TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Occams_clipper Archive

View 10 posts and 237 comments by Occams_clipper on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

The simplest explanation here is that it's difficult. Not really. There's nothing difficult about describing (in graphic detail) the process of sexual escalation. I think the word you're looking for is uncomfortable. When average/below average men are trying to get women into bed, the process is never Hollywood-like picture perfect. There's almost always resistance from the woman that the man has to break through and this "breaking through" process can very much seem like harassment to blue-pill…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 05:17 AM
2

Why are you pretending like there's a difference?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 05:32 AM
1

That bluepillers should stop chastising men who aren't doing well in the dating market by telling them to "improve their social skills". Their social skills are usually already good enough, sometimes better than men who are getting laid. What the sexually successful men have is social/sexual aggression and social permission to be aggressive which too many people conflate with social skill.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 04:16 AM
1

You can have an IQ of 60 and be socially intelligent. Not really. Not in the overwhelming majority of cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 04:08 AM
3

Assertion without evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:31 AM
2

Out of the hundreds of comments thus far I haven't noticed even one that has addressed what I described in the final three paragraphs especially the Mike Tyson-Tiger Woods dichotomy. Interesting.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:31 AM
1

Why don't you look at couples where both parties are under 30?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:08 AM
1

Lol you have it backwards. The entire point of my post is that sexually successful men aren't these charisma gods with some special secret understanding of human behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:07 AM
1

This mainly happens for athletes.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:02 AM
0

I mean.. there's limits to everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:00 AM
2

Typical. No actual response to the data or the interpretation. Just a bunch of pre-formed conclusions.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:42 PM
2

Extreme examples help us parse out causes. Since we can reasonably assume that the 60 IQ boys are much less socially skilled than 120 IQ boys, and yet they're getting laid to the same extent, the primary behavioral factor is not social skill. What do 60 IQ boys have more of than 120 IQ boys? 1) Social/sexual aggression, 2) Social leeway to act out those behaviors (read the last paragraph of my post).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:38 PM
1

Specifically, do you seriously think that 60 IQ (borderline retarded) boys are skillfully deciding when to be low inhibition and when not to?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 11:13 AM
19

You're literally just ignoring the data that was presented and redefining intelligence to mean whatever you need it to be. It's like you're wedded to this idea the male sexual success is a barometer for social skill or virtue and the evidence to the contrary doesn't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 11:10 AM
2

You're just ignoring the actual points that I brought up.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 10:59 AM
0

In the Sciencedirect paper I linked to, the 60 IQ boys did just as well as 120 IQ boys. So unless you think that borderline retarded boys are decent at flirting, perhaps other behaviors are involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 10:58 AM
0

Show me the evidence that being smarter leads to a lower sex drive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 10:50 AM
1

Women, all over the world, ENHANCE their looks far more than men do. Go to a 3rd world slum in South Asia or South America where makeup is too expensive and tell me if you think the women look like they are "too pretty" for their husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:03 AM
19

I've been most successful with women when I act like a retarded love island frat boy. I'm glad you call it like it is without sugar-coating. So many people (both men and women) pretend that there is some deep and complex social understanding involved even with so much evidence to the contrary. It's like criticism of sexually successful men is an indirect attack on women, therefore the same people that complain the most about toxic masculinity end up inadvertently covering up for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:56 AM
2

Sure there might be a tiny number like that but the the vast majority of men want a promiscuous sex life for at least some time in their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:50 AM
-2

Wrong. When redpillers talk of hypergamy, they are referring to women going for men of greater looks and/or SOCIAL status. Educational attainment has never been one of those things
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:42 AM
3

The thing is, not all sexually forward behaviors are created equal. If you can be forward without being lewd, that's the sweet spot. Do you believe that boys with IQs around 60 can do this careful dance better than boys with IQs around 120? I doubt it. Maybe, just maybe, the forwardness is most of what matters and the all this other nuance is unnecessary. You talk a lot about "leeway" for behaviors - you can behave however you like no matter who you are. Sure you can. Doesn't mean people will re…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:40 AM
1

They parade the isolation of these men as some massive triumph for female empowerment of their "choice" such as things like "welp our choice. too bad so sad'. This is perhaps the biggest falsehood that feminists promote (that too many men believe as well). The idea that men are doing poorly in the modern dating market because women's "freedom to choose". In reality, women have stamped out a lot of men's options by banning prostitution. They've also artificially enriched themselves at men's expen…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 08:09 PM
-2

Yes, it is juvenile. I absolutely despise it. Do you know how you can make it go away? Normalize the criticism of female sexuality and sensibilities. Normalize the idea that female sexuality is just as, if not, more shallow than male sexuality. The proliferation of "alpha male" culture is a result of a gynocentric society that overvalues female sensibilities and therefore, men that appeal to those sensibilities. If you can reduce the overvaluation of female sensibilities, the men that appeal to …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:52 AM
–

If an activity is banned in far more locations now than it was during a particular point in the past, then it's safe to say that it's less socially acceptable now.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:57 PM
–

I didn't say it's impossible now. My point is that you are risking MUCH more now. Legally, and reputationally.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:35 PM
1

Have you seen noticeable changes in the gender composition of your workplace due to automation in the last few years? I'm curious cos I haven't seen much of it where I am.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:19 AM
–

Prostitution was legal and/or tolerated in most of the US up to the mid to late 1800s. Add to that, no mass surveillance or social media so the odds of it damaging your reputation was extremely low. Given all of these factors, any normal single man at the time could get laid worry-free pretty regularly.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:46 AM
1

Buddy please stop falling for the feminist propaganda that they are for "free choice". The modern dating scene isn't a free market. It's legally and culturally regulated in women's favor. Feminists say they are pro-freedom as a way to bait you into supporting an authoritarian solution. Don't take the bait.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 06:31 AM
–

Getting laid had always been hard for men, right now its more accessible than almost all times in history. You're way off the mark. Both about the past and the present.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 06:09 AM
1

Exactly. Men who are looking for a quality woman should not be mad about damaged women going for damaged men because you don't want that woman raising your kids anyways. Men are mad at the fact that those damaged men are treated better by society than they are. Men are also mad that those damaged women will pop out damaged kids and will then leech off of taxpayer money. It's quite legitimate to be frustrated with the overall state of society that has led to so many women being removed from the d…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 11:53 PM
102

Women are entitled to their standards but that doesn't mean that society as a whole has to cheer them on.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 09:21 PM
2

Could be
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 09:52 PM
3

I agree with the title 100% but you could have put in a much better body of text to illustrate the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 09:41 AM
0

Mooching of off taxpayer money when alternatives exist should be seen as unethical. Also, I'm not proposing that this be done in cases where the children are older but mainly for newborns/infants. And even in the case of newborns/infants, no forcible removal need take place. The state could simply provide the mother a time window during which, she'll be provided welfare for the infant and at the end of that window, the welfare payments will end and giving the child up for adoption will be the on…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:02 PM
1

If we simply flipped the genders in this post, you wouldn't be saying any of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 08:40 PM
12

Female sexuality is the ONE human impulse where we as a society collectively pretend that the instinctive preferences are perfectly optimal. Think about it, would anyone in their right mind claim that instinctive human food taste is optimal for health? To get back closer to the topic, how about male sexuality? Would anyone claim that bimbos and manic pixie dreamgirls have good personalities?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 08:39 PM
1

I'm not sure whether this is 100% legit [https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting\_adoptive\_families#:\~:text=While%20it%20is%20difficult%20to,couples%20are%20waiting%20to%20adopt.\] but this webpage says that there are 36 waiting families for every one child that's put up for adoption. If that is indeed the case, welfare can be vastly reduced without any children having to starve. All that we would have to do is enforce a rule that the state will only provide welfare for a child if t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:21 AM
2

Everything you're saying here, if I'm being real, comes off as "if feminists don't want to be afraid, they need to get with men so the "male loneliness epidemic" ends - if they don't, they know the risks and so their fears are bullshit!" It's honestly impressive how you people repeat some version of this strawman argument over and over again while ignoring the 10 ton elephant in the room: Prostitution is illegal and the main reason is that WOMEN want it to be illegal. This is an actual top-down …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:52 AM
1

Women want to punish normal everyday men for the actions of the attractive few.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:32 AM
5

The number of men going out there and impregnating multiple women is much smaller than the number of women going out and getting impregnated by these types of men. Therefore, on a population-wide scale, there literally are more women that deserve the blame than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 09:12 AM
–

I've noticed that nuanced discussion is basically forbidden in this sub. You can post inflammatory rants to your heart's content but the moment anybody says anything against feminism that might actually be effective at piercing through their arguments and convincing those on the fence, it gets deleted.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 07:28 AM
–

I simply used children and their food habits to provide a well known example of a group of people alternating between exaggerating disgust and exaggerating attraction. If you're going to be offended by something so innocuous then I really don't know what else to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 07:24 AM
1

Hey Mods, why was this post removed?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 10:32 AM
0

What language did I use that you think is so egregious?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 10:23 AM
–

Since you supposedly understand evolution so well, please outline for me the evolutionary pathway through which women would have evolved the instinctive attraction to the "best" men. Social groups and societies have no impact on evolution. Can't tell if you're being serious here.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 06:02 AM
–

As usual, no real arguments. Just ad hominem.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 05:57 AM
2

Sure. The difference though, is that there's no culture of denying male shallowness. There is very much a culture of denying female shallowness.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 07:48 AM
1

I didn't emphasize morality much at all. If you think that the female of a species will necessarily always pick the best (from a purely survival/fitness perspective), go look up Fisherian Runaway.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:42 AM
1

Didn't realize I was talking to the conjecture cop.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 04:54 AM
1

None. It's just speculation on my part based on the fact that the hormonal disruptions in the womb that would produce a gay son are different from the hormonal disruptions that would produce a lesbian daughter. Different types of hormonal disruptions could be caused by different types of genes in the mother. Also, if you do make this assumption, it offers a neat and tidy explanation for why there are so many more lesbians than gays.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 05:59 PM
1

less control is irrelevant, you're conceding that they did have some control over their choice, which nullifies your argument since they could use their abilities to choose mates in some capacity I don't understand this need to draw an all-or-nothing conclusion. If only 10 % of women historically made the full decision on who fathered their children, and those women weren't having proportionately more children than the other 90 %, then that means that the vast majority of women today are descend…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 05:51 PM
1

Let's say there are two groups of men: Group A- 50% jocks, 50% artsy prettyboys Group B- 50% jocks, 50% nerds If these two groups went to war against each other in an environment resembling what early humans dealt with (or really any environment), I'm confident that group B would demolish group A and it really wouldn't even be close.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 05:40 PM
1

I've skimmed through some of those links and from what I've gathered, the genes of gay people were examined to see if there were correlates. That's fine but one thing that stuck out to me was that in at least one of those articles, hormonal conditions in the womb were referred to as an "environmental" factor. I mean, sure, those hormones are outside the body of the embryo that's being turned gay, but there is no reason to assume that the genetics of the mother don't play a role in that phenomeno…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 03:57 PM
1

However, we can clearly see that women are attracted to masculine features like leadership and aggression and confidence and dominance. And men possessing these traits enjoy more female optionality, than those possessing more "feminine / nice guy" features. There are almost as many women attracted to soft artsy prettyboys as those attracted to alpha jocks so that pokes a bit of a hole in that theory. And sure, tribes needed leaders, but those leaders needed at least a few people in the tribe to …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 03:18 PM
1

My point was that they weren't selecting the best mates in the ancient world either.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 04:43 AM
1

I would assume homosexuality would not have been tolerated throughout most of history in most places. Any relationships would probably take place in secret. The key here is the difference between gay men and lesbians regarding how they would navigate the situation. A gay man can marry a woman for the social standing and then just have sex with her as little as possible. A lesbian married to a man would not have the same power. Therefore, most lesbians would probably end up having more children t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 02:37 AM
2

You, like almost everyone else here, didn't understand the post. I point was not that women pick immoral men (although that is certainly often the case). My point was that even if you take morality out of the equation, women don't pick the kind of men that would have been best at surviving/thriving throughout most of history.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 02:19 AM
0

I literally answered it in the next sentence. The entire point is that babies would NOT be made.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 02:08 AM
1

Fair enough. I was feeling a bit iffy about that one myself but what's done is done. I still stand by points 1 to 3.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 06:50 PM
2

I also have no idea where you get that number from, your own source directly states men 72.6" or taller have an average salary of $60,229 and men 65.77" to the next lowest height deviation have an average salary of $38,913 5,525 USD being the salary difference between 72 inch and 65 inch height is mentioned in page 435 in the second-last paragraph of the "Results" section (right before the "Differential Effects by Gender" section). That number actually takes other factors into account and isn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 06:42 PM
1

I literally typed out the ways in which taller can be better to start with, but I guess any criticism of female preferences equals "moaning".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 06:11 PM
2

I was being somewhat hyperbolic in the post but my point still stands, women had far less control over mating throughout most of human history than men did (the man could be her prospective mate or her father).
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 06:08 PM
2

I agree that most of the fathers may not have been arranging things at every step, but in the vast majority of societies, they had the power to get rid of a man from being their daughter's mate if they disliked the guy enough. That's the part that matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 05:59 PM
3

and therefore genes matter more for height than you were implying.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 03:45 AM
2

I absolutely don't think it's a strange example for someone who posts in shortguys to try to argue that tall men aren't better, it's actually kind of par for the (dis)course on this sub This is an argument against the very existence of sexual dimorphism, which pre-dates humanity by quite a bit. The vast majority of sexually reproducing species have larger males. I assure you sexual dimorphism has every reason to be necessary in sexually reproducing species, even in 2025. It helps to know who are…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 03:41 AM
2

Average Dutch male height is more like 183-184 cm so the difference is more than 2-3 cm.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 02:28 AM
6

Of course women could influence the situation. Children can influence their parent's spending habits but I'm sure you wouldn't claim that the child has actual control. The key point is that whatever influence/control women had, it pales in comparison to what they gained in the mid to late 20th century.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 02:17 AM
3

Do you think genetic differences in height don't exist? There have been multiple generations of adequate nutrition in parts of China and India and even if you specifically looked at those affluent populations, their heights are less than e.g. the Dutch.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 01:58 AM
7

It's an overall combination of strength, size, stamina, speed, intelligence, and many other traits. It's impossible to provide a comprehensive description for all of it. You have no argument if you can only tell us that we chose wrong but can't tell us what the right choice is I actually do. My argument is that women, throughout most of history were having their mating choices made for them by other people. In this situation, it was impossible for the women with innately good preferences to stan…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 12:00 AM
1

Oh, yeah, yeah, you are amazing, women want to make you worse. Hope it helps. Don't know why you have to be so snarky about it. If I said that men find bimbos and manic pixie dreamgirls more attractive then smart/competent women, would you be so oppositional? If male shallowness is so easy to accept, why is female shallowness so controversial? Still the part about women now choosing and what does it matter is left. When men stop relentlessly trying to adapt to women's preferences, they will star…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 11:20 PM
1

The men that posses the overall set of traits that help them survive/thrive in a particular environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 11:12 PM
5

Just question, what balance did you bring? Modern culture denigrates men who are unattractive to women by telling them that their situation is the result of a character defect on their part while simultaneously saying the opposite to unattractive women. Therefore, successfully upending the notion that women are somehow hardwired to pick the best men will lead to less of that denigration mentioned previously on unattractive men. That's the balance.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 10:56 PM
0

The biggest part of taxpayers money goes to social security and social security benefits more men than women. How does social security benefit more men than women?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/25 07:41 PM
1

I think Woman A should be allowed to have sex with the Man entirely based on her own choice and Woman B should fuck off Thank you. I'm pleasantly surprised by this answer. Just a follow-up question: I think you'll find that "Woman B"s are extremely common throughout society i.e. women who want to keep prostitution illegal and politicians clearly respond to these demands. Given that situation, do you still think its wrong to say that many sexless/lonely men are in that position because their opti…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 05:41 PM
-1

Can you address this simple point: Man A wants to have sex with Woman A. Woman A is not as enthused as Man A by this but decides that if Man A is willing pay her a little, then she'll go through with it. Woman B swoops in and decides that because Woman A was not perfectly, romantically seduced by Man A, and is not willing to bang him for free, this whole activity should be banned. Do you still think Man A's lack of sexual prospects are purely a result of individual women rejecting him? Or does l…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 05:38 PM
1

Men commit more violent crimes than women because: Men are far better at it. Men have more motivation to do so. A better question is, why do you care that men are overrepresented in crime? Shouldn't the goal be to just reduce crime no matter who's committing it?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 05:41 PM
1

Did you read what you wrote before you clicked send? How are already INCARCERATED criminals being excused for anything? Women who breed irresponsibly are given free money and are therefore not being held to a standard of responsibility. Plus, as has already been mentioned, the prison system does not cost anywhere near as much as social security and welfare.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 05:06 PM
1

What the hell do you mean by "unpaid"? Women who are married get (in the vast majority of cases) most of theirs and and their children's expenses paid for by their husbands. For single moms, they get welfare, which is what this post is about so they're still not unpaid.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 09:53 AM
1

A disproportionate amount of whom were raised by single moms who went out of their way to breed with criminals.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 09:40 AM
–

How is this apex fallacy? All I did was point out the glaring hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/24 05:24 AM
1

In modern (mostly Western) culture, you can endlessly tear down financially successful men for supposedly being a) just lucky/privileged, b) immoral. But if you switch the topic from male financial success to male romantic success, suddenly the same people (mostly women) will tell you that the winners earned it all, no fortunate circumstance or underhanded tactics. Funny isn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/24 12:35 AM
3

The cool thing about being Twitter mutuals with psychologists, you learn that a lot of “folk wisdoms” are actually false. So which one are you, stupid or ugly? Or do you believe yourself the rare exception? This “RPG theory” of human traits is false, positive attributes actually tend to be correlated. https://x.com/datepsych/status/1807818860332187879?s=46&t=u1g_5fR3YGp28bQ5RGZX1A Interesting how the guy you're linking to doesn't cite the sources for any of what he says. Regardless, let's say he…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/24 11:48 PM
1

Have you actually met a tech millionaire? Most tech millionaires are autistic weirdos that remain chronically single and eventually marry way down, if they get married at all. Plenty of tech millionaires who are single and childless at 45. This says more about women's terrible preferences than anything else.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/24 09:02 AM
5

..... Ukrainian women also have the blonde blue eye privilege going for them. As opposed to Ukrainian men?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/24 04:34 AM
1

You're basically taking one hyperbolic idea: "you can't improve your social skills anyways they are genetic / locked in at birth / determined when you are a child." and replacing it with your own (plus a strawman): "IRL, social skills are like many other mainly intellectually based skills, such as like playing the piano. You can learn it as a child, you can learn it as an adult." How can you learn something no one is willing to teach? The thing is, I can ask anyone teach me the piano and there's…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/24 08:19 AM
1

Women, very early on in their lives notice that men have higher libidos than they do. Shortly after, they notice that men are willing to do a lot of things for the opportunity to get sex. After years and years of being on the receiving end of this effort, they develop a sense of entitlement to it. Of course, the better looking the man, the less romantic effort is required. Therefore, whenever they see an average man get sex without putting up all this effort, they get mad and attack him. They kn…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/24 07:33 AM
–

It still means that far more men exercise than women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/24 01:06 AM
–

Thank you for pointing this out.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/24 12:57 AM
5

When average looking men in relationships talk down to Johns, it makes me picture fishermen talking down to someone going to Walmart to buy fish. I mean imagine if the fisherman said, "Lol, what a loser! He has to pay for fish while I, a REAL MAN, get fish for free." As if said the fisherman didn't have to spend a boatload (pun intended) of money on equipment, fuel, and of course, time and energy.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/24 07:37 PM
6

This is only because of a culture that glorifies female sexuality. If we acknowledged that women's preferences are just as shallow as that of men, there wouldn't be anywhere near as much vilification of Johns.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/24 07:24 PM
1

I'm gonna say something that's gonna blow your mind: Incels are capable of using hyperbole. Shocking, right? Not everything that someone says is meant to be taken 100 % literally. From the tone of your post, I can't tell if you're pretending not to understand this, or you genuinely don't. Not sure which is worse. For example: women only list after 6’ tall white men with beards. They are describing a general tendency that they've observed. The word "only" is used by some of them as hyperbole to d…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/24 09:25 AM
1

Modern women don't have rights, they have artificial privillages.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/24 08:56 AM
1

A rule that only net tax-payers (people who pay more than they consume in gov benefits) can vote would go a long way towards solving the problem. It doesn't require discrimination against any demographic but would probably still be hugely unpopular.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/24 08:49 AM
2

You wrote a pretty great post. Maybe the best post I've read thus far on any pill-related sub. I actually have something similar to this in the pipelines that I'm gonna be releasing soon.
/r/AllPillDebate27/07/23 09:41 AM
1

Regarding your first point, yes IF you could somehow lower the male:female ratio, things would improve for men. The problem lies with how to even implement something like this to begin with. Men pay the majority of taxes, and men also make up the vast majority of police and military. No government on Earth wants less taxes or less cannon fodder.
/r/AllPillDebate27/07/23 09:36 AM
2

You do realize that a guy can treat her nice while still treating plenty of other people like shit, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/23 01:10 AM
6

The vast majority of normies don't have social skills. A skill is something you don't just passively absorb but something you use intentional focus to learn. FBI interrogators, high-level businessmen when cutting a deal, lawyers, etc. have true social skills. Normies have what I like to call "social comfort", i.e. through years of (mostly) good treatment combined with not being on the spectrum, their body language and facial expressions conform to what most people want. They are not 'skilled' at…
/r/AllPillDebate18/07/23 04:27 PM
1

You don't have to remove rights. Just get rid of the artificial privilleges.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/23 08:51 AM
1

OK, that's understandable.
/r/AllPillDebate19/06/23 07:48 PM
1

I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that you missed out on young love and that caused you just as much depression as the average man in the same boat? First of all, I highly doubt that. You know why? Cos there's FAR LESS propaganda telling women that being unappealing to men is due to some fault on their part. The downstream effect of this is that just because you missed out on something when you were young, it doesn't mean you can't have something almost as good right now. The oppos…
/r/AllPillDebate19/06/23 04:05 PM
2

Wrong. It's not the lack intimacy itself that is the main cause of trauma. It's the endless societal messaging that men who don't get romantic intimacy have some kind of character defect. This of course is coupled with complete OPPOSITE messaging towards women ( i.e. defying male preferences is "stunning and brave"). The root of this is the myth that women have a "deeper, more complex sexuality than men". Take a look at this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate N…
/r/AllPillDebate19/06/23 04:10 AM
1

Your post describes the opposite of what actually takes place. In modern culture, it's women's preferences that are placed on a pedestal. It's women's approval that is seen as some 'objective' marker of quality. When people try to discredit a man, the first they do is insinuate that he doesn't do well with women. Meanwhile, there are literally academic programs dedicated to scrutinizing the male perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/23 09:30 AM
5

No. It's cos of how society treats those who miss out. In this day and age, if you are a heterosexual man and you're not getting what you want from the sexual marketplace, it MUST be because you have some defective 'personality' and should be ashamed of yourself. Simultaneously, the same people will say that women are 'good as they are', and any inability to conform to male preferences is nothing to be ashamed of. This obvious hypocrisy is the cause of most of the toxicity.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/23 12:13 AM
1

Women are not the arbiters of what makes a "good personality".
/r/AllPillDebate04/04/23 12:01 AM
1

Lol "sophistication".
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/23 07:45 AM
1

Exactly. It's like these people have never heard of Fisherian runaway.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/23 07:42 AM
6

Let me guess, you think she's head and shoulders above in looks? I will say she's slightly better than him when you consider the totality of their looks (not just focus on face and hair), and take into account that she's probably looksmaxxed more than him. The funniest part of posts like these is that if he had not called himself a passportbro, bluepillers would use couples like these to 'prove' that women are less shallow than men, or that ugly guys who complain about the dating market are just…
/r/AllPillDebate13/03/23 06:06 PM
1

Feminists were told all the same things that you are now saying to blackpillers. They did the OPPOSITE and got what they wanted.
/r/AllPillDebate13/03/23 03:07 AM
1

Males in this sub say, “just wait till AI comes out and we won’t need women anymore”. Well y’all have said that about prostitution, “just wait till sex work becomes legal in America, we won’t need women anymore”. We can look at places like Australia and the Netherlands to see that’s not true. Males in Australia still get married even though prostitution is relatively cheap and easily accessible. Your comment is just a bunch of empty bluster and binary reasoning. Just because marriages are happen…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/23 01:26 AM
1

The 20th century disproves everything you are so vehemently asserting.
/r/AllPillDebate12/03/23 11:56 PM
2

I am not talking about momentary unhappiness.
/r/AllPillDebate12/03/23 10:39 PM
4

An important takeaway from this post that people are missing is that it massively contradicts what bluepillers say on both prostitution and age-gap relationships. If you listen to bloopers, they'll talk about ALL transactional sex being akin to some form of torture for women, especially when it's with older guys. Here we see a sex-worker describe the 'worst' clients as merely being kind of annoying due to some of what they say. Doesn't exactly paint a picture of someone who's oppressed, does it?
/r/AllPillDebate12/03/23 10:17 PM
2

Ugly losers as men but after they got tits, ass and tattoos load of women are in their DM's ready to suck and fuck for free Loads of women or loads of men?
/r/AllPillDebate12/03/23 09:53 PM
2

OP is somewhat exaggerating but everybody contradicting him are ignoring two points: Almost half of marriages in the US end in divorce. It's reasonable for us to conclude that none of these relationships were all that happy. We can also assume that many of the ones that don't end in divorce are only remaining intact out of convenience. Therefore, even if it's a slight majority, we can say that most marriages aren't happy.
/r/AllPillDebate12/03/23 09:28 PM
6

"Asocial schizoids" are the only reason we're not still living in mud huts.
/r/AllPillDebate26/02/23 06:35 PM
2

I don’t think legal and consensual sex work is exploitation given the sex worker isn’t being forced and makes their own decisions. That is not something anybody would glean from your previous comment. Here are some of the things you've said: We’re not sure if these men are really trying to find love/respect traditionalism, or if they’re exploiting poor women for sex.” ​ I don’t go to poor areas to exploit women, I engage in regular dating and get to know the women I meet. It seems like you're pu…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 07:07 AM
5

Plenty of (maybe most) women in this sub define ALL upfront transactional sex as 'exploitation'. Even if there was no trafficking or coercion involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 12:41 AM
4

Patriarchy would never have become such a successful system if what women are attracted to was objectively good.
/r/AllPillDebate24/02/23 06:12 AM
6

Not according to women or blue pill men in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/23 07:49 PM
5

Lol @ "artificially pacify their needs". If realistic sexbots ever became a thing, she and her ilk would probably be the first to try and get that stuff banned (or at least, heavily ostracize the users). She also doesn't mention the core cause of all this, which is society's endless insistence that women are not as shallow as men (again, something that people on her side promote the most).
/r/AllPillDebate18/02/23 07:40 PM
1

This isn't about individual women or men. The point I was trying to make with the post is that society in general promotes the idea that female sexuality is less shallow than male sexuality and that is wrong. Also, I didn't use any moralistic language such as "low-rent trash" in my post cos I don't think it's evil to be shallow but I just find it kinda shitty when people pretend not to be.
/r/AllPillDebate18/02/23 07:25 PM
1

no one calls a man desperate for pursuing women of any race. Say what now?
/r/AllPillDebate17/02/23 06:16 AM
1

What specific point do you disagree with?
/r/AllPillDebate17/02/23 05:38 AM
1

Not women I talk to. Women online. If you go to the post on PPD you'll see that none of the women (or anyone else) are disagreeing on that specific point (that women prefer erotic fiction over porn).
/r/AllPillDebate17/02/23 03:26 AM
1

I don't know if they mean it but it's been my general observation that women at least say that they prefer erotic fiction over porn.
/r/AllPillDebate17/02/23 02:36 AM
3

Please educate me O wise one.
/r/AllPillDebate16/02/23 05:26 AM
1

Insanity= Anything that doesn't worship women?
/r/AllPillDebate16/02/23 05:14 AM
1

This reads like a troll post so I'm not sure how much of this you actually mean. Anyway, saying men are less moral than women is like saying 20 year-olds are less moral than 10 year-olds. If you compare two groups and one of them (on average) has fewer means and fewer motives to do horrible things, they will do fewer horrible things. Doesn't automatically make them better people.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 05:59 AM
–

Exactly
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/23 12:19 PM
1

Thank you. I was about to say that. The paper simply assumes 100 % of the violence was male-to-female.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 11:23 PM
1

I believe there are very few enthusiastic supporters of blue pill amongst men, even in the west. I think most of them have literally never seen a prominent/respectable member of society critique feminism so they just never bothered questioning it themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 11:09 PM
5

You're right. I'm not trying to convince her or any of her supporters. Everything I wrote is for men who are lurking and still on the fence.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 10:59 PM
6

You've been doing plenty of "black and white" thinking yourself. It seems like you cannot fathom that just because a guy isn't attractive, he isn't repulsive either. You frame any sex/relationship where the woman isn't head-over-heels in love as some form exploitation.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 08:50 PM
7

Why do you frame everything in binaries?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 08:10 PM
16

If you define coercion as anything that doesn't put the woman first and maximize her benefit then sure I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 07:19 PM
3

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 06:52 PM
13

Women promote the blue pill because it's conclusions favor them. I doubt all them sincerely believe it. Most men (in this sub) have grown up in a world were they were told that anyone who doesn't believe the blue pill is evil so many of them don't bother questioning it. Also, a "huge majority" of men are not blue pill if we count the entire world and not just North America and Western Europe.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 06:10 PM
15

Don't have to. I can read posts and comments. It's a fairly common sentiment amongst the women (and blue pill men) here that any sex/relationships a man has that doesn't massively advantage the woman he is with must be abusive. All transactional sex (that doesn't disproportionately benefit the woman) is abuse according to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 05:55 PM
16

Most of the women here would be against this phenomenon regardless of whether abuse was occurring or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/23 05:37 PM
1

A good comedian is someone who has had interesting life experiences which usually means they have had some type of trauma which means it is likely they have non-Chad looks. Due to the trauma and look females tend to not like them as much but they do have some status due to doing comedy. Yeah I agree that looks are the biggest factor but I was comparing the occupations themselves. I honestly believe that if there were two guys with absolutely equal looks/fame/money and one was a comedian while th…
/r/AllPillDebate30/01/23 07:17 AM
1

All people with a sex drive prefer people they are attracted to rather than people they aren’t. This isn’t a mystery. Obfuscating like this does not strengthen your argument. We're talking about the specifics of what does or doesn't cause attraction. My main point in my previous comment was that it's kinda curious how you instantly poo-poo the notion that women might not be all that attracted to intelligence or decency in men. Especially when it's pretty mainstream for women themselves to compla…
/r/AllPillDebate28/12/22 04:19 AM
1

Why are you so desperate to put a positive spin on female preferences? I doubt you would be doing this in the opposite scenario i.e. if a woman said that men in general prefer bimbos.
/r/AllPillDebate27/12/22 05:06 AM
1

It's just narcissism. Also, a lot of the women in this sub seem incapable of fathoming the idea that their preferences have something to do with their life experiences. They can't seem to get that ANY group of people, when put in a state of abundance, will become choosier over time. Women just happen to be the ones with abundance because of higher male libido.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:34 AM
1

Beautiful
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/22 11:43 AM
1

Meanwhile, I can point to The Lion King 2, where it shows the villain is an abusive mother who is training her kids to be a sadistic killing machines. Good on Lion King 2 but it's a straight-to-video release that highly doubt most people today have ever seen. It's nowhere near big enough to be influential. Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, and Snow White all features very evil abusive women and it's typically a man that has to save the princesses from the evil women. You're not disproving modern misa…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 11:34 AM
1

When men claim "the media told them to think all women are amazing", I love when I ask for examples and they can provide none. How about pretty much the entire filmography of James Cameron? Regardless, why does the media have to say "all women are amazing" in order for it to be misandrist? All it has to do is portray female villains MUCH less often than male villains while simultaneously allowing generalized negative depictions of men to slip through occasionally while pretty much NEVER allowing…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 10:43 AM
2

Men have much higher libidos than women so this gives them a greater 'need' for sex. But I would say that the greater 'need' for relationships that men display today is a result of modern social conditioning (more details here> https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/yd0uyv/the_modern_male_need_for_female_validation_is/). Basically, modern culture portrays female preferences as objectively 'good' while simultaneously portraying male preferences as objectively 'bad'. Therefore men feel…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 07:32 AM
1

I think your post quite correctly describes the shitty situation that modern men find themselves in, as well as the disingenuousness of bluepillers when they talk about these things. But I do disagree when you say that male desire for female sexual validation (to the extent that is shown today) is wholly instinctive. I think a lot of that 'need' has been artificially amplified by a modern gynocentric society. I go into more detail about this in my previous post: https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePi…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/22 12:12 PM
1

What if men want--even need--something most men just cannot have because nature wanted most men weeded from the gene pool? Nature doesn't 'want' anything. There's no grand purpose to it. One minute there's dinosaurs, next minute they're gone and mammals and birds reign supreme. Nature just follows the path of least resistance. Historically, men were ''weeded" out through wars, not some sexual version of American Idol where men performed and women judged. So maybe trying to find a way to meet eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/22 11:51 AM
1

If anyone wants to get a proper idea of the relative looks-levels of men and women, the best thing to do is to look at third world locations like Africa, South America, Indian subcontinent, etc.. Basically, places where the overwhelming majority of women can't afford plastic surgery or even make-up. I think most non-biased people would say that women, at least in those places, aren't any better looking than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/22 09:29 AM
1

I agree with most of what you said but you left out the most important factor: Libido Male libido is MUCH higher than that of females. This ensures that at any one point in time there are more men chasing women therefore women have an excess of options. When anyone has an excess of options, they nitpick. Conversely, a lack of options causes one to overlook flaws. So women nitpick male features while men overlook female flaws.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/22 09:21 AM
1

Bloops have basically moved past the denial phase and are now in the justification phase.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/22 10:05 PM
1

Well put.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/22 07:15 PM
2

I still have to disagree here - the issue is how the men would've acquired this validation back in the day. If we're talking strictly evo-psych, the men that were able to acquire resources were the ones that generally ended up having the most women. I think you're actually in agreement with me but we're talking past each other cos you're defining 'validation' differently than I am. When I talk about female validation, I'm referring to genuine attraction, not the desire to be with a guy to get so…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/22 10:00 AM
2

Rudimentary knowledge that a species as a whole adopt traits built for their survival. Therefore the idea of beneficial to the human race. It doesn't matter whether people see it as bad or good. It is the basis of Evo psychology. I'm not interested in continuing this discussion much further. You talk about evolution like it's some grand rational process. Go look up "Fisherian runaway".
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/22 08:49 AM
2

You're assuming that behavioral traits that are attractive to most women are automatically "beneficial to the human race". No basis for it whatsoever. Romance has to be built for men to invest and not just go on a rampage treating women like trash, You keep coming back to this idea that lack of interest in romancing equals "treating like trash", no basis for this either.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/22 09:54 PM
1

So for the part where you’re talking about the Palmar gasp reflex, which I’ll just call Premise 1, nothing else can follow because you’re presupposing that we evolved to have the optimal habits to survive on an individual level. If you look at it from the standpoint of maximum chances at procreation, then it actually explains the male need for validation from the opposite sex. The men that got female validation wouldn't have fathered any significantly higher amount of children than men who didn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/22 09:23 PM
2

Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/22 07:30 AM
3

You're putting up a false dichotomy where a man can either be an abusive tyrant rapist, or he's a romancer. There's an entire galaxy in between those two that you're ignoring. Most men throughout history reproduced in a transactional way, exchanging protection and provision for sex and childcare. There wasn't necessarily any 'force' but there also wasn't any romance. I simply used Genghis Khan as an extreme example of an unromantic man who was reproductively successful. This doesn't mean that al…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 08:43 AM
1

What the hell are you bringing up peasants for? If you're saying that most men throughout history didn't reproduce, I don't disagree with that. What I'm saying is that the men that DID reproduce commonly did so through arranged marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 08:08 PM
4

Lol this isn't a manuscript that's being submitted to some prestigious journal, it's a post on PPD. You're not entitled to that level of effort. I'm just like any other layperson here that's spitballing and speculating.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 08:02 PM
0

I'm sure most men didn't rape or pillage but I don't see how you can say that most didn't have arranged marriages. Seems like common practice in the 3rd world today and thus it would have been even more common in the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 05:02 PM
2

I understand and I don't blame you for feeling that way. I'm just trying to get you and other men here to question how much of that feeling is innate and how much is learned. I'm sure it's a mix of both but I think people underestimate the extent of the role that life experiences play.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 04:56 PM
3

Another day, another post trying to deny female shallowness. You're just looking at surface-level behaviors and jumping to conclusions without thinking about the 'how' and 'why'. Maybe women's magazines don't show naked men with 6-packs cos average (even slightly below average) women can have a naked man with a 6-pack show up to them in REAL LIFE at the click of a few buttons (the same is not true for men). People don't fantasize about things they perceive as being easily attainable in the real …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/22 07:37 AM
1

You brought up some great points. Next time, don't use any hyperbole like the "prison" thing in your post. The bluepillers are not here to debate in good faith and will zero in on stuff like that to derail the discussion. Anyway, don't let the bastards get you down.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/22 06:36 AM
1

I think there's also another thing to consider which is that during technologically primitive times, wars would wipe out large numbers of men while not wiping out too many women. This would probably cause young men at any one point in time to be noticeably outnumbered by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 08:08 AM
1

Direct me to the research conducted on which entertainers women find most attractive. Don't know of any research on this specific topic. You're free to go look for it if you'd like. My perception of comedians being much less attractive than musicians, actors, etc. is just based on my personal observations of media and real life behavior. I've pretty much never heard of women name-dropping famous comedians when asked about men they're attracted to. I believe the best way of finding out what peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/22 06:13 AM
1

Well research (heterosexual) conducted on what people find most attractive in partners consistently shows that women value a man that is funny above all else. If this is true then why aren't comedians considered the most attractive entertainers? Women are less superficial than man. They value character. You sure? Or does it just appear that way? I've discussed this in a little more detail here.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/22 04:51 PM
1

The women in this comment section are clearly desperate to paint involuntary male virgins in the worst light possible. They'll just spout unproven assertions about them having mental illnesses, lack of "interpersonal" skills, and many other sorts of maladies. It's pretty much inevitable that at least SOME of these women will go on to raise sons that end up being a involuntary older male virgins. And I'm sure when that happens, they'll just claim that all of those men are rare exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/22 02:46 PM
1

Here's one for PPD females: What YOU desire in men is not what is objectively good.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/22 11:33 AM
1

Nobody "treats" Incels like anything. They do it to themselves. People leave them alone. I genuinely can't tell if you're trolling. People most certainly do not just "leave in*els alone". They are CONSTANTLY told that their lack of ability to attract women is some sort of character flaw on their part. This is usually mentioned by the same people who are against any kind of judgement towards women.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/22 11:25 AM
4

You're just straight up wrong. Men, due to their comparative lack of options, are FAR more accepting of ALL kinds of women than women are towards men. Chyna from WWF once posed for Playboy and that was one of their highest selling issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/22 09:17 AM
1

None of the bluepillers (or redpillers) in this sub have ever come up with any genuine rebuttals of the blackpill. It's always lazy strawmen or pointing at rare exceptions. The blackpill consensus is not that "personality doesn't matter, looks matter". It's more that looks matter OVERWHELMINGLY more than personality to both men AND women i.e. women are at least as shallow as men. While I don't agree with everything they say (they're just as wrong on genetic determinism as the reds), they're much…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/22 07:13 AM
1

Ok how change? What are you even asking? How change what?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 01:19 PM
1

There will come a day when the word "in*el" has about as much emotional effect on the average man as the word "slut/whore" has on women today (i.e. not much). When that day comes, things will get better.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 10:34 AM
1

That if womens attractiom was malliable, it would have happened by now. Not really. There hasn't been any widespread social forces in recent times that would push women to change their preferences. Everything feels impossible until it happens and then people just take it for granted. Look at the other two commenters on this thread, they're seriously insinuating that MILFs were historically just as popular as they are today.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 05:33 AM
0

Thank you for making my point for me. That kind of content needed separate magazines i.e. it was not popular enough to included in the mainstream ones. Unlike today where it's one of the most popular categories.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 05:15 AM
-2

Are you seriously pretending that men preferring youthful women isn't a traditional stereotype?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/22 07:28 PM
1

Your point being? Men are also attracted to certain set of specific physical features but their willingness to compromise has gone up considerably in recent times. Hell, large numbers of men even fetishize unconventional looking women nowadays.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/22 06:40 PM
-1

Go look at some issues of Playboy from '70s, '80s, and even early to mid '90s. Then go look at pornstar rankings on any popular pornsite. Notice how 'MILFs', 'bbws' and other women that aren't traditionally attractive are far more prevalent in modern men's sexual entertainment.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/22 06:31 PM
-4

Don't you ever get tired of spewing this BS that women are magical creatures whose wants/needs are completely unaffected by basic human biology/psychology? Men have already been conditioned by society and culture to be attracted to women they previously weren't. If you think this can't be done the other way around, you're basically saying that women's brains are less malleable than men's. Now THAT is an extraordinary claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/22 05:24 PM
2

Blue pill is basically pro-female bias. Nothing more, nothing less. That is the only thing consistent about them i.e. they unironically believe that "women are wonderful". The reason why they have so many contradictory beliefs is because certain societal rules can benefit women one minute while benefitting men the next minute. Bluepillers want to keep all the benefits for women while getting rid of the ones for men so it seems like they have contradictory opinions on societal rules.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/22 12:10 AM
6

There is nothing funnier than a modern day woman (or a bluepill man) using appeal-to-nature fallacies to justify their imperatives.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 01:26 AM
1

I don't know why they chose to word it that way. You can download the pdf for free and read it yourself and look at figures 16, 17 and 20.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/22 02:06 AM
1

This study [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2375926] is for New Zealand but I doubt the figures are drastically different for any other western countries.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/22 04:57 PM
1

Male shallowness is ubiquitous discussed about and criticized while female shallowness is either swept under the rug or people put a positive spin on it. So if you want blackpillers to stop obsessing about women being "shallow hoes", make everybody else talk about it too.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/22 04:47 PM
13

Lol. Now suddenly it's all about 'society' and 'birthrates'. Equal rights should be for equal responsibilities i.e. either both men and women are drafted or neither. And if you're going to insist that men should be drafted while women aren't then only men should get to vote in federal elections since that determines foreign policy.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/22 02:10 AM
8

Some truly Olympic level mental gymnastics from these people. Removing coercion on men=coercing women apparently.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 10:29 PM
26

Nailed it. It's always the same old BS from bluepillers. Social conventions changing to favor men a bit more must always be portrayed as either impossible or evil to even attempt.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 08:51 PM
3

I don't know of any in**ldom statistics from other countries. What you might use as a proxy is the suicide statistics [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate]. The US has a higher male suicide rate than several countries that are reputed to have easy access to prostitution such as Germany, Japan, Thailand, etc.. Japan is especially interesting cos their male suicide rate is lower than that of the US while their female rate is equal to the US. None of this proves anything…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 08:36 PM
10

As far as legal restrictions: The buying of sexual services is illegal in most parts of the US. A lot of men that are flooding dating apps right now wouldn't be doing so if this other option was safe and legal. Affirmative action restricts men's ability to moneymax. Men in general pay more taxes in their lifetime than women do. As far as sociocultural restrictions, unattractive men are depicted in a much worse light than unattractive women in mainstream media which makes these men more desperate…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 07:53 PM
0

The men usually claim that just this simple acknowledgement is really all they're asking for. Just an admission of privilege and an awareness of the situation along with all that awareness entails (men not being shamed for a lack of partners or inexperience, an understanding that men will of course try and work on making themselves more attractive because its a competitive challenge, and so on). Regarding this point, it doesn't matter if the men are being dishonest about this being the only thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 07:37 PM
4

I love how it's just assumed that women's massive advantages in the sexual marketplace are purely a result of 'freedom' and not because of restrictions on men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 07:22 PM
2

Why are you so against the idea that women are shallow? Would you be putting up this much opposition to someone claiming men are shallow?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/22 06:20 PM
10

What's stopping the women from using guns? They're in the same country/state and are subject to the same gun laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 07:24 PM
1

A huge portion of whom in this case are women.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 07:02 PM
8

It's so hilarious how so many people are trying to contradict OP on something so basic as "women are much less horny than men". I guess they want women's pickiness to be seen as a trait that is inherent by itself and not something that is an emergent phenomenon caused by other factors.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 06:37 AM
7

Lesbians have sex much less often than gays which is strong evidence for women having lower libidos.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 05:50 AM
1

Male circumcision is also done for women's vanity. Sandra Bullock apparently had it done.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/22 05:47 AM
1

Denial of female shallowness is one of the few things that are propping up feminism so they REALLY don't want to let that go.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 08:39 PM
1

Plenty of people do. The idea that women are just as shallow as men is nowhere near mainstream yet. If you think it is, ask yourself this, could you show the results of those various 'chadfish' experiments to a normie public without surprise or pushback?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 08:29 PM
7

Why are you moralizing masculinity? Someone can absolutely be abusive, tyrannical and even 'insecure' and still be masculine.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 01:51 AM
1

The traits that women actively select for do not make society 'better'.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 01:21 AM
3

Something being biological doesn't necessarily mean "nothing can be done about it". Biological tendencies can be greatly amplified or dampened based on the specifics of the environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 05:12 AM
1

Why are you trying to make it seem as if women are some united front in favor of abortion? Do you not know the statistics or are you being dishonest? Regardless, abortion is just one issue out of many.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 06:41 AM
-3

It was men that gave them the right to begin with. You're just taking one instance and trying to form a narrative based on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/22 05:52 PM
-1

If a bunch of people voted for a politician who implements policies that make things worse for you, would you only be mad at the politician or also the voters that supported him knowing what he would do?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/22 05:41 PM
1

Men who are acting on behalf of women. This isn't the gotcha that you think it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/22 04:58 PM
1

There probably is a higher percentage of non-hetero women than non-hetero men. A lot of people will try and use this to claim that it's just cos women are "objectively prettier" than men but I don't think that's the reason. My own pet hypothesis is that men just have a very high level of sexual disgust towards each other and this was evolutionarily selected for because this disgust would lead them to avoid promiscuous women(cos it feels like touching another man by proxy) and thus they were less…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/22 07:36 AM
1

Well put.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 07:57 AM
2

Do you hold women to the standard of traditional femininity in the same way you're holding men to the standard of traditional masculinity?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 10:59 PM
4

This study disagrees--> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513821000453 Here's the abstract: "Self-reported mate preferences suggest intelligence is valued across cultures, consistent with the idea that human intelligence evolved as a sexually selected trait. The validity of self-reports has been questioned though, so it remains unclear whether objectively assessed intelligence is indeed attractive. In Study 1, 88 target men had their intelligence measured and based on sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 10:23 PM
2

Certainly not the kind of intelligence that has done the most to progress human living conditions. You know, the boring and technical kind. You can bet though that they will try and redefine whatever they like as being the 'real' kind of intelligence.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 10:08 PM
5

Literally contradicted the title in your first sentence.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/22 11:14 PM
2

Tell that to the women in this comment section. It's like they NEED their sexuality to be seen as something ethereal or spiritual.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 11:39 PM
0

Nope. There absolutely could be a common environmental factor in all those different scenarios that you're ignoring. It's funny how bluepillers/feminists like you will normally reject genetic determinism and evo psych outright but now you're sloppily applying it here cos the conclusions favor you.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 09:56 AM
2

Lol original analogy I'll give you that.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 07:20 AM
3

And there is no proof that women instinctively care more about behavior than men do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 05:52 AM
7

Sure it has. But that doesn't mean that ANY behavior that's common is a hard-wired instinct.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 05:35 AM
1

Why are you so hellbent on denying that life experiences have a massive effect on sexuality?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 04:48 AM
2

It seems that most of the women going against what I wrote aren't really responding to the content but are instead getting hung up on the title. Even then, they're ignoring the keyword in the title: 'inherently'. It's like they NEED to preserve this idea of women having a more complex sexuality so much that they don't address any of the points. I'll clarify a little further. I did NOT say that women don't require behavior (more than men) to feel attraction. I simply believe that this requirement…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 03:32 AM
6

Did you actually read the post? I didn't deny that women might need certain behaviors in order to feel sexual attraction. You could say that makes it more 'complex'. What I went against is this idea that it's inherent.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 01:52 AM
5

Don't know. Maybe they're asexual. Maybe their tastes are so niche that nothing has appealed to them thus far.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 01:10 AM
10

Women shame men for being shallow all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 01:03 AM
3

Homosexual men have amygdalae similar to that of hetero women and despite this they are just as unchoosy as hetero men. Besides, even if there was some inherent part of the female brain that made them care more about behavior to SOME extent, life experiences should still play a big part. The life experience of average men and women are vastly different and would definitely exacerbate whatever behavioral requirements women have.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/22 01:00 AM
3

Women don't mean it when they say that they want those social norms changed. They love being able to shut down any argument with a man by questioning his sexual success. But I disagree with you when say the norms cannot be changed AT ALL. Far stranger things have happened over the last century or so. It's just that this change definitely won't come from women.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 05:19 AM
2

Fraction of the means? What are you talking about? Are you saying that if men were gone then NO women would be able to take control of the technological and political apparatuses left behind? It appears I have more faith in women than you do cos while I absolutely believe that there would be an initial crisis, women would EVENTUALLY get a handle on those things. Are you saying that once that happens, female political leaders wouldn't do the same things male political leaders do?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 12:47 AM
2

You can insinuate as much as you want that women are morally superior to men, doesn't make you correct. If men disappeared tomorrow, the violent criminal males of today would simply be replaced by violent criminal females. The violence would take place due to ethnic divisions and resource scarcity, pretty much the same as now.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/22 11:47 PM
3

Lol "protection racket". Sure. Just like the parent-child relationship is a "protection racket" too right? After all, what do children need protection from the most? Other adults. You're basically promoting the classic feminist myth that because there are more criminals per capita amongst men, the non-criminal men must be out to aid and abet their presence.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/22 11:39 PM
11

Women do not require intelligence or kindness in order to feel sexual arousal. As far as 'interesting', that's a vague term that means different things to different people. Your problem is that you think that just because a set of traits appeal to women's subjective tastes, then those traits must be objectively good. Men have behavioral preferences in women too, the difference is that we don't have mainstream culture/media glorifying those preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/22 01:40 AM
1

It didn't impact your mental health because in the modern world cos there's no widespread cultural narrative that single women have something wrong with them. By single women, I'm not just talking about those who are single by choice. Even women that want men but can't get them aren't depicted as being worse people than women who don't struggle. Female success in the dating world is seen as a fortunate life circumstance rather than a product of virtue and this is why average/below average women …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/22 10:53 PM
5

LOL those bad boys "don't care" about female approval cos they've already received so much of it. They didn't start out not caring. If you want men in general to be less desperate for female approval, then reduce the value of female approval. Stop telling men that don't get female approval that they are worse people or have something innately wrong with them and you'll see how quickly this desperation disappears.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/22 11:22 PM
1

Agree 100%. But you have to realize women will always try and apply just-world fallacies to men they find unattractive. So any cultural shift in favor what you're proposing will have to forced by men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/22 09:21 PM
1

This post was disgusting but ultimately no different from Sharon Osbourne and the other women on whatever that show was that cackled at the castration story.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 02:55 AM
1

Oh please. No incel needs to say any of this get hate. They could question feminism and gynocentrism in the mildest way possible and would still be ostracized.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 01:34 AM
1

I think you are overthinking it. Music and dancing are just natural tingle manufacturers. It’s emotional not logical. That's kinda my entire point though. People for whatever reason try and act like the non-physical aspects of sexual attraction are dependent on abstract concepts like confidence when in reality it's about whoever provides more visual/auditory/sensory stimulation regardless of whether somebody else is actually more confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/22 06:25 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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