotype is actually: WOMEN WANT RICH MEN, NOT POOR ONES. To which I say: of-course-fucking-duh I mean I'm not speaking anecd…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 08:17 PM
1

Technically we can't agree on that because we don't know anything about each others circles. So no, I can't agree on that. The women I know who date older men are all hot, except one of them, so I think the fairest assessment here is, "Some women who prefer older men are hot, some are ugly slags. Some women who prefer older men are stable, and some are not." Otherwise you are just using your own anecdotes to forward your own bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 07:26 PM
4

Nearly all the men I know that are 29 and up, my age range, can easily sleep with 18 - 21 year olds, and only some of them are in good shape. I think you're underestimating just how easy it is to get laid if you're a guy with even a little money and a good physique, even into your early 40's. It is fucking trivial and 20 year olds are, in general, sluts.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/20 07:01 PM
1

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/20 04:43 PM
1

How is that a denial? Where do I say anything about whether or not they are prostitutes in one way or another? You literally don't know my views on this because I have yet to state them, so I really have zero clue what the fuck you're talking about beyond weird rando assumptions. Are you high or do you have a learning disability or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/20 07:18 AM
4

I think most of the mongrels around here think the gen pop of women sit around in nail-filing cabals and endlessly talk shit about the faggoty losers they made pay for resort vacations and diamonds while they were secretly off suckin'n'fucking a thousand GigaChads an hour. They're so afraid of shitty women, who do exist, that they willingly ignore the numerous majority who are ho-hum, plain, normal human beings. Who woulda thought?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/20 12:14 AM
6

I'm not Chad, just tall, and I know plenty of dudes who aren't tall that get laid on the reg. It's not that difficult. Whinging men on the internet massively over-complicate dating dynamics and massively underestimate their own sexual opportunity.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/20 11:25 PM
2

When did I deny that? And why am I simp? Because I actually know how to get laid? Like, you do know there are more options than "simp" or "incel", right? I know the many multidimensional categorizations humans fall into might be too broad for the inculcated internet boxworld you've built for yourself, but that doesn't make them nonexisent, champ.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/20 11:24 PM
6

We aren't forced to lie about anything, jesus christ dude. I don't know what kind of dating life you have or where your "ranking" is in the SMP, but there's this thing called upfront, forward communication and people do it with one another all the time. I don't have to lie about my intentions to any woman I date because women aren't retarded, 99% of them are not naive enough to assume I'm there for anything but sex, especially if I meet them on OLD. I treat them like human people, and I generall…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/20 08:25 PM
7

It's a tough world, kid. Get jacked, make money. That's all ya' got.
/r/askTRP12/09/20 12:04 AM
10

Maybe. AFAIK Americans are fiscal dumbfucks because their Kthru12 education provides exactly zero real information when it comes to the economy and personal finances. I guess I don't really know if other countries provide this kind of education (although I know European and Asian kids are objectively better educated in math and science), but it seems pretty god damned important for young adults getting thrown to the hellfire void-world we have now to know how to not spend their money on ridiculo…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/20 04:02 PM
3

Maybe I should have put a /s?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/20 03:57 PM
22

Also has a lot to do with lifestyles choices. I make a little over 50 annually in Phoenix. Huge city, fairly expensive in some parts, but I'm frugal and save and big purchases are exclusively for expensive restaurant dates and travel. Even middle class people these days are so used to lazy luxury that they think having an 80 inch 4k tv mounted into their wall is a totally ordinary expense and they just have to drive their giant SUV/truck and they have to have xyz new cool thing. Every lower-midd…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/20 03:29 PM
4

"It is better instead to form beliefs based on guesswork, no evidence and personal observation, as has been done for centuries, amen."
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/20 03:21 PM
6

You got a good head on your shoulders, pal. Wish there were more like you here and a lot fewer of these sad little creatures we have scuttling about.
/r/askTRP25/08/20 08:42 PM
14

Agree with most of this, except I think magazine level shape is pretty much out of the question for even most in shape people. It's not the top 20% who are maintaining movie star Brad Pitt Fight Club physiques -- that's like the top 2%. You can be in the top 20% and be slim-fit or even fat-strong a la some UFC fighters and You Were Never Really Here Joaquin Phoenix, no problem. tl;dr Setting the bar high is good -- setting the bar too high is actively discouraging.
/r/askTRP25/08/20 08:33 PM
12

I think you're right, and pretty much everyone I know (myself included) could confirm that you're right, but I'm not so sure this is the common sentiment on this sub. I've seen dudes say similar and get screeched at for it. Also I would note this is not true in areas where there are gluts of women but excesses of men. It is almost certainly true when the populations are leveled, and there are a near-equivalent amount of youngish hottish people around (i.e. university towns and major urban center…
/r/askTRP25/08/20 08:06 PM
1

Imagine being so directionless and mouthbreathing that you ask an internet forum what you should be doing with your time. My suggestion is: if you cannot think of something to do yourself, you don't deserve to do anything. So don't do anything. Just sit there with your mouth open drooling and shut up.
/r/askTRP19/08/20 05:45 PM
5

yeah man, me too, i start with 'yo you degradable biohazard whore, you want some cummies on that skank head of yours?" works at least 100% of the time
/r/askTRP13/08/20 04:12 PM
5

I think your first part is true, but "Most ugly guys have better social skills than their attractive counterparts" is total nonsense. If anything, the inverse is more likely to be true. Attractive people get treated better on average, thus are more likely to have broader social circles, thus are more likely to sharpen social skills over a longer period of time. Even if that's not true, there is precisely fuck all support of any kind for the notion that "omg ugly people have better personalities.…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/20 08:15 PM
1

There's more white girls in Los Angeles than Latinas. I worked in entertainment -- pretty much every woman around on a daily basis was at least a 7, even if they were like PA's or production designers. Then there were the actual actresses and models, of which there are probably more than any other place on Earth. Actresses and models literally exist to be hot and very few of them in my experience have anything resembling a worthwhile personality or anything whatsoever to say, but they're still g…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/20 05:07 PM
2

Agree wholeheartedly, Jim, well put.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/20 02:41 PM
1

Yep, that is certainly just your opinion and I agree with it 0%.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/20 08:18 AM
1

I lived in Los Angeles for five years, man, you are preaching to the choir! Some silver linings when living in places like that, though. You shape up and become not a worthless dumbshit real quick because you have to compete somehow. I do find the constant pressure of invisible competition somewhat comforting.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/20 05:30 PM
3

> Yeah -- a guy has to be pretty damn hot to get regular hookups these days. I'm certainly a top 20% guy(i.e. 6'4" 210 lbs, graduate degrees, six figure job, not ugly). However, I don't have women throwing themselves at me. I think you're mostly right, but I also think this almost certainly has to be a demographic and or geographic issue. I am two inches shorter than you, 40 pounds lighter, 1 Master's degree, with a highmiddle 5 figure job, and pretty much everyone I know with these stats or sim…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/20 05:19 PM
1

A "manipulated event"? What, precisely - as in, the exact definition - is a "manipulated" event, and how is it different from a "not manipulated" event? Seriously, dude, I really don't understand what you're talking about. There's lots of examples of extremism being good. Your black and white thinking on this topic will get you nowhere and is incorrect to boot.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/20 12:55 AM
2

“Kids in Africa are starving” the argument. The Fallacy of Relative Privation
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 09:45 PM
1

Well you’re forgetting the fact that for the past 400 years war has been a profitable business more than any noble cause... Not sure what this has to do with anything we're talking about. it can be justifiable in times of tyranny and even attempts of forming a tyranny. Ok, so this is like the opposite of "extremism is always bad", which is essentially what your first post states. In any other scenario it just fails to realize that it simply forms part of the vicious circle This is not a coherent…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 09:31 PM
1

Yep, I think the same thing for men. It's all about when the behaviors begin negatively impacting your life, not numbers or gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 09:29 PM
1

it's still completely plausible that an increased number of sexual partners decreases one's ability to pair-bond. Plausibility is like the least useful criteria I can think of. The inverse is equivalently plausible, especially if you have inconclusive data sets buttressing opposing theories, and all we have are inconclusive data sets afaik. So I think agnosticism on claims like these is more appropriate.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 08:47 PM
-3

I mean, that link kinda shoots your point in the foot: Researchers in this field, who were not involved with this particular study, told The Huffington Post that these findings should be taken with a grain of salt. "There are a wide variety of reasons that may lead people to have multiple partners before marriage and, independent of how many partners they have, also be less satisfied in marriage," Dr. Jim McNulty, a social psychology professor from Florida State University who has published a pl…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 08:33 PM
1

I would consider the Czech National Revival as an example of extremist nationalism that was necessary and beneficial not only to Slavs but to the world at large, as it gave Czecho-Slovaks back a culture that was essentially stolen (and subsequently Germanized) from them since White Mountain by the Hapsburgs. Also, like, Thomas Paine, was considered an extremist propagandist and he is literally one of the main reasons the United States exists. Any of his material, but especially Common Sense, Rig…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 07:21 PM
1

Bad argument. Everything in moderation, including moderation is better. There are times when extremism is entirely called for, necessary and the only way forward. I will be happy to provide as many historical examples as you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 07:12 PM
9

I said it had things to say, not that it was true, which it isn't, and I never said it was. There is an okay amount of anthropological research that says that polygamy and short term relationships were practiced throughout the ancient world cross-culturally, which is one of the few claims Sex at Dawn makes that is true. The problem with Sex at Dawn isn't necessarily the truth claims (although this is an issue with the book), but with how they approached the research, and how badly the research w…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 06:55 PM
4

Yeah, I guess I just don't agree. I don't get the ick factor from 30. 30 is about as high as it would go for me before I started getting the heebies, tho. If a 30-35 year old woman told me she has had 30 sexual partners, I wouldn't bat an eye, and I would consider it a sexually healthy number, especially considering I've had a near equivalent amount of partners. It would be way hypocritical for me to bash a chick for exploring her sexuality when she is at her most biologically desirable (her 20'…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 05:08 PM
22

This is a Sex at Dawn argument, which I think has some things to say, but totally misses the broader picture. We're not "wired" for monogamy any more than we are "wired" for polygyny or short term relationships. What I think is more true is that different groups of humans in different circumstances adapt and or pick up sexual behaviors either through their environment or epigenetically, or both, and that it's possible for humans to have contradictory genes that only express themselves under cert…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 05:05 PM
50

Why do you doubt biological reasons? Besides obvious learned behaviors, all of our behaviors are the result of biological underpinnings we have no control over. I'd bet that a disgust in promiscuity has a lot to do with paternal uncertainty. Really, though, I never see anyone talking about gradation. There is a huuuuge psychological difference between a person who has slept with 20- 30 people and a person who has slept with 100 - 200 people.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/20 04:37 PM
2

Yes I do. If Alison Brie told me I could facefuck her every day for the rest of my life but she just so happened to chew with her mouth open I would tell her to fuck right off and go to hell. That shit is sick.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 08:03 PM
2

Single parent family means single parent, not divorced, as in - 1 dad, or 1 mom. You can have two parents and have divorced parents at the same time. Your extrapolation makes no sense and is borne entirely from confirmation bias and believing in the shit you're selling before getting the evidence, then finding random evidence and trying your damndest to apply it to this specific situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 06:49 PM
2

That wasn't the original claim, now you're just making another claim, but ok. At least you can admit you're extrapolating and nothing you're saying is based on evidence. Good on you, man. Respect.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 06:31 PM
1

answer if this is better for society and the children? Dude, are you just making shit up? This was not your original claim. Your original claim had nothing to do with society and children. We are not talking about society and children. Do I really have to show you the effects and data on single parent families? Not talking about this, either. Seriously, what are you talking about? I am asking for very simple evidence of a very simple claim you made and you can not provide it, you just keep movin…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 06:23 PM
1

To be as fair as I can possibly be, there are many examples where multitudes of correlations do infer causations, this is called Reichenbach's Common Cause Also stuff like this: https://www.vocativ.com/335705/correlation-causation/index.html https://www.sciencealert.com/watch-here-s-the-best-guide-we-ve-seen-to-how-correlation-and-causation-work
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 06:13 PM
1

Why do you believe that an inability to pair bond is psychologically damaging? Oh, and by the way, at first you wrote physiologically damaging, and that's not the same thing as psychologically damaging. You really need to make clearer claims. Either way, I have yet to see proof that an inability to pair bond causes psychological or physiological damage, so at this juncture it seems as though you're talking a mess of shit with no evidence to back it. Interesting. Ok, so what is a 'high body count…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 06:09 PM
4

Pretty much all studies in the social sciences related to gender are correlational. I don't think this guy understands that and thinks a few articles is absolute proof of his conclusion, even though the only point of these studies existing is so other scientists can poke holes in them. But, yeah, this is confirmation bias on his part.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 06:04 PM
2

Yeah, I've read that study before. That study is different from your claim that it "physiologically damages them". That study says that there is a correlation between higher partners and higher divorce rates. It says nothing about "physiological damage", or being a "hoe", or any of the other crazy bullshit you just wrote. Again: do you actually read this shit, or are you just parroting talking points? Also again: do you have these magical studies that show that sex "physiologically damages" them…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 05:55 PM
8

What about if they chew with their mouth open tho?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 05:32 PM
3

CMV if you get anally raped by three horses you will probably die
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 05:31 PM
-2

This has nothing to do with what I was talking about, thanks for playing, work on reading comp thanks :)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 05:22 PM
4

Your claim: "being a hoe 'damages' women 'physiologically'" What does 'hoe' constitute, in your definition? How does it 'damage' them 'physiologically'? Where in these studies (I've read the Miller one before) does it say that 'hoes' are ' physiologically damaged' by sex? If you're so well versed on the subject and have read through your own material, you will likely have no trouble isolating the parts of the research that validate your conclusion of 'being a hoe damages women physiologically'. …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 05:21 PM
1

I have no idea what you're talking about
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 05:03 PM
3

I think you're both right but will probably box past one another without reaching any kind of synthesis. purplegenz has a point -- approaching a lot does a fuck ton for the average man's confidence and social mobility. Talking to attractive people and chicks out of our league, even if you're being consistently rejected, is a tried and true strategy at beating out dumbly wired social inhibitions. If you get good at bullshit say-whatever-thefuckyouwant absurdist small talk with attractive women, y…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 04:17 PM
9

Statistically I think you're right, there's a good study floating around that shows men (generally not always of course) evaluate themselves a "point or two out of 10" higher than they actually are, which wouldn't surprise me at all. A part of the problem that isn't discussed all that often is that some 5-6/10 dudes, like me and most of my friends, can every now and then fuck or have a relationship with a 7.5 or an 8 and this totally fucks up our expectations for the future. The onus is on us to…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/20 03:45 PM
1

k
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/20 04:22 PM
1

And my claim was that nothing new would be said and lo and behold nothing new was said.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/20 12:10 PM
1

No, literally everyone else who commented on the reddit thread and youtube video IS as wordly as I am (whatever that means, and I never claimed to be worldly lol). Cause they all came to the same conclusion right when they read the title of the video. The uniformity and lack of any real debate in the comments is a pretty huge indicator of this. It's common, self-evident knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/20 11:35 PM
1

Eh, 'slight twist', whatever man, we all knew the conclusion before watching the video, just like everyone in the comments in rvideos and youtube did. This is a debate sub. I post to debate, so exactly the opposite of posting in threads that align with my beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/20 05:38 PM
1

Hey look, another non-response because you don't understand simple concepts! Cute dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/20 11:28 PM
1

Funny how you ignored my entire post because your original point is so evidently a platitude for dummies. Congrats. This is surely how you 'debate'.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/20 11:07 PM
1

Well sorry man, but you're objectively wrong. First off, you admit there's newness in tech and science... so your quote is already stupid bullshit. Like, you just admitted your quote makes no sense because previous unknowns become knowns constantly due to scientific inquiry. Also there's new concepts in philosophy all the time. Is philosophy tech/science? Answer: nope. What about math? Is math science or tech? Technically, no, it's not, it's MATH. Do you really think they were thinking of the et…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/20 09:38 PM
0

There's lots of new things under the sun. Things are invented all the time. Concepts are invented all the time. New ways of looking at old problems are invented all the time. Your quote is a platitude and means fuck all. Novelty exists, novel ideas exist, "newness" exists, and beating a dead horse definitely exists. This topic is beating a dead horse.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/20 09:14 PM
12

What I don't understand is that OP linked a thread with five THOUSAND comments and then he's like, "hurr durr, do you think there's anything else to say?" Like, dude, there's five thousand fucking comments right there, and they are mostly saying everything this sub has been saying for like half a decade. I don't understand this at all. There's a search bar at the top of the sub. It will give you all the answers you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/20 04:09 PM
36

This sub has had this exact conversation about ten million times. There will be no new insights or revelations. You have created a thread that will be entirely regurgitation, 100%.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/20 03:51 PM
2

sick
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/20 07:45 PM
3

What men should do in my opinion is make themselves the best goddamn free agent they can make themselves and enjoy the most freeflowing and diverse pussy buffet available to the masses in human history. Some relatively in shape dude making just above average money in America can fuck a volume, variety and velocity of women rivalling Genghis Khan in today's times and even some wealthy people don't do it? Bingo. This sentiment is fought hard here for some reason. But 'just slightly above average' …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/20 07:41 PM
2

I agree that in modernity Islam is more of a problem than Christianity, but Christianity is still a problem, and while Jesus wasn't a war promoter, he was still a stupid asshole and an apocalyptic prophet. Like, have you read the Bible? Jesus's whole shtick is, "You better love me and daddy when the apocalypse comes or you fucked as fuck dawg." This is one of the primary messages of Jesus and no amount of cherry picking or other theological semantics will make it otherwise. Jesus does not come t…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/20 06:37 PM
8

I see so many hot 30-somethings daily that whenever this topic is brought up I wonder if it has to do with population demos more than it has to do with "the wall" being a rock solid thing. A 35 year old woman who takes care of herself in Los Angeles or New York is only slightly less hot than she was at 25. If she was hot at 25 and took care of herself, which is statistically likely in cities where people aren't fat retards, then she's still going to be hot as fuck at 35, and she's still going to…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/20 04:24 PM
2

i'm making shit jokes to everyone in this thread, lighten up
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 07:59 PM
2

letting one of your illegitimate children you refuse to pay alimony for draw on your face does not count as "going to the barber"
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 07:57 PM
1

i didn't know they let blacks into hoovile you hoo-nosed 6
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 07:55 PM
3

your beard looks like it was drawn on with sharpies
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 07:55 PM
1

sick dude thanks
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 06:43 PM
2

you look like you're 37 and on probation. get a lamp idiot
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 06:40 PM
2

you're a grown ass man who took a duck face selfie. get your fucking life together
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 06:38 PM
1

lol you look like the kind of guy who still gets picked on by his high school bully even though he's like 30. how many fucking yu-gi-oh cards can you fit on that eleven head of yours retard
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 06:36 PM
1

reasonably hot but also kind of look like a transexual porcelain doll. also lazy eye.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 06:35 PM
8

the epitome of cherubfaced milquetoast shitbag normies, all three of you
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:54 PM
3

i dont even have to make fun of this because it makes fun of itself just by existing
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:48 PM
1

im doing it to literally everyone, dont flatter yourself
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:46 PM
3

reasonably hot, kinda mannish chin, can also tell you hate black people intrinsically
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:39 PM
3

oh look it's what you get when you search basic white bitch who probably believes in crystal healing and other retard shit on google
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:28 PM
1

im making gay shitty jokes that suck to everyone in the thread, its not personal also im ugly as fuck so youre good bruja
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:25 PM
2

wow man when you die make sure to get buried so the worms can eat from your lips for centuries
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:24 PM
2

you look like a Russian sex worker and that's not a good thing. i bet you have dosvedanya or something tattooed above your pussy
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:23 PM
2

youre hot but definitely have teacher who fucks her teenage student vibes
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:22 PM
1

your eyes are too far apart, you look like the concept art for a grey alien, you're ugly and gay, etc etc
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:20 PM
2

you look 12 and that's not a good thing
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:19 PM
3

you are the one of most conventionally attractive women to post in this thread but also look like a twisted amalgam of most of my ex girlfriends so it is certain you are a simpleton and a tramp
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:19 PM
1

you're by far the ugliest woman who posted in this thread congratulations
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:03 PM
4

you are the some guy-iest some guy here 100%
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:03 PM
2

you're hot but i've seen less shit hair on Haitian prostitutes
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:01 PM
1

i'm not down at all my dude, just tryin' to be objective. it's ok to have an ugly face. doesn't really stop me from doing much of anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 05:17 AM
1

Why? I'm objectively unattractive, but I'm tall and take care of myself so its chill. Type ugly tall Jew, Steve from Stranger Things, or Jean Ralphio into google and you'lll find plenty of pictures that are nearly indistinguishable from my actual look.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:53 AM
1

you look exactly how your username sounds
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:42 AM
5

shit im sory i didnt know it was so serious i apologize i meantt to say you're hot and let me eat your asshole
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:36 AM
2

you're a 6.5-7 and could be an 8 if you tried a little harder
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:32 AM
3

hahahahahahahahahaha, fuck, i got nothing, good work.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:26 AM
8

reasonably hot but your personality makes you a 0
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:26 AM
1

hahahahaha, i am just fucking around, it's purge and this is the only time i'm allowed to be a cunt : (
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:23 AM
4

you look like a flamboyantly gay spanish cartoon character, in this pic especially i'm getting guilty conscience queer bullfighter, how close am i
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:22 AM
1

you look like most of the dudes at uni i knew who liked date raping girls for funsies but you're also objectively attractive so i'll just go fuck myself you fuck
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:20 AM
9

i'm trying to make fun of everyone in this thread but i can't make fun of this it's too cool and definitely not gay or trashy
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:18 AM
9

you look like a rapist who is also a pastor, so, a pastor I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:17 AM
4

fucking ew
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:16 AM
1

Your ears are weird but otherwise I'd say you're fine man. I'm hideous in the face -- I know people who are objectively more attractive than me in the real world.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:15 AM
1

My face is hideous. I'm uglier than you, almost certainly. Post away.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:14 AM
1

Why is your hair like that
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:13 AM
3

You look fat. edit: I should have written, "is your altar made out of butter and pizza sticks you fat fucking retch?" but I didn't, so eh
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 04:12 AM
7

I might just be more optimistic than you, but I think there's a large bevy of people here who are routinely rational and not cunts. I see well thought out comments every day. Sure, they're dwarfed by the shit comments, but they're still there, every day, multiple times. But, eh, you're right. This subs nearing 50k members -- the bigger it gets, the dumber it's going to become.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/20 02:30 AM
25

One of them should be normal fat, one should be morbidly obese, and one should be dead of an opioid overdose. That's the real deal diversity in the U.S. these days.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 11:24 PM
1

Oh fuck, the question makes sense now! It's a miracle!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 09:24 PM
2

Good excuse. First off, it was a joke. So the joke is that everyone you meet considers you a worthless trite slut because you are one. Your "consideration" is not necessary. But yeah, lets break down the grammar you're bitching about. You can "let" others "consider" something about you... what the fuck are you talking about? That's perfectly acceptable and readable English lmao. here: "I let them consider xyz about me" "I let them consider me a slut." These are perfectly good sentences and anyon…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 09:13 PM
4

You don't "understand" my question because you're purposefully being obtuse, or you're overwhelmingly dense. My question makes perfect sense. Also you misspelled "grammar" which is always very funny. Probably shouldn't admonish people for their bad grammar if you don't even know how to spell grade-school level words. I guess all those skull-fucks have really rattled around that ol' whore noggin' of yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 08:58 PM
1

you're wonderful at deflecting perfectly readable and reasonable questions, at least. good quality for a worthless trite slut, for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 08:47 PM
2

do you consider yourself a worthless trite slut or do you just let everyone else do that for you?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 08:41 PM
1

since when does laughing and pointing at the idiot count as angry? all i'm doing is laughing and pointing at the idiot (that's you, and I'm only telling you it's you 'cause we've already established what an idiot you are), as all good people have done since time immemorial.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:52 PM
1

this is the cringiest comment i have ever read on reddit and anyone who says 'lesser beings' like you just did is the ultimate overcompensating faggot. thank you once again for proving my point, you absolute embarrassing idiot.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:49 PM
1

see? no argument or answers and nothing funny to say either because you're such an underwhelming dullard. very obviously an overcompensating low iq beta. good to know. thanks!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:45 PM
1

i don't even think you understand the words you're saying at this point. what you just typed is psychobabble and clearly the result of your low self esteem and bad life choices. i hope things go better for you man, because being an incel troglodyte pussy for your entire life has clearly taken a mental toll.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:41 PM
38

No one here with an ounce of critical thinking thinks this place has anything to do with dating or gender dynamics. This is a place to play mostly incorrect arm chair evo-psych professor and argue with other would-be wrong fake evo-psych professors who disagree with us and that's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:38 PM
0

does it hurt being as unfunny and retarded as you are, or does this just come naturally to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:33 PM
1

what did i edit in the comment? can you tell me which words i changed? also how does editing grammar/syntax in a comment mean you have me on a leash, what does that even mean? fucking lol dawg. you seem way too mad at a throwaway comment during purge. fuck you're *dumber* than I was anticipating and that always makes it more difficult. smh.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:30 PM
1

woof woof idiot
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:24 PM
3

lol @ assuming I'm serious because of a comment during purge you might not be sexless dude but you're definitely a worthless baby faggot
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:22 PM
3

I wish there was some type of anti Elliot Rodger superhero who would round up all you whiny sexless faggots and just get it the fuck over with.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/20 07:20 PM
0

youre welcome btw do u still have problems cumming because i have black friends that could help with that
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 09:39 PM
2

what really floats my boat is killing and raping women but i'm not allowed to do that because of the police state so i'll just settle for calling them weak do-nothing narcissists on the internet
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 09:25 PM
5

i have met one girl and one boy and the boy was stronger and faster so that's all the evidence i need thx
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 09:16 PM
1

it's not because only men are useful and do things
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 09:12 PM
1

it can be both
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:36 PM
1

yes and no
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:34 PM
1

this would work better if you were funny like the words gay and faggot which are funny and which you also are: a gay faggot
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:31 PM
1

learn to read dude, you're embarrassing. like just knowing someone as retarded as you exists is embarrassing. all the words are there and they mean the opposite of your gay misinterpretation and everyone but you knows it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:28 PM
2

every day i am not as faggy and objectively worthless as you i feel better so yes
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:17 PM
1

"u can't criticize stuff unless you've also made shitty music, this is an intellectually valid point i promise, i don't constantly just post gay wrong uninteresting shit all the time"
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:14 PM
1

Rammstein is for autistic suicide potentials and le edgy goth dykes with cunt piercings who like to listen to ancient screeching vulvas woe-is-meing themselves to the grave. not surprised you posted this.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:08 PM
1

weird cause me n my boys on the football team were in one last week and we made sex with the quarterback's "gf", so guess you dont actually know anything huh dummy
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 08:03 PM
2

it's not closed if i'm inside of it idiot
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 07:56 PM
1

You're right about the dick thing, I might just be reading L'Ami du peuple too often. (and not French, but I like Perkin)
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 07:53 PM
1

we will continue guillotining your daughters until they sleep with us and not the small dicked aristocrats in Vendée. loser.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 07:48 PM
0

last week this chick i met breaking quarantine at denny's crumpled under the accumulated weight of the University of Arizona offensive starting line and it was super not dope dude. she got to fuck like fourteen huge black guys in a half hour. it's not fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 07:45 PM
1

Woooooow, get the fuck out of here with this shit you faggy schmega-eating loser
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 07:42 PM
6

0 BMI, they are hotter dead and rotting, #makeallwomenskinnycorpses
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/20 07:37 PM
3

High IQ has a very high comorbidity with autism. Tried to look for something that said exactly this, but there's not really any papers that make the exact claim. There's some that are somewhat close, though. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289616303324 > High statistical significance and a remarkably high relative risk ratio of diagnoses for all examined conditions were confirmed among the Mensa group 2015 data when compared to the national average statistics. This implica…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/20 04:43 PM
4

You can't call that person tall/short, people are more than just their height you know! "Tall" and "short" can be measured based on averages. Alpha and beta cannot, and have not. Person who relies on female validation and kisses their ass in order to try and get pussy" vs. "Person who holds women to account, non-neurotic, self-assured. (Typically ambitious)". I like how you just used a totally different definition than the user above and are trying to claim they mean the same thing. If I were to…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 06:56 PM
3

I'm not sure how I could get destroyed by someone who didn't make a single point the entire time. Also, if you can point to what you disagree with me about instead of saying nothing, that'd be great. This is a debate sub -- debate or gtfo. If you find fault with what I said, tell me why and I will respond. I know what it means. This guy assumes people can't understand nuance. That's the bigotry of low expectations. He assumes the audience would not understand more nuanced definitions which accou…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 06:12 PM
4

lol what?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 06:02 PM
2

No he isn't. He's a fucking loser. Now you're just injecting some random ass shit that doesn't have anything to do with the conversation. Women are not a monolith, but there are general statistics on what makes them aroused and the sort of mates they choose for long term partnerships and short term partnerships. Those statistics are really the only okay-ish measurements we have to begin to describe what "women" "in general" get aroused by. So I don't "wish" anything. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 05:00 PM
3

So a dude who fucks exclusively obese trailer trash uggos and is 5'1" and stickthin is "ALPHA" because his romantic relationships are "primarily" based on "arousal"? Fucking LOL. This isn't even what the terms mean to TRP. This is definitely not what is in the sidebar. You're just making up terms, and they don't mean anything, and no one thinks anyone is "alpha" just because their relationships are "primarily" based on "arousal" (whatever that means).
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 04:49 PM
3

This is impossible, because I do not know what the terms mean. The uniform standard definition is retarded and accurately describes no individual's actual behavior, and the testimonial definitions are all contextual and based on individual interpretation, thus are meaningless. This is another great reason why a stupid lexicon helps no one and does nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 04:33 PM
7

I've been reading TRP and seduction forums for like a decade. Almost none of it is true, and I think your argument is bogus. > We need terms that have meanings so that we can have a discussion. Ok, so come up with more accurate ones. Terms that don't accurately describe something are stopgaps, not solutions. Terms that do not relay the reality of the situation completely at hand up front are meaningless. What I think you're doing is called the Bigotry of Low Expectations. I think most people are…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 04:27 PM
6

I deny your question, it is a bad one. Ask a better question that doesn't inherently force me to answer a binary.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 04:07 PM
4

There are lots of different types of men. There's 3 billion of them. And within those 3 billion of them, each one displays a variety of disparate behaviors based on their genetics and environment, and within those genetics and that environment, those behaviors play out in all sorts of different crazy ways day by day -- it is all contextual. I am unsure what your point will be from here.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 04:04 PM
11

Because it doesn't "relay the message more easily" if it's a false binary, and it is -- those terms fundamentally ignore and or otherwise reduce the complexity necessary to evaluate human personality dimensions, behaviors and characteristics honestly. If the terms were good metrics, scientists and psychologists would use them. https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_myth_of_the_alpha_male https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/head-games/201412/are-alpha-males-myth-or-reality https://…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 03:53 PM
5

'Home of confirmation bias, testimonial evidence and post-hoc justification' should be on the banner of this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/20 03:38 PM
2

Ok dog, whatever you say dog.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/20 05:32 PM
2

Kinda' reminds me of this Tom Robbins quote: “Humans have evolved to their relatively high state by retaining the immature characteristics of their ancestors. Humans are the most advanced of mammals – although a case could be made for the dolphins – because they seldom grow up. Behavioral traits such as curiosity about the world, flexibility of response, and playfulness are common to practically all young mammals but are usually rapidly lost with the onset of maturity in all but humans. Humanity…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/20 03:48 PM
1

The 80/20 rule is a natural rule that applies to most everything To most everything? Really? Come on, man. You know that's not true at fucking at all. Pareto distributions are not a universal property of nature, or economics, or physics, or fucking anything at all. They're hyper useful for a lot of things, but to suggest it's a "natural rule that applies to MOST EVERYTHING" is objectively incorrect. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1306.0100.pdf https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/95164.pdf https://en.wikipedi…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/20 09:13 PM
-1

lol k https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/brb3.1389
/r/TheRedPill25/04/20 05:48 PM
3

Is this a joke?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/20 09:06 PM
1

Please never stop talking.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/20 08:47 PM
6

We've been out of ideas for a while now. Where have you been? The same questions are asked every single day and are given the same answers.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/20 08:08 PM
2

This is correct. Source: I ain't got no motherfuckin friends That's why I fucked yo' bitch, you fat motherfucker (Take money) West side, Bad Boy killers (take money) You know who the realest is niggaz we bring it to you (take money) (Take money) First off, fuck your bitch and the click you claim Westside when we ride come equipped with game You claim to be a player but I fucked your wife We bust on Bad Boy niggaz fucked for life
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/20 02:35 PM
1

Your claim was: > that women and men are intrinsically different and will always want different things, and that no amount of social reconditioning will change that. He doesn't say that men and women are "intrinsically different", so that claim is false, and you should edit it. You won't, but you should. Second, are you saying men and women DON'T want different things at a baseline? If so, why do you think this, and what evidence supports it? > men and women having intrinsic hard-wired differenc…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/20 08:10 PM
5

I'm not even a fan of Peterson and I'm pretty certain you're misinterpreting his view for the sake of argument. Hell, after a cursory google search I found his blog, where he straight up says: > First, men and women are more similar than they are different. This is true, cross-culturally. Even when men and women are most different —in those cultures where they differ most, and along those trait dimensions where they differ most — they are more similar than different. So I think you're being dish…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/20 06:13 PM
1

Yeah, that's fair, although I'll note pretty much anybody can buy followers on IG for like $100. I could make myself "famous" in like two hours just by emailing some Sovietbloc botfarm-firm who can make it look like I fuck Russian models 24/7 and am in a new country every month.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 03:26 PM
3

> to superficial girls this is a big turn on. I think people misrepresent this a lot. If your social media matters to her, she's almost certainly some kind of shallow one-dimensional trash. There is absolutely no high quality reasonable human being who gives a single fuck about how many followers you have on social media. That is the most teenager fake gay bullshit I have ever heard.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 03:16 PM
1

Your experience < actual studies. I don't care about your anecdotes. I was talking about *on average.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 03:00 PM
1

I'm not over exaggerating. I posted studies. Read the studies. Women GREATLY prefer tall men. Which means they greatly DON'T prefer short men. But ok, you keep saying words that don't mean anything. Saying they start at the bottom is not over exaggerating according to the studies I posted. Almost NO women surveyed say they prefer short men. It's the same for fat and poor men. All of them start at the bottom comparatively. A 5'6" jacked guy starts at the bottom compared to a 6'1" jacked guy. A ja…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:50 PM
2

I like how you directly ignored the next statement regarding the first paragraph, which is stating that it's not impossible for short men to get laid, and that it's a "stupid disadvantage", which is all I said about it. The last statement has nothing to do with what we're talking about. It is stating that being tall is a boon (it objectively is, as I just noted with studies) and being not fat is a boon (it objectively is, I can post those studies, too) So, like I said: you need to work on your r…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:41 PM
2

Some do, some don't. Some RPers legit do get jacked and improve themselves, but you're right that it's likely a small percentage because genuine self improvement is super difficult for most people in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:34 PM
3

6'2"
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:34 PM
1

How "big of a disadvantage" did I make it out to be? Can you show me where?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:33 PM
4

So what did I over exaggerate, then? What was the exact statement that I "over exaggerated"? All I said is that it's a "stupid disadvantage". And it is. Are you saying it's NOT a disadvantage? Every study ever done disagrees with you, and every study ever done on this topic notes that women in general prefer tall men. Don't know what to tell you. It's a disadvantage and I never said anything different. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0429/b91a7863659e945e37df2e1e56c811c10445.pdf https://www.sci…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:24 PM
3

No I wasn't. I literally said "it was not impossible." You need to work on your reading comprehension. Being short is a disadvantage. Everyone knows this. More than that, we have lots of stats. You can go look them up. It is, once again, *objectively, as in, *factually, a disadvantage to be short in the dating game, but no where did I say it's a "grand achievement" for short men to get laid. You can interpret shit however you want, but your interpretation doesn't reflect the meaning of my words,…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 02:11 PM
5

How is saying that it's "not impossible" implying anything? I said that money is a huge advantage, and it is. I don't understand what's so difficult about this. If you have one huge disadvantage, you have to counteract it with an advantage. You yourself said they were good looking and funny -- great, there's your counterbalance, and them being short is still a detriment *ON AVERAGE. Two women finding them suitable isn't what we're talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 01:54 PM
5

I said that "if you're short you're at a disadvantage, but it's not impossible." Those are my exact words. When did I say short dudes couldn't get attractive partners? I said it's a disadvantage and it objectively is. There's tons of stats on the importance of height to women. So I'm unsure why you wrote that comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/20 01:26 PM
4

edit: replied to the wrong person. I guess my response to this is: "Oh no! How dare they agree about something! Agreement is disagreement! War is, fuck, you know. Peace is, ugh, fuck it."
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/20 11:45 PM
17

> Is there a point where everyone, even a fellow red pilled brother, has to look at these angry sexless guys and just say sorry dude, you’re just unappealing to women to the point where you can’t even use them if you wanted to? Yes. And the people who can actually get laid need to be honest about why they get laid. I think that's where a lot of the misunderstanding and side-taking is coming from. The only reason I get laid is because I'm tall and thin and approach women. It is not because of any…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/20 09:57 PM
13

"Common sense through an edgelord lens." Very well put, my dude. I think the "edginess" is there because sexist ranting is the default setting for most hurt/otherwise "mishandled by women" dudes around 18 - 30, and that's almost certainly the demo of RP subs. Most dudes on the manosphere subs don't seem to realize you can fuck hot girls without being an annoying prejudiced cunt.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/20 05:42 PM
27

I do all those things listed in your first paragraph. I do not consider myself "RedPilled" because none of those things you listed in the first paragraph came to me by way of RedPill, and it's fairly box standard advice that has been floating around the internet long before any manosphere subculture became popular. Be a healthy, active and educated human being and you'll probably get laid more than some slovenly lazy dipshit. Whoa, what a fucking revelation. Definitely need a whole sub for this,…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/20 05:30 PM
2

The current literature I find most convincing states that narcissism should be "conceived as personality dimensions pertinent to the whole range of PDs" and "The proposal to delete NPD as a prototype category in the DSM, Fifth Edition, seems well justified." Validity aspects of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, narcissistic personality disorder construct. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21193181 Narcissist or Narcissistic? Evaluation of the Latent Str…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/20 03:05 PM
0

Whatever you say, pal.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 09:10 PM
3

I'm always trying to be silly because being silly is fun and I like having fun. But I stand by everything I wrote there, and I'm glad you found it inspiring. I rarely get that, so that's very nice of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 06:45 PM
1

It depends on the man.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 06:18 PM
1

I don't know why, but this cracked me up. Never stop being you, you lizard-holding weirdo.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 06:05 PM
2

Sure, I also think quality counts a lot more than quantity. I know my fair share of "average" guys that fuck hot girls, though, and I'm "average" and have never fucked a fatty or total uggo, at least, and there has definitely been a certain level of somewhat difficult self improvement that went along with this. So some average dudes are genuinely trying for the absolute best girls they can get and *somewhat succeeding. I'm sure some others are, as you said, just racking up big girls and plain ja…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:57 PM
1

Ok so you asked why would it be a turn off No, I didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:39 PM
5

The guy has to be select worthy in the first place. For online dating, I'll actually concede that point -- the dudes who get selected for online dating are genetically gifted and don't need much more, it's mostly based off looks. Then again, capitalization of looks is definitely a thing. Good looking dudes can't just let themselves get whatever slovenly skinnyfat and stay in the game, they still have to maintain a certain level of shape (women don't really, they have to be skinny or not fat and …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:38 PM
2

I think sleeping with physically attractive girls regularly takes a bit of effort for the *average guy, and I don't think I've ever said anything different. The criteria the men have to meet are at least a lot more stringent than the ones the girls have to meet, I don't think that's particularly debatable at this point...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:18 PM
2

I mean, if a bunch of dudes agree with me that 'effort' is a major contributing factor with male disgust with h n-counts, wouldn't that kinda invalidate your point? Second point is interesting, and can agree that's a double standard. I still think many men are concerned over the effort portion of the equation, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:14 PM
6

So the average girl find creeps and weirdos attractive? I never said this. Not even a little. I said she will have to sift through weirdos and creeps, but within her pool of men she is still going to be able to find xyz amount that she finds attractive (who are NOT weirdos or creeps) and will want to fuck at a moment's notice. Please read my statement again, because you clearly misread it. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:11 PM
1

'Eh, I wrote 'most', not all, was trying to be careful but I guess not careful enough. I will agree 'most' is probably too overgeneralized, too, and I will make the addendum that this is solely based on my personal experience, so you can take it for what that's worth, which is nothing at all. No skin off my back.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:10 PM
8

What she has to do: Go on XDatingApp, sift through a fucking cavalcade of creeps and weirdos, select however many dudes she finds attractive, go sleep with them. That's it. Those are the only steps. Men have to do everything else. I'm not even saying I particularly mind this. I kinda think it's good, as it sort of actively forces men to not be lazy neckbeard queers and get themselves together if they want to get laid or have any romantic interaction with a woman at all. But I don't see any good …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 05:03 PM
7

Ok, this seems like a copout argument, but I'll bite. I really like women and I really like fucking them, because I am a normal human guydudemanthing. I don't give a fuck what anyone thinks about it. I actively "chase" sex because it gifts me a bounty of social interaction, thoughts, ideas and experiences I would have otherwise not had. I only have one life to live and it will probably not be a very long one, because even sixty or seventy years is not very long relatively speaking. So I have six…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:59 PM
6

> women LOVE sex and some women love sex as much as men do. Every study ever done on this exact topic disagrees with you. Men think about, prioritize and legitimately care far more about sex than women do. Men's sex drives are *objectively* stronger on average. I promise you this is true. If you could find me even a single study that says women are as sexually charged as men, I would hugely surprised. Afaik, such literature does not exist (and I do not think it ever will).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:34 PM
3

That's a strange presumption that I do not share, so, shrug I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:20 PM
2

I don't think I made a faithfulness argument, that's coming out of your own imagination. I think "difficulty" matters because it's the same with anything. I respect the guy who hunts his own meat a lot more than the folks that get it at the store. I respect the guy who builds his own house a lot more than some rando who signs a lease agreement. There is a certain amount of effort which is considered respectable by and large, and I think this effort is only made by men in these situations. So a m…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:20 PM
1

I think most women can intuitively tell the types of women you've slept with based on how put together you are. They won't know exactly, but if you're attractive and put together their baseline assumption isn't going to be that you've been fucking fatties and uggos.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:15 PM
2

The surrender jokes are for people who don't know history, but my favorite ex is French, and a French history scholar, so I got really into the Revolution and Napoleonic era because of this. 18th - 19th century French men and women were the baddest motherfuckers alive, and also kind of fucking nuts, but I like fucking nuts, so Vive La France and fuck the haters.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:06 PM
5

I don't really follow, I'm pretty sure there's nothing wrong with talking about minority populations, so you're going to have to elaborate.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 04:02 PM
3

I only speak baby French for retards because I am a hack fraud who deserves the slicey machine. I'm sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 03:59 PM
8

Yeah, sure, I don't think this really invalidates my point, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 03:58 PM
11

If a man is having sex with a lot of women, why would he shame his partner if she also has a lot of sex? Because in order for him to the gain the sex, he has to make himself better. He has to actively improve himself every single day in order to continue getting sex. He has to make himself NOT disposable, which is his default setting as a male human in western civilization. Even "alphas" (whatever that fucking means, and by this I mean the term is retarded and we should stop using it) have to do…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 03:50 PM
26

But, why would it be a turn off for you if your potential partner has a high body count? Sex feels good for women too. Why do I have to have sex with the one and only one and wait for that special someone? Because in order for an average man to regularly fuck *high quality women* (I'm not talking ratchet-faced skanky obese uggos) that man has to put in the work. There are a bevy of very real obstacles, socially and physically, that a man must face and go through in order to fuck on the reg. In o…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/20 03:41 PM
1

small cycles of “creative destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction#Examples
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 09:59 PM
1

Godspeed, friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 07:58 PM
2

Only because of the scientific contributions of the few. Fundamental human nature hasn't changed. Although you do make a good point here. A few really smart people can make the world better and totally overturn a swathe of shitty radicals if the conditions are right.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 07:51 PM
2

As far as I can tell, groups have subgroups within them, generally comprised of radicals on both sides, moderates leaning to either side, and moderates straight down the middle. During the French Revolution, we had a bunch of Revolutionaries who wanted to fundamentally change the underlying principles and frameworks of France (and Europe) as a whole, but the dumb bastards couldn't agree on shit and fought with each other so frequently, and fought with opposing monarchists so frequently, they did…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 07:44 PM
2

Society is going to burn whether or not we want it to. I have a pretty bleak view of human nature and I cannot see it ever changing from "me important, tribe important, everyone else leeches, faggy, weak and gay." This has been the human standard since time immemorial (and it isn't necessarily "wrong" to think this way, as there are many immediate benefits to valuing your self and your ingroups over randos and groups you're not included in) . I'd love if we could somehow have reason win out over…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 07:17 PM
5

Legitimately teach critical thinking, starting at like 5 years old. /u/neverbiden 's answer is also salient, though. Fuck the learning and teaching. Just get yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 06:57 PM
9

I think the dudes saying this simply haven't been around enough people. Most people are inculcated into segments of populations, see, hear and feel only what's directly around them, rendering it impossible to accurately predict genuine trends, like, say, whether or not bisexual women are "skeeved out" by bisexual men. I'm a bisexual man, and not only has it never mattered, but the current girl I'm dating and like five others I've dated have also been bisexuals. If I was going to use my own exper…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/20 03:30 AM
1

Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:50 PM
2

Nope, YOU definitely can't help me grow. The end. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:24 PM
1

You're reaching and you know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:21 PM
1

Not really. I suppose he would have "grown" in some way if he realized his thinking was fallacious, although I do not think those two phrases are mutually exclusive. My intent wasn't to "help him grow", or anything about growth, my intent was "explaining why his thinking was fallacious." Those are different things. Thanks for the random ass inquiry tho.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:17 PM
1

I wasn't trying to "help him grow", I was just attempting to explain why his thinking was fallacious. He failed by not listening to my objectively correct advice. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:13 PM
1

Just them or, given enough time, everybody? No, it is possible to mitigate cognitive biases out. Not completely, but it's not that difficult. Go read through my posts. I have never once used a NTS, because it is too easy to NOT use. Moreover, I like admitting when I am wrong, or when I have used fallacious thinking so I do not use it in the future, and have done so numerous times in this sub, and this is evidenced in my post history as well. Well, since you're the one who noticed it, perhaps you…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:11 PM
1

Both feminists and RPers are guilty of using NTS, and other bad faith, fallacious arguments. Don't think you fixed anything, really. I mean, the guy I was arguing with couldn't even fathom what a NTS was and wouldn't admit he used the fallacy as a substitute for reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 08:05 PM
1

I said that most of the misinterpreted information comes from people who aren't RP. You don't get to decide what is and isn't RP. You are not the arbiter. and I guarantee you would not speak to me this way in person Yes I would. I write the way I talk. Want to give me a call right now? I have no issue with this. Your entire post was a logical fallacy, which is why I focused on that point. Look at my first post. My only issue with what you said was the fact that you made a logical fallacy and wer…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 05:14 PM
1

> Americans talk about the bible all the time, whether to dispute its validity, or to make a point, but most don't actually read it, but I never said anything about "actual" Christians not reading the bible. We were talking about RPers talking about RP, not purplepillers talking about RP, or XOtherGroup talking about RP. So your analogy is either very poor, or we're talking about different things. You have to compare a like to a like, or else it doesn't make any sense. Anyone can say, "X Group t…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 04:42 PM
1

Did you even read your own link? First of all, it is a study of 1,000. And it's not a study of 1,000 Christians. It's a study of 1,000 Americans. So that's not even close to the claim you made. LifeWay Research surveyed 1,000 Americans about their views of the Bible and found significant splits in how familiar they are with the Christian scripture. One in five Americans, LifeWay Research found, has read through the Bible at least once. That includes 11 percent who’ve read the entire Bible once, …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 04:01 PM
1

I'm sorry man, I just don't agree. The RP content is clear If it's so clear, why are RPers constantly bickering with one another about the "right" way? I've read RP forums for years. It's just constant shit-kicking one another for misintepretating certain tenets. If the tenets were legitimately clear, this wouldn't be the issue. How many people that talk about Christianity have actually read the bible? I guarantee more of them haven't than have. You don't know what the word 'guarantee' means, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 03:35 PM
2

If you have a community where the content is so pervasive, misinterpretable and toxic that it literally creates subgroups of misunderstanding within the original group, all you have is one big No True Scotsman. "This guy isn't RP, but I am." "This isn't RP (even tho lots of RPers say it is), but this is." This is just fallacious thinking. The dumbfucks of RP are still RP, just like an Episcopalian is a Christian and a Catholic is, too. Maybe if the content itself didn't devolve into rage, hurt b…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 02:44 PM
1

This is interesting. At first I thought this was definitely wrong, but there's a lot of stats that agree with you (and disagree with you). According to the okc stats, 21 is the peak desirability for women. It shouldn't really be surprising that youth is attractive, and these 'standards' have been around looooong before Hollywood. https://miro.medium.com/max/944/0*q95i3Ma24k-hxBtK.png https://theblog.okcupid.com/the-case-for-an-older-woman-99d8cabacdf5 According to other studies, though, the peak…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 02:34 PM
1

I mean, I do have an opinion, though: you are all wrong by virtue of your arrogance. I also think the "I just want to be right stuff" is intellectually indefensible, and can never be a focal point of a community that wants growth, and or progress, and or *something different. I mean, dude, I have tons of opinions. I just don't mistake them with facts, unlike those groups I listed.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 02:59 AM
1

Well I'm dating a (hot) molecular biologist and come out of a STEM heavy field -- there is no changing my nature in this regard. Hasn't stopped me from getting plenty of gash in the past, as there's plenty of girls to go around in my neck(s) of the woods. Has never been an issue, and likely won't ever be (I'm tall). I want to win, I'm pragmatic, and I'm definitely results oriented. This has nothing to do with Red Pill, tho, and I would argue skepticism and pragmatism are brothers, or at least co…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 02:26 AM
1

I care because sexual dynamics are interesting, and seeing both sides pollute the topic with bad ideas is disheartening. Instead of synthesis and compromise, or just plain saying, "I'm wrong and or have no idea", many of you form entire identities out of it, and these identities act out behaviors I think are childish, or silly, or wrong, so I say words in the hopes you will not say and do these things. The fact you are already completely stonewalled at this point shows that your hangups are enti…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 01:49 AM
1

We disagree about fundamentals, so why would I do this? If I say data is inconclusive, that doesn't mean it's wrong or right, it means we should remain agnostic, which you do not want to do under any circumstance it seems. You are making this unbroachable byway of underlying philosophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 12:54 AM
1

Tell me which points I'm supposed to be refuting. You and I have actualy done this like a few weeks ago. I told you my viewpoints, you didn't sway me to yours, I told you why yours were wrong, and alas... here we are.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/20 12:37 AM
2

Why can't it be that? See? You're invalidating points before hearing them. I think "you don't need RP for x, y and z" is a perfectly valid point. You don't because you're indoctrinated. Either way, solving this is easy: come up with some kind of RP Sanhedrin, compile a list of claims, and then see if those claims hold up to scrutiny in a jury of randomly selected peers. Actually, not just one jury. Do ten juries. Once you do this (and this feat is accomplishable on its face), many people will st…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 11:41 PM
1

That's so sad. Also you have no "reason". You have "reasons". Those are different, thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 11:12 PM
1

Um, no, juries are for determining guilt. In this case, a "jury" could easily be used to determine whether or not your ideas are bullshit. But since many RP ideas are so blatantly backward on their face, and so fundamentally coming from a tribalist/shitty place, you couldn't have outsiders or "others" among the randomly selected because they would all sniff out the dumb in an instant. If you can't even have a randomly selected jury of peers coming to unbiased conclusions about ideas you and your…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 11:10 PM
1

Consensus of a group does not mean anything. Lots of bad groups come to bad consensus's. No, I was trying to get you to understand that even though I informally used the words "beyond a reasonable doubt" that we're still more scrutinous than the legal definition, since it is so low. But you're not. You guys don't even have juries of randomly selected peers.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 11:00 PM
1

You can live a non "Blue Pill" life without Redpill. And no, science's value is coming up with evidence* until it is right, or not. Lots of things are inconclusive and you seem to have trouble with this.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 11:00 PM
1

Its not about balls. It's about liability. If you fund researchers and they make empirical claims without the claims being stamped into reality, you could get in a ton of deep shit. What you call lack of balls is literally just liability. Science is about proving itself wrong. It's good that people make claims that can potentially be overturned with more evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 10:22 PM
1

No, you are NOT being specific. There was no way for anyone to tell within your comments whether or not you meant it formally or informally. You used a term, then said, "wait, not that term!" Like lol wtf are you even saying dude
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 10:19 PM
1

Nothing I wrote is word salad. It's perfectly intelligible and I use baby words for baby humans. :) Having a hypothesis doesn't mean much if you cant gather evidence for your claims lol Also in my posts I already said that empirical truth exists. We can say lots of stuff for certain. When did I say otherwise? We just can't say everything for certain. You are willfully misinterpreting what I said. There are many objective facts. I state many in my comments here. So not sure where you got that shi…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 10:17 PM
1

If you want to rest your philosophical laurels on bad testimonies as your primary evidence, be my guest man. I'm sure your little cult and fascist thinking will get you far. You def played yourself with this comment. You just admitted you only care about your own points and scrutiny doesn't matter. As long as there's "two kids saying" something, you'll believe it. Sounds gullible and childish to me, but then again, I'm a fully grown adult male.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 10:11 PM
2

If this was Poe's Law, you wouldn't continue proving your scientific illiteracy... Like you've been arguing "le science sucks" for a while now... and it's not really sticking, and I've gotten like five DM's from people JUST TODAY saying, "Don't argue with this guy -- he literally doesn't understand science." So at least you got a little reverse fan club here, bub.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:58 PM
1

That is literally where the term comes from...
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:56 PM
1

The burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt for the men who read it, no more, no less. ... Oh man. That is NOT how the burden of proof works. You're so far gone I have no idea how you got this far in the first place. Like, holy fuck -- this is an insane misunderstanding. You are going on /r/iamverysmart when I get home, my man.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:56 PM
1

Yeah, no, it is being careful not make false statements. If you just want to say shit without verification, then science clearly is not for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:55 PM
0

Data being inconclusive isn't a weak spot of "science". The only way we can actually determine whether datasets are cogent is with the scientific method. Funny how that works.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:54 PM
1

That's not what that means. Reasonable doubt has no IQ criteria in a court of law. Guess you're just making shit up now. Makes sense, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:53 PM
2

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/738/025/db0.jpg
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:52 PM
2

I'm not trying to be a jerk, insert question clearly intended to offend or otherwise remark at the intellectual capabilities of the person I'm arguing with without any sensible retort or sticking to the point?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:41 PM
2

Right, well, RPers have a pretty long uphill battle to even start approaching this, given that you guys do not understand how to properly back up claims whatsoever. Hell, I agree with some shit RP preaches, but only because it has been backed by a myriad of evidence (women preferring height, hit the gym, stuff like that) But RP makes a lot of claims. Therefore the burden of proof is still on them. They have to prove the claims, beyond a reasonable doubt. If they had done that already (they haven…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 09:15 PM
1

Um, when did I say I didn't agree to it? Or that it was wrong? We've actually had this convo before. My answer was, "Everything has an evolutionary basis." See, the issue is: your question is wrong. No scientist will claim this because the starting assumption is always an evolutionary basis. So you're just setting up some random argument no one made in order to kick it down all by yourself. But, dude, no one made the argument. I didn't make it. No scientist made it. You're talking to yourself. A…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 08:57 PM
1

It makes those statements *once enough evidence has been verified. Like how it WILL objectively make statements about empirically true claims. I'm sure you can think of lots of those! Lots of claims haven't been tested sufficiently and that's okay. Not sure what the problem is. Eventually, they might be. Gathering enough evidence to claim objectivity takes a very long time, and that's ok, too. Now you just seem impatient. :(
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 08:52 PM
9

Considering that it's hypothesized that the more attractive and dominant a man is, the more likely he is to induce orgasm in his partner, I don't see how this could be true. Whether or not "women" or "men" as giant groups are "more shallow" than one another seems to me impossible to test sufficiently at this juncture. > Thus far, the evidence indicates that an attractive and dominant male may increase the rate of orgasm in women. Dominant men may also have the time, experience, and confidence to…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 08:38 PM
0

Oh yeah, and you clearly need this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence Just because we don't have evidence for something doesn't mean it's untrue. Your speculation that "OMG BIOLOGISTS WON'T SAY IT" doesn't mean it's false, and it doesn't mean what you're saying is true, either. It means it hasn't been studied enough. It means we ought to be AGNOSTIC about the results, since they are inconclusive. WOW, it's almost like what I've been saying all along!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 08:09 PM
1

You made the claim. The burden of proof is now on you. I did not make any claim. So go ahead, prove your claim. I'm waiting.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 08:06 PM
1

Yeah, your burden of proof is scientific law\fact. And ours is "beyond a reasonable doubt." What? You can look all you want, no one will make the claim concretely. Are you an evolutionary biologist? Did you read the paper, or did you come up with an answer before reading it? If you just read the abstract, don't expect me to take you seriously. That's not how research is done, and it's not how opinions ought to be formed. Also since you are talking about the orgasm, I'll have you know we have bee…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 08:04 PM
1

Female arousal mechanisms have an evolutionary basis Do you mean orgasms? Or other parts of female arousal mechanisms? Can you please be more specific? What exactly do you mean by "female arousal mechanisms"? Is your theory that "female arousal mechanisms" are culturally induced, and are not genetically decided upon? If so, congratulations! You just discovered the Burden of Proof, which is now on **YOU**, since you're the one that made the claim. Go ahead and prove that claim, buddy! Good luck!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 07:53 PM
1

Sure, then why bother bringing in such absurdity as calling this stuff "pseudoscience." Because the preponderance of evidence points to it being pseudoscience. Dozens of highly certified well renowned historians calling a historical book pseudoscience -- it's the same for any claim. All we can do is listen to the experts. Don't you think that's a better beeline to truth than random extrapolation? And really, even using Bayes rules on that book would be its doom. Within like two priors you would …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 07:42 PM
1

To be scientifically valid. Uh, noooo. It's not to be scientifically valid, it's about which is more likely to be true based on probability values. Notice how that is not even a hard claim -- it is claiming what is more probabilistically determined. That is waaaay different from hard scientific evidence. Who the fuck is exchanging notes on the best way to get pussy and worried about peer review. No one, and I never said that these claims require this. I have over and over again said that all cla…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 07:20 PM
3

It is better than chance, likely. See? This is the problem. You make claims just because YOU think they are "likely". This is the very definition of irrational. This is the exact kind of claim that CAN be tested, and SHOULD be tested, and we SHOULD NOT say "WE KNOW" when you actually don't. This is easy stuff. Freshman philosophy seminar stuff. The vast majority of decisions require quick assessment with little to no ability to test your hypothesis or gut read. We're not talking about daily deci…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 06:59 PM
3

Not particularly. It's one self-report study with a high sample size but kinda' wonky measurements. I don't like Big 5 stuff so any study that uses that as a metric is immediately suspect to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 06:34 PM
3

I am more than capable of making many assessments that require speculation. I, however, do not make claims unless they can be tested later, or have already proven to be true. Some claims can be tested and some claims can't. All the claims in this thread CAN and SHOULD be tested. Those are different things. I also think there are truths that can be determined without empirical evidence, so I'm not sure what you're on about. It is all dependent on the claim, contextually. How exactly am I being ir…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 06:32 PM
1

It's right here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23679066 Abstract INTRODUCTION: It has been generally thought that the practice of bondage-discipline, dominance-submission, sadism-masochism (BDSM) is in some form associated with psychopathology. However, several more recent studies suggest a relative good psychological health of BDSM practitioners. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare scores of BDSM practitioners and a control group on various fundamental psychological characteristics.…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 06:27 PM
3

That someone like you would have been one of the people who dismissed these things as pseudoscience for decades. No, I wouldn't. I would have said "I don't know". What don't you get about this? I would have made NO claims until evidence was presented Lots of evidence has been presented that the book you're praising is pseudoscience, which is why I made the claim. Because the evidence has been presented. A May 2017 article from Quartz described Strauss–Howe generational theory as "pseudoscience".…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 05:48 PM
3

Right, because they're logically consistent. It's not like these people had hard evidence to prove such a thing, just an observable phenomenon with a logical basis. And then they came up with evidence, over many decades. That has not happened with your book. Your book made claims, and then over many decades, those claims were found out to be untrue. That's why it's pseudoscience. If there weren't scientists calling your book bullshit, I would have said, "I don't know." But there are dozens of sc…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 05:29 PM
3

That is exactly my point. You would have called those claims pseudoscience. No. I would have said, "I don't know." Making claims isn't agnosticism. I would have made no claims, just like now, without evidence. You are saying I would have made claims. That is objectively false. Saying "I do not know" is not a claim. Good try, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 05:21 PM
3

Those "mountains of evidence" appeared decades after they were "pseudoscience." My views are changed by evidence. So I would have been agnostic until the evidence changed my mind. I would have made NO claims unless the evidence supported them, just like I do now. You seem to be unwilling or unable to be agnostic. Thing is, though, the link you posted is about a book written in the 90's -- that has been slammed as being as pseudoscientific as astrology since its come out, and you STILL think it's…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 04:57 PM
3

Hilarious. You just compared two things with mountains of evidence to your wonky pseudoscience bullshit no one takes seriously even after decades because it's so clearly vague and theoretical. There's a whole giant criticisms list on the wiki you posted but you don't care to read it because you're indoctrinated into a viewpoint. Oh no, your beliefs aren't 100% reflective of reality! What ever are you going to do! Reshifting your position to better understand the world around you is too difficult…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 04:41 PM
3

tldr: I don't think pseudoscience is valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 04:35 PM
3

"After introducing the non-falsifiable concept of the elastic saeculum, Mr. Strauss and Mr. Howe proceed to stupefy the determined reader with dozens of equally mystifying categories: not just Anglo-American Generations (from the millennial, 1982 onward, back to the Arthurian, 1433-60), but also Four Archetypes (Hero, Artist, Prophet, Nomad) and Four Turnings (whence the title). Put these together, and you get sentences like this: ''An Unraveling cannot lead back to an Awakening, or forward to a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 04:16 PM
9

That girl is overweight, bordering obese, and unhealthy. She's not hot at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/20 02:32 PM
4

Yeah, I don't really think it's a lot, it's reflective of a fairly normal healthy sexuality. I don't bat an eye if a chick tells me she's slept with 20 - 25ish people. I've slept with slightly more women than that (just slightly), so it would be hypocritical to give a shit. Now, if you tell me you've fucked like 50 - 100 people, that's a different story...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/20 04:06 PM
2

This is very interesting. I have a STEM degree that has some overlap with gender dynamics and evopsych, but I am not particularly well versed on testosterone therapies in women specifically, so this is interesting information, definitely. Would also like to thank you for being so open minded and willing to read through the available evidence. You did not jump to conclusions, screech, or make any blanket statements. This might be the first time on this sub something like this has happened to me. …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/20 03:58 PM
4

We're in agreement then. I'm a stickler for statistics and they seem to reflect what you're saying, or at least have for the last 10 - 20 years. Over/under 15 is a good benchmark, too, anecdotally. The sluttiest women I've met have slept with about 20 - 40, while the "normal" girls have slept with *around 15, or under, and most of those have been around 7's or slightly above, so it's not like sex was difficult for them to procure.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/20 03:53 PM
2

I think this is likely true, but I'm curious what your reasoning is for this claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/20 03:29 PM
1

Also if you think I'm a feminist or something, boy do you have another thing coming. I argue with just as many dumb cunty chicks on here as I do RPers, and am no friend of either camp.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/20 12:24 AM
1

I don't understand what you mean. Every claim I made was backed up with a source.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/20 12:07 AM
5

There are many studies on testosterone therapies being effective for both men and women. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5649360/ > Recent publications suggest that TTh improves mild ED, though may be less useful in men with more severe ED. In men unresponsive to PDE5 inhibitors and with mild ED, TTh can further improve erectile function. Testosterone therapy has also shown consistent benefit in improving libido in men with low testosterone levels at baseline, with no additional imp…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 06:12 PM
6

You will not be able to find me a serious study that says men and women have equivalent sex drives, or that women have higher sex drives than men. I have read a lot of the scientific literature on this topic. It does not exist. Every study done on this topic has pointed to a single conclusion: men have higher sex drives than women. > Isn't this based on self reporting? Studies like these are based on self reporting sometimes, but many are factor studies. For example, there are many studies about…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 06:05 PM
2

That's not how truth works. Sorry, try again.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:39 PM
2

Yes there is. It is objectively true the Earth revolves around the sun. It is objectively true the moon revolves around the Earth. It is objectively true that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. "Objective" truth means truth that isn't dependent upon a subject's perspective, but upon the object from a disinterested point of view. Either way, if you don't want to understand objectivity, that's not my fault. There's still things like Asimov's 'The Relativity of Wrong' (https://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersI…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:38 PM
2

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:29 PM
3

You're cute. Glad you have just totally given up. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:27 PM
2

That's not how reality works. Some things are objectively true. It is objectively true that men have a stronger sex drive than women. It is objectively true that women have a lower sex drive than men, on average. "YOUR" reality has nothing to do with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:25 PM
3

Why are you okay with saying things that are easily disproved and not true in any context?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:23 PM
4

Um, there's good evidence for the claims I made. There is no good evidence for the claims you made. This has nothing to do with agreeing with me. It has to do with the clearly established facts, which you seem okay with ignoring, because they do not fit your own preconceptions about the nature of reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:22 PM
3

Yes, you saying evidently wrong things also makes me laugh out loud.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:19 PM
4

Women do not have “a relatively low sex drive compared to men,” lol Oh my sweet summer child. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238048296_Is_There_a_Gender_Difference_in_Strength_of_Sex_Drive_Theoretical_Views_Conceptual_Distinctions_and_a_Review_of_Relevant_Evidence > Across many different studies and measures, men have been shown to have more frequent and more intense sexual desires than women, as reflected in spontaneous thoughts about sex, frequency and variety of sexual fantasies, de…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/20 05:09 PM
3

> There are many studies that state the opposite of what you support. Really? How many (methodologically sound) studies do you think there are that say cigarettes DON'T cause cancer? How many (methodologically sound) studies can you find that say the Earth DOESN'T revolve around the sun? Are you saying objectivity doesn't exist? Are you saying some things aren't facts? Like, seriously, what are you actually saying here? Listen. Some things aren't facts, they are just supported by mountains of ev…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 08:14 PM
2

No you weren't, because you didn't take into account the initiators feelings whatsoever. The evidence pointed to the initiator still being *SEVERELY hurt, which directly contradicts the claims you made in your post. You did not take this into account whatsoever during your tangents. You really need to start reading more closely.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 05:05 PM
1

So why are you on this subreddit if every single comment you read is worthless? 99% of comments on this subreddit dont come with links. There's plenty of people here willing to be intellectually honest, willing to alter views based on the available evidence. Also I think teaching people about critical thinking and the importance of beliefs driven by data instead of bullshit and fallacies is imperative to any community, so I'll go ahead and stay thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 04:43 PM
2

You gotta be in serious denial to think its at the same level as each other. When you break up with someone you realise you dont love them anymore. The person being broken up with usually still loves them. Yo, you didn't read my post. I never said this. I literally posted evidence that said BOTH are hurt by it, but initiators are hurt less. Like, fucking read dude. I simply told you to take BOTH into account and you're not taking both into account because you're too in love with your own points …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 04:21 PM
3

Its pretty common knowledge the person getting dumped feels worse than the person doing the dumping. If you had any life experience with both you would know that. Not really. I have sometimes felt pretty terrible dumping people, and have sometimes felt relatively nothing being dumped. But the point is: our anecdotes don't matter, and what you consider "common knowledge" isn't "knowledge" at all if there's no evidence to back it up. The thing is, we do have evidence that the initiators of breakup…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 04:04 PM
8

Wow, you really don't understand how statistics work. That 90% of college educated women is already included in the 70% stat. You combining the averages is inaccurate and means nothing. 70% of women still initiate divorce, not 85%, not 80%, not 90% -- 70%. Randomly throwing in education when we already have THE TOTAL regardless of education is dumb af. That was my point its only marriage, meaning when it comes to actual serious relationships like marriage women do the breaking up and move on fas…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 03:41 PM
16

85% of divorces are initiated by women. It's 70%. If you want to forward a point, at least use the right numbers. Being off by fifteen fucking percent is pretty terrible. Also, initiating divorces is not the same thing as initiating breakups outside of marriage. Rosenfeld found that nearly 70 percent of women initiated a divorce, but this figure did not translate to break-ups in dating relationships. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-third-wave/201705/who-initiates-divorce-more-often h…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/20 03:08 PM
6

> I’m curious how most men would react to a “cuckquean” woman. You will never understand how "most men" would react to this, because asking a subreddit of 40k people does not encapsulate "most men". At best, you can barely glean what like a few men think. That said, an ex-gf and the current GF are both bi and have both requested this. It was fun and did not really effect either relationship in any significant way. I did not think of either of them differently.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 08:26 PM
13

Yep, this. The title may as well be, "Do you think propaganda exists and does stuff?"
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 07:12 PM
1

And some men rate completely contextually, dependent on the woman *at the time, kind of like how I gave Jenna Fischer three separate scores. Anyway, if my 9's look like Alison Brie and Emma Roberts, I'd say the vast majority of men would agree with me that they are higher up on the scale -- they are, objectively speaking, not 5's or 6's, or "average" or "slightly above average", and they, are objectively speaking, not 1's or 2's. If there is a contextual variance between 7's and 9's that is *dep…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 06:40 PM
2

Why probably not? Objective features exist. And Yeah, I agree, there are women who look like Emma Roberts, a lot of them, and they're 8's or 9's, not 5's or 2's. He'd defining a "9" as someone with 10k insta followers. This makes no sense, and having more or less followers has no correlation on attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 06:30 PM
1

I already outlined women who I think are 9's, 7's, 5's and 1's. I doubt this guy was dating Emma Roberts, and I'd bet our rating system is highly similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 05:05 PM
2

Really? It doesn't exist? ScarJo doesn't even have an insta. What is she, a 1? Like, plenty of hot women don't have social media and you are illustrating your lack of lived experience here pretty starkly. Insta has 500 million active daily users. There's 3 billion+ women on Earth. Statistically what you're saying is highly unlikely. Second, no, I don't think every woman is a 9. Alison Brie is a 9-10. Emma Roberts is a 9-10. Some other actresses, like lets say, Gillian Jacobs, is like a 7 - 8, or…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 04:19 PM
1

Your lived experience is everyone else's lived experience now? Tell me how that works, please. Your argument is: "I dated a girl once, therefore every girl is exactly like this, no exceptions." Do you really think that makes sense? By the way, there's hot women who don't use instagram, fyi. Not even sure why that was brought up or how it's relevant to anything. There's 9's with like 100 followers, too. But I guess since it's not YOUR anecdotes, it doesn't exist. Makes a lotta sense, my dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 04:08 PM
4

Um, I don't think 9's are exclusively super models. There's 9's in the Midwest, too, you know, and in the Kashmir, and Russia, and the Sahara, and fucking everywhere. Go outside. Hot people exist outside of supermodels and actresses. I promise. Some of them are easy and not shallow, too. I know it might be too much for you to comprehend on any real level, but seven billion humans exist on Earth right now. Also reddit is one of the most used websites on the internet. LOTS of average redditors fuc…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 03:53 PM
1

Kinda' shoots your "every man on reddit " theory in the foot, huh? And kinda has nothing to do with the fact that you think everything you do and think is also somehow passed on to and shared with other people, as if you are the focal point of all things old women?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 03:46 PM
1

I'm much older than 23, and I think marriage_is_hell's description of women is the closest truthy we'll get: Some things are, and should remain, inscrutable. Women were not meant for man to truly know. Much like the hard problem of consciousness, the fundamental question of metaphysics, what dreams may come as we exit Plato's cave -- whatever strange tempests churn the alien landscape of the feminine mind are, like the storms under the veil of Jupiter, not to be glimpsed by mortal man, lest he b…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 03:30 PM
3

"I'm 50 therefore every other 40 - 50 year old woman on Earth is exactly like me and has the same tastes and likes the same things. This is an intellectually stable argument, I promise." - Atlas
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 03:19 PM
2

I'm a straight up 5. I'm tall and lean, take care of myself, but my face is also Jewjank as fuck. I have been called "uglyhot" several times by several different women. Height and thinness really help me out here, so I'm almost always batting out of my league by about two. I can regularly get 7's, and can wishywashy everynow'n'then get 8's and 9's.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 02:30 PM
4

This is an interesting point. Maybe you can call it the Attachment Coefficient, or the LegitIntoYou Variable, the LIY Variable. Honestly, a single 7 - 9 who genuinely enjoys you for you seems to be worth about a hundred chicks (or dudes) who don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/20 12:18 AM
11

N quality is a thing. I would rather fuck 5 9's than 9 5's, and I'd much rather fuck 1 10 than 10 1's. To take the number rankings out of it, I would be much more impressed with a guy who lost his virginity to an Alison Brie-lookalike or something, with an N count of 1, then some dude who has fucked a thousand impoverished trashy club sluts.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 08:51 PM
1

How is asking a question being uncivil?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 06:45 PM
1

Okay, so are you saying open relationships and polyamory are the exact same thing? That's weird, because they literally have different definitions, even when therapists and other mental health professionals talk about this kind of stuff. Here's a sex researcher explaining the difference: https://www.insider.com/difference-between-polyamory-open-relationships-swinging-2019-11 You literally do not know what you're talking about. I recommend reading things and not being so willfully ignorant just b…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 06:43 PM
1

Yeah, no, you are literally just unable to see gradation or nuance. Which is hilarious. Thanks for the laughs.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 06:39 PM
1

Yes, they objectively are. Polyamorous relationships are generally emotional relationships, too, openly dating other people, openly becoming involved with other people. Open relationships are not that. My GF is my only emotional relationship, and I am her only emotional relationship. They are different things, but luckily your ignorance on the subject does not change that. https://www.elitedaily.com/p/theres-a-difference-between-open-relationship-polyamory-heres-what-it-is-8814939 https://www.zo…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 06:37 PM
2

No it isn't. Poly and open relationships are different. Sorry you can't appreciate the nuance.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 06:35 PM
2

They do all know about each other, and no I am not "poly", I am in an open relationship with my GF. We're "allowed" a few extra partners a year, up to a max of 3 others, but we're not just going around fucking everyone willy-nilly and like 90-95% of our sexual encounters are with each other. Most of our partners are shared since we're both bi, so I really don't think the "poly" label works and I would absolutely not consider myself "poly". And yes, this system has been working wonderfully for us…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 06:33 PM
2

Considering I asked for her number, and she said it out loud to me, and we did not touch once, I'm pretty sure I'm good thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 05:35 PM
0

Does having a sidechick make me a manwhore? I don't really understand what a manwhore is, or whether or not I qualify. I sincerely doubt I do.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 05:33 PM
11

It's possible to be aware of objectively selected for features without being attracted to them yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 05:31 PM
-1

Why are you assuming they're "random"? I've been with my sidechick longer than my GF, and the other potential I've known for nearly a decade. All of us are quarantined anyway and working from home, so no idea what the fuck you're on about. Plus, the girl on the train was just to see if I could get a number during all this crazy shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 05:26 PM
-2

Honestly, almost no difference. I have a GF and a side chick -- been seeing the GF once a week, sidechick once a week. All three of us are working from home and quarantined anyway, so the weekly rendezvous aren't changing much. Really I don't think much has changed in general. I got a chick's number on the lightrail like two days ago, and another potential sidechick has been asking to come over, so all seems pretty normal overall. Probably different for different people.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 05:10 PM
6

It's almost like people don't pick what or who they attracted to or something...
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/20 02:42 PM
1

Ok, I can agree with that for the most part. Don't think the pairbonding thing is necessarily true, though, at least not without good evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/20 03:40 AM
2

Is that a joke?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/20 03:00 AM
3

Good source. With enuff googling, you can find way more studies on the benefits of sex for both men and women. I promise. And I found both articles on the positives and negatives of casual sex. I'd say the evidence is inconclusive at the moment. On mobile and out atm, will update later
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/20 02:46 AM
5

actually has negative effects, Source? Also notice that my list is mostly physical benefits, not "emotional" ones...
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/20 01:56 AM
31

It is sad, although as social creatures this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. It is well studied that lack of intimacy and sex lead to all sorts of negative outcomes for both men and women, and since sex and intimacy are easier for women to obtain, it follows that men would be hit harder (and more frequently) by these feelings than women. There are also many studies that focus on the opposite and find the same results: the more sex you have, as both a man and a woman, the happier you are, you …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 06:30 PM
8

I was talking about TRPillers specifically. However, all men are the same deep down even if they don't consciously realize it. You might think you are different, but all men are raised in the same system and internalize certain beliefs. ALL men are raised in the same system? Are... are you ... serious? So Muslim men are raised in the same system as secular Jews? You know exactly what "systems" these people grew up in, even though you only have a single life, and couldn't possibly understand the …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 02:21 PM
8

You can check my post history if you for whatever reason think I'm some frothing redpiller, which I am not. But you make the exact same disgusting generalizations about human nature as they do, and don't even seem to care that you're willingly grouping billions of people into the "other". > Men hate and despise female sexuality. What the fuck? How could you possibly know this? No we don't, and if anything, the manosphere is evidence that men are obsessed with female sexuality in several differen…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 01:59 PM
1

That's certainly a fair addition, and it's still fewer than three sentences. But yeah, fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 01:43 PM
2

And the avenue is...not the greatest. And how would you know? Are you a nice guy? You watch nice guys fuck? I have friends who are nice guys, and they fuck. On a few occasions, I have watched them fuck. I've swapped GF's with friends before, and have had a couple of threesomes, both mmf and fmf, and they were all very nice people. :) As long as those nice guys aren't mouth breathers, incels or short minorities, right? What is this a reply to? Don't know what you're getting at here.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 12:29 AM
7

When did I say they should "naturally" figure it out? I simply listed a formula, you can add + read books about human nature in that formula of advice, and it would still only be a sentence as I originally promised. :) They are getting anti nice guy training because they are nice guys. Its literally what its for. Secret: Nice guys get laid all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 12:13 AM
5

You think boring fat dudes will understand this? Are you fucking serious? Yes, I think boring fat dudes also understand gyms and why working out works, at least on average. Most people are capable of self reflection and self awareness. Once again, this is the Bigotry of Low Expectations. I don't buy the argument. So everything else you've wrote...how would they know that? How would they have spoken to a bunch of women in that state? Because people can intuit stuff based off reasoning. Incredible…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/20 12:01 AM
8

WHY the gym works? ... Are you telling me there's people who don't know WHY the gym works? Or WHY lifting works? Are you fucking serious? Moreover, why do you need a relationship advice forum to help you with the gym? Shouldn't you be talking to a personal trainer, or a fit friend, or anything other than a bunch of people shrieking about how they can't get laid boohoo? WHY style works? Style is subjective, and lots of different styles work for lots of different types of people. It's about findin…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 11:49 PM
4

You're a good egg. Keep on keeping on.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 11:36 PM
1

It was a joke, really, but first one.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 11:32 PM
13

"gym+eating healthy+style+going out=pussy" There, one sentence, courtesy of /u/OXOzymandias. All of TRP boils down to a few phrases and "gotchas!" RPers are constantly repeating themselves, mimicking others, borrowing phrases and altering them slightly. That's all it is. There's nothing said now on RP forums that wasn't said in decades old RSD videos, and we all know how cringey and shit those guys are. If you take the above advice to heart and fail, there is nothing on RP forums that can help y…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 11:25 PM
4

I'm not a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 11:20 PM
15

No, government is a necessary evil, RP and the manosphere when taken as a whole community is a backwater of mouth breathers, incels, minorities who don't understand why affluent white chicks don't like 5'6" Indian guys, a few normalish dudes who just stick around for the free internet slapfights, gymbros, and a bunch of frustrated inbetweeners who are desperately attempting to be better versions of themselves so they day-in-and-day-out imbibe "truths" they can't justify at a moment's notice or e…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 11:09 PM
5

you would know that AWALT and NAWALT aren’t to be taken as statistical truths. When men say, all women are this and that, it means that so many of them are like that, you are statistically better of treating them as if they were all like that. And I think this is retarded. If you come up with a definition for something, then backtrack constantly when it is misinterpreted by literally everyone because the definition is retarded, then all you have done is come up with a retarded definition that ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 04:32 PM
10

> It happens because people want to use the insane fringes of a group to discredit it as a whole. Bullshit. I've been active on RP subs and PUA subs for years. Like, nearly a decade. These are not "insane" fringes. Mainstream RP philosophy says shit like "women are teenagers" and "women are ALL sluts" and all sorts of crazy generalizations. I mean, AF/BB -- insane generalization, Alpha/Beta - biologically retarded misconception of human gender dynamics, COCK CAROUSEL - literally means all women …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 03:53 PM
3

I don't understand why it's so difficult to admit that both sides have their fair share of stupid sexist assholes and that the stupid sexist assholes pollute and otherwise degrade the "main messaging" from both groups. RP and feminist-adjacent groups both need huge reworkings to be palatable to larger bodies of people. In their current states, they are echo chambers that harbor extremism and jacking each other off because disagreement is seen as being a part of the "other". It's stupid tribal bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/20 03:31 PM
1

You said I wrote this: "anyone who wants to be smart like I am, has to agree with me" I didn't write that. That's your uncharitable take on what I wrote, but it's not even close to what I wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 10:38 PM
2

I didn't write that. I told you why all of them were wrong. Generally it's a matter of anecdotes not being data, and generalizations not being data either. Most of RP is anecdotes and generalizations, thus is not taken seriously in actual classrooms or among scientific studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 10:24 PM
2

I edited those, but I really do think the answers should be fairly obvious to anyone who wants to think scientifically and objectively. We can't do that perfectly, but we can mitigate being stupid to the best of our ability. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 09:58 PM
4

All this really boils down to is tone and morals. No. Most of their conceptual thinking lies on poor definitions they don't realistically understand, lack of scientific scrutiny and or broad generalizations. That's a lot more than 'tone and morals'. And besides, if it's just TONE and MORALS, that's even worse in my view, because it means they're filtering GoldTruth using a ShitSieve, so even if there are little golden info nuggets in there, they're still coming out all retarded and malformed and…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 09:58 PM
3

> So how can you say RP is wrong when the current data doesn't know? Um, why did you ignore my other point? The point is they don't SAY they don't know. They say they know. RP can never be agnostic about anything and that's a huge issue. There's a difference between inconclusive data and actual data. They present it as if it's real data, data we're done with, that we have an answer to, and that's NOT the case. The point is: it's inconclusive and we should treat it as such. They don't. > Your res…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 09:48 PM
5

Yeah, these are three scientists, but I promise you there's thousands of us and we are not a single mouthpiece. I like Bret and Heather, but it doesn't mean they're infallible. Something tells me they would absolutely NOT subscribe to RP concepts. I've listened to them a lot and I have never heard them say anything even remotely approaching crazy RP batshit screeching. If you can point me to exactly where they back up the RP claims I listed, I'd love to hear it. But I really doubt they do that. …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 09:45 PM
6

There's tons of critiques of Red Pill all over the internet. Why don't you look those up? Since you don't want to, here's a short list -- Alpha-Beta: The way RP uses Alpha/Beta is literally biologically retarded. No serious biologist in the world thinks alpha or beta or (somewhat, since I know 'omega' and 'sigma' are thrown around too) binary definitions of complex human behaviors makes any sense. AF/BB: Another unfalsifiable claim that is generated through use of anecdotes and personal observat…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 09:26 PM
2

I have plenty of experience, and plenty of observations. They're the opposite of yours. So it's almost like we shouldn't use anecdotes to expound on reality or something. Wild idea, I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 03:11 PM
1

I'd cuck myself to Mars for this chick, so yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 03:02 PM
0

> Yes, although she would have to be head and shoulder's above the other women in my life in order for me to consider it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 02:54 PM
5

Yes, although she would have to be head and shoulder's above the other women in my life in order for me to consider it. I dated a single mother last year for about six months. She was hot, had a great job as a database administrator, insanely talented at piano, painting, all manner of computer science bullshit, we were wickedly sexually compatible, and she was all around one of the smartest people I have ever met. In short, she was an exceptional individual. This wasn't oneitis and she wasn't a …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 02:51 PM
0

How do you know this?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 02:22 PM
-12

You didn't upset me, you're just a silly goose, and silly geese do nothing but amuse me. Have fun. :)
/r/askTRP25/03/20 03:26 AM
3

I endorse this post. It renders TRP as a subculture void and mute. You could post this simple, elegant formula for every comment under every thread and nothing of value would be lost.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/20 02:25 AM
2

Comment chains are proof of nothing and if you keep believing they are, you will never learn, and you will always make the same mistake you're making now, which is making claims and having nothing to back them up, i.e. dumb bullshit. Also you don't need a stockpile of links. Generally when a claim is controversial it takes about ten minutes to do the cursory digging needed to verify whether or not it's bullshit. You just refuse to do any actual research or work. You like blabbing and saying noth…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 11:19 PM
2

No. A reddit chain is not evidence. You have convinced me of nothing because convincing me requires evidence. All you have proven is that you do not understand human biology beyond a superficial internet level where you are parroting other users with no real unique take of your own, and beyond that, you make huge claims and back them up with absolutely nothing and that's pretty stupid. If you want me to be convinced of your argument, the only thing that will change my mind is evidence, not more …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 11:07 PM
1

Thats not moving goalposts, men who meet women standards have an opportunity to reproduce (meaning they may or may not), but men who dont meet said standards have no opportunity to reproduce Standards have shifted throughout time, and you have no idea what paleolithic peoples considered 'standard', or if they even had 'standards' like we do today. You literally don't know it. You weren't around and we don't have evidence. You don't know how sexual selection worked in the paleolithic -- you do no…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 09:44 PM
1

No. The word agnostic literally means DON'T KNOW. 'Being agnostic' towards certain unverifiable materials (like everything you're talking about) is usually the only intellectually honest position. You don't seem to like saying I DON'T KNOW. I do. Because the amount of shit we don't know is much larger than what we do know. Ironically enough, I KNOW you don't KNOW what you're talking about. You don't KNOW any of the shit you're postulating. It's theorizing and that's it. You have no objective met…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 09:25 PM
-16

I blame Christian conservatives, since they are the ones who put the laws into place. But okay. You go on with your incel screeching blaming the girls.
/r/askTRP24/03/20 09:18 PM
1

Ok, a group of men built the hut... and then they set the standard for all other men. It could have been a community effort for all you know. You literally don't know. Why are you afraid of agnosticism? Yes, it was gradual but at one point, all men transitioned. Women still separated men into two groups. No they didn't, lots of people still live in caves AND huts. Yes, the gradient existed because some men were more successful at reproducing than others, BUT, there most definitely exists a cut o…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 09:12 PM
89

https://search.proquest.com/openview/b197a6be41a239ae80ddac0efc6718fd/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1576347 > Recently, researchers Scott Cunningham of Baylor University and Manisha Shah of the University of California, Los Angeles, estimated the real impact of decriminalizing prostitution by studying six years of legal indoor prostitution in Rhode Island, including data from massage parlors, escort agencies, and the online market. Examining local crime reports, health records from the CDC, and mar…
/r/askTRP24/03/20 08:46 PM
1

Women separated men into two groups in cave men times - true Okay, show me the data. Show me the evidence. Your word is not enough. Show me the peer reviewed evidence that women separated men into "two groups" during "Cave men times". Please. Go ahead. One day, a "winner" built a hut and set a standard for all other men - true Please show me the evidence. It seems more likely a group built the first hut, not a single man. So, please, once again -- DATA please, not random fucking words. One day, …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 08:36 PM
1

I still have no idea how this is relevant to anything I said. You have no idea if its true, you have no data sets or evidence, you have literally nothing except saying words, just like the guy before. I was talking about the difference between the world RATIONALIZATION, which is a psychiatric term, and the word REASON, or REASONS. They are different terms, and mean different things. I was making no other argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 08:18 PM
1

I have no idea what you're replying to, or how this is relevant to anything I wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 08:05 PM
1

I had to assume you believed women don't rationalize things with how hostile you seem to get when it's implied that they sometimes do. My entire argument has been a lexical argument, not a gendered one. You coming to the conclusion is ridiculous. I was simply discussing the psychiatric definition of rationalization and I made no claims beyond that. Because humans rationalize all the time, and women are humans. They also reason all the time, too. That's why we should use the appropriate words. Ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 06:30 PM
1

Im curious why you assume op was a male though. What's the rationalization behind that? It's not a rationalization or an assumption. Probabilistically speaking, any single user is more likely to be male than female on reddit since the vast majority of users on both reddit and the internet are male, not female. This doesn't matter, though, because I always read a little bit of a post history before replying, so that is how I know his gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 06:08 PM
1

My goal post was that using the term rationalization was not a knock, that was my original response. You went into the rationalization vs reasoning thing. I dont think it has a negative connotation if the whole planet does it. I think its ilmuch worse to pretend peoplendont do it. Maybe rationalization gets a worse rap on ppd because of the way people use it on this sub. No I didn't. I posted the definition of rationalization, which is negative, whether you like it or not. Should I post it again…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 05:51 PM
1

You're moving the goalposts. This isn't what we were talking about. We were talking about the difference between rationalization and reason. At first, you try to tell me there's no negative connotation to "rationalization" and that I'm making it all up. Looks like this wasn't true (it isn't, and psychological literature supports it) so you move on to saying some other unverifiable bullshit because you didn't have a point before and were objectively incorrect. Funny. Man is not enlightened. Enlig…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 05:29 PM
1

Wow! What a revelation! Sometimes women make rationalizations! Any other tidbits of wisdom for us? Often times it is though, Often times it is, though? How do you know this? What data do you have to make the claim that reasons are often rationalizations? Isn't it possible that reasons and rationalizations are different things? Or is that totes impossible?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 05:22 PM
1

Considering that rationalize and reason mean different things in philosophy contexts, I find that highly appropriate. Within psychology, a rationalization is BY DEFINITION considered a defense mechanism. It IS a negative. In psychology and logic, rationalization or rationalisation (also known as making excuses) is a defense mechanism in which controversial behaviors or feelings are justified and explained in a seemingly rational or logical manner to avoid the true explanation, and are made consc…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:57 PM
2

Um, ok? Not sure how this refutes or otherwise nullifies what I wrote. Anyway, here: http://rtraerdoingethics.blogspot.com/2010/08/reasoning-vs-rationalizing.html https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ambigamy/201511/whats-the-difference-between-rationality-and-rationalizing He didn't use it correctly, since a reason is not necessarily a rationalization. Rationalization is generally used in a negative context.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:43 PM
1

You have no idea if this is true and are just saying words. I think women would continue on being women, which is to say, a grouping of people with disparate interests and attractions that are not easily boiled down into "THEY WOULD DO THIS NO MATTER WHAT SCREECH SCREECH".
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:36 PM
1

I don't know, this has never happened and never will happen, so I have no idea, and neither does anyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:34 PM
5

Incels are unattractive because they play video games. But deadbeat Chad is amazing because he plays video games all day. No one has said this. This is just some insane shit you may have seen anecdotally like once and now you're using it as an argument. If women were honest about why they pick what they pick, they would probably end up hating themselves. "Women" are not a monolith and many of them are honest about why they pick what they pick. Some women do this, some don't. What a revelation! B…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:30 PM
3

Calling it a "rationalization" is a knock because it assumes the reasons are ill-thought or self-deceptive. There is a difference between a reason and a rationalization.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:28 PM
0

What do you think would have happened if all human males looked equal? I think the question is impossible to answer and I remain agnostic. My assumption, that is neither MOST LIKELY or LIKELY or NOT LIKELY, but simply an assumption, is that innate and unchosen biological attraction would still be the primary motivator for mate choice, and what others consider "rationalizations" or "justifications" are simply, just like now, perfectly acceptable decisions based on genes and neural processes we do…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 04:14 PM
-2

Yes, but there are plenty of examples of animals mating based on the most ridiculous courtships imaginable. I don't know what this has to do with anything I've said. Would women have made this new thing up if all men looked equal all along? Most likely, yes. How about instead of shitting out made up answers, we just go, "Eh, I don't know"? Because, like, you *don't KNOW, you're just philosophizing. "MOST LIKELY, YES" -- why is it MOST likely? How do you know this? How could you possibly know thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 03:59 PM
3

I'm unsure as to why reasons are considered rationalizations. Since there is a huge amount of variability when it comes to subjective features of attraction, I don't think it's fair to knock (unconscious) interpersonal choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 03:56 PM
9

> They would just make something up. We already do that to an extent now. Not really -- most of attraction is just subconscious biological processing, you don't just 'make up' what you're attracted to, it just kinda happens to you without your input.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/20 02:18 PM
1

When did I say he should accept his fate? Maybe he should go find some more quality material from accredited professionals that isn't filled with toxic rage and blatant [unwarranted] misogyny. You can get all the "good stuff" that TRP preaches without the blatant sexist screeching that is self evident to anyone who spends more than ten minutes on any RP sub, despite some members proclaiming it's all about "self improvement". Also you sound like such a poor little victim! I feel so sorry for you!…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 08:54 PM
2

... what? Can you... elaborate?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 08:40 PM
1

> If you think reading books authored by professionals and experts That's what I said. Sorry I wasn't redundant enough for you. I only urged you to read books by professionals and experts, instead of urging you to read quality books by professional and experts. Sorry for the single missing word that made it so difficult for you to understand my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 08:11 PM
1

Wow, it's almost like you have to choose quality books by accredited humans or something... shocking...
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 07:25 PM
3

All these say is that they're struggling to find guys that fit extremely specific criteria, not that they're struggling to find guys. Those are different things. It even says that in your first article: > “It creates a statistical challenge, because they are voluntarily limiting themselves to a dating pool that has four women for every three men, but it also gives way too much leverage to those college-educated men, and I think it encourages those men to be overly choosy and to delay settling do…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 07:20 PM
2

What is your reasoning here? It's an axiom of contemporary western culture that women have an easier time dating/finding sexual partners than men, especially in their 20's and 30's.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 07:17 PM
3

Karma ( the sum of a person's actions in this and previous states of existence, viewed as deciding their fate in future existences) doesn't exist. It is just another intellectually bankrupt idea with no foundation or reasonable explanation forwarded by crackpots and neuronally gorked losers. > how does integrity even work for a human whose mind is hyper focused RP/BP/PP lifestyles Are you saying you can't have integrity just 'cause a couple new acronyms entered your lexicon? What?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 06:50 PM
1

If you think reading books authored by professionals and experts is the same thing as reading a self help subreddit of NOT experts or professionals, then you are exactly what I'm talking about in my first message. If you cannot delineate and see the giant chasm of difference, there is no hope for you whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 05:49 PM
3

Well, personally, I find that very sad. They should go read some books and stop jacking off in a male-centric echo chamber.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 05:05 PM
1

Care to explain?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 05:02 PM
2

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 03:15 AM
7

Your reply made me cringe. None of these are difficult words. Also I'm not married.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/20 03:15 AM
19

If you need a self-help subreddit to aid you in becoming your 'true self', you are likely going to be a dullard-nothing-blockhead for the rest of your life. There is no hope for you. Using cheap regurgitated half-finished information as a dominant philosophical position is ... poignantly pathetic and also dumb af -- essentially signals to the rest of the world that you are a near-illiterate trog.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/20 09:44 PM
11

I doubt he cares if it's good or useful or anything at all. His whole post is just a naturalistic fallacy and should probably be disregarded. If you have to say this as a disclaimer to your ideas, > I’m not justifying rape at all Then you are probably saying some highly stupid bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/20 09:39 PM
1

So if you fuck 1,000 ratchet-faced obese hags, you're alpha? Aaaaand here we have a wonderful example of why the terms "alpha" and "beta" mean ab-so-lutely fuck all when talking about human sexuality.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/20 09:19 PM
2

Really not sure what the fuck the other guy is talking about. There are numerous world class fighters who only do bodyweight stuff and cardio. Nick Diaz, fucking Floyd Mayweather, BJ Penn, hell, GSP has said he only lifts for aesthetics, not strength or conditioning. "Lift weights and nothing else" is lizard brain, unthinking generalized advice. You can be just as desirable and healthy without lifting a single weight and simply doing cardio and bodyweight shit. It's all a matter of regimen and d…
/r/askTRP19/03/20 04:19 PM
1

“Oh! Im a sex addict because Im addicted to the IMPROVED MEMORY!” No, the point is -- **because it has other objective benefits, your analogy is bad. You have to compare a like to a like and if you can't do that, you are being intellectually dishonest. Fat people will also say that about junk food. Fat people and addicts don't have objective stats to back them up. I do. This is another false equivalence. Congratulations. Your entire argument has devolved into fallacy. You just THINK sex is more …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/20 01:39 PM
10

It's probably because you're an overthinky anxiety-and-guilt-ridden mess who likes to think about stupid bullshit instead of actual problems, kind of like most millennial and Gen-Z retards. You're in good company, at least. But, yeah, we think about unimportant wonky shit like gender dynamics and attraction because we're small minded trogs. I have a friend who works at Deep Mind, another who is a theoretical physicist, another who is a cinematographer at a fairly high level -- you think these pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 09:57 PM
1

Are you procreating? If the answer is no, then no its not. You don't get to answer questions for other people, unfortunately for you. As for all your links: Is that ACTUALLY why people want Sex? Or they just doing it for the high and the good feeling? There are objective benefits. Memory, overall happiness, mortality. All affected by sex. Learn to read. None of these benefits are given from eating pizza consistently. Those benefits are on a different scale than the benefits of eating pizza. Eati…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 09:47 PM
1

You see? You ignored the word GRADATION, and my entire left hand argument. Do you know what a gradient is? Clearly you do not, so here is a definition: an increase or decrease in the magnitude of a property Sex is more important than pizza. There are objective cognitive benefits, in both men and women, from having frequent sex. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-myths-sex/201808/sex-the-brain-frequent-sex-might-have-cognitive-benefits https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4776624…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 07:22 PM
1

I never said sex is a need. Please read over my comments again. You're arguing with a ghost. If you want to debate, quote exactly what I said and respond directly to what I said, otherwise you're being disingenuous and punching the air.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 07:15 PM
0

No, you directly compared pizza to sex, which is retarded and makes no sense. No matter what you say, that analogy will be absolutely fucking stupid until the end of time. You seem to have some trouble with nuance and gradation. Not sure why, but it's clearly not your forte.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 06:53 PM
0

I didn't say his answer was good, I said your response was retarded and makes no sense, and it is, and it doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 06:45 PM
2

> That’s called a want. Life would also suck without pizza. Still not a need. Did you just compare sex to pizza? Listen -- this is on a gradient. Some things are more important than other things even if neither is a NEED. For example, I don't NEED my left foot. I could cut it off and live a pretty good life without it. But there's a difference between the lifelong positive benefits of having a left foot and the extremely short term temporary positive benefits of eating pizza. Your analogy fuckin…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/20 06:23 PM
1

As someone who has a business making 5 figures a day, You also say you make 120k a month in another post, so you DID make this claim at least once... Good try tho, little guy. :)
/r/askTRP17/03/20 08:03 PM
1

236,883 people in the U.S. earn $1,000,000 or more a year. There's 70k people on asktrp. 250,000 out of 400,000,000 is .6%. .6 .6% of people The probability of you or your friend making more than a million a year, bragging about it on the interwebz as if it matters, is extremely low. Possible? Sure. Probable? Not even a little. I'll stick with probability on this one. :) edit: /u/pilot333 Not only that, but after a brief look at your post history, your income seems to vary wildly, so wildly it's…
/r/askTRP17/03/20 07:26 PM
2

People who make seven million dollars a year don't brag about it on asktrp lol.
/r/askTRP17/03/20 06:50 PM
-1

Wow, a screenshot! You totally showed him! There is definitely no way to fake this and other pictures of this definitely don't exist online and photoshop definitely doesn't exist either! Wow!
/r/askTRP17/03/20 05:52 PM
1

You're right, and good on you. Tempe and Scottsdale are kinda' crapshoots for high quality women 'cause of the University and community colleges, mostly just harpy glittery slutboxes, but I've had a lot of luck in DT PHX finding worthwhile not-obnoxious women. Happy hunting, friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 09:56 PM
1

Sounds like Scottsdale. A bunch of snooty nose-raised faux-aristocrats that need all the stuff before the proletariat can get their grubby impoverished hands on it. Also I'm joking. And while I'm kinda prejudice against Scottsdale in general, that area does have some really cool stuff, and probably the best restaurants in AZ. You lucky af my dude. Hope you're slingin' all the dick around the posh cunts over there.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 09:45 PM
1

You rich bastard. I bet it's you buying all the toilet paper!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 09:39 PM
2

Yep, PHX/Tempe area.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 09:38 PM
2

I live in Arizona for about six months out of the year and California the other six months out of the year. In AZ at the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 09:17 PM
1

frivolous I never used this word, so I'm not sure why it's quoted. Also, I was talking about the women in my life, not women in general, so I don't see why you're so offended by this. Like, I deliberately noted that this is my experience and not meant to be taken as a general rule. > pursuit of human connection has benefited me way more than yapping about thoughts and ancient texts. Wow, it's almost like people's lives are different or something. Astonishing. > I’ve never derived any practical b…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 05:54 PM
2

Very debate-y. I can almost smell the points.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 01:05 AM
2

Well, is there a difference between SOME men and MEN? If so, then yes, distinctions are important, or else I don't know what you're talking about. SOME is different from a blatant overgeneralization. I went for "misandrist" because of your overgeneralizations and stereotypes of men. Wouldn't you do the same if I overgeneralized and stereotyped women? Would I be a misogynist if I said 'WOMEN ARE XYZBADTHING'? I am assuming you would think so. Yet, you did exactly that. You know you did it, it's t…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 12:56 AM
3

Debates are debates. You debate the things. If you don't want to debate things, don't debate them. If you don't like my points, tell me why. I have said nothing untrue as far as I know, but don't like being wrong any longer than I have to be, and I like discussing things until both parties have reach some sort of consensus, or if you wanna go back to Hegel, synthesis. If you don't want to do that, okay, it's just a little confusing because you started with some unverifiable points (I didn't star…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/20 12:16 AM
3

You are mistaking caps lock for anger and assuming you can comprehend intonation based off text. You can't, and you should probably stop assuming how another human is feeling based off text. It's pretty dumb and makes no sense. If it's so well studied, you will have no problem proving your point with evidence. The random jibbering of some faceless nothing on the internet who says 'There's evidence!' and then provides none is highly suspect. Here's a study of FIVE THOUSAND that says you're wrong:…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 11:49 PM
3

This is your anecdotal life. In my first comment, I very carefully noted that this was MY experience, and not meant to be taken as evidence of anything. Your whole comment is just a silly exaggeration and stereotyping and generalizations. I for one love speaking to these things with anyone, man or woman, it has just been men who like discussing these things more, in MY EXPERIENCE. It doesn't mean they actually like talking about these things more, it just means it's what I've observed. But I'm j…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 11:20 PM
5

The belief that the lives and thoughts of people they interact with are less worthy and interesting than abstract concepts and institutions has been brought up repeatedly by men here. That's because people die in 70 years and concepts survive. So yes, they are more interesting because of longevity. I can talk about Missy Cumpants who isn't going to matter in ten years when she dies of an overdose, or I can talk about shit that has mattered for hundreds of years, or will matter a hundred years fr…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 10:00 PM
7

Because I like talking about concepts and ideas more. It's a preference. I give a shit about them, it doesn't mean every conversation has to be inward and self-pointed. I find talking about yourself too often to be obnoxious and vain. The girls talk a lot more about themselves than the guys. I think saying 'by an order of magnitude' would be appropriate. > How does pontificating about economics, religion and politics affect your life concretely? This is a ridiculous question. Politics and econom…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 09:36 PM
2

Would say it's roughly 70/30 for all of them -- 70% them hitting me up, 30% me hitting them up. Only difference is the guys and lesbians hit me up for one on one's, dinners or lunches, while the straight girls almost always hit me up for group (3 or more people) stuffs.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 07:22 PM
6

This is just my experience, but my male friends are resolutely more interesting, better read and more fun/intellectually engaging conversationally than my female friends. The girls mostly gossip and talk about emotions and tell self-centered stories about their own experience. The men can talk about anything. In general, the women in my life talk about other people and themselves, while the men are broader and more conceptual and can riff about most everything (philosophy, politics, ethics, reli…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 07:13 PM
5

I don't like being disingenuous with people in any context, so I have zero attractive female friends. If you're pretty, I want to fuck you, and I am not going to be dishonest about this fact. I am friends with a couple of lesbians and a couple of ugly girls, though, so that's something.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 07:07 PM
1

The problem is that it's possible to be better and worse at the same time. ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/20 05:35 PM
4

What? How about just becoming interesting enough, through hard work and through trial and error, that you get a bunch of enthusiasm thrown your way and you don't have to deal with tepid tiptoey bitches? It's really not that difficult.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/20 11:19 PM
13

I would never put up with anything even remotely cold. If you're not an enthusiastic YES, then you're a no.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/20 02:54 PM
2

Well I guess we have agreed the whole time and I am just an asshole. Apologies. Was misinterpreting you if this is the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 09:59 PM
1

67% of something working not as intended is a crisis. No it isn't. Because, once again, the *degree to which it doesn't work is what's important. Semi-replication is still a result and can still lead to empirical findings. It's about what CAN forward certain hypothesis'. My point is that for almost every psychological article you can find the one that contradicts it. And the crisis is that the truth on the subject remains unknown. That's probably true. So why not remain agnostic instead of cheer…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 09:53 PM
1

This sounds a bit like a distinction without a difference, but I do see your point. Will think on this.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 09:52 PM
1

Exactly. One third of studies does not replicate at all and most of the rest only to a limited degree. 66% of something working is not a crisis, and even then, the degrees to which those "failed" is debatable. 33% of things failing is not a crisis, either. Also, want to give me some evidence about the 5 "notable" sciences that are affected? Empirical studies? We don't know specifics here, so I still think dismissing things based off NOT ACTUALLY KNOWING STUFF is kinda' silly. I provided a lot of…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 09:46 PM
3

Don't discount things before you read them. And just out of curiosity, what is your personal definition for attraction vs selection? And there's plenty of good papers on this kind of stuff. There's so many that I'm agnostic on the issue, and I am not making and have not made any hard claims. Here's some more on attraction: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0162309595000682 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229935402_An_evolutionary_perspective_on_physical_attractivenes…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 09:16 PM
7

No, I just think they are largely overblown. As my article states, there is currently no good empirical evidence to suggest that there is reproducibility crisis in science as a whole. I am open to new evidence, but even if you would just peruse the wiki on the replication crisis, you'll see stuff like this all over the place: The Reproducibility Project, a collaboration of 270 psychologists, has attempted to replicate 100 psychology studies, while a 2018 report examined studies published in the …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:54 PM
8

No feelings touched, just explaining why you don't really know what you're talking about. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:47 PM
5

Ok, cool, I was just presenting it as actual research on the topic instead of anecdotal bullshits.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:46 PM
3

Maybe read the paper.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:38 PM
3

Ok... and...?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:38 PM
3

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/11/2628 To summarize, an expanding metaresearch literature suggests that science—while undoubtedly facing old and new challenges—cannot be said to be undergoing a “reproducibility crisis,” at least not in the sense that it is no longer reliable due to a pervasive and growing problem with findings that are fabricated, falsified, biased, underpowered, selected, and irreproducible. While these problems certainly exist and need to be tackled, evidence does not sugges…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:32 PM
8

Women put greater weight on the intelligence and the race of partner, I think you ought to read this more closely. It's not saying women ONLY scan for intelligence and race, it's that compared to men, intelligence is more important.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:29 PM
9

https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/121/2/673/1884033?redirectedFrom=fulltext Women put greater weight on the intelligence and the race of partner, while men respond more to physical attractiveness. Moreover, men do not value women's intelligence or ambition when it exceeds their own. Also, we find that women exhibit a preference for men who grew up in affluent neighborhoods. Finally, male selectivity is invariant to group size, while female selectivity is strongly increasing in group …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 08:14 PM
6

At this point, poor binary definitions, black and white thinking, and scientific illiteracy are the raison d'etres for this subreddit. I'd say 90% of the posts I see here are either totally misguided, lack any semblance of scrutiny or nuance, and or are based on emotional screeching logicks. This sub is entertaining but largely just fucking embarrassing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/20 03:45 PM
1

No... They just like sex, which is okay. Why are you shaming my friend for liking casual sex? And like, once you can get casual sex as easily as my friend does, don't you think it becomes a lot less special, and might just mean some humans like sex more than other humans, and that's perfectly fine?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/20 02:57 AM
1

I didn't condescend anybody. Can you show me where I did this? Your first comment: If you're going to answer a question, answer the question. Don't answer half the question. If someone asks a reason and there's six reasons, don't list one. Seems pretty simple to me. Orange had no place to talk about it after misinterpreting her comment. She doesn't. None of us do. But how is a solitary woman expected to understand the motivations of a billion dudes heads? A man would know better, don't you think…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 10:00 PM
-1

I like... want to agree, but... when I'm 40 I'm not going to suddenly stop finding 20 year olds fuckable, and I'll still want to fuck them and this is true for most men. So the ick factor there isn't biological, it's all cultural. I see what you're saying, but there's nothing morally wonky here as far as I can tell, even if it does (and it DOES) bring in feelings of disgust.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 09:48 PM
1

You’re being extremely narrow minded if you think people can’t have multiple desires. When did I say this? I even agreed with YOUR argument in my last comment. But YOUR argument wasn't Orange_Paisley's argument... You misrepresented both of us and won’t let go of your delusion that either one of us said feeling special is the only motive a man has. Orange_Paisley never said anything about any other reasons. She answered the question straight up. Why didn't she include any other reasons? Not only…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 09:40 PM
1

This has nothing to do with what you just said, which was, You also said that dudes don’t brag about casual sex. I didn't say that. You're responding to like totally random shit and seeing if it sticks. But it doesn't. 'Cause I didn't say that. And the other user didn't respond AT ALL like you did. He focused on totally different points. So ... are you okay? Did you hit your head or something? You seem to be focusing on points I DID NOT make EVER even remotely.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 06:29 PM
2

Your argument is fair, except that's not what Orange_Paisley said. She said it was that 'everyone likes to feel special' without the HUGE addendum of: except for the people who don't care about feeling special and are doing it for X, Y and Z other reasons. Like, you defended her argument, then backtracked and said, "Well, it's not ONLY that". Well, yeah, no shit it's not ONLY that. She said it WAS and that's why her argument is bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 05:51 PM
1

Where? Where did I say that? Please show me. I'll be waiting (because I never said this and you're just making shit up lmao)
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 05:20 PM
2

That is NOT my argument whatsofucking ever. My argument is that men's sexual impulse is very high (biologically true in general) and that they want casual sex (also biologically true in general). I never said most men achieve casual sex or can get it easily. Hell, I said the opposite. I said if a man is achieving casual sex, he already feels special, as the majority of men who can do this regularly are probably high SMV and probably have a modicum of confidence. But I never said anything remotel…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 05:11 PM
0

What are you talking about? I never said anything about that...
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 05:04 PM
0

I find a woman commenting on men's motivations for casual sex to be pretty dishonest. Men seek casual sex because (many of us) are slaves to constant sexual impulse, not to "feel special". One of my good friends is a Ryan Gosling-ish traveling cinematographer who makes 100+k a year and can fuck anyone he wants. Do you think after he fucks some rando chick he'll never see again in Vienna, or Brussels, or Glasgow, or wherever, that he's like, "oh my god, I did it because I wanted to feel special! …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/20 04:22 PM
6

Are they more prone to anger? Or do they just express anger differently? The research I've read seems to be highly inconclusive -- some points to men and women being equivalently angry, some points to women being "more angry" just expressing themselves differently, some points to men being more angry, and the rest point to sort of everything in between. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/01/000131075609.htm http://library.allanschore.com/docs/SexDiffKring.pdf https://www.psychologytoday.…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/20 05:41 PM
30

I swear this sub makes less and more sense every day.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/20 09:44 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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