TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Nevamst Archive

View 0 posts and 330 comments by Nevamst on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

The question was whether or not there's anything a woman can do to stop her man from cheating on her. I don't understand how what you say is relevant at all to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 07:48 PM
1

What you said is that the median (as in bottom 51%) of my friends that I describe as having a non-existent dating experience is "between bottom 10% and barely average". Unless there's a huge discrepancy between mean and median that is tautological and a completely useless comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 02:03 PM
3

A woman can't do anything to prevent a man who will cheat from cheating. While I mostly agree with your post I disagree that there's not anything at all a woman can do to even slightly reduce the risk of her man cheating. I think the vast majority of men would cheat if they are extremely dissatisfied sexually with their partner (assuming they can't just leave/divorce due to kids/house/whatever) and an opportunity arises. I think as a woman making sure that you give your man sex, physical touch, …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 09:40 AM
1

Haha... Yes... That is what the median means lol... Astute observation...
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/24 07:54 AM
1

Looking at the men in my life (~60ish guys, in the age range of 20-35, mostly nerdy) I would describe the median of their dating experience as "non-existent". These median and below guys are kissless virgins, who might've had a few chances in their lives but were too afraid or unknowing to take them. Their social circles exist of pretty much only men who share their interest where there are pretty much no women, so they have no organic ways to get opportunities for dates. At some point in their …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/24 02:22 PM
-2

That’s because So you agree you were incorrect when you said women live shorter lives?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/24 01:45 PM
1

They did, and they also explained how 1 in 666 couples relying on vasectomy for birth control get pregnant per year because no birth control is 100%. Apparently they didn't cover that in your biology classes though, which is why I'm saying you need to learn some biology before you make snarky comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:36 AM
1

The only way for the man to not put his sperm in a fertile woman's womb is by not having sex. Everything else just reduces the risk of a child, but doesn't eliminate it. You need to learn some biology...
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:27 AM
1

So can men, and so do men. How can men have sex without a risk of having to be financially responsible for a child for 18 years?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:17 AM
1

Lol no. Women can have sex without a risk of having to be financially responsible for a child for 18 years, because they have a choice. Men don't have that choice, and not because of biology, just because we've decided that's how we do it legally. That's a huge gap in rights, both sexes should have that choice so that both sexes can enjoy recreational sex with less risks.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:12 AM
1

How is women being able to choose whether or not they want to pay for a child but men not being able to choose that not a gap? It clearly is, and this is a completely man-made gap, we could make that gap disappear with the stroke of a pen.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 07:54 AM
1

The way you write is super confusing, I don't understand how any of this has anything to do with what I said. I made a point related to what you were talking about, that "The ability for men to have an abortion of those responsibilities would go a long way to bridge the gap of rights between the sexes when it comes to sex and reproduction.". Do you agree with this, and if not, why do you believe men should have lesser rights than women in this aspect?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 02:48 PM
1

A child is the result of using ones reproductive rights, these are not separate things. Being able to have sex recreationally while not having a risk to have a huge responsibility legally thrust on to you is an awesome right, a right enjoyed only by women today. It would be great if both sexes had this right.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 02:29 PM
–

If negging works (I'm not redpill enough to claim that it actually does) then women select men who neg them to a higher degree, meaning the men who neg are better than the men who don't neg, hence men who neg are more often "good enough for women". The logic is there.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 01:06 PM
1

Men have no "post-conception rights" because male bodies aren't involved "post-conception." Men's bodies are absolutely involved when they become legally responsible for a child when it's born. The ability for men to have an abortion of those responsibilities would go a long way to bridge the gap of rights between the sexes when it comes to sex and reproduction.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 12:37 PM
1

It won't, read IPCC, the idea that climate change is an existential threat for humanity was given up on a decade ago when new studies came out.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/24 05:15 PM
1

Oh true, I miswrote that one.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 06:03 PM
3

OP makes 3 claims in his last paragraph: A ~thousand years ago or more only 20% of men reproduced This changed in the past hundreds years where most men reproduced And that it's now changing again with Gen Z men being locked out of dating. I don't see how most men in their 40s reproducing in 2006-2010, which is what your source shows, goes against anything OP said. In fact it seems to back up his second claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 02:26 PM
1

Is the misandry in the room with us right now? Yes, as long as you're in the room your misandry is in it too. I never said I hated men You didn't have to, your reasoning showed it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/24 08:51 AM
1

Of course I'm not being oppressed. Your hatred of my sex could never oppress me because you have no power over me. Doesn't change the fact of your misandry though. I know some men who would choose the bear too. Yeah, there are stupid self-hating men too.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/24 08:26 AM
1

Most human encounters are in public areas or at least nearby to other people. I’m sure I’ve walked past a serial killer, but they were smart enough not to attack me near a ton of people. The same is true for bear encounters too, most bear encounters are not 1-on-1 in a secluded area, and as such most of the time the bear is smart enough to not attack when it's outnumbered. I’m wary of running into anyone when I’m completely alone. As you should be, as am I. But I'm even more wary when that "anyo…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/24 07:13 AM
1

Bears kill approximately one person in the US per year despite encountering humans hundreds to thousands of times. If you leave them alone, it’s highly unlikely anything bad will happen to you. Now take a look at how many man encounters there are in US... Probably trillions per year right? It's absolutely insane that you would even try to fight this on the merits lol. How messed up your mind must be to not just plainly see how wrong you are. Since 1913 there has been 10 deaths by bear, 1 death b…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 08:52 PM
3

Haha you think a few thousand people dying in the middle east outweighs what is at stake in this US election? How about Trump's wavering support for NATO and Taiwan resulting in further Chinese and Russian aggression resulting in potentially hundreds of millions of people dying in large scale wars? The few thousand people dying in the middle east surely outweighs that right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 09:33 AM
1

Picking the bear has everything to do with hating men. Picking the bear is guaranteed to lead to a much higher risk of a negative outcome, and a much higher risk of a much worse outcome if you do get a negative outcome. This is just a fact, one that should be clearly evident to anyone even without any evidence, but as we've seen in posts on here for example in the past the evidence to show it can be found too. The only reason you would pick the bear is because your hatred of men has blinded you …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 09:17 AM
1

Yep.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 08:06 PM
1

Not to anybody.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 07:07 PM
1

Nope.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 07:03 PM
1

Me neither, much of what you write makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 06:52 PM
1

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 06:36 PM
1

What?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 06:02 PM
1

I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:57 PM
1

It's not confusing at all, you just fucked up again.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:49 PM
1

You literally just said you never said anything about needs which is a blatant lie. Good job dude...
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:45 PM
1

Who are you trying to fool lol, go look and see if you can find the word "need" in your comment again. Pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:40 PM
1

Why would I be desperate for company? I'm hanging out with my gf right now while I'm laughing at you dancing for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:25 PM
1

I don't need anything except for you to keep dancing for me, like I told you this is hilarious to watch.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:07 PM
1

What I'm saying is already manifested in the real world, you're the one trying to manifest a fantasy to avoid taking the L. Pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 04:21 PM
1

Not very important no, just embarrassing for you to go through these lengths to try to avoid taking the L. And still nope, it's still just you trying to spin it to a different plot because you got rekt.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 04:06 PM
1

No, it's the same as losing any argument anywhere, but I'm sure you're very familiar with doing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 03:56 PM
1

Nope, it's still just you trying to spin it to a different plot because you got rekt.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 03:47 PM
1

Nope, it's still just you trying to spin it to a different plot because you got rekt.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 03:05 PM
1

Nope, you made a statement with incorrect data and I corrected that, that's the plot. OP is completely irrelevant to the plot of this comment chain.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 02:56 PM
1

Nope, that's just the plot you tried to spin it to after you got rekt.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 02:52 PM
1

No, the plot is to what degree people find their LTR-partners through their friends today, which is the focal point of our argument here. But yes, you've been continuously trying to spin it to other plots because you got rekt on that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 02:47 PM
1

Nah, if they're stuck making arguments over and over in spite of the data showing the opposite that's when they've truly lost the plot.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:56 PM
1

If they are it ever: then they have a good record of what denial looks like. Agreed lol. Then they can decide if “man, I better go be social” or “man I better believe in a chart that has more meetings than people on it” At least they can’t go; “I didn’t get the full picture” Nah, they can decide if they wanna go "Man you know, you're right the data doesn't support what I said" the next time they're wrong or if they wanna go on this embarrassing journey you put yourself on.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:51 PM
1

Lol buddy there ain't nobody reading these comments but me and you, we're like 50 comments down a chain at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:46 PM
–

Most users here don't post novel length posts though, I can agree that the minority that does probably are weird, but the rest of us are probably pretty normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:42 PM
1

But you're writing comments meant for OP in response to me. If you don't feel that you need to write them to OP then why are you writing them at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:41 PM
1

We are like 50 comments down a chain dude, OP is not gonna read this. The only one reading this is me. So if you wanna write to OP you gotta make another top-level comment to his post.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:31 PM
1

Who says it does? OP wants to pull tho. Then why are you responding to my comment with drivel that has nothing to do with me or anything I've said. If you wanna talk to OP go make another comment to the OP post.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:26 PM
1

What does your drivel have to do with me or anything I've said?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:22 PM
1

The chart is crap and THAT is what you are going off of. Nope, I'm going off the Stanford data that the chart is based on. How many times have I told you this by now? And if you were getting what you wanted you’d have gone “huh, interesting: my way is different than what I do” Then back to doing it, Not clinging to a reddit post where the dude gets criticized in the comments Better? No, I still don't understand what you mean at all. Why would me getting what I want in life and me correcting a Re…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 01:13 PM
1

The chart is crap and THAT is what you are going off of. Nope, I'm going off the Stanford data that the chart is based on. How many times have I told you this by now? And if you were getting what you wanted you’d have gone “huh, interesting: my way is smugly different@ and fine back to doing it, Not cloning ti a reddit post where the dude gets criticized in the comments Haha what? None of that makes any sense, can you re-write that in English?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 12:26 PM
1

And yeah: you hold tight to one piece of crap data You can't just call the data from Stanford "crap" because you disagree with it. while 68 percent of LTRs come from social circles You can't just keep repeating this thinking that eventually it will magically become true, I've already told you how this is wrong and not what your source says. and 80 percent of men are getting laid And the sky is blue, what other irrelevant factoids do you think we should bring up? They are getting what they want t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 12:22 PM
1

Haha, you've made like 50 comments about this chart by now, you're clearly the one who made it about it. I didn't deny anything, I showed you data to prove you were wrong. I'm the one who failed here? Haha sure buddy...
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 12:10 PM
1

Haha no, you made it about a chart. And you continue to try to spin it to be about the chart because you know you're wrong on the actual facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 06:11 AM
1

I do, you clearly don't. You didn't just lose the plot, you never had it to begin with. You've been lost this entire conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 09:56 PM
1

Well no, the discrepancy is the inflation. The reason for the inflation is irrelevant for the argument made, what matters is the outcome, not the underlying reason, if we are to figure out whether the average female or male have had more sexual partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 09:55 PM
1

What Stanford did and what that chart show were different. The dude even admitted it. Nope, the dude admitted his chart was different from other random people's charts based on the same data. The chart perfectly reflects the data Stanford collected. You just want it to mean what you want it to. Nope, I just want it to mean what it actually means. I prefer sticking to reality rather than drifting off to wonderland like you. And even then it still shows less than 68 percent met online. Yes? Nobody…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 08:07 PM
1

In a closed population and defined time period, the mean number of opposite-sex partners reported by men and women should be equal. Men reported a mean of 14.14 lifetime partners; women reported 7.12. It's literally right in the abstract of the first study. I already explained this to you in the first comment I made, and I've referred you back to that comment multiple times to go re-read it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 08:04 PM
1

The data says something but this chart was made to show it differently on Reddit Nope, I've already explained this to you. And no one (except a few who never took statistics I’m assuming) are buying it Again, you're the only one criticizing Stanford for their method from what I can see. Meanwhile apps are literally growing thru a downturn Said nobody.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 08:01 PM
1

Exactly, we got the amount of inflation from one study which we then can apply to the other study to get closer to the real numbers. So you do understand it, then why do you keep playing dumb?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:56 PM
1

Except the data has them meeting multiple ways. They do indeed meet in multiple ways, you can for example meet someone through friends and in a bar at the same time, mind blowing idea right? and that’s more logical than “hey, my friend has a sister: you want to meet her?” There's no logic in this statement, how could it be more logical than something else? If what you meant to say is "likely" instead of "logical", then yes, based on the Stanford data it does indeed seem like meeting partners thr…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:51 PM
1

I already explained all this to you, why do you keep pretending I didn't?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:42 PM
1

I don't know, the data doesn't say and unlike you I don't make random speculations. They're not meeting through friends at least, the data shows that pretty clearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:41 PM
1

It's not the chart that has more meetings than people. It's the data that has more meetings than people because people can meet in more than one way. The chart just represents the data. If you have a problem with the data take it up with the professor at Stanford buddy. I agree anybody trying to live their life off this chart will probably keep you company in the L-team. And again; Meanwhile people are meeting through online means more than ever, including these 68% who become friends after most…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:23 PM
1

I already explained all this to you, why do you keep pretending I didn't?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:16 PM
1

Again, the chart represents the data, the data you can download from Stanford and look at whichever way you want. That isn't trash. I agree, you failed epically here, and for some reason you insist on continuing to do so over and over instead of just taking the L.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:15 PM
1

Why are you saying you didn't link to a study that you linked to? So, obviously the commenter is wrong, because the two largest available surveys did not agree with his assumptions I've told you over and over again I'm not talking about that commenter, I'm talking about the other one you asked for receipts, how is this so hard for you to understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 06:36 PM
1

Except the chart is trash. So you stand on trash Both me and the chart are standing on the data, the data isn't trash. Meanwhile people are getting together LTRs at a 68 percent clip and OLD are in a downtrend. Meanwhile people are meeting through online means more than ever, including these 68% who become friends after meeting online before they become LTRs, and again OLD keeps being completely irrelevant for this discussion, no matter how much you try to spin it in. Congratulations! For what? …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 06:35 PM
1

So then why did you link a study that claims that?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 06:32 PM
1

Why do you say "for no reason" when the rest of comment of mine you quoted literally explains that reason?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:54 PM
1

No, my rock solid: Here's data from Stanford showing this, and this chart shows this data.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:54 PM
1

It's so funny that you keep trying to spin this into me spinning something. Again, I'm rock solid and right where I started, I'm not spinning anything any way. Yes, your "fact" is what you've showed, and I literally just explained to you how that fact is completely irrelevant to what we're talking about and OP, you restating your fact does nothing as a response to that except make you look silly.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:33 PM
1

That's not what you showed. I already explained this to you. You showed that before LTRs happens they often are friends first, you did not show that couples meet through social circles, in-fact I showed the opposite, that they don't meet through social circles. Again, whether or not couples (who mostly meet online today based on the data) become friends before they become LTRs is irrelevant to OP and irrelevant to social circles. Again, the chart accurately represents the data from Stanfords, it…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:20 PM
1

You're the one who lost the plot (and the argument) and now are just trying to write random shit to see if anything sticks.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 05:01 PM
1

Literally none of that has anything to do with what we're talking about, now you're just writing random shit lol...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:59 PM
1

Ok so now you are saying the chart that shows more than 100 percent does matter. Congratulations you admit to cloning to trash charts for your beliefs. Why are you making up what I'm saying as a response to me explaining exactly what I'm saying? I'll just copy paste what I said again: The chart does matter, I never said it doesn't matter, it represents the data. But if for some reason you don't like the chart you can just go to the data directly, the chart is just a means to present the data in …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:48 PM
2

Indeed, my initial comment explains that to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:44 PM
1

You see how your spinning now, I'm not spinning at all, I've been rock solid the whole time, you're the one who keeps trying to spin things every way you can. “The chart doesn’t matter, but it’s accurate as long as people first let they multiple means.” The chart does matter, I never said it doesn't matter, it represents the data. But if for some reason you don't like the chart you can just go to the data directly, the chart is just a means to present the data in an easier format. Meanwhile from…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:42 PM
2

... What? Read my first comment I made to you again. I already broke this down and explained it for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:28 PM
1

The “data” when taken apart to chart more than 100 percent of ways people first meet? That data? Nope, just the data. If you don't like the charts showing the data you can just look at it raw, like I explained to you. The accuracy of more “first Mets” on the chart than people? You're criticizing the method Stanford used to collect the data now? You think it's impossible for couples to have met through multiple means? I’m showing how most LTRs happen. 68 percent of the time. So when you said "Abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:26 PM
2

The mean doesn’t have to be identical, because people don’t have the same number of partners. I already acknowledged this in my comment but it likely won't change the outcome much. And the inflation or deflation isn’t assumed to be 2x or 3x or none. We just don’t know what it is As I already explained the first link of yours show the inflation is pretty much exactly 2x. All I was doing was comparing the commenters claims to existing data No, you were asking for receipts for the statement that th…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:12 PM
1

It is ridiculous, it's not at all what is happening. The data shows the opposite. Maybe that's true for your friends circles, but the opposite is true for mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 04:06 PM
1

Who gives a fuck about the state of OLD? That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about your ridiculous claim that 70% of people meet their partners through their friends today.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 03:19 PM
2

I don't care what you believe, or what your inflation numbers are, they're irrelevant. Your first link shows us exactly how much people inflate their numbers, and when applied to your second link we get the receipts you asked for, as I showed in my comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 03:16 PM
1

It’s “based” on the standard data but the dude just pout as much as whatever he decided to “fix” it and make a chart that goes over 100 percent because people meet for the first time more than one way? No, the dude saw other people who made other charts that also goes over 100% (because that's the only way to make a chart with data which has multiple-choice) based on the same data, and saw them making what he thought was a mistake so he decided to correct that. Meanwhile https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 03:14 PM
1

No, I'm also part of the <10%.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 03:08 PM
2

One guy did, the other guy that you asked receipts for said "average female has higher body count than average male.", and then you provided the receipts to back up his statement yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 03:07 PM
1

So the chart is literally made up then. You know it isn't, you know it's based on the Stanford data, as I've said repeatedly. Why do you keep making these asinine statements? This proves nothing other than “people will cling to whatever they can find in the internet” Haha no, the only thing this conversation has proved is that some people will do absolutely everything to avoid taking the L when proven wrong, including embarrassing themselves over and over.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 03:06 PM
2

It does not depend on that at all. In the initial comment you responded to there were no numbers. And you asked for receipts to that, which you now ironically provided for yourself, as I pointed out.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:59 PM
1

Cool. You're part of the <10%.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:57 PM
1

No, I don't think Stanford would release a chart at all. But if they had to release a chart of it; of course they would, there is no 100% in the data. It's impossible to make a 100% graph based on this data, because again, it's multiple-choice data. Where is this Stanford graph you said was a 100% one though in your previous comment? Can you link me it, or was that just part of your fantasy too?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:57 PM
1

The Stanford prof has a 100 percent graph. Someone edited it. And posted it on Reddit. Nope, Stanford does not present a graph for this data. Additionally if Stanford was to present a graph it wouldn't be a 100% one because the data is a multiple-choice one, like I've explained to you already multiple times. And re read what you wrote. What should I re read? You don’t have any data or charts you just cling to it despite seeing the obvious. Because you want to Haha what? What do you mean I don't …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:43 PM
1

First, did you see how it says “online” not OLD? Did you see how it says "Through friends" while you said "come from friends or friend social circles"? You said almost 70% of relationships are through friends, I refuted that by showing that less than 10% are through friends. My point isn't about "online" or OLD at all. 2nd go ahead and turn in that kind of work to your profs and then continue this argument during summer school. What work? The work where Stanford called thousands of people to not…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:21 PM
1

Haha again, the data is the same. Whether or not presenting it as a line chart was a good idea is a topic that could be discussed, but that doesn't change the fact that over half of the respondents chose online as the way they met their partner, while less than 10% chose "through friends", you know, the actual data, as opposed to the presentation. But I understand you're in full denial mode to try to avoid accepting reality and that you were wrong...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 02:05 PM
1

You're the only dude failing basic shit here.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:56 PM
1

Actually there is a wrong; you can’t just change the data to what you want. Again... The data is the same in both cases, only the presentation of the data was changed. How is this so hard for you to understand? That’s why the chart now has things going over 100 percent. Nope, the data includes multiple choices for the respondents, if you just took like 2 minutes to read the comments of the post I linked instead of arguing this with me you'd see this.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:51 PM
2

Or maybe the original study is right and a bunch of people just didn’t like it so they agreed with the changes. There's no "right" or "wrong" here. The original study chose to present couples who met online and then subsequently had their first date in a restaurant or bar as in the "restaurant or bar" category as opposed to the "online" category. This is not "wrong" to do, but it doesn't show us what we're looking for specifically for the things we're talking about here in this thread, which is …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:39 PM
1

You absolutely do, the data is good from the study, the way the people who made the study chose to present the data is not, of course we get to correct the presentation of data. The fact that this post is in a data-based sub and has 30k upvotes, is 93% upvoted, and that comments overwhelmingly agree with the correction means you should maybe reconsider your position and that just maybe, maybe, you're dead wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:22 PM
1

No, the dude decided to correct a huge mistake made in the original study.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:12 PM
0

Not anymore, online is king now: https://np.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/18h7k9g/how_heterosexual_couples_met_oc/
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:05 PM
2

In addition, many of us men who do have large social circles have them consist of pretty much only other men. I have a huge social circle, 4 big friends group I stay on contact with regularly and hang out with and do things with, but everybody are men in these groups, and never ever have I gotten a date out of any of them. They have given me the social skills to do decently well with women on the dating apps though.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 01:00 PM
1

You are just showing your ignorance about men more and more with each comment...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 12:45 PM
1

You know absolutely nothing of men if you think what I'm saying isn't true.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 12:36 PM
1

90%+ of men on dating apps would love a picture of a disembodied vulva from their matches.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 10:26 AM
2

Oh this is so funny, do you not realize that you just delivered the deathblow to your own argument with these sources? In your first study we measure the mean, and like the study points out, the mean mathematically has to be identical between the two genders, but we see that men are inflating their numbers by 2x (14.14 for men, 7.12 for women). In your second study we look at median (which is actually what we're after, we're talking about the average female vs the average male, not the average o…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 09:20 AM
2

Men definitely want to see disembodied vulvas too.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 08:56 AM
1

Nope, there are plenty of true scotsmen here in Europe.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 10:18 PM
1

No, you're the one trying to make America into some gotcha to support the failed arguments you've made. From the very start I've been clear about that the arguments I'm making are for proper first world countries where abortion is fully legal and cheap (free). You bringing up America over and over and over to try to defeat my arguments is just a really shitty strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 10:10 PM
1

Why do you keep quoting me costs from third world countries when we're talking about first world countries? Just click the link I provided... "Getting an abortion is free in Sweden, but you have to pay the usual patient fee for the doctor's visit itself. The patient fee varies slightly between different regions, but it is usually around SEK 250. If you are under 18, it is free in several places in Sweden."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 05:19 PM
3

The United States is the only country to put a man on the moon. Yup, and they used the metric system to do so. Only the plebeians use imperial. Talk to anyone working at NASA (I know a few) and they'll tell you imperial is a scourge that all of US should get rid of.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 05:11 PM
3

Last I checked, zero countries that use the metric system have put a man on the moon Check again, 100% of the countries that have put a man on the moon used the metric system to do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 09:51 AM
5

The rest of the developed world
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 09:49 AM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/18h7k9g/how_heterosexual_couples_met_oc/
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 09:22 AM
2

That’s why it’s advised for men to expand their social circles and meet women the organic way. That's not really an option for many men though. All their friends are men, and all their hobbies and interests are things only men are interested in. Going to your local D&D game isn't gonna ever let you meet women, it'll just make you meet more men. And going to your local salsa classes isn't something many men enjoy, and pushing through interests you don't enjoy just to meet women is generally consi…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 09:19 AM
-3

Yeah he lied dude 😂 Nobody would deny that height doesn't help, but short men aren't as hopeless as you think. I've personally seen my 5'3 friend with at least 10 different girlfriends throughout the years.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 09:08 AM
1

?? How are you this blind? Look for the part where I write "Honey" in my previous comment and you'll see me providing a source for the cost of abortion in a first world country. You gotta put more energy into this and actually read what I write or you'll look like a fool, but you've already managed to do that quite well...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 07:57 AM
1

I mean, sure, kinda. But it's also like 20% of all women so not really creme de la creme, and also not really an unrealistic standard since I'm that age myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 05:51 PM
1

A BMI of 19-21 is the top percentage of women outside of Asian countries and impoverished nations. No, it's roughly 30% based on the BMI distribution chart I linked you earlier. How is this so hard for you to understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 05:25 PM
1

That doesn't explain what you meant with "No between 19-21." at all. And no, going for women in roughly my age-bracket isn't me going for "creme de la creme".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 05:23 PM
0

What?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 05:13 PM
1

No, not at all, literally the opposite. Again just look at the BMI distribution graph I sent in the other comment. It's impossible to deviate far on the underweight side, while it's very much possible and somewhat common to highly deviate on the overweight side, this will heavily skew median from mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 05:12 PM
4

Oof, your data literacy is lacking. An average (mean) of something doesn't mean that half the population falls on either side. 10 people where 8 have a BMI of 23 and 2 have a BMI of 40 have an average BMI of 26.4, while only 20% of them are actually overweight. What you'd want to look for here is a median, not mean, or even better something like a BMI distribution chart (which I linked in the comment to you higher up).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 02:53 PM
-1

What do you think is top 1% of women? A less than 25 BMI (that is my hard-line standard), or exactly 21 BMI (which is what I consider optimal in terms of male attraction)? Looks to be around 12% of women where I'm from (data is for Germany but it's probably fairly similar here in Sweden) that hits 21 BMI, with another 20% or so having even less. 70% in total would be in the date-able range for my standards Additionally I would imagine higher BMI is more common in age groups that I'm not interest…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 02:47 PM
-2

21 is a pretty optimal BMI for a woman when it comes to a man's attraction, anything over that is some degree of "fat", but yes it doesn't reach "overweight" until 25. I draw a hard line at overweight so that is my standard, but the closer she is to 21 the more interested I will be in her.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 01:39 PM
3

Just to give you an example: "The only argument that makes sense in my head as a counter point. Is that sex + love/loyalty/commitment is better than just having sex. And I’d be willing to argue that. And I don’t even disagree with that. I just don’t feel it’s the only way." Should be: "The only argument that makes sense in my head as a counter point is that sex + love/loyalty/commitment is better than just having sex, and I’d be willing to argue that, and I don’t even disagree with that, I just …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 11:16 AM
2

Lol that is not how studies find out what percentage of a population is suffering from something...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 09:45 PM
2

Almost every dude I know my age had had trouble getting up once they got a gf the first time because of porn addiction. Cool story, almost every dude you know is part of the 8% then I guess. Fetishes are gojng up because people need newer stuff to get off. The potion exposure and type of porn changed radically since you were ten. Ok? But 92% are still not having a problem, unlike what you said.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 09:15 PM
3

What? This was for the age group 20-29, how "new" do you think this "issue" is? Me and everybody my age has been watching porn since we were 10, and I'm in my mid-30's.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 08:52 PM
1

Me and pretty much all my male friends started watching porn at the age of ~10. Me and most of my male friends are happy, successful men in happy long-term relationships with great sex lives. Do some men get damaged by porn? Absolutely, but I'd bet the vast majority of us don't. Same as alcohol, gambling, shopping, eating chocolates and a lot of other things in life. A few people abusing something detrimentally is a very bad reason to ban/regulate that thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 01:46 PM
3

Most younger dudes have ED because the wack it to much. A quick google-search tells me 8% of young dudes have ED, and that porn/masturbation isn't even the main cause...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/24 01:40 PM
1

because you've never thought about it and were happy for women to pay 100% of the costs of pregnancy. you can't not do something that someone else does and say it is miniscule and petty. if it were so miniscule, men would be doing it. how hard something is is determined by the people who actually do it, not the people sitting on their ass at home. Haha what? That makes no sense at all. How hard something is is based on what it is compared to, and what we're comparing it to is having the responsi…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/24 08:59 AM
1

if you were being sincere about this being an equality issue, you would have said men have to pay for and schedule the abortion and give women rides and be her support person during. Haha sure, we can throw that in there. This is such an incredibly petty, minuscule and irrelevant point. The equivalent would be like discussing free chemotherapy for cancer patients and you going "but you should still have to pay for parking". Like ok? Whatever lol. but the way you are saying it makes it seem like …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/24 10:40 PM
1

so your argument is that men can force women to pay for and endure medical procedures because the alternative is men face the consequences of the actions they already took, knowing the potential consequences? it sounds like you think women need to save men from their own actions? Nope, my argument is that 2 consenting adults can choose to engage in sexual activities, hopefully using contraception to minimize the risk. BUT, in the event that the contraception fails it is far more reasonable that …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/24 09:21 PM
1

you keep trying to erase that the woman has to do something to stop the scenario or nothing happens and the woman doing something has costs. Because that cost is minuscule compared to the cost of having a huge 18-year long responsibility forced onto you. It's honestly hilarious that you even try to compare the two. We as a society has to choose one or the other, and it's super clear which is the lesser evil of the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/24 12:54 AM
1

That would be like saying a guy driving a car doesn't "opt in" to drive over someone when he chooses not to brake at the pedestrian crossing. Women have a simple and easy way to opt out, not opting out means you're opting in.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 06:13 PM
1

so she can get an abortion without his consent? but she would need his consent in order for the child to be cared for by his or her father? do i have that right? Yeah, she should be able to do anything she wants to do whenever she wants, 100% full autonomy. The only thing she shouldn't be able to do is force a huge responsibility onto a man who doesn't want it. That responsibility is something that both people should have to opt into if they want it. okay well i live in america and it happens al…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/24 01:12 PM
1

A woman should of course be able to get an abortion earlier if she wants. A man can choose to sign the document and commit earlier too, it's just that 12 weeks is the deadline for him, while the deadline is 18-22 weeks (in civilized countries) for the woman. Gives her a few weeks extra to decide if she wants to keep it or not once she knows what the man will do. okay but it happens all the time to women? In third world countries where abortion is illegal? Sure. But I don't care about those, I li…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 06:37 AM
0

Condoms are only like 90% effective long-term so that doesn't change anything about the argument, and then we're back to the asinine medieval conservative talking point of abstination. Sex is amazing, and it's a biological need, and it's something we've liberated in the modern day. Let's not go back to stone ages and promote abstination and instead find better solutions. Let's give both genders the choice of if they want to be a parent while letting women retain the choice of having the kid by h…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 07:52 PM
2

Sex can’t ever be risk-free, that is completely unrealistic. Sure, but that doesn't mean we should do our best to eliminate as much of the risk possible for both genders. OP is advocating for men to be able to opt-out even when they are the biological fathers of children. That will cause way more issues down the line that you aren’t thinking through. I personally think forcing men who doesn't want to be fathers to take on that huge responsibility for 18 years anyway leads to way more issues down…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 03:20 PM
1

So you think 1 guy getting lucky with DNA-matches is "That’s how sperm donors work" and "sperm donors are very not anonymous"?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 02:50 PM
2

So if a sperm donor child finds their father in the real world, today, what do you want to happen? How would this happen? Would the child randomly go to all hairdressers in the world picking up hair from the ground and testing it against their own DNA until they finally get a match?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:10 PM
2

We're not talking about the biological aspect at all, we're talking about the legal aspect. Women are absolutely free to decide what happens with their bodies, and that should continue. The question is whether or not the woman should have to have the baby on her own if she decides to continue with the pregnancy if the man doesn't want to be a father, or if she should be allowed to continue to force on a huge responsibility on him for just having sex. In my opinion it makes total sense that both …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:08 PM
0

We're not talking about what a person ought to do. We're talking about how we want our society to look. As it stands a man should maybe abstain if he wants zero consequences, but the question we're actually talking about is; Do we want our society to look like that? I think we don't, I think we want a society where both genders can have risk-free sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:04 PM
1

shouldn't of had shouldn't have had*
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:02 PM
1

I think it makes more sense to have men sign a document at 12 weeks in of the pregnancy (assuming you live in a civilized country which allows abortions to week 18) stating that he will be the father. As long as he doesn't sign that he should not be under any obligation ever for anything related to the child. A woman choosing to have a child without a signed document from a father does so entirely on her own. It's insane to me that we force an 18-year long huge obligation on men just because a w…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 11:59 AM
–

I think you're conflating red pill with conservative beliefs here. Red pill is mostly about dating strategy for men but also a bit about men's rights in our society, sex vs gender is kinda irrelevant for those topics.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/24 11:29 AM
2

Nope
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 06:07 PM
2

Not according to men here. According to men here, she’s an amusing born again virgin who deserves what happened to her. Nope... Well just like I explained in one of my posts, it’s the same thing as being jealous that your friend helped another friend and got burned. Ok? And? That still doesn't change the facts... MOST WOMEN HERE WHO SEEK DATING ADVICE ARENT HAVING A BUNCH OF SEX WITH CHADS. THEY TEND TO BE AWKWARD LONELY GIRLS WITHOUT A LOT OF EXPERIENCE. AND YET YOU SHAME THEM. AND THOSE WOMEN …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 05:16 PM
3

But you dont understand how sexual coercion works. You clearly don't understand how sexual coercion works, what you're describing is full on rape and has nothing to do with what we're talking about... 2 years later, Sarah also meets Bob. She tells Bob that she had casual sex once and hated it. “LMFAO YOU WHORE YOU SLEPT WITH CHAD ON THE FIRST DATE BUT NOT ME!!! MAKE BETTER DECISIONS!!!!” Yes... And? I'll just re-state what I wrote last time, maybe you missed it; Many guys feel that way, regardle…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 04:26 PM
1

The dating advice from men here is hurtful and condescending. Men tend to give advice that works, not advice that makes you feel good. If these 2 are at odds men prefer the former. A lot of these things you bring up is good advice for women, though you've hyperboled the advice to make it look extra bad, let me break them down; “Sexual coercion isn’t real! You could have said no!” Many women do have a problem with firmly saying no. Educating women that it is in fact ok for them to firmly say no, …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 11:51 AM
1

I have not yet been able to find any statistics of wild animals committing sexual violence people Why are you worried about sexual violence lol? A bear will literally eat your intestines while you're lying there on the ground still alive screaming. That's 10 times worse than 99.99% of all sexual violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 09:04 AM
5

but you have not been conditioned to fear that as much as women are conditioned to be cautious of men. Yeah no shit, and that's why women give an irrational response to the question while men give a rational response to the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:21 PM
5

Any time you wanna check if it's misandry, replace "man" with "black person" and then vibe-check that. If it's racist, then it's misandrist.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 02:06 PM
2

The problem (and why the stipulations are needed) is that men have an innate physical advantage against women. So just add the one simple stipulation that the woman is similar to Ronda Rousey... The two scenarios are now identical and I pick the Ronda Rousey woman every time. Or make it a well-trained gay man, I pick the man every time. Who the fuck picks a bear lol...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 02:01 PM
1

And again, what you do is completely irrelevant to the societal problem... Again, the fact is that the reality we exist in is one where the dating apps is how the vast majority of people find their partners, and probably a majority's only way of finding a partner. The fact that women don't find average men attractive on dating apps is a problem, and telling people to get off dating apps isn't going to make any difference because they won't.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/24 06:59 AM
1

How is the concept of a societal problem so hard for you to understand? Again I have a girlfriend, I don't need anything to work with. And it's not 40% on apps, it was 60% in 2020, probably even higher today: https://www.np.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/18h7k9g/how_heterosexual_couples_met_oc/
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/24 09:46 PM
–

We're talking about a societal problem, how's your reading comprehension? The fact is, again, that the vast majority of people us dating apps and only dating apps for finding partners. Saying "fucken get off tinder" doesn't do anything for that societal problem because that's not gonna happen at a large scale. I have a girlfriend so none of this matters to me personally.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/24 08:13 PM
–

Lol a decent photo and text doesn't make an average man attractive to women on dating apps. But yeah having a shitty pic can make even a very attractive man fail just as hard as the average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/24 06:13 PM
–

Doesn't really matter how you phrase it, the fact remains.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/24 11:57 AM
–

But dating apps (or other social media) has become the way the vast majority of people meet partners now, and the only avenue for it for many people. And I don't see that going away any time soon, or ever, so that is what we have to work with.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/24 10:05 AM
1

15 isn't "underage" in most of the developed world.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/24 09:59 AM
2

Just stop responding if you want a conversation to stop... But good at least that you admit you were wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/24 11:40 AM
2

the person ranking themself to 6.7, looking at charts with sample faces for each number, has already expended way too much energy on a dumb topic Lol no. You don't have to look at charts to know roughly where you're at looks-wise compared to other people. You just have to exist in life. Sure if you're a reclusive hermit that has never met people before it would be fair not to have any idea, but that is a red flag in and of itself so...
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/24 09:50 AM
3

I don't know who you're arguing against. Not me at least, since I said myself that asking a girl this on a date is weird. Nice strawman attempt though.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/24 11:16 AM
1

Haha I love the mental gymnastics, keep dancing for me monkey.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/24 12:39 AM
1

Incorrect. Haha you think I care about changing your mind? I know that's impossible lol. I'm just intrigued by how long you're willing to write useless shit just to try to get the last word in.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/24 12:23 AM
1

Studies weren't necessary to prove you wrong, only logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/24 12:16 AM
1

What? This comment makes no sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/24 06:08 PM
2

Lol wtf. If I said "haha hell yeah i'm a 10" to some guy who asked me that, and he started bitching about how i'm delusional and a red flag, I'd think HE was the red flag. Lol why would he start bitching about how you're delusional? He would just mentally note down the red flag or even just walk away. You might think the number ranking system is some super serious, objective aesthetic ranking but many others don't take it that seriously. If a guy I thought looked really average called himself a …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/24 09:23 AM
1

I've already proved you wrong, you just refuse to admit it. Feel free to die as much as you want on any hill, it won't change anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/24 09:20 AM
5

Why are you so desperate for women to hate their appearance? Why do you care so much about women’s perceived confidence? Like why are y’all so obsessed with us lmao. I'm neither desperate for women to hate their appearance, nor do I care about a woman's perceived confidence, nor am I obsessed with women. What I care about is how delusional you are, and this is a simple test for that. The girl in the clip saying she's a 6.7 is an instant green flag that she has both her feet on earth, while the o…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 11:07 PM
1

I don't think my girlfriend would like it I started sending dick pics to anyone else than her.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 09:11 PM
1

I already told you I do experience it. Like I just told you it's not actually a crime no matter what you emotionally might think.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 08:14 PM
1

I think you'll be hard pressed to find a definition of social group that doesn't include old classmates and coworkers...
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 08:05 PM
1

Finding porn is different from finding a community to share pictures of themselves in though. I think many men would think that such a community doesn't even exist and wouldn't even be looking for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 08:03 PM
2

Why would they do that? Some sick men probably get kick out of it being unwanted. Other men probably just don't know about Reddit and it's various sub-reddits for stuff like this and don't know there's a proper avenue for this kind of stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 07:14 PM
1

Yes? Mostly old classmates or coworkers. None of the men in my social group would risk such a thing So which is it?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 07:12 PM
1

i dont see the purpose of making a distinction when its unhinged and immoral either way thats like someone saying "murder is bad" and you saying "well murdering a child is worse than murdering an adult" like?? Again, that wasn't me making a point, that was me asking for information. If I want to know about child murder of course I will ask specifically about child murder lol, like?? yet you keep insisting i can't include men i met on apps for some reason? Haha yes, for the reason that those are …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 07:10 PM
1

yeah he has a lot of victims vs one victim There's obviously more differences than that, to send a dick pic to someone you know IRL but don't have any kind of romantic connection to is on a whole other level of unhinged compared to just spamming it to random women online. not sure what point you are trying to make I'm not trying to make a point, I'm trying to get an answer out of you because I'm interested in your experience in this, since I don't have any myself being a man. If you just answere…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 06:44 PM
2

Huh, interesting. I never paid much attention to the suggested list, and it seems kinda insane to me to just add strangers from it and start hitting on them, but alright, TIL. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 05:53 PM
1

you think matching on tinder is a reasonable circumstance to send an unsolicited nude??? No, but a guy spamming dick pics to every match on Tinder is way different from someone sending a random dick pic to a woman he knows IRL in some way. The former I wouldn't be surprised if there's some dudes mass-spamming their dick everywhere, but I'm really surprised about the latter, which is why I'm asking about them specifically. So, What % of men that you know IRL, that you weren't dating, and where th…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 05:49 PM
1

What % of men that you know IRL, that you weren't dating, and where there wasn't any reasonable expectation that you would date (like you didn't match on Tinder first, or he didn't ask you out and got your number that way etc.), have sent an unsolicited dick pic to you? 5%?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 05:26 PM
1

it makes it normal to them and they probably aren't the only person its normal to Normal to you and normal are 2 different things, and unless you have a mental deficiency you should be able to recognize that something that is normal to you is not normal in general (if that is the case). car accidents are the definition of normal they are the leading cause of death for 1-17 year olds and a major cause of death for all age groups Haha that is so not evidence for it being normal lol. Dying at 1-17 …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 04:34 PM
2

met their partners through IG. How do you meet someone on IG? Like technically in detail? As far as I know unless you start trying to type people's username at random you will only be seeing people you follow on IG.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 04:27 PM
0

Something happening multiple times to someone doesn't make it normal. I've been in multiple car accidents, but I realize I'm an outlier and that the vast majority of people haven't been in a single car accident, so I realize that car accidents aren't normal. The amount of men sanding random dick pics to women they know IRL has to be less than 1% of the male population. It should be easy for her to realize that is not normal based on the other 99% of men she knows not sending her dick pics.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 04:12 PM
9

I thought random dick pics was mostly an app-thing, so like Tinder or Instagram or wherever online you might find a stranger woman you wanna hook up with, so that's why and how. Men sending them to people they know IRL seems insane to me lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 02:25 PM
1

I'm not opposed to having female friends, but it just seems unlikely that I ever will. Women don't really hang out in the activities and groups I hang out in, and most woman are different enough from me that it's hard to have enough of a shared common ground to start the friendship off on. I don't really go out looking for friends, friends just sort of happen organically, but women sort of don't really exist in my organic life. I do actively go out looking for a romantic partner though, so it's …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 02:09 PM
1

No. That’s why it’s strawman. You added context to suit your point changing the original retort. Again, that's not a strawman, that's shifting goal posts. A strawman is when you misrepresent your opponents position and fight against a strawman version of what they're saying. Feel free to google this and you might learn something. And again, I didn't do neither a strawman nor shifted the goal posts. I've been saying the exact same thing the whole time. Feel free to reread our convo too. You’ll no…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 07:56 AM
2

The adjusted wage-gap in Sweden is less than 1%, and in those studies there are still a plethora of factors they're failing to adjust for. It's safe to say there are countries where women don't earn less (for being women, they earn less for other things than them being women of course).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 09:20 PM
1

We see women taking more lower-paid jobs the more egalitarian society is. Women simply don't want the jobs that pay more.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 09:16 PM
1

Supply and demand, the market decides the value, no entitlement involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 09:13 PM
1

You're wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/24 07:45 AM
1

Those are a multitude ofseparate ideas. None of which you brought up prior. Strawman to make it make sense. Haha what? Of course they're not, they're the exact same thing I've been saying the whole time. And you have no idea what a straw man is, what you mean is shifting goalposts, but like I explained I'm not doing that either. It's you who are trying to throw out some rhetoric bs by throwing around some random fallacies to make what you're saying make sense since you're starting to realize you…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/24 08:11 AM
1

You can call it what you want, it's still a need.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/24 08:48 AM
–

Strawman and not a good one. Nope, my point was the regular sex part. Take away that and keep everything else and some men would still commit suicide. A long-term relationship was just one example that I brought up as a way for a man to fulfill his sexual needs. Regularly being able to see a prostitute is another way for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/24 08:47 AM
1

Do you think that women in general can be conditioned to find John C. Reilly viscerally more sexually attractive than Henry Cavill? Now I'm no historian, but from what little I know, being fat, unmuscular and untanned were at points in the past considered attractive traits, likely due to what they signified culturally (rich and prosperous, plenty of access to food and not having to work in the field). So not only do I think women in general could be conditioned to find John C. Reilly viscerally …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/24 03:50 PM
1

But saying women's standards are too high, unrealistic, should be ignored or are the result of invalid social media or assorted personality deficits is in fact the same as saying women's standards are invalid. Not at all. Invalid and problematic are two very different things. Women here do see a problem, it just isn't their standards. Some women, sure, but some women don't (and even some men), and those are obviously the ones I'm talking about. Rather, they see it as one of men being unwilling t…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/24 08:40 AM
1

For some people, for others sex is that one, single solitary thing, kiddo.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/24 08:33 AM
1

The opposite is probably true, that therapy would be a temporary quick fix, while a fulfilling long-term relationship with regular sex is what the person actually needs to feel fulfilled and that life is worth living.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/24 08:32 AM
1

Great, then we agree, that women overall have the right standards, and the few who might have the standards that keep them single, will eventually change their standards. Very few women remain who could be single against their will because they have too high standards for their own value on the mating market. How did you manage to interpret "while a decent chunk of women seem to be pretty far away from having these standards" as me agreeing with what you just wrote? What I would say is that this…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 04:34 PM
1

It causes the mind to fail in some cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 02:39 PM
1

Suicide is not a death from sexlessness. It sometimes is.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 02:14 PM
1

I've already given you all the rebuttal needed, you're the one "nuh uh"-ing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 02:11 PM
1

I'm not sure if anybody is saying women's standards aren't "valid", but rather that it's problematic. I feel like 99% of the discussion I see here on this is women fighting back on this not being problematic, so I think women in general just needs to admit that it kinda is problematic. Once that battle is over we can see if there's anything we can actually do about it, and of course that's pretty hard. I personally believe both men and women get mindfucked by porn and social media, to the point …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 01:58 PM
1

Who is to judge if women have artificially inflated standards or if they have exactly right standards and they have been artificially removed by socially "forced" monogamy and marriage? How do we know, that women ever assumed that their husbands are on average sexually attractive to them? Whatever standards ends up with the vast majority of the population being able to find a partner seems to me at least to be the "right" standards. If everybody was attracted to people in or slightly below their…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 01:52 PM
0

Nah, people have had a negative view of the redpill since its inception, before all these creators. Of course the people wanting to live in ignorance (taking the blue pill) will fight against anything else existing. These shitty creators calling themselves redpill have made it a bit worse though.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 01:37 PM
2

but in 2020 ... And that was before COVID. Bruh... It's called COVID-19, what do you think the 19 means?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 10:24 AM
0

You're wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/24 07:52 AM
1

Funnily enough I think the exact opposite is true. I think very few men fall in love quickly, we become attracted and want to have sex with some or even most women quickly, but love is something we build over time. I've never heard any of my guy friends express something that feels like "real" love that you see in the movies, except maybe a few who have lived with their girlfriend/wives for a long time, but even those I wouldn't say fit the description of "Liam Neeson the world"-love, rather it'…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 06:15 PM
0

Just because some people don't need it doesn't mean other people also don't need it. Like I said; "A lot of lonely men kill themselves, for some men sex is a need."
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 05:36 PM
1

Yep.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 10:58 AM
1

Nope.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 10:50 AM
1

Nah in reality this is not true It is. and even if most are attracted to most women and women aren’t attracted to them what can we do about it? Nothing, not everyone can be with someone they aren’t attracted to I never said anybody can or should do anything about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 10:37 AM
1

Everybody obviously cares about attraction, including me. But almost all men are attracted to most women. And even so attraction is a point men sometimes are willing to compromise on to get companionship, sex and someone to share your life with like I mentioned. And I again I think that is a pretty rational and reasonable way to think about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 07:44 AM
1

Obviously jacking off wasn't enough for them. Therapy might help, sure, but therapy isn't a panacea to all woes, it's a mitigation-strategy.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 07:40 AM
0

Who are you to say what other people's needs are lol?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/24 07:40 AM
-1

A lot of lonely men kill themselves, for some men sex is a need.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/24 09:32 PM
2

Most men those guys who are supposedly holding out for that virginal shy girl That is not most men lol, that is a small minority I'd bet.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/24 07:04 PM
1

Obviously the convo is not over since you keep coming back to try to get the last word in. I laugh every time you do, keep dancing for me monkey.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/24 04:13 PM
1

Ironic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/24 08:28 AM
1

Hilarious.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/24 08:08 AM
3

Like I said it doesn't really matter how strong the correlation is if the causation is something different, like those waiting with cohabitating due to cultural reasons also having a strong overlap with believing you also go to hell for divorcing. Also I don't think seeing divorce as something negative is the right way to look at it. Divorce is the good outcome of a relationship that stops working. Not divorcing is the bad outcome of a relationship that stops working. You should be looking at th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 11:21 AM
1

Source? I would imagine at the very most you can show correlation, not causation (as in "leads to"). And I would imagine correlation would look that way because the people insane enough to marry before cohabitation are deeply religious and believe they would go to hell for divorcing, so the reduced rate of divorce is from that and not from not cohabitating before the marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 11:04 AM
1

For one is a strong societal expectation, and a single man is often shunned or looked upon weirdly. And secondly it's hard-wired in our biology to want a partner, and for most men this is very strong and we can see that A LOT of men who are lonely end up killing themselves. What you're asking is kind of like "Do you even want food, do you realize how much work cooking is?" and like yes, it's a lot of work, and it costs a lot of money, but there's not really an option to forgo it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 10:57 AM
2

Kind of, but what you're worth will not only depend on your inherent worth but also on the market efficiency. It's not wrong to say that something is valued lower than it should be due to a market inefficiency.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 10:48 AM
1

Mayim Bialik (Amy in Big Bang Theory) or Greta Thunberg is what I would say is an average, plain-looking woman. And I think a majority of men would be happy with those as a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 10:38 AM
1

Haha, your pathetic rhetoric attempts are hilarious. You got absolutely wrecked, and no amount of gaslighting attempts is gonna change that. Just suck it up, it's so much less embarrassing for you if you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 09:02 AM
1

You didn't, you were wrong, suck it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/24 07:57 AM
1

You didn't explain shit to me, you were wrong, suck it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/24 09:58 PM
1

Exactly what?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/24 08:45 AM
5

We're now 14 hours and 364 comments in and I can't find a single one supporting the "manosphere" here. I think it's safe to say this sub is not ruled by guys who aren't too well adjusted with real life, or at the very least this post ain't the proof for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/24 09:16 AM
1

Haha what? What the fuck are you talking about lol?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/24 08:14 AM
1

It’s not irrelevant, you’re just ignorant/ biased. Wow, what a strong ad-hom comeback, good job. The answer is very simple, both men and women aren’t what they used to be. Yeah no shit. You want to pretend men are still the same and only women have changed. Haha wtf kinda strawman is this!? Of course man are not the same, I have literally said as much myself. What's wrong with you? You're 100% a ChatGPT bot lol, you don't even read what I'm writing, you're just spewing out random auto-generated …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 10:20 PM
1

What you think men are supposed to be is completely irrelevant to our conversation. How are you this lost in the conversation and this unable to engage with anything I'm saying? Are you just a ChatGPT bot?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 10:01 PM
1

If the main issue is working harder than their grandparents it’s still not true. It won’t be. This economy isn’t built for one income household so how are they working harder when they need help from their partner? Again; We Are Not Talking About Jobs. When are you going to understand this strawman of yours won't work? Also you're arguing against yourself, if the economy isn't built for one income households then obviously men needing help from their partner doesn't mean they're not working hard…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 07:48 PM
-1

It’s not a strawman. You just don’t like the response. It is a strawman, I explained why it was. You can't just go "you don't like what I said" and think that defeats my argument lol. In no way are men working harder. Not in jobs Again, strawman, nobody has mentioned jobs except you. nor dating. Incorrect. Men just think that since men don’t want to be basic either. They want to be top dawg and get rich and get a hot girlfriend. Nah, some men are like that, but the vast majority of men just want…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 04:36 PM
3

Haha I donno dude, like normal standards? Like someone who loves them, someone who contributes as close to equal as they can for things like money and chores etc., someone who's nice and positive and pleasant to be around most of the time, someone that's at least decently attractive and cares about their looks at least a bit and stays at least somewhat healthy, someone who's able to at least partly fulfill their sexual needs. The vast majority of men I talk to don't have problems they need someo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 01:59 PM
6

Wtf kind of men are you having conversations with lol. I don't think I've ever met a man in my life that fits that description.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 10:16 AM
1

Brenna, while not a great option, there's no obvious red flags like there is with Casey.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 10:10 AM
-3

lol. Men aren’t the men they used to be either. Men are too busy being gamers online while women are doomscrolling. Either way, excessively online. Not a gender exclusive thing. lol. Women used to take care of the household and cook, and now they're scrolling on instagram. Men used to work more and then go to the pub and get drunk every evening with their mates, and now they're playing video games. Of course men would prefer the women of the past, but you're saying "Men aren’t the men they used …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/24 09:35 AM
5

Why can't you look at someone who will fuck up your life with their antics and go "I'm better off without them"? Because if you don't get any water you die from dehydration, there's not really anything that is worse than that, for a lot of men that nature's programming to have a partner is that strong. A lot of lonely men kill themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/24 03:30 PM
–

This really just seems like different people to me. Some men will want a woman who sleeps instantly with her, other men will want a woman who doesn't do ONS/casual sex. The overlap between the two is very low I'd imagine. I'm pretty sure all those men who wants a woman who doesn't do ONS would not consider her for more than an ONS if she does an ONS with him. And also there's men who want a traditional woman, and there's other men who wants to split the bills and expenses, but again I would imag…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/24 04:42 PM
6

I'm plenty social, just not in a way where I can organically meet women. I don't enjoy bars/clubs, and I have no interest in Salsa or volunteering, and my social circle is spread all over the world after everybody I knew moved away for job opportunities so we usually hang out online instead, and because I'm a software developer so there's no women at my work. I like engineering stuff, tech stuff, playing D&D and computer games and esports, politics/debates, stock market/economy, playing various …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/24 09:14 PM
2

Because no man who watches porn would be okay with his girlfriend making it. Why would we have to be? There are some women who like making porn, and they're not my type. Me occasionally watching them and at the same time not being ok with my girlfriend producing similar content is totally fine. He sexually prefers hot crazy women but his girlfriend is stuck being the “safe good girl” who’s marriage material. No, we all sexually prefer our girlfriends to be a hot crazy woman. We just don't want h…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/24 09:07 PM
–

Not every woman has to be my type. It's totally fine that there are some women who are into doing porn and are happy that way, they're just not for me. The fact that I think porn should be legal, and that I sometimes look at it, doesn't change that in any way. You can call me anti-porn if you want, but to say that about someone who thinks porn should be legal and who watches porn sometimes guilt-free seems pretty moronic.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/24 08:57 PM
11

Because most of us don't have a way to organically meet people. We don't like going to the bar/club every weekend, we don't like taking Salsa-classes on Wednesday nights, we don't like volunteering at the local soup kitchen, and we don't work in an environment where we organically would meet people, and we lack the social circles to have social events to go to regularly where we would organically meet people. Our options are either OLD or spending an incredible amount of time and effort to inser…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/24 08:42 PM
2

Imagine 30% of your money gets taken out of your paycheck and you see that some of it is being used to get Jimmy a girlfriend. I've already invested so many of my tax dollars in Jimmy's education etc., spending an extra 0.001% of that to make sure he doesn't kill himself at 30 and actually get a chance to pay the investment the state has made in him forward seems great.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 03:57 PM
–

It's not, the things you're describing are strawmen, or are only applicable to less than 1% of the male population. Try again.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 04:56 PM
2

Sure, if you're happy then go you. I'm specifically talking to/about the women complaining about it, which a lot of them do.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 03:09 PM
1

No, it's not as simple as "if I don't I don't", we can do lots of things to mold and change our preferences. The abundant use of social media and porn likely molds both women's and men's preferences up. Abstaining from social media, meditation and rationalization, giving people a chance to see if you develop attraction, and of course therapy are just some things from the top of my head that can probably help women get out of a mindset that keeps themselves from finding a partner they can be happ…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 12:19 PM
1

But when it’s not there it isn’t. But that's the whole point, it could be. You cannot expect a portion of the population to mutilate their self interest to benefit others. That's a weird strawman, I've never argued for women to do this for someone else's benefit, my point the whole time is for the woman's own benefit.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 12:02 PM
1

I don't know about negotiate, but attraction isn't this set thing, you can do all kinds of things to change and mold your attraction. If your attraction is holding you back from finding happiness with a mediocre man then like I said I would suggest you try to work on that. and as much as I don’t like referencing the animal world, it works the same in nature I don't think this is correct, I think many species don't care about attraction at all, and will have sex with whomever whenever. Additional…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 08:59 AM
1

"Attractive" isn't a set objective thing. Like I said if you don't find most men attractive then I would suggest you work on that as it seems like it would be preventing you from finding happiness with a mediocre man (not you specifically but "you" as in the type of women we're talking about here).
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 08:53 AM
1

Sure, but I desire/love/like and want to have sex with most women. But the few that I don't I agree, I also want nothing to do with those. The thing I don't understand is why women only want so few men. It seems irrational, like if they just got over that they could be really happy with a mediocre guy, but somehow they keep being their own enemy it seems and that is the part I don't really get. Like personally if I found that sort of irrational dissonance within myself I would work hard on that …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 09:36 PM
6

Yeah, sex is nice, companionship is nice, sharing your life with someone is nice. Unless she's a raging bitch that literally makes my life worse by being in it those things will make it worth being with her for me. She doesn't have to be the most beautiful and most kind person ever, she just needs to beat me with my loneliness, which isn't too hard. Seems pretty straightforward and reasonable to me, and I don't really get why women think differently.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 09:30 PM
9

It's the same for me as a man, it's just that I like most people, women included.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 09:23 PM
2

Who's mad about that? The only people I see mad at women are for denying reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 09:15 PM
1

Also, nobody ever “needs” sex, otherwise virgins and celibates wouldn’t make it to old age. Oh also, a lot of them don't make it to old age since they kill themselves. Suicide rates are high for men, and I would guess there's a fairly high correlation with sexlessness. So there's that too...
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 03:53 PM
1

That’s because during this kind of crunches you really just want to turn off your brain for a bit and just treat yourself when you have a bit of time for yourself. And sacrificing a little bit of that for your partner isn't the end of the world for you, but does a lot for your partner. Also, nobody ever “needs” sex, otherwise virgins and celibates wouldn’t make it to old age. Your "needs" are not just what you need to literally survive.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 02:00 PM
1

Because sacrificing 10 minutes of sleep, or 10 minutes of scrolling social media, or 10 minutes of watching Netflix, is a pretty small sacrifice. And sacrificing sex for a week is a huge sacrifice. Sometimes, it's the guy's needs, and sometimes it's the gal's needs. Which is literally what I've been saying the whole time. The "too tired" for a week straight just ain't it though.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 12:12 PM
1

Ehm sure I guess, but I don't think this is what the vast majority of people think of when they say "too tired" for a week. Sure, if you're only getting 4 hours of sleep per day and are super busy for the remaining 20 then I can kinda get it, but as a software dev who have been part of crunches, and who had many exam weeks, I've never seen anything close to that. I think most people when they think of someone being too tired for sex for a week think about someone who has it kinda stressful at wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 12:10 PM
1

But this reasoning can be boiled down to: if you're not the perfect partner all the time, then you never loved me. Not at all, it can be boiled down to; "If you don't consider my needs and my well being, and weigh those against your costs of fulfilling those needs for me, then you never loved me". Like I said having a severe toothache would obviously make the cost of having sex really high, so it's fully understandable to skip sex for a bit in the rare occurrence when that happens. But "too tire…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 11:36 AM
–

No, we're talking about a situation where there's no sex for a full week because she's "tired". You said: Should a man leave a woman who had a project deadline at work and had been too tired for sex for a week? To which I said that that is a red flag. Obviously a "I have to go to work right now, can we fuck later when I get back home instead?" is fine. But a whole week of that is absolutely a red flag that your partner doesn't really care about you and your needs. And I never feel obligated to h…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 11:30 AM
1

I understand your point of view, but if you weren't willing to have sex with me just because you were tired I would be questioning if you ever loved me too, which is why I would break up. It's not the lack of sex that is the issue that causes the breakup, it's the complete disregard of my needs and feelings that causes me to breakup. The same would be true of anything, if a clean kitchen is super duper important to me because I have some sort of OCD about it, and my woman left the kitchen messy …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 11:11 AM
–

Like I said a woman shouldn't do anything, and I don't put any moral superiority to any of this, so a "good" woman shouldn't do anything either. But I would recommend a man to find a woman who cares about his needs and well-being. The example used above was a woman who has a lot going on at work for a week and is "too tired" for sex. If a man has a woman like that I say run, quickly, she clearly either doesn't give a shit about you or she has some serious mental issues regarding sex. But of cour…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 10:37 AM
–

I already found a woman like that. Although she generally has a higher libido than me, so it's more often me "having" to have sex with her than the opposite, but I'm happy to do that, it costs me almost nothing and gives her great joy, so of course I will do that whenever she wants, I would be a monster if I didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 09:56 AM
–

No, again you're in the wrong mindset, you shouldn't "just offer your body". It becomes a laborious horrible experience if you see it that way. Instead you should see it as having sex being an important part of what keeps the bond in your relationship, and something that your man needs, and something that you're happy to fulfill, even if you yourself doesn't have a drive for it right now. It doesn't become horrible unless you make it horrible, obviously nobody likes being forced to have sex, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 09:27 AM
–

From my experience plenty of women don't feel that way, so I would stay away from the ones that do, and I don't feel that way myself so I don't see why women would feel that way. My GF has a higher libido than me, and she will use me for that masturbatory process as you described it multiple times per day, and I'm just happy to be able to make her happy, because I care about her. And it shouldn't be that she feel pressured to offer her body, it should be that she loves her man and wants to see h…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 08:52 AM
–

It's not about not being able to take a break, if she has to go away on a work trip for a week it's absolutely fine that there's no sex for a week. But her caring so little about you and your well being that she can't sacrifice 5 minutes of her busy day to fulfill one of your most important needs is a huge red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/24 08:44 AM
–

Absolutely, "too tired for sex" is a big red flag. A woman can keep her man pleased enough with 5 minutes of low effort if she's feeling tired. It means the world for the man and costs almost nothing for the woman, if she's not even willing to do that for you then you should be looking for someone better.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/24 11:02 PM
4

Because for a lot of men it's the least miserable option that has a chance at success for meeting women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 09:43 AM
4

if you know you are unhealthy for her, why would you want someone you care about to be with someone who is unhealthy? maybe you weren't thinking about this extreme but i've 100% heard men say that they don't care if they are bad for a woman or the relationship harms her. I don't see any scenario where I would be unhealthy for someone, and being unhealthy for someone is quite different from what we were talking about before. I would guess a guy who would be unhealthy for a woman also wouldn't car…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/24 08:47 PM
1

and think "she should aim higher, she deserves the best life possible"? If she's happy with me and wants me why would I try to dissuade her? She's a grown woman and I assume she knows what makes herself happy better than I do.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/24 08:00 PM
2

It seems to me that women have it pretty good right now in my parts of the world, I don't think they need any support from me. I'm strongly against 4th wave feminism so I find myself opposing most of the things women might be looking to me for support for like gender quotas etc. I'm very strongly in favor of abortion rights, voting rights, and everything else that came with the earlier waves of feminism though, and if anybody tried to take any of those things away from women I would be staunchly…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 08:33 PM
1

It's hard to say without seeing you, but my guess is that you're a bit too self-confident about your looks and that you actually look fine. Since you're not fat I think the experience you've had is more down to bad luck than anything else. Keep looking, approaching, and maybe try out a dating app, and I think you'll find what you're looking for!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 08:09 PM
1

Odd, I would guess you've probably just been unlucky. When men talk about approaching women we usually talk about how many hundreds of women we've approached and asked out, with a small sample size luck plays a big factor. What do you mean by "do not fit societal beauty standards"? If that's code for "fat" then I can understand you're having a hard time, most men are very much not attracted to fat women, like for me personally I can't even get hard with a fat woman, which makes a relationship im…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 05:28 PM
1

Look at historical posts in /r/theredpill. It used to be great before posers like Tate co-opted it with their bullshit, and before Reddit decided to quarantine the place for bullshit reasons. I don't know if there are any good old-school redpill communities out there left, I haven't been active in years.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 04:58 PM
3

Most couples meet trough online dating because vast majority of those relationships fall apart within the first year. Do you have any data to support this? I have a hard time seeing relationships that started from meeting online failing more than others. Cool, I dont know a single person who met their long term partner online. Cool, so then it works like half the time based on our data, which is still amazing, and that makes online dating a great idea. That's not what I ment. It's a compatabilit…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 04:42 PM
1

Can you give me some examples of your approaches you've tried in the past, and how many times you've tried? I think some men would be apprehensive at first, thinking "where is the camera?", assuming they're getting pranked, or that it's some scheme to rob them. Are you shooting for way above average men?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 04:34 PM
5

Online dating really isn't a good idea for anyone not looking for casual sex. Of course it is, most couples meet through online dating today, the vast majority of my friends met their long-term wives or girlfriends through online dating. Wanting something to "connect you two" before you date is asinine, you make something that connects you over time. My grandpa asked my grandma for a dance at a ballroom, that's how they met, they didn't have anything to connect them initially, but they built it …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 03:44 PM
6

As a black woman you don't have any issues with this text from the comment higher up? If it bugs them so much do something about these men black people but like omg quit bitching about us like we’re at fault because we don’t feel safe around you after experiencing violence. Not all men black people are shitty but the men black people threaten, harass and demean us are shitty and they aren’t in short supply and we cannot tell the difference between the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/24 10:32 AM
1

She isn't complaining about not getting laid on Tinder, she's complaining about "Random men in public don't even give me the time of day".
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/24 04:14 PM
1

Random men in public don't even give me the time of day and these land whales are doing this? I mean yeah, you should just go on Tinder, why are you trying to get random men to approach you in public? Few men are willing to do that in this day and age. Either go on Tinder or start approaching random men yourself (if you do I'm sure you'll do really well).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/24 03:39 PM
1

Fat girl does well on Tinder and gets laid a lot Average girl doesn't get approached IRL Seems to be that if average girl just goes on Tinder she will be getting laid a lot too. That's the explanation I think.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/24 03:38 PM
0

In my high school (Sweden, 00s), the girls were openly showing disgust at even the thought of dating one of us guys at the same age. They constantly went on about how immature we were and that they needed someone older. All the guys dated girls a couple of classes below instead.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/24 03:23 PM
1

What I'm saying is a fleshlight isn't an alternative. My hand or a fleshlight can take care of the physical sensation, but it does nothing to help with all the other things I want out of sex. A prostitute is kind of an alternative (I would imagine, haven't tried myself), it doesn't satisfy all the parts, but it does a lot better than a fleshlight, which is why many men settle with that alternative to actually dating. So yeah, due to the grueling process of dating many men choose either prostitut…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 07:17 PM
1

But it's from my perspective, a man's, that we're talking. We're talking about if men should read profiles or not. If I was a woman and could get a hundred matches instantly I too would probably start to filter women based on random arbitrary stuff, and sure, if I could pick between a woman who likes sports and one who doesn't, all-else-equal I would pick the one who doesn't (I too don't enjoy sports that much). However a woman liking sports is not a deal-breaker for me, it's something I absolut…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 07:12 PM
1

Just create new throwaway accounts every now and then. Deleting comments is kinda shitty because it destroys the value and entertainment for future readers.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 05:24 PM
1

Yep. They really put themselves on an emotional rollercoaster by swiping yes to a woman they don't want then doing the elation then crash when she matches. I've never heard of this happening to men, it certainly never happens to me. I swipe pretty quickly, and I swipe right if she's decently hot (most women on Tinder are). If we match I'm interested, and I will push towards a date pretty quickly. What pics or bio she has in her profile, or whatever meaningless texting we do before meeting is use…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 05:19 PM
1

The idea that you can filter out compatibility from a dating profile is pretty crazy. 90% of women on Tinder could absolutely be compatible with me, and she would have to write something crazy in her bio for me to think otherwise. How we vibe when we meet is everything, whether or not she likes cats or pasta is completely irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 05:15 PM
1

How would reading or looking at profiles help get matches from non-strange women? It's not like he's swiping left on those non-strange women, and if he swiped left on all potentially strange women he wouldn't be getting any matches at all so what's the point of even being on a dating app then?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 05:11 PM
1

You think a fleshlight is anywhere close to as good as real sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 05:08 PM
1

If men collectively decided You expect a whole gender to be able to collectively decide anything? Men are not one big cohesive team, in-fact when it comes to dating we're competitors. Of course we'll do whatever is best for ourselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 05:07 PM
1

PM me a picture and I'll tell you if you are.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/24 02:10 PM
1

Yeah I can understand the perspective of wanting a contract when you want an in-equal relationship. I guess in my preferred type of relationship, an egalitarian one, there's no need for a contract to ensure you get half, because you already have half, you're not giving anything up for the sake of your husband. I think our views on marriage is maybe not so different after all, it's more so our view on what a relationship looks like, because I can now understand your need of marriage in your type …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 08:46 PM
1

Realistically men and women have different sex drives due to the difference in testosterone so for women to participate in sex frequently enough to make a man happy will probably make her unhappy. A lower sex drive doesn't necessarily make you dislike having more sex. I have a lower sex drive than my current GF, like I will initiate once per day roughly and be happy with that, but when she initiates a second or third time a day it's not like I'm unhappy, even if I have 0 drive left and often can…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 08:19 PM
1

I guess I just see relationships more egalitarian. I as a man will be putting in at least half the effort for kids and homemaking, and making at least half the sacrifices for it. And I want a woman who works, someone strong and independent who doesn't need me, but chooses to be with me because she loves me. So the protection you're looking for just wouldn't make sense the type of relationship I want. And I don't want sex to be a transactional thing, I want a woman who wants to have sex with me j…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 07:30 PM
1

I’m not religious either but I highly value being seen and accepted by society and my loved ones as husband and wife not as boy and girlfriend like we’re still in grade school. Maybe this is a cultural thing, where I live (Sweden), there's none of that, I would almost say the opposite. Also the fact is if a man is already planning for the possibility we will grow apart that action alone says to me that he doesn’t think we are going to last. All it says is that he's intelligent and rational. Some…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 06:05 PM
1

I don’t think marriage is a trap and if he does we’re not compatible. I know you think that, the question is why? I’m not going to build my entire life on the word of someone who’s already told me they’re scared and want the option to leave because when he does leave, my life will crumble. And your life won't crumble even more if you or him are locked into a marriage that you or him can't get out of? That sounds so much worse to me. There’s no relationship if there’s no trust and marriage is a w…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 03:50 PM
2

What does marriage protect you against? And why do you feel you need protection, can't you just trust the man you love? When I say it has 0 effect I mean 0 positive effect. The reason I'm against marriage is that firstly I'm kinda anti-religious, so I want to avoid what is basically a religious ceremony. Secondly marriage just makes breaking up really messy and hard. A large portion of marriages do end up in divorce, and while everything might be great right now, 10-30 years down the road we mig…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 02:16 PM
1

You are missing something. In your scenario the man is getting all of his needs met but the woman is not having her needs met. No, I'm just asking why marriage is a need for the woman. To me it just seems like a paper that has 0 effect, so I'm trying to understand why something seemingly useless becomes a need for women. If I’m with a man that can’t see that I need commitment in order to trust and feel safe with him then we are not compatible. It just shows that he doesn’t respect my needs. It w…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 01:50 PM
1

Again, none of the things you mention here requires a marriage. Like I said I had that with my parents without marriage, that's the model I'm now trying to follow with my own relationship. Also you didn't really respond to anything I said, show me the trauma and damage, like I said it should be really easy to show with how much marriage rate is falling.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 01:15 PM
4

It's not for men's benefit that you women spend so much time and money to "look pretty", it's for your own. We couldn't care less. Actually that's not true, most of us would probably prefer if you spent less time and money on "looking pretty". I keep telling my GF that I prefer her natural look, but she keeps insisting on spending hours on her hair and makeup.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 11:37 AM
1

Canada Interesting, from quickly reading about it it does seem that in some states it is like that at least. It isn't like that in my country though. Because kids should grow up in a household with two parents who are in love and committed to each other for life, official, not half-assed bf/gf shit. Anything outside of that is traumatizing and damaging to the child. Speaking from experience, my parents "bf/gf shit" hasn't been half-assed, it's been full-assed, and the fact that they're not "offi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 09:46 AM
1

Men and women are different thus men shouldn’t expect women to value things the same way men do. Indeed, which is why I'm trying to understand your side. It’s used as a fear tactic so that men can tell women what to do by threatening to leave every time they get push back from women. What about if you find a man who isn't manipulative, that throughout the X years of being his girlfriend he never once threatens to leave when he gets push-back from you. Would you be ok with being his girlfriend fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 09:43 AM
1

Why couldn't you build anything together if he's scared of being trapped with you (and he's equally scared of you being trapped with him)? Why can't you just cut the entrapment part (marriage) and then continue with the relationship without it with everything else equal? Some countries do have legal rights, but imagine you lived in one that don't, is marriage still a requirement and if so why?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 09:17 AM
4

That explains the views on marriage. People who were never modeled a healthy marriage will not be able to attain one. Another reason to get married and model the nuclear family to the kids. I grew up in a healthy nuclear family, just that my parents didn't have a paper from the state/church, it changed nothing for me or them. The True North strong and free What country is that? You also didn't answer my question: "Why would it be best to not have kids out of wedlock lol?"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 12:11 AM
2

Alright cool, I think we're on the same page then! Reading the other comments from women here though it seems most wouldn't accept it even in this case.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 12:09 AM
2

You didn't criticize my reasoning though. Feel free to do so, I'd love to get a counter-argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 12:08 AM
7

Yeah no shit, but we're in a debate forum so it's fair to criticize her reasoning. Why did you write this comment?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:57 PM
1

Why is that?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:55 PM
3

If you want to have kids, it's best to have them in a marriage and not outside wedlock, unless you're ok with having a bastard child. You're speaking as if we're in the 1600's, I'm a "bastard", and it has not negatively impacted my life or my parents life in any way. Why would it be best to not have kids out of wedlock lol? Besides, in my country, a couple becomes married by default after cohabitating for a certain number of years so being a long-term girlfriend isn't even an option. Really? I d…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:52 PM
2

He clearly doesn’t love me. Why would him not wanting marriage due to it being some religious bullshit that entraps people mean he doesn't love you? I know lots of couples that have been together 10-30+ years with kids that aren't married and they're super-happy. Why couldn't that be you?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:50 PM
1

I was just answering your question "So why should I be fine if my partner assumes we have no shot?", explaining that the "no shot" part is a strawman, and pointing out that your analogy in the follow-up comment doesn't really work for what we're talking about. And it's not about believing in you or not, people change over time and that often leads to divorce, no matter how much you believe in them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:48 PM
1

Not if there was a ~50% risk you would die from the car ride (like there is of getting divorced in marriages). But setting that aside, if I didn't enjoy driving around in a car, and I didn't need to go anywhere, then I wouldn't get into a car and drive around due to the small risk of an accident. Same with marriage, if there's no benefits why risk it?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:43 PM
3

what incentive do I have to stick around The fact that you love the guy? I see marriage as some religious bullshit that entraps people in relationships making it hard for them to leave if their spouse changes or even becomes abusive in the future. What's so horrible about just staying boyfriend/girlfriend forever and having exactly the same type of relationship as you would if you were married, but without the useless paper?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:39 PM
3

Why is it an insult? I don't see being a forever boyfriend an insult so I have a hard time seeing why it would be.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:37 PM
0

What if you have a successful career on your own and as such already have financial security regardless? Does that change your opinion on requiring marriage?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:36 PM
-1

But why take the risk when there's 0 upsides? Literally nothing changes from the day before you're married to the day after, except there's now a big problem if you ever want to split up. Again it's not about trust, it's about the fact that humans change over time.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:34 PM
1

Hmm alright. I'm the opposite, if at any point I'm unhappy in my relationship I want it to be as easy as possible to get out, and I especially want that for my partner. I absolutely don't want her to stay with me because it's a big deal to leave and she'd have to break vows, I can't think of anything worse really than having a partner who is unhappy in a relationship with me but unable to leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:25 PM
-3

That's a stupid reasoning though. It's not about trust, it's just about human nature. Most marriages end in divorce, and they often do so because the people in them grow apart. All humans change over time, so even if everything is perfect today and he fully trusts you, he knows that there's a decent risk that 10-30 years down the road you won't love each-other anymore, and if you're married then it just gets really messy.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:20 PM
1

"No shot" is not the same as "there's a risk it won't work", of course your partner doesn't assume you have no shot in this case. If he assumes that he would just dump your ass right now. But if there's even a 1% risk that you discover things about each-other after marriage, or that 10-30 years down the road both or either of you change enough (all people change over time) that you're not compatible anymore, then being married is just really messy, it's just easier if you're not.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:19 PM
-1

the benefits of marriage What benefits are those? Are you talking about tax-breaks or other bureaucratic stuff? If so, if you lived in a country where there were non of those (as I do), would that change your opinion on requiring marriage?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 11:11 PM
5

Sounds like the opposite no? Porn is usually much longer and with lots of different positions.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/24 10:52 PM
1

This sub is full of dudes mad that women are single and happy. Really? I only ever see dudes here mad at women complaining about all men being shit and them not being able to find one that fits their super-high standards, despite the women saying those things being average. I don't think I've ever seen a dude here mad about a woman just saying "I'm happy single".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/24 09:09 AM
3

Also important to note that the only way to fully control the Sex → Conception link is abstinence, all birth-controls have a failure rate, and the most common ones a surprisingly high one. The Conception → Birth link has full control through, as long as you apply diligence and take a pregnancy test and go for the abortion in a reasonable time. So the only way for men to have full control is abstinence. While women have full control the whole way.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/24 09:04 AM
1

Destiny is a popular twitch streamer He is a Kick/Youtube streamer, he hasn't streamed on Twitch for years. that aligns with bluepill thinking Not really, he's kind of a middle-grounder, in the blue-camp on certain points and on the red-camp on other points. It was revealed further that the reason for said divorce was due to Destiny putting his foot down at her sleeping with other men. Complete misrepresentation of the situation. The divorce is because his ex-wife got romantically attached to a …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/24 08:46 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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