TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

PorgiAmor Archive

View 0 posts and 316 comments by PorgiAmor 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

Well, if hypergamy didnt exist, people would be much happier. No, they wouldn't. If women were forced to be with men they aren't attracted to, then they would be unhappy. And men would know that the women they are with are disgusted by them. That's not a recipe for widespread happiness. Either that, or many women would just drop out of the dating scene altogether if they couldn't get with men they found attractive, because women are better at living romanceless and on their own compared to men. …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 07:37 PM
2

Please answer my question.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:49 PM
1

Please answer my question.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:49 PM
1

Please answer my question.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:48 PM
1

So 3/10 women should abstain from dating men who are 4s and above? Is it reasonable to expect that women should turn down offers from higher SMV men?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:45 PM
1

So 3/10 women should abstain from dating men who are 4s and above? Is it reasonable to expect that women should turn down offers from higher SMV men?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:44 PM
1

A 3\10 woman actually getting a relationship with a 8\10 man does not mean they're both on the same level of attractiveness\SMV, OR that their relationship is "reasonable". So 3/10 women should abstain from dating men who are 4s and above? Is it reasonable to expect that women should turn down offers from higher SMV men?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:44 PM
1

Didn't answer my question. Do you believe this behavior is unjust? Is it unreasonable in the sense that women will fail in attracting a higher SMV man? Because I would argue that it is not if in fact it is not uncommon for lower SMV women do date higher tier men.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:43 PM
2

So what if she CAN date a higher tier man. Is she being unjust if she does so? Should she abstain from dating men above her level in your view? Is that the only way women can be just?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:41 PM
3

If a fat, short, ugly woman claims to only be attracted to tall, buff, handsome men, she is being unreasonable. I would say she is not being unreasonable at all IF she is able to get into a relationship with a man above her SMV, which many women are. So again, should women who have an opportunity to date a higher SMV man turn him down? Is that the correct and just response, in your view?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:40 PM
1

Please answer my question: OK, how about "unjust", then? You seem to think it is not only an inconvenient thing for women to do this, but that it is also a blameworthy behavior You do see hypergamous behavior as something blameworthy in women, is that right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:38 PM
1

NO woman is attracted to men in her league or below. That being the case, are you saying most women should abstain from participating in sexual and romantic relationships if they cannot or do not find men on their level romantically appealing?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:37 PM
1

Stop twisting around my words. Well, OK, you appear to want to use an appeal to justice and fairness to prevent women from dating above themselves. Is that correct?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:36 PM
1

Let me rephrase: is a woman who does this unjust? Is she blameworthy in some way?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:35 PM
1

You're twisting my words around again. I never said anything about "immoral". Stop fucking twisting around my words. OK, how about "unjust", then? You seem to think it is not only an inconvenient thing for women to do this, but that it is also a blameworthy behavior, which implies you think women are acting immorally by being hypergamous. Is that right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:34 PM
1

IT IS UNREASONABLE FOR A LOW-TIER WOMAN TO EXPECT A HIGH-TIER MAN, WHEN SHE IS LOW-TIER HERSELF I'm not talking about expectation. I'm talking about a real life scenario, which is not uncommon, whereby a woman is offered the chance to date a man more attractive than herself. Is a woman who does this immoral? I think that you just stated that it is. This wouldnt be a problem if hypergamy didnt exist. So, in the present sexual marketplace where hypergamy does exist, is it immoral for a man to date…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:32 PM
1

The problem with this (Hypergamy) is that it isn't balanced. So, according to you, it is unjust and immoral for a woman to date a man out of her league. That's what I thought, but I wanted to be clear. So what if an unattractive woman is not attracted to men in her league or below? Is she morally obligated to abstain from dating, sex, and relationships altogether in your view?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:29 PM
2

Appeal to women's sense of justice and self-awareness to make them change their ways. So you want to force women to date only those men on their "level". What if they genuinely aren't attracted to men on their level, though? Should they remain dateless and alone? Should a woman who has the opportunity to date a higher level man be morally obligated to turn him down because she is less attractive? The other issue I see here is that I honestly don't see how you could force any woman to find a man …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:26 PM
1

A person with many negative traits expecting a person with many positive traits is unreasonable. I would agree with this. Except you seem to also frame this in terms of morality and justice. Are you saying that it is immoral and/or unjust if women actually attempt to date higher than themselves on the SMV scale? Or if they are mostly attracted to men higher than them on the SMV scale? Like, let's take a hypothetical fat woman who has the opportunity to get into a relationship with a more attract…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:20 PM
1

OK, but then what. So a woman who is objectively worse than her SO dates a better man. Is this immoral and unjust in your view? That's what you appear to be saying. Like, "women should not date men who are better looking than them." Is that right? And I guess I'm curious about what your proposed solution is to this problem, if you have one? Are you arguing that women are morally obligated to date on their level only? And what about men? Are they immoral if they date down?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:14 PM
1

They objectively are not on the same level, regardless of who gets in a relationship with who I'm not trying to twist anything around. I'm genuinely trying to understand your argument. If it were an exception, no. What counts as an exception in your view? What percentage of women are the maximum allowed to do this and not be behaving immorally in your view? And again, what about the men who date down? Are they behaving immorally?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:10 PM
2

OK, so a 5/10 woman is attracted to a man out of her league. She fancies him and makes a move. He responds and they start an LTR. According to you, is either party in this situation acting immorally? Are both acting immorally? Should she have never made a move and indicated interest in the first place? Does he bear any responsibility for choosing to date down?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:07 PM
1

Again, we can look at what are considered objectively positive traits, but you are overlooking the role that the individual and that personality plays in a match. If a non-fat man finds love with a fat woman, who are you to say he's wrong and he shouldn't date her? Same with a good looking woman and a less attractive man. Attraction is at least partially subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:04 PM
1

You see stuff like that all over the manosphere, like at ROK, Dalrock's blog, and even MGTOW on Reddit. Women are supposed to be sweet, submissive, demure, and yield to the man, etc. One article on the now defunct Spearhead site chastised western women for laughing too loudly and showing too much of their teeth when laughing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 10:23 AM
1

That was not my father's case. He didn't have trouble finding women to date. And some famous men like rock stars and actors marry abusive spouses too, and obviously many women want them. Sometimes men are just blinded by lust, and prioritize physical attraction over character, much as some women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 10:20 AM
1

I was looking at the latest data for the US as reported by NIH/NIDDK. Sorry, I should have stated this was US-based data. I believe the UK is about the same, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 10:32 PM
2

Not 90%, but more like 70%. So yeah, if you won't date a woman who is even just overweight you are being picky. Not that I'm giving you a hard time for having standards, just pointing out that most available women do not meet them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:57 PM
4

Because in ye olden times hairloss was likely to be as a result of sickness and ageing. Male pattern baldness has been around for thousands of years; long enough that women realized a man losing his hair was not necessarily sick.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:53 PM
2

"Manic Pixie Dream Girl"
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:52 PM
3

higly masculine features because it indicates good genetic quality. Right, and highly masculine features don't bring you to orgasm just by lookin' at em. The man himself and his skills in bed are what do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:46 PM
3

If a 5\10 woman can get in a relationship with a 7\10 man, he meets her standards, but that DOESNT mean they're on the same level. If a 5\10 woman only accepts a 7\10 man or above, then she IS asking for too much. Not if she gets a 7/10 man, and he's happy with her. He's not being forced to date down, he could ignore her. But gosh, maybe a 7/10 man is capable of loving a woman who is less attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:37 PM
3

Must be able to sexually satisfy her (in other words, a good looking masculine man) You can be very sexually satisfied by a man who is not especially good looking or masculine.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:32 PM
2

men give a lot more encouragement to women. Not in my experience. By far, women give the most encouragement to other women, at least that's how it's been in my life. Based on what I have observed, men tend to be more competitive with each other and insult each other a lot, even if it's a teasing sort of insult.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:28 PM
3

that they're a reasonable match for each other? That is up to THEM to decide. If they are happy together, then it is a reasonable match.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:25 PM
5

However the bar for women is literally just "Be pretty, don't be fat", so i'd say it's a pretty equally low bar. Men should have a higher bar, especially if they want to have kids. My dad's bar for wives was "Be a good cook, be decent looking, have big boobs". He married some horribly abusive women, one of which was a horrible mother (mine). And he never learned, not after three divorces.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:19 PM
2

Confidence, ambitiousness, assertiveness, ect. Many men find these qualities turnoffs in a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/17 09:08 PM
3

I have seen people on r/sex, here, and especially TheBluePill engage in oneupmanship over how kinky they are. If anything, it's the manospherians and TRPs who disparage vanilla sex. They don't consider a relationship good unless the woman is regularly performing BJs, allowing anal, and allowing herself to be dominated -- including being choked -- during sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/17 09:26 PM
1

then 50% divorce rate (the majority of which are initiated by women) gives you some idea that women seem to tire of their relationships and opt out whenever they please. There is no 50% divorce rate. That's a myth that red pillers keep repeating, but it's simply not true. Article quote: The divorce rate peaked in the 1970s and early 1980s and has been declining for the three decades since. I read recently the divorce rate for first-time married couples at least 24 years of age with college degre…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/16 01:03 PM
1

No, it won't do squat for their insecurities. There are guys on /incels who have had sex before but are still miserable because 1) they had to pay a hooker for it and/or 2) were still unable to attract a woman on their own OR get her to stick around after a one night stand. Merely having sex with an incel won't help him. Having a woman stoop to pity sex may even make him feel WORSE, as would having to lower his standards super low. In fact, sometimes incels even turn on the women who sleep with …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/16 06:18 PM
5

I wouldn't sleep with an incel friend because it wouldn't really help him or give him happiness. In fact, he might feel worse after it was over. It wouldn't raise his self-esteem because he'd know it was pity sex and not motivated by my genuine attraction. Therefore, it wouldn't given him the validation he really wanted that he was an attractive and sexy person.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/16 06:14 PM
0

Most RPers want to become those men. If they can do it without being manipulative jerks to women, then more power to them. Being confident, successful, socially adept, and assertive are NOT mutually exclusive with being intelligent and athletic. Incels and some TRPs keep trying to build up this false dichotomy. It's much like claiming all beautiful women are bimbos.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 12:59 PM
9

Your first link concerns binge drinkers, not frat boys. And the second link is for an article about one group of frat boys. Neither one supports your generalization.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 04:31 AM
18

They go after frat boys, athletes, party boys, the majority of which are not intellectually gifted and have no real goals for after college. Except I have known many college athletes and frat boys who WERE quite smart, gifted, and capable. Yale has frats, and so does MIT. So do a lot of very selective schools. It seems like many RPers have a tremendous bias against young, handsome, athletic, and outgoing men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 12:29 AM
3

Women are in fact NOT more easygoing than men. While men return to their baseline emotional state a few minutes after a stimuli, women tend to maintain their high emotional state for hours or days afterwards, creating an exaggerated response to any new stimuli. Actually, no, Gottman found the exact opposite. Men have a much harder time recovering from negative emotions than women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/16 12:58 AM
2

Then the only way a girl can have a clitoral orgasm is for a guy to go down on her or for her to masturbate. Or he can dry hump her.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/16 01:15 AM
2

Many women, if not most, can come more easily from dry humping than PIV YES! Totally true in my case.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/16 01:13 AM
1

A meaningful answer to the question at hand should apply whenever the woman engages in any kind of sexual activity with her partner, even non-penetrative ones. Even dry humping while fully clothed?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/16 01:07 AM
2

Any girl that's taken it in her mouth or doing anything that is commonly referred to with monikers bearing the suffix of "-job" is not a virgin. Wow, so you think a handjob equates to sexual intercourse? Personally I see oral/anal/PIV as being things that end one's virginity, but not handjobs, dry humping, and things that don't involve swallowing or absorbing reproductive fluids.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/16 01:07 AM
3

Holy confirmation bias, Batman! Woman says something TRPers believe to be true, TRPers be like, "See, proof that TRP is right! AWALT!" Woman says something that contradicts TRP dogma; TRPers be like, "Lying bitches!"
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/16 03:44 AM
2

But why not keep the money we each make separate so that we can freely spend it on whatever we want without worry of the others approval? Or you can take the hybrid approach, something that works well for our family. You have a joint acct that you both contribute to at an agreed-upon rate, but then you have your own accounts and money leftover too.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 09:16 PM
2

expect men to adhere to very traditional gender roles of provider and protector This Purple/Blue-Pill woman does not expect her man to protect and provide for me or our family; I expect him to contribute to it and do his share. Not the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 08:44 PM
2

I would stay with a SAH husband if he were at home raising kids or if he were an artist or writer who worked from home. Or if he had a serious home business or were a farmer or something. If he were just a no-ambition guy who wanted to stay home playing WoW all day with no responsibilities, then no, I wouldn't be OK with supporting him.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 08:41 PM
2

fully half or more of the marital estate, half her husband's retirement benefits Yes, because she isn't buliding her own retirment account or social security reserves if she isn't working herself. I'm no fan of frivolous no-fault divorces, but a woman who has spent a decade or more off the job market taking care of raising kids and not working and building up assets of her own still deserves some financial security as a result of that sacrifice. very, very generous alimony for at least a few yea…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 08:37 PM
2

So nice that a random man on the Internet knows exactly what we wommenz want better than we do!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 08:35 PM
2

Well I'm very attracted to my husband despite financially supporting him Same here. I was the breadwinner for over a decade. The only reason we changed places on that is that I changed careers, so I'm kinda starting over and my salary took a hit relative to his.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 08:35 PM
2

Or dogs.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/16 03:25 PM
2

Disagree. A stable marriage is better for everyone, parents as well as children. Women are still quite fertile in their mid-to-late 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/16 12:10 AM
1

Don't forget egg-freezing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:40 PM
2

I do, hovewer, find your ridiculous double standard of "we cannot let women perhaps marry men they're not really into because their feelz will be hurt" and "who cares about feelz of those beta losers LOL" hilarious. I don't think it's a double standard. If a woman chooses to marry a man she doesn't really love, then she chooses it. It's different from being forced to marry (or sleep with) someone she doesn't want to.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:34 PM
1

The thing is, if there's a wider age gap, it's more likely for the man to be in a place to be a good provider, be more mature and all together be a better husband. According to a study I saw recently, the happiest marriages reported had a husband 4-5 yrs older than the wife. A bigger age gap is actually a divorce predictor. There's no demand that they provide for their families in quite the same way that there's a requirement that men provide. Nowadays that is less and less true. Also, the brain…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:25 PM
2

There have been studies that show a huge drop off in the rate of divorce if a woman gets married after 24. And is college-educated, don't forget that.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:23 PM
1

You rock, lady :)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:23 PM
2

18 year old women should marry recent college graduates or slightly older men in blue collar jobs (21-23 years old). Yeah, except who are the women who make the most stable wives and mothers? College-educated women. A woman with at least a college education who is at least 24 when she marries is least likely to divorce later on.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:22 PM
1

because some of these women never work full time jobs indicates they are operating on a similar parallel with our past, Except that's completely wrong. The Netherlands is one of the most gender-equal countries out there. Also, men and women may shack up young, but they don't marry young: The average age of a Dutch man when he gets married for the first time is 37, while women are almost 34 years old The difference between the Netherlands and us is that there is more societal support for working-…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 11:16 PM
1

I never did say that either. No, the author of the blogpost quoted by someone else did. That's what I was arguing against.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 08:47 PM
1

No, I'm not a feminist. Nevertheless, I don't see any basis for claiming the vast majority of rape accusations are made up, or that the vast majority of convictions are false.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 08:41 PM
1

When our society crumbles because there are excessive catladies & single mothers. Or maybe women predisposed to be slutty made crappy mothers, and children are best served not being born to them. Maybe we should leave the baby-making to the women who most value being moms rather than forcing women who don't want it or aren't enthusiastic about it into being mothers. Maybe you should channel your energies currently spent on hating women into making contraception and sex ed more accessible.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 08:29 PM
2

Because they are INNOCENT. Maybe, maybe not. Or maybe they weren't guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt".
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 08:27 PM
2

Of course women lie, and of course there are false rape accusations. However......that does not indicate that the vast majority of rape accusations are false. Also, 342 prisoners is a tiny number compared to the overall volume of jailed rapists. Many men accused of rape don't serve time and aren't convicted at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 07:44 PM
1

So while "correlation =/= causation" is a good talking point for most subjects, some subjects will not be able to be tested for causality, so you have to fall back to correlation. No, sorry, good logical reasoning doesn't work that way. Just because there is a correlation that can't be tested for causality, you don't just get to assume causality. Sure it doesn't PROVE it, but it does say you're playing with a loaded gun by picking a high N-count partner (notice how I said "partner" and not just …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 07:41 PM
1

If that data existed I would have heard about it on here. Right, because TRP has no problem posting data that shows their preconceived notions to be false...oh wait. we know sluts tend to be bad for relationships. Bad (or less suited) for long-term traditional monogamous and exclusive relationships? Sure. But there are a few outliers who are into polyamory and other open types of relationships. But my point, which you keep missing, is that nothing PROVES that women sleeping around makes them una…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 07:37 PM
1

They should rethink their hedonism & socially abusive behavior. This catastrophe never happened before women became selfish assholes. LOL. Wow, men by and large still run most major government and economic bodies, even in the West. But yeah, it's all women's fault!....uh, nope. If you were more charitable & owned up to your mistakes perhaps this would've been more constructive a criticism, but since you insist women's irresponsibility isn't responsible for our current predicament then sorry, no.…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 07:26 PM
1

I'm "rustled" because you are blaming feminism and women for social problems they are not responsible for. A big problem in delaying marriage is the "education bubble". It was, by and large, men who decided to subsidize college loans with government money, which is what has led us into this current unworkable mess.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 04:50 PM
1

feminism causing young women to be more interested in fun than parenthood Actually, no, people in higher socioeconomic strata having fewer children has way more to do with the very high cost of raising children and educating them, and the fact that people in lower socioeconomic classes now prefer to have children before (or ever) marrying. And the fact that they are less likely to use birth control for a variety of reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 04:02 PM
1

There is no data on male sluts and divorce risk I am aware of. Then look for it. It's out there. Mansluts are more likely to divorce and less likely to be happy married to one partner. Not surprising, actually, given that men in general are more likely to cheat on their partners than women are. You have no proof that would-be sluts would end up unhappy or divorced if forced to marry early. And you have no proof that they still wouldn't end up divorced and having sex with many partners after marr…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:38 PM
1

And many can be blamed on bad decisions by male politicians and bankers. Many can be blamed on Wall Street, for instance.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:32 PM
1

The graphs tell us something is very wrong in the mind of a slut. They tell you that maybe male and female sluts aren't really the best bets for long-term monogamous partnerships. Trouble is, that would be true even if these people were forced to marry as young virgins. Sluts would end up as unhappy wives and husbands longing to break free from the intolerable bonds of monogamy. Therefore, giving sluts the freedom to be sluts is a good thing, for them and for society as a whole.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:29 PM
1

Yes, and you know what? Those things can't all be blamed on feminism. In fact, many of the decisions that led to those things can be blamed squarely on men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:21 PM
2

Search correlation Ding ding ding. Here's something you might not realize: correlation does not imply causation. Proving something is causative is much more difficult. Ergo, the fact that women and men with lots of premarital sex partners divorce more may just be because they have restless personality types, or high sex drives, or a high need for variety. Those graphs do NOT prove that premarital sex partners means they can't "pair bond" anymore. They may have never pair bonded anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:17 PM
1

Yeah, sorry, that's not the way the rest of the world is going, let alone the Western world.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:13 PM
2

Such as?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:10 PM
2

I believe it impairs future pair bonding with whatever mate you end up with, essentially. Key words: I believe. This is your opinion only and has no basis in scientific fact. The chemicals released in the brain during sex are designed to help you couple and bond to that person, facilitating successful family formation. They also get released during breastfeeding, and even playing with your dog.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:07 PM
2

Before women went to college they were forced to hitch up with a reliable, successful beta at an early age, that's the whole point here. And this was a good thing, in your eyes?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 03:03 PM
2

this That blog post is ridiculous. For one thing, that blogger is so dumb he can't even get the name of the fraternity right ("Phi Beta Kappa", lol). For another, there's no evidence anywhere that UVA Jackie slept with Ryan Duffin. On casual observation and common sense very few rape accusations are true, the overwhelming majority of rape convictions are false and unjust Yeah, right, says the blogger who pulls this completely out of his own arse.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 02:57 PM
1

Anddddd how is he the red pill idea of an alpha? He has a baby face. And he's only 5'7".
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 02:54 PM
1

You do realize the Nuclear families plummeting into flames right? In the lower classes it is. In the middle-to-upper-middle classes, it's doing fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 02:54 PM
1

And why do so many women wind up with violent/abusive/criminal men? Because "low-tier" women from lower socioeconomic strata often come from violent homes so that's all they know. Most middle-class-and-above women don't end up with those men, or they tend to leave them.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/16 02:48 PM
6

Or orphanages! Even better, amirite?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/16 03:30 PM
3

The criteria of the program would make it so it heavily targets high crime neighborhoods and neighborhoods who have far more people on the welfare system. If successful, the program would eliminate a lot of problems. So basically, the poor and minorities. No way that would be constitutional. Or humane. Problem is, nobody has come up with a good way to deal with unwanted children. There are no good options really: 1) Forced contraception/sterilization -- this is now generally accepted as a human …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/16 03:30 PM
5

For example, when a woman asks a guy to hold her purse, some would say the correct response could be. LOL I always ask my husband to guard my purse, not hold it. So why not respond with, "I'll guard your purse and keep it safe!". That way she understands you are still being masculine while holding it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/16 07:12 PM
2

To be honest, I don't think a women-only society could keep civilization/progress at the level to which a male-only society could (that's assuming if the male-only society didn't all kill each other). But I don't believe it would completely collapse, either. Regress, yes, but eventually I think it would continue on.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/16 05:41 PM
2

Women disappear: restaurants become self-service. More like: Women disappear: worldwide wars break out as men slaughter themselves over petty slights, leaving a completely decimated population of only strongest survivors without the potential of reproducing.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/16 04:58 PM
7

There are fewer women in those roles than men, but they DO exist. And most women are capable of this thing called "learning" that would assist in training up those who need to learn, just sayin'.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/16 04:56 PM
1

I think the US's nuclear arsenal would be OK. My SIL is a nuclear engineer who services submarines. There are fewer nuclear engineers who are women than men but they DO exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/16 04:55 PM
2

On demand? Not necessarily. You do realize that to a man, "Love" means "respect" and sex, right? So you speak for all men? I already said I think spouses are generally entitled to sex with their spouses, unless they agreed otherwise. What is meant by "support"? Financial? Emotional? Moral? All that apply.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:41 PM
1

Love, support, fidelity, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:35 PM
2

Yes, I do, for some of those. I don't think a wife can demand that a husband can drop everything and clean the floors RIGHT NOW. I do think in general, though, that it is reasonable to expect he will help around the house.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:24 PM
2

That's why I don't understand the position that women married to BBs and alleged low libido women in DB marriages claim an entitlement to avoid sex with their husbands. Aren't they also required to take their husbands' feelings into account? I generally agree, although I don't think husbands are also entitled to sex-on-demand. But I think it is cruel and wrong to deny sex to your partner on a long-term and regular basis, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:20 PM
1

Can you answer the question -- what if your husband had a series of ONSs with several someones who were meaningless to him? Is that >OK with you, given your view that sex is important, but only when there's an emotional connection, and has only the meaning a particular individual ascribes to it? No, I would not be OK with it, because he promised sexual fidelity in marriage, as I already said. Would I end the marriage over it? Probably not. As I said, I would feel much less hurt by those actions …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:15 PM
2

Not to mention, but I wasn't chiming in to weigh in on whether sex is important or not in the grand scheme of things. What i took issue to was your claim: Women bond to the first few men they have sex with, and that bonding happens whether those women want it to happen or not. Which is completely false, both in terms of current scientific research and my own experience. The subjective importance of sex is really unimportant to my overall point that your claim re: virgins and bonding is opinion a…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:07 PM
1

No, I did not. Go back and reread carefully.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:03 PM
2

I didn't agree with that particular quote. I said that sex from a subjective perspective tends to be more important when you are emotionally connected to the person you are having it with. The deeper the bond, the more the likely importance to her emotionally. That's why it's fallacious to talk of a woman bonding with a man she has sex with merely due to the mechanics of the sex act. The bonding happens due to the emotional connection that is or is not there.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 02:00 PM
1

The second quote isn't mine. And anyway, the original point of my responding to you was not to debate the importance of sex, but to debunk your pseudoscientific claim re: virgins and alleged pair bonding, which have no basis in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:55 PM
2

I said sex is more important the more connected you are to your lover. My husband and I are legally married, so we have deep emotional connections as well as legal connections to each other. And as we had traditional marriage vows, we vowed to be sexually faithful to each other. So yeah, we have the right to expect sexual fidelity from each other. That being said, if my husband cheated, I would absolutely have an easier time forgiving a one-night stand with someone he didn't care about than forg…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:47 PM
3

Not made up. Women's bodies produce bonding chemicals when they have sex and when they orgasm. Those chemicals are produced involuntarily. Take a gander at this article. Key quote: But when it comes to casual sex, Feldman said, no one has done studies on humans to measure oxytocin and emotional entanglement. "The findings are not there," Feldman told LiveScience.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:41 PM
1

Yeah, pretty much, although it's not a matter of want. Sex tends to be more important the more emotionally connected you are with your lover. I believe there are psychological studies that found that women and men both tend to enjoy sex more when they are having sex with someone they are already emotionally bonded to. What a shocker!
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:35 PM
2

So, to you, sex isn't really all that important, right? Way to twist what I said. Sex absolutely can be important to me. That particular sex act, the one in which I happened to lose my virginity, was not. On the other hand, the first time I had sex with my now-husband was VERY notable and important....but that's because there was already an emotional connection there.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:31 PM
2

Was he sexually attractive? Was the sex good? Not really and no, not really. I wanted it to check the box, so to speak. I was 26 and still a virgin and I was getting neurotic about it. I also suffered from a crippling shyness around men. just an activity you did with a guy who just happened to be there? Pretty much. Although he had been pursuing me for a while. But there was no emotional connection, so really, it was just checking a box as I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:24 PM
2

His name was Mohammed, he was an immigrant, and he had a daughter. That's pretty much it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:03 PM
2

Citation needed. What is your "solid science"?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:02 PM
3

Women's bodies produce bonding chemicals when they have sex and when they orgasm. Those chemicals are produced involuntarily. You have no control over it. It's not magic. It's biology. You mean oxytocin, something that also gets released in childbirth. If you were correct, then the more children a woman has, the less dedicated she should be to any man. But that is blatantly not true. This "pair bonding chemical" things was a belief promulgated by an anti-abortion, anti-contraception, pro-sexual-…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 01:00 PM
2

Women bond to the first few men they have sex with, and that bonding happens whether those women want it to happen or not. This is an agenda point disguised as fact. I did not bond to the man I lost my virginity with at all. You keep citing this as though it's an established fact, but in fact it is just your personal opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 12:57 PM
4

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. With the caveat that the best predictor of future behavior is recent past behavior. There's a big difference between a woman who was promiscuous as a teenager but has been chaste in her 20s and one who is still promiscuous in her 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 12:56 PM
2

everyone should have control of their own (consensual*) sex life without being judged by others. Like others have said here, I agree that what you do shouldn't make you free from judgement. That being said, you can always ignore those who would judge you negatively.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 12:51 PM
1

Children born through IVF are less likely to be well-adjusted and thriving?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/16 01:45 PM
1

Dude is gorgeous + quite charming + obviously tall. Shovel face. LMAO. He's average height, pasty, has no chest hair, and he has a rather flat face. I got the "shovel face" nickname from the YouTube Honest Trailers about the Twilight movies (very amusing, check them out). If you want women who are truly beautiful you gotta be a 6'6'' brad pitt with a 20inches cock and a bank account the size of Bill Gate's. LOL. Yeah, the more desirable the woman, the more you have to be desirable yourself. Hard…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 02:46 PM
0

Christian Bale had nothing to do with 50 shades the film, just FYI.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 09:58 PM
1

A chad is a tall, handsome man who can be slim like professional runner, or well-buit. David Bowie was bisexual. Oh, and he used to wear a lot of makeup. How would any TRP consider this guy a "Chad"?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 09:56 PM
3

Tall, perfect face, perfect body, hair etc. Which is what all of the guys on the lady boners have. Lol. One of the guys featured there on the front page is RDJ, who is 5'8" and is also age 50. Also Tom Cruise is there, who is distinctly NOT tall at 5'7". I see a pic of Christopher Eccleson there, who is tall but doesn't have a "perfect face" because he has a big schnoz. Formerly cucked Robert Pattinson aka "shovel face" is also featured there. And so is Adam Driver, who is very tall and muscular…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 09:43 PM
6

but aren't first mates supposed to step in to steer the ship when the captain fails? Yep. If the captain is running the ship aground or into an iceberg, it's a dereliction of the first mate's duty to just stand around and watch and not try to stop it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/16 11:15 PM
5

Because any many worth of the balls hanging between his legs will, once they realize what happened, will pull their socks up real quick since they will realize that they can't provide a future for this family with the way he's behaving now. But again, AGAIN, he has to come to this, with YOUR support. Not always. My late grandfather gambled away his salary and never got over his gambling addiction. My late grandmother genuinely loved him and stood by him and never complained and never would have …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/16 11:14 PM
1

Do you honestly think that women actually care about "STD"'s when they are cheated on? They do when they get infected with the other woman's STD. A friend of mine whose hubby cheated and subsequently gave her HPV was pretty steamed about it. Another friend of mine divorced her husband when she found out he had fathered another child while she was pregnant with his kid.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 06:52 PM
2

Taking someone back doesn't necessarily mean tolerating cheating. A coworker of mine had an affair that lasted a year and his wife took him back after he 'fessed up (guilty conscience). The only reason she took him back is that she thought it was better for their two children to grow up in a household with two married parents. That and he promised to never cheat again. I bet if he broke her trust again, though, she'd leave him in a heartbeat. Fool me once and all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 06:50 PM
1

Or father a child with another woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 06:48 PM
1

Because pussy. Isn't that putting the pussy on the pedestal, though?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/15 02:46 AM
1

I just hated the idea of being seen as one of those douchebags who was selfish and "sexist" in bed. Given how you phrased your original post, this is exactly how you come across.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 11:38 AM
1

9/10 guys I talk to agree that they want a submissive woman, who will dress up for them, blow them, try anal with them, let them tie her up, etc. without expecting the exact same in return. Do you realize how selfish that makes men sound? What about all of that male selflessness, honor, loyalty, etc. we keep hearing about on TRP? This makes the alleged 9/10 men sound like petulant, narcissistic little boys. If I wanted to try anal, she needed to be able to peg me. Why not have you experience the…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/15 11:36 AM
1

the US is rather exceptional with most states having 17-18 as the age of consent. I thought it was 16-17 on average for US states.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/15 12:03 AM
1

It's not meant to say that a man can only be one or the other Have you been on TRP very long? Because honestly, there have been countless threads on there on alphas vs. betas, and it's pretty clear that the mods and ECs view alphadom/betadom as a strict either/or.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/15 12:49 AM
-2

is there something about the chronological aging process that enables the knowing of such things? No, but there is something about the life experience process that does, or at least should.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/15 11:25 PM
0

Because at 40 year old you should know better that most of your problems lie within, not without.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/15 09:22 PM
0

So beating boys will make them better men?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/15 09:21 PM
2

No, it's here to debate Blue and Red pill principles, not TRP principles exclusively.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/15 07:45 PM
3

because TRP is a community revolving around men's sexuality But of course, this isn't TRP. Did you forget what sub you were in?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/15 08:41 PM
2

Bingo!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/15 01:13 AM
2

Parents will always love their children more than anyone else. Not necessarily. I speak from experience on this one, my mother having disowned me in my adulthood.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/15 10:07 PM
11

To give you an idea, men will love like women love their children. What man would dread or dump his child for putting on a few pounds or acting bitchy? Yet you see men in TRP and MRP ready to divorce or next the women in their lives for issues such as this. Girl goes traveling abroad by herself? NEXT! Girlfriend wants to go hang out with slutty friends at the beach? NEXT! Wife puts on 30 lbs? Dread game her and next her if she doesn't lose it fast enough! and on and on. Sorry, it's pretty clear …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/15 10:01 PM
7

No, that's not the case for men, and it's this difference that is alarming to men initially. Then why is Married Red Pill full of men who seem to be contemplating divorce if their wife doesn't lose weight/accept the new TRPey them/give up controlling family finances, etc.? That sounds like awfully conditional love to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/15 10:00 PM
7

Actually, I just told him about it in the context of telling him some creep online accused me of "mudsharking". He said you were an asshole and that was all he said. Then he went back to his computer. QED -- my husband is the exactly the person I thought he was.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/15 05:03 AM
8

No, my husband is a sane and rational man...and a much better human being than apparently you are.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/15 04:53 AM
11

you know that's why slutty white girls hook up with black guys. I wouldn't know, as I was never a "slutty" white girl, although I did lose my virginity to a black man. there is a difference between being conquered and being the conqueror. Ah, I see, women are automatically "conquered" by having sex with men, and the men are "conquerors". Even if the woman initiates the sex? LOL. Have fun back in the 17th century.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/15 02:23 AM
4

You honestly think that without the idea of "big black dick" and taboo white girls would be as attracted to black men as they are today? Get real. Actually, it's increasingly less taboo for white women to sleep with men of other races, and it's also becoming more common.... that fact kinda shoots a hole in your pat theory there, doesn't it? I bet that was part of your motivation for being a mudshark Stay classy, brah. As for TJ he would never acknowledge a possible black child. You're shifting t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/15 12:45 AM
3

I do think you are disgusting for having sex with a lesser evolved more primitive ethnic group. Yes, just like those horrible race traitors Thomas Jefferson and Strom Thurmond. They shoulda been run out of town, I'm telling you. In an ideal society you would be exiled. This is not sane people's idea of an "ideal" society, so fortunately it will never exist. You probably do know someone like me they just aren't going to tell you. I don't doubt that many people have reservations about interracial …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/15 01:20 PM
2

I personally would never date you or a woman like you. That's my prerogative. Not disputing your prerogative. Just sad that you apparently find women like me as "dirty" and "spoiled". Then again, I would never want to date someone like you either. Or even know someone like you. They do it as a part of a sexual experimentation phase instigated by media depictions of black male sexuality. And you know their interior thoughts and motives how?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/15 11:55 AM
1

Generally it's for one reason and one reason only. Which is? Seriously, I don't know what you're getting at here. I dated a black man before I dated white men, and I'm white. Not because I was looking for anything special about black men, but because I happened to meet a really nice black guy through a computing group and he made me feel comfortable in his presence, and typically I was very shy with men, so we clicked. And dated. And broke up. And then I married a white guy many years later. I a…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/15 07:30 PM
4

What about a woman who dated a black guy but then decides she wants to marry and have kids with a white guy and celebrate her white heritage in doing so, yadda yadda? Why is she then irreparably damaged somehow just because she was touched by a dude of some other race? Please do explain.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/15 06:56 PM
3

Marry and have kids in your early 20s Bad advice. People who marry in their early 20s (before 24 IIRC, especially the bride) have a much higher divorce rate than those who marry mid-twenties or later.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/15 05:56 AM
1

Jesus you're delusional. No, I'm not. You're interpreting what I said through how YOU see the world, which isn't how everyone sees the world. Is that really so hard to understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/15 02:20 AM
2

'Why haven't you've had a dick inside you yet'? Said no man ever Not true. Just as with women and men, some men (not going to speculate on how many, but they exist) look for "social proof" that other men have desired his woman. Also, they don't want to have to teach the woman how to be a good lover. Ex-boyfriend was not a 'tard, but he was in fact with me mostly for sex, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 06:38 PM
6

I believe this person is saying that she (?) was virgin shamed by a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 05:06 AM
8

Can confirm. I was virgin-shamed by my first real boyfriend because I was a virgin at 25.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 05:06 AM
0

women have a taste for weaker and lower status men, its just that more powerful men stopped them from exploring it. I'm saying that women, if given the choice and freedom to do so, would probably have given way more than a measly 1/17 men (less than 6% of men) a chance to reproduce, yes. Consider that the women of the FLDS church have virtually NO say in whom they marry, and are married off to the church elders at very young ages. Given the chance, I'm sure a good number of them would prefer not…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 01:08 AM
1

Women actually believe that they should be completely safe to walk through downtown Chicago, at 2am, alone, unarmed, drunk, and wearing a halter top and booty shorts, and that nothing bad will ever ever happen to them. Some women do -- typically outspoken rad fems. I don't think most do.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 09:57 PM
3

And I am saying back then, 4,000 to 8,000 years ago, men probably were aggressive and fought off/killed other men for access to women. And it's likely the strong, powerful men actively prevented weaker men from having the women by controlling the weaker men's access to women in the first place. This dynamic still exists in chimp tribes and with the FLDS church, for example. So basically, this is an argument saying that what TRP leads to is a bad thing for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 09:53 PM
2

I literally had a girl admit this to me in so many words Except that your story says nothing about the girl desiring the guy due to sexual preselection. Rather, it speaks to her own insecurity about her SMV and why this man-ho has't approached her yet.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 09:44 PM
1

But it's as /u/illimitableman has said, it's not because virginity in itself is problematic, but because of what it entails - especially these days where not having had sex at a certain age is the exception, not the rule. Right, but that holds true for men as well. It's not the lack of sexual experience that's problematic, it's what it signifies.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 09:41 PM
1

Based on a study that came out a couple years ago and was much touted in the press, Dutch women are the happiest because they tend to have this type of work/life balance. women spent time working in the domestic sphere. Yes and no. On the farm, women weeded, tended crops, planted, milked cows, helped the farm, paid the help, and tended the books. In fact, you could consider the man's duties mostly "domestic" in that sense too, in that they were focused on the homestead. People in general didn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/15 09:35 PM
3

Yes, but harder to the same degree? Pretty much, yes. Women with a high number of sexual partners are fundamentally damaged in some way I would say the same of anyone with a high number of sexual partners, male or female, is probably damaged.....just because for most people extreme promiscuity is damaging, just as it can also result from mental/emotional damage. But I also don't think such a person is irreparably damaged. Contrary to TRP maxims, I know a couple of former sluts who are happy moms…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/15 08:12 PM
5

I do not believe that a man becomes damaged the same way women do if he has many sexual partners. But the data show your belief to be largely bunk. A manslut has a harder time remaining committed to one marital partner and being happy in a marital relationship compared to a previously chaste man. women were not "allowed" to slut it up without suffering consequences. And of course, neither were men. They were forced to be feminine and good housewives for their husbands. No. The idea of "housewife…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/15 07:23 PM
4

if someone forced them to keep their vagina closed. As long as men likewise were forced to keep their zippers closed as well, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/15 03:37 AM
1

The Taliban is not known for their super conservative nature No, when it comes to women, they absolutely are. Remember what women were treated like when the Talibs ruled Afghanistan? I think you are confusing the Taliban with Al Quaeda.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/15 03:35 AM
20

Men cheat righteously... Yeah, sure, tell that to my (now divorced) friend whose husband knocked up another woman when she was 8 months preggo. Tell that to my friend diagnosed with cervical cancer due to HPV, gotten from her last boyfriend who cheated on her...and who got it from the other woman. (I posted this to TBP, but it fits here too).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/15 07:49 PM
9

No, sex is not the same thing as intimacy. I've been having sex for 17 yrs now, and I'm married, and I most certainly do NOT take intimacy for granted. Real intimacy is emotional, based on a shared relationship and connection. Sex can be one important way to express intimacy, but it is not intimacy itself. Thinking sex is intimacy will only leave you bitterly disappointed when you find it it's not what you were hoping for.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/15 11:36 PM
1

It may be okay for men to be short an unmanly, but they aren't going to get any coitus Tell that to the numerous short, fat, balding guys I know who are married.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/15 10:47 PM
2

The Incel Games! Catching Pussy! I think you just inspired a porn series.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/15 10:45 PM
2

Alas, having sex with someone does not guarantee intimacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/15 10:38 PM
6

Or they could organize charity mission trips for the incels to go en masse to Nevada once or twice a year. Rent an Incel bus, have a road trip, the whole 9 yards.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/15 07:49 PM
1

2) Public schools are dominated by women, there are very few male teachers/male role models. So women hold boys to girl standards. I think that has been true for a while, and not just in public schools. I went to Catholic school K-12 and all of my teachers were women. The only male teachers I heard about my friends (in public school) having were those in HS math and physics courses. If you think this is so terrible, why not start encouraging more men to go into K-12 teaching?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/15 11:38 PM
3

Re: what you said re: #2...Ok, let's say for the sake of argument I have the experience of being raped by a man (which I have not in real life). Does that justify the hypothetical me posting "all men are scum who rape women if given the chance"? Why or why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/14 12:09 AM
4

2, 3, 21. Nope, I really meant ALL women are awful because ALL women will pull this shit- if you let them. I think "Evil" might be a bit strong but...AWALT [3] Personally, I don't think that comment is reasonable in any context. I will grant that is the lowest up voted, at 4. The other two are at 18 and 19 up votes as I post this.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/14 08:12 PM
5

I think http://www.reddit.com/user/BluePillProfessor is a respected commenter at TRP, actually. And he's a mod at MarriedRedPill. Some of those choice quotes are his, and notably are at 20+ up votes.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/14 05:35 PM
2

15, actually, according to Wikipedia. And it wasn't a happy marriage because he cheated on her numerous times. Hardly a shining example here.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/14 05:30 PM
2

Still want to stand by that? First of all, let me be clear, they are both utterly rephresensible. But, I still maintain that in today's day and age, with child support owed to children fathered out of wedlock, a man fathering another kid with someone is just as bad as a woman fooling him into raising someone else's kid in most cases, simply because it takes resources he could otherwise be investing in his own wife and kids. Now, if the guy is rich, obviously that lessens the negative impact on h…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/14 03:59 PM
5

Don't forget that these are modern norms and by no means applicable to any society. They are applicable to advanced Western societies, particularly the ones we have in most of the US, Canada, and Europe (though these ideas are also present in some other societies). Ergo, these standards are pretty relevant to most of us who post here. Who cares what they did in Europe in the 1600s or do today in rural Bangladesh? I mean, it was and still is part of more backward societies to stone adulterous or …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 05:02 PM
5

No, a wedding is an exchange of vows at its most basic; typically those vows promise lifetime committment. I had a wedding when I got married, but I didn't have a "big party" or "bride day".
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 04:38 PM
1

Umm, wedding = long term committment. Granted, they don't always end up long term, but that is the point of wanting to get married in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 02:54 PM
2

it may become inconvenient if your man has children with another woman when he's supposed to support these, but it doesn't cast your own maternity into doubt. I think "inconvenient" is a huge understatement. The woman I've known who have found out their man fathered a child outside of their relationship felt incredibly betrayed and hurt, and promptly dumped the guy. Think about it -- if a man now has to pay child support to some other woman's kid, that takes away from the resources he can spend …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 02:50 PM
3

something alien to women What??? This is bass ackwards -- women are more likely than men to seek committment.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 02:47 PM
2

Promiscuous men are generally high value in a multitude of ways which is why they are able to be promiscuous. Except they tend to have higher divorce rates, be less satisfied with their partners, and higher STD rates. So, himbos are no prize either, basically.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/14 02:47 PM
1

Why are we supposed to accept the basic premise that gender is a purely social construct? Personally, I don't believe that premise. I think gender is partly social and partly biological.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 01:51 AM
3

but men have done more to invent and advance technology on the whole, and that's the point. Yes, no argument there...but then again the percentage of men who have done this is a very tiny percentage of all men. Most of us, male or female, aren't special snowflakes whose names get written down in history books, period. I find the constant refrain of "men were almost solely inventors and made great scientists and blah blah" that comes from TRP to be rather tedious. I just don't buy the idea that y…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 01:50 AM
8

Because men ONLY care about looks when choosing someone to marry. Right.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 12:53 AM
2

Unless you learn to cook from Julia Child.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/14 09:17 PM
1

Umm, don't you mean on "her"? Or do you think she gender-identifies as male?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/14 06:40 PM
11

most women have never contributed anything of actual worth to the advancement of society. Ditto for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/14 06:38 PM
3

Listen to yourself for a change: the behaviours of these consenting adults looks unacceptable to me Having your throat grabbed or having your head forced down into a man's crotch without being asked beforehand if these actions were OK with you is not consenting to those behaviors. That's why these actions constitute assault. Yes, it's true that he probably would not get arrested without someone pressing charges, but the fact is that his actions are such that charges could be pursued against him.…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 06:18 PM
2

Whether she seems to be enjoying it or not. The Japanese women in that video shilling for his seminar didn't seem to be enjoying his behavior. One was actively trying to resist having her head forced down. Not to mention -- where is his proof that women really wanted or responded to this? How do you know Julien Blanc is anywhere nearly as successful with women as he claims to be? "It didn't look right TO ME... thus Julian Blanc must have been a criminal." If he was walking around forcibly grabbi…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 05:52 PM
0

it is strange not a single woman has come forward against him. Maybe they were embarrassed.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 01:23 PM
4

These women did because they wanted to. In that video he posted, it's pretty clear at least one of the women didn't want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 01:20 PM
2

he has not been banned from Australia Now he has, praise Dog.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 01:09 PM
5

Oh no a man touched me! get the fainting couch out And maybe this is why more women aren't calling the cops on this guy. They don't want to be perceived as "overreacting". That still doesn't make what he's doing OK.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/14 01:08 PM
1

Well said. I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 11:21 PM
1

Rodger
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 11:19 PM
2

Well, it's true. I've never seen a women turn a guy down because he's too good at attracting women. Even typing that lasts sentence out made me chuckle at how ridiculous that idea is. I have! Seen a hiimbo turned down by a woman who didn't want to be just another notch on his belt.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 10:41 PM
6

Umm, nearly all my friends are more lefty than me, and so is my husband, and all of them work hard at their jobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 10:34 PM
2

Premature ejaculation still involves having an orgasm. And while circ'd men have some sensitive skin removed, in no sense does this mean that they can't have any pleasure at all from sex. And who is forcing men to wear condoms, exactly? That's like saying women are forced to take the pill, which is ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/14 10:28 PM
1

That's just a stereotype, got any evidence to back it? Many, many studies have been done on promiscuous teenage girls (data collected from STD-treatment providers) that found most of them came from bad family backgrounds. Promiscuity also correlates with low self-esteem, impulsivity and recklessness, also common to people from abusive homes and upbringings. Girls in homes without their fathers don't just sleep around more, they even go through puberty earlier. A study of college girls who were p…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/14 08:34 PM
2

Gee, like TRPs assume negative things about every woman? And I'm actually not assuming anything. Everything I've said about her was framed as a hypothetical.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/14 11:10 AM
2

Well, the guy in this case was taken anyway. Are you asking me if, he were single, he should have dated her? Because no, I certainly don't think he owed her anything. But that doesn't mean she can't be a good partner for someone else, now that she is older and wiser.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 11:21 PM
2

She didn't say she liked him, just that she realized now that she was stupid not to have given him a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 10:52 PM
1

Ok, let me explain -- MGTOWs are retaliating against feminism by destroying their own ability to form happy familial relationships. Google "Pyrrhic victory".
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 10:35 PM
2

Umm, because all people -- men too -- tend to make at least some terrible decisions when young? Because making mistakes and learning from them is part of being human? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the guy in this scenario should have taken her back, even if he was single, but neither do I see this woman as completely and irreparably corrupted by her mistakes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 10:30 PM
1

Stats? I know this is red pill conventional wisdom, but do you have any real life research to back this up? I know of several couples, including my own parents, who stayed together through the husband's job loss.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 10:26 PM
0

Opting out (MGTOW)/going redpill are ways to retaliate against feminism. Talking about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Men in good relationships are happier and healthier than men who are alone. Statistically speaking, they also get more sex. Oh, and they live longer too. Also, RP men like to taunt feminist women by saying they are a dying breed by virtue of having few or no children, and thus are weeding themselves out of the gene pool. But MGTOWs are doing the same exact thing. "Yes,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 09:09 PM
2

If somebody came up to you and said "well, I really don't like getting together with black people. they're great and all, it's just a preference." that makes it ok? Yes. People are allowed to have their own preferences when it comes to romantic partners and shouldn't be shamed for those preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 09:05 PM
1

If she decides she prefers to sleep around instead why does that make her less developed as a person? Maybe she just doesn't like exclusive relationships. Generally speaking, promiscuity is a red flag on many counts. It's not PC to say it, but very, VERY few women are happy living a promiscuous lifestyle full of hookups with no emotional connections. Very promiscuous women tend to emerge from abusive childhoods, no or little father contact, and other negative situations. Of course, I think male …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 08:49 PM
1

Would love to see the debunking research. Got links?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 08:45 PM
2

The idea that most relationships are loveless and exploitative (at least from the female side) is what most non-TRPers see as retarded. Yes, and myopic as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 08:44 PM
1

The repeated description of "he has a good job" as a positive trait in a husband is an indication of women's want, not for "true love", but for a man who can provide. Don't forget that being able to keep a steady job is also a mark of good and stable character. Perhaps women care as much about that than as how much the guy can support her. After all, don't women now bring in about 40% of income for double-income households? Most women now expect that they will have a career or at least a job whi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 08:43 PM
1

Do you actually know women who find that remotely pragmatic? Ha ha, yep. I used to hang out on and argue with the feminists on the late Ms Magazine boards. More than one posters who were mothers of female children posting how they hoped that the girls would turn out to be lesbians so they could live their lives free of men and male violence. Lotsa feminist crazy there. They even turned on each other, resulting in the mods getting sick of the infighting and closing down those message boards. Pers…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 06:16 PM
1

Most women who slept around in their youth simply put two middle fingers up at the idea of consequences. Citation needed. Where are you getting this information? In the earlier post you said You paint this caricature of TRP'ers hating evil women, when it's merely men making pragmatic decisions for themselves. Kinda like feminists who urge women to make the pragmatic decision to avoid relationships with men, as all men can potentially rape them.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 05:39 PM
1

It's fairly well accepted that barring some major life trauma, most people are set in their ways past age 25. Right, and I'm not arguing against that. I'm saying that many young women realize that being a "slut"/sleeping around is a bad idea and leads to heartache BEFORE age 25. This is why considering only a woman's "n count" without any context is shallow, because young men and women both tend to make a lot of mistakes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 05:14 PM
1

The problem with this is that RP'ers know very, very well that most women who express this aren't genuine. No, they ASSUME it. They (very solipsistically) assume that they understand exactly what women think and what their intentions are (hint: always evil). Also, in what universe is a woman of 20-24 hitting the "Wall"? As I argued previously, there is a big difference between a woman who was a slut only in her early college years and then abandons that lifestyle and a woman still sleeping aroun…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 04:41 PM
2

Again, he hadn't change in the meantime, if anything, he was (physically) less attractive at 29ish than he had been at 22. It was just that he now had qualities as a provider (and she didn't have one). But she had changed in the meantime. Yes, women change too; they make mistakes, and if they are smart they develop more wisdom and empathy. She probably wised up, got more life experience, and realized she had made a terrible mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 04:34 PM
2

Yep, exactly. The fact is, most young women quickly find out that 1) ONS are unfulfilling for most young women, and typically don't even lead to female orgasms -- because ONS usually results in jackhammering, not "stimulating the clitoris" -- and 2) That having ONS is a horrible strategy for trying to attract a lasting, monogamous relationship with a young man.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 04:28 PM
5

One user making one argument about one woman's actions in one specific and complicated case does not equal "all women are not responsible for their actions".
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 02:15 AM
2

I don't see that this is different than what I said before. Can you enlighten me on the contradiction? I haven't seen hard data that says high n women tend to marry high n men. But, when considering that women prefer men with experience and SMV equal to or greater than their own, I don't think it's an off-the-wall conclusion. High n women are almost certainly more disdainful of low n men or male virgins than lower n women would be. Also, high n women are more likely to socially interact with and…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:58 AM
9

Really? The Blue Pillers in this forum are the ones who are always trying to argue that women shouldn't be held to any standards because its unfair to expect women to be in any way accountable for their actions. I don't read this forum every day, but I really have not seen anything posted here that supports this claim. On the contrary, the BPers here seem to have no problem calling out crappy female behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:32 AM
1

Hmmm, is there direct evidence that these "post cc" women tend to marry men with partner counts lower than their own? Without hard numbers, it's all conjecture. One study I saw said that women and men both tended to have about the same number of partners over a lifetime.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:25 AM
2

Well, the man in this case was a minister, and her father (also a minister who went to the same seminary as son-in- law) and mother fully approved of her marrying the guy, so I don't think he counted as a "bad boy". Not knowing the ins and outs of his personality, I can't say if there were red flags there, but superficially he seemed a good catch to her parents. I heard of this woman's situation from her dad, whom I know personally. I think of this as a big tragedy because she seemed to do every…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:18 AM
2

It matters in that you may be limiting your pool of potential LTRs, thus making it that much harder to find one. Because being in a happy LTR or better yet, a happy marriage, is good for women and men and society. RPs like to point out the common phenomenon of women setting their standards for men way too high and then complaining about the lack of good men, or worse yet, feeling ENTITLED to "better" men, which I agree is both all too common and sad. And we know how much TRP hates single mothers…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:07 AM
3

I know someone who did this too, and divorced her husband due to his infidelity. I don't think these women's chances are "in the shitter", though.....bad, yes, but not that bleak. I find RP's claims of single mothers doomed to spinsterhood to be greatly exaggerated. I know several upper middle to middle class single moms who have remarried. My own studly cousin married one with 4 kids. Secretly this makes me a bit sad, though, as they aren't having any more kids, so he won't have any children wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 12:37 AM
2

So burden of proof for your claim is on you. Nope, because it is much more difficult to prove causation than to prove correlation. One study alone isn't enough. If you are claiming causation here, that burden of proof is on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 12:32 AM
3

why would I even bother with Olivia or Susie if I can find 10 girls who have an N-count of 2 or below? Because those women (25 and above, anyway) are 1) quite rare, 2) probably have strong religious views that you might not share, and 3) might very well have extreme shyness or other sexual hang ups that you might find undesirable. Also, while n count matters, to make that the most important criterion for mate selection outside of the context in which those Ns were accrued would very severely lim…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 12:04 AM
0

So the woman who had 5 ONSs at 18-19 in college, is an unrealistic example. In all likelihood, she will continue doing 5 partners per year, no matter the new year's resolution she made to stop. Actually no. Susan Walsh of "hooking up smart" did her own research among young college-age women and found this pattern (hooking up a lot early in college, then wising up) was a fairly common phenomenon among upper-middle class college girls who want to marry someday. Hell, this was the pattern I myself …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/14 11:56 PM
3

Yeah, I think what I said is quite valid, because it seems that many "sluts" became that way when young and stupid. I am arguing there is a qualitative difference between an ex slut who wised up by her early/mid 20s and one whose love for thrills and impulse is still there after age 25-26 (when the brain's orbital frontal cortex, seat of judgment, stops developing). And by the way, I married a man with a past history of drug and alcohol abuse and who was also a college dropout-- because he was y…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/14 11:43 PM
2

My thought on #1 -- I wonder if the increased risk of divorce for women with high partner count is related at all to the fact that high n women are going to probably marry high n men as well, and high n men are also bad LTR/husband material statistically speaking. I think it's highly unlikely a woman with many previous partners would marry a male virgin. I know a couple in real life who were both high n and who divorced when he impregnated another woman - and then tried to hide this fact -- whil…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/14 11:40 PM
4

Good reply. My problem with RPers' judging of women's sexual partner count is that it doesn't seem to take into account character development and especially young women's ability to improve decision-making regarding sexual partners as they age. If Susie College has 5 ONS her first year of college when she's 18-19 but then realizes this is a bad strategy for getting a boyfriend and then stops doing it, is she still a slut for having, say, an n of 6 at 25? Isn't she allowed to make mistakes when y…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/14 11:07 PM
13

Given how negatively women are viewed in much of the "red pill" world, I'd go blue if I had to choose between the two extremes. At least in the blue-pill world, women are viewed as adults capable of rational thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/14 05:07 PM
1

But I do get the sense that the average woman feels like she understands men more than they average man feels like he understands women. Yes, I can agree with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 07:08 PM
1

Being submissive in the bedroom is a good way for a man to undermine his leadership and dominance outside the bedroom. But why? Where is your support for this claim? Why would the specifics of sexual situations affect things like respecting your husband as a person or respecting his intelligence?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 04:06 PM
1

Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of this. I think the TRP types exaggerate the cognitive differences between men and women, though. Just because way fewer women are math and physics geniuses doesn't mean the average man has that much more raw brainpower than the average woman. I seem to recall that studies of "g", or general intelligence, found that men and women had on average the same "g". From what I understand about intelligence research, men's intellectual capabilities have a wider distri…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 03:59 PM
2

What's up with the nasty loaded question? This subreddit is supposed to be for civil debate, not put-downs poorly masked as questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 03:23 PM
2

The research of Dr. John M. Gottman. He wrote about this fact in his book on making marriages work. Gottman is unique among relationship experts because he actually does physiological testing on couple interactions in a clinical setting. As measured physiologically by hormone levels, blood pressure and other markers, women experience more intense emotional states than men on average. The ability of females to recover faster from negative emotional states is actually even present in babies, btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 12:40 PM
1

Actually, one objective metric for defining sluthood is whether or not a woman only has sex with men in the context of romantic and exclusive relationships rather than ONS with men she has little or no emotional connection to.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 02:16 AM
2

From what I have seen, your average male is not demonstrably more rational than your average female.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 02:02 AM
3

Male innovative geniuses and inventors definitely outnumber female ones, but be honest -- men like that are extremely rare even among the general male human population. Mozart was a once-in-a-century musician. The average male, even the average male musician, has musical talent much closer to that of Nora the piano-playing cat than to Mozart's genius. Please stop arguing in favor of general female inferiority using extreme male outliers, already!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 02:00 AM
1

Sociopaths feel some types of emotion --notably fear and anger; it's empathy they don't really feel. The point of the findings I cited is that emotions are key to good decision making. These brain damaged people are incapable of using emotions when making decisions. This wouldn't apply to stoics, who also experience normal emotions but don't express those emotions externally. And where are the actual studies that find men tend to prioritize logic over emotion when making decisions moreso than wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 01:16 AM
8

Well, but not all feminists hate men, nor is all of feminism hate speech. Prevailing feminism is the liberal, not radical kind (except in academia, where rads prevail). On TRP, though, it seems the ratio of hate speech to normal speech is pretty high. Then again, I hope that TRP doesn't represent most "red pill" thinkers.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 01:12 AM
1

In short, TRP says that women will make their decisions based mostly on emotions Everyone bases their decisions on emotions whether they realize it or not. Those who can't use emotions in decision making become rendered ineffectual decision makers because they can't prioritize the decisions to be made. In fact, emotions are an important component of effective decision making. See this abstract. And those findings are mentioned in this article: Without benefit of fear, regret, embarrassment, or o…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 10:12 PM
11

Mainstream Feminist philosophy says that women are equal but different to men, but many who embrace the philosophy feel inferior to men, and this manifests as anger and hostility to men, which leads to men being spoken of as inferior. Thing is, TRP types and cultural conservatives love to attack all of the feminist hate-type writing....Valerie Solanas writing about SCUM, Dworkin and Mackinnon stating that all sex is rape, man f*cks woman -- subject verb object, "all men benefit from rape"....and…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 09:59 PM
4

women are better with emotions. Women feel emotions more intensely than men as measured on a physical scale, but women also recover from negative emotions much faster than men, on average.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 09:56 PM
0

The problem with attraction is that women tend to be attracted to men they look up to, and him being a leader is attractive. Hmm. I definitely look up to my husband. But not as my "leader", just as being an all-around stand up guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 05:40 PM
3

Thanks. :) Good to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 05:38 PM
1

he said, "It's okay, I don't mind if 48% of you divorces me as long as the other 52% includes your butt and boobs." Did I strike gold or did I strike gold? ;) Sounds remarkably like what my hub would say. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 05:14 PM
2

Mine was 15%. Yay.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 05:13 PM
3

Speaking of RPW only, we advise women to be sweet, look good, keep his stomach full and his balls empty, so yes, I think this advice would work in all relationships. But don't you mandate seeing him as a "Captain"? What about women who want to do these things (be sweet, fulfill his sexual needs) and yet also don't see their man as their leader/Captain? Do you think such women can be RPWs?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 05:06 PM
5

I do think that there is some validity in what is called "red pill" thinking, and I'm definitely not solidly "blue pill" by any means, but I don't think I could call myself RPW as your sub defines it for one big reason: I don't subscribe to the Captain/First Mate dynamic. You say But if you're with a good man who treats you well, then I think it could work for anyone. I am with a very good man who treats me well. But my husband and myself see each other as partners, not as one mostly leading and…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 05:03 PM
1

I think that stating there are gender roles in part due to biology and that these roles are useful generalizations at a very high level is fine. It's when you start mandating that people conform to these roles -- when they become restrictive -- that they become toxic.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/14 04:51 PM
1

Yeah, in my social circle in college, man sluts were definitely looked down on.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/14 03:34 AM
3

Umm, hello, everyone lies on surveys, not just women. Self reported data is notoriously unreliable.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/14 03:33 AM
1

Why would it make a difference if it's child support from the father or the government? One is a shared cost, one is a burden shouldered by one individual. Sure as hell would make a difference from that individual's perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/14 03:18 AM
1

Yes, totally agree. I don't know the extent of the spermjacking cases, but several of them have come to light in the last few years. Also, as women continue to push the fertility/age envelope, I think it is probably more commonplace now than in generations previous. One of the worst cases was that of a woman who spermjacked her coworker's semen from a blowjob, got herself pregnant, had a kid that he didn't even know about until she sued him for child support--and the courts upheld her claim. Ano…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/14 03:12 AM
3

But only once every ten minutes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/14 12:48 AM
7

Everyone normally uses emotions to affect what actions they make, not just women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/14 12:33 AM
4

Yeah, and some men openly defended War Machine.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/14 12:11 AM
4

Yes, but most people here are saying that's one of the bad things she did. Dread game is emotionally abusive no matter which sex does it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/14 12:04 AM
2

Purple pill perspective: woman with mental issues and binge drinking problems (as told in the chat log) does horrible things and now regrets them, screwing over boyfriend in process. This one example does not apply to all women or even to all girlfriends. Much as the WarMachine guy's beating of his girlfriend does not mean all men do or want to beat their girlfriends. The end.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 11:57 PM
2

Oh come on, plenty of attractive female celebrities have found husbands and boyfriends. You also don't know what rafaeli's standards are....maybe she only wants hunky actors as boyfriends. And the mention of Gosling is precisely because he doesn't fuck lots of women. He is in an LTR with 40 yr old "post wall" Eva Mendes, who is older than he is, and who is having his child.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 11:52 PM
1

Overall I dislike reddit TRP, but there are nuggets of decent info on there. I already mentioned the red pill sites that I do like, however. The point of the people who started this comment trail is that you are free to choose what aspects appeal to you in "red pill" thinking, and I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 12:33 AM
3

I was talking about why openly discussing at least some of the more rational "red pill" stuff on TRP and elsewhere is a good thing for men. That's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 12:06 AM
1

Pretty much. My personal belief is that we're all shallow, and we all go for hot people while ignoring the red flags of bitchery/assholery. I think that this is also dependent on upbringing and on age. For all of the TRP harping on how great young girls are, young girls tend to lack wisdom and good judgement -- as do young men. Time and making mistakes tend to make you wiser and more empathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 11:02 PM
1

You don't know, because your privilege blind you, that men are presumed guilty in a DV situation. I know that for a long while that was true but I'm not certain that it is universally true anymore. I have read of at least some cases where a woman was indeed arrested for DV.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 10:57 PM
4

I am a grown woman, in my fifth decade of life, and yet never have I seen this stuff mentioned in sex-specific contexts anywhere else, with one exception I will mention at the end of this post. Instead, I have seen too many instances among friends and coworkers of a wife scolding her husband in front of others, talking down to him like he's a kid and with condescension and contempt, and yet nobody says anything or blinks (yes, even me, until I started to come around to more "red pill" thinking).…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 10:50 PM
4

Because there are cowed men out there with openly disrespectful spouses who suffer because they keep doing what their wives say they want, thinking this is the good and right thing, and yet the wives keep treating them worse. This is the dynamic my parents had, unfortunately, and yet nowhere did I see it ever addressed except on "red pill" sites. Yes, there are husbands/boyfriends who treat their wives/gfs the same way, but popular culture is a lot less tolerant of this dynamic compared to the r…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 10:27 PM
10

There's aspects of TRP which I agree with and other parts which I don't. Yeah, same here. Although it's not so much TRP that I agree with (I find a lot of it too yucky) but some of the saner "red pill" stuff out there, like some of MMSL and Susan Walsh's "Hooking Up Smart".
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 03:49 PM
1

She's waving her knife and I pop her in her fat mouth. But in this scenario you hit her once. Mack's face definitely shows evidence of more than just one blow. As for the other scenario...I have no idea, I'm not a lawyer or a judge. Hopefully there would be other evidence considered.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 01:56 PM
3

But swollen-shut? Yes. When I look at this picture, the image of her face on the top right doesn't look like "an entire face hideously swollen." Compared with the image on the bottom left, the one of the bottom left might look more swollen but it could well be the lighting. Compare Mack's beaten face to how she looks normally, like here and then tell me her entire face isn't swollen in the post-beating pics. You can see how swollen it is in particular in that one shot of her reclining -- look at…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 06:29 PM
2

There is some blood, but the overall structure of her face seems intact - not "pulp." Her entire face is swollen, she has severe bruising around both eyes (which are swollen shut), a nose that could be broken, and a very obviously busted lip. OK, maybe not beaten to a "pulp", but pretty damn badly beaten. It wouldn't take a whole lot of Halloween makeup from Walgreen's to recreate what we see on her face on somebody else's face. Sure it would, because without latex prosthetics, you cannot simula…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 05:51 PM
3

You missed the point. I'm saying that a man should never fight back in a DV situation unless he's willing to go to jail: No, I just don't think that's good advice if a woman is actively trying to MURDER you with a weapon.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 03:38 PM
6

They say you're never supposed to hit a woman, but what if she comes at you with a knife? Is your solution to RUN LIKE HELL first, and you can only hit her if she has you literally cornered? OK, for the sake of argument, say that Mack came at the MMA guy with a knife. So he could have taken her out physically without having to savagely hit her in the face repeatedly. Probably a few well-placed blows would have been enough to disarm her and knock her down. But those pictures...there was no reason…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 02:37 PM
8

"Why didn't Corey Thomas call the cops?" That bothers me too, to be honest. Yes, she has several injuries BUT it was herself that reported all of them. So it sounds like you are suggesting some or all of Mack's injuries might be self-inflicted? OK, let's say, for the sake of argument, that Mack was lying about missing teeth or having a ruptured liver....Mack still has some very serious injuries as shown in the pics, particularly to her face. Her face obviously suffered severe direct, hard blows.…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 02:35 PM
1

I wasn't directing that comment to you personally. Merely stating a fact re: the negative consequences of male promiscuity. If you don't want to marry, then I'm certainly not going to tell you that you should.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/14 03:28 PM
5

Man sluts make bad husbands in terms of divorce risk, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/14 12:55 AM
2

Yeah, but only men can be sealed to more than one woman, right? And a woman can only be sealed to one man?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/14 12:54 AM
1

Same here. My hubby's family are all LDS or ex-LDS. Great people.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/14 12:52 AM
2

Yes to your comment on drugs...but No to Mormonism's ban on caffeine!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/14 02:07 AM
11

Good advice for both sexes: don't get falling down drunk. Bad for you healthwise and sets you up for sexual encounters you'd be smart enough to avoid when sober.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/14 01:32 AM
1

I also think it's likely she took advantage of his vulnerability from the alcoholism and depression at the time, and it ended up paying off. She helped him get sober 20+ yrs ago and had two kids by him. If she had married him and left him 6 months later, you might have a point. But no, you are grasping at straws to set her up as the evil woman who used Robin Williams. Did it ever occur to you that he might have used her too? That he might have not gotten off drugs and alcohol the first time with…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 12:30 AM
2

And you are right, she left him after he went back to alcohol after 20 yr sobriety.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 12:26 AM
1

First of all very few men were able to do this ever including now, and second these laws were made in the times where women working was rarer. Spiral has pointed out, though, that alimony laws have indeed changed with the times. That is why female breadwinners are having to pay ex-husbands in some cases. Those laws aren't stuck back in the 50s.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 12:17 AM
2

I'm not saying that rape isn't a terrible thing, but this notion that it is the worst possible thing that can happen to someone is being treated as sacrosanct. Agreed. This is one of the many reasons I reject modern feminism. The idea that rape is worse than murder (something a feminist poster claimed online once) and that rape completely cripples a woman for life is just false. Rape is a terrible thing and shouldn't be minimized, but it's something women can and do get past. Can't get past bein…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 04:24 PM
3

While there are outliers, most women will not "marry down" so I doubt we'll see men receiving alimony outside of major career changes within a marriage, such as layoffs for the man or outstanding raises for the woman. Given that women are now earning the majority of college degrees and there are more and more women entering high paying fields like law and medicine, more women are going to have to marry down. It is possible for culture to trump nurture/evo psychology when options are limited. And…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 01:13 PM
4

Lifelong alimony is stupid. So is the $48k monthly alimony David Duchovny has to pay to his successful actress ex-wife Tea Leoni. ....whom he repeatedly cheated on.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 12:47 PM
2

Then the same skepticism ought to be applied to the study that Social Pathologist posted, which TRP treats as gospel, showing correlation between a woman's number of sexual partners and divorce rate. How many of those virgins were really virgins?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 12:39 PM
2

I'm not defending her atrocious behavior, just stating that the encouraging factors here almost certainly outweigh any shame that would deter her from continuing what she is doing on the air. Also it's wrong for you to assume that female viewers would defend her behavior--the majority are probably perversely enjoying watching the train wreck while also disapproving of it. Even lower primates like chimps and gorillas rubberneck at their brethren's train wrecks.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 01:06 AM
2

Well, again, this woman is cucking her husband and broadcasting it internationally. There's no shame anymore. She is flirting heavily with a man, not openly sleeping with him, so technically not cuckolding yet. Also, this brings good ratings and attention and publicity to the woman, which I'm sure heavily outweighs the shame factor. Isn't a core TRP belief that women all want attention? That is probably the #1 reason she's doing it, and the producers love it because it ups the ratings. Also, pre…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 12:28 AM
6

Ask the unmarried 30+ year old women who rode the cock carousel That most young women are riding the cock carousel is a myth; see www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/09/14/.../sex-and-the-pareto-principle/
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 12:21 AM
9

It may have played a role, but it is far from the only reason. He also struggled with despression and has been addicted to drugs/alcohol in the past if I am not mistaken. And had recently relapsed into hard drinking after 20 years of sobriety followed by a few rehab stints. Rehab is damned expensive. I bet that was causing financial strain too.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/14 12:02 AM
10

He was also very depressed over his relapses and his sputtering career. Don't try to pin the blame solely on his problems with women. Did you hear that in his most recent marriage he was sleeping in a separate room from his wife? Have you ever shared a bed with someone who has a chronic drinking problem? I have; I don't recommend it. You wake up in a wet bed soaked with the piss of someone who is too drunk to get up to use the bathroom, or vomit puddles on the sheets, or both. Or to the sound of…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 11:29 PM
7

What if the husband is cheating or in the throes of terrible addiction and not getting help? How are women who divorce men like that gold digging whores? I actually agree with the TRP thinking that a woman who divorces a man for silly reasons like he's boring or she's feeling unfulfilled and then sues for major alimony is unjust to the ex-hubby, but what about those times when the man destroys his own marriage by becoming a raging alcoholic in denial or a serial philanderer? Is the woman here su…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 11:09 PM
9

His cheating on wife #1, including a long fling with the woman who was later wife #2 was a large part of why that marriage ended. His hard relapse into alcoholism and possible cheating on wife #2 killed that marriage. His wives didn't divorce him for "frivolous" reasons, which I thought was an integral part of the "divorce rape" trope.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 10:59 PM
0

Sorry, I responded to the wrong comment. I meant to respond to the question in the last comment by /u/Aerobus.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 04:53 PM
1

Did I shame her by rejecting her? Or was it me stating a preference? Is it possible to reject someone without shaming them? Yes. You don't need to call such a person a dirty slut-ho to make your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 03:04 PM
1

My tax dollars are funding their welfare and allowing them to eat more fatty foods. Then when they get diabetes and heart disease my tax dollars are paying for their health insurance, courtesy of Obamacare. Yeah, well, keep in mind your tax dollars are also subsidizing crops that are used to make a lot of those unhealthy foods, like corn and soybeans. The American gov't is driving the mass production of high-fructose corn syrup. The USDA is no friend to public health, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 03:02 PM
3

I think it comes down to people being butthurt because that person doesn't prefer them sexually. Yes, that certainly happens. The "shaming" of the type most people seem to be discussing here is a defensive action in response to someone's disinterest.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 02:53 PM
2

Interesting article. Note he was shaming food choices mostly, not ridiculing people so much for being fatsos.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 02:05 AM
3

I grew up fat, got shamed by parents, teachers, acquaintances. Didn't make me thin, just made me more depressed, and led to me sneaking and hiding junk food. Oh yeah,and led me to crash diet several times too, before I knew how bad that was. Not being able to stay on crazy diets also led to more depression and hopelessness too. Feeling shame internally can be a good motivator, yes, but I doubt how well external shaming really works. Someone on another subreddit posted a link to a book on a priso…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 02:00 AM
4

Where my friend works, at a health care consulting company, they actually have treadmill desks.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 01:25 AM
3

Shaming has been shown in studies to be a piss-poor motivator overall. Yes, sometimes it works, but sometimes it backfires and makes the person on the receiving end more depressed, thus driving them further into the problem behavior. Sometimes it just makes people angry and defensive enough that they start to tune it out. And you're wrong if you think fat people still don't get openly shamed in today's America. I'm fat, and believe me I know this.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 01:24 AM
7

TRP shames gold diggers all the time. And I have seen examples of non "pill" friends and acquaintances doing the same. A former babysitter of mine had a roommate that she lived with when they were both just out of college who signed up for a dating service to meet men wealthy enough to let her never have to work. Fmr babysitter and her bf both thought that was sickening. Also, why listen to people who try to shame your dating preferences? Your preferences are your own, you don't have to defend t…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 01:21 AM
2

You can be a career woman and still have a good work life balance. I have a fun but def not a super duper demanding IT job. Still have enough time to have a life.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 01:12 AM
2

Not true for my hub and I. We both hate cleaning. He does most of our chores, actually. I like that. But he never learned how to throw out his trash, and I used to nag him about it, but I finally accepted that's how he is, so I do it for him. I also load and unload the dishwasher, because he hates that too. And we both cook.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 01:09 AM
2

No, trp is seen as something terrible because it freely does what women are free to do. Within the boundaries of law, anyone is free to do what they want. But it's ultra hypocritical of TRP to decry when women act irresponsibly, are selfish, promiscuous, manipulative, entitled, and destroy relationships for frivolous reasons but while also encouraging men to do exactly the same. Two wrongs don't make a right and all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/14 02:03 AM
1

Try telling the state of Utah that it's a fringe belief. Also, Mormonism is a rapidly growing sect worldwide, IIRC.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/14 01:50 AM
1

The boner itself? Nah. It feels different when a boner gets touched compared to a flaccid dick, but if you're just standing around naked they both feel the same. Wow, would not have guessed that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/14 01:48 AM
2

My hubby does all that stuff except the anal penetration part, which is fine by me. I like the biting and smacking part. We tried full anal several times, but I never really found it satisfying, even when I was relaxed and he was careful. We stopped when I realized that -- TMI alert -- it left me distended down there for a couple of days. I was sometimes a bit leaky too...yuck. My hubby is bigger than normal on the girth axis, so he left a lasting impression as it were. A couple of ruined pantie…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/14 01:44 AM
1

Being mathematical geniuses and also being exceptionally stupid--men have a wider bell curve for IQ than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 11:20 PM
-1

Personally, I would not get into a car with a strange man, Lamborghini or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 11:11 PM
1

If ideas and concepts are truly ludicrous, they are simply laughed into obscurity, and they go away on their own because they truly lack merit. Not true at all. Take a look a Mormonism, a religion based on pseudohistory that is demonstrably false as well as containing some of the most ridiculous theology ever. Take homeopathy, also demonstrably false. Yet both beliefs thrive even today.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 07:35 PM
4

Yeah, Cosmo has a lot of the "how to drive your man crazy in bed" type of stuff. Never seen any women's mag telling women that they should just use men to get their own rocks off without caring about his pleasure at all, which is an idea I have seen espoused on TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 06:18 PM
10

You are allowed to commit or not to commit to anyone you like (or don't like, as the case may be).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 06:03 PM
3

Countless women's best sellers and women's articles have talked about training men in. The TRP stuff about "training your women" doesn't really bother me, precisely for what you cited. Calling it "training" is a bit demeaning, but, let's face it -- most romantic partners try to "train" each other a bit. Romantic partners tend to manipulate each other in minor and mostly harmless ways in the best of relationships. If this is done without malice and done mostly by positive reinforcement of desired…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 04:37 PM
2

Try my husband. Been married 14 years and making decisions jointly and in the "Disney" way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 04:17 PM
1

This is great and how my husband and I are. He is not my "Captain", we are both "Co-pilots", but neither is he a pushover. He doesn't ask my permission when he wants to hang out with his friends. And, so far atl east, in 14 years of being together, there hasn't been one major decision that we have had to face that hasn't been resolved in some way or another without tearing us apart. And if he makes a bad decision, then we try to do what we can to fix it. Likewise if I make one. Pointing and sayi…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 04:08 PM
4

That says that women are men's social superiors, not that men are worthless fools who need a good woman to train them and lead them. The Rules was a best seller for a while, and then once the fad was over, it fell off the bestseller list. Probably one of the authors' divorce helped kill its buzz. And again, while the Rules had some advice on artificially making men wait and said that women shouldn't ever take the initiative in asking a man out, in no way did it trash all men or say they couldn't…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 04:03 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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