TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PeaSlight6601 Archive

View 0 posts and 84 comments by PeaSlight6601 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I think it’s a fundamental problem with human nature. But somehow it doesn't seem to be an issue in small villages... people seem to be able to pair up in those communities despite the very different sexual objectives of the participants. The problem with dating apps is scale. We evolved to play a mating game in smaller communities with maybe a hundred potential mates. We now play this game in communities of millions. There is no surprise the game is broken. You can't play basketball with teams …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 06:07 PM
1

That isn't what the law says.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/24 02:02 PM
1

Yes and? There are lots of things the government requires of people under threat of some loss of rights. I'm just not sure what your point is beyond the "only requiring men to do it is wrong."
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/24 01:40 PM
1

But men aren't being drafted to do that either. So there is equality in who is being drafted. The inequality is only in this form that 18 year olds fill out. It would make more sense to get rid of the form entirely than make more people do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/24 11:41 AM
0

The war in Ukraine is hardly a "conscript-ocide" by historic standards. During WWII Germany lost 3.5MM soldiers (2MM killed) from a base population around 80MM people. So between 2.5 and 5% of the total population was lost in combat (non-civilian). A lot of that happened towards the end of the war, but they had combat losses averaging half a million in each year of 41-43. The Ukraine's population at the start of the war was 50MM and the US government estimate of total losses is 200k, or less tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/24 10:43 PM
1

Selective Service is a joke. Most men aren't properly registered. I registered when i turned 18 in order to vote and never updated my registration after that. If there was another draft it would be because of mass mobilization not seen since WWII. Even if women aren't on the lists, they can quickly be added, or will be called up to work in military adjacent activities just as they were during WWII. Modern warfare is too technology focused to need that kind of mass mobilization anyways. Planes fl…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/24 10:19 PM
4

I think this discussion is really only relevant in the context of families with children. If children aren't involved it matters a lot less in modern society where the expectation is that both spouses are working. With children in the mix there are two factors I think don't get adequately considered: The desire of some families to have "traditional" single earner households. In those families the agreement was that he goes to work, she raises the kids. After divorce you are left with an arrangem…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/24 03:31 PM
1

Sure every state was different, but if a couple wanted to divorce by mutual agreement they could move to a state that allowed divorce by mutual agreement, so it was in that sense universally available. One big complaint with no fault when it was introduced was that by the same logic it was available to everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/24 01:05 PM
2

California doesn't have common law, and even states that do have common law tend to require the parties to have made public statements that they are married. If you cohabitate, but hold yourself out as "not being married" you won't be deemed married even in common law states.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/24 01:01 PM
1

I actually have a lot of respect for women who say publicly that they don't like seeing men cry. They are going against the wider social pressures to speak honestly about what they actually want and expect from men. Its much more common for women to parrot the party line against "toxic masculinity," but then be uncomfortable or bothered when their male friends and partners are vulnerable. Its all well and good to say you want equality and vulnerability, but if that turns you off or gives you the…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 12:29 PM
2

people would still want to divorce others due to falling out of love I'm not disagreeing that modern no-fault and the high rates of divorce reflect people's view that "marriage is an expression of love, and love is fleeting." I am asking a more fundamental question: why do we even have marriage if all it is, is an expression of love. We don't require high school teachers to track teenagers and report on government forms who is dating whom; and nobody would argue that the government should do tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 12:02 PM
1

And at times in the past it was prosecuted. All I ever said was that the treatment of adultery as a social ill, isn't required in marriage law. It made sense when marriage law was based on principles of monogamous heterosexual partnerships, but that isn't seen as the only form of marital relations these days. We have destigmatized divorce and we could do the same for adultery and non-monogamous relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:31 AM
1

I'm not asking you a question. I am telling you a fact. Adultery is even today a criminal act in much of the United States.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:26 AM
1

The reality is that the divorce and division of assets is by far the easiest part of the process for any couple with children, but it also doesn't accomplish much but embitter people when "she got to keep the house, why does she get more for child support." I think it is ultimately easier if their independent assets remain independent, and then the custody and support conversation is its own separate conversation. I don't know enough about cohabitating couples with children to know what if anyth…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:25 AM
1

I think you are missing the fact that adultery was a criminal act in much of the US until more recently, and even today is a felony in Michigan, Wisconsin and Oklahoma.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:04 AM
2

You know what is even less burdensome on the judicial system than no-fault divorce? Eliminating marriage as a legal institution! I just don't get the purpose of marriage at this point. In the past you could view it as a system to give women the financial security they would need to have and raise children; but thanks to no fault there is nothing in the marriage law that gives here that. You could refuse to marry her and let her give birth to a bastard, or serve her papers the day after the child…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 02:24 AM
3

marriage functions more like the 19th century ideal of the romantic movement - aka, its purely a symbol meant to represent how much people love one another. No. A much more significant element to marriage has always been property and inheritance, and avoiding bastardy. The notion of picking ones spouse out of romantic love, came after marriage was well established as a religious, social and legal institution. These days, marriage is far removed from the concerns of inheritance and bastardy. Ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 02:07 AM
3

It isn't hard to buy a car either, but you can't just walk onto the dealers lot and demand the keys, you have to make and offer and negotiate terms. Absent a desire to marry another person, there isn't a lot of pressure to dissolve the current marriage after separation. You can live apart have your own lives, your own sexual partners, whatever. I'm imagine that many women at the time used extended separation as a way to secure their lifestyle as they moved from one spouse to the next. They can s…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 01:54 AM
2

No fault wasn't an option 70 years ago. Historically your options for unilaterally ending the marriage were limited to proving fault. Otherwise you had to have mutual consent to end the marriage. With the addition of no fault, nobody can prevent the dissolution of the marriage. If A wants out and B doesn't want to then A can file for no fault. B can protest all he wants, but as long as A lives apart for 6 months the court will grant the request. There is generally no reason for anyone to avail t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 01:47 AM
8

But it has to chain up with that group. In the 30-49 age group the difference is smaller, but its still there. Who are the 30-49 year old women dating if those men are dating the <30 girls? Obviously your answer is the 49-65 men... and then you have to ask who the 49-65 women are dating if those men are dating the <49s. Only when you get to >65 does your chain of "dating up" actual reverse and make sense. Its also just too big. Most relationships are within 1-2 years in age. You need a much larg…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 11:40 PM
2

But, most of the time I hear women talking about this its about random or not well acquainted men coming up to them and just dumping all of their trauma on them, which you have to admit could get pretty annoying after awhile. That is almost never the complaint. The complaint is usually that men open up to their partner, and are then rejected. As for the notion that men "trauma-bomb women," I think this is a byproduct of our mental health industry. I think the mental health profession is just ver…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 10:28 PM
14

That can still only explain AT MOST a 2.5% gap. Out of the 105 baby boys born 18-29 years ago, 51% or 53.5 of them are single. Of the 100 baby girls born that many years ago only 32 of them are single. So who are these 21 girls dating? Each other? The same guy?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 10:19 PM
6

Divorce wasn't as hard to obtain as you describe. It just required mutual agreement. With unequal incomes and job opportunities there was almost always one party that would benefit from refusing to consent to the divorce. In other words withholding consenting to the divorce and expressing a desire to reconcile became a negotiating tactic, not based on any real belief the marriage could be salvaged, but because it might increase what you get to take home. Rather than complete these negotiations m…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 10:06 PM
2

I think you over-emphasize how hard Divorce actually was. If both parties agreed, Divorce in most states could be completed after a year of separation in most instances. The difficulty is that unless the parties were equally economically situation one party would have an incentive to refuse the agreement and drag things out. Modern no-fault allows one party to very easily end the marriage over the objections of the other party, and without really stating a reason for doing so. What is particular…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 10:00 PM
1

A big challenge is the cost of litigating a no-fault divorce. If you are choosing between: Spending $200k on lawyers to battle over assets and maybe walk away with $600k in an at-fault divorce. or Spending $10k on lawyers to sign on the dotted line and walk away with $450k. Technically the latter is better.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 09:40 PM
2

He just told you what he wanted in marriage, you just didn't listen. He wants a traditional marriage. He wants to make a trade to his intended: "I will give up the opportunity of other women, in exchange I want exclusivity and access to you." The state has decided not to allow him to make that kind of agreement. As a result his intended loses out on his financial resources, and he loses out on having a stable committed relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 09:30 PM
5

Slight correction to what you said: [Eliminating] no fault divorce might mean it is harder for them to leave you. I think the flip side of this question is what advice will men give their children in 20 years. Certainly my advice to my sons will be: "Don't get married (unless she makes/has a lot more money than you)." Couples can co-habitate, buy property together, even raise children without marriage. The only people who seem to benefit from marriage are: those who want to be homemakers and div…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 09:26 PM
1

More likely people just won't get married in the first place. You would have lots of unmarried but cohabitating couples, and lots of married couples living separately. Also once you have kids, it almost doesn't matter. The child support and custody element is a much more complicated thing to deal with than the divorce element. Many couples (particularly where both have careers) can easily settle the divorce in an afternoon if they approach it rationally, the hard part is the kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 09:07 PM
5

they would be committing adultery if they got in sime other relationship and then they'd be giving the other partner grounds There is no reason that adultery has to be considered a "fault" (much less a crime). One could certainly imagine a system where: Divorce is hard and requires the parties to prove some kind of harm to each other along the lines of "he isn't sharing his income" or "he beats me" but sexual monogamy is not expected by the state, and either party can have sexual relations outsi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 09:03 PM
–

All of that can be created and protected through private contract. You don't need marriage to do it. Marriage does it all in one single form, but its not necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:07 PM
–

These days these legal protections are pretty limited, and basically nothing you can't contract for on the side. You want to establish a contract where you are each others beneficiary in death, you can do that and set up some trusts to receive the assets and distribute to the survivor. You want to buy a home with survivorship, that's easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:06 PM
–

You can do that with a will.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:04 PM
–

Are there actually people who think: "If my partner doesn't want to be with me anymore, I will spend of my life FORCING them to spend every day they have left with ME." The thought is that if there were stronger social and legal pressures against divorce, then people might try harder to overcome their issues. Certainly there is no guarantee that greater social and legal pressure would cause couples to work through issues. In many cases it probably wouldn't help, in a few it might. I think the bi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 08:02 PM
6

Child support is a mess in the US and really needs to be revisited in light of the increase in families with two working parents. In my state two parents making equal incomes (say $10k/mo=$120k/yr), with 2 kids, and where the kids spend 40% time with the father, the child support payment is ~$1500/mo from Dad to Mom. Since mom and Dad make the same income, this payment can really only be viewed as compensation for the time in which dad is not feeding, clothing, and caring for the children, and i…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/24 07:55 PM
1

guys aren’t as put off by the artificiality and inauthenticity of the performance. Oh please. Who watches "Real Housewives" and "The Kardashians", Men or Women? Both men and women have times and places that they accept and reject artificiality. Men largely remain silent about #TradWife because: They don't watch it, because its not targeted at them. They aren't offended by it, because it is not judging them. Men have long been told that men aren't supposed to express opinions about how women shou…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/24 07:59 PM
2

This is absolutely not true, and one of the big problems of the culture war is that progressives don't understand and entertain that some of the things they advocate for are in fact restrictive of conservatives. People just end up talking past each other. A great example of this is this issue of choice of pronouns. The progressive view of this is an individual gets to make their own choice, and that how you refer to others doesn't affect you, and besides gender is a social construct. While I agr…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/24 02:17 PM
2

What I don’t respect are the trad wives who feel like they need to shit talk women who made choices different from their own. I think you underestimate the amount of negativity that these women sense from society towards traditional roles like being a homemaker. That isn't to say that the there is rampant hostility in the media towards them, but there are lots of voices trying to express positive sentiments towards working women. If only a few of them express themselves in ways that denigrate ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/24 01:57 PM
2

almost exclusively based on religion and thus they feel an imperative to make the rest of society like them - regardless of what we want. So do progressives. Everyone advocates for what they think makes the world better.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/24 01:43 PM
2

Certainly abortion rights are under attack, but I don't see any real efforts to keep women out of the workplace, or out of colleges. If anything it is men who are falling behind women in college and many higher value careers. That's not what the cause is Then what is? The original question was for Women to explain why they are hostile. The answers I have heard don't make a lot of sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 08:14 PM
1

TradWives might share many views with 1960s anti-feminists about what is best for women, but the circumstances have changed. They are not in a position to force women to stay in the home. Nothing in #TradWife compels women to give up their careers and stay at home, there is no compulsion. You have a choice to reject #TradWife and say you disagree with it. The power of choice, is the power of choice. Vitriol and hostility against #TradWives merely because they choose to live their lives different…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 07:51 PM
–

many men lack scruples are easy to seduce and bamboozle. Agreed on "lack scruples," male sexuality has a strong opportunistic component to it. You miss 100% of pitches you don't swing at. "easy to seduce and bamboozle" requires a definition of "seduce." Sleeping with a woman is not being seduced. Spending a modest amount of money on a website or even taking a woman out to an expensive dinner is not being "bamboozled." (To suggest that it is makes traditional dating a massive fraud committed by w…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 07:25 PM
1

A lot of talk about whether or not therapy is good or bad, necessary or unnecessary.... very little talk about $$$ and induced demand. People talk about therapy a lot because there are private therapists who need to put money on the table. People talk about therapy because the industry has gotten mental health benefits included in many corporate health benefit programs. In the 1950s mental health therapy happened in institutions. Those doctors didn't need to advertise your services to bring in c…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 07:06 PM
-3

Assuming arguendo that all faults in modern families lie at the feet of men for not partnering equally... that just goes to prove the point I made: Nobody can accurately predict how a substantive change like women's equality, will actually play out. There will be some good outcomes, and some bad outcomes. Feminists of the 60s and 70s didn't warn us of the negatives, does that make them grifters? Was it all a scam?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 06:37 PM
5

Its not pretty, its not coifed, its not instagramable. Nothing on instagram is actually instagramable. I think your complaint is a more general one about social media as a whole, I don't see it as being specific to #TradWife. If #WorkingWoman started to trend on instagram, can you honestly say that you would be equally critical of those women pushing unrealistic views about how fulfilling office jobs are?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 06:29 PM
-4

I don't think feminists of the 60s and 70s anticipated the dramatic changes in family structure, and increase in childlessness among women. That is what I am largely referring to. Certainly not all of it is attributable to the women's movement, but it definitely has had an impact. As for men "seeking careers and independence," I don't think that is an accurate description of men's behaviors in "traditional America." Men wanted mates, and to have a mate in traditional society you needed a career.…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 06:17 PM
1

As Roy Baumeister and Kathleen Vohs stated so eloquently: "men will do whatever is required in order to obtain sex, and perhaps not a great deal more." What 20 year old men really want and need, is to understand the rules of the game. What women want, hasn't actually changed all that much. They want men who are financially secure, stable and committed. They may be willing to wait a little bit longer before marriage, but by and large they follow the old rules. They may have a few more partners an…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 05:43 PM
2

Much of what you say is true of all social media influencers. VanLife looks awesome, but not having a proper shower, and keeping your toilet under your kitchen sink is a pretty obvious downside. FIRE sounds great, but I think everyone understands that you have to make lots of sacrifices throughout your life to be able to retire in your 40s. Similarly TradWife would allow some women to do what they want, but you obviously give up a lot of power to your Husband and better hope he is good to you. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 05:03 PM
15

There is no way that Harrison Butker is threatened by high profile professional women. So that is the first bit of evidence against what you are proposing. In general I don't see a lot of men pushing "tradwife" instead I see women adopting it. It is social media influencers who call themselves #tradwife in their instagram, and that it is mostly driven by women, not men. I think "tradwife" has a lot more to do with these women not wanting to feel inadequate relative to their peers. If you are a w…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 10:28 PM
–

You have to be careful where you live if you do that. If you moved to a common law state one could claim it as a valid marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 09:27 PM
–

legal structure of it as a benefit and as a kind of legal protection for potential children It is hardly that these days as the state does nothing to stop you from getting divorced whether or not you have kids. I would actually say that being legally married is potentially worse for children than having children outside marriage. If you have kids and end up getting divorced, you now have a very expensive legal matter to settle to determine who gets to keep what from the marriage. Meanwhile you a…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 09:17 PM
0

Suppose you and I are both really interested in pottery, you might initially have a bunch of conversations around the kinds of pottery you have done. Maybe we go to the studio and share some tricks for making better pieces, but at some point we will exhaust our mutual shared knowledge of the subject. We will have shown each other everything we know about the subject. Now we could continue to go to the studio together and work on things together, but unless we want to constantly make the same bow…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 09:02 PM
–

"accountability," "responsibility" and "coddling" are somewhat different things. Responsibility is: "having a duty to deal with something" Accountable is: "required or expected to justify actions or decisions" Coddle is: "to treat with extreme or excessive care or kindness" Responsibility doesn't seem the right word to me. I struggle to think of instances where women are allowed to just not deal with things that men have to deal with. Everyone has to pay taxes and rent. Maybe 50 years ago a woma…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 06:22 PM
–

Not being a woman I can't really say, but certainly media presents women as being much worse towards other women than men are to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 06:06 PM
–

But what of these show women neglecting their personal responsibility? First I would note that you added the word "personal." that doesn't appear in my comment or the person you are responding to. I generally don't think that average women (as a class) neglect their "personal responsibility" any more than average men do. Going back to what /u/Updawg145 wrote: Being equal means sometimes not getting your way, it means getting treated poorly, it means competing with others and losing, etc. A lot o…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 05:42 PM
–

average, working woman The media is often dominated by those who are not average, which I think makes these conversations that much harder. There is a fairly consistent message in public discourse that: women's issues matter even in the most extreme instances and that women's approaches to problems are the right approaches. For the former, I am thinking of things like gender pay gaps in athletics, or corporate boardroom composition. These are situations that are far from the norm and aren't rele…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 05:23 PM
2

Likewise, couples can choose an economic and legal framework that works for them. One of the problems with marriage these days is that couples CANNOT choose the framework that works for them. They have a binary choice: "married or not" and don't get to customize the structure in the way they want to customize it. Through pre-nups and other agreements they can try to manage how the government will treat the marriage in the event of its dissolution, but they can't actually control how it functions…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 04:31 PM
2

I think those are very different. No matter how much you love the office, you will never have Michael Scott over for dinner, but you can have your friend from the pottery class over. So if one partner is a homebody with no meaningful social life outside the home, what are they going to bring into the relationship that is really novel?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 03:56 PM
2

I think a difficulty with one person going out while the other stays home is that it makes the dynamic very asymmetric. One person comes back and has lots of interesting stories to tell about other people outside the relationship, while the other person says: "I watered the plants, and cleaned the kitchen." This could lead to bitterness and resentment, or it could lead to one party feeling guilty for having "all the excitement". I'm sure some couples can navigate it, but its probably easier if b…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 02:37 PM
1

I don't think I missed a word, but the "that" is ambiguous. The message I see a lot in popular culture is that of the "spouse as best friend." They seemingly do everything together and are always together. Its this "best friend" message that I think is problematic. Your spouse probably shouldn't be your best friend, but rather someone different and interesting enough to keep you engaged.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 01:21 PM
1

People should do what works for them, but I don't think "look for similar interests and activities" is particularly good advice to the average person.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:58 PM
1

People can have different views on what an ideal relationship is like. Right now society is struggling with the after-effects of the birth control pill and feminism and people are trying to figure out what they want and what works best for them. For some women, feminism and birth control has been a blessing. They have careers they are satisfied with, financial independence, and the freedom to pursue satisfying sexual and personal relationships in ways they never could before. For other women thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:55 PM
3

Hunting may not have brought in as many calories as foraging would have. The reality is that while life is hard for hunter-gatherers it isn't constant starvation. Calories were not the limiting factor, so a man bringing home some large animal they killed isn't really about providing food necessary for the group to survive, so much as demonstrating his ability and fitness.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:44 PM
1

Absolutely. For some individuals with particularly well balanced interests I think this could work well; but I am skeptical that the average American has such well balanced interests. So back to my original comment that I think society has been pushing a message that doesn't really work for most people. That the average person should seek out someone who has some different interests and can cause them to move away from their natural tendencies.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:34 PM
2

The risk with spending too much time and having too many interests in common with your spouse is that they stop being interesting to you. If you can manage to continually introduce new activities into the relationship, and find new friends to grow the social circle, that is great; but many people aren't wired that way (particularly more introverted people), and they might find themselves running out of experiences in the relationship. Eventually they are sitting on the couch deciding whether or …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:12 PM
1

There is a balance to be found. The extreme of sharing interests would be to find someone so aligned in interests that they effectively have none. They offer nothing to the relationship because they always want to do whatever you want to do. They just follow you around like a dog happily wagging their tail. For most people this doesn't work in a romantic relationship. The other end of the extreme is Candide and Cunegonde, However that doesn't mean that if you like to hike, then she must also lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 12:06 PM
2

Alternately, having different interests makes it more interesting that you will go your own separate ways and bring back interesting stories, or introduce each other to people from other social groups. It is important that your partner have some "other-ness" to them, because the other-ness is what attracts you to them. You wouldn't want to date a man who was a blank slate and wanted to join you in all your activities without bringing in anything novel of his own to the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 11:57 AM
2

Do you find it impossible to listen to someone who you care about talking about something that isn't directly relevant to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 11:54 AM
3

Exactly this. Hopefully nobody is dumb enough to believe you can have a lasting romantic relationship I suspect a lot of people believe that. Society has been pushing the "marry your best friend" narrative for some time now, and there are good reasons to think that your spouse should not be your best friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 11:48 AM
1

With the League you can pay for more matches. It is stupid expensive but I'm sure there are guys who think nothing of spending $400 to see another 20 profiles.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 08:18 PM
–

Certainly we can't know for certain what kinds of behaviors dominated in the past. There are some good arguments that at some point in the past women may have been more promiscuous which has left its legacy in our genetics and behaviors. But I don't know how you can look at the aggregate behaviors of individuals on modern dating apps and say there isn't a strong genetic component that drives this. Bumble was founded on feminist ideals of female empowerment in dating... and ultimately gave up. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 08:00 PM
1

This doesn't insult or diminish the roll of fathers at all. Fathers and male figures in general, are critical to the development of the child as it gets older; but father's are not the source of food for the newborn. It is stupid to say that women are not biologically suited to raising children, when they are critical to the survival of children after birth. You are just denying factual reality when you say that. What you should be talking about is the definition of "raising a child." What does …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 05:04 PM
1

Your comment is in response to a poster who said did nothing to suggest that he thinks men are the more logical and rational sex. You aren't responding to the people you are talking to, but rather a strawman you have created in your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 12:26 PM
–

Talk to those men then. I haven't said that.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 12:18 PM
–

You aren't actually having a discussion. You are just arguing against the strawman views you have have created: "men's common claim," "what the men here say," etc... understood.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 10:56 AM
–

Saying that "men should understand this better than anyone" is misandrist. You are putting the blame for some failure of understanding at the feet of men in general. As for: "Men chase because it benefits them more to do so" these are co-evolved dynamics and elements of intersexual competition. Men don't benefit from chasing. Chasing is costly to men, their direct evolutionary pressure is not to waste effort chasing. However there is strong evolutionary pressure on women not to respond to men wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 06:44 AM
–

I don't understand how your comment is a response to mine. I'm pointing the misandry in your blaming men for not understanding that there are biological differences between the sexes. Meanwhile one of the top dating apps, created by women, is having to completely rethink its strategy because women don't like to message first. Both sexes are very confused right now.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 06:29 AM
13

M[y] recommendation for what both men and women should prioritize is. It doesn't matter what you recommend. Dating apps and the swipe mechanic drive the sexes towards the extremes of their genetic programming. If finding a mate is truly like walking into a massive warehouse with millions of choices on the shelves, men's raw genetic programming will be to swipe right on the pretty ones, while women's raw genetic programming will direct them to be more discerning. These two behaviors feed back int…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 06:10 AM
–

That isn't what he meant. The risk to a woman is that she gets pregnant, which during our evolutionary past was a significant risk to her health and life. During that time she needs a partner to: protect her, provide resources, assistance, and who is willing to stick around for a couple years until the child is no longer a toddler. If he isn't willing to chase during the courtship, he won't stick around during the pregnancy. If he can't make dinner reservations, can he find a hospital during lab…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 05:21 AM
–

First paragraph is fine... but Men - who are supposed to be the logical, rational gender - should understand this better than anyone. Yet here we are. Men didn't create Bumble and the idea that "Women should message first." Both sexes are understandably confused by a society that actively tells them that gender differences are largely socialized and the result of patriarchy; but when they try to put this into practice the underlying genetic programming comes out and demonstrates some very clear …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 05:08 AM
–

it's that men have higher libido, so they have more motivation to approach women. Agreed with /u/ArmariumEspata. This isn't about relative libido. For one libido can be hard to measure, and there are plenty of women with high libido, but they are usually selective about who they present that libido to. Men are less selective in choosing partners because they don't face the significant cost of pregnancy, and will present a high libido towards every possible partner, including that sexy looking tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 04:45 AM
1

women are biologically suited to raising children. Women are biologically suited to raising children. Its why they have breasts that produce milk. The big difference is that in modern society we don't have communal living arrangements where all of the children above toddler age are running around feral in the village, learning simpler skills by observing distantly related adults. Instead we keep our young children in our houses and away from other adults at nighttime. This forces us to do more a…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 01:52 AM
1

The male provider absolutely does have some biological relevance. Human babies are born with substantially fewer capabilities than other mammals. If human gestation was in line with other mammals it would something like 18 months long. The only reason it isn't is because that massive heads of 9 month olds cannot fit between the hips of a bipedal female. So yes the male of the species really does need to provide extensive support to the female and newborn infant for an extended period or time rel…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 01:44 AM
3

There are two cups on the table, you don't know what is in them, but you are thirsty and hope that one has cool refreshing water. The first cup is empty. The second cup is filled with molten metal that burns your mouth and throat. Do you prefer the first or the second cup? Either way you aren't getting that drink of water.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 01:24 AM
1

You can't have a meaningful discussion about this until you first define the institution of marriage. Among European nobility, Marriage was a way to protect inherited wealth and legitimate offspring. If that's all marriage is to you (and you lack effective birth control), then he can sleep around, and she can't; because her sleeping around risks cuckolding the spouse and breaking the very purpose of the institution, whereas his sleeping around just creates bastards that are not a threat to the i…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/24 07:28 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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