TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Merger-Arbitrage Archive

View 24 posts and 6,469 comments by Merger-Arbitrage on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
27

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:13 AM
18

Merger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/18 04:37 PM
16

ScienceMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 07:08 PM
16

ScienceMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 07:11 AM
13

ScienceMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 12:46 AM
12

Merger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:50 PM
12

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/17 06:22 PM
10

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:47 AM
9

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/17 12:41 AM
9

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/17 04:25 PM
9

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/17 05:18 PM
7

ScienceMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/18 07:16 PM
6

Question for WomenMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/17 04:38 PM
5

Question for Red PillMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 07:11 AM
5

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:11 AM
5

ScienceMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/17 07:27 PM
4

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 05:24 AM
3

Merger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:22 PM
3

CMVMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/17 07:11 AM
3

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/17 04:32 AM
3

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 12:42 AM
3

CMVMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/17 05:53 AM
1

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/17 04:38 PM
1

DiscussionMerger-Arbitrage/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/18 08:50 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 6,469 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Dunning Kruger continues to accrue victims.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:25 PM
2

maybe you should listen to them. Only if they earn it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:24 PM
2

In that case there's no way to know anything for sure about these people, and discussions are completely pointless.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:11 PM
1

Whoa, wild animal on the loose in here!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:08 PM
3

Pointing people towards a dictionary sounds like a better way to teach them definitions of words. No half-baked outcomes possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:07 PM
2

You also need to consult a dictionary before you embarrass yourself too the point of no return. Especially considering this OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:56 PM
3

They are both a verb and a noun, actually. They mean somewhat different things, however. At least consult a dictionary before you post.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:55 PM
0

Mmmm... the "golden ratio."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:49 PM
1

I responded to you twice already.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:47 PM
2

That dude needs to lose a ton of weight, ditch the glasses and get a tan. Meathead mode in the gym can't hurt, plus designer clothes (latter requires $$, but if you have it, time effort is minimal). He goes from being a sad unfuckable to average at worst looks wise. Hair implants (is that possible to a total baldie?) Probably above average looks wise by virtue of better fitness and dressing. I was expecting that dude to be disfigured... man you 'guys' are weak.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:44 PM
2

I'm still not sure I understand how a woman rapes a man... Does she drug him to knock him out, lift him up onto a chair or bed, tie him up and then give him viagra, and then proceed to ride him? Is that a thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:34 PM
1

You make lots of assumptions. Such as? What assumptions did I make by seeing photos of normal looking dudes? No Yup. You believing me is completely optional. We complain of not even being average. Stop looking at good looking and average looking mentalcels and projecting it onto all of us. /u/FACEandLMS. /u/currycell92. I have yet to see a hideous picture of an incel. The worst ones were quite overweight, but nothing horrid.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:31 PM
0

I'm not sure what you mean by "middle finger to the just world fallacy" in this case... Regarding your second point, most of them, as pic evidence shows on their forums, are not that bad at all. They are average "baseline" genetically at the worst and most aren't even fat (the latter point just came to mind, actually).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:29 PM
1

You might be on the losing end, but based on your "baseline" traits (genetics, at least physically) most of you aren't that far on that end at all (incel pics show that). You really end up on the losing end by mindfucking yourselves onto that end. You think you need perfection or near it to succeed, but people with average baseline genetics + lots of effort can do very well in life.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:25 PM
1

I believe the incels are right about a lot of stuff I agree - there are incels who indeed have a surprisingly good understanding of things like universal beauty standards. Too bad for them it serves as "rope fuel."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:16 PM
2

So people with problems, past or present (who make up a disproportionately large amount of PPDers) are a good source of suggestions? Doesn't surprise me that incels would consider PPD a good source of "advice" - given their track record in life.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:14 PM
9

Nice outrage porn analysis, chief.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 03:34 PM
3

Take the test and see if you can join the club! http://archive.is/9cDYv https://psychology-tools.com/autism-spectrum-quotient/
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 02:39 PM
2

Do you consider yourself to be a hot young girl? If so, post your pics!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 02:07 PM
1

Never said that, I said: validation from losers > no validation Right. Validation from losers has no effect in practice. Too much attention from losers could actually be insulting to some people. How would a guy feel if only fat chicks were into him? It's anti-validation. There really isn't a fixed cap for self-improvement. It scales logarithmically with time, so it gets harder and harder and you feel like you're plateauing, but you're still improving. Also, even genetics can be changed with nut…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:48 AM
1

Mgtows will claim they are all off going their own way and just no longer care about women. They then spend most of their free time complaining about women Pretty much all you need to know to judge "MGTOW". Men going their own way don't talk about MGTOW (worst case they may have heard of it). That's that.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 05:11 AM
3

Oh hey, brosevich! Respect the terminology here! I think even I have been convinced that those women are "vol"cels. You almost can't be ugly enough to be unable to get casual sex as a woman, hence, female "incels" are arguably an impossibility. Male lechery has been shown to exceed my wildest imaginations!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:55 AM
2

As much of a toxic shithole that this place is in purge-mode or not, how could it be any worse than braincels normally is?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:33 AM
6

Well, she's autistic by her own admission, so there's no surprises here.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:29 AM
1

Likes attract likes, with few exceptions. That's that.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/18 04:20 AM
1

I don't pretend anything - I even saved a small list of posts that shows that game is an ambiguous joke (pretty much like most RP concepts) to make this abundantly clear with zero effort every time. TRP's sidebar further confirms it. Bonafide snake oil. https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/17xmry/acronym_and_glossary_thread/ Game – A loosely based set of behaviors specifically designed to increase attraction. https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/7f79dd/the_contrast_effect_how_bob…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 06:41 PM
1

They should talk more about it - nothing like a good laugh while observing mental masturbation about, per the TRP sidebar: Game – A loosely based set of behaviors specifically designed to increase attraction. Unlisted behaviors loosely based on ... nothing apparently. Brilliant stuff. Manospherian grade 10/10.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 06:15 PM
1

Wow man, those are some strong flip-the-script tactics! And yeah, I'm here around lunch time EST most weekdays. Most other posting is extremely sporadic. If you're the same - good for you!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 06:05 PM
1

Anything cuck or buck related is all you, the latter by your own admission! Maybe one day you can double up and be a cuckbuck? A new Manospherian animal of sorts? And you care a lot, or you wouldn't post angry rants about "gender dynamics" here all the time (as opposed to my derisive commentary I direct at some people here).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 05:59 PM
1

Swear on your kiddos life, Lewis... do you honestly think I care if someone on PPD hates me? Or any random schmuck in general? I pick my sides carefully via very strong polarization. It works great. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 05:53 PM
1

Validation is validation, and it inflates one's ego regardless of who's doing it. A 6 who receives praises from 4s will be harder to bang than a 6 who doesn't receive any praise No, all validation is definitely NOT equal. What kind of malarkey is this? Yeah, with men who are losers before TRP helps them. The difference is TRP actually does something to improve their lives, whilst people like yourself just shame them. I shame (shit on) people who ask for it with their words and actions (including…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 03:54 PM
1

Whoa! Angry! Does it sadden you that legit Eurotrash has infinitely higher SMV than you ever did or will?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 01:22 PM
1

Cucks bucks fucks schmucks ducks yucks !!!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 04:24 AM
1

What you said is mostly correct - except it's garnish on the mashed potatoes. There are universally attractive traits which precede all of those cliches and have far more power in determining attractiveness. For the love of all things holy, don't start ranting about drug dealers and bouncers!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 04:22 AM
0

For men under 25, this is not the case at all Young women have access to tinder/social media, have insanely overblown egos from years of unconditional validation, and male thirst Thirst from Internet losers isn't worth much to anyone except the bottom-barrel women. This is self-explanatory. I now have some idea of who you're dealing with regularly - thanks for sharing. As such, a young man who is a 7 and doesn't know about game can only fuck 4s, or have a shitty one-sided relationship with a 6. …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 04:21 AM
1

You really do love doing everything backwards, eh? Why aren't you out with your flamethrower? This is the perfect opportunity to vent for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 03:53 AM
3

Uh, yeah? One of the local incels literally posted on braincels and said that PPD no-rule-week is on...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 03:50 AM
3

Back to the cage for you, OP. Enough air time for today.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 03:47 AM
1

I love Indian food and my wife doesn't tell me that I stink to high heavens after I have some...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 03:46 AM
3

I wonder why this thread is crickets... hmmm... what could it be?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/18 03:43 AM
3

I wanted to see how people on here perceived others under the guise of a real post.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 08:28 PM
1

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 08:26 PM
3

Many of them straight up don't use it or almost never update it. Why even bother with Internet retard validation when they either have a great LTR with a BF or get validated by other attractive men in real life? Real life > Internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 08:00 PM
2

Actually I've never been repulsed by the smell of an Indian girl who also had access to soap/water.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 07:53 PM
1

The best part is ladies didn't mind getting photographed with me touching their boobs while I was in "fat lesbian" mode post the famous "freshman 15" that came on. You definitely don't see me complaining.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 07:49 PM
2

Can't speak for others, but anyone in their right mind should only care about what people they find attractive in real life think of them...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 07:45 PM
6

99% of attractive women end up doing the internet validation thing in one way or another. Like clockwork. Partly bullshit. Far from all physically attractive women sit around on social media - many don't give a shit about it at all (you need to meet women from competitive universities to see this). Unless you really want to argue that only "1%" of women are the ones I'm referring to. Maybe. In that case, call me privileged.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 07:41 PM
6

Several of the good lookers were fakes I posted on purpose (and later revealed as such).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 07:37 PM
1

Genetics or laziness? That's the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:54 PM
2

He's not fat. He's the high end of "normal weight" for a fit male.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:49 PM
1

:'(
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:34 PM
2

Your observations are strong.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:33 PM
1

Americans and their fatwashed eyes.. You need to go to non-Anglosphere Europe.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:31 PM
0

And old RPers are sexy, fit studs! https://www.facebook.com/the21convention/photos/a.10155032008637405.1073741830.325059967404/10155032053662405/?type=3&theater https://i.imgur.com/0Qpe2ZT.png https://i.imgur.com/5T2xoq5.png
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:18 PM
0

Why are you so flustered? Some people can't be helped and most don't take "it" seriously anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:15 PM
3

Nah, the Marie Curies of the world would synthesize Chadsplooge and women would just self-impregnate. No one wants the neckbeards or chapaticels.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:10 PM
1

Atlas rarely wins, but this is a real winner from "it". Bravo. Well done.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:09 PM
10

I agree, but many PPD red pillers have even higher estrogen levels than the BP soyboysthings. The reds are straight up cuckbucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 06:07 PM
5

I've been to the gym a few times? Can't squander good family genetics (mom's side) - grandfather competed for Master of Sport title back in the USSR; snatch/jerk/clean over 150kg (320+lbs) in a weight class of 65kg (145lbs).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 05:59 PM
4

I'm uncut - only seen girls treat my kolbasa with enthusiasm. I also don't mind meatier vajeens (there's more to their looks than meatiness) - and frankly hygiene is far more important. What gives?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 05:44 PM
2

Rolol wins that one hands down.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 04:53 PM
1

:'''''''''''''''''(
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 04:25 PM
2

When those edgy, loud dolts talk about "blue pillers" they are actually referring to anyone in society who is not "red pilled." Basically them vs. everyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 04:22 PM
3

Mmm... no.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 04:19 PM
5

Not just virgins, one guy here was arguing with people about women when he had never even asked one out. There is no real debate here - it's mostly mindless entertainment.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 04:12 PM
6

Do fatter guys have creamier loads due to more fat content in their body, and fat making things creamy?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 03:50 PM
0

This is more difficult for the mexicana and negra putas?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/18 03:47 PM
3

Lose weight (30+ lbs), shave the bum fluff and get a sharper haircut. Maybe ditch the glasses.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 09:01 PM
2

Do you have some odd allergy to numbers or what? Let's say we had actual data here that said that a normal follow up rate to getting a second date is 80%. This guy does the math and discovers he's getting follow up dates 10% of the time . This gives him strong evidence that he needs to think about what he's doing wrong, because the problem is most likely him, not the girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 06:24 PM
1

I'll make a bunch of assumptions on your behalf then, based on your "social circle relationship" qualifier. I'm going to assume that you know her well enough to know that she doesn't have any obvious deal breakers to you. I'm also going to assume you have a decent amount in common in terms of interests and values (long-term life goals). With this in mind, assuming you like her enough to ask her out and she says yes, I'd say a follow-up date should be 80-90% likely. The only thing I can think of …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 06:22 PM
1

So what you're actually asking is "what rate of no-second-date is bad?" Frankly, this is impossible to answer, because there is no point of reference or benchmark that is available at the moment. A large survey of people answering this question would be what you want, though (e.g. they would tell you with which frequency they were able to get a follow up date - men or women). I'd again also argue that it depends on how well you knew the girl beforehand. Online-sourced date? A higher failure rate…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 06:15 PM
8

Whatever the answer is, it will definitely depend on how well she knows you (how long you've interacted with her before you "pull the trigger") and also the definition of a "rejection." Without knowing those, no one can actually answer your question.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 06:00 PM
2

Some of it is inaccurate, though. Like the "pro stubble" argument in that article. Evidence on that is mixed. I bet a bunch of other things are off there, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 05:33 PM
5

@ /u/planejane also Ditto here on "selecting less overall attractive or people with deal-breaking flaws" for non-LTRs. Easier to walk away and not get attached. I'm a dude and that makes sense to me, too. Always did.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 05:24 PM
3

Recognizing sluts is exactly what they should be talking about - yet they never discuss how to actually tell which women are into casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 04:37 PM
4

The traits that men have from both categories are not mutually exclusive. Hence men often have both to various degrees.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/18 01:37 AM
6

None of those studies have mate choices as black and white. That's fiction.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/18 11:23 PM
1

Speak for yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/18 07:10 PM
2

Yeah, the stereotypes are real. Even a little bit of effort can set you apart. I put on a good 10-15lbs in Sept/Oct of freshman year in college and by Halloween was turning chubby, but by virtue of dressing/styling well and being outgoing (or just generally not socially retarded) I did alright even back then. I posted an actual photo of me touching (through) clothing some senior girl's boobs on that Halloween at a campus party and that caused some serious REEEIng here from various losers. These …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 10:51 PM
1

I think "ambiguous" is the word you wanted, not "casual." That's far more clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 10:45 PM
3

You're just making up your own alpha/beta definition as this point...
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 10:45 PM
2

Yeah.. now that makes sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 10:44 PM
1

As I've told Atlas, believe it or not, religiousness doesn't affect actual reported sexual numbers much at all. Reposting: I've spliced that data in various ways (races, religiousness, etc) and the results don't move much at all. For example, difference (between medians of groups being compared) between a very religious individual (church once per week or more) and "never been to church" is a partner count of 1 at the MOST. Blacks vs whites? 1 partner. College vs. no college? 1 partner. So I don…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 10:42 PM
1

You've answered the question "why do town bicycles talk about their experience" .. but not my original question of "why does PPD attract a disproportionately large amount of them." What I'm getting at is people don't end up here by accident. Something is drawing the town bicycles here. Initially I thought it was backlash against Manospherian criticism, but that doesn't explain how they find this place. I'm still wondering how they end up finding this place in much higher numbers than is warrante…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 10:41 PM
1

So nothing that made any sense given that it was lacking elaboration. Thanks for sharing!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:57 PM
2

Say some more?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:55 PM
0

Yup. I did. She said "nasty." If I didn't give her my actual # I'd have perhaps encountered bar drama. No thanks. She was blocked shortly afterwards. The (slight) ego boost was mostly killed by her cigarette breath, by the way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:53 PM
10

This is a great way to misrepresent research. You used the "term" toxic in your title. Then the researchers used various words to describe men (list below). Assuming toxic even means all these terms to most people: Jerks Bullies Abusive Manipulative Narcissistic Serial killers Criminals What kind of specific behaviors (other than some obvious ones, like serial killers killing people...) did these people have? Because that serial killer can be described as having OTHER traits as well as being a s…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:47 PM
4

Welcome to The Red Pill, where definitions are molded on the spot to make me right/good/strong/masculine and you wrong/bad/weak/feminine/gay! Enjoy your stay!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:32 PM
3

What is "beta as fuck?" Is that all beta, no alpha? If so, that makes no sense in this case as a "handsome" man, by TRP definition of having "sexually attractive traits", is going to be at least somewhat "alpha." Don't shoot the messenger - but that's sidebar crap for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:31 PM
2

If you mean holistically attractive (not just looks) then that's correct most of the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:29 PM
1

See (before your edit): Right, but so long as they were exclusive/committed intentionally (even without telling each other!) they were "dating" or "seeing each other" (if you ask me) - otherwise the only people that could date (technically per your definition) are post-college grads who go on more "formal" dates. Edit: Mostly my contention with your comment was the implication that "casual" always means "has a clear expiration date." IMO, more often it means the people are feeling each other out…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:21 PM
1

You're technically correct, but in practice what freakazoid minorities like incels "think" is irrelevant. Most opinions on the matter would likely cluster around some specific number if you asked a randomly selected group of individuals from the general population.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 06:19 PM
1

So it is my experience that a lot of young relationships start out as casual, i.e. the couple is sleeping together but are not yet "official" or even really "dating". I didn't even know anyone in my early twenties who went out on actual dates. People just met at parties, bars and social gatherings, made out, hooked up, and often enough that led to a relationship. Right, but so long as they were exclusive/committed intentionally (even without telling each other!) they were "dating" or "seeing eac…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:53 PM
2

What you're saying is that different demographics will have disparate "results." This is wrong. I've spliced that data in various ways (races, religiousness, etc) and the results don't move much at all. For example, difference (between medians of groups being compared) between a very religious individual (church once per week or more) and "never been to church" is a partner count of 1 at the MOST. Blacks vs whites? 1 partner. College vs. no college? 1 partner. The data is excellent at helping es…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:47 PM
1

But I think many -- if not most, then a sizable minority -- find LTRs by indulging in more casual relationships and seeing where they go. Thus, for many women, the guy she ends up marrying is a guy she was attracted to and sexually uninhibited with from the start. I just find it odd to call that "casual" if the intent is committed and long-term. It seems like you're having a forced reaction to that "BB interview dating" you alluded to earlier and are finding the need to contrast to it. I agree t…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:43 PM
2

You're right, they didn't know, and most people today don't know even with the Internet being available. That doesn't mean one couldn't have gone to the library and found the answer, though, should they have been curious enough to do it. Now we can make better informed decisions in a more convenient manner. Did you have a point in your initial comment? Were you critiquing using information for decision making?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:36 PM
-2

You will soon be next. Who's "you" - the 99.9% remainder of society?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:34 PM
3

The Internet didn't create demographic data.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:29 PM
1

While there is no bible or formula to tell you what "objectively low n" is - using basic data on sexual partner history and comparing one person to that data will provide you with an idea of what is "objectively" normal and what is not (and measures of central tendency represent the norms by definition).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:29 PM
3

In my experience, the guy they settle down with is the same guy they had fun with when they were younger. I think you're on point overall, except here: that makes it sound like intent from both parties was (or at least the girl) "casual relationship with expiration date" (what you call "having fun") vs. people who were looking for something long-term from the very start and then just let things roll naturally from there (intent is to be together indefinitely). I think for the vast majority of pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:13 PM
0

Duh - the entertainment won't be as integrated if they get banned as it is now. Say some more, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:40 PM
2

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/9jnvzi/how_common_is_the_afbb_scenario/e6sxdye/ This has to be "bucks bucks"
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:35 PM
2

I was just surprised at the coincidence that we both had a "revisiting college experience" recently. I guess the last thing I expected was for you to have that same conclusion, hence my perhaps poor use of "irony." Let's call it coincidence instead.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:22 PM
1

competitive programs IE registered Nursing at any California state university, schools which basically admit anyone who fills out the application lol. That by definition is not a competitive program, though. Competitive implies lower acceptance rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:20 PM
2

That would be a rare case (the only sexual activity being female receiving oral)... but I was mistaken in my definition. Receiving oral does count under CDC partner history.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:20 PM
1

Do bears shit in the woods? It'll be OK buddy, you guys will find another place to pollute with your "real" masculinity.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:15 PM
1

The more extreme form is bullshit (most men are ultimately a mix of various "alpha" and "beta" as per the TRP definitions of it). I may have seen one example of the extreme form of it.. here's a story about something that happened to me within the last 2 years. I'd love for some self-styled gender experts to digest this one and tell me what they think: I was at an upscale bar in Fenway in Boston having a drink (I'm 30, married, wife was out with a friend). A 40-45 year old blonde (other than bei…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 04:04 PM
4

For what? Casual sex = irrelevant. LTRs = I'd say no more than slightly higher (by 1 or 2) than the median (this covers like 70% of women) for her age group (when considering 18-30 year olds). I'm using the CDC definition of partners for hetero women: oral (given or received), vaginal (received) and anal (received).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:57 AM
2

Funny coincidence.. I'm 30, but my brother is 18 and just started college. Based on his suitemates (9 people total inc. him, with one dude hard of hearing - so we'll ignore him and call it 8) ... maybe him and his roomate fit that description... barely. The other 6 guys are .. dorks? Maybe I'm just getting old...
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:45 AM
3

I'll help you: see EC posts on made within the last 12 hours (today is 9/28/18 - for the record). Good luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:24 AM
5

When you start ranting about conspiracies which makes no sense whatsoever, you've lost "frame". You either get it, or you don't, and there's nothing in between. Don't let me stop you from DUUURing - I won't get in your way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:07 AM
2

Well the Communist one is barely OK, but the Positive Masculinity one is awful. Like deliberate incitement. Looks like no one is going to teach those people a balanced approach.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 05:05 AM
2

but i do think that regretful town bicycles are not going to choose to spend their time on here Say some more?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 03:44 AM
0

Are you sure? Maybe it will give the minority of toxically-masculine men a real source of therapy? Most people do fine without RP - remember?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 03:02 AM
1

Who assigned that link to the quarantine page? Reddit admins?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 03:01 AM
9

They are losing their shit as we speak - so much for "holding frame." I guarantee there will be some hilarious EC posts in the next few days. They'll definitely get banned soon after.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 02:10 AM
6

Some people never got over high school... and its lame cliches... again...
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/18 12:48 AM
6

The best part of this is the reactions of the ECs and SECs, most of whom have the charm of a... sulfurous fart. The morons clearly have no clue how obnoxious they are. Good thing they can just move somewhere else and continue to entertain.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 11:17 PM
1

No, but I should.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 06:00 PM
2

Oh yeah, you can say that again. Relative comparisons can be as important as absolutes. Standing out from the degenerates and being as close to Prince Charming as you can get is a winner's strategy. You give women what they want while getting what you want (and no, this strategy isn't at odds, as most people want committed relationships that lead to having children).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 05:02 PM
3

Could it be that most of those "extra" women going to college aren't going to the more competitive schools? Hence they can't really expect to date "high SES" men who usually go to more competitive schools and meet women at those schools. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/the-gender-factor-in-college-admissions/2014/03/26/4996e988-b4e6-11e3-8020-b2d790b3c9e1_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b8c8fdc49040
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:51 PM
2

You did prove me wrong - on something that means little to most people. Just to be clear. You win, man. Congratulations. Bye bye now.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:38 PM
2

That doesn't really answer my question. Why is there a disproportionately large amount of them on PPD? (This is a fact - see the PPD surveys vs. general population numbers). Horn tooting in the face of RP criticism or something else?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:27 PM
1

Definitely some truth in that, although financial benefits and lifestyle changes due to changes in single/dual income situations will be dependent on age and actual individual income of parties in the couple and if they have kids or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:23 PM
3

Not necessary. You're welcome to the peanuts. That and you missed that fact that low income earners might be better off with welfare vs. the tax benefits (hence 1/3 of the groups I mentioned doesn't even benefit that much if at all). Well done sport. You win the petty argument. Turn around. I'll pat your back.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:11 PM
3

College might have been where women found a husband. Now college has shifted to women find parties and relationships. However, the overall culture is geared to fuck around. I don't think much has changed within colleges over the last 20 or so years. That and data shows that most people (in a 3:1 ratio in some cases) in college still express exclusive/traditional relationship preferences vs. "just having sex" or "hooking up." A guy who is attractive in a holistic sense in college who wants an LTR…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:09 PM
1

My comment was partially facetious in response to what people here parrot: that social media has made everyone super narcissistic and everyone just wants to show off and be cool and all... bla bla (hence the need for a fancy wedding). I've known middle class people who indeed did do the "judge" wedding.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:06 PM
2

Great, if you want to count peanuts for exceptions for people who in school AND married, adopting or low-income earners. Well done.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:04 PM
2

single LC moms do not suffer from any negative stigma in their social circles Yes, but that's a recent change (right or not?), or there shouldn't be a drop in marriage rates in that socioeconomic class (assuming you think the change in the marriage rate in that socioeconomic class is due to reductions in stigma against out of wedlock kids). Do you follow?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 05:21 AM
3

Username does not check out.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 05:07 AM
1

Cookies are taking over. I don't even recall the last time I looked at a divorce article or stats. Those little shits probably know how to scan websites like this for keywords ... and DIVORCE is repeated here ad nauseum.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 05:07 AM
2

When you say no tax advantages for equal income earners, these are some of the LC people the article was referring to. It applies to anyone who makes comparable income. Two 100K earners filing jointly or single = same thing, essentially. A typical WC setup of 50K plumber and 20K somethingsomething would benefit more in terms of "effective tax rate" improvement. One reason is that the low income woman with children will lose some of her welfare and free health care if she boosts her income by mar…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 05:05 AM
11

Does everyone want an expensive wedding that desperately? There's some tax considerations: For equal-income earners, marriage offers essentially NO tax benefits. For most wide disparity couples or single-earner households, the tax benefits are very real. I wonder of lower socioeconomic class couples have wider disparities in incomes vs. say lower middle class or upper middle class couples (I would imagine 1%er UC couples have the widest disparities, with some men earning massive 500K+ paychecks.…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:37 AM
8

Someone remembers ~7th grade math... perhaps all is not lost.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 04:26 AM
3

Wow, the cheapshots just get more PPD-cliche and get sprinkled with some nice strawmen. An administrative role is indeed a good fit for you. You earned it well.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/18 03:26 AM
3

It's not about having vs not. It's frequency of use and dependence on "Instagram dopamine."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 09:07 PM
5

Wow, nice one!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 09:06 PM
4

Okie dokie hun let me just inform you that you speak for yourself and yourself only. Just trying to help you out so you don't embarrass yourself in front of someone who'll rub your ignorance in your face in real life. Or think you're a complete dolt (in most cases). Assuming you speak for others is a big no-no. It was great chatting! PS: there's nothing wrong with Basics. Chill, easy girls are great - for some things.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 06:56 PM
6

Far from all women who enjoy alcohol and loud music in moderation are also glued to Instagram (or whatever is hot nowadays) and are club hos and bar flies. The latter are what the OP is talking about. The former exist but don't go over the top with those "vices."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 06:53 PM
5

It's been said before and you are right. They are either too dumb to realize it (esp. if they want a stable relationship) or should stop bitching (if they just want casual sex then they have to accept the women/men that give it up).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 06:51 PM
3

nothing that you've said here is a direct reply to me saying that girls who are basic get with highly desirable men. Nothing says they get "highly desirable men" by any universal standard or at all except you and something you think your auntie did. I work in investment management at a large firm in Boston surrounded by the some of the most highly paid and educated people in the country. Most people in the top end roles here are the opposite of Basic. Most admins aren't even that Basic (hell, my…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 06:43 PM
4

I will continue to observe what happens outside of the town bicycle and "21 forever" crowd world, too, if you don't mind? In other words, I'll continue to watch what 90%+ of people actually do. Yes, expiration dates on those relationships are pretty small. Just look at the PPD town bicycles and their relationship histories. They were total shitshows most of their life. Exceptions don't make the rule. We know that likes attract likes. This is backed by loads of research. People in high end career…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 06:24 PM
4

you live in a fantasy world where men care about how diverse or interesting women's hobbies or perspectives are. men don't care about that at all. I live in the real world that doesn't revolve around town bicycles and their "21 forever" lifestyle. It's a world where people understand that choices can have long-term negative consequences. Most people don't understand this, Basics and their SO Bud Lights and other new-age hipsters in particular. What happens in that world is high RMV men intuitive…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:58 PM
5

No one obsesses over basics in any way - with few exceptions. They are easy to spot and even easier to replace. Their desires are also irrelevant - since they are only good for casual sex. Clueless ethnic men and their behavior towards basics is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:50 PM
1

That has nothing to do with basics and what their tells are.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:45 PM
3

"i just want a chill guy"/ "someone who i can kick it with and is down for me" Sounds what a the most basic basic would say. The kind of girl that guys love - for casual sex and then nice, easy, chill disposal.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:26 PM
5

i don't care if a guy used to stuff you in your locker or whatever if he's good to me. You think the odds of him being an asshole to you are the same as with a guy who doesn't act like a twat regularly?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 04:52 PM
6

Both me and the wife are 5'6". A woman's height has nothing to do with her physical attractiveness for me, which is more related to: her face, her body shape (hourglass) and how shapely her legs/butt are as well as her styling/self-care. I'm 30 and she just turned 29. I care more about mental/emotional maturity than the age, although if I had to find a partner today I'd prefer younger women due to them having more prime baby making years ahead for better family planning.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 04:21 PM
3

Well, they'll tell you just read any men's magazine, just read Men's Health. There's decent styling/grooming tips in there. If US-based men actually followed them, they'd vastly improve over their lame ass Mr. Bud Light looks. They'll tell you to be confident (without telling you HOW to be confident) TRP doesn't tell you HOW to do this either. Example: when they tell you not to fear rejection and that your balls won't shrink when a girl rejects you, you're not really learning to "be confident" -…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 04:11 PM
1

You're partly wrong. 1) You've been had by the trolls who ID as "blue pill" and will just say evo psych is wrong for shits and giggles (obviously these people have nothing to offer as arguments against evo psych) 2) People who disagree with certain interpretations of certain data which evo psych uses for actual stated reasons "2" isn't necessarily wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:51 AM
1

I do not have a personal definition of "the blue pill" - that also means I cannot answer the second part of your question. I also can't disagree with your position as it is not entirely clear to me. Either clarify it or you can feel free to stop responding to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:36 AM
1

Well for starters, this is a new definition of "blue pilled" that you've made up. So actually "blue pilled" = disagreeing with interpretations of human evolution as it is portrayed by certain groups of researchers? Correct?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:22 AM
2

By "Blues" do you mean members of the subreddit "The Blue Pill," "blue" members of PPD or society at large that is not in any way affiliated with "The Red Pill" subreddit and "Red Pill" blogs (which is >99.99% of people)?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 05:13 AM
1

Oh yeah, can't wait to meet those folks!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 04:33 AM
3

Anyone ever wonder why PPD attracts the childfree town bicycle contingent?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/18 04:29 AM
1

There's 24 hours in a day, with work and leisure being large parts of those 24 hours. Hours worked are down, video game hours are up (leisure). I cited sources earlier for this (as noted by economists at several investment banks). Young people play the most hours of video games. Young people are being less sexual. Connect the dots. Or don't...
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 09:53 PM
1

The argument is that young people (ages 17-24) are less sexual in general (not just waiting longer), not that they all end up as incels. And young people also happen to play more video games than before while working less - even economists noticed. All connected.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 06:39 PM
1

Will he tell the truth to my face if I asked?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 06:16 PM
1

And how old are these people? Men, right? Early to mid 20s?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 06:12 PM
0

Another poster said: All the data we see shows less sex among a large amount of young men . You said: No it doesn't. The data shows that young men and women are both waiting until they're a little older to lose their virginity and get married. You are wrong, because: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25940736 Changes in American Adults' Sexual Behavior and Attitudes, 1972-2012. Number of sexual partners increased steadily between the G.I.s and 1960s-born GenX'ers and then dipped among Millenni…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 06:09 PM
2

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25940736 Changes in American Adults' Sexual Behavior and Attitudes, 1972-2012. Number of sexual partners increased steadily between the G.I.s and 1960s-born GenX'ers and then dipped among Millennials to return to Boomer levels. The largest changes appeared among White men, with few changes among Black Americans. The results were discussed in the context of growing cultural individualism and rejection of traditional social rules in the U.S. There is also a docu…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 05:27 PM
2

I have never heard most grown ups mention video games in normal conversation. I'm 30. I still play a little bit (Witcher series lately). I played loads of games at age 12-20, with a gradual rampdown since then. Certainly not in a bar or something similar (never heard someone ask me if I play games at a bar in over a decade of being a patron of various places). Most definitely NOT women. Casual gamers (especially men) who might dick around playing something ultra mainstream like CoD hardly ever t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 05:25 PM
0

Is it ironic that his supposedly "bad faith" argument actually makes some sense vs. "good faith" non-sense arguments which are all too common on PPD?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 05:11 PM
0

Not quite: "incels" are just involuntarily celibate, by definition (in practice, yes, many also "hate" women). The real question is: do they have a desire to have sex? This will separate the "IN"cel from the "VOL"cel (the latter ("VOL" = voluntarily) whom just abstains for sex and doesn't give a shit about - aka the "dead sex drive" argument from me).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 05:02 PM
3

That's a great question and not one that we can answer without a survey into the matter. What these people truly want vs. what they think they can get vs. what they actually get are all important pieces of information.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 04:43 PM
4

Old guys in ball caps and everyone else. Older women, younger women, younger men, bartenders, dealers - whoever. The only socialization in video games tends to be "F uu nooobbbb duidrrrrr" via the headset. One is clearly better than the other, even if not the Grand Cordon of being social.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 04:42 PM
2

Either they are incels or they have seriously dead sex drives. My 18 year old brother is very much like that - sits around and watches other dudes play video games. Pretty sure he's a virgin (no GF I ever heard of). Not exactly pride-inspiring.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 04:32 PM
3

Sitting at home playing games and going out to a casino might be vices in some way, but they are not even remotely the same in terms of socialization. Even if you don't initiate conversations at the casino, someone else will with you. You can't get around at least some socialization while you are there.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 04:22 PM
3

You're partially right. There's more to it: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/10/labor-shortages-persist-as-the-tale-of-the-lost-male-unfolds.html Drugs, jail and video games have taken millennial men out of the workforce and they aren't likely to return —a phenomenon dubbed "the tale of the lost male" by economists at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. But men may also be putting a priority on leisure, which could be keeping men at home. The U.S. Labor Department's American Time Use Survey found that be…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 04:16 PM
1

I was coming from the practical side: a machine could indeed do it because it could measure angles/ratios accurately. A normal person - not so much.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/18 04:01 AM
4

Well you'd figure that the US-centric PUA and TRP crew would have figured it out by now. I can tell you that women who smoke cigarettes and women who frequent the same bars alone as repeat customers (and do not interact with bar staff that much - in other words, they are not the bartenders' friends) are highly likely to be down for casual sex. There's got to be more than that to pick up on, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 10:43 PM
8

If you're talking about ones extremely desperate for validation, then I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 10:40 PM
1

The former isn't perfectly clear here, that I agree with. On the other hand, the latter (if it were only females rating) would be irrelevant, as women are the ultimate judges of male attractiveness. What women rate is what women rate and that is dependent on what they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 09:30 PM
3

I've seen: men dating women significantly less attractive than them, men trapped in betabux marriages, men in abusive relationships So absolutely nothing to do with what I said about you not being able to observe non-Manospherian men succeeding in dating... Site note: There are lots of people in successful LTRs that have never heard of the Manosphere - in fact, they outnumbers Manospherians 20 to 1 at least (almost no one in the world knows TRP or PUA or actively uses it.. maybe 0.5% of men? 1%?…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 04:55 PM
19

2) Turns out that if women want to hookup and you are attractive, you dont need to do that much gaming. Very little setup required, sex on the first date. TRP seems to overdo this approach in the main from what I've seen. Given the inputs of 'wants sex' and a practically limitless set of options this makes perfect sense. Who wouldn't take the best and make it as easy as possible? Rules 1&2 in effect. This is the part most PUA/TRPs miss. It's the woman and what she wants, not them or what they do…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 04:37 PM
2

(Though the counter-argument the author would make is I was not vulnerable, just a needy/desperate nice guy. And it makes sense) Well at least you got that right. However, the argument I have in favor of vulnerability was my last LTR You were indeed vulnerable here based on Manson's definition (you left yourself open to potential 'love rejection' and what you said came from a genuine place) and look at what it did... First argument I have against the idea is that I have personally never seen a s…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 04:12 PM
3

but then you have to fairly/accurately judge the womens' SMV...
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 04:30 AM
2

SMV, meaning "attraction for casual sex" only is obviously highly dependent on looks (as well as some character/personality traits). Just focusing on looks, there's a few things you can do to get some idea of how attractive you are. You need to know what physical traits are sexually attractive to the opposite gender and then you measure up on them. For a guy.. things which are important and which you can measure and compare: body ratios (like shoulder-to-waist: about 1.618), general fitness / le…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/18 04:09 AM
1

Assuming was used in a humbling manner. I posted the quote to show that. Actually, if it were only men rating, it would be even more useless. I'd say all female judges = best, assuming scores were standardized after.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/18 04:38 PM
1

The chest is a gift from the heavens. All it took for the thing to grow was sporadic pushups in middle school. I'm going to give you something exclusive. Only a handful of 15 year old girls have seen this pic. And you're the only other... Here's a pic of it from like.. when I was 16 (circa 2004). .. since you're into other male bodies and all... :D
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 11:34 PM
2

and then when they give those women their precious exclusivity and future commitment, those women shit on them and deprive them of sex because they aren't sexually attracted to those men. It's possible, but by "exclusivity and future commitment" I actually do NOT mean marriage at that point. I mean just "official" GF/BF status. You then have a 3-5 year vetting period to see how she acts and if she's a keeper. Still no guarantees, but that's the best way I can think of to "vet" a girl for marriag…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 08:45 PM
1

I'm going to go ahead and proceed here just as a lesson to you and anyone else following this conversation of bodyfat % numbers and why to perhaps stop making them up. I posted this pic here before. That's 14.2% on a DEXA (which was done the following morning at Cenegenics in Boston) from earlier this summer. I could go a little leaner (maybe 11-12%) but that does take some good effort. Anything lower is very hard and not worth the effort at all. You seriously want me to take a pic of my bathroo…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 08:29 PM
2

Actually, I'm not fat at all and I have been DEXA scanned before (you know, that x-ray machine that gives you accurate body composition?). I'm ~14% at my more lean side and probably look far more cut than your well past middle age dad. Who you think is literally almost as cut/lean as a steroid-using stage-ready bodybuilder. LOL. You have no clue what a 9% person looks like nor do you have any clue what what your dad's bodyfat is - it's something you made up. By the way... I mean you're either a …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 08:18 PM
1

Your dad is not 9% bodyfat, and probably not even 19% bodyfat on any accurate scale or measuring device. That is something you pulled out from your posterior.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 07:26 PM
1

Nah, but I'd personally ignore women that really care about online likes at all. In fact, if they have little to no social media presence... you are probably looking at a winner.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 07:25 PM
1

I think being pursued by 1 person in real life that you find attractive is more validating than 1000 likes on social media...
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 07:03 PM
6

I guess that would be more realistic although I just can’t ignore my past observations that regularly, every day young men still got laid casually every now and then back when I was younger. Granted idk that was “most” and “doomed” isn’t defined. It’s hard to say definitively although I don’t think you’re doing that. Yes, the question is how do you translate this absolute conversation (X # of men) into what % of men actually get to pull this off with any regularity (as well as defining "regulari…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 07:01 PM
1

My father weights 180lbs at 6 feet tall and 9% body fat 9% bodyfat grandpa age dude? Hahahahaha. You forgot a digit in front of the 9.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 06:33 PM
6

for some reason "average" to most men here means "the statistical average as reported by the CDC irrespective or race, region, age, etc" or when asked to produce a picture of the "average" man (in the US) the post a picture of a middle eastern man I just imagine a chubby whiteboy with a sorta-unkempt beard in washed up, loose clothing and sneakers. Maybe a baseball cap.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 06:19 PM
5

I'd change your argument just a bit, and it would be on point. If most men just pursued casual sex and offered no exclusivity/commitment, then they would be doomed, yes. More importantly, they would be "doomed" because they wouldn't be giving women what they are interested in: exclusivity and future commitment. /u/sublimemongrel I think that's what he really meant to say, in which case, I agree with him, although it's a weird scenario where most men, as if controlled by some hive-mind, suddenly …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 06:15 PM
1

How their actual attractiveness was determined? Other people rated them during interactions, I would assume. Downs (1990b) discusses the three possible sex effects dealing with self-perceptions of physical attractiveness. Women might yield higher self-ratings because cultural demands require that women view themselves as attractive. On the other hand, men might yield higher self-ratings because they do not have as many anchors by which to compare their self-looks. Finally, a third possibility is…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 06:06 PM
1

"Horniness" or "arousal" come to mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:08 PM
1

I have never seen anything more practical (actionable / straightforward / without an agenda) or accurate (based on my personal experience) than Models. What else would you recommend? Be warned: I'm probably going to shit all over them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:07 PM
1

No offense, but he’s right. Top notch body, but the face—come on. Not sure what you mean here? And there’s no such male phenomenon, by the way. It means that only males have been documented to exhibit a certain behavior. In this case, this behavior is overrating self attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:05 PM
1

Strangers they find physically attractive at the very least, possibly more holistically attractive ("smarts" and personality/character, as well).
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:03 PM
1

Yes, that's right. No one wants attention from people they find unattractive. There is no tangible value in that. If you disagree, explain the value in attention from people you find unattractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:26 AM
1

The "just trust me" parts are a very small portion of Models, hence my recommendation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:23 AM
2

Hahaha... wow. Yes. The point is clear: it is indeed impossible to feel any kind "attraction" towards an oversized fleshlight with glossy eyes and perky eyebrows beyond its utility as a masturbation device, contrary to what some undersexed or virgin PPD locals might say, as they are an irrelevant, tiny minority and do not define "attraction" in a general sense. Or was your "point" still related to actual women, not sex dolls, being used as masturbation devices? Totally agree. I do think though t…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/18 04:19 AM
0

I think I could dig up the uncensored pic collage in that link - cocks, balls and JAWS in full effect. If anyone is interested... PM me. Where are all of my favorite local homoerotics? Don't be shy...
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 11:59 PM
6

If you want to use the words "utility" and "attraction" interchangeably - have at it. That screwdriver I used the other day was so attractive. Brilliant.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 11:54 PM
8

Health and wealth are universal status symbols, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that 1/2 of those made it into the "definition of success" list. You could easily argue that "healthier" women are "stronger" as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 11:44 PM
7

Those dudes didn't even see a photo. They just wanted to fuck. The only attractive thing there is the theoretical utility of a vagina. The girl becomes a masturbation tool. If you think that's a good description of "attractive" - then you carry on thinking that. You are bastardizing the meaning of the word "attractive."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 11:23 PM
8

I do think though that attention from the undesirables is evidence that the least attractive women are more attractive than the least attractive men. Eh... fuckable / usable as a masturbation device =/= attractive. Maybe if you changed "attractive" to "in demand for certain things."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 11:13 PM
4

I don't even have to be a female to find the attention of undesirable PEOPLE.. or women, in this case (often very low class / culture) to be repulsive.. they can even be fairly physically attractive. Ditto for women who have awful hygiene or are extremely out of shape. Maybe I just can't relate to guys who are genuinely physically unattractive (or otherwise) and can't get ANYTHING...
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 11:11 PM
2

I agree, but look at his original point (I was unclear in my criticism initially): he said that women have it better than men in that regard. That was simply not true, and a study he posted showed that. Both genders were affected.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 10:55 PM
1

OK, in the bar situation, if she's hanging around you and she looks over and gives you a smile or whatever - sure, go for it. Going across the room to talk to her (15+ meters)? I wouldn't - it's hard to judge to what extent she checked you out or if it was even you she looked at. To be clear - those are certainly better than situations where the girl gives no indications of interest in you whatsoever (like the guy in the photos I posted).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 10:33 PM
2

1) You're overestimating your own attractiveness in some way? It's a well-documented male phenomenon. 2) You send off a bad vibe via your actions/posture or style/grooming. And you are unable to see this while self-evaluating. Or something very off about your locale (I'm in Boston, FYI).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 10:21 PM
1

Sure, for example, this is more normal if you have seen each other before (like in class at school/college, work, some other place you frequent regularly and know she has seen you). Bar randoms? Totally different.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 10:19 PM
1

I found it interesting that your post had 3 upvotes, but the rebuttal had 20 upvotes. Hmm... consider the biased audience (its PPD, not an impartial group of judges), not the quality of the argument? Someone argued that the quantity of attention matters. I think the quality of attention needs far more merit. If I gave you 1 turd or 100 turds... it's still all worthless turd. I'd argue 100 turds would actually be damaging (attention from 100s of shitty men = girls gets the idea that she's worthle…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 07:38 PM
1

The homoerotic comment just refers to your seemingly obvious fascination with the bodies/faces of other males. Your opinion is both questionable (you may be a fetishist / be into very specific types - we can't know) and, more importantly, irrelevant (except to gay men). Women are the only relevant judges to heterosexual men. That and the obvious apex fallacy that's looming (even if 0.0001% of men are near perfect.. it makes no difference on the dating / casual sex market). (By the way: I'm not s…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 07:03 PM
1

In that case, I urge you to take a very long break from the Pillsphere (or the Internet in general) because you've been thoroughly brainwashed by the local bozos. I mean it. With the exception of Manospherian creepazoids {PUAs in particular} men do not stroll around a bar or lounge and hit on random women - like this Read about it here Most of this happens more organically: guys are next to girls and they initiate a conversation when there is a good reason to (such as genuine curiosity about the…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:47 PM
1

Your homoerotic fascinations have been duly noted, thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:40 PM
1

I said objectively their lives are better but subjectively it doesn't has to be. What does that mean, exactly? Your study just showed they are impacted negatively by a lack of good looks in the same way as men are in general. There is no relative advantage to women in this regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:39 PM
1

This has nothing to do with relative aesthetic, as the quality of the benchmark can be quite dubious. Back to the point: repulsive breath and BO are still signs of imperfection (to get back to our original point; Photoshop and professional images aside). No, those guys are not that good looking in real life. Stay on topic, buddy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:19 PM
1

Your appearance shapes your personality. I'm starting to believe this is quite true, but its incomplete. Here's why. One of the ideas that I've had come to my head since I started screwing around on PPD was related to that. I've said before that "attractiveness" = looks, smarts, personality/character and values (values for LTRs only). Even though there are many "feedback loops" between those categories, I've come to the conclusion that there are "origin" categories... and they are: ... "looks" (…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:05 PM
1

Didn't get approached then. Don't get approached now Do you use the term "approached" in the literal "he came from a distance to talk to me" manner?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:57 PM
1

What about it? What is your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:53 PM
2

Unless you've a hanging belly, I'm not convinced the extra female attraction you get when fit is more due to attitude change rather than females perceiving how ripped you're under you clothes. This is a great point. A lot of people do NOT understand that clothing diminishes the impact of being "ripped." To me personally, it depends on the type of clothing that I'm wearing: tighter/more fitted clothing = better to be more lean. Full suit? Far less any difference between "ripped" and "normal" in t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:51 PM
2

Thanks for sharing your homoerotic side with us.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:49 PM
1

Professional taken, touched up photos are not that representative of reality. In real life this dude might have bad breath and warts.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:36 PM
1

I think they should pick up a copy of Mark Manson's "Models" instead. Just use caution any time he says "just trust me" (a handful of times in the book on particularly controversial topics where he's just sharing his gut feeling and expects you to blindly trust him to buy into his system).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:34 PM
2

Thanks for your "concern," but: 1) Blurring eyes out is not a complete masking, but it's sufficient and I'm fine with that (the same thing is done by active military members when posting pics to protect OPSEC - operational security) and the eyes are a KEY feature to ID people https://www.quora.com/Why-do-they-cover-the-persons-eyes-with-a-black-box-in-some-pictures 2) Blurring my entire face would not show facial changes due to fat loss (you're predictably looking at all the other places as a du…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:31 PM
1

OK - so how do some people find happiness anyway? Did they find it by whining on a forum? What's the point of pointing this out? (Another poster posted a good study that showed a controlled connection between facial attractiveness and BMI vs. well-being and distress/depression). So now that's more or less established (although it affects both genders - contrary to his original point).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:26 PM
2

I got lucky on two accounts: 1) Lots of excess fat going into my hips aka gynoid region 2) A barrel-chested build where my chest just sticks out more than my waist / stomach area, so I appear less fat than I am
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:22 PM
1

Well done. This is going somewhere, especially once they controlled for other traits. One problem... let's look at your original argument on your top level comment: Comparing the average woman's life to the average man's life You're comparing men and women, and that paper suggests that BOTH are affected by a lack of looks. This is where your argument actually falls apart. Women have the same issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:19 PM
1

Thanks for sharing your feelings. Sorry I couldn't feed your desire to have your biases confirmed.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:13 PM
1

Who let you out of the cage? Zookeeper? Where are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:12 PM
12

Winner of the "Shittiest Advice/Idea 2018" award.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 01:12 PM
3

Try focusing on the argument at hand: that lack of sexual attractiveness causes unhappiness and that it's a key determinant of happiness in a large part of the population.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:05 AM
3

1) Are you still talking about sexual attractiveness or holistic attractiveness? 2) If it's the former, you have to provide evidence that there is a causal relationship between sexual attractiveness and happiness at the population level (otherwise I'm going to assume you just THINK it impacts more people that it does) AND 3) That sexual attractiveness is a key determinant of happiness (vs. a tiny, irrelevant part of happiness) Have fun with your strawman arguments, sport. I'll reply to you if yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 06:04 AM
1

Red Piller can barely spell. Hmmm...
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:47 AM
3

All you're saying is that no one is perfect (which is obvious), and that X trait "could" cause Y problem (another obvious point). What is the point of stating the obvious? You are also, more importantly: 1) Failing to provide evidence of X and Y relationship with anything except "rationalized" evidence and 2) Failing to show that even if the relationship exists, how important it is for "happiness"
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:44 AM
5

How about a knife? Does she become a slave chopping your veggies or a man?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:27 AM
6

You're saying being unnnatractive can't be a source of unhappiness? So it is unattractive (in a holistic sense) or sexually unattractive? Not the same. It COULD be a source of it, like a Boeing 747 COULD fall on someone's head tomorrow. Not saying much of anything, is it? I think there's far more sources of unhappiness and happiness than sexual attraction, if that's still your "source" and not "holistic" attractiveness. Having access to attractive mates is the same as being with unnatractive mat…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 05:22 AM
5

Go ahead and try to show a causal relationship between happiness/depression and sexual attractiveness. Non-anecdotal.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:48 AM
4

I went from fit to fat (BMI about 27) to fit again between age 21 and 30 (got fat till 25, then got in shape again). I met my wife just before my 21st birthday... 4 years later at near my fattest... she still accepted my proposal. Can't really say my 27-BMI body did anything with regards to sex frequency. She always did compliment me on my body back in college, though, now that I think about it. With regards to other women... it could be pure coincidence (crap sample size of "observations") but …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:42 AM
6

Comparing the average woman's life to the average man's life is like comparing a depressed rich westener to a hungry poor african. You could say the westener has no reason to be unhappy but he still does, it's because happiness standards are subjective. Yes, it's like making a deliberately biased comparison TWICE! Both the rich westerner and the depressed male who has no sexual attraction are exceptions. Lots of sexually unattractive people live without depression - probably the vast majority. H…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:24 AM
5

You're correct, but this has been pointed out here repeatedly by other users in the past (to give credit to others, too). I had to see the desperation for myself and posed as a girl looking for something casual on Craigslist - without posting pics - and got this result. I knew there were desperate men around, but holy shit, this took my understanding of "desperate" to a whole new level.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 04:00 AM
2

Prostate massage?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/18 12:33 AM
3

Unless there's some alpha male "bible" out there which defines the term "alpha male", there is no remotely objective answer to your question past personal opinions (often contradicting alternatives) regarding definitions of the term.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 08:59 PM
1

lmao YOURE the one who made the claim that no one outside of the pillsphere talks or thinks about feminism. That's correct. They do not talk or think about it. Some people are benefiting from changes made ages ago related to a completely different "feminism." That's not "talking" or "thinking" about it. I had this conversation to figure out which "feminism" you were talking about. Any further clarifications?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 06:34 PM
1

Feminism of 100+ years ago has nothing to do with this thread and I am not interesting in discussing it (the only reason I asked for you to define it was for me to figure out which "feminism" you were talking about).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 06:19 PM
1

So let's summarize this, now that we have something to go off of... You've done a mind blowing job of making a few correct generalizations. Bravo. Turn around, I'm going to pat you on the back. You deserve it. All of which miss the entire point of the thread... Talking about false equivalences... you claim that: A) Some version of feminism from the past led to changes in laws or social norms relating to what kind of decisions women could make in terms of politics, sexuality and health. is someho…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 06:06 PM
1

That's just gravy on top of #2. Muscularity is attractive, of course, but not much more beyond a generally "strong" masculine appearance/build (the aforementioned "V" or "mesomorphic" body shape) which is driven by your genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 05:51 PM
1

OK - but where is the evidence that some large-scale ideological movement (this requires active involvement of people to push a cause) drove these changes and not a combination of technological change and religion falling out of favor (for abortion) and other very gradual trends independent of "active feminism" which have made society more sexual as a whole? (Unless you're saying feminism caused religion to fall out of favor as well as caused technology to improve, which would be preposterous, o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 04:38 PM
1

No, again that is a false equivalence. UV rays are not an ideology, nor a political movement. Please drop the logical fallacy. We can't debate illogically. It's not about the equivalence. It's about noticing the impact of something and tracing it back to a source (catalyst). Changes in womens' behavior over time ... are they noticeable... what is the source/catalyst for change? You can keep being right about the wrong point. No problems there. Any decision by a woman with regards to political an…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 04:23 PM
1

That's a false equivalence. UV rays are not an ideology nor a political movement. Don't devolve into logical fallacies now. Say logical. The only thing that's odd here is that you can't seem to understand "practice" vs. "theory." A tan = a noticeable (practical) influence. Do you believe the female vote, sex before marriage, and abortion are all acts and decisions that are UNinfluenced by feminism? Yup. One relates to basic human equality. One relates to personal sexual choice. One relates to li…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 03:52 PM
3

I'm not going to try and defend your own half-baked argument, are you kidding me?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 02:26 PM
1

You don't have to go to pro-women rallies for your decisions to be influenced by feminism. Of course you do, if you want to see that influence on a practical level. I'm influenced by UV rays every day. I don't get tanned from a 5 minute exposure. Oh... analogies!
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 02:13 PM
6

No. STR : Selected against nurturing, for jawline LTR : Selected against jawline, for nurturing. Pretty much everything you need to know. The Jaw returns with a vengeance! Me: will certainly fail to link these studies in their original form in this thread Hey folks.. didn't I say something about zero sources cited? Like clockwork. Someone's hiding something...
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 02:12 PM
6

I'll list what I know on the topic and let you connect the dots. In terms of looks... 1) Women prefer moderate masculine faces https://i.imgur.com/PQNTj03.jpg 2) Women prefer specific ratios of masculine shaped ( "V" ) bodies and other "male" traits 3) When rating photographs of men, higher ratings were correlated with men being more sensitive ; the correlation with masculine appearance was less if not close to 0 4) Surveys and various studies will show women have a preference for well groomed/s…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 02:10 PM
1

Try to keep the focus on feminism, bud. Most women probably don't recall the last time they heard that word in real life. Their decisions are driven by human nature and basic self interest as allowed by the law (no different than your analogies). Not some "ideology" that anyone barely remembers (unlike the ones you mentioned). Remember: keep it practical. Nothing more, nothing less. Most women are nothing like the women at feminism rallies or niche internet forums.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 01:46 PM
8

Studies are clear. You've probably never read a single study in its original form on the topic, will certainly fail to link these studies in their original form in this thread, and don't present their findings in an accurate manner. Women choose masculine men for short term mates and controllable mates with nurturing disposition for long term mates. Those studies, unless shown otherwise, suggest that women choose more masculine men for ST partners relative to their LT partners; similarly, they c…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 01:43 PM
1

The strength of influence is of critical importance and thinking about said ideology will impact strength. Nothing more to it. Try to be practical, not all theorist and logical.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 01:14 PM
1

I like how you can't even define the influence you're mentioning (what I'm asking for, which is clarification, not a red herring at all). You're literally avoiding debate because your position is baseless. Classic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 12:15 PM
10

Red Pill = <0.1% of population who read some blogs by middle aged bozos ranting about women or the dating market and needed the obvious spelled out for them (and also think that relatively obvious things are in fact "special" information and they are now the "enlightened" ones) Blue Pill = >99.9% of the population which includes plenty of people who didn't need the obvious spelled out for them nor do they think that the dating market needs armchair analysis from middle aged bozos Hmm. I wonder w…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 06:14 AM
5

Why would a little below average be indicative of risk-averse personalities rather than just "normal" sexuality and an absence of personality traits which cause partner counts to rack up? They are actually normal people sexuality wise, contrary to most posters on here.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 04:36 AM
2

Before we can see if women's decisions are driven by feminism (or was it radical feminism? is that even the same thing?) you'll have to define what feminism is and what decisions are in question.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 03:48 AM
1

Last I checked that SO meeting number was 20% or so. Still irrelevant, as ratings, online or offline do not (simply cannot) reflect who dates who because the most attractive people pair off with the most attractive, less attractive with less attractive, and so on. Ratings are irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 12:44 AM
1

That's attraction ratings, not LTR pairings. Also, it's OKC, which may not represent the "offline" world accurately.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/18 12:06 AM
1

What evidence? Elaborate in detail and provide said evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/18 09:53 PM
5

For the umpteenth time: no one outside the "pillsphere" talks or thinks about feminism. Even the now dying #metoo crap on mainstream media didn't refer to feminism a great deal. It hasn't done shit for people do live off the internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/18 09:07 PM
1

What you are suggesting is more or less how attraction for LTRs works anyway. Bottom 1/3 with the bottom 1/3, mid 1/3 with the mid 1/3, and top 1/3 with the top 1/3. Of course, there will be some people who get lucky and end up with someone who most people will think is a large mismatch in looks or overall attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/18 05:31 PM
4

With this title I came here expecting giggles. Left with :''''( 0/10 PPD try harder.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/18 05:10 PM
2

Is that your alt (the regretful "good" girl lost and looking for company)? Fess up.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/18 03:50 PM
12

When they constantly deal with drunk or otherwise inebriated women who later regret their intoxicated behavior... what do you expect?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:51 PM
5

I asked her once, actually, and she answered indirectly. I commented about it several times. Not the same. No I won't be taking this to modmail.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:47 PM
1

Err.. say some more?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:27 PM
2

I want to keep arguing with you. It's a "debate" forum, after all. Why not post your bodyfat %, android/gynoid and waist/hip ratios while you're at it? What you're doing makes no sense whatsoever. At least you're not this cow and want to be "thrown around." This was fun though.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:27 PM
0

That's exactly right. PPD is lunchtime entertainment for me, mostly. Any further questions?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:23 PM
0

Are you telling me you're making this puzzle because some of the local creepazoids might find your weight in your posting history (and later somehow mock your for being normal weight?), but be too stupid to translate BMI into weight given that you posted your height?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:18 PM
-1

What kind of ridiculous insecurities prevent someone from posting their weight on the Internet under completely anonymity? JFC... PPD keeps on delivering.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:13 PM
1

I like how the most important piece of information was omitted. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:07 PM
2

why does the tendency to devote your life to crafting your body in a gym and the diet involved indicate anything about your character? Post some pics of the guy you are picturing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:05 PM
3

Man's gotta be able to toss me into bed. That's as much on you weighing less than a 1-plate per side loaded barbell as it is on the guy...
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 06:04 PM
3

Now we found the real problem - no ability to manage available time that involves interests of multiple individuals.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 05:57 PM
2

You're basing this entire argument over a 30 minute meal (against which nothing is getting in the way anyhow, frankly) while also giving yourself carte blanche to 2 hours of "own activities." This makes no sense whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 05:39 PM
4

Eh... laughing at things stupid people do, I guess? Possibly stroke their egos a bit in the process, too (by patting themselves on the back that they avoided those women).
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 04:39 PM
3

Yes, they are idiots.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 04:07 PM
26

Q4All: Why do you think "Career Women" are mocked? I'm pretty sure that the "career woman" that's mocked around the Manosphere is basically a near-comical caricature of actual career women. In the Manosphere, she's basically some middle management or high administrative (in practice) clown who thinks she's hot shit because she can afford to pay rent and decides to write about it on her blog / social media pages about how she can indeed do those (basic) things. Of course, anyone who is like that …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 03:50 PM
2

What about revenge-mockery?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/18 03:46 PM
1

ok, this is just something that you're pulling out of your ass. Nope. I can just look at the 50+ people from my high school as a large sample to see that. in fact, the whole study is prefaced on the basic understanding that people's personalities do change. Where'd you get that idea? Quote the study. you're the only person who keeps trying to bring in "just world" type arguments and value judgements about "good morals" and all that shit. Do you know how the "just world" actually works in practic…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/18 06:22 PM
1

Yes, and I'd imagine people try to follow their preferences. And if they can't get them, sometimes they just wait till they can get their first choice. Mind blowing stuff, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/18 06:15 PM
1

Yes, I was thinking Iceland or Greenland or something "Northern white." That or Central Asian (like Uzbekistan) and white mix.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/18 06:14 PM
3

Interestingly enough, the sexual partner count MODE for both genders in the US = 1. Just some food for thought for those people who remember what a "mode" is.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/18 06:09 PM
1

Lol no they’re not. Yes, they are. And you don't speak for all of them and you certainly have never met most of them - yet here's their choice: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3613286/ In a study of 681 emerging adults, 63% of college-aged men and 83% of college-aged women preferred, at their current stage of life or development, a traditional romantic relationship as opposed to an uncommitted sexual relationship If you can do the some "difficult" math here, that leave right about 1…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 07:01 PM
1

How the fuck do you think i can afford tren, cyp, clen, HCG, hgh, and pct? By spending what little money you have on it, perhaps? Who knows. All girls sleep with hot guys unless they’re conservative, then they’ll only do it in a relationship. Not just stupid hos all the hos. By this definition, 70-80% of girls are conservative. Surveys into sociosexuality confirm that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:51 PM
1

Hmm... Central Asian, perhaps? I didn't think of that. Like Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan. That's getting mixed with White, for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:50 PM
1

Based on what I see on wiki, "hapa" could refer to Islanders / Hawaiian people, who look very different from your Big 3 Asians (Korea/Japan/China) and Southeast Asians. I can see Islander/Hawaii, but not SE Asia. I mean my family lives in Singapore... I've seen countless SE Asians. Not sure what else to tell you. I have no opinion on her hair. Looks too light for Asian (Asian girls are dark dark dark usually), but comparable texture.. maybe.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:43 PM
1

Your looks matter far more for casual sex than for LTRs. A great looking guy with little else going for him will fail hard in LTRs. He won't even get to sleep with the girls unless they are dumb hos desperate to lock a guy down, but those are by default irrelevant to a guy seeking quality wife material. All of that is somewhat tangential to our previous comments, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:39 PM
1

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/4d2f1739cadcbbc0420c0000-480-497.jpg Her, right? She's definitely got a "unique" look for a white girl, but I can't put my finger on a title/ethnicity/nationality. If by Asian you mean Oriental.. I don't see it at all. Pacific Islander? Maybe. That would be more like it, but that's not "Asian" or "Oriental."
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:36 PM
4

Have. You. Ever. Seen. An. Asian. Before? I mean seriously, this comment: the asian looking girl Hilarious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:20 PM
4

Because Atlas's attraction-dar was never properly calibrated, or, on a more serious note, no single human being could ever possess an accurate one even if they had read all heterosexual facial attractiveness research and also memorized it. Way too many variables to judge at the same time for the human brain (ratios, angles, etc.) - especially in an objective or accurate manner.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:18 PM
2

Have you ever seen an Asian before?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:17 PM
3

Damn, if that's the spectrum of jawsomeness, I'm a Supreme Jawchad. Excuse me while I pat myself on the back for an hour or so.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:43 PM
1

Fair enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:43 PM
2

Well, partly. I wouldn't be against reading some original research into how and why it was determined that certain jaw shapes are attractive. Low-level or meta-analytical.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:35 PM
5

You have a very particular type. Don't make the mistake of thinking you speak for other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:32 PM
5

The jaw, man, the JAW. Tell us about the Jaw. As powerful blackpiller, you must know all about the JAW and its powers. And of course about Jawsus... or are you a jawcel?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:31 PM
3

What about the Law of the JAWWW?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:13 PM
1

Post pics of attractive women for us.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:10 PM
1

There’s no reaping what you sow in the dating game in fact the inverse is mostly true. If everyone around you is an asshat - it's time to take a look at yourself. You really do reap what you sow. The real question is... can one dig oneself out from the cesspool? basically any girl over 10 dudes is never going to be wife material Well sure, sluts aren't wife material, but if you can pick them out from a crowd and get yourself off, great.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 04:05 PM
1

You can keep thinking that people "can change" in theory, but reality shows otherwise. And the above study that I linked shows just that: people's values and personalities do NOT change, in practice. Quote: We have found a large domain in which partners show very little change— personality traits, attitudes, values, prejudices, and a selection of socially-relevant activities and behaviors. Niche construction allows for stability of identity, value systems, and ideological network. This is essent…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 03:43 PM
1

"Just world" has nothing to do with this - there isn't some nebulous power that's going to screw you over. The people who you shit on will just shit on you. That's how it works. Evidently you just don't get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 03:28 PM
2

What evidence is there that the average sized male can bench 225 even after working out for 3-5 years? (This is of course ignoring the fact that you can look great without benching that much and some dudes who do bench that much just look like blobs).
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 02:09 PM
1

I am unbothered by feminism. I never even thought about it in almost 30 years of my life until I discovered PPD, which I discovered only because I knew of the existence of PUA (and by extension MGTOW and RP).
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 05:02 AM
2

you're focusing on external behaviors and habits and routines. people (and all animals) tend to follow the same behavioral patterns over and over because that is most efficient. but when a new external stimulus comes along, people will start following a new pattern. someone can go to work at an accounting office and do accounting work every day for years and years. but that's not because there is something fundamental about him that makes him an accountant, there just hasn't been anything to thr…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 02:44 AM
1

You reap what you sow, because likes attract likes.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/18 02:22 AM
1

"Slut shaming" is just an expression of one's values vs. those of other people or expression of anger/frustration Women who don't give it up easily will "slut shame" other women because they find those women give away their sexuality too easily, when they themselves are more restrained and/or selective. Men will slut shame because the part of them that wants strong commitment will be repulsed by women who jump on lots of dicks (the opposite of evidence of wanting commitment). Another group will …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 05:32 PM
3

Only men. What about women (long-term comparison of non-LTR women with LTR women (marriage OR simply a normal/monogamous relationship) ?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 05:09 PM
4

Loads of facts, but I can't find one: Where's the long-term comparison of non-LTR people with LTR people (marriage OR simply a normal/monogamous relationship - these are in practice the same thing)? That's the real comparison that needs to be made.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:56 PM
5

statistics show that marrying a carefully selected woman and having children is just about the best thing a man can do for his own personal well-being and happiness. The same cannot be said for women. Marriage and children have either a neutral or negative impact on women's overall happiness and health. Link to original source?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:09 PM
1

It's a nice fantasy, that's for sure. Here's what I told another poster: Most lazy people remain fairly lazy. People who suck in school usually continue to suck in life ; very few exceptions here. People who get good grades and have decent social skills get into great universities and prosper. People who suck at certain things continue to suck at them (e.g. certain sports, for example). Liars remain liars. Grown ups can repress some of their negative traits better than teenagers, but those come …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 03:06 PM
1

Yeah, you had the baseline mental capability to learn a skill. Most lazy people remain fairly lazy. People who suck in school usually continue to suck in life ; very few exceptions here. People who get good grades and have decent social skills get into great universities and prosper. People who suck at certain things continue to suck at them (e.g. certain sports, for example). Liars remain liars. And so on.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 03:05 PM
1

I don't find it realistic to believe there is a significant number of women who will put themselves through situations that are entirely unenjoyable It's like you've created a problem that you think women have that you yourself don't believe exists and have no evidence for. What the hell is wrong with you? So are many women enjoying these situations ... or are they not... because well... those situations are not enjoyable?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 05:32 AM
1

Ah damn, I triggered some people here really hard. Good. I'm going to rub more salt on the wound, because it will feel great to me in this instance. he is just as autistic as some of the TRPers and not particularly self-actualized. Oh wow! Autistic! The ultimate insult when.. you have no clue how to respond. Perfect. You find this a lot with reddit posters.....the complete lack of ability to look outside their bubble to realize that not everyone is exactly LIKE them...I mean read his comments...…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 05:24 AM
1

I don't agree that she's enjoying much of anything, except the man himself. You just want me to help you feel better about what are likely some really shitty things that you do. Rest assured, women are NOT enjoying shitty relationships where they are strung along. Better?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:48 AM
1

One BIG shitty thing (like lacking commitment) in a relationship can ruin the whole thing (at that point the man and the relationship are separate things, in fact), in case you can't figure that out. Just helping you out here!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:44 AM
1

Worked for me, and for a bunch of other men. Even if it doesn't help everyone, it certainly helps more than mainstream advice, and DEFINITELY more than female advice You do realize that there isn't even a consensus on what constitutes mainstream dating advice? Surprise for you! Ready? If you think it's "be nice and by her flowers" - you're just projecting your own previous failures on everyone else. It's you, not mainstream advice or common sense. Except 80%+ of all marriages fail. Failure as in…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:42 AM
1

If you don't understand that a woman can like a man's "baseline" characteristics (let's say.. his looks and his good paycheck) yet be completely unsatisfied (therefore "not enjoy") when she doesn't have verbal agreement to "exclusive" rights to those "baseline traits" (he can cut and run anytime)... I don't think you can be helped.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:13 AM
1

Then what exactly is it that's attractive to women? A lot more that confidence, that's for sure. What do you think "Be yourself" means? It's an implicit call to confidence. A lot of it is just attitude. Then you just need body language to reflect attitude. Give me a break. You can be confident and physically unattractive. You can be confident and have no empathy or other ability to connect with another human being. You can be confidently boring or clueless. And so on. Plenty of other deal-breake…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 04:11 AM
1

Evidently not, in terms of %, which is what I was getting at. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/upshot/new-york-still-has-more-gay-residents-than-anywhere-else-in-us.html Boston is actually almost 5% gay while NYC is 4% on the dot gay. In absolute terms, NYC is #1 indeed. Too bad this doesn't break down by age, which is what I wanted. I'll have to look around sometime.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/18 03:22 AM
1

But can you keep them? Doubtful. You know this place might as well be called "Complaint Central," right? Do you see me complaining? So should those people listen and take seriously the advice, opinions and thoughts of someone who openly states that they are a shit and asshat about a group of people who are at least attempting to help other people even if not always in the optimal way? I don't care what they do. I tried helping them (as I told the other guy) - my advice was met with all kinds of …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:19 PM
1

It's not a matter of English, fam. It's logic: strong claims require strong evidence. A claim along the lines of, "women, in general, do not like any part of one sided relationships where they pursue men who refuse to reciprocate commitment," is stronger than saying, "there are some women who dislike some aspects of such relationships". The first claim, being stronger in its conviction, requires stronger evidence. OK so, on the contrary, where is the evidence that many women get into one-sided r…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:14 PM
1

This was a horrible post and certainly does not paint you in a good light at all. I really only care about how a very select few people perceive me, to be blunt. As one example..you were too busy with your wife to help.....but not too busy to film the guy then laugh about it with your friends and post it to the internet thinking that other people would laugh with you..... Laugh about it with my friends? Other than my wife seeing that ordeal (she actually didn't even pay attention to the dude, if…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:07 PM
1

But it does seem to working and helps them find the women that will give them what they want. Tons of women hate and demean players\ and fuckbois but guess what....you CANNOT be a player or a fuckboi unless you are fucking tons of women so who cares what some dolts on the internet and in the math club call you. And sorry women have to admit that hearing that a guy is a player\fuckboi makes the guy more interesting\attractive because it is normal to begin to wonder what all those women see in tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:02 PM
1

Interesting - I do believe that a city like NYC would attract a lot of them. I'd love to see a sexual preference breakdown for NYC by age group. I wonder if Boston (where I work/live) is in a similar boat...
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:57 PM
1

Oh, I misunderstood that part. Still, the men who naturally get casual sex are usually highly extroverted and hot. So they will likely give advice that works for them, but not necessarily for you, like "be yourself". I don't see at all how such advice is more effective than TRP Well, on the flip-side, how is TRP advice supposed to work on all men with problems? These men can't even remotely all be the same. Mating is conflict of interests between the man (who wants to have sex) and the female id…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:56 PM
1

maybe the reason that so many Manospherians act like complete asshats is because the only people who seem to be on their side and trying to help are other asshat RP shitlords. while all the non-asshats like yourself are busy making fun of these guys or trying to socially shame them. Once upon a time... I had a neutral opinion of Manospherians. Then I started talking to them online after reading "The Game" back in summer 2008. Even met a few in real life. I discovered I was doing far better than …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:51 PM
1

Its really not. You're clearly failing to understand a basic term. Says the guy who brings up "passive" vs. "active" and then quotes something which mentions neither. Brilliant. Keep it up. Nothing like stroking yourself over pointless semantics. Describe what constitutes "business acumen" Go to a reputable business school and find out. Lots of those around... unlike... Where's seduction school? YouTube University? Blog College? Want to make me laugh a little bit and define "seduction" aka "game…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:43 PM
1

It's funny how you think that an increase in confidence will make him attractive and therefore he'll get laid. Priceless.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 06:06 AM
1

I'm assuming you're not being sarcastic... NYC is only higher in F/M ratio for the overall population. At the prime dating age (18-30) let's say ... it's actually slightly more male-heavy. So I'm surprised that is the case. Thoughts as to why that is?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:56 AM
1

And you do? I'm not claiming to, but your claims are too strong to be persuasive. Shouldn't strong claims be more persuasive than weak ones? English a second language, for you? First, a relationship happens over weeks, months, and even years. To say the entire relationship is unenjoyable comes across way too absolutist, particularly because relationships are also multifaceted. Assuming the girl wants commitment at some point she's going to need to have a verbal confirmation of this from the guy.…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:37 AM
1

You think you know what the majority of women are thinking? Get real.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:18 AM
1

They are TRYING to get results are the expense of women often completely losing out (not getting what they want), even though there is no for them to. They will get shit on for that, obviously, by people online and in real life. If both parties don't give the other what they are looking for - there are going to be all kinds of problems. Nobody owes anyone anything. That much is clear. If they were any smarter about what they did, they would find people who were interested in actually giving them…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 05:14 AM
1

The vast majority don't do that (because .. oh shit, it's not enjoyable and just a gamble!), so feel free to give them all that due credit they are missing from you! All of it - don't be stingy!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:51 AM
1

What do you not understand about this (my explanation): enjoy it vs. merely tolerate it in vain hope that the guy commits? They are tolerating the situation, not enjoying it, because they are hoping that the guy will commit to them. They "enjoy" or put up with the guy, yes, but they do NOT necessarily enjoy the situation that the guy is putting them in.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:44 AM
1

Well, you can always speak for yourself, that's for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:39 AM
3

a man’s SMV only increases until he’s like 40-45. Higher age = higher BMI (fatter people) = more sexually attractive (higher SMV)? Oh shit, no! Fatter =/= more sexy.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:36 AM
0

I'm not a creep. I'm at least a supreme creep. Or you can call me a Martian. Whatever you like. I'll pretend to care.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:33 AM
0

Where did you get the idea that they enjoy it vs. merely tolerate it in vain hope that the guy commits? That's called "shooting out of your own league and hoping for the best."
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:30 AM
3

Riveting. Wow.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:27 AM
1

1) I personally put assertiveness (non-aggressive confidence and courage) under character, so by that token you are wrong, as those character traits are "sexually" attractive. I didn't elaborate there, so I won't hold it against you. HOWEVER: 2) That isn't a summary of SMV (never claimed it to be just for sexual attractiveness), it's RMV (far more holistic). SMV is just a subset of RMV traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:26 AM
2

Which is exactly how I found out about TRP. An ENTP friend of mine who is really good with women despite being average-looking introduced me to PUA, and through PUA I discovered TRP What the hell? Do you even realize that's the exact opposite of what I'm suggesting? I said "men who get casual sex without having to resort to PUA and TRP for advice." In other words, asking fish how to catch fish. Mating is war, you don't ask the enemy how to defeat them. (Women are not necessarily the enemy, but t…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:24 AM
1

I'm guessing his body language was off, he's probably not as physically attractive as me, and he couldn't make a conversation flow after his first line. You get better at all of that with experience. The girls were having a fairly involved conversation and the guy butted in with a totally random question right after walking up to them. There is NO way that was a good start of any kind of conversation (and frankly, beginning a conversation with those girls, given their level of involvement in the…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:21 AM
2

Thanks for the sob story. :'''''(
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:19 AM
1

Yeah i think you're just way too fatalistic bud. How else am I supposed to react after I've spent some time perusing PUA forums? I've come to my conclusions. Most of those guys are beyond help, and they don't even know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:09 AM
1

so why didn't you help him out? i mean, since you're such an expert on social interactions and attracting women and all that. instead of taking some sneaky pics of the guy getting rejected and then posting them on the internet so you can make fun of the guy and laugh at him behind his back, why not give him some helpful advice so he won't keep making the same mistake in the future? Let's see... because: 1) I was with my wife enjoying some beer 2) Most Manospherians are complete asshats in my exp…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 04:05 AM
1

Yes. No. In order to be confident one has to be comfortable with failure. One can only do that by failing. It's the great crime with how the millenials and homelanders now too have been raised. And then we wonder why people need safe spaces. There's actual research out there that suggests that acclimation to new experiences is less effective in a crash-and-burn format like that. After he does that a few dozen more times, he'll realize that rejection is no big deal and move on. Move on to more fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 03:57 AM
1

Those definitions have nothing to do with passive or active anything, which was your way of defining them. Those dictionary definitions have leeway to be both passive and active in practice. Nice flop. Any more pointless semantics? We're using slightly different words to describe the same thing. Hey listen, why don't you say some more about "seduction" and elaborate on this - what constitutes "seduction?"
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/18 03:51 AM
2

“Attract” and “seduce” are not the same. Attracting can be passive, seducing is active. Lots of people tell them how. It’s just not frequently referred to as ‘game’ every second. Learning game is not ‘becoming attractive’. It’s seduction. I'm not interested in discussing your definitions / semantics. They are certainly not universally agreed upon, especially outside of the Manosphere. I agree that there are passive/active ways to attract/seduce, however (and again, these words are interchangeabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 10:42 PM
1

He can't be helped? Why? Do you know him other than this one off interaction? So for the next 40-60 years until he dies, because he asked this one question to two women he is doomed to never learn social interactions ever? Guess what dude, some things AREN'T obvious to people and they LEARN. That's why they're social skills. Some people learn em late, or never at all, some people early. Maybe he learns, maybe he doesn't. Either way, a guy going up to two Women in a Bar and just saying something …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 10:36 PM
3

Right. You've gone with the de-facto (most common) definition of it: "the ability to attract women" except subbed the terms "seduce" and "attract." When lost Manospherians are told to "learn game" (become more attractive) no one really tells them HOW to do it, specifically, with few exceptions. For example, even some of the more common advice, such as "get fit / lift" is usually never specific enough to help them get results quickly.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 10:31 PM
2

building up that thick skin. Was he? Or just building up more anxiety about women?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 10:29 PM
1

So you agree there is a 'game' out there, Definitely. I just call it "universally attractive anything" where "universal attractive" = what is attractive to the largest group of people of the opposite gender (if you're hetero).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 09:16 PM
2

You usually suck balls at something first before you get better. What's next is he keeps talking to strangers and finding out what works. What you open with doesn't necessarily matter. You could walk up to someone saying "Ever wondering what the meaning of life is?", if they wanna talk they'll walk, what's the big deal. Lol you're acting like this guy is gonna kill himself now for failing ONCE. Life isn't that serious. Props to him for having the balls, many guys don't and just complain on the i…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 09:14 PM
3

That could be a definition of game (except others would keep on making up different ones for their own reasons, unfortunately.) In practice/reality: 1) Whether PUA/TRP has correctly identified those universally attractive traits AND figured out how to TEACH them reliably and consistently is unproven (in fact, much of their crap is arguably counter-productive!) 2) Whether teachable traits are enough to turn men around (or to what % of men the teachable stuff is enough) A side note, but an importa…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 09:07 PM
3

He learned something. He's going to learn that he's clueless and PUA is garbage. What's next for him?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:57 PM
3

If courting = dating for monogamous LTRs, it is simply possessing as many universally attractive traits as possible (there is a relatively large amount of research out on the topic of inter-gender attraction, and that's where you learn which traits are attractive). Attractive traits come from: looks, "smarts", personality/character and "values" (in the most high level way of listing them). Some of the traits under those 4 categories can be changed / taught, but some most likely cannot (especiall…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:53 PM
5

And Red Pill / PUA terms win first prize on that EVERY time.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:44 PM
3

I agree, sitting at home is the worst option. Not the point, though. I think the argument is that a targeted approach is better than the million shot approach.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:43 PM
0

What you're saying doesn't rule out: 1) Either being able to ask non PUA / non TRP men about how they get casual sex or, even more pertinently to your point 2) the limitations of PUA / TRP people knowing what works You're only partly rejecting my idea at best (since, again, you can ask men about what works for them, free of TRP and PUA) or at worst arguing with a double edged sword (Manospherian men themselves don't know exactly what works and what doesn't).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:43 PM
6

Go ahead and link them to me. I can't wait. Of course, that's never going to happen, as none of that shit is anything more than fiction at best very vaguely based on any kind of books. PS: I saved the links for all of that drivel that I just alluded to: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/7f79dd/the_contrast_effect_how_bobs_and_vagena_indians/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/7evnbv/help_me_analyze_a_long_night_out_and_the_ways_i/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:34 PM
5

People think something works. Brilliant.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:31 PM
3

Yes, it is. I have seen it defined in these ways: 1) Getting women to sleep with you using manipulation/influence as taught by 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene 2) "Attraction maxing" (improving looks or anything else that is changeable) 3) Something based on psychology (vague!) 4) Being aware of how cause/effect works in the real world (even more vague) 5) Charisma (vague) 6) De-facto simply meaning "to attract women" (in any way possible) Many are mutually exclusive and rather vague, at best. …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:27 PM
11

Game is a meaningless buzzword. Every dolt on here had their own definition of it. You can't argue that something which is effectively undefined "works."
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:20 PM
4

Straight away, he is advocating mass approaching of seemingly thousands of women. I can't believe that people can actually do this. Having skimmed Models out of sheer curiosity, it was actually a good distillation of classic dating advice. I got the opposite impression: he said you need to know what you want in women and where to find those women (a target demographic of sorts). This will involve meeting numerous women, yes, regardless if you are looking for an LTR or casual sex, but not blind "…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 08:06 PM
2

1) In my experience the advice being told to me by Men like these sort of fits in line with what I've read on TRP. YMMV Can't generalize accurately here for or against. No way to know. I just know these men exist and you can try to befriend them and ask. 2) You can do that, but directly asking people things isn't that great. It's like a Car salesman asking customers how to sell cars, instead of other car salesman. People buying cars never learned how to sell cars. It's a skill. If you asked peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 07:06 PM
1

You tell me. It seems to be whatever someone wants it to be, as long as it fits their agenda. The broadest marketing slogan which I have seen is that RP/TRP is a "toolkit for men." "O-K."
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 07:01 PM
2

Hate to break it to you, but most people still meet their SO IRL (75-80%). And even more so for literally encountering people of the opposite gender. Goes double for people still in school. A decent amount of people meet their SO (or people in general) in work-related circles. Good luck sweeping this shit you spin under the carpet there. If you're doing nothing but attempting Tinder-rando-banging, you have a point.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:53 PM
2

What will likely happen instead is that you throw yourself under the bus lol Can't disagree with this - it's a frequent outcome based on what people here post. People can't really throw you under the bus if you hold all the power. Depends. Here's a common example of where both parties have "throw under the bus" power: that girl you strung along, willingly or unwillingly, could tell other women in your social circle that you're a shitty person/boyfriend/whatever for X, Y and Z reasons. Reputation…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:47 PM
0

Not surprisingly, you don't get it at all. Why are you bringing dating into this when the topic it at hand is the holy grail of every PUA and TRP: casual sex. If you want casual sex, why not: 1) Ask men who get casual sex without having to resort to PUA and TRP for advice 2) Maybe even ask women who are into casual sex what they want (the Internet would be a GREAT place for that, so long as those women aren't men trolling forums) 3) Figure out how do identify which women want casual sex and purs…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:45 PM
2

No problems with that, just don't expect for your life to be nice and peachy when you hurt and piss people off and then they throw you under the bus in return. And don't expect anyone to feel sorry for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:39 PM
2

You can have whatever moralizing opinion you want lol I won't attempt to change it Mhmm.. I know. Probably, but that doesn't mean they are going to do that. Again, what people should do is different than what they actually do. Stop being idealistic. Nah, I'm going to do the following: continue being idealistic and watching as being more idealistic brings good results and then watching people who fail to do so drown in their own shit. I think this more accurately describes PUA than TRP. Bullshit.…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:26 PM
3

You call it the teenager approach. I call it how most men and women today date. Yup - and for now, many of those men are congregating in the Manosphere. That's just not how dating works. It is likely that people haven't made their mind up on dating someone seriously until weeks or months after they first meet. So what? If those people in particular haven't made up their mind yet, maybe they should keep their legs closed? You can't be used for sex (strung along, willingly) if you're not opening y…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:14 PM
7

No. The fact that women are repulsed by a philosophy encouraging men stringing them along says nothing about the efficacy of such philosophy. AH ok, so you're just stating that men follow this philosophy because it gives them results, regardless of impact on women. Basically, they don't know or can't do any better. OK. In these situations men act ambivalent of their relationship goals. They are acting like everyone in the dating market acts. Casually dating someone who might work as a long term …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 06:03 PM
4

Yes, women are repulsed by a philosophy that encourages men to string them along.... Right, so men should probably look for a new way to get what they want which actually yields better results. Women would still be against a philosophy that encourages men to string them along, willingly or unwillingly. What is an example of unwillingly stringing them along anyway? Nobody "willingly" gets strung along. That's a weird way to phrase it. It's implying a woman willingly being pumped-and-dumped and em…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 05:35 PM
5

But what women say they don't like vs what they actually do are two completely different things. You said that ^ as if it makes "The Red Pill" good advice for men to follow, when in fact most women are repulsed by what those men want and do. That makes it bad advice, as you get a win-lose situation instead of the desired win-win situation. I don't think you can so easily separate those two things. I can't speak for all women, but my experiences with many of the women I know tell me that they are…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 05:15 PM
6

Lots of women just don't like the language of it, and fair enough. But what women say they don't like vs what they actually do are two completely different things. Women say they don't want to be strung along and used for sex, but what actually happens in their life may be completely different. Let me get this straight... women actually LIKE/ENJOY being strung along for sex? (What "happens" could be completely unwanted and unintentional). Look, most women have been in a situation where they care…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 04:58 PM
2

You just noticed this place is used by regulars / long-timers to jerk each other off? I mean they even have a chat room.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 04:32 PM
1

Interesting, thanks. 1) Does the MBTI "extroversion" have a similar definition to the Big 5 one? 2) I personally prefer to be alone than in the company of people I don't really like, although I certainly like being in the company of people I actually have things in common with.. yet according to MBTI I'm 69/100 extroverted (0 being full introvert, 100 full extrovert).. I suppose that isn't contradictory, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 04:11 PM
1

Stick with Giga Anal on those ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 01:22 PM
1

I'll have to seek out a better explanation of extra/introversion. In my mind I'm stuck with the (no doubt wrong) colloquial "shy/timid" vs "social" person difference ... likely a gross oversimplification. What you just said does make sense, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/18 05:57 AM
1

Neuroticism seems not to matter at all. Interesting! Not at all intuitive. I agree, not intuitive at all. After thinking about it more, I think that high neuroticism, even though linked with low self-esteem, is unrelated to validation sex behavior. I wonder if "validation sex" is a separate thing from "promiscuity" altogether, because validation-seeking is definitely neurotic. I agree, I think they are different, but there has to be some overlap (quite significant, actually) right? (Especially c…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/18 10:34 PM
1

Most people should stay away from online dating with few exceptions (such as finding dates in a town you've recently moved to or have few friends in). To avoid flakes, stick with good old regular dating. Most people still meet like that, and with good reason (showed this earlier). Get to know women in more casual settings before if possible before going on a more traditional date, if possible. If they are cancelling on you.. they just don't like you enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/18 06:07 AM
1

Promiscuity for both genders was linked with low agreeableness, across all regions (p 310 from that link) Interestingly enough, neuroticism has been shown to be generally uncorrelated to promiscuity. Some studies showed a negative link, some a positive, but overall it seems to be a wash. https://www.bradley.edu/dotAsset/165862.pdf I'm basically trying to suss out a relationship between "validation sex" (due to a lack of self esteem) for both genders and Big 5 while also considering "impulsivity"…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/18 05:58 AM
1

I did read it, but I wasn't able to connect impulsivity to validation sex or neuroticism. Thrillseeking sex = only extraversion required is what you're getting at, I suppose?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/18 05:46 AM
1

So a combination of high neuroticism AND high extraversion = validation sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/18 05:11 PM
1

Interesting. Where are you getting that definition? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits Wiki:Neuroticism (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident). Tendency to be prone to psychological stress.[9] The tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, and vulnerability. Neuroticism also refers to the degree of emotional stability and impulse control and is sometimes referred to by its low pole, "emotional stability". High stability manifes…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/18 05:07 PM
1

https://www.bradley.edu/dotAsset/165862.pdf So it seems that neuroticism is not related directly to promiscuity. Its actually ~0 correlation. I'm trying to connect two things to promiscuity now: impulsivity (I think this is entirely its own category separate from the Big 5) ... that's the only way it makes sense. I don't think it's connected to high extraversion. I'm also trying to see if there's a relationship between promiscuity and low self esteem (promiscuity is correlated with low coscienti…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/18 05:05 PM
1

sleeping with people because you want to is not "impulsivity" I agree for the most part. Which big 5 trait do you think is most prevalent in women (or men) who engage in validation-seeking sex (that's largely to counter low self esteem, essentially)?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 11:23 PM
1

the impulsivity was the extraversion, then the worry and anxiety that followed was the neuroticism Not sure I follow that. I think that he's saying that impulsivity can come from either neuroticism OR extraversion. See this quote: Whereas extraverts tend to take exciting risks because they want to, neurotic people tend to do impulsive things to help reduce their anxiety but then soon regret their behavior. I'm trying to connect validation sex that some women pursue with a Big 5 trait. I thought …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 11:07 PM
1

Also just because you didnt have a problem with it doesnt mean the trend doesn't exist. Which i think you understand. Why do you keep responding to me if you dont give a shit? It's because two outcomes are possible: 1) I'll get a laugh out of it 2) In a more rare case I'll learn something new (factual) or engage in some kind conversation which is actually somewhat more intellectual to discuss some difficult topic I'm good with either one. Because i generally think social media ruined society (da…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 09:44 PM
1

I never denied you had some facts (Millennials and less sexual activity, for example). I'm on PPD mostly to laugh at the stupid shit Manospherian men say, FYI. Entertainment. It's fun to watch clueless people write fiction about something that I have no "problems" with and never did. I only know of the Manosphere because someone put a copy of "The Game" into my hands in 2008. It had no impact on my ability to attract women whatsoever (I was already doing fine), but I did find a new source of hum…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 07:33 PM
1

The Big Five Related to Risky Sexual Behaviour Across 10 World Regions: Differential Personality Associations of Sexual Promiscuity and Relationship Infidelity https://www.bradley.edu/dotAsset/165862.pdf Looks like I was wrong - there doesn't seem to be a strong link between Neuroticism and sexual promiscuity, although I think I'm confusing some traits of other Big 5 Facets (from Agreeableness and Conscientiousness) for those in Neuroticism. Some studies showed a link, but this large-scale meta …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 07:23 PM
1

I didn't really need to go that far - I just needed to see a link between neuroticism and impulsivity (and they indeed do seem to go hand in hand). The wiki summary suggested that more promiscuity = more impulsivity, but I also (think) I recalled seeing another source suggest that more promiscuity = more neuroticism. Given the above article, that seems likely. (More promiscuity = more neuroticism). You may be an exception, assuming you're self-diagnosing for neuroticism correctly.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 07:01 PM
1

How does sleeping with people when single predict infidelity I don't know who referenced infidelity, but partner counts (when single or not) were usually connected to higher risk of marital instability (separation and divorce) and more marital dissatisfaction reported (at least from the side of women), not infidelity.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 06:57 PM
1

I think I must be operating under a more colloquial/less scientific definition of "neurotic." Yup. http://www.subjectpool.com/ed_teach/y4person/2_facets/refs/Lynam_2001_impulsivity_as_NEO_facets.pdf Here's the thick of it if you're really feeling adventurous.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 06:32 PM
1

See this, I just replied to another poster: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/confessions-of-a-neurotic-extravert/ Neurotic people are also more vigilant to danger, and are generally more aware of potential threats and dangers. On the other hand, neuroticism is also associated with the imposter phenomenon, stress, anxiety, depression, and impaired physical health. In terms of impulsivity, neuroticism is associated with a sense of urgency, reflecting “the tendency to experience…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 06:27 PM
1

That number is skyrocketing according to almost every data source and psychologist who speaks on this issue fwiw. Also you still had a much smaller sample of men to choose from because of how the centralized internet (something that rose to prominence in 2007ish) works. Stop it, dude. I was around back then. Online dating has existed the 1990s and chat rooms full of horny people existed. Attractive people don't need to go through the extra step, no matter how easy, of setting up e-dating profile…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 06:18 PM
0

stay home, keep to themselves, avoid taking risks That's someone who is timid, shy or introverted. Neuroticism = lack of emotional stability. Lack of emotional stability = constant internal turmoil = nervous (constantly worried and sensitive to outside environment) = which leads to brash (impulsive) decisions that are not made with a clear state of mind. If you want to ignore me, I was looking for something more authoritative anyway: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/confessio…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 06:08 PM
1

If its negligible, then why do you say "I never said being taller wasn't a good thing.". If its negligible (with the exception of 5'4" and below, which is not just short for a man but absurdly short, you say 5'6" or 5'7" it doesnt matter but also how being taller wasn't a good thing. You shouldn't say its a good thing or a bad thing, its not relevant to men with the exception of 5'4" and below, which simply isnt the case. All else equal and in theory, taller = better. (90% of women prefer tall v…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 06:01 PM
1

high neuroticism is LESS impulsive Source? That makes no sense on the surface to me. Neuroticism = low emotional stability People who are neurotic are more unstable (sensitive/nervous), hence impulsive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:44 PM
2

Actually, I believe that very much. People don't change much - that's based on loads (examples) of anecdotal evidence. From teen years to adulthood: Fit people... generally stayed fit or got a little fat as they grew up. Fat people mostly stayed fat. School slackers went to shit schools and got shit or OK or got shit jobs without college education. They go nowhere in life. People who got good grades went to great colleges and work in great, competitive positions. Liars stay liars. Kind people st…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:33 PM
1

Not me, I'm a guy. I just wanted to see how desperate dudes were when I made that post and put myself in the shoes of women being hit on by various lecherous cockroaches.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:31 PM
-2

Oh I'm sure you're just perfect for one another. If you've tested low for neuroticism, that's an 'unexpected' result. The quote above refers to it (high neuroticism) as "more impulsive" (also known as "less stable" in some pieces of literature).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:30 PM
1

Statue of an erect penis in solid gold.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:27 PM
12

It's more like you're just loaded with this: "Certain personality traits are also more prevalent in highly promiscuous (socieosexually "unrestricted") individuals:.. they are: less agreeable,[8] lower on honesty-humility,[9] more impulsive,[11] more likely to have an avoidant attachment style,[12] less likely to have a secure attachment style,[13] and score higher on the Dark Triad traits (i.e. narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy).[14][15]" Contrast this with higher chances of associations…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:49 AM
3

Right. All gross and completely un-fuckable except by the trashiest of women. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5vw5zv/cmv_no_way_this_is_validating_to_women_fake/ Keep projecting your male sexuality onto women, though. It's quite entertaining.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:45 AM
6

Most people (men and women) want something more long term, even at college age (even more so after college age). It is therefore quite likely that a person you are considering dating is one of them. So either 1) They kept trying to "keep" the LTR and kept failing (the common denominator is the person that kept failing - there is something wrong with them) ... this is the most likely option especially as you get older past college age or 2) That person didn't want LTRs before, but what evidence i…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:39 AM
3

Triple figures is a "less than 1% achievement" for men and women. The CDC doesn't even have anything past a "50+" partner count option for their NSFG surveys because of that reason (even 50+ partners is a <1% "achievement"). I have no idea why you'd envy someone who's had a shitshow of a "love life" .. but you do you. Time to repost the good old "does partner count matter" comment I made ages ago: . . Why avoid women with high partner counts for LTRs/marriage (>7 or >10 which is ~double to ~trip…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:15 AM
1

The link you gave later says that men who are shorter says they also have lesser quality of partners (and also said fewer in general). They also don't say it only affects 5'4" and below, it said below average (which is 5'9" and below, 5'4" is well below average).Its more than just 5'4" is the only cuttoff point. 5'8" has the problem. I doubt 5'10" sees the problem much to the point that its worth even mentioning fwiw. And you are responding still, so you are "getting your panties in a bunch" as …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 05:03 AM
1

Height is a factor. Its a factor in how attractive you are. You agree. But then you say it changes no number in the amount of partners you have unless its below 5'4" (which is like 5% of men at most). You contradict yourself. Where is the contradiction? I said it only affects men 5'4 and below to any noticeable degree as per available evidence. Men 5'5 and up can't complain, hence the relevance to this OP. Explain the contradiction in detail. Do you want to respond to the post that said the qual…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 02:52 AM
1

Whoa whoa whoa.. stay very chill and cool, buddy. You said "they have the same amount of sexual partners, see!" I never said that. That's you pretending to be me. Try and quote me. I said: Merger-Arbitrage: Only 5'4 and under men report ONE less partner at the median. . But your original post was "see the n count is the same" almost as a way of saying "height doesn't matter". No, I said (and showed a link) that only "very short" (5'4 and under) men actually feel an impact, and implied that "it's…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/18 01:27 AM
1

No one denied height is a positive physical trait. What does any of that have to do with your claim that preferences for height have changed? Still ZERO sources for that one. I even kindly provided you with a link for data you wanted. All I get back is "whine whine whine." Disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 09:09 PM
1

Well my anecdotal experience is the direct opposite of yours, but I'm just going to assume I got lucky and compensated (along with the 5'8 guy I mentioned from college) in the face and upper body build department (as well as access to $$ for clothes/grooming). Our 6'+ friends rarely got attention vs. me and the 5'8 dude. What gives? These anecdotes don't really replace data/research for making accurate generalizations (including diagnosing why some guys fail to attract women).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 09:07 PM
1

Sorry, did you REE and DURR a little bit? I'm the married "heightcel" who's wife is also 5'6 and size 4/6 LOL. Makes perfect sense there! She even wears heels and that makes her a little taller than me. Incredible, right? I'll repost actual reality for you (no need to thank me): Let's see what women actually say and the impact of height, at a high level, on basic sexual success. 1) http://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/top-20-traits-she-wants A survey of thousands of women who ranked traits (inclu…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:52 PM
1

i am, the description: This statistic presents the percentage of internet users in the United States who have used online dating sites or apps as of April 2017, by age group. During the survey it was found that 30 percent of internet users aged 18 to 29 years were currently using dating apps. What does "using" mean? Logging on? Going on a date? How many met their SO that way? I already answered the last question. A small minority. The reason why height is a talked about factor more than style (a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:47 PM
1

I disagree that you have a point, that's the point. Saying that "height is a good thing" is a no-brainer. Of course I agree. What is the point of stating the obvious in a purely theoretical statement? There is none. On related topics, I said several things on response which actually have a point, if you ask me: 1) In practice, a tall guy can have unattractive traits and short guys can have attractive traits and they will be equal, practically speaking, in terms of looks. 1A) More interestingly: …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:36 PM
1

17% is way more than 10 years ago, and definitely 10+ years ago. https://www.statista.com/statistics/706499/us-adults-online-dating-site-app-by-age/ Also among younger people, its only growing. Are you a paid subscriber there? I'm hitting a paywall. Nobody is saying height is the only factor (at least im not). But im saying social media made it a bigger factor because its always been a big factor, and social media made big things bigger. Makes no sense at all that it would only impact one trait.…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:29 PM
1

Make a simple comparison: "average looking" 5'5" guy vs "average looking" 6' guy. What do you call a guy under 6 feet? - Friends" - common joke among women Yeah, we know who wins every time. Not sure why you refuse to believe reality. I never denied that this simple example was true at all. I said that IS true. Go ahead and quote me saying that the above example is not right. That example is obvious and pointless, though, unless you want to whine about theoretical disadvantages of height. You're…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:18 PM
1

Show ME proof on that, buddy. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/29/5-facts-about-online-dating/ https://www.statista.com/topics/2158/online-dating/ Online dating has only risen and seems to continue. And the first link is a two year sample size. That just shows how many people "used" an app or some similar metric. This shows where people met: https://mic.com/articles/112062/the-way-most-people-meet-their-significant-others-is-not-what-you-think#.zCqe6RtJy About 17% actually met their …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:08 PM
1

You're not comparing apples to apples. Compare average looking 6' dude vs average 5'5" dude. 6' dude wins every time, don't lie. I just told you I agree with that, but that's NOT apples to apples. You have a rotten apple (5'5) and good apple (6'2). A rotten apple is NOT an normal apple. Not. The. Same. Apples to apples is "negative trait A + positive trait B vs positive trait A + negative trait B" --> 5'5 guy w/ handsome face vs. 6'2 with unattractive face. This is a "fair" comparison. "What do …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 06:02 PM
1

It absolutely is similar. Expectations are risen due to the options and fear or missing out that social media in general causes. Since women are the ones being pursed in the vast majority of cases, and shes being perused MORE due to how the online dating works (See contrapoints incel video...great video where i only have 1 criticism) 75%+ of people still meet in real life. Nice try, though. Keep on being digital, buddy. Keep on. You've had a few pieces like this in your responses, seems more lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:55 PM
1

Try comparing apples to apples, bud, such as my example. Not bad (5'5") vs. good (6'2). No one is debating what's better here, all else equal. Way to oversimplify, though. In reality: no guy has it all (all else is never equal). People have good and bad traits. You want to write off complex topics like physical attraction with your (almost) witty little high school quips? Go right ahead. Want to learn and get out of delusion land? Read my post. Then read it over again, till it sinks in. And then…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:48 PM
1

Just look at the mountains of actual data that suggest that height isn't even a top trait (important, yes, but not top), and that men who are 5'4 and under only report ONE sexual partner less. https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/9dbtwg/what_of_women_would_outright_reject_a_guy_for/e5h1qnr/ 6'2 lanky dude will actually likely lose out to a 5'5 dude with a handsome face, based on this. Yes, mind blowing, I know. I didn't fabricate that information. I won't even bother with my own an…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:40 PM
1

consumer can apply to the dating world too. It is a marketplace in a sense. Shopping for washing machines is not the same as looking for people to sleep with or date. This is preposterous to even try and equate. And height is one of them. Maybe they are willing to settle for a shorter and better face, but height is a major factor for women, especially compared to how much men care if shes shorter than average (not much). Along with hygiene, styling/grooming, masculine build (v-shape), muscularit…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:36 PM
1

Your "point" was this: I'd say 95% of women. If you're 5'6" you're playing life on HARD MODE. You can't just be an average guy, you need a lot going for you - you better be hitting the weights, good job, and interesting hobbies. Just go to any night club for a hard dose of reality. My response was: all guys are playing on "hard mode" (more like "roll the dice" mode) at clubs, regardless of if they are 5'6 aesthetic guys or 6'2 lanky dudes (to be fair for comparison). This was followed with the l…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:19 PM
1

I'm saying increased technology has allowed people to act on their biological instincts more. Based on what? Again, some vague pseudo-intellectual drivel with some sprinkles of terms like "biological instincts" doesn't really cut it. Women always wanted taller men. In the past she was more limited because social media allows us to look and interact with so many more people on a shallow level. Then people might concoct dreams in their head. FOMO as well. Women have always wanted physically attrac…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:18 PM
2

Face > height > frame > body fat Let's fix that based on research and surveys, and not something someone randomly made up: Hygiene > Face > Leaness(lack of protruding stomach)/Build(v-shape)/Muscularity(moderate muscling)/Style/Grooming > Height I have never seen height be ranked/rated/shown to be more important than either of those traits in any survey or research piece. From the third group above: it's equal, usually, but style/grooming usually win out. Build is a harder one to gauge as I've n…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:10 PM
1

This post belongs under "low-value poster, definition of."
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 05:01 PM
1

girls wearing heels and mini-skirts seeking attention from men I see this, yes. Most girls go out for the attention and to feel "sexy." Side point: There's also a disproportionate amount of trash in that group (girls that go clubbing). Using them as a basis for any conclusions is idiotic, to say the least (very poor/biased sampling choice). So you don't see poor chumps buying girls drinks all night -- and then ignoring those guys buying them drinks I see this, yes. This involves a very small min…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 04:45 PM
1

Are you saying women's preferences for body parts and characteristics changed because a tool made it a little more convenient to look at photos? If so, what is the evidence of this? Note: things you concoct in your head are not evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 04:27 PM
1

Wow, yeah, wow... Tell us all about it.. clubs and "natural selection."
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 01:20 PM
1

big, jacked, good looking guy that gets panties wet. More high school homoerotic fantasies. Great stuff. Keep it coming. Take a trip to Vegas kid, you have a lot to learn. Thanks for the .02, bud. I'm all set with Vegas. Once was enough. I prefer intimate clubs like Cielo in NYC. Old Zouk and MoS in Singapore were top notch, too. And I think I know pretty well that I can't read minds (unlike some pretenders around here). I can also see, quite clearly, that most people don't mingle with strangers…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 04:50 AM
2

You stalk the bouncers of these all-night clubs in Miami and Vegas and see them go home with girls who you know for a fact aren't their GFs? Or just friends? These bouncers are making out with these girls right in front of their managers? Are you aware of how delusional you sound? I mean you can see things, but that doesn't mean you know what's going on. That much is a fact. Here's what I see: the absolute VAST majority of people go home with the same people they came with. BFs/GFs or their frie…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 04:16 AM
1

I never said it was a good place to meet women, nightclubs are horrible for most men. I said if you want to see hypergamy in it's most natural and brutal form, go watch how women interact with men in a night club. Not some grungy club in a flyover state, I'm talking a Club like in Vegas or Miami. Do you know what I mean? Yes. Those clubs. Also, how is that any better than an upscale bar or dive/pub? Beach > those clubs. Dude, seriously? Women most definitely go to these places to fuck if they fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 04:06 AM
2

It's an easy write off, LOL. On the flip-side, when is the last time you heard a guy get rejected and told "your face isn't attractive enough" or "your body isn't v-shaped enough" ?? Never. Those are subconscious attractiveness traits which most people: 1) Don't have words for 2) Can't measure or describe well (who the hell can describe in detail why someone' face is attractive?) Hence they resort to general statements like "I just don't find you attractive" or use an easy scapegoat (height).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 04:05 AM
1

Where in the holy hell did you get the idea that 22% of women in the US are taller than 5'6?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 03:56 AM
1

I myself am close to 5'6'' and it is the single biggest reason girls reject me I'm sure you like to think so. It's easy to state more or less objectively that being 5'6 is a detractor of looks. Of course it's all of the other things that you likely suck as judging: upper body attractivess, facial attractiveness, style/grooming/hygiene level. You can THINK you're good at judging those things, but that is just your wild guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 03:54 AM
2

It's the furthest thing from an optimal place to meet women (impossible to hold a conversation), because the women there are in no position to evaluate men, which the vast majority do on more than just looks. I've been clubbing on 3 different continents over the last 14 years at world-class venues (I'm Eastern European, but grew up in India, and then moved to the US - so I've had access to clubs since I was 16 years old) and I can tell you that many people (women in particular) go out to dance (…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 03:52 AM
4

Come on, dude. This is way too well thought out for PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 03:43 AM
3

Just go to any night club for a hard dose of reality. It's hilarious how anyone thinks (implicitly as it was the only place mentioned) that "clubs" (I'm assuming large dance clubs) are the only venue to meet women even among nightlife venues.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 03:19 AM
6

Women would disagree with u Hahahahahahah... oh man. Did you get your mind reading degree from Manosphere University? You should ask for your money back. Let's see what women actually say and the impact of height, at a high level, on basic sexual success. 1) http://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/top-20-traits-she-wants A survey of thousands of women who ranked traits (including this group of physical ones) for "making a guy hot" (reports if trait made it into top 10/20): Physical Sense of Style 30…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 02:30 AM
1

The distribution is skewed, hence the inaccuracy for that end of the tail of my calculation. Anyway, that clears up the marriage age issue (10% post age 33 is still a minority). My point was about age of meeting spouses for another poster.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 01:25 AM
1

That chart shows almost the exact same thing. Less than 2% post age 33 or so. A cumulative chart would be even clearer. Do feel free to thoroughly debunk the other source directly, though. I linked it in my original comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 12:56 AM
9

There's way more to a guy's looks than height. I'm 5'6 and can't complain.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/18 12:38 AM
1

Those were numbers for meeting people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68%E2%80%9395%E2%80%9399.7_rule The numbers for FIRST marriages are: A 3-standard-deviation range for men and women to meet their partners is therefore 1.81*3 +/- 28.3 and 25.8, respectively. Assuming the standard deviation is about correct in the source I cited: 99.7% of men are married between age 22.9 and 33.8 99.7% of women are married between age 20.3 and 31.3 It won't be more than a few % off. This is real life and real d…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/18 11:55 PM
1

I like how you missed the important part: that you meet your spouse years before you marry them (there is a courting / dating period). I'm feeling so nice right now, I'll even repost it, even though that was a pretty big reading flop: If the length of courtship is 4 years and median ages of marriage 28.3 and 25.8, people meet at the median ages of 24.3 and 21.8, for men and women, respectively. This means that 50% of people meet BEFORE those ages. Age of meeting ---> courtship ---> marriage age …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/18 10:14 PM
3

You graduate a 4 year program at 22, usually (most people turn 19 in freshman year in college, do the math from there to reach 22). Average length of dating is 3.3 years - see source. Average engagement probably about 1 year. That's ~4.5 years of courting. No less than ~4 years for sure. Median age of marriage is 28.3 for males ; 25.8 for females - see source What we're missing is standard deviation - another link provides a value of 1.81 years. If the length of courtship is 4 years and median a…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/18 08:29 PM
3

If you're fit you really have no reason to give a shit about fat people - including some trendy bullshit about "dadbods" and women that look like cheeseburgers with legs. Fit people always have the option of practicing making babies with other fit people without exuding any double standards or added difficulty in finding a fit partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/18 04:42 PM
1

No point to complain to me about the various double standards some men have. You don't see me complaining about women not sleeping with men they hardly know or like. With regard to dating around - that's not synonymous to me (at least) with mandatory sex. The opposite, actually. Most first dates with people you hardly know (in particular) are going to be pretty PG-13. Unless of course the girl actually has so little going for her that she's going to try and make herself look like a keeper by ope…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/18 03:58 AM
2

Here's an article covering a relevant survey to this topic: https://www.bustle.com/articles/97433-more-women-than-men-care-about-a-new-partners-sexual-history-says-new-study-and-over
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/18 03:41 AM
6

Different ways to become a slut. He's talking about women who sleep with men as a way to get into an LTR with those men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 10:01 PM
6

Her very high level of promiscuity and previous preference for casual sex. Of course you can't be "pumped and dumped" when you're just sleeping around - it's by definition impossible as you'd first have to be seeking commitment.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 09:54 PM
12

It's pretty much impossible for you to understand what most women want or go through because you're a fairly extreme outlier.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 09:19 PM
2

Would you take a fishes advice about how to catch a fish? So asking women about attracting women is the same as asking a certain group of beings about how to kill their kind (e.g asking fish about catching [killing] fish)? Dumbest analogy ever. Parroted by countless Manospherian dolts.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 08:28 PM
2

Mhmmm .. right. That's really something. Keep at it, sport.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 05:34 PM
6

If someone isn't posting around the clock throughout the week here, it's hard to argue that they are jobless or have no life. Of course, many here do indeed post almost 24/7, but it's not exclusively blue pillers.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 05:13 PM
1

One thing you can't change is your height. If you're 5'3, no matter what you do, you may be stuck as a 4 at best. 10x0=0. There are lots of things you can't change, like upper body bone structure and facial bone structure. Not just height. That being said, there is no objective way of knowing how much a certain single trait (and level of that trait, like being 5'3 for a guy) impacts your overall physical attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 04:46 PM
9

OP - you should probably clarify which "blue pillers" you are addressing... 1) "TheBluePill" subreddit visitors? 2) "Blue" posters on PPD 3) Anyone who isn't "red pilled" here or on "TheRedPill"?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/18 04:43 PM
2

Priceless stuff, dude. I love it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 05:43 PM
15

From my experience, women care only about Looks, Money, and Status. Nah, your experience is just parroting what some randoms on the Internet said. Nice try. A more comprehensive look at attractiveness is, in four broad categories: looks, smarts, personality/character and values (values for LTRs only). Status and money are "downstream" traits from various combinations of primary traits under those four broad categories. There is both personal and universal preference for various traits - my guess…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 05:18 PM
3

I thought even blue pillers had admitted this is false? There are no "blue pillers" are a unified group or ideology. You should know that much. Agree, which is why I'm actually ethical in all my affairs (except when gaming chicks). Ethics is a massive human accomplishment that has facilitated our survival by allowing mutual gain in risky situations. Still, if your goal is sex you'll have to compartmentalize "Gaming chicks." Priceless. I'd understand bending the truth at work, but you're describi…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 05:03 PM
1

I'll give you a bonus before I wrap it up here: Master PUA "Mystery" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuceTz9gZRQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC8X-btgrzk (full version)
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 04:00 PM
1

https://coaching4men.com/ He also wants your money: Option # 1: 4 Relationship Coaching Calls This package will get you started with 1 month of weekly calls. $500 ($125/hr)
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:49 PM
2

https://i.imgur.com/0Qpe2ZT.png And here's "BluePillProfessor"
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:42 PM
2

Thanks, I'm going to archive this and use it as a basis for a larger "RP/PUA" photo post (expanding on another one that I made before). More people need to see this.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:40 PM
3

http://sci-hub.tw/ Tried using this? Put in the URL of the study (like a researchgate link) and you'll get the full thing if it's paywalled.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:36 PM
1

Normally I know it's correct because when I follow my gut , it provides an accurate or close to accurate representation of what I'm about to do . I do not sit down and analyze with data every single decision I make but I often have very accurate gut perceptions and understandings of things without having a complete view of all the data. I don't know how to be specific because it happens all the time? So you do something all the time and can't describe it or provide examples. I'm speechless. Very…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:31 PM
1

That wasn't me writing much, mostly just quoting an actual dictionary. Enjoy your mental gymnatics, bud. PS: turns out I'm a literal anti-sperg ;) (nice try with the pathetic cheap shot, suits you well.) Write some more fiction for me, though. Please?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:25 PM
10

And most people, particularly honest ones, are repulsed by liars. Regarding manipulation, the word has no meaning if you are going to play with mental gymnastics like its ever so popular around here and claim that "everything is manipulation teheheheh." Anyway, you've earned yourself a visit back to English class. Time to dig up a post I made ages ago for someone just like you! A=Merriam-Webster B=American Heritage C=Oxford A1 to treat or operate with or as if with the hands or by mechanical mea…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:19 PM
3

Because ethics is what gets you women No, the logic is that lack of ethics will repel women (and people in general who are otherwise ethical), especially for LTRs when you both parties get to know each other better.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:16 PM
1

I for one think my gut is more "sensible" and rational than pure statistics and logic. Why? How do you know it is? Be specific. Simply following a statistic won't make their lives magically better and it's logically fallicious to think that way. Another baseless statement from you. Claim X then do no provide any rationale or evidence is becoming your modus operandi. What is logically falacious about using statistical evidence on very specific topics to make very specific decisions? Simply put if…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:58 AM
3

The latest trend is to dismiss using correlation because "it would be better if we also had causation pinned down." Then they try and ascertain causation via anecdotal evidence and mental masturbation. Priceless.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:52 AM
1

:-*
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:50 AM
1

That's the overall theory - you've explained it well. Now let's get down to practice with regards to the current topic. Level 1: no correlation or causation evidence ; anecdotal evidence only Level 2: correlation evidence available (non-anecdotal) ; no causation evidence except anecdotes Level 3: correlation (non-anecdotal) and causation evidence (non-anecdotal) available for use You're saying Level 3 is the best - I agree. Yet if we don't have any causation evidence that's non-anecdotal on a pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:36 AM
1

Another example along with countless other media, including multimillion dollar franchises definitely not restricted to online consumption (eg Ghostbusters, Star Wars, the Ocean series, ...and fucking..Terminator?). You may not read Cosmo. I don't read Cosmo. But it's one of the most high-profile magazines for young women out there. In fact I struggle to name a more popular mag for the same audience. I have never seen a woman read Cosmo either. I have never seen a girl pick one up at the grocery…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:28 AM
1

So why am I not complaining like its so popular to do here while hiding behind a computer screen?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:26 AM
1

Most people aren't going to mesh with the majority of people. does not equal Most people are shitty so 'Avoidant-dismissive' or 'avoidant-fearful' attachment style detected. Stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 03:25 AM
1

Women's marches and left-leaning political events are a common occurrence. Words like "toxic masculinity" are thrown around like nothing in many articles of high-profile news sites et al, even if they may be in the opinion section(s). I've never heard a girl IRL tell me about one or mention her participation in one. Cross my heart and all. The #metoo movement is another current example. Is it not obvious to you via media sources alone? In the newest books, and the newest movies? Assuming you're …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:52 PM
2

causation is never irrelevant Baseless statement as it stands. It helps to back up a claim to be taken seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:48 PM
1

Most people are shitty 'Avoidant-dismissive' or 'avoidant-fearful' attachment style detected.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:46 PM
1

Yes otherwise you are racist No senor... por favor... anything but that!
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:39 PM
1

I suppose the reason why I didn't address the latter portion of your response was because I wasn't sure exactly what you meant. To me it's obvious feminism has gone mainstream, some would say to its detriment and to the dismay of the more fervent and dogmatic. How has it gone mainstream? Provide some examples / evidence. If it has gone mainstream, it should be having an impact on my life, right? I'd see it, too. To restate my point - you mentioned fixating on potential negative female behaviour …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:33 PM
1

Cambodian jungle men are therefore Alphasupremes? Am I interpreting your post correctly?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:22 PM
0

I like how you ignored the second question in my comment, which was the one I was hoping you'd actually respond do.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:19 PM
2

Why the need for clarity? The target audience for TRP is men in a broad sense even if not all men agree with it or like it. No, it is targeting men who are low SMV and then by default also low RMV. Men who are generally unattractive, to be clear, where attractiveness is define as: looks, smarts, personality/character and "values" (latter for LTRs only). My experience doesn't match yours, but I'm at a loss as to how you can somehow think feminism and feminist concepts have not made it into the ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:12 PM
1

No; the sexes are fundamentally different in most ways. Not like anyone is going to take your word for it. LOL.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:05 PM
6

You're the one who's here saying "female N doesn't matter" This is not true, and we see no quotes here to show it is. Who would have thunk it!? Oh shit, how about this non-edited (in the link) post by me: https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/8u9rmu/do_you_believe_that_a_womans_ncount_has_an_effect/e1ds68e/?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/8u9rmu/do_you_believe_that_a_womans_ncount_has_an_effect/e1du5gd/ "Red Pillers are morons" This is true. I will admit…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:05 PM
8

Lewis, were you born blind? Honest question. The relationship of "marital problems" (divorce + separation rate) to pre-marital partner counts was statistically significant at the 5% or even 1% level (p<.05 or .01). The "marital problem rate" of the 0-7 partner count women is in the low to mid 20% range, while it is around 30-35% for the 10+ partner count range. However you want to twist it, there risk of marital problems is about 50% higher between the two broad groups. (~30% / ~20% - 1 = ~50%).…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 05:01 PM
1

The reason for this fixation is because RP acts as a type of awakening for men A certain subset of men. Need to be clear about that,. Can you honestly say feminism and other associated ideologies don't fixate on potential negatives of male behaviour? They are largely irrelevant. Till I started reading PPD for shits and giggles, I have never heard anyone in real life talk about these: toxic masculinity, feminism, gender wars or any such malarkey. It does not impact me in the slightest. Am I a spe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:57 PM
0

Some for sure, but most is unisex.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:55 PM
4

I'm the guy who posted a shit-ton of those studies/data saying that it's in fact another GOOD use of correlations. I even ran numbers myself. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/79wvoc/discussion_women_reporting_a_divorce_by_total/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/79wvoc/discussion_women_reporting_a_divorce_by_total/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/7j8znt/this_will_probably_start_a_firestorm_on_here_but/dr596dd/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PurpleP…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:53 PM
6

"Blue pill" here continues to be a euphemism for unattractive/clueless people. Some of these Manospherian dolts probably think that the vast majority of people are as clueless as they were (are, really) when in reality most people do OK while they themselves were bottom-barrel. That and there's a sizable portion of people who figured out to how "maximize" their attractiveness without any "pills" (blue pill++ as per this OP).
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:46 PM
3

And "telling the truth about female nature" might as well be "talking about potential behavior of people of either gender." When you fixate on potential negative behaviors of one gender people are going to start to wonder.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:39 PM
16

Is this a sick joke or what? Married couples have sex about 1x per WEEK on average. Averages represent the norm. This is "normal." Your 4.5 times / day x 7 = 31.5 TIMES normal. What you're asking is.. is 31.5x something average... "normal?" Is making $1,181,250 per year normal?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:29 PM
4

A classic PPD shitshow.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:27 PM
6

I find it hilarious that people around here think that causation is necessary to use most statistics to make better decisions. Most don't know the first thing about an ANOVA output, yet love cute little quips like "correlation is not causation" to reject entire studies when causation is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:20 PM
1

You can end it if you want, but I'll reply to your on-topic comments which I still find to be lacking in reason. Sigh. Well, sue me for thinking that you "should or shouldn't date someone" is a big effing deal so yeah you should bet that your metric is a good one if you're gonna limit your own dating pool so significantly. "So significantly" is a baseless statement as it stands. I have described why the opposite is true, though: most people are NOT "high partner count" but rather right around th…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:13 PM
35

Your blue pill ++ is what attractive people who have never heard of blue or red pills (people who have no problem with attracting the opposite gender) have always done. There's plenty of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 01:17 PM
2

But doesn't the "ancedata" objectively disprove that there's a "general rule" that works in every scenario. The correlation is meaningless to me, because I find the statistical approach to be a misaporoximation of reality. No one said it works in every scenario. That's a strawman. And my fiance is not even close to a poor chump. What if other men are being deterred from perfectly good women because of some statistical correlation that has very little to do with reality? We can't debate every sin…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 04:04 AM
1

You're right on the former (data shows people are losing their virginity later .. and I think MIGHT show that there are slightly more virgins in general) and probably right on the latter, but that's only a hunch due to the ease with which extremely promiscuous people can meet other similar people via the Internet / hookup apps.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 03:52 AM
2

I mean I just don't agree that proves the premise that people with mismatched n counts "shouldn't date eachother". 106 IS a small sample size considering our population. The confidence level of what you get with that sample size isn't the highest. It's high enough to point you in a particular direction (mismatches = bad). There is NO non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary, on the other hand. "It's better than one person" is meaningless to ME since I'm not asserting what the average trends are or…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/18 03:21 AM
3

Is anything with a partner count over 0 or 1 promiscuous now? Especially with a handful of studies showing that promiscuity is actually decreasing in younger crowds (Millenials)... Nothing like writing fiction. Keep at it, PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 06:30 PM
7

Frankly when I was younger I don’t recall anyone of either gender making a big deal out of it, Because most people aren't overly promiscuous, so it's a non-issue. Like worrying about landmines in your backyard. It's an issue for people in former warzones... not you. My guy friends (to throw on some personal experience a la PPD style) were repulsed by the idea of dating known sluts.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 06:17 PM
3

Edit: is 106 people enough data size to actually get accurate percentages ? Unsure. It sure beats 1 person on PPD with their limited experience (you're not even married) and sample size. 106 people is a sample large enough to come to meaningful (or certainly more meaningful) conclusions about the population. You're clearly not very familiar with statistics and their practical usage (or underlying theory). Here you go: http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mph-modules/bs/bs704_probability/BS704_Probabil…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 06:13 PM
7

Women are actually more judgmental than men about past sexual history. And people in general view high partner count people as less attractive even for casual sex. I don't make this stuff up nor I do use the local wackos as a source of information for my conclusions. Study 1: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306518734_Sexual_History_and_Present_Attractiveness_People_Want_a_Mate_With_a_Bit_of_a_Past_But_Not_Too_Much Summary of Study/Survey 2: https://www.bustle.com/articles/97433-more-wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 05:56 PM
6

Exceptions don't make the rule - he/she's right in rejecting your personal experience (limited by both the time you've been with with your SO and sample size) for making generalizations. /u/whodunnit88 See this: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5964280_Matching_in_Sexual_Experience_for_Married_Cohabitating_and_Dating_Couples Results indicated that, with the exception of cohabitating couples, romantic partners showed a significant level of matching in the prior number of intercourse partn…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 05:46 PM
6

My thinking goes like this: pairing an inexperienced person with a promiscuous person would be a disaster. It would just lead to insecurity issues and jealousy. So it would be better to find people with your own level of experience. Promiscuity and experience are completely separate. In fact, I'd wager a non-promiscuous individual with 1-2 LTRs under their belt has been in the sack far more than slutty Sally or Joe who've had a dozen random half-drunken screws mostly with different people. It's …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 04:20 PM
1

For most people I think that casual dating (or social circle "acquainting") is the norm and then it moves to exclusive dating after 1 person from the "casual/acquainting" group seems like a potential winner. This is especially true for high school and college, but also for people who have large circles of friends in their area as a grown up. Moving on from college there's largely two groups of people (who are interested in LTRs/commitment; I'm excluding people who want to casual sex their way th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 02:58 PM
2

Well.. many of those women never get into relationships that last in the first place. Now those that do... I could argue its the guy's fault for not seeing that she's not that attracted to him and still proposing to her. In that case, the guy is an idiot.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 06:26 AM
2

Yes, it's a special form a mental retardation. Quite the humorous one, if you ask me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 05:57 AM
3

okay...but most women looking for that type of guy are probably in the top percentile of attractiveness themselves. Well ignoring the fact that some guys here think that even average women want that guy... that guy is like 0.001% of the male population. Do you know how to combine probabilities? Simple example: The odds of 100K income on an individual basis @ age 30 = about 10% only 6' tall and 100K @ age 30 = .1 * .145 = 1.45%. We haven't even gotten to attractive build, face or self-care yet. O…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 05:41 AM
5

In that >6' group that's just 14.5% of men in the US. Even their physically attractiveness is highly questionable because we haven't considered facial and build attractiveness.. let alone hygiene, grooming or styling. So... face, build and self-care. What % of that 14.5% of >6' tall men even have 2/3 of those? Or even 1/3? I mean if the girl is a height fetishist.. I suppose it's all good. And then from that 14.5% or less... what about guys with actual high incomes AND good personality/character…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 05:13 AM
2

First one definitely can't. Women are much more eager to throw drama. Second one yeah, which works to reinforce my point that monogamy isn't sustainable Women have drama, men have the potential for physical force. Bla bla. All of those can be flipped or gender-flipped. Non-points. High amount of unhappily married men, ever-growing unwillingness of non-desperate men to marry, high cheat rates The "ever-growing unwillingness of NON-desperate men to marry?" The richer parts of the Anglosphere (the …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 04:54 AM
2

Women want to throw drama/negativity at their husbands. Men don't want drama/negativity Women want to get fat. Men don't want to be married to a fat woman These can be flipped around and the same holds true. Women want loyalty and monogamy. What evidence is there that men don't? Men want variety and poligamy Says who? You don't speak for all men. And "Manospherian consensus" couldn't be worse for sampling bias issues. Women demand behaviors that reduce their man's attractiveness in her own eyes.…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 07:22 PM
5

Where there is a conflict of interests, there is war. Male biological imperative is fundamentally incompatible with female one. "Opting out of the war" is essentially losing the war People aren't slaves to their biology. Blaming everything on biology or some other 3rd party is a loser's strategy. I won't stop anyone from taking it There is no war, unless you choose to participate in one. Most people want a family and kids. There's better and worse ways to make that a reality. Knowing what you wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 06:21 PM
3

Beta is anyone who has trouble attracting women. As for the "etc", there are also PUAs, sugar daddies, sadists. Heh - so we're back to what I say is in-practice use of "beta" and no one around here believes me. OK. In that case, I disagree with that point. Men who are attractive have also been hurt by women. Why? Not every relatively attractive woman finds every relatively attractive man attractive. To me, being a player is more a pragmatic defensive strategy than some revenge plot (though I don…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 05:38 PM
11

I agree, I am pretty sure every mgtow/dark triad/player/etc was once a beta. What's your definition of beta? Who else is in that category under "etc."? And at some point they were let down by women, e.g being incel, being cheated on, being broken up with. Myself included. If you do a Q4RP and dudes are honest, I'm sure they will admit it. This has happened to pretty much all manosphere legends (Roissy, Rollo, Roosh) Most PEOPLE, men or women, have been "let down" romantically in their life. This…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 05:19 PM
3

PPD has been therapy/advice/an outlet for horn tooting for people who can't afford a real therapist or other relevant outlet for its entire existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 04:58 PM
3

What makes you think this is an issue for MOST men? It's not. It's an issue for men with relatively low intellect. The proof is "in the pudding" here, so to speak (if you can't sniff out those women, you're an idiot, essentially).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 04:29 PM
2

Totally!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 04:22 PM
2

Sucks to be a physically unattractive or mentally inept - gender is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 04:22 PM
3

Tell us about how you became a self-confident bad boy. In detail.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/18 01:25 PM
1

Its not anyone's problem that they can't communicate - except their own.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/18 05:51 AM
1

Men with bad personal hygiene.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/18 04:05 PM
1

The super successful high value men I know used their 20s on career, pursuing interests, extra education, moving cities, etc. What a hilarious pile of claptrap... hah! The actual super successful guys landed jobs right out of school in a great city (like NYC, Boston or SF) which fit their career path and degree and then they did whatever they wanted. Moving around = being unsatisfied in an absolute sense = lack of success. Hardly "top male" material. Usually means they were in a sub-par job and/…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 08:25 PM
3

Just don't take it all the way. If the guy pushes or insists, or starts to act uninterested in you when you slow down... you know he's just after some easy sexytime. Good way to screen for the girl I'd say, at least from my guy perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 07:01 PM
7

in contrast, women may be more likely than men to hookup with the hopes that it will eventually lead to a romantic relationship with the partner. In contrast, a much higher proportion of women (64.5 percent) than men (35 percent) ideally wanted their hook ups in general to lead to romantic involvement. Again, the gender difference was even more pronounced when they were asked about their most recent hookup: 60 percent of women versus 13 percent of men said a romantic relationship was the ideal o…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 06:19 PM
1

I don't know why you're getting all "depressed" if I just told you that you're right about 80% of the time? High achieving people in really good schools are going to be far more mature (emotionally and intellectually) and "well off" at 22 than a schmucky 32 year old from community college or no college degree. I suppose I'm arguing via apex fallacy here (sort of), but in absolute terms there's plenty of these high achieving22 year olds for comparably high achieving (good school, great job) 32 ye…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 04:55 PM
1

Right so we can just flip all this: Someone making 55k/year does not have the same lifestyle as someone who makes 100k+. Not the point at all. Those people can afford lots of similar lifestyle things, and the 100K/year person can pay for a larger portion of higher ticket expenses. Cheapskates not included in this example (which was your example for the 22 year old person). A 30 year old that wants to party like an 18 year old? That sounds like an underachieving 30 year old etc. Logistically a 22…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 04:41 PM
2

You'll have to find something actually wrong with their study selection process beyond your skepticism of there being some supposed bias. I'm all ears on something actually substantial regarding criticism of that meta.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 04:29 PM
1

Sounds like an underachieving 22 year old. Someone with a 55K / year job and median 35K student debt (an average college grad in my eyes) wouldn't have to be a cheap shit like that, unless they were just a cheapskate by nature. Regarding partying? I'm 30 and can still party like I'm 18. Can't complain. My wife is 28 and generally the same as she was in college, when I met her. I don't see any value in these anecdotes, though (yours or mine). I could write the same story about 40 and 50 year olds…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 04:26 PM
1

Nah, it's 9/10. I don't make up numbers on here, unlike most people. If I'm guessing, I'll say so. Source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/164618/desire-children-norm.aspx (add "have kids" to "want to have"). Add another 3% for people who wished they have kids. It's actually 93%. FYI: PPD is abnormally high on childless / no-children-wanted types. Source: PPD surveys. (This doesn't surprise me one bit).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 04:17 PM
1

I'd limit LDR to 1-hour driving distance. That was workable for me and my (now) wife back in the day. She'd come over on 3/4 weekends and I'd go to her 1/4 weekends. Worked like that for 2 years for us. But when I said "goals" I wasn't just thinking of geography--for instance, a couple in college are far less likely to be seriously thinking, let alone talking, about if they want kids, let alone how many, until they're graduated and in jobs. That's just you thinking about other people thinking. M…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 04:01 PM
2

Reconcile this one for us, brosevich. All-cause mortality was minimal at 20·0–25·0 kg/m2 Of 10,625,411 participants in Asia, Australia and New Zealand, Europe, and North America from 239 prospective studies https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4995441/ /u/cxj since he's likely interested, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 03:48 PM
1

So what if it’s better than 20 and 30? Lots of people here compared 30-something to 20. A relationship between 32 and 22 is far more likely to succeed than between 30 and 20. I'm pointing out that a large difference in maturity exists with just that specific 2-year difference (20 vs 22). That and 32 and 22 is more comparable than you think to 50 and 40, unless the 22 year old is really behind for their time (e.g. very low level of maturity relative to their peers).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 03:34 PM
1

I can agree that "teens" will change their goals. People grow up pretty fast in their mid to late college years. Career paths and therefore future, more permanent geographic location becomes clear to people. This gives them the option to "settle down." It's now a realistic choice to them. Most people who have "geographic uncertainty" will indeed avoid LTRs or any kind of relationships in general, till they are done with education and job searching. For some people who go to grad school, that COU…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 03:30 PM
1

fear of missing out. Lots of irony in that one. They end up throwing away something good for a dice roll.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 03:24 PM
1

Actually 32 and 22 is often far closer in "situation" than 30 and 20. (Let's assume the 22 year old is a graduate with a full-time job or close to it - an extremely common occurrence). If we're talking about college educated people, this is because sometime between 20 and 22 people many people will go through a pretty big "growing up" phase - usually via full-time work (through an internship in college or with full-time work post-college after age 22) which comes with exposure to lots of grown-u…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/18 03:09 PM
1

being interested in ltrs often leads to serial monogamy, doesn't necessarily mean you're looking for the one. Most men (inc. attractive ones) will have a handful of LTRs before they meet "the one", at least per CDC sexual partner data, but that doesn't make them serial monogamists. Of course we have to define serial monogamy (how many LTRs = serial monogamist?). Let's use 5 LTRs as a cut-off point: The only reason I see anyone becoming "serial monogamists" is: 1) They are actually crap LTR mater…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 10:03 PM
3

Just sounds like something up with your particular social circle. FYI: There is no evidence, even at college age, that even very physically attractive men prefer LTRs less. Some of them prefer casual sex more, but the same proportion of them prefer LTRs (exclusive dating) as attractive and average men (44-46%). And exclusive dating leads to marriage down the line. Source: https://imgur.com/a/8s5qk Table 3, pg. 235. 45%+ of men and 55%+ of women said they were "dating exclusively" (or assumed to …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 09:04 PM
1

I dunno, most of the people I hung out with in college were the impulsive adventurous types, a lot of them seem to be settling down in the direction of going on a family skiing trip once a year. Lots of people here seem to project their social circle experience onto everyone else. Your experience (and that of many on PPD) may well be (actually likely to be) a minority one. At least you're somewhat cognizant of it. https://imgur.com/a/8s5qk Over 10,000 college students were asked on relationship …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 08:50 PM
1

That's still somewhat vague, but under that vague definition I can say that many of those men were in LTRs in their early to mid 20s and then married in their mid 20s to early 30s. Some obviously went through a few relationships to finally meet the one they "put a ring on." I've spent the last 8 years in Boston and 4 years before that in Rhode Island. I'm 30. I have to wonder what the deal is with this conflicting anecdotal evidence...
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 08:34 PM
1

the trend that i have anecdotally seen for men that I consideri high quality is meeting your partner in your late 20s and marrying in your early 30s You'll have to elaborate on your definition of "high quality" for any of this to mean something to us reading it. I'm 27 now and the top guys from my class don't seem marriage minded at all, they are either in seemingly non marriage tracked relationships or just single and dating casually. their focus is career and partying in their scant free time …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 08:26 PM
2

I know a good amount of guys who didn't want to settle down young (although some were in relationships that they didn't take that seriously, not just sleeping around), but did when they got to their late 20's - early 30's. Your 20's are really the only time you can be completely independent and do whatever ridiculous stuff you want, get up and move on a whim, etc, so I don't blame anyone for not wanting to rush into having to worry about someone else's expectations. Not just "you can sleep with …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 08:05 PM
5

First of all, you have to define "interested" - does that mean: 1) actually getting married or 2) meeting the person they eventually marry? Where is the evidence that the "best" (an undefined term) options won't be interested till their 30s (remember to define "interested"). I suspect there is none. If it's anecdotal evidence, I got plenty that support the idea that most "high quality" (college educated + fit) men won't marry in their early 20s, but will meet their partners in their early to mid…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 07:49 PM
2

1) Men are far more often the ones who don't want to commit when they're young. Plenty of quality guys are not remotely interested in finding a serious relationship at 23. That's because they are trying to win the lottery with a girl - a supermodel from Harvard (to use a cliche, exaggerated example). Or are they simply not relationship-minded to begin with? Is that a guy a girl would really want for commitment? Ask yourself - why NOT be in a relationship? Why avoid commitment? Assuming you are s…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 07:00 PM
4

The risk difference between 25-29 and 30-34 is negligible. And that full range is exactly when MOST people get married anyway (25-34). There are other variables which are more important in vetting a partner for a good marriage candidate.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 06:53 PM
1

The actual gap is still the same: 2.5 years. Both pieces of data can be used to show the gap and changes in the gap. Your data was more clear, though. I'm not sure what you're arguing here, I conceded that there was indeed a drop (of -0.5) in the age gap as opposed to it being flat. That's not proof of any kind of large-scale (effective) discouragement against age gaps, though, given that it's -0.5 in 48 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 05:54 PM
1

https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5vw5zv/cmv_no_way_this_is_validating_to_women_fake/?utm_content=title&utm_medium=user&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=u_Merger-Arbitrage Yup. I did a fake Craigslist post posing a chubby woman who refused to post a photo. Results made me realize how pathetic some men are.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 05:21 PM
1

The Internet and online "dating" continues to own dumb people.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 05:19 PM
1

How is that any different from this paper? Those two looked at age gaps of husbands and wives. I looked at median age at marriage. Those look different at the surface, but with a large enough data set they represent the same thing. The median difference in age of two population is in fact the age gap (do the math on my table and it's right around 2.5). https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2011/03/age.jpg https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/Q6mWF2IT/Screenshot_20180823-125657_Drive.j…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 05:10 PM
1

OK so it went down by 0.5 in 48 years - this graph shows that where mine didn't show it clearly enough. You win on the change in age gaps. That's supposed to support your point: that this is some kind of MEANINGFUL discouragement against large age gaps? A change of 0.5 in 48 years?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 05:04 PM
1

I like how you're completely ignoring the casual relationships that older men are having with younger women. The typical sugardaddy-sugarbaby bullshit. Any other irrelevant BS you have about actual age gaps for couples, which have been steady for 50+ years according to actual data? the 27 yr old men are marryign the top end of whats creatign the female median. This statement makes no sense whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 04:58 PM
1

People marrying are in fact couples. They are the most official couples. In fact the age gap between non-married couples is probably even bigger, given that some of those are casual relationships where stigma is even less tantamount to anything. Keep writing fiction, though. Pretty please?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 04:55 PM
1

Looks about the same since the 1950s. Certainly the 1970s. https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2011/03/age.jpg http://www.genealogyintime.com/Images/image_US_marriage_age_1890-2010.jpg The "discouragement" is failing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 04:48 PM
1

What does this have to do with proving that the correct interpretation of "settle while young" (aka "if you want an LTR and are in a position to pursue one, find an actual keeper and don't worry about age") is bad advice?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 04:40 PM
1

If you let someone slip away it's because you're still young that's because the person isn't that great. It means that you need to put in the effort to keep them around (if not, they'll "slip away.") That person can be objectively great ltr material, but you're just not attracted enough. If person A isn't attracted to person B "enough" - a relationship between A and B isn't a good proposition anyway. Pardon the pun. It has nothing to do with "settle while you're young" or anything related to the…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 04:18 PM
35

A fact that gets overlooked by the "lock someone down while you're young" crew is that you can pressure people into marriage, but you you can't pressure them into loving someone they aren't attracted to. If any of the two women described above were to listen to this advice, they'd be just settling, and the men who they'd be settling with would end up in a dead bedroom. The best advice that you can give a woman is to not marry for the sake of marriage. I have never interpreted that advice as bein…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 03:51 PM
2

Study after study? I see one piece of data on an Ivy league school. What about the rest of them? I like how you completely avoided the other part of the question, too, which questions your assumption more directly (regarding relative promiscuity and how its measured). It also doesn't consider the popularity of Greek Life (or lack of it, rather) at the top say ... 300 schools in the US ... (even if UMC/higher income people are a higher proportion of Greek organizations, that doesn't necessarily m…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/18 04:34 AM
2

Disproportionately UMC relative to the general population, but not majority or even close. No way most people here are top 15-20% earners on an individual basis. Having an OK college degree and making 65K per year doesn't make you UMC, or the bar for that title/group is pointlessly low. Mostly high LMC (if you break "MC" into 2 pieces) or straight up "MC" if you break it up into 3.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/18 08:35 PM
1

Well, it's not untrue just because you say it's not. I'm open to changing my mind should there be actual data on this topic - especially one that shows disproportionate amounts of "richer" college kids in Greek life (esp. girls, per this topic). Anyway, let's assume you are correct, and that college girls who join Greek life in general tend to be from wealthier families. 1) How are you defining hookup? What makes you assume they are more interested in hookup culture than the general population o…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/18 03:50 PM
4

Those girls are more likely to be from LMC or even WC families which is more representative of who they are at that moment (when in college). Parent socioeconomic status is inversely related to sexual partner counts (same study as Smoogs) mentioned showed that. That and not all sororities are whorefest-oriented.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/18 01:16 AM
2

Despite what men on this sub say, attraction to alpha masculine traits isn't universal. Preference of moderate masculinity and masculine traits is about as universal as it gets, though (V-shaped bodies, moderately masculine shaped faces, tallness). It's the degree of preference that varies.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/18 04:01 PM
1

Sounds around right. Wiki's 5-adjective approach is good, too: strength, courage, independence, violence,[5] and assertiveness.[6][7][8]. Fits well with a very generalized model of male attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/18 03:35 PM
4

I'm with Skook on this to a large degree. I never got officially cheated on, but I was led on and lied to at one point when I was younger. In hindsight, I see this, though: 1) Me and her were long-distance and I wasn't in a position to have anything serious with her 2) She was16 at the time and was completely clueless as to what she even wanted from a relationship, based on her behavior (frankly, though, I was 18 at the time... hardly old and wise, but was far more grounded than her). So it was …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/18 05:38 AM
3

My wife has gone to see DJs and other artists perform with her friends, but without me plenty of times. Ditto in reverse. I even go out solo if she's out with a friend and I don't find any guy company for the night, though mostly to upscale food or drink joints which are open late.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/18 11:11 PM
2

More like therapy for people who can't afford a real therapist.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/18 05:26 AM
3

What are you on about? If my wife annoyed me, I'd avoid or ignore her. I wouldn't be thinking about having sex with her, that's for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 09:57 PM
1

Wow that was a good one. Made my toilet reading really enjoyable. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 09:41 PM
3

I don't know about other people, but I don't want to fuck someone who annoys me. I want to avoid them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 09:39 PM
1

I'm not going to stop anyone from having forced or borderline forced "gift" "connection-building" sex - but that sounds downright awful and indicative of a dwindling relationship. Good luck with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 06:07 PM
1

I never said anything about "perfect" sex - just meeting previous benchmarks. I'm saying: You don't need to actually have any kind of sex to build or maintain a connection with someone (e.g. touching genitals or having orgasms) More importantly, you really won't be kissing/touching/having sex with someone unless you actually have that spark / connection / whatever that makes you WANT to do those things. This is the key here. You: sex is a tool to connect and bond NOT an outcome of connection and…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 05:24 PM
3

I really don't see how some sleep-deprived sex (starfish mode likely) is going to suddenly help you connect any more than talking, embracing one another, cuddling or kissing. If anything, lackluster sex (you did say sleep-deprived) is just going to depress me even more, as I'll be thinking about how much better it was or should be.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 05:08 PM
2

sex is a tool to connect and bond NOT an outcome of connection and bonding That sounds like a dwindling marriage/relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 04:56 PM
1

Not even going to try to decipher than incel drivel.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 04:55 PM
1

Can those 5'2 guys just buy a zillion escorts to hit the average? Can a Boeing 747 fall out of the sky on your head? Who the fuck cares about self reported information? If self-reported information is the best you have on a topic, then you go with it. And on many topics, it's all you have. Most of them aren't hiring escorts as most men do not actively engage in hiring prostitutes on the regular. The only way you're going to counter this is with research on the topic, not some drivel about what y…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 04:35 PM
1

ok. Well you clearly care more about money that I do. That's fine. But as I said, I don't, so it shouldn't be too hard to understand that it's not that I find "uneducated and unsophisticated" girls "works to my advantage", or that I can "manipulate" her more easily, or "feel better about my own lack of career success", etc. I actually believe you might be an exception to my jab - and most men on here are full of shit if you ask me. Its merely that I don't want to have my life be slave to another…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 04:24 PM
1

There are almost no men who are 5'0 tall and bitching about their fate isn't going to help at all. I'm 5'6 and I never had issues with attracing girls. Very short men (5'2 to 5'4) report just 1 less sexual partner at the median relative to taller men. Fact. Original source: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/psychology_articles/57/ Anything else?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 04:11 PM
2

've been both poor and moderately well-off. Was a freelance consultant for a long time, and used to make +$200k/year. There's a big difference between 35k and 100k. Not much between 100k and 200k. And even less between 200k and more. 80k seems to be the optimal. After than more money isn't going to make much of a difference. I already have the money which allows me a 80k lifestyle. Adding more isn't really that important to me. Then you really have no clue what money can get you. My wife and I m…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/18 03:43 AM
1

Hmm.. so total shitshows like PPD, except on completely different topics? I have never posted once on either of those forums nor have I read more than a literal few posts on there.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/18 08:40 PM
1

Nope. But you go ahead and tell yourself that. Just your word against mine regarding my first comment. Now.. Personally I wouldn't want to have my life tied to the busy schedule career of some career women working 60hrs/week. Only a small handful finance professionals (investment banking employees in particular divisions), accounting and law professionals work those kind of hours. Maybe a tiny handful of medical professionals. My wife works 40-50/week and at age 28 makes 90-100k/year depending o…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/18 06:40 PM
2

I've posted pics of me here multiple times, but never pic swapped. No idea who or what "misc" is, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/18 06:29 PM
7

Best of luck with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 05:45 PM
1

Even legit Eurotrash gets laid more than fat ass, sneaker-wearing American dolts.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 05:41 PM
1

If you say so, Mr. Icouldntfigureoutwomenwheniwasyouandnowmywifedoesntgivemeenoughbangybang. You win, OK?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 05:28 PM
7

man want the best women and a couple sidepieces Thinking about what other people think is quite something... a great way to write crap that might sort of make sense to you, but be completely untrue. I can take this approach to assessing your statement: 90% of people (inc. men, duh) want kids. Marriage = monogamy = stable environment = best environment for kids. What does introducing sidepieces do? Probably creates an unstable family environment due to resentment from the wife/woman. Now you have…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 05:23 PM
1

Not good invisible woman = < 8/10 woman Less attractive men exist, too, and will ultimately pair off with less attractive women, in every sense of the word.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 05:17 PM
1

I have to wonder why so many people push these idiotic gender-war agendas (both here and those feminists in the article). Some serious butthurt, I'd imagine, over what someone of the opposite gender did to them in the past. I can understanding holding grudges and seeking revenge against individuals, but against an entire gender? Pathetic. One thing that doesn't make sense, though: why didn't the guy just voice-record her actual sex talk on his phone if it happened over and over?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 05:12 PM
9

Every time someone starts with "we're all slaves to biology and have no free will because X gender imperative DURRREEE" claptrap I want to barf. Yes yes... keep blaming biology theories, God or the universe for all of your problems. Just never yourself. So pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 04:56 PM
1

Did you get better anger meds? You've making sense for once. Bravo. 10/10.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 04:50 PM
1

Mhmm.. but the amount of "good" women is about the same as the number of "good" guys. So the "not good" women are invisible to the "good" guys. The most desirable people pair off with the other most desirable people.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 04:48 PM
2

No one has it all, so even among two very successful people, they can look up to one another for their specific strengths, as they won't necessarily overlap.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 04:38 PM
1

A lot of trp seem to disagree and even go so far as to say that the girl being uneducated and unsophisticated works to their advantage somehow. They are manipulate her and use her more easily? Or feel better about their own lack of career success?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 04:29 PM
1

That makes no sense whatsoever. Men choose who they ask out or marry. That's also known as choosing. You can call a cat a dog, though. It actually puts them in the "get chosen" status, if anything. Those pedantics don't interest me, though. Keep on with the bizarre mental gymnastics.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:55 PM
1

I agree. There are certain Big5 personality traits (which are also considered more attractive) which are correlated with educational achievement. One study found, if I recall correctly, higher levels of neuroticism and extroversion to be negatively correlated with educational achievement. Higher openness to experience was a slight positive correlation with educational achievement. Higher agreeableness and conscientiousness was positively correlated with educational achievement. In this case, I b…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:54 PM
1

Conflating "choosing" with "women having a preference for provision" is beyond bizarre. And saying "yes" in all of those cases is as much of a "choice" (choosing) as it is those men choosing who to ask out and who to ask to marry them. What are you on about here? Is this some bizarre "gender war" mental gymnastics? I'm arguing that your statement: Women do the choosing. Is false. Both genders choose who they date/marry/whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:43 PM
5

Men do the "first choosing", actually, as they are almost always the ones to do the "asking out". Women then choose who from those who chose them. So how do men with good careers end up with women with good careers? The real question is: 1) Is it convenience / what's readily available? Men with good careers are surrounded by similar women (starting in college and then on to career venues) or 2) A preference for women with those careers or 3) Some combination of the two
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:14 PM
1

Not all birth control, including the pill, will give any specific woman side effects. Stop REEEing about problems that have easy fixes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 12:49 PM
0

Ask the VAOTOMARNOCU guy...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 12:21 PM
2

I work out 4 days per week using a bodybuilding routine. Never been on stage. Call it whatever you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 12:20 PM
4

9/10 you're right. I'm a 30 year old dude, married, met my now wife when I was 21 in college. Had a girlfriend in high school. Played around with some girls to various degrees between the GF and wife - median partner count by CDC standards. No attachment or personality disorders that I know of. No drug problems. No autism, even! I only found the Manosphere because someone put a copy of "The Game" into my hands back in the summer of 2008 and it promised improvement of my ability to seduce women. …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:32 AM
1

Oh... good one. I except something more (perhaps mistakenly) from people on here than someone to tell me that the sky is blue. My bad, my bad...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:19 AM
1

The entire point of my original post was that it was more effort. It’s a scientific observation. Riveting stuff. No seriously, why are you playing Captain Obvious? Explain.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:14 AM
0

The point that was lost on you is that it’s more effort than it is for men. Men have more lean body muscle than women by default. Why do you think between the average man and woman who are both 5’7 and 130 lbs the man is stronger? I’ll give you hint. It’s muscle. Muscle burns calories faster. This isn’t some female conspiracy and you don’t have to repeat to me calories in calories out. I’m acutely aware. Most women remotely into maintaining their size count calories as it’s the easiest way to be…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:10 AM
0

Like what? School me with all of your vast knowledge of the side effects on various birth control methods on women's bodies. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/contraception/unintendedpregnancy/pdf/Contraceptive_methods_508.pdf Take your pick. Something won't have side effects. Cry us a river if you don't like to do your homework. My wife BSed about her hormonal birth control for a while - I told her to go see a specialist and tell THEM her problems, not me. Lo and behold, they helped her fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/18 03:01 AM
1

Woe are the people on meds that supposedly make them fat. There's plenty of BC methods out there as alternatives even if they affect a specific woman. And I never claimed woman have it as "easy" as men to lose fat. I just claimed being normal to low normal BMI as not being hard, period.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 11:43 PM
1

Because sometimes theory doesn't have enough impact on practice. We're talking about people here who are young enough that the drop in metabolic rate (you means to say metabolism decreases by the way) isn't going to mean anything to their ability to stay fit. We're not talking about middle-aged people. Or grandparents. So your point is a non-point here.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 09:57 PM
1

Let's suss out this "nuance" then: OP says: I saw a post in foreveralone the other day about a woman saying that men wanted “Slim, Feminine women with pretty faces” and one of the reply’s said that most men don’t have standards that high. When I think about it, are those standards really that high? I mean given that most of the US is overweight I can see how statistically speaking wanting a slim woman would be picky but then again staying slim really isn’t that hard. And 9/10 if you’re slim and …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 09:52 PM
1

But none of this changes the fact that metabolism does continuously slow down as we age (for men too). For people in the "dating market" (let's say 18-35) year olds this is peanuts in the grand scheme of things.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 09:41 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/978wbt/what_is_considered_high_standards_when_it_comes/e46cr8c/ This is you blaming biology instead of women for having shitty dietary habits. "But but our bodies are made to store fat." Thanks, that's obvious to everyone who knows basics of biology. The fact that women are prone to carry MORE fat than men as a % of body weight means this: your maintenance calories are lower. Eat less. Do not eat that whole cheeseburger. That's 90% of the battle…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 05:13 PM
1

It's some kind of cheap fat feelgood claptrap in combination with stating the obvious that "some men like the NICHE of very 'curvy' women" and "some fat is necessary on women for them to look good." Thanks, Captainette Obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 05:03 PM
2

1) I was talking about overweight women moving in to a BMI of 20-23. 2) "Safe" - don't even open that can of worms unless you're going to provide direct links to research into that topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:56 PM
0

Your argument is fat people feelgood crap masquerading as generalizations on what the largest group of men finds attractive and why that is.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:54 PM
0

Then your standards are reallllly low, I guess. Posting some BS about "fat is supple and bounces and is therefore attractive" (to how many men? to what extent? how much is enough? what is the impact on overall attractiveness? etc.) and then posting three pics of celebrities is fit for a middle school level debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:48 PM
1

I agree. But only a little bit more complicated. And not for mid-range normal BMI. I'm not talking about bodybuilder shredded women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:46 PM
0

Are you kidding us? No one in their right mind is going to read all of your replies in a thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:45 PM
0

That feel-good claptrap about "fat is great?" That comment is vague (on how it applies to women in general - where is the limit of how much fat is actually good?) and then goes down the apex fallacy route (of using a handful of celebrities to prove a point). Try harder.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:43 PM
0

No, because of hormonal cycles which is WAY more important than any man on here seems to be able to grasp (shocking). Because we are literally designed to carry extra weight, specifically in our stomachs and hips. Men naturally have more lean muscle which helps burns calories - this also increases your metabolic rate which yes, means you burn more calories a day than women do. Durr... so eat less. I didn't say it was impossible for women to be skinny, I said it's harder than it is for men, which…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:40 PM
1

Block me. I don't care. I can't wait for you to tell me more about how difficult it is to have basic portion control and an understanding of caloric density to maintain "normal" or "low-normal" BMI.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:39 PM
1

The claptrap in this thread from the vagina contingent is hilarious. Tell me the outcomes of these two scenarios: Laydeeesss get locked in room and fed meals which generative a 25% caloric deficit over the course of a day for 30 days. They are also encouraged to do 30-60 mins of cardio for 3-5 days. Laydeeess are asked to do moderate cardio for 6-8 hours per day while Chad, Vlad or Tyrone (they pick) feeds them cheesecake for those 6-8 hours for 30 days. What is the impact on their bodyweight in…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:38 PM
1

softness Except you never mentioned this before and now want me to "ponder" it in some vague and mysterious load of BS that you're spinning here. Coy 10/10. Actual argument 0/10.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:33 PM
1

Tell us again how it's soooo hard to not eat the whole burger?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:30 PM
0

Ohh... the "vague and mysterious" argument. That's really something. You don't need beyond a bare minimum of fat to have "softness." It doesn't take much to cover up bones.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:30 PM
2

I'm not saying that women get a pass to be fat, I am saying it's harder for them to NOT be than it is for men. How is it harder? Because they have lower maintenance calories ... and not chowing down the WHOLE burger is harder? It's harder to resist the temptation? Is that your whole argument?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:27 PM
1

Americans eat too much shitty food or are genetically inferior. Choose one. The end.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:25 PM
2

Feminine shape comes from other things. The waist/hip ratio is the key measure here. A narrow waist is indicative of lower body fat + a certain type of bone structure (indicative of healthy fat distribution). No narrow waist = no "ideal" body shape (as it impacts the hourglass look via the waist/hip ratio). And hip width, especially frontally (how these judgments are done and how the conclusions were made) is heavily dependent on bone structure (pelvis width). https://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakul…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:22 PM
2

You just nailed it with the unisex portion comment. That + American shitty calorically-dense food = weight problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:14 PM
10

Geez, how odd. Last month I spent a few weeks in Latvia and Ukraine (where my wife and I have extended family). Everyone... 20, 25, 30 year old women (including those with multiple kids!) were FAR fitter than in the US. Could they just all have superior genetics to American women? Or wait, could it be: 1) Americans eat more calorically-dense (often in general less healthy) food in larger portions + 2) Smaller framed women fail to account for their lower caloric intake needs (basically suck at ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 04:12 PM
9

It's only a failure in life for men who overvalue casual sex, yet fail miserably to get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 01:21 PM
2

I Ced the V in the second statement?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 01:16 PM
-1

A woman who can't "bang a rando" is essentially mentally retarded, physically deformed or has the hygiene of a cadaver. Getting a date with a de-facto RMV match should be equally hard for both genders. Edit: Masssssive triggering detected from the local physically repulsive women and low RMV men and women. Ouch!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 06:18 AM
1

Well, I suppose Fairleigh Dickinson might be elite relative to Turdwaffle Community College? She's either a troll or legitimately one of the most mentally handicapped posters on here (with the only exception being her ability to scratch by on standardized tests.. maybe).
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/18 06:10 AM
2

That much I could have figured out completely on my own based on what you've said here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 05:34 PM
2

Well, you go ahead and enjoy talking to yourself, sport. I'll be watching you.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 05:27 PM
2

Yeah, not bad. HB8.5/10. I was hoping you'd tell me about Chadding at da klub or how Mikey the frat party organizer has the attention of 30 girls who don't actually know his name or that he organized the party blowing him in some puke and piss covered dorm bathroom.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 05:26 PM
1

Oh, so you were indeed referring to their "nearby cousins." Thanks for confirming.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 05:23 PM
2

Whoa, that's a little too normal for PPD. No no, we need to PPD things up a bit here. How about in the context of "clubs, bars, drugs & Tinder"? How about some FRAT parties? That's what life revolves around, after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 05:16 PM
2

Prole girls eh? Right right. Nothing like ubiquitous trailer trash (and its nearby cousins) that comes with guaranteed halitosis.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 05:14 PM
1

What does it mean?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 04:47 PM
3

Post pics of gross women, meh women and "9s."
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 04:45 PM
7

Nothing like shitting on a group of people out of spite when they don't want anything to do with you...
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 04:44 PM
2

you're assuming that service industry folks are all broke when i live in nyc and plenty of them make great money, All empty talk without details. nothing about the way you described my friend's life is what its actual like. these aren't waiters at applebees, these are staff at some of the most known establishments in the country. I never assumed they were low-end at all, actually. Bartending at The Capital Grille (plenty high end for our example) doesn't make you significantly more than median i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 04:34 PM
1

Your point is stating the obvious? Thanks for nothing, I guess? Try comparing the same guy in cheap vs. expensive clothing. Or try comparing how quickly you can change your wardrobe / style vs. how long it would take to get results out of the gym.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 04:29 PM
1

Thanks for sharing.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 04:26 PM
1

Okaaayy.. so let's see just how little this bullshit you're spinning makes sense: Let's take a hypothetical John, who is either a bartender or DJ and compared him to the same guy, looks and personality wise, with a guy who is either a high end investment professional (a more competitive job at a well known investment bank or asset management firm) or private law professional. John the bartender or DJ apparently can have "status" because he can mooch mediocre booze off of people who he had to be …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 06:18 AM
1

Spoken like someone who neither knows about nor can afford quality clothing. If that was your goal, you've succeeded.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 06:04 AM
2

Sounds like your BF knows some potentially high status people, but outside of his social circle no one knows who he is or cares. Money talks.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/18 12:08 AM
2

Now explain how any of that gives status. What part of that don't you understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/18 11:49 PM
1

Can you be any more vague? You don't have an actual answer it seems. Hence the smoke and mirrors bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/18 11:32 PM
1

So where do they get it?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/18 11:26 PM
1

Serving drinks to well paid men doesn't give anyone status... what kind of malarkey is that??
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/18 11:16 PM
9

Ahahahahahah... 10/10 humor, 0/10 accuracy.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/18 07:56 PM
1

http://archive.is/9cDYv
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/18 05:26 PM
1

After grad school I went to the gym for 6 months and got nothing done. Then I decided to do some thinking... Why not just do straight to some of the best people in the business? No need to bother with anything else. https://www.amazon.com/New-Encyclopedia-Modern-Bodybuilding-Updated/dp/0684857219/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1534011712&sr=8-1 A massive $20 I use the Advanced Level 2 routine from here, but cut down to 4 days instead of 6 (you still work out every muscle twice per week,…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/18 06:34 PM
1

She's telling you the WHAT, not HOW to do the WHAT.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/18 06:21 PM
1

"To win the game you need to score a goal by shooting the ball into the net."
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 08:47 PM
1

Forming an opinion by using shit (not the most accurate) information.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 06:27 PM
2

And is Stronglift 5x5 enough to get the average guy into good or great shape muscularity wise? Hmm.. And Keto? That's an interesting fad. Never seen it supported by anyone I find credible (who at least has some education in the field of nutrition or exercise)> Now, you are right that there isnt anything out there (certainly that I've seen) which can help identify where to buy clothes or how to make sure they fit correctly, nor is there anything obvious about proper haircuts or styling. I saw ONE…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 06:05 PM
1

You're building a bridge with paper mache.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 06:00 PM
0

Do you really expect an accurate assessment here, dude? Come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 05:35 PM
4

Problem is TRP doesn't actually teach you how to dress well or lose weight (most of the guides are nowhere to be found - and how about quality assurance?). The guys with problems there probably know they have those problems, but they can't fix them, and TRP doesn't tell them how to do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 05:33 PM
3

And young women love a gay baby face. That's for sure. I'm 30, but probably look like I'm of college age. I feel both flattered and quite uncomfortable when ~15 year old walks by with her parents and I notice the girl looking at me and then not looking away for 2-3+ seconds.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 05:29 PM
7

They recommend all kinds of crap, I can't keep track of it all. Their generalized term "beta" usually just means someone without a spine, a coward.. someone who can't stand up for himself. With that in mind, I'd say that cowards raise cowards. That's that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 05:05 PM
6

Step 1: define what the hell "hyper-bloop" means.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:53 PM
1

This is why guys who live in shitty apartments and work dead end jobs can still attract quality women, as long as they aren't boring or creepy. While meanwhile tons of loaded but socially inept engineers in Silicon Valley hire prostitutes and end up marrying poor women from the Philippines who really just want to be with them for convenience in a lot of cases. Aren't you contradicting yourself here? What's attractive about these men with shitty apartment and dead end jobs, if that implies that t…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:48 PM
1

What's with the barely relevant side topics? All kinds of things can affect you, especially your partner's current and future decisions... which will likely be a lot like his previous ones (based on static personality and character traits).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:41 PM
1

Now you've gone from "none of my business" (supposedly not caring) to caring about frequency. That's more like it. Regarding your specific question: you'll have to define "uncommon" with a number. That's irrelevant to my point, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:21 PM
1

Can't speak for the "family alpha" .. but what do we actually know about Rollo's marital satisfaction? And how does his wife/daughter react to his blog?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:19 PM
0

Right, that's for now. Once enough high profile cases emerge that turn out to be bullshit, it'll be game over MeToo. "Balancing itself out" (e.g. women being able to report abuse, but not abuse the system) is the best possible outcome. No brainer.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:18 PM
2

Its bound to happen - plenty of shitcunts out there who will try to abuse the momentum that the movement has to get revenge on men that they feel "wronged" them or what not. Either that or people will forget about it entirely.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:16 PM
2

If this isn't joke, Lord have mercy on our souls.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:35 AM
2

"MeToo" will die once enough false accusations surface, as standards of proof will rise. That's all there is to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 04:23 AM
1

Maybe a Boeing 747 will fall on somebody's head tomorrow.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 02:43 AM
1

The fact that PUA has changed quite significantly is evidence against its efficacy. MRP / RP efficacy for actual LTRs is the one that most people (including myself) really question at the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 02:37 AM
1

Not for maintaining what is by most people considered an "LTR" when considering duration, and certainly not the amount of time it takes to maintain marriage and start a family. RP/TRP has literally not existed long enough for anyone to judge it by the latter standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/18 02:33 AM
1

In a relationship with the same girl, yes? And how long have you applied RP?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 06:27 PM
1

More like you can't reliably judge it (one way or another), as there is no quality evidence to support it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 06:26 PM
1

It's funny to watch the reds here go "well it's working for me now" just like it's hilarious to see the local gleeful reformed sluts go "well a guy committed to me I've been with him for 2 years... my 5th boyfriend!" Laughable. MRP / RP for relationship management and your ability to hold relationships is judged over prolonged periods of time - 7 to 10 years (for one relationship) or even longer.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 06:02 PM
0

That doesn't mean it works over long periods of time (say, 10+ years to maintain relationships, for MRP in particular). RP hasn't been around that long, even less so for most of its proponents here on PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 05:55 PM
1

So you think this data shows that a man who hires a hooker once is likely to share traits with those who do this habitually? I never claimed that. Someone who hires a hooker once is similar to someone who only has a small handful of casual sex experiences (which makes them quite sociosexually restricted, NOT unrestricted). That data above applies to sociosexually unrestricted individuals (into regular casual sex or potentially the use of prostitutes).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 05:52 PM
1

Again, this is dependant on so many things not included in this data. This statement makes no sense whatsoever, because what is in the data, is in the data (and that's a demonstrated connection of sociosexual restriction and personality traits). No other dependent variables were mentioned. I try to stay away from black and white thinking and sweeping statements. There is nothing black and white about the above if you ask me. It merely points out that certain activities are performed by people mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 05:29 PM
2

The vast majority of those traits are negative to most people. There's research into that topic, too, for the less obvious ones. So if you want to play the nonconformist card on the preferences for one reason or another, go for it. Positive: higher on openness to experience,[7] Neutral: and be more extraverted, more erotophilic,[10] Higher masculinity[16] (maybe masculinity = negative trait, actually?) and eveningness[17] in women is related to unrestricted sociosexuality. Negative: less agreeab…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 04:57 PM
2

No actually that just makes me normal. Most well adjusted adults outside of these forums don't obsess over other peoples sex lives. Right till they need to get into a serious/committed relationship with them. Key words: committed, serious. What do you consider "common traits" of these people? It doesn't matter what I consider them to be, given that there's ample research on the topic: With sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociosexual_orientation Unrestricted = more promiscuous / open to ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 04:49 PM
1

Well I don't speak for all women, but I don't give a flying fuck if adults want to pay for sex or be paid for sex. File that under "none of my business". I also don't care if someone wants to invite a stranger from the street into their home to fuck. Also none of my business. That's an irrelevant metric that borders on some really cheap virtue signalling. The real question is: would you get romantically involved with people like that or with people who exhibit traits commonly associated with peo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 04:38 PM
2

Hardly 20% of women even at college age actually engage in casual sex regularly, and about 1/3 have ever done vaginal in a hook up. Not that many at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 01:19 PM
1

Sometimes the bozos post pics. Then all is revealed. Fatasses (claiming to be "big and strong"), poorly-dressed schmucks, bald geezers, certified creeps, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 06:27 AM
3

I want your reply, but you have to make your claim in detail because the source literally gives up explaining itself and offers two graphs that I'm not being hyperbolic about, are the worst I've ever seen. I would need to transcribe them in detail and don't have time for what we summarized by other users as concurring with my view. You said: These women would claim that "female doctors are marrying male doctors." But there is not parity, and the direction in which one partner will be willing to …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 04:37 AM
10

if a woman has to pursue a man, he doesn’t truly love her A woman who continuously goes after a man is always his second choice. Unless he starts pursuing her back, he truly doesn’t love her. Both parties need to pursue to some noticeable degree for things to be less ambiguous and move in the right direction. That's that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/18 01:48 AM
2

They do a fine job of putting one of your claims away. Keep throwing vague quips out, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 11:20 PM
2

The link completely contradicts your theory.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 10:58 PM
1

My point was I like plain Janes. Oh right! I forgot about that. The flaws in your reasoning are even more apparent now, but that seems to escape you. Oh well.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 10:55 PM
1

Yeah, I disagree with you completely. About what, exactly? That no one has ever called the average guy "hot" - not even their girlfriend? How about when they say “you’re the hottest guy I’ve been with?” Maybe they've been with below average guys before and you're just average, but still the hottest to them? That would be a perfectly plausible explanation to the above. And actually, many guys have told me their chicks aren’t in anyway infatuated with them. So not sure where you’re getting your in…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 10:51 PM
1

I think you’re reaching here. For a closer look at your reasoning. You don’t need to determine what average is, if everyone you talk to tells you how you’re so hot, amongst other things. Are you saying the average guy has never been called "hot"? No girl calls him hot? An average guy never gets a girlfriend? That's what you'd be implying if you argument made sense. Average guys DO get girlfriends, and their girlfriends most certainly consider these guys "hot" or "handsome" or whatever in their o…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 10:03 PM
1

How do you the comments make you ABOVE average? How'd you determine average SMV and the comments or gets?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 09:17 PM
1

You've never been in the shoes of anyone else, so you don't have any points of reference or other benchmarks. How's it obvious? You're still being vague.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 09:12 PM
9

These women would claim that "female doctors are marrying male doctors." But there is not parity, and the direction in which one partner will be willing to "marry down" is almost entirely on the male side. Wrong wrong wrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrong. https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/college-graduates-marry-other-college-graduates-most-of-the-time/274654/ Two tables here show that. This has long since been pointed out.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 06:23 PM
2

I read her comment as: WASP top out of sight elite men in the US are practically the only class of men who can wear pink withOUT opprobrium I think she meant "without", not "with" based on how the first part of the sentence was phrased.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/18 04:41 AM
2

and I’m not average. Rationale?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 09:12 PM
1

So what will you be faking? Can you provide specific examples?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 08:57 PM
6

Examples? Your answer is still quite vague.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 08:57 PM
6

And what do you mean by "game" here?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 07:56 PM
5

Define "game" for us.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 07:55 PM
3

Finance crew checking in. "Can confirm." I own some pink polos, dress shirts and ties.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 05:32 PM
2

I wonder if the women know about the other women... or if this dude nearly shits himself every time he gets a text and he's with one of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 05:09 PM
3

"Masculine."
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 04:53 PM
4

Wrong one.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 04:45 PM
1

OK so you used it as a very generic term on anything theoretically changeable: looks and personality/character in this case. OK.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 03:49 PM
2

Older RP men are miserable oafs whose wives don't give them enough sexytime. Probably for many understandable reasons. Older RP women are either actually trolls-with-penises or mental whackjobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 03:47 PM
1

What qualified as "game" to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/18 12:18 PM
5

This is the most pathetic attempt to discredit a fairly hefty amount of research and data I've ever seen on here. The only thing laughable is this borderline strawman argument you're spinning here: proports to have established some scientifically valid category of “attractiveness” based on “interviewer ratings” Regarding women participants... No one claimed anything about "scientifically valid categories of attractiveness" - and that's completely irrelevant as instead they established that "inte…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 10:31 PM
5

Also, men of lower socioeconomic backgrounds tend to favor curvier body types. High SES = skinnier body types Immediate availability? Lower SES = fatter people. Men tend to date women with more feminine features (big tits, big eyes, big ass) for short term casual sex, and women with more androgynous features for long term relationships Fatter girls = bigger ass / boobs = easier pickings for casual sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 06:07 PM
2

That's rich, coming from a someone who couldn't make an account for free or find an imgur link (to read the actual study, not the article summarizing it and omitting the best part: data tables). Bravo. Great stuff. You're welcome that I made you a little bit better informed, by the way..
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 05:29 PM
1

At the bottom of the POST, not the study... The tables summarizing the research are below: http://imgur.com/a/8s5qk I'm wondering how lazy/inept you are - that's why I'm not copying/pasting anything. And still wondering why you haven't gotten a free account on Scribd.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 05:17 PM
1

1) I make a note that you can get a free account and read the whole thing 2) There is an imgur image link at the bottom of the post that highlights the data which the study uncovered
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 05:04 PM
3

Low class for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 04:45 PM
2

https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5ybwci/discussion_physical_attractiveness_other/ I reviewed the largest one on the topic here. Note: virgins were excluded from the analysis.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 04:43 PM
1

Well, Dunning-Kruger and autism are brutal, but most people taking surveys don't suffer from either.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 04:40 PM
6

Run.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/18 01:31 AM
1

Shitty career, low earning, undereducared and therefore low class/status and/or ugly men trading money for looks don't care. Plenty of those around these parts.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/18 03:38 PM
3

RMV still matters to many men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/18 03:35 PM
1

When you're dealing with former town bicycles, disproportionate amounts of "don't-want-kids" nonconformists and other "free spirits" ... that has become the expectation for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 07:28 PM
1

I prefer the fully encompassing meaning of "socioeconomic" as it accounts for everything that encapsulates the range of what UMC can be. That's fine (especially if you have a lot of accurate information about some specific individual), but it's not necessary to generalize. I think we're in agreement here then. Why is this such a sore spot for you? No one is debating that exceptions make the rule? You're just saying stuff now. yikes. You keep bringing up exceptions to make seemingly Captain-obvio…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:50 PM
8

hy all the online hooplah about online dating when it seems like most people resent it, that it opens them up to more rejection, and they don't get relationships ou tof it. If that is the case, why are people acting like this is the future of dating? Only the local edgelords and other clueless weirdos will tell you that Tinder/online will take over dating (it's had plenty of time, and it hasn't done that at all). Fact of the matter is, long before you download an app or make a profile - you can …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:30 PM
5

I get that way as a reaction, though, because why would I sympathize or be empathetic with people who display: gross ineptitude/laziness, blatant ignorance (including being oblivious to unknown unknowns), dishonesty/disingenuity/charades/hidden agendas/ulterior motives and a complete disregard for the feelings/well-being of those who have done seemingly no wrong. It feels great to shit on people who exhibit this kind of behavior or traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:26 PM
1

So now we're using one TV show (or a few) to show that established socioeconomic models are generally wrong? You should change your username to "exceptions-and-fiction-make-the-rule." Regarding those dolts you knew: a handful of people wasting potential don't make the rule. I bet most didn't stay baristas, did they?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:16 PM
1

never mentioned any anecdotes, I was talking about gathering data, you read what your own biases told you, of course. Again, that's what they say, not what they do, and the two don't necessarily match. That's just not getting through apparently. This? This is you literally suggesting to use personal observations as "data." Nice game, pal, really. It was riveting at first, now it's boring. And vice versa. \Maybe they mislead you, maybe not, maybe they unknowingly mislead themselves, or maybe not,…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:13 PM
1

It's an assumption when you generalize. On the other hand, it's not an assumption if you see the tatooed person in question (say.. someone you might have considered a romantic prospect) doing shit you don't agree with - then it's just more evidence for you that you're making the right decisions.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:07 PM
3

I can't be nice to anyone who is seemingly: disingenuous/dishonest, extremely lazy/inept/clueless/ignorant or has a complete disregard for the well being of someone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 06:04 PM
21

There are people out there who are miserable and messed up in ways I never imagined...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 03:44 PM
0

The best part is that one side is usually mentally handicapped while the other generally normal and on point for the arguments that have mutually exclusive conclusions.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 05:35 AM
7

Sure. I agree. And regarding your point about primal vs intellectual. If you have a ton of anecdotal evidence that people with tatoos behave a certain way, you'll act on your evidence accordingly. I don't think anyone here is really arguing that tatoos are the problem, it's rather the type of people that often get them, unless they are trolling or being classically PPD-edgy.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 05:08 AM
2

Oh yeah, with a little laissez-faire attitude, you don't just get crabs. You get shellfish medley on the first serving.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:59 AM
5

Only to a point. Hardly anyone thinks that McDonalds makes the best burgers. They are merely acceptable when you're in a hurry or starving (or both). Subjectivity in art isn't that far off from this analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:54 AM
10

I think most reasonable people would differentiate between weird, tacky, unoriginal and very large tatoos / large amounts of them vs. something restrained and less edgy. I don't like tatoos, but wouldn't judge someone negatively for having something original and small that has very strong personal meaning to them. Tramp stamps, full-body art, tacky my-friends-did-it type shit? I'm already wondering what other shit I'm going go discover about her.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:53 AM
1

"My anecdotes are better than your anecdotes." I never mentioned any anecdotes, I was talking about gathering data, you read what your own biases told you, of course. You were talking about gathering data personally, which is the same thing as gathering anecdotal evidence. Nice try, bud. You know that I can't do it because you can read my mind, obviously; and I didn't even have to fill in a boring survey, what a leap sociology has made since your recent comments. Not to mention that the scientis…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:30 AM
1

Too little time in a day for second-rate for those guys. Why even bother?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:18 AM
1

I'd like to think that those A-list actors can do better than support staff on a whim.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 04:00 AM
1

If it's a lie, of course her argument is wrong, as it is literal fiction, and therefore worthless in "proving" or "showing" anything about romance / dating / pills / gender-whatever as it exists in the real world. You have to assume that she's being honest / accurate at face value? You can literally make up anything you want to here, then. What good is that, unless you're just trying to perpetuate a shitshow (which you are as a mod mostly for your own entertainment benefit) ... but the lies at l…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 03:58 AM
1

Your definition also requires a lot of information that's not readily available and more arbitrary than dollars. We judge people here all the time - and money is usually easy to suss out and impossible to misunderstand (100K is 100K). All of the other things? Easy to obfuscate and beat around the bush, plus twist interpretations. It'll take quite a bit of effort to get accurate information on "values, cultural mores, beliefs" etc. Why is this is a debate? No one is saying it isn’t rare. By why n…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 03:46 AM
1

It doesn't really matter if you believe it. Nothing to do with me. It's about planting seeds of doubt for third parties - so they turn on their brain. A listers don't live in an alternate universe. They sleep with and date nobodys all the time, even the Toms and Jennifers Hmmm.. I have to wonder how they mostly end up marrying / LTRing other A-listers. And how the tabloids that I can't miss at the supermarket checkout seem to miss the "sleeping." Something's not adding up...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/18 03:44 AM
2

I'm quite the actor myself. Z-list.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:48 PM
2

And I'd agree with those women, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:48 PM
0

Just not the Tom Cruises and Jennifer Lawrences of the world. The A-list thing is the only thing where I think you're stretching it. And FYI - nothing against you per se, I'm taking a shit on that "no invalidation" rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:47 PM
1

I think she's stretching the truth a bit (to artificially inflate the strength of her argument), especially anything involving A-list celebrities. Not stand-in mega Chads who are stunt doubles or whatever...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:46 PM
1

That idiotic "no invalidation" rule allows for people to make up complete bullshit to troll without punishment. Just so long as its believable enough and they tell you it's how they truly feeeeeeeeel.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:45 PM
3

I don't mind "making an ass of myself" (in the eyes of those who disagree, of course, saaahhhprise!!) when it serves a point.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:35 PM
0

Oh for sure. The Tom Cruises of the world, even when not single, are "male-hypergamizing" with the support staff for the male imperative to spread their holy seed because biology dictated so! Totally happens all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:34 PM
4

I think I see Tom Cruise there hitting on that girl. She's resisting. Somehow.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:29 PM
1

And income/wealth is the easiest one to generalize with to identify someone's socioeconomic class, at the population level, with 100K plumbers being an irrelevant exception due to rarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:27 PM
4

I see women jumping around trees naked all the time. Women are apes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:26 PM
3

Oh yeah, she totally gets hit on by A list actors. No way that's a stretch...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 10:20 PM
1

To point out that the 10% or 1% of blue-collar people making 90K or 100K are irrelevant to generalizations which can be made using income, which are very accurate (90% or 99% accurate, as per the above) in predicting non-economic behavior of people ("values" .. "beliefs" .. whatever). I get the SOCIO aspect of it. What you're also apparently missing is that ECONOMIC (money) conditions drive the SOCIO conditions. Money is the precursor of "values" or whatever you want to call it. This is a tangen…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 06:25 PM
1

Here you go again with these once a blue moon cliche exceptions... drug dealers... 100K plumbers and well-tipped bartenders... Here's THREE academic models that mention this. Your opinion is, frankly, irrelevant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_class_in_the_United_States#Academic_models UMC is a socioeconomic class, too. Get with the program. Every single one mentions money/income. Let me know when your GridReXX model of class gets traction in the real world.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 06:00 PM
1

Yeahhh you’re missing the point I was making. The other person brought up plumbers and their income. My point is that plumbers despite their income are not UMC. That much is clear, a 1% exception. That is a crucial and relevant point because class and income shouldn’t be conflated. Of course they should be conflated - your 1% plumber exception is completely irrelevant to the general rule. Do you not get that you are "right" 1% of the time in that approach, essentially? That's an awful hit rate. …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 05:54 PM
1

I get your point: there's a tiny little 1% exception to the rule. Yet: The low frequency is highly relevant, actually. It makes those exceptions irrelevant to general discussions of class, as these 1% exceptions don't mean anything to discredit using income as a primary determinant of class (economic or social).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 05:48 PM
1

A 1% frequency exception is a non-point. Come on now.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 05:43 PM
1

Again, that's what they say, not what they do, and the two don't necessarily match. That's just not getting through apparently. Oh I've heard it 1000x before here, parroted by people who want to write off anything but their own preconceived, anecdote-based beliefs. To me, what they say they like usually matches up with what they do like. What now? You're quite biased against checking the facts instead of playing scientists with surveys and shit, speaking of biases. Checking the facts... that's r…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 05:30 PM
1

If the UMC is indeed 44% (or 30% per the link) of America then income becomes even more important for distinguishing between groups within UMC, funny enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 05:05 PM
1

If UMC is 100K and higher for households, according to IPUMS CPS data for 2017.... 44% of America is UMC then (remaining ~1% reserved for UC). It makes the UMC as big as the WC and LMC in combination (almost).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:51 PM
1

Why would it be based on quintile as opposed to quartile or non-equal buckets?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:46 PM
3

A tiny fraction of plumbers make 100K. What kind of malarkey are people here spinning? People operate on "information" pulled out of their posteriors. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes472152.htm#st 91K for top 10%. 100K is going to be a ~1% endeavor for a plumber.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:44 PM
1

Edit above: I applied the top 15% restriction presented above to household incomes from IPUM CPS data for 2017 to arrive at a figure of 175K. I've made one too. It went over 3 socioeconomic models.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:41 PM
1

I see, that's the "Urban Institute" definition, it seems. https://i.imgur.com/j35swJ4.png I used the ones here from 3 other socioeconomic models. From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_class_in_the_United_States#Academic_models I applied the top 15% restriction presented above to household incomes from IPUM CPS data for 2017 to arrive at a figure of 175K.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:36 PM
1

It probably does, but that's not the point I'm making. The point is that people here arbitrarily (and falsely) place themselves in UMC to toot their own horn when they are in fact medium to high LMC, when judging by income percentiles as presented by socioeconomic models which I reviewed here. https://i.imgur.com/j35swJ4.png
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:34 PM
1

Don't have a seizure over this. My standards are probably 10x yours. Literally. I'm white, but grew up in Asia with a chauffeured Mercedes and maids. My socks were hand-ironed for me. No joke. Business/first class travel, 5 star hotels and fine dining since I was a kid. My father by US standards was a <1% income earner. Need I go on? Now I do pretty well for myself by US standards. Somewhat above entry level UMC by the ones I presented here. And it's a notable improvement over someone in LMC (e.…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:31 PM
1

I can't read their mind through questionnaires, too. At least this way I know what they do, even if I have to deduce why myself. And be totally wrong as you bask in personal biases you didn't even know existed? OK. In the questionnaires they are telling you their mind with little reason to twist the truth as they have no reason to (privacy). "Uhhh" indeed. Indeed, you didn't understand a thing about that study. And you can narrow down those multiple traits to say the top three and in general gat…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/18 04:25 PM
1

Ah, yes, because a woman needs to have a guy drop a 200 euros dinner on her for her to feel that the guy is truly and madly in love with her, right? He should also have a Savage Garden song play while he's reciting 19th century poetry to her, because women love that shit. Do you think I spend money on netflix? Really, dude. Nah, but Netflix & chill is garbage that low-value men can pull on low-value women. I would invite a classy girl over and do something way more interesting / unique. Like mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:39 PM
1

No, that's them saying that looks don't matter that much. I've shown pictures of men who are considered to be very attractive by women at large, and the female posters were like meh, not that special, not my type, this and that, but how would they react if they met the guys in real life? My wife is the same way. Women have more varied preferences. She likes SOME actors, but far from all or even most. hahahaha, sure thing. The most attractive she is, the most likely she is to have had Chads hitti…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:33 PM
1

Maybe you don't know how get the most out of your money? Because at entry level 6-figures (100-115k) I'm feeling way better than most people in Boston. No student debt for me, ever. Why are you using yourself and some benchmark for generalization of perceptions? What about all those median income people in those cities?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:28 PM
1

Too narrow or not, there is no other reliable way to stratify people as a whole (or individuals without know great details about them). It's education and income for socioeconomic models. People on here can't even get that straight, but love to stroke their ego and call themselves UMC. How do you judge if they are full of crap? And it has nothing to do with "enough" or "nearly enough" - these are meaningless terms and even more arbitrary than what the socioeconomic models propose... which is usi…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:24 PM
1

What you're saying is neither completely accurate nor relevant, hence I am "grumpy" about it. Why are you so incessant about it? 90K in Montana sounds great, FYI, but good luck getting a 90K / year job there. Hence the lack of accurary I just mentioned but didn't elaborate on earlier.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:14 PM
2

1) Your point is irrelevant in a general discussion of socioeconomic classes (models) - which I did not create, I'm merely pointing them out. https://i.imgur.com/j35swJ4.png 2) 90K isn't scraping along even in NYC, unless you're buried under a shitton of student debt. You can afford a decent place yourself. I'm repeating myself now. It's above median income. Mean household incomes in NYC range from like 50K to 90K depending on neighorhood. HOUSEHOLD. Not individual. THINK.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:09 PM
3

Where is the evidence beyond your word that there are "Lots of people with mega bucks aren't culturally UMC." ? Let's see it. I'm willing to wager these are small minority exceptions (a small % of high income earners). Plumbers earnings 100K per year, like the favorite cliche example here on PPD, are a tiny minority - it's mostly older ones (I verified this on CPS IPUMs data). I'm also willing to wager they work 6-7 days / week with a massive client portfolio.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 03:03 PM
5

90K with little to no debt to your name will get you a decent 1-bedroom in NYC or Boston without roommates. And you'll have plenty of local entertainment money leftover - just not enough for upscale travel. Not sure what else needs to be said. It may not be an elite lifestyle, but it's way better than... that other 85% of people below you. And relatively speaking, that's a very good place to be. Judging people by "elite" standards is ludicrous.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:57 PM
1

There aren't specific kinds of women. There's one kind only, and the way women act with a man depends on how much more sexually attractive he is compared to the other men around her. Pretty much almost all women will have casual sex with the guy if he's hot enough without them having to get to know the guy first. That a woman needs to get to know a man first before she wants to have sex/develops a strong attraction, only shows that she doesn't find the man to be all that hot, but he's passable. …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:47 PM
1

I noticed that. People on this sub like to pull studies and data and such done on human sexuality, to prove their points of view and to further their agenda, like women here saying that women aren't that attracted to hot men and then say it's the dude's confidence that does the trick(yeh, I know, I also laughed my ass off at that) and others saying that women's sex drive is reactive, not active, and that women need this and that, to be made to feel this and that by a man, before they get horny. …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:41 PM
1

Do you honestly believe that a lifelong union is possible in this time and day? Sure I do. It's just not guaranteed. Women are incredibly valuable, and men aren't, unless you are talking about say Cristiano Ronaldo, the world's greatest soccer player of all time. Women can easily replace a man no matter how attracted she is to him, in the amount of time that it takes her to shoot a text message to the endless numbers of men she has in her friendzone. Yawn @ apex fallacy. The only reason you'd ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:35 PM
1

Read minds/see through walls are ad absurdums. You can simply watch what others do, no need for superpowers. Just don't tell them beforehand they're going to be watched. What good is that? You can't know why they are doing what they are doing, because you can't read their mind. You could for example analyze Tinder matches to determine how women rate photos of men and vice versa, of course without telling your "participants" that they participate in anything. Uhhh.. that's exactly what some of th…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:31 PM
3

That is higher than 85% of all full time workers in the US. IPUMS CPS 2017 data. The top 15% is the average cutoff from established academic socioeconomic models.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:25 PM
1

You can judge relative to your age group (perhaps even better for making some judgement about RMV), but that is going to take you outside of the socioeconomic frameworks (academic models) that I mentioned. The latter is the topic at hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 02:23 PM
1

Why would it NOT be somewhat rare? It's the UPPER middle class. Most socioeconomic models suggest that it's the top 15% or higher (with the last 1% of that 15% reserved for 'upper class'). There's also the lower middle class and working class below that, which is MOST people (inc. the 60-70% of people in the US without college degrees and therefore very often lower income earners).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 01:51 PM
2

They are too low income to qualify.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 01:15 PM
2

They just lowball the entry level for UMC. Information clueless.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 01:05 PM
1

Source that men predominate elite / competitive schools?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 01:05 PM
7

Lots of UMC fakes on here. How convenient to be able to place yourself wherever you want... Other than at least a Bachelors degree . . Income matters. And top 15% is usually the entry level per most socioeconomic models ... or why call it Umc? (It's $90k for individuals or about $175k for households nationwide in the US).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 12:40 PM
1

A questionnaire, my ass. In other words, yet another "study" on what humans say and not what they do, just as the majority of the sociology "science". This one with added autism of rating 27 bloody features in isolation instead of at least rating the whole picture. 1) There is no way to know exactly what people "do" or why they "do what they do" (in any way) because we can't read minds and we can't see through walls so there is no point in guessing as you'll never know the "right" answer. What y…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/18 04:36 AM
3

You have an original PPD cloak of misery. Wear it proudly.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 04:57 PM
1

Uh, did you read the actual study? Of course not, because it's behind a paywall. No feel good bullshit there (that was just the tone of the article). The tone doesn't change the content. Here, "mate", let me help you: http://sci-hub.tw/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-997-1013-0 Read. The. Whole. Study.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 04:40 PM
1

I think it's particularly important in a social circle context when you observe people you know and how they act. Remember: the vast majority of people are NOT dating or even sleeping with people they met in bars or Tinder. So from school/college to work to adult social gatherings of friends... women will observe men and how they act. If you have the balls to disagree, stand up for your opinion and yourself (if someone tries to ridicule you) you look like a stronger man. And this confidence is s…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 04:26 PM
1

Sure. Here's a summary of a study that showed that self-care (dressing) was one of the top traits in predicting someone's attractiveness. Their shocking finding was that, by far, the most attractive features fell under the category of "self care". These features were changeable aspects like good grooming, neat hair, nice fitting and quality clothing, good posture, and healthy weight. Essentially, the most attractive features about a person (male or female) is that they put forth some effort to s…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 04:23 PM
3

Self-care, being fit, and standing up for yourself are not really BP strategies. BP may not be explicitly against these but the emphasis is minimized if not foregone altogether You do realize that there is no formal BP position at all right? Even RP can't agree on their own position, forget the position or definition of BP in the eyes of RPers. To be clear - I refered to BP in my comment as "my personal general upbringing... which pre-dated RP Internet malarkey." Instead, BP indoctrination tells…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 04:20 PM
5

If sexual strategy = having an ability to attract women, then blue pill advice seems pretty straightforward to me. It's what I was raised to believe: being fit, having good self-care, having the balls to stand up for yourself and a solid education and career = attractive. Thus far it's panned out.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 06:00 AM
1

A sense of style translates to an appearance, which is visual/physical. Want to spin some more bullshit?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/18 05:47 AM
6

I'm pretty sure he's jobless right now (hence the fight) so he'd end up living with his parents or without a roof over his head...
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 05:07 PM
1

Where did I take that position? Quote me directly.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 04:32 PM
1

Clubs, bars, drugs and Tinder, right? Right?? I mean 2002 was like a caveman times. Abacus days and all... And then magically the BIG COASTAL cities changed... because someone said so. Brilliant.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 04:31 PM
1

First of all, that's not a study, it's a survey. Secondly: It was a generic question on what makes a guy "hot." They didn't give out the actual question / phrasing. Thirdly, and most importantly, it's irrelevant, as we're comparing physical traits relative to other physical ones here. I don't condone comparing the physical bucket here vs. the 3 non-physical buckets.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 04:30 PM
6

Coincidentally, on the way to the gym yesterday while walking through my condo building I overhead a raised squeaky voice. It was an Asian girl yelling at her white boyfriend - I could hear the conversation clearly standing beside their unit door. Something about how she wants him to "be a provider" and that "wishing that he could be" wasn't good enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 04:25 PM
1

I lived in the Providence area from 2006-2010 and then Boston from 2010 till today. Being Eastern European and raised to dress well and groom properly... compared to most average American men (arguably lower middle class) it's not that hard to dress better. Since I started college in 2006... I have received, in approximate order of frequency compliments on: leather jackets, suit/tie combinations and accessories like cuff links, dress shirts (casual not tucked in), hair styling (matte effect past…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 06:07 AM
1

The world really hasn't changed from 2002. And I showed you plenty of data 10+ years newer to show that. I mean you're arguing that what's happening in coastal cities has been the most drastic change... like they are the only place that got more promiscuous ... and the others did not. LOL. That and what makes you think your friends and social circle somehow represent normality or are a good source for generalizations? Just because you and your friends did something doesn't make it common or norm…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 06:01 AM
1

Again, i never said dressing nice was a bad idea. Just that it has little to do with physical attractiveness. Learn to differentiate between the two. So clothes aren't physical? Is this a sick joke or what? Or grooming? There was an actual study done that showed that self-care literally had one of the strongest impacts on someone's attractiveness. Their shocking finding was that, by far, the most attractive features fell under the category of "self care". These features were changeable aspects l…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 05:59 AM
1

How could it not be? No one has yet made a strong argument against it. My opinion is my opinion, and I find it, at the moment, to be more substantiated than the others here. If SMV has looks and character/personality components, how could these be absent in a RMV / relationship point of view?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 05:57 AM
1

They look alright. And for what it's worth, they are the least relevant to attracting women anyway...
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/18 05:55 AM
0

About shit - shit smells. A good tangential point. As long as the guy isn't so repulsively bad at regular hygiene that he stinks, yes, better clothing still makes him more attractive. Even if he's quite fat. Of course at some point good clothing won't make the difference (such as being like BMI 35+ or awful at hygiene). Arguing against this is some sort of weird projection / bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 10:53 PM
-1

Do Men Actually Like Nice Girls or Not? I'll stop "liking" girls when they all start to smell like 3-week un-showered currycels in middle of a hot summer.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 10:48 PM
1

1) You don't speak for all UMC kids in urban cities. You are a certain type of individual - that mixed with similar individuals. Don't assume that your experience mirrors normality or majority experience. And on top of that ... UMC = college educated people = less reported partners (see link below). So if you were actually in normal UMC circles, you'd be encountering people who are less promiscuous than the US average (as opposed to your claim or college people in a large metro area being more p…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 09:16 PM
6

Your problem here is you're taking what women say too much for face value. Women lie about these sorts of things all the damn time to not appear shallow. Get this... I actually do dress much nicer than pretty much all American men (because I can afford to)... and guess what? I get compliments and female eyes on me regularly. Shocking, right? Those tricky womenz... must be some twisted ploy! Additionally: saying that someone likes "stylish men" is hardly pro or anti shallow. It's a neutral topic,…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 09:00 PM
1

A recent analysis showed that Millennials actually had fewer lifetime sexual partners than Boomers when age and time period were controlled (Twenge et al., 2015) From the paper I linked: http://sci-hub.tw/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27480753 Even more data: The median partner count for people based on CDC data has hardly moved since 2002 to 2015. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/n.htm#numberlifetime Down 0.6 for men and up 0.4 for women. That's an overall decrease, but I won'…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 08:53 PM
1

Ok, you don't get women. They often present themselves as prudish to their boyfriends/husbands to be a "wife material". But they also seek ways to express their raw sexuality. Oh yeah, I totally "don't get" women. Even though I never had a problem attracting them since I was a teenager. Now I'm 30 and have been with someone for almost 10 years (now married). I TOTALLY "don't get" women... HAH! You got me! If you are the guy she lets her guard down with, she will tell all the dirty details in hop…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 08:33 PM
2

You're completely off base. Millennials are becoming LESS sexually active. The amount of projection-based theories on PPD is always hilarious. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305783331_Sexual_Inactivity_During_Young_Adulthood_Is_More_Common_Among_US_Millennials_and_iGen_Age_Period_and_Cohort_Effects_on_Having_No_Sexual_Partners_After_Age_18
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 08:27 PM
7

Hah, even as a hetero male I thought the same thing ... his build/face was overall better in the first pic. If he lost weight he might be able to fix that... he won't be attracting club sluts but he'd do very well in an artsy niche. With his old self?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 08:15 PM
1

Better than this? https://i.imgur.com/z3mHvz2.png
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 08:11 PM
8

For guys stuff you buy at the mall does not increase your value. Who are you kidding? All else equal, nicer looking / better fitting clothing is always a good thing. Women voted "sense of style" to first place on what makes a guy "hot" physically. http://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/top-20-traits-she-wants In fact it's how most "average" shaped men differentiate themselves and get physically attractive SOs. and hit the gym. You can't out-exercise crappy or even OK genetics. Like this TRP guy: ht…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 07:00 PM
2

Small waist + wide chest/shoulder area = classic male "V" look. Also heavily bone structure dependent. Plays small violin for unfortunate gym rats.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:33 PM
1

What you're saying makes NO sense at all even "in theory." You're literally saying that women tell you / an "inquisitive other guy", IN PERSON, about these things they feel shame about YET they LIE in anonymous/private surveys. Ahahahaahahah!!! That's so senseless it's unbelievable. 0/100.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:31 PM
2

Ah, now that is indeed well-phrased and interesting question. As a straight male, I don't have a well informed or thought out opinion on it. My best guess is they do indeed set a lower "looks bar" for LTRs, but not by that much. It simply gives them more options to choose from when it comes to smarts, personality/character and LTR values.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:22 PM
1

It's a nice theory. Does it have any support beyond your word?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:19 PM
2

Hopefully all the guys thinking that "gym" will make them physically attractive get better results than this TRP poster: https://imgur.com/a/xopC8 Aka skinny-fat to rotund.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:15 PM
5

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:12 PM
3

Oh please. Privately/anonymously reported numbers from 10,000+ people are better than what you or any individual thinks about what other people are or are not doing in the bedroom. Research into this ("Bogus Pipeline" research by Fisher) has shown deviations of NO MORE than ONE partner in self-reports. And she reported means, not medians, which favored her argument (for the fact that people change their numbers based on reporting conditions... public, private/anonymous and Bogus Pipeline.. which…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 06:05 PM
1

Some cars are white, some cars are black, folks!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:34 PM
5

It's normal to be poor or on the verge being poor (working to pay the bills), but I wouln't call it a normal state of being even if it is normal for most people. That's not normal. That's being poor. Poor =/= median. The poverty line isn't at median income. All else is your personal, quite arbitrary standards on what is "poor."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:33 PM
2

Well you may not know it, but your number preference is anchored around the population median for partners (more or less). And that's a reasonable (... arguably most objective) data point to judge from.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:32 PM
1

Very easily. 1) Part of SMV is a sexually attractive personality/character, too. They could have that going for them. 2) Massive overcompensation with wealth for lack of looks. Wealth is obviously a byproduct of "smarts" and personality/character traits, which make up a part of RMV. And the women value their money more so than anything because they want a sugar daddy, so they are pairing up on their disproportionately strong personal preferences (and vice versa... the man going for her looks).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:30 PM
3

I know some good people who have had bad luck choosing poor quality partners. Luck (or bad luck) are definitely factors, but they become less and less likely to be the culprit as time goes on (and # of relationships, in this case). You know what I mean by this, right? (Odds/probability). A few broken relationships? Maybe bad luck / the people are not a "problem." I've read the the average individual has 2 LTRs in their whole life (I assume many marry afterwards). So 1-3 is a normal range, natura…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:25 PM
1

Block me. I'll continue to point out stupid crap as long as it pleases me.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:21 PM
1

My point still stands. SMV is a subset of RMV. You're complaining about perception.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:20 PM
3

Most people are settled down and having kids in their 30s. That's how life works for MOST (the vast majority) of people. That is, therefore, normal. It might not seem that way when you're on a nonconformist oddball forum like this one. If you want to base your generalizations on a small minority of people, that's on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:19 PM
1

Well now you've gone from baseless blanket to unfalsifiable. Do you think what you've said has any value? Now it's just stating the obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:16 PM
1

"Sexually attractive men probably do not want to get married?" Baseless blanket statement of the week award. Come, come on up! It's all yours!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:14 PM
2

SMV is a subset of RMV. You can't talk about RMV without implicitly talking about SMV. Sexually attractive features aren't exclusive to casual sex. They are important for LTRs, too. For most people they are going to want enough of those SMV-specific traits in someone before they consider them relationship material (high enough RMV) to date.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:13 PM
2

You do realize that in the US that the median female has 3-4 partners at age 30 and males about 5? https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:07 PM
1

No. It's 3-4 for women and about 5 for men at the national median. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:06 PM
3

Depends on how fucked up their past is. Nothing more, nothing less.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:04 PM
1

You're sick. You know that, right? CDC data points to a median 30 year old woman as having 3-4 partners and median 30 year old man as having 5 partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 05:03 PM
2

Frame of reference for the numbers or the compatibility issue?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 04:54 PM
1

It's not a type of women. In fact most are happily willing to engage in casual sex with the right man. BUT most also deny it. They have invested interest in hiding their true sexual nature so guys would invest money and time in them. Hahahaha... give me a break with your armchair expert theories about sexual preferences of people. Data on sexual preferences suggests that no more than 1/3 women have ever even had vaginal intercourse in a hookup (ever) and only 20% of college women are interested …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 04:50 PM
1

Right, you said: I did say that most men have low or medium SMV in most women's eyes Which means you think that men DON'T have low to medium RMV, while women do (you think it's higher than women perceive it to be). That IS what you're saying. Which is basically whining about womens' standards. Say it ain't so.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 04:38 PM
1

Hahah.. come on! This place was toxic long before I made it part of my lunchtime entertainment repertoire. I'll say it again: answer my question, and if I believe you answer to be genuine, I'll answer yours. I'm not wasting my time on serious discussions here unless I believe them to be genuine and fruitful.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 04:35 PM
1

There's definitely a trend there, yes. The more tattoos the more wary I get.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 01:24 PM
6

Come on. Being in a relationship with someone who already failed 10 times (guess who's the common denominator?) is literally asking for trouble. Like putting a former 10 time rapist alone in a house with a kid.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/18 01:22 PM
1

Men having low or high RMV is up to women to judge, not men. Who else would judge men? Likewise, men judge women and decide what is high RMV and what is not... Please don't start crying about how the world is unfair or some shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 06:50 PM
3

I wasn't trying to toot my own horn. I was responding to the way you phrased the "have to date". I gave my own example to show that you can skip dating. And it's not random fucking, it a selection mechanism for finding the best suited mate in way that lets a person be honest if they feel sexual attraction fast. Yeah, not only are you into sleeping with specific kinds of women (the kind that would come over just for sex without properly getting to know you) ... you're now saying that "sexual attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 06:48 PM
1

So you're saying, implicitly, that most men are in fact low to medium RMV at best? (Due to very few of them having above-average on all relevant traits). If so, what's your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 05:40 PM
3

So you're into random fucking - thanks for sharing. That has about 1/3 (being generous) to do with the OP, making your statement you tooting your horn. Did you have a point relevant to the OP?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 05:36 PM
3

It's not impossible, it's just less likely. No one is perfect - duh. Moving down.. Most people aren't even very high on all those traits... BUT Quite a decent amount of men and women are above-average at least to some degree on MANY of those attractive traits which make up SMV and RMV.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:32 PM
1

I agree. But SMV is just part of the "whole" package of RMV. Not sure why you think that's odd, if you disagree. Put another way, it's essentially impossible to be high RMV without being high SMV. On the other hand, you can be high SMV without being high RMV.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:31 PM
1

Me too. I personally find that nothing changed, especially if you stay away from OLD/dating apps. Finding people on an electronic device was the game changer. The fact that you can do it more frequently/conveniently is largely irrelevant (the time of day that you get your messages on the app/site, etc - is irrelevant - to clarify).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:30 PM
2

I don't date and have plenty women wanting to be with me Wow, that's really "something!" Nop. Quite low actually. The effort is in becoming a confident man that women want to fuck. But the the process of getting together can be very low cost. For me, 5-10 min initial approach. 30-60 min talk on phone or while walking in the park. Her decision of whether my offer is something she will engage in. Nothing high cost in that. The amount of free time that you're going to spend dating as a proportion o…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:28 PM
1

That's what dumb/naive women do - I already alluded to this earlier. I also personally don't find them to be a majority of women. Using them as some benchmark or example doesn't make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:23 PM
1

To ask such a question, you must be: 1) A child 2) Extremely disingenuous or playing coy 3) Somehow mentally handicapped Which is it? I will decide if I want to answer based on your reply.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:22 PM
2

I could tell you about things like empathy, chemistry (thinking alike) and propinquity/intimacy, but you'd draw a blank. I hope some girl out there turns something on inside you and you suddenly feel like you have the ability to connect with her (and other women, potentially). Now get back to shooting people in the head with an assault rifle on your TV!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:48 AM
0

A bit macabre and voyeuristic but whatever turns you on. Well, thank you very much?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:42 AM
2

Indeed. I sit back and enjoy the shitshow.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:35 AM
2

Every other freakshow on this sub has their own half-baked definition of those terms.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:32 AM
1

I agree, except the same SMV traits fall under RMV as well (I usually say that RMV is more comprehensive and includes SMV traits). There is no relationship without the baseline sexual attraction requirements, unless the woman REALLY screwed up her dating and had to settle downwards hardcore. I can agree that women have higher standards for casual sex in general (without needing convincing), but you've made NO case that women actually have higher standards for relationships. You literally just "s…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:28 AM
5

Yet another topic where everyone assumes that their definition of the most abused terms of the Manosphere are indeed the same as the person they are talking to. Waiting for: "high" betas, "omegas" and whatever other bullshit someone has made up more recently that I missed...
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:15 AM
1

Well you made an assertion, but left it completely baseless/unjustified. Bravo.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:11 AM
7

I'll be serious here and say I'm no expert on autism. Perhaps there are degrees/severities of it where understanding and being in relationships is impossible? Maybe that's just how the dice rolled for you. All you did was counter with "cons" of a relationship. I pointed out there are indeed risks ("cons"). Of course there are cons. There are "pros", too - lots of them, but frankly I don't feel the need to go into them. At the end of the day, there is no perfect way to "weigh" these pros and cons…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 04:10 AM
3

Did you miss the part about potential lifelong and priceless benefits? To ask such a question, you must be: 1) A child 2) Extremely disingenuous or playing coy 3) Somehow mentally handicapped Which is it?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 03:51 AM
1

Initially, yes. What do you mean "initially?" When is that, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 03:16 AM
21

If you want a human life partner of the opposite gender, you're going to have to date, you're probably going to have sex and maybe even get married. The initial time costs and effort required are high - the risks afterwards exist too - but the rewards potentially lifelong and priceless. No one is forcing you to do anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/18 03:09 AM
3

You tell that to all the women on here REEEEEing about how "we're womenz we knowz how our attraction workz and only us." ?? Right?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:41 PM
6

men who care about his partners sexual history are stupid and insecure. Said the local reformed/former slut, while thinly veiling her remorse.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:39 PM
1

A "man slut" is a "badge of honor" in cheap locker room talk among men. A cheap compliment when nothing else comes to mind - so therefore likely among relatively low-value men in the grand scheme of things who derive value from how many promiscuous girls opened their legs for them. Nothing more. Women seeking LTRs avoid players / man sluts like the plague unless they are extremely dumb/naive. Therefore, hardly a badge of anything good.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:33 PM
0

That speaks only to the limits of your empathy and/or imagination. The "limits of my empathy" .... hahahahha... wow. Say some more? Please? People who get insecure about n-counts are just that: insecure. Insecurity when it comes to promiscuous partners and the consequences of that on LTRs is a great thing, unless your goal is a shitty relationship which likely ends in break up or divorce. I wouldn't stop a stranger from making shitty life choices, though. Just remember: choices have consequences…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:28 PM
1

Are you talking to yourself or what? I never said "belong" anywhere. I just assume that men follow through on their obvious preferences the vast majority of the time. That's that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:24 PM
2

If you want to stretch things to fit your biases, you're doing great. Let's take a look at some basic data: https://www.cnn.com/2013/10/21/tech/web/online-dating-pew/index.html Six out of 10 Americans now believe dating sites are a good way to meet people, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project. That's up from 44% who felt that way in 2005, the last time Pew conducted a similar survey. And barely two out of every 10 people (21%) still feel tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:23 PM
2

I think that the distribution gets skewed by the relatively fewer men who have very high N compared to the more numerous women who have “mid range N.” If by "skewed" you mean in some way faulty, then you're off base for the purposes of this particular point that I'm trying to make. Any skew present in the distribution in fact only reflects sexual behavior or men or women. In particular, I'm referring to the high partner count tail for both genders. Point 1: There are more men in it. Point 2: In …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:21 PM
1

More men have "sleep around phases." Evidence: sexual partner count history distribution and reported desire for casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 01:17 PM
1

Tedesche meets a girl. 5 years later they are together, things are good. Tedesche and his girl are in bed one night, getting ready to go to sleep. Tedesche's girl: You know, Tedesche, I never told you, but I had this sorta-wild-phase in college that lasted till I met you. Tedesche: I was 27 when we met. You were 26. So what do you mean by wild phase? Tedesche's girl: Oh you know, I just dated around, had some fun. I was with lots of guys during those years. I don't even remember how many exactly…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 05:15 AM
1

I was not generalizing at all. Just tooting your horn, then? as many many late-40s and early-50s high SMV men have children with their 40 something wives every single day. "Many" only in absolute terms (counting one, two, three, etc.). Meaningless. Relatively speaking, these people are a very small minority of parents. https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/30/health/birth-rate-older-moms-teen-risk-study/index.html The largest proportion of the births in the study, 28.9%, was among women 25 to 29. About 25…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 05:05 AM
1

Ah yes, how could I not see it before? Average 40 year old, hence chubby, unremarkable women totally taking all those hot 20s guys from the hot late teen to 20s girls that those hot guys strongly prefer... because those women are... hot ... and the guys are hot. Totally believe that!
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:55 AM
1

We were talking about evidence for TRP; you claimed there wasn't any. Wrong. You said: Does he have no game? Read PUA books, inner game books I said THOSE have no non-anecdotal evidence backing them. Not "TRP." And the people writing them have questionable authority. Pure charlatans. After I pointed out that there was ample anecdotal evidence, you moved the bar and said anecdotal evidence wasn't enough. So I pointed out ample empirical evidence, too, and you tried to ignore it completely. Now yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:52 AM
0

Do you see how funny it is that you're triggered by my generalizations based upon my everyday experience, when your only argument against it is generalizations you've made from your hopeful assumptions? You have to see that, right? Do you see how funny it is that you're oblivious to all of the problems of certain choices? Or that you can build a one sided argument for just about anything? Or making arguments that defy logic or basic demographic data? The latter two were particularly funny. The f…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:46 AM
17

What a load of crap. Tinder wasn't nearly as groundbreaking as regular online dating or even the Internet (chat rooms, forums, etc.) as a new medium for meeting singles. Tinder is just the scapegoat of the moment. The vast majority of people (who are still meeting their lovers / spouses) in real life don't give a shit about Tinder.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 04:22 AM
4

Are you having fun playing "I'm right" with these bullshit titles?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/18 03:20 AM
3

Way more, better job opportunities? Keep your college relationship without having to move away, potentially breaking up in the process...
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 11:20 PM
3

Nah, he's right. the average 40 year old woman could fuck a new hot guy in his 20s every day Average 40 year old woman and 20's hot guy is a complete delusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 09:04 PM
0

My high SMV husband had a kid with me when I was 41, Wow.. hahaha... way to try and generalize using yourself and your "high SMV husband" as an example! Brilliant, if aiming for a 0/100.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 09:01 PM
9

I wouldn't bother with the handful of rich dudes as examples - that's arguably an apex fallacy. As I said... and we're in agreement, on this point: abilities to parents biological children are the primary driver of "the wall."
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 05:29 PM
0

Irrelevant to me Don't want kids? OK, you're a 10% minority. Just to get that out of the way. And sure, "The Wall" is a lesser deal, then. That's an interesting assumption, and also totally false. Young men chase women in their thirties pretty relentlessly. What are "young men"? Men will sleep with just about anything. Demographic data on couples/parents will tell you all the actual facts on more serious "pairings." I can't make up demographic data. It all points to men being generally 1-2 years…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 05:20 PM
6

I didn't say anything about "all women" or even make any generalizations. I'm pointing out that when you have $$, you need to start being wary of gold diggers (being liked for your money, as opposed to all of the other things you actually want to be liked for).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 05:12 PM
5

his accumulation of wealth That's a borderline acceptance of being a sugar daddy / taking on a gold digger, though. I'd be really wary.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 05:02 PM
6

I view "The Wall" as largely being related to the ability (or "ease") of having biological kids / family. It comes later for men, and it would be worse if women knew that semen quality does "degrade" for lack of a better way to put it and birth defects DO rise with age for fathers. Most men simply avoid older women because they know that older women = higher chances of health problems in kids. For men, as long as you still physically attractive and doing well financially, you can definitely have…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 04:58 PM
9

So you don’t like it. I would not like it, no. Do you consider her shaving her legs to be deception? I do not. That's only a "thing" (deceptions via self-care) for some freaks on this forum, FYI.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 04:31 PM
1

"The Wall" is mostly an own biological family/baby ordeal more than anything (based on personal observations and demographic data). At 33 the amount of men who will want to have children with you will be far more limited (how stupid do you or them have to be to have kids without getting to know each other for at least 2-3 years?). Most remotely smart men know that younger women = healthier kids. Big detractor there. More importantly, the quality of actual men is in question. Almost all of them w…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 04:27 PM
15

She can stop shaving her legs when my BMI hits 30.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/18 04:18 PM
1

Did you know the more attractive men in their late teen years? They likely get that higher partner count from early college.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 11:23 PM
2

less attractive women (5s) and fatties get pumped n dumped a LOT because quality dudes aren't interested in dating them. a lot of their notches come from drunk desperate guys who probably wouldn't want to fuck them if they were sober, much less date them. Probably that (drunk validation sex, basically) and also from "hope-for-LTR" situations which go nowhere (mostly due to the fault of the girl not having a relationship talk before sleeping with the guy) where the girl gets used (essentially) fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 09:52 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5ybwci/discussion_physical_attractiveness_other/ "Oldie, but a goodie." Pretty much suggests that average men, if seeking sex with more attractive women, should stick with LTRs. Also suggests that above-average looking men who are LTR seekers are big-time winners.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 08:23 PM
1

What was covered there is hardly exhaustive. In fact, it's quite the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 08:20 PM
1

Not quite a riveting as you being oblivious to what seems to be obvious to others, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 04:15 PM
1

Nope. A specific subset of those people. Although I did leave out one important thing: you. That combination is what gave you your experience. Not "all those NYC college people."
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 04:11 PM
5

Pretty sure it's one of the worst feelings in the world - particularly when you wanted more from the other person.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 01:04 PM
1

None of that is what I'm talking about, however. I'm more interested straightforward physical or personality/character traits which are most attractive to the largest numbers of women. Tangentially, the alpha/beta and menstrual cycle topic has conflicting data, but that's beside my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 05:44 AM
1

Not sure I understand your two types of women that you've used as examples...
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 05:44 AM
1

A 1 partner different for top 10 metros vs. the rest is a significant difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 05:43 AM
3

Nope, it was a specific subset of "average college students and 20somethings" - you seem to be oblivious to this, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/18 05:41 AM
3

And started mixing with certain, specific kinds of people...
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:30 PM
2

That's actually wrong. Big metro areas similar or lower numbers of reported sexual partners. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad362.pdf Pg 28 - 29
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:30 PM
6

When men say or hear "attractive", it means "sexually attractive". This is you speaking for other men (making crap up, basically). You're in no place to do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:22 PM
1

I don't think you're getting my point. Some men cannot "flirt/seduce" due to personality/character trait issues (we've settle the "smarts" issues question above). First of all, what are these traits? Secondly, how does "approaching" alleviate those problems?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:21 PM
8

Speak for yourself, sport. Stop putting words in the mouths of other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:18 PM
42

Waking up next to an awesome human being day after day is one of the best feelings in the world (random hos do not apply). That's why.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:17 PM
1

Oh for the love of God... you need to say that from the get-go. 80% of people here are from the Anglosphere.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:13 PM
1

How does that makes him naturally figure out how to flirt/seduce, though?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:13 PM
4

Nice IS attractive. Just not sexually attractive. It's not the same. And I've never heard anyone say "nice = sexually attractive." Your parents pulled one on you, sport.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:12 PM
5

And you don't know what's good for you. It's OK, I wanted to answer your question, now I just want to see you crash and burn.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:11 PM
1

Those you listed work for a single girl, not so much in situations where you have to open to a whole group of girls which I had little experience with yet seems to be the majority of my sets at frat parties or bars. "Hey, what are you ladies upto?" Just go plural. Or talk to just one of them for the first line. No big deal. I can't get behind canned openers because they are automatically in a way dishonest/fake and less representative of who I am than something I come up with myself. It’s pretty…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:10 PM
5

They answered the question while making a bunch of assumptions about what you meant. You can't even come up with a good definition for nice guy. You have no idea what you're asking, essentially. It's quite entertaining to watch.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:05 PM
1

OK - which personality/character problems is that going to fix?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 05:03 PM
6

"but I'm nice...." because that's what everyone has told them is sexually attractive Hahaha.... Yeah, essentially no one said "nice" is "sexually attractive" ... because no one says "sexually attractive" very often outside of PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:56 PM
1

Are you one of the local recurring 500K/year studs?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:54 PM
1

Then you’re reaching way below average IQ level type guys. Which I can’t really speak on since they would need extra assistance in many areas including flirting. So I agree OK, but what about the average to above average IQ guys that can't flirt/seduce because of character/personality issues (as opposed to "brains/smarts" issues? I believe this is the more relevant group to PUA/TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:53 PM
4

Your question is vague, yet you don't even realize it is vague. I mean how bad do you get? Why don't you come up with something which is more concrete, instead of assuming people just know what you mean (most will just take a guess at their own peril). I'm not one of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:42 PM
1

OK, no worries, assuming that's all you like in PUA, then I'm genuinely curious: 1) Why do you like the pre-made / canned openers (I'm assuming this is what you mean) vs. "Hey, how are you / what's on your mind / what are you upto?" and 2) What is this escalation template? Can you link it?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:39 PM
1

If you look at things "all else equal" then the op looks really dumb: "which would you like more $100 or $150 all else equal?..." There are always trade offs. Well shit, the OP really is that straightforward. The PhD should indeed win most of the time. In some cases (like this one) the trade-offs are pretty one-sided. A PhD is just likely to make UMC money. That's not going to make any noticeable difference in my life. Depends on your income. How dumb or disingenuous do you have to be to not see…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:34 PM
4

Yeah... I can't read their mind, so I can't tell who thought that when....
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:29 PM
1

No, PUA (back around 2008) did not do anything for me. I could attract women before PUA and PUA did nothing. PUA is at best a tool for men with absolutely no clue when it comes to attracting women. And again: there is little to no evidence that it is nothing but a placebo even for men who struggle with women. "It" working is "something" working yet not necessarily what is claimed to be working. That might be too much for you to handle. Try thinking about it for a while longer. Where the hell did…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:27 PM
1

Many of the men that couldn’t figure it out in the first place have failed to learn by approaching what...? 2,3-5 times in their entire life? And done so in appropriate places. We can't know for sure what the numbers are, unfortunately. They are important, however, I agree. The simple action of approaching more (provided you have a brain that remembers experiences) will improve your game. Ah, see, but I'm willing to wager the "brain" is missing in those guys and it's not going to expand much via…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:24 PM
1

A 5'2 or 5'3 guy IS very short and THAT point it WOULD be a big deal. We're in agreement there. 5'5 or up is no issue. https://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/very-short-men-have-fewer-sex-partners/ Some basic empirical data to back that up. To reiterate my whole point: height isn't really an issue unless you're really short (below 5'5) and facial attractiveness, build (bone structure of upper body) plus fitness level are more important. Working out isn't going to make a man with crappy bone structu…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:21 PM
1

Much of which broadly supports TRP, yes. Most of those have nothing to do with what I'm talking about: intergender attraction (traits which we find attractive in the opposite gender). Attraction is the pinnacle of ALL things PUA/TRP, but most of those dolts miss that. Unless you believe there's a widespread conspiracy to lie about how effective TRP is (in which case I'd ask who's getting paid enough to drive that), that's ridiculous. Why would the majority of guys out there not be mostly honest …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:17 PM
1

So she can be a stressed out harridan in a fancier car? You're just arbitrarily introducing negative traits to one party being discussed to suit your argument. I could just as easily argue that the "MC office worker" hates her job and stresses out about not having a lot of money. Garbage argument in both cases. You need to look at things "all else equal" here OR prove that there is an actual relationship (not using anecdotal evidence) that indeed PhD candidates are "stressed out harridan[s]" wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 03:34 PM
9

Define "nice guy" and I can answer your question, as there is no universal definition on here of the term.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 03:29 PM
5

It's pretty obvious: money, which brings comfort and pleasure.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 03:15 PM
3

But you claimed there wasn't "any evidence backing their efficacy." That's clearly untrue. The fact that there is anecdotal evidence against them doesn't change that. Congratulations, you win on the technicality. I'll have to take this argument a tad more seriously, then. Anecdotal evidence is about as good as fiction in this case. None of it can be verified for efficacy with any reliability. Neither for yourself nor other people. There are far too many variables involved in human interactions f…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:50 AM
1

It shows you the “right” way to do things, and in doing such illuminates what’s lacking in your own game/appearance. Who said it's the "right" way? Anyone can write a bunch of self-published bullshit. Internet charlatans are a dime-a-dozen. Do you know these self-style "gurus" well in real life? I doubt it. Take the mystery method for example. You had thousands of guys having 1000x more success with women than before. It doesn’t matter how it works, only that it does. 1000x more success? Yeah, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:43 AM
1

Yeah, if a guy is short or ugly, him getting buff (which I'm not a super huge fan of anyway even on a good looking guy but that's personally me) is not going to turn him into the guy playing Superman (which I read used to be fat). It could very well end up looking more ridiculous than anything on guys like that tbh. Short isn't an issue unless you're a borderline male dwarf (less than 5'2). "Ugly" in a face or body sense is a killer (poor shape or skin, basically, including being overweight) as …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:37 AM
1

What? They can't seem to learn shit, hence it must be difficult to learn. crash burn flirting is exactly what TRP advises lol. It frequently claims its the only way to improve. "Next and move on" is a common phrase what .. TRP doesn't teach men how to have conversations either Therefore it is generally worthless, like PUA, which is something I often mention here. The only exception is getting a small subset of their userbase who are.. "shy" for lack of a better term to put it to go out and talk …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:35 AM
2

I have a mountain of anecdotal evidence against them. What now?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/18 04:25 AM
3

And what does this have to do with her and her daddy? (or some such cheap Hollywood cliche)? Banging some ho from a random school isn't her actively trying to "piss of her daddy" nor is it indicative of any general trends.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 07:06 PM
2

Delusional. MC, UMC girls love pissing off daddy by banging lower class alphas Delusion is buying into Hollywood stereotyping. 10/10 points for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 06:55 PM
1

Never was for me. I stumbled onto RP after I already knew how to flirt. Really depends on the the person. Some of them are on the spectrum so in which case duhh! Got to wonder why you need RP for anything if you supposedly know "how to flirt..." But they can learn to be. You keep saying easy, and near impossible. Nowhere have I said this is easy. Well, the proof of the difficulty is in the TRP/PUA pudding. Are we back to this again? seems like you're just trying to win with a witty comeback. Re-…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 06:50 PM
1

So are you saying that its harder for some people than some others due to their personality? No shit. Either way, its all learning through trial n error and refinement (yes even the “naturals”). I'm saying it's borderline impossible for some people. These "some people" are also mostly those guys on /r/TRP and PUA. Some people take longer than others. And many never learn it because they don’t want/have to. It’s still a skill like any other. And if you’re unskilled the only way to get better at i…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 06:27 PM
1

Going to the gym everyday, for instance, is not mimicking desirable men. It's a path to becoming desirable. Unless you have an unattractive face, build (bone structure) and carry too much fat (which gym won't necessarily fix).. in which case it won't help much.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 06:21 PM
1

Reading these books helps self diagnose. How? I haven't seen a single one which teaches someone how to HOLISTICALLY determine their weakness in terms of personal attractiveness (looks, smarts, personality/character traits). I don’t know what you mean by they have nothing backing their effectiveness. That’s objectively false. If it's objectively false, where's your backing evidence of it being such? Who verified the efficacy of any of that material? Users testing the efficacy aren't exactly a rel…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 06:10 PM
1

Big questions. Why do you believe that learning stops after teens? Do people have a set date in their lives where it ceases to happen? I didn't say "learning." I said certain "smarts" or character/personality traits are acquired during those years (which are conducive to being flirty, for example). Calling something ‘innate’ is just an easy copout. Old dogs can learn new tricks. Certainly not the former. And the latter isn't that easy. Some things come very easy to some people, and very hard to …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 06:06 PM
39

I'd say "I'll keep that in mind" and then surprise her down the line (sooner rather than later) on a fitting occasion.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 04:21 PM
1

Their ability to learn it hasn’t changed. They just have to do it later. Do they (all or most people in general) have this ability in the first place? Big question. If not, no amount of action will change that. It seems to me that certain smarts and character/personality traits are either innate or acquired at a very young age (teens).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 04:19 PM
3

Does he have no game? Read PUA books, inner game books and practice talking to people. The only thing those books might do is convince the guy to go out and talk to people. None of them have any evidence backing their efficacy. In fact, they might counteract the above advice which you replied to which is "not put people off." One must be honest with themselves and their shortcomings and use the millions of resources available at their fingertips to troubleshoot ways on how to become the person t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/18 04:15 PM
1

You’re getting too hung up on the word ‘game’ Hardly. That was the case until we finally got your definition out: "flirting" and "seduction." Learning game is as vague as learning how to tell a good joke, what generally works and what doesn’t. There’s no set of steps that work every time because the scenarios are highly contextual. The only way is practice. Practice practice practice. That figuring it out naturally is done simply by trying and failing, trying and failing until something clicks a…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 10:47 PM
1

Ehh... I'd be OK with that so long as it doesn't make her constantly bitter/resentful (which would rub off on me no doubt).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 06:05 PM
0

Yes, too dumb to. Not necessarily her dream job, but one of the possible career paths that she actually enjoys. There's also the money factor. If she loves art, but it doesn't pay her bills, it's highly likely I wouldn't want to date her. Money problems = drama + no fun = no thanks. Art can be done as a hobby.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 05:52 PM
2

It is of moderate importance. She hates her job Will likely make her bitter/resentful and annoying to be around. Might also have been too dumb to get the job that she likes. A possible deal-breaker. She loves her job Great. As long as it covers basic living expenses. Being able to live comfortably on your own is important. A hallmark downstream trait of high RMV. She is a workaholic Depends on the extent. Eventually this becomes a deal-breaker. She wants to just work then go home after work and …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 05:46 PM
1

A child learns running (or walking) by watching adults around doing it then attempts to emulate it over n over again until they get it. Conversation and language is the same. Hahaha... I'd love to see a source that suggests that 12 month old babies "learn by observation" and that this is not mostly instinct. After their muscles are strong enough, they just start using their legs. Luckily most humans learn this when very young at the expected time in life so messing it up is more forgiven. If you…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 05:23 PM
2

All fairly straightforward, in no particular order: Initiated cheating on their partner in the past Smoking or other drug use (moderate alcohol consumption is OK) Mental health issues (likely highly correlated with past promiscuity as well, the latter of which can be used as a proxy for the said 'issues') Perhaps something else I missed...
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 05:06 PM
1

Running is something a child learns - it's instinctual. That's a long way away from "flirting" and any kind of effective "seduction" to which there are no well-regarded sources (unlike sports coaches who can teach more advanced techniques than running). PUAs are nothing but charlatans and your local "red pillers" could be nothing but keyboard warriors. I've already said this. So how is someone just going to "figure this out"? It doesn't seem like something someone can practice, more like somethi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 05:01 PM
1

Well that's the whole point, isn't it? If the guy already can't figure it out, how is "learning game" going to help him if you've essentially said "game" is partly learning to talk to people?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/18 04:32 PM
1

following conversation, the flirting and escalation all makes up “game” So the people who couldn't hold a conversation before suddenly figure it out because someone told them that holding a conversation is "game. " That's what you're implying.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/18 01:35 PM
1

Opener = pick up line. If it's absolutely great she might like you right off the bat, sure. Big IF. I wish people who can't figure out social skills a lot of luck "learning" them or "game" whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 04:43 PM
1

Openers aren't really going to attract women even if they are witty or otherwise good. Very mildly at best. Neither will trying them in different environments. What exactly is one learning about "game" here? Game is having pick up lines aka one liners the very first sentence in a potentially lengthy conversation? This is the holy grail of attracting (or "gaming") women?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 04:31 PM
1

Yes, baseless. You just said "people who do A are X." No reasoning. Hence baseless.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 03:47 PM
1

It's more complicated than asking for directions. It's impossible to know if the source is reliable when seeking that info online.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 03:45 PM
1

What's on your CV gets you the interview in the first place. Regarding cliche "practice makes perfect" ... yet again... what are you going to practice if you don't know what to actually practice?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 08:13 AM
0

Still zero rationale provided. Baseless opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 07:49 AM
3

The real question is what do you weigh...
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 07:45 AM
1

I'd say it depends on which part of RP they believe, but generally you're correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/18 08:11 PM
3

Clearly some Men are able to figure it out based on trial and error, they literally just had more practice while growing up. Most of these nerds tryna learn pick up and game, are just way late to the party. So what makes anyone think that the "late to the party" guys can figure it out? They might have tried and failed repeatedly. How do we know that didn't happen? If you've been hooking up since 14-16 you most likely will figure out what works and what doesn't as time goes on. Maybe. You might n…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/18 04:25 AM
1

But yet it’s mostly just risk-averse pussies that come up with every excuse not to ever try. I will confidently say that most men who failed to figure it out gave up after approaching a small number of women. Based on what? Evidence/source? Because someone had to do it before him to instruct him? Duh. Not everyone is retarded. Critical thinking and learning social cues n shit is a thing. Learning critical thinking is a thing? There's a special class for that? It seems to me that it's something t…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/18 04:18 AM
2

No. It’s how you learn it. By attempting seduction and failing, learning what works, learning what doesn’t. Practice makes perfect. What a load of crap - how much more wishful thinking could one possibly engage in?? 1) What evidence is there that most or many men haven't already tried the above and still failed to figure it out? 2) What evidence is there that without a good source of instruction on what works and what doesn't, he is likely to figure it out on his own? I don't like analogies, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 06:31 PM
0

Walking across the room to talk to women who you think will give you a boner = "game"?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 06:15 PM
1

They must not "work out" 6 days a week and have a "good" job... :)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:45 PM
1

Mmmm no, the reformed versions of those guys get dates "all the time."
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:06 PM
1

That's what they measured me at on my most recent physical exam?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:05 PM
8

the number of guys I've met on this sub who never went to parties or smoked or drank in high school is mind-blowing. of course you won't get laid living like that. And then all of a sudden they become self-styled women "experts" after they finally stop being a "kissless virgin" in college. Some of the biggest dolts on this sub follow that formula.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 04:38 PM
1

you can learn game And what would that entail?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 04:22 PM
2

I haven't used that particular term to describe myself before.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 01:16 PM
1

And when a basic relationship history question pops up during courting (100% expected) and you have 4 divorces and 10+ STRs under your belt?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 01:16 PM
2

Lol sorry but no - the "top RMV" people are not going to private but not prestigious schools in major cities. If you don't get into an elite school then the next step is big state U, think Indiana, North Carolina, Michigan, etc - still great schools. If not those then another state school of some sort like Oklahoma State, East Carolina, Florida State, etc. That is the prototypical American college experience and where the vast majority of college kids come from - university town schools. They ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:30 AM
1

Definitely. If you move away you are more likely to not get caught while lying. Your mileage may vary though, in a digital society, the past becomes harder and harder to hide...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:26 AM
1

Yeah, and the point I am making is that you can rule out having STDs simply by undergoing tests. OK but that involves actually having someone go through that process (and therefore getting to know them... and convincing them to get a blood test), not random casual sex. If that's the case, then sure, I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:25 AM
2

Eh? What do you mean?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 05:24 AM
1

I mean you don't even need my anecdotal experience to poke holes in your theory. Let's take the slim number of good schools near great career cities. Berkeley, U Chicago, USC, MIT, Harvard, NYU, a few others. I guarantee you the median age of marriage from schools like that is higher than the average college graduate. There's more great schools in those areas than the top 10, dude. Guarantee us that? Any evidence of this? The marriage age in those states is slightly above average, that is a fact…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 06:28 PM
3

Ohhh okk tell us all about high RMV and your "experience" on the matter, please...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 05:34 PM
1

Most people move to a good education/employment area when they are 18 (for college) if they are indeed destined to be high quality marriage / RMV material. E.g. the Bay Area, NYC Area, Boston area, etc. in the USA. They don't have to move around after that since good employment opportunities are all around them, hence they can settle down quite effortlessly.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 04:39 PM
1

See, here is where we differ. I don't think there are "clear trends"! And thinking you have things all figured out is probably likely to give you a false sense of security that may lead you to ignore red flags that you'd spot otherwise. You're welcome to disagree with the smorgasbord of data on the topic. It doesn't change those facts. Look at it this way. Say that you know, statistically, that four out of 10 women are chronic liars. That information may give you a general idea about the truthfu…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 04:36 PM
1

Men's ideas about who's attractive are only about 20% more correlated than women's - which isn't a significant amount. It disproves the notion that men have more varied tastes in women. That is not true. They tend to find the same women attractive. And... it isn't significant? Says who? Further, you kind of missed the answering the question about whether men find a larger percentage of women attractive than vice-versa. It's true. Lot's of data show this - not just OKCupid data, but data from Tin…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 04:35 PM
1

True but high variance 6/10 beats low variance 7/10. Perhaps, at that point we have to decide what "rating" is high enough for someone to accept their advances.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 04:32 PM
1

Errr... so what's the problem here? If you know she sleeps around, breaks up, has the reputation of a slut... you know know your risk of an STD is much higher than with a girl who isn't. That's the only point I'm trying to make here.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/18 04:29 PM
2

Bitch, am I redpill or am I motherfuckin R E D. P I L L??!! Generalizations are what we do Not so well, very often. I deadass think most dudes would find triple Fs on a nice slim figure to be 10/10 tho. Is that really a stretch to you? And I think slim girls with cute faces and A cups would rate about a 7/10 to most dudes . OK - ALL else equal, bigger boobs would be more attractive, yes - ALTHOUGH to a point. I really don't think that triple Fs are going to be the most sought after size/shape. U…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 11:18 PM
1

I personally am attracted to outdoorsy women that don't shave their legs or care about their hair or makeup So what? If only a small handful of people are attracted to these women, these women have very few options. That matters. How attracted you are to her is not as relevant as long as she's good enough to sleep with or date (aka she "passes the bar.") High variance > low variance if you're trying to find someone. Way to jump to conclusions. At the same "attractiveness level" that may well be …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 11:15 PM
1

That makes no sense whatsoever. If you know a slut is a slut, your chance of getting an STD from her is higher. That's all there is to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 09:58 PM
2

I love how you just randomly assigned a value to how you think other men would rate other women.. and assumed the fetishized ones like the one here would be rated the highest. Sigh...
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:44 PM
1

"attractive as hell" is another's "ugly AF". This is going to be a pretty rare case. Most likely in highly fetishized individuals. Like massive tits or other exaggerated traits. That kind of exception doesn't make the rule. You can't seriously be arguing that many individuals are NOT clearly more attractive than others.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:40 PM
1

Are you talking purely about the mens' faces?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:35 PM
1

It just makes you sound like one of the incel bozos. If that was your goal, it's working. If it was to describe masculinity accurately, well, you stated your opinion. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:33 PM
0

What does that have to do with what you said before about: "I can tear your head off your body with my hands" look" and what I said about that only applying to only a tiny minority of men?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:27 PM
3

Hahahaha.. No. More like: be well groomed/styled, have an attractive face and a V-shaped body. Tall is important too, but secondary to the former traits, except to some minority height fetishists.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:22 PM
4

Most of those dudes are probably fatter than they are strong. It's like not the days when tons of machinery didn't do the really hard work...
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:09 PM
2

In that case most men never had it except massive dudes - a tiny minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:06 PM
5

Okay I'm good on those. It's easy to think so. Factually knowing so? Different ballgame.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 05:04 PM
4

Men may have higher physical standards, but most men have a larger range of women they are interested in. Men have NARROWER range of women they are interested in (correlation of attraction ratings show this) and they value PHYSICAL traits more than women. Those are factually correct statements.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 04:48 PM
1

http://i.imgur.com/rrLe319.jpg
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 04:36 PM
1

And her “heterosexuality” isn’t even known. Yet likely given basic probabilities. And no the OP rated her as elite. That’s not objective. Depends on if he's expressing his personal opinion or guessing/estimating a consensus opinion. In the former... it's his call. In the latter case, you are most likely right (I agree with you), but we can't know for sure unless we get 1000 random dudes to rate her and 1000 other women. And then draw a line at what "rating" is considered "elite." And I’m like a …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 04:21 PM
1

Wow that's really something. Thanks for sharing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/18 04:09 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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