TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PerhapsPerchance Archive

View 1 post and 26 comments by PerhapsPerchance 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)
2

CMVPerhapsPerchance/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 06:04 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I should clarify it was not my intent to claim unattractive people cannot have relationships or participate in sexual intercourse.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/15 05:46 PM
1

Science has answered this question. Male bodies should be masculine. A male's face can be androgynous and still be attractive. Overall, feminine morphology is preferred on male faces. But, masculine coloring is comparatively better. Female bodies should be feminine. The most attractive female face would be feminized. Androgyny is far more attractive on males than females.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/15 05:15 AM
1

The whole women aren't visual thing is a really worn out pop psychology cliché that less and less people take seriously these days. I can't believe she tried to play that card.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 06:20 AM
0

Height has very little effect on physical attraction when compared to face and/or body.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 06:02 AM
1

Intriguing. I agree that both men and women should generally agree on what is attractive. What evidence are you referencing when you claim that men are comparatively more prone to subjectivity? I don't disagree; I am simply curious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 05:59 AM
1

That was the funniest thing I've heard in a long time. Thanks man.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 08:00 AM
2

I am skeptical.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/15 08:37 AM
5

CisWhitemaelstrom, bravo, man. Bravo.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 07:38 AM
1

Well, we both believe in the importance of physical attraction, it would seem. I don't think there's much disagreement to be had here. "The fact that laypeople do not consider neotenous features, gender dimorphism, histo-compatibility complexes, facial symmetry, specific body fat levels, immune systems..." This paragraph in general makes a great point if I am interpreting it correctly. Physical attraction is incredibly indicative of overall health, and evolutionary advantageousness. It would sim…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 05:21 AM
1

"Nobody said that physical attractiveness does not MATTER and therefore your first premise is a straw man." Nobody is a bold claim. I would grant that it is not stated frequently in an obvious form. But, the importance of the trait is frequently diminished. Much like you attempted to do here. Of particular interest to me, is the claim that physical attraction is significantly subjective. This, if true, would diminish the impact of physical attractiveness. So, people are stating that physical att…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 09:55 PM
1

It was not my intent to compare physical attraction to other factors. It is not my claim that it is more important than anything else, in particular. Just that it is important. And because physical attraction is important, it is likely not significantly subjective. Some factors may obscure this. Which is why such tests should be performed in a controlled environment. I have no doubts there may be an ostensible enhanced bit of subjectivity in the 'real world.' But, there are things such as ration…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 08:42 PM
1

The claim isn't terribly uncommon, but it's usually phrased differently. It's usually put as: 'Attractiveness is important, but not everyone agrees on what is attractive' This claim would diminish the importance of physical attractiveness. It also provides false hope to physically unattractive people, and allows some individuals to skirt the true impact of appearance. The thing is, the claim doesn't make sense. Not empirically, and not theoretically. If physical attractiveness were truly signifi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 08:16 PM
0

50% is a made up inaccurate number. We all know that. One number wouldn't explain the dynamic. There would be a large difference in physical attractiveness between a 50th percentile guy and a 99th percentile guy. Threshold effect would not take effect at 50%, lol. More than 50% of men would be attractive with the appropriate status/wealth. If she's saying 50% of men are attractive, that doesn't mesh well with some other findings in the red pill community. Or evolutionary psychology, really. The …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 10:15 AM
0

50% is a high number. Such a figure would probably not be supported by theoretical pondering within the evolutionary framework. I don't care to a large extent, however. I would be pleased if the sub were to accept that physical attraction is important, and that physical attraction is not significantly subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 09:46 AM
2

I don't give much credibility to the idea that physical attractiveness has changed much. At least not in recent history. Being fat could have been a status symbol, it would not mean it is physically attractive. There is still no scientific consensus on whether men prefer small, medium, or large breasts. So, historical variation over the attractiveness of certain breasts sizes would be no different than today. Men absolutely do prefer certain waist to hip ratios over others, though. As well as fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 09:38 AM
5

Women use opportunities like this to establish how much they care about personality and not looks. It is ridiculous. Science says women are dishonest about how much they value physical attraction. Science says beauty is not significantly subjective. I repeat, these comments are absolutely ridiculous. Men, if you are reading this, do not believe women are actually attracted to this guy. I am serious. Do not believe them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 04:45 AM
1

Well, weight problems can largely be genetic in origin. He may be able to control his issue by putting an ungodly amount of effort in. He'd still have to worry about an unattractive face. He'd still be short, 'sub 5'9' as he puts it. He will never be average looking without plastic surgery, and an extreme amount of effort. He was born to be ugly, and he is bitter about it. Because girls care a shitload about physical attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/15 04:37 AM
2

They tell you to lift because your body is far easier to change than your face. And body IS important, maybe like a quarter of overall attractiveness. With the vast majority being face. If you are short, but good looking. That is a far, far, far better situation than the opposite. Still not ideal, but a good face will let you succeed if you try. Considering you acted to an international model's face with a yawn, you may actually be pretty good looking.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/15 06:49 AM
2

To begin, if one may permit an off-hand comment, I have my doubts even the most attractive of men are regularly offered casual sex. A true test of aesthetics would be how receptive girls are to a 'cold approach' as it is termed here. Height is not as important as face or body. The studies bear this out. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3637716/ http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090513809000580 For men, body shape was determined to be 10x more important than height. Wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/15 06:35 AM
1

He is a lucky guy. But, it's more because of his face than anything else.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/15 06:00 AM
2

The guy xemnas81 posted is an international male model. He is tall, and physically fit. Which of course doesn't matter much compared to face. But the model still has an excellent face, and is absolutely amazing looking. His tan complexion is among the best I've seen. The only flaw I'm seeing is a slightly large forehead. I will post another picture of him. http://coolspotters.com/files/photos/1022689/tobias-sorensen-profile.jpg Scott Eastwood is good looking too.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/15 04:55 AM
3

Well, this is unsubstantiated nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/15 04:50 AM
1

You can't expect women to accurately convey what they are seeking in a mate.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 03:16 AM
7

Girls like him because he is famous and good looking. It is that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 06:53 AM
2

While I would be forced to agree with your claim here, I find it extremely misleading. "Attraction is subjective" should have an asterisk attached. Because while by definition any individual discrepancies necessitate subjectivity, people generally agree on what is attractive. On a purely theoretical basis, it does not make much evolutionary sense that physical attractiveness would be significantly subjective. Additionally, empirical evidence seems to bear this out. http://psycnet.apa.org/journal…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 05:25 AM
2

"This is not meant to prove or disprove any PPD ideologies or whatever. See it as a fun thing or skip past it." This is probably the wrong sub for such a comment. I would grant that physical attraction is subjective, but I would contend that it is not significantly so. There are individual variances, of course. But, generally people agree on what is attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 02:22 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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