TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SeemedGood Archive

View 5 posts and 16,403 comments by SeemedGood on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 16,403 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

An idea can have power even if you don’t believe in it. For example, it could be said that “taxation is a social construct,” yet it still holds power over me even though I don’t believe in it. Also, define “social construct.”
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 02:04 AM
–

I don’t believe in extramarital sexual intimacy. Better to let her move on (because you’re not obsessed), and give her the requisite encouragement to do so if need be.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 01:58 AM
–

….uh, maybe because they already know how desperate they are, thus the criticism of the dating market? Whereas, your comments imply that you were unaware of the level of desperation. You really didn’t think this one through before typing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 01:30 AM
–

No, not the typo. Nothing from “please tell that to the men here…” logically followed.. It’s as if you were typing random nonsense reactively.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 01:22 AM
–

You didn’t think this one through before commenting.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:58 AM
–

Why would men be here “constantly whining about how hard dating is” if they didn’t already know that “guys do be desperate too?”
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:21 AM
–

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:14 AM
–

Guys do be desperate too.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:09 AM
–

If your wife doesn't want to be sexually intimate with you at pretty much any moment (ie most of the time), you never should have married her in the first place and you should be letting her move on to a man to whom she actually is sexually attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:04 AM
–

Meh. This gives off a weird desperate game-playing vibe, like you expect to be courted and are fishing for attention. The proper response to this is a thank you nod, maybe sending a drink back, and keeping my good time rolling elsewhere. If you're not interested enough to walk up and talk to me, you're not interested enough for any kind of satisfying relationship (ONS or LTR).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:00 AM
–

Awkwardness is actually often endearing as it signals genuineness.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:47 PM
–

Being "horrified" by a woman cold approaching is a very atypical reaction. Women do it all the time, it's not that unusual.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:42 PM
–

Never seen nor heard of a guy doing a free food date. A meal is just not worth hanging out with a woman who doesn't have a chance. Guys will, however, spend time with women whose personalities they don't particularly like for potential sex. And the fewer other options a man has, the more likely he is to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:35 PM
–

Not a point about which to worry necessarily, but you can definitely make a man uncomfortable if you're obnoxiously drunk and grabby or overly verbally aggressive in public. That can often still work for NSA if the guy is himself drunk and randy, but is a turn-off for anything other than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:29 PM
–

The issue is that women want to always retain plausible deniability and the optionality that comes with it. I understand why as being long optionality is generally the better trade unless implied volatility is wicked high... ...but when men have other options (and men who get approached at all generally do), the game playing to hold onto plausible deniability (as distinct from clever flirting) just seems silly and wasteful and indicates that a woman's not really interested enough to be worth our…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:24 PM
–

Men who get approached, typically get approached frequently enough that we've seen it all... Physically, from women we've known forever (and even know that we're married) randomly kissing us out of the blue to drunk strangers sloppily grabbing our junk (or grabbing our hands and then placing them strategically), and... Verbally, from women with whom work or are in our broader social circle (and even know that we're married) playing the long and super flirtatious game over months to women we've n…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:12 PM
3

His “ulterior motive” is that he likes you and wants to spend time with you. 🤦‍♂️🤡
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 10:04 PM
1

Everything the commenter to which you replied referenced in his comment was behavioral.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 02:04 AM
3

You don’t have to be a cat to observe and draw conclusions about how cats behave. It’s called the ability to think abstractly.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 01:06 AM
1

We can pinpoint it though.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 12:51 AM
3

Facts. If I had been half as grabby with women as women have been with me over the years (inclusive of my childhood), I’d be rotting in jail.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 08:29 PM
1

I do ignore the obvious feminist delusional pseudoscience just like I ignore the “science” which declares that men can become women and vice-versa.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 03:36 PM
1

Yes, familiar with the minority chimpanzee subspecies Bonobos, and our human social structures are (and always have been) quite different from theirs, and (like the Ojibwe with a patrilineal/patriarchal family structure, male warriors, and male hunters, where even their mythology places women as caretakers of children) more similar to that of other chimpanzees and most other mammalian species in which the rearing of the young requires considerable parental input over long periods of time.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 03:33 PM
1

You know as much about Paleolithic genetic mapping as you do life in rural West Africa, which is to say nothing. That Hunter gatherer societies of the past would be significantly different than those of today(ish) is highly unlikely. You’ve been watching too many modern movies. Men and women have (and have always had) significant sexual dimorphism of both physique and behavior for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 05:34 AM
1

Had a lot of interaction with nomadic people in the Sahel on the edge of the Sahara, mostly Touareg. And the whole thing about “egalitarian societies in which both men and women were hunters is nothing more than feminist mythology.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 04:59 AM
2

I’ve spent a fair bit of time in villages all over rural French speaking West Africa and know far more about life in such villages than you’ll ever know. And yes, what I said about women’s essential roles stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 04:38 AM
2

Gathering berries, vegetables, and wood, making clothes, fetching water, and (later) cooking, all with children on their backs when not feeding them. Altogether not all that different than how many live in rural Africa now (but with light farming duties like millet pounding, tending the chickens, and taking the goods to the local market with the young children strapped on their backs).
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 03:44 AM
2

I’m saying women’s essential natural roles are that for which the sex exists in the first place and for which Homo sapiens sapiens women have evolved over 250,000 years. Oh, and you must not have actually read the Communist Manifesto. His disdain for the family unit and call for Communism’s abolition of it are plainly stated in Chapter 2.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 01:55 AM
2

…because of a sustained Marxist effort to undermine the family structure by fomenting women’s hatred of their essential nature and roles. Wealth and the power it confers is relative, and women measure men’s wealth and subsequent power relatively. That relative nature will fuel concentration in competition for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 12:16 AM
1

Check out the current and historical standard of living in non-capitalist countries to see how you’re wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 06:57 PM
2

Men desire riches because women desire rich men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 06:56 PM
1

This applies to you too: https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/eFJbmo6h7J
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 06:55 PM
2

Men desire riches because women desire rich men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 06:54 PM
1

It’s never due to that nonsensical victim fantasy because that’s not how economics works. Try banking cartels and government spending (for which new money is created faster than the growth of productivity).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 06:53 PM
1

It does, 100%. I misread your first post and thought you were suggesting repeated asks were coercion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 05:34 PM
2

Sorry, I misread your first post. You are 100% correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 05:33 PM
–

To the extent that you’re willing to ignore the meaning of words, perhaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 05:29 PM
-3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 05:06 PM
1

Not necessarily, the groupthink is actually even worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 11:29 PM
1

You grant universities far too much credit. Source: My father was a professor and administrator at a major US university and I and all my siblings hold bachelors and masters degrees from Ivys (me) and mini Ivys (my siblings).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 07:48 PM
1

You didn’t take note of the distinction between “is not evidence” (a definitive statement) and “if anything…could be” (a double conditional). That’s why I suggested you slow down, breathe, take your emotions out of it, and think through what you’re typing before you respond.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:46 AM
1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_mistake and Firstly, the claim that introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique are anathema to women are not tenets of RP philosophy. Second, that women underrate themselves is not evidence that they uptake honest introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique. Thirdly, if anything, the fact that they tend to underrate themselves could be presented as evidence that they are not practicing honest introspect…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:36 AM
1

Still purchasing (and trying to deploy) those category errors, I see.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:30 AM
1

I said that as proof that it was a category error (ie not relevant). You’re getting all emotional again and not thinking things through. Slow down, breathe, and take a minute to think before you respond.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:28 AM
1

My claim was that your “evidence” constituted a category error (ie not applicable to the issue at hand). Same claim applies.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:21 AM
0

Note the big “would” in that assertion.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:20 AM
1

As I have suggested, category error.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 05:19 AM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/PJr8PaIBCv
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:58 AM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/PJr8PaIBCv
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:58 AM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/PJr8PaIBCv
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:57 AM
2

The content of an entire sub could fairly be considered evidence. Also: https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/PJr8PaIBCv
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:56 AM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/PJr8PaIBCv
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:55 AM
1

Firstly, the claim that introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique are anathema to women are not tenets of RP philosophy. Second, that women underrate themselves is not evidence that they uptake honest introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique. Thirdly, if anything, the fact that they tend to underrate themselves could be presented as evidence that they are not practicing honest introspection, objective self observation, and objective self…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:54 AM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/zLPwZC3xBI
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:47 AM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/zLPwZC3xBI
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:47 AM
2

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/zLPwZC3xBI
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:46 AM
2

It doesn’t seem as if you understand that of which a category error consists. Maybe this will help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category\_mistake
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:45 AM
2

It doesn’t prove my point because it’s entirely unrelated to my point. But thanks for proving my point!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:43 AM
2

☝️apparently category errors are on special today.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:42 AM
3

…and a 3rd category error.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:41 AM
2

☝️yet another category error
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:41 AM
3

☝️category error
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:40 AM
1

Again, you are attempting to draw a false analogy and here’s why: Organ donation requires giving a part of your body to another and losing the future use of that part of your body. Using one’s body to produce sustenance and shelter for one’s children (like in gestation or any other work) does not require one to give a part of one’s body and lose the future use of it. Also, if you refuse to donate blood to your child and your child dies, you will likely be charged and prosecuted with criminal chi…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:37 AM
1

…and again, I ask how is that false analogy at all relevant to the topic at hand? After childbirth women retain all the organs they had prior to pregnancy. Gestation can in no legitimate way be likened to organ donation.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:28 AM
1

Note the big if as your opening word.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:26 AM
1

Nothing you have linked makes any claim that Homo sapiens sapiens is not properly classified as a member of the Kingdom Animalia. Rather, it merely claims that humans are distinct from from other animals, which is obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:25 AM
6

The difference being that RP philosophy is rooted in the use of empirical inquiry, adherence to observable outcomes, and the idea that men must adjust themselves and their opinions to the results of that empirical inquiry and the observable outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:07 AM
8

Feel free to study this entire sub and even your own comments within it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:01 AM
1

As I have already stated, men are legally required to use their bodies to provide sustenance and shelter for their children until they reach the age of majority. The law literally forces us to use our bodies to keep our children alive. And yes, after a lengthy legal process (longer than gestation) you can surrender your parental rights and that responsibility (just as a mother can place her child up for adoption) but during that process you are legally required to use your body to produce susten…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 02:00 AM
1

Are you suggesting that there is not broad scientific consensus that Homo sapiens sapiens does belong to Kingdom Animalia? Didn’t think so. So why this diversion? Simply so you can try to slide in a lame attempt at social shaming?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:43 AM
1

I’m stating that parents should not have a “right” to kill their own children. And I would extend that statement by amending the idea that this nebulous and ill-defined buzz phrase of “bodily autonomy,” whatever it means, does not confer on parents a supposed “right” to kill their own children. As I have repeated many times previously, on the contrary, our society broadly (and rightfully) recognizes a parental duty and responsibility to use one’s body to produce sustenance and shelter for one’s …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:38 AM
1

How did you make it so far academically with such poor reading comprehension? That you did doesn’t reflect well on your almae matres. The title of the book that the author in your link wrote (and upon which the article is based) is: The Gap: The Science of What Separates Us from Other Animals. You may wish to note the adjective “other” in front of the word “animals.”
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:22 AM
1

Can you logically explain how that question is at all relevant to the discussion at hand?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:14 AM
1

That the most accurate denotation and etymology of the word English word “child” disrupt the narrative you require to justify killing your own children obviates neither that most accurate denotation nor etymology. Rather, it just means that you are ignoring meaning in order to justify something you want. The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” describes a relational state which is independent of the states of development of the things being related, for which the most accurate s…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:13 AM
1

The zygotes resulting from the sexual reproduction of a human male and female is most definitely Living, and A member of the genus homo (aka human), and The offspring (aka child) of the male and female who participated in the sexual reproduction
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:09 AM
1

To liken something is not to say that something is “the same.” Rather, it is to suggest not insignificant similarity. You’re attempting to use it as an analogy, which is to liken it. And to do so is entirely false because the two things are in no way similar and share no essentially fundamental characteristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:05 AM
23

As is so thoroughly demonstrated in this sub, women have a strong tendency to associate critique with hate and generally find introspection, honest self observation, and honest self critique to be anathema. Rather, they default to defining what is true by what they want to be true (ie truth is subjective), when in reality the concept of truth itself implies external standardization. Systematic improvement and successful implementation require these two things which women strenuously avoid. This …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 06:05 PM
1

If they both have jobs in which they make average salaries, they are above average as the average salary doesn’t include the roughly 33% of adult men who are not in the labor force.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 05:37 PM
1

Absolutely false. https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fa0032432 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656621000131?via%3Dihub https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19558447/ https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/eli-finkel/documents/EastwickFinkel2008\_JPSP.pdf https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0092-x https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Febs0000162 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0217152 https://www.scien…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 03:24 PM
2

The hoops women will attempt to jump through in order to deny the obvious never cease to amaze me.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 02:07 PM
1

I have never made the claim that elective abortion is murder. Murder is a legal fiction and elective abortion is legal in many jurisdictions. Elective abortion is the killing of one’s own child, however; and establishing a supposed “right” to kill one’s own children merely because you don’t want them runs contrary to the natural duty of a parent to his or her children and enshrines into law a psychopathic level of selfishness and cruelty.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 02:03 PM
1

So you did skip Biology. Mammalia is a class within the kingdom Animalia. It’s a sub classification of vertebrate animals. And yes, many animals may choose to reproduce. However, the reproductive act is completed at conception. After that, the “choice” to which you refer is that of whether or not to kill your child. And yes, some animals do that as well, but very few of them and it’s almost always fathers killing the offspring of other males (so not really their own children).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 01:54 PM
1

For one, likening pregnancy and childbirth to organ donation. Secondly, attempting to establish a right to kill others (your own children no less) simply because those others derive sustenance and shelter from your use of your body. I have made no attempt to define the term “bodily autonomy” as it is merely a trope designed to excuse the establishment of a supposed “right” to kill one’s own children and appears to have no consistent meaning or application outside of such justification.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 01:46 PM
1

I dismantled your logically inconsistent argument (inclusive of the irrelevant “question”).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 06:43 AM
1

It does not follow from such a principle that an individual’s complete control over his or her own body permits him or her to kill other individuals, much less their own children. Also, men are legally required to use our bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for our children until they reach the age of majority. If we do not, we can be criminally charged, prosecuted, fined, have our wages garnished, and even imprisoned. And speaking of prison, you are required to surrender complete control o…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 05:59 AM
1

Did you skip all your Biology classes? The species Homo sapiens sapiens (aka modern humans) are absolutely and unequivocally classified as members of the kingdom Animalia (aka animals).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 05:50 AM
1

The zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are scientifically classified as: Living organisms (aka living), and Members of the genus Homo (aka human), and The offspring (aka children) of the male and female humans who participated in the sexual reproduction . And as such, they are the very members of society (albeit in an early developmental state) who will contribute the future productivity that will be required to sustain you in a welfare state as you age, parti…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 05:44 AM
0

Have your brothers been incarcerated? Did they finish high school? How about college? Do they have jobs? How much do they earn? Etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 05:38 AM
0

Laws are codifications of morals. What is the actual definition of “bodily autonomy” and why does it confer on parents a supposed “right” to kill their own children? I have asked in this thread several times and have yet to be given any answer, let alone a logically sound and consistent one. It seems like a convenient but hollow catch phrase upon which people rely to claim a supposed “right” to kill their own children without having really weighed the issue carefully. Furthermore, women retain a…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 05:32 AM
1

I never made the claim that children don’t rely on their parents to live. In fact, I have claimed the opposite - that parents have a natural duty to produce sustenance and shelter for their children, not kill them. But whether or not someone relies on you to live, that still doesn’t confer on you a supposed “right” to kill them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 06:15 PM
1

Picking for character is being picky. But women are also intensely picky about appearance as well. Men generally do not care or even notice what shoes or clothes women wear, but women notice and care. I noticed that women noticed whether or not my suits were off the rack or custom tailored. Edit: Every single woman with whom I’ve been intimate has made some reference as to “what our babies would look like” at some point. And if I had $1000 for every time a woman flirted with a reference to what …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 05:50 PM
1

…and so you are pickier.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 05:00 PM
1

Children do not “take” a mother’s organs or blood in pregnancy. The mother retains both her organs and her blood during pregnancy (noting here that children often have different blood types from their mothers and could not actually use their mother’s blood or organs were they to be donated). Rather, the mother uses her blood and organs to produce sustenance and shelter for her children, just as fathers use their blood and organs (all of them) to produce sustenance and shelter for their children …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 04:53 PM
2

Why does it take so much time for women? A: Because women are pickier than men?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 06:57 AM
1

Take the same rooms and propose the sexual intimacy after 3 months of dating. Will the woman have a higher probability of having the larger number or the man? I will bet your entire net worth that the man will have the higher probability of having the higher number because… …women are pickier than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 06:45 AM
1

If you would even care to know (and you would) that creates selection bias pressure which skews your selection away from the average.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 03:17 AM
1

So if I put you in a room with 100 random men, 10 of whom are or have been incarcerated, that status wouldn’t inform your choice of which men to approach? Because if it would, you’d be selecting in such a way that your choice would not reflect the average. As I have repeated, women (yourself included) don’t approach average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 03:15 AM
1

If you did not have access to the bodies of others to maintain your survival, you would die in relatively short order. Do you believe that those on whose bodies you rely for your survival (and well being) have a right to kill you? If not, you are being inconsistent in your beliefs. Men are legally obligated to use our bodies (and every organ in them) to produce sustenance and shelter for our children until they reach the age of majority. If we do not do so, we can be criminally charged, prosecut…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 03:10 AM
2

Thought exercise: Take a pool of 100 random men and ask a random woman with how many of those men she would be willing to be sexually intimate. Now reverse the sexes and do the same exercise. What is the probability that the woman’s number would be higher than the man’s? No, men are not pickier than women. Yes, women are picker than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 03:01 AM
1

…and that argument would be both fallacious and invalid as… The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” describes a relational state which is independent of the states of development of the things being related, for which the most accurate synonym is “offspring.” For example, I am still accurately described as the child of my parents even though I have adult children of my own and both of my parents are deceased. Further, the etymological derivation of the English word “child” sprin…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 02:53 AM
1

Depends on =/= donation. And similarly, you rely on the use of other’s bodies (and every organ in them) for your survival, yet you would not suggest that those on whom you rely have a right to kill you because your survival relies on the use of every organ in their bodies. Also, each year in the US more than 3x as many men die while using their bodies (and every organism in them) to produce sustenance and shelter for their children (and wives) as do women, inclusive of death from pregnancy and c…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 02:50 AM
1

Then, again, it would seem that the population from which you are selecting could not be said to actually be average and you are selecting for men who represent an above average predilection for criminal behavior (which is not unusual for women).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 02:44 AM
1

Like the only reason for the existence of the sexes is sexual reproduction, that is also the only reason for “wanting companionship and commitment” within an intersexual pairing (whether or not one is conscious of that dynamic and the subconscious “want” is only derivative of that base desire). Again, the only reason that the sexes even exist is sexual reproduction. Were it not for the (conscious or subconscious) basal desire to reproduce there would be no intersexual pairing. Trying to separate…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 02:41 AM
0

The only reason that the sexes even exist is sexual reproduction. Attempting to separate romantic interest from sexual interest is just delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 12:21 AM
1

Neither pregnancy nor childbirth require women to surrender any of their organs to their children. Women retain every single organ that they had prior to pregnancy after giving birth. The idea that pregnancy and childbirth are somehow analogous to organ donation has no basis in the science of pregnancy and childbirth and is entirely fallacious. Further, you rely on the bodies of others to live. Does that confer on those others a “right” to kill you? As I said, you haven’t really thought this one…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 12:16 AM
2

Is it at least 10% of all the men that you know? And if so, would their record of incarceration (entirety independent of the cause of incarceration) bias you against approaching them? As I have been suggesting, women (yourself included) don’t approach average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 12:11 AM
1

…and yet the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from the sexual reproduction of a human male and female are still scientifically categorized as living members of the genus Homo (living humans) who are the offspring (aka children) of the human male and female that participated in the sexual reproduction.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 12:09 AM
0

It is common knowledge that most women find most men unattractive, so the average man is unattractive to most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 12:06 AM
1

The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” describes a relational state which is independent of the states of development of the things being related, for which the most accurate synonym is “offspring.” For example, I am still accurately described as the child of my parents even though I have adult children of my own and both of my parents are deceased. Further, the etymological derivation of the English word “child” springs from the Old English “cild” and proto-Germanic “kiltham” …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 12:04 AM
0

Romantic interest is sexual by definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:58 PM
1

The men posting here are likely drawn from a Poole whose average is above average in many ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:58 PM
1

I ask because you haven’t really thought this one through (as we’ll see momentarily). So, again, what does “bodily autonomy” mean and why does it confer on you a supposed “right” to kill your own children?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:45 PM
1

I do think that they were all somewhere in the upper half of that distribution, and thus not actually average. Edit: …and yes, whether or not you actually know them has extreme bearing on whether or not they are average. For example, unless at least 1 of every 10 men that you know has been incarcerated, the pool of men that you know is already above average.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:34 PM
3

Average is an objective mathematic concept. You are treating it as subjective. I have merely made the point that what you (and all women) subjectively rate as average, isn’t actually average. It is well known by this point that women do not rate men according to a normal distribution. Rather, they rate men according to an inverse Poisson distribution when the actual distribution of men is, in fact, normal. Thus, as I have maintained from the beginning, women don’t approach average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:25 PM
2

So, as I said, women (yourself included) don’t actually approach average men. Women are actually selective and select based on men being more appealing in some way than what is actually average.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:17 PM
1

And we circle back to… What is “serious?”
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:10 PM
2

So, again, not average. But even if it were, “swiping right” =/= approaching.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:07 PM
1

So, you assert a supposed “right” to kill your own children based on a principle which you can’t even define? That’s so troublesomely violent as to verge on insane. Imagine if a man said: I have a right to kill my children because of primogeniture. Then when you ask him: What is primogeniture? He responds: I don’t really have a definition of it but it gives me a right to kill my children. As insane as that is, fine, give me someone else’s definition of “bodily autonomy” with which you agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 11:00 PM
1

Again, please define “bodily autonomy.” You keep referring to this principle which supposedly grants you a right to kill your own children without actually defining the principle.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:30 PM
2

…without any filters other than area? And even then, the men on Tinder are probably representative of the entire population.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:27 PM
2

So you should be just fine then with approaching 50% of men in that random pool without the conditional. But let’s be real here, you’re not, and you wouldn’t. Thus, my original statement: women don’t approach average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:25 PM
3

See that if you threw down? That invalidates your “average” claim. If you were truly approaching average men, you would be just fine with approaching the 500th man out of that pool without your conditional because that would be average.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:20 PM
2

If I took a room full of 1000 randomly selected men within your age range and allowed you to get to know them all, you would approach any of 500 of them for potentially entering into a sexual relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:14 PM
1

Of course there are economics. Economics is just a language which we use to describe natural markets and the dynamics of mating are most certainly market based as people have and express preferences in those dynamics.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:09 PM
1

Why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:07 PM
2

So, not average then.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:05 PM
1

You keep using it as a justification for a supposed “right” to kill your own children. Given that, you should have a firm idea of what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:04 PM
1

Yes. What does that have to do with “seriousness?” What is “seriousness” as you define it? The woman in question seemed to define that as the ability to receive forward utility (which, again, is why she was upset at the lack of said seriousness).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:03 PM
2

So (under the fair assumption that men are normally distributed) you could have gone to Target and you would have approached at least half the men you encountered there?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 10:01 PM
1

What (exactly) is this “bodily autonomy” to which you refer? Just because I have a right to own and carry a gun does not give me a right to shoot and kill my children with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 09:57 PM
2

What is “bodily autonomy?” That we have a right to bear arms does not mean that we have a right to kill our own children (or anyone else for that matter). Why are you conflating those two disparate things?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 09:40 PM
1

Are you suggesting that marriage defines the difference between a serious relationship and a casual one? If so, why?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 09:37 PM
2

No, it’s not called “bodily autonomy.” It’s called the “self defense” defense, and elective abortion does not meet that legal standard. Yes, I do believe that the people’s right to organize militias to protect the security of their free states requires that the government be restricted from infringing upon the people’s natural right to bear arms. However, that does not mean that I believe that people have a “right” to kill their own children because they wish to avoid the natural duty of care th…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 09:21 PM
1

Enlighten me.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 09:15 PM
2

So they were not average then?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 09:14 PM
3

So, why were you approaching them?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:58 PM
1

…and why does that matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:56 PM
2

True, abortion isn’t murder. Murder is a legal fiction and in many jurisdictions elective abortion is not illegal. However elective abortion very much is the killing of a living human that is one’s child no less and as such is the ultimate form of violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:41 PM
3

I made no such association. Rather, I said that the concept of “investing in oneself” has a self-centered focus that will produce self-centered results and that self-centered results tend to be toxic. To that I would add that the self-centered focus is typically a result of fundamental insecurity, and “self-confidence” born from attempting to “fix” fundamental insecurity is false. I also suggested that true (and positive) power extends from curiosity and an outward focused energy. But it is true…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:33 PM
1

It’s quite easy to understand actually. What is the difference for her between a “serious” relationship and one that’s not serious? Why (exactly) was she upset that he was not “serious” about the relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 08:22 PM
-3

Anyone who’s ever tended bar can tell you that women sexually harass women far more frequently than the other way around. If I had sexually harassed women as often as I have been harassed by women, I’d be writing from jail with no prospect of getting out. As to violence, even research based on reports shows that woman are nearly as physically abusive as men not counting the male underreporting and are more emotionally abusive within the context of relationships (where the vast majority of abuse …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:56 PM
-1

The problem is the delusion of separating romantic interest from sexual interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:26 PM
-2

The bulk of the “research” is based on reports. Men report being victims of violence and sexual harassment far less frequently than do women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:24 PM
-1

Of course it does, but pair bonded relationships between men and women are rooted in sex and sexual desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:21 PM
-1

Not really.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:19 PM
3

Words have meaning and (as I demonstrated in my response) meaning matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:06 PM
-1

The entire and singular reason that the sexes even exist is sexual reproduction. The entire reason that men and women form paired relationships is sexual. Of course it was all about sex from the beginning.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:05 PM
8

…and not average.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 07:02 PM
6

Women don’t approach average men. If a man is being approached by women, he’s most definitely significantly above the average.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 06:14 PM
4

You forgot the part where he observes you always choosing to eat something other than burgers.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 06:08 PM
-1

Women are more frequently violent when rejected than are men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 06:06 PM
2

Yes, effort is needed to accumulate power, but it’s not so much “investing in yourself” as it is just being curious, energetic, and wanting to do things for others. The “investing in yourself” idea suggests an inward borderline narcissistic focus that corrupts the energy that generates actual power into a toxic form of power (to which women are all too frequently also attracted).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 06:04 PM
-2

Perhaps you should stop pretending that sexual relationships are not about sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 05:54 PM
3

This take ignores the economics of the situation. The men to whom women are genuinely attracted are in very short supply and very high demand. Playing the passive game puts women at the disadvantage in that market condition.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 05:51 PM
4

It’s less that men are put off by women approaching and more than women are approaching men who are “out of their league” (noting that I think that’s a terribly inadequate phrase, but you get the idea) and very frequently already have a significant other or a full roster of less significant others.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 05:47 PM
1

Being a man who gets approached isn’t really about what we “invest in ourselves.” Rather, it’s about the extent to which we signal power in some combination of physically, socially, financially, intellectually, or spiritually. Power is what attracts women and if we signal enough power women will approach and make themselves available.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 05:42 PM
1

…and that’s a problem for her because?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 01:40 PM
1

That the woman in question’s definition of “serious” was predicated on the expectation of receiving forward utility is clear from his retelling.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 05:11 AM
1

You know because she is upset that she is not getting more. No reason to be upset unless she expected more than the enjoyment of the relationship that she had. She is upset because she (and the OP) felt like she was investing and wasn’t going to see the expected return. Investing implies the expectation of return (utility). Had she been in the relationship solely for the enjoyment of the relationship without regard to expected future utility there would be no reason to be upset.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 10:25 PM
1

Because if she defines “serious” as the receipt of some forward utility. Otherwise, there would be no reason to feel betrayed. She felt betrayed (and the OP concurred) precisely because she was not going to receive the utility that she expected. He obviously didn’t feel betrayed, or as if he had been shorted in some way because he didn’t have any expectation of receiving forward utility in exchange for being in the relationship. Rather, he simply appreciated the relationship itself for what it w…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 10:15 PM
1

As I said at the outset, the OP’s perception (and apparently yours) is that both “serious” and the focus of the relationship = the expectation of receiving forward utility rather than enjoyment of the relationship itself. Otherwise, there would be no reason for the woman in the relationship nor the OP to be upset and complaining. If you enter into relationships for the enjoyment of spending time with the other and without the expectation of receiving some forward utility, there is no cause to fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 09:07 PM
1

As I said, the commenter made it obvious that her valuation of the relationship was not based in the contemporaneous enjoyment of being with the other person, but rather on the expectation of obtaining some forward utility. Her definition of “serious” was solely rooted in obtaining the forward utility rather than appreciation of the relationship for its own sake (meaning the entire point of the relationship was obtaining the forward utility as opposed to enjoying the time spent with the other pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 08:49 PM
1

Reading comprehension? That’s what she believes the woman in question “paid” in anticipation of the receipt of some other utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 08:24 PM
-1

Themselves transactionally, and themselves non-transactionally.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 03:55 PM
1

“He spent a year getting consistent sex, validation, affection, and food and presumably other benefits like support with tough situations etc.” …implies that there was a transaction for which the above was paid and for which a return was expected.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 03:14 PM
1

Yes typical male asking for some hard facts and cold logic as opposed to wild conjecture about feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 03:10 PM
1

We don’t. Perhaps you should try arguing against the actual claims.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 02:58 PM
1

Her entire argument was predicated on the fact that the woman in question would be foregoing anticipated future utility. You haven’t thought this one through.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 01:56 AM
2

Critique =/= bigotry =/= hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 12:40 AM
0

“I merely follow what women say about themselves to their logical conclusions…” You may wish to develop a better understanding of the definitions of logical fallacies before calling something a logical fallacy lest you make your ignorance obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 12:38 AM
0

I merely follow what women say about themselves to their logical conclusions. And the logical conclusions stemming from what most women say about relationships is that their relationships are centered on the expectation of receiving specific utility, often in exchange for being sexually intimate.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:23 PM
2

Your post is full of straw men. I’m simply asking you to make a non fallacious assertion about specific men’s assertions.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:18 PM
1

Being sad about the loss of something you enjoyed and feeling “used” are not the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:17 PM
2

Say what things specifically?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 05:18 PM
3

As I said, we understand the value of the semantic deception (read: Vietnam was a “police action” not a “war”), but back in reality Vietnam was actually a war.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 05:14 PM
5

Women are the sexual selectors of the species. You act, we respond to your choice-making actions rationally. Tension exists because you collectively lie about your actions in order to maintain a fallaciously positive self image, some men believe those lies, and then wonder why the math isn’t mathing. When they eventually work backwards to discover a rationalizing formula which makes the equation balance, you get upset that the formula which accurately rationalizes exposes the fallacies you propa…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 05:10 PM
4

“I am not a prostitute” vs. “people need to educate themselves on sex work as a whole” 🧐 We understand that the employment of euphemism and semantic deception is important in your line of work for legal reasons, and maybe for the preservation of one’s self image, but the use of such euphemism and semantic deception to create technical loopholes for the law (or self-conscience) does not alter the fundamental nature of a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 04:54 PM
7

…or women put themselves on a pedestal, portray themselves as an ultimate prize to be won, view relationships as markers of status, and some men believe it. And then those same women get upset when the men who don’t believe it point out that women are merely humans who have become accustomed to a favorable supply/demand distribution and using that favorable distribution to their advantage.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 04:44 PM
1

Not sure you understand the meaning of “transactional.” A transaction is when you exchange one thing for another, not when you engage in a mutually enjoyable activity. It is transactional when (as you stated above) “women provide sex” (among other things) within the context of a relationship with the expectation of receiving some other utility from the relationship. It is not transactional when two people are sexually intimate with each other because they both enjoy being sexually intimate with …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 04:28 PM
1

Nothing I have said contradictory, nor is anything I have said bigoted. That you are unable to understand that relationships have intrinsic value distinct from the forward utility you expect from them does not obviate that intrinsic value. Rather, it simply means that you don’t value relationships for anything other than the forward utility they may provide you. And that you have made your relationship value system obvious enough for me to summarize with the above sentence makes me neither bigot…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 04:10 PM
3

Nope, not transactional. My wife expects no other utility from me and I don’t expect any other utility from her in exchange for sexual intimacy. We are sexually intimate with each other only because we want to be sexually intimate with each other, and it’s been that way since our first date.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 07:20 AM
1

We got married because we wanted to formalize our relationship, for however long it lasts. Time is not the factor which makes it valuable to us.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 07:17 AM
5

As would my wife. What is the point of being in a sexual relationship with someone with whom you don’t wish to be sexually intimate?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 03:28 AM
5

Nope. What makes it serious is that we enjoy each other’s company - no matter how long or short the duration of our total time together, and it has been that way from our first date. And the duration doesn’t matter because what makes the relationship serious is not the expectation of future utility that we will garner from it, but rather the joy that it brings us in the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 03:27 AM
3

Apparently you are the one viewing the relationship as a transactional one in which sex is exchanged for some other utility. Those were your words, not mine. As I said, I appreciate my relationship with my wife for its own sake, regardless of the duration of the relationship, because I appreciate her, not the future utility that I expect from a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 03:00 AM
8

Wrong. You may wish to reread my comments for better reading comprehension. I appreciate the relationship independent of the duration of the relationship or commitment, because I value the relationship for its own sake, not the future utility I expect from it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 02:57 AM
7

And you can only “get used for it” if you look at it the way in which you apparently do: as a payment made in exchange for the receipt of some other utility (aka as if you are prostituting yourself).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 01:08 AM
8

I don’t view it that way, I just appreciate my wife (and always have) for each and every moment that I get to spend with her, not for what she may or may not do for me in the future. And if our relationship were to have ended (or will end) at any moment, I would have appreciated (or will appreciate) it for all the moments I had with her, rather than feeling like a victim because I didn’t receive some anticipated future utility. …and that’s because I actually love my wife, not just utility I expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 12:57 AM
9

That’s your definition. Why do you have that definition? Answer: Because to you the value of the relationship is the extent to which it produces future outcomes which will garner expected future utility, and (sadly) not the interaction with the person with whom you are in the relationship. The relationship in your eyes is simply a tool for garnering future utility and nothing more.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 12:08 AM
7

Your definition of “serious” is interesting. The idea that a woman would enter into a relationship for something other than the current enjoyment of being in the relationship and that her future plans are what determine the “seriousness” of the relationship is the main problem, and are what leave her feeling betrayed. In fact, she betrayed herself by entering into a relationship based on the expectation of receiving some other utility than the present enjoyment of the relationship and thus felt …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 11:13 PM
1

…because the idea of (insert your identity group) “rights” is a red herring designed to inflame division and victim mentality, and …because we recognize that we have responsibilities to others and our societies as a whole (“it’s not all about me and what I want”), and that such responsibilities sometimes require self-sacrifice. While it is debatable for which ideas we should be fighting and dying, if men were unwilling to fight and die for certain ideas the world would be a much worse place in w…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 12:57 PM
9

Red Pill Philosophy exists because men did listen to women and took them at their word. If men didn’t listen to and believe women, TRP wouldn’t exist. There would be no need for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 01:24 PM
1

That you genuinely don’t care about truth has been made obvious by your previous comments, inclusive of your original misrepresentation. No need to reassert it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 02:11 AM
1

That you want something to be true, doesn’t actually make it true. Etymology works according to linguistic rules, not your particular predilections.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 02:02 AM
1

But yes, many men will want (and pay for) women who want money for sex. That doesn’t change the fact that they etymological root for “whore” refers to the desire of the whore and not the desire for the whore.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 01:59 AM
1

I’m just here to speak truth into a void of delusion. The extent to which you are thankful for that will be the same as that to which you value truth over those delusions which you find appealing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 01:56 AM
1

While that may be how you’d like to see it, that’s not an accurate portrayal of the etymological root.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 01:30 AM
1

Not really. Etymologically it has meant “adulteress” and “prostitute” stemming from “one who desires” not the object of the desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 01:26 AM
1

…and to his point, she’ll come back of her own accord if it is anxiety and the interest is genuine enough to support any kind of healthy relationship. Women tend to be much more observant of men who they actually find attractive than we are of them. And if they actually find you attractive, their enthusiastic interest will likely have been set before you even notice them. In fact, they will likely be (and have been) placing themselves in your close proximity because they are enthusiastically int…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 01:02 AM
-1

I did not attempt to refute any assertion of yours while simultaneously stating that my sample was skewed. Not the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 08:34 PM
0

Your argument is self contradictory. And that self contradiction is easily explained by the parties seeking divorce having an unrealistic view of their own circumstances pre and post… …which suggests advantage so extreme that delusion festers.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 08:32 PM
-1

…based in an anecdotal analysis in which you admit that your own data is drawn from a skewed population.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:51 PM
0

Your take.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:48 PM
1

Divorce statistics and the outcomes from them suggest otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:48 PM
1

“I definitely know more 35 year olds than 20 year olds” That would explain it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 07:47 PM
2

You are treating 3 significantly different things as if they are alike.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 05:35 PM
0

Great example. It is always wrong to kill your own innocent children.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 05:33 PM
3

In the realm of sexual relationships, men are significantly disadvantaged relative to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 05:32 PM
2

We all know many 35 year olds who are less mature and settled with less life experience than 20 year olds that we know.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 05:31 PM
–

Good ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 06:38 AM
–

Women are “allowed” to have whatever preferences you wish. Just take responsibility for them and their effects on yourselves, men, and broader society and don’t play the victim game when you get criticized for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:32 AM
0

Calling someone a female humanoid is dehumanizing? 🤦‍♂️
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 07:07 AM
2

The concept of a “double standard” only applies when the two things to which the standards are being applied are the same. Men and women are not the same. Also society, including men, readily admit when our preferences are shallow.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 10:21 PM
1

The concept of the reasonable man standard exists for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 06:37 AM
–

In theory, yes. In practice, unless it was something like reconstructive after an accident it would signal a level of insecurity/superficiality that would not be compatible with an healthy LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 01:19 AM
2

My wife is one of those ultra rare women that will drink when led to water. I married her, in part, because she was willing to be introspective, objectively self observant, and objectively self critical enough to mature out of pure solipsism and develop a healthy respect for prioritizing that which is true and subordinating that which she merely wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 07:58 PM
1

Our observations have not been limited to a particular age cohort. If anything we find younger cohorts of women to be even more solipsistic, less likely to view their husbands/boyfriends holistically, and even more likely to use sexual intimacy as a control mechanism.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 06:07 PM
6

Over my lifetime I have watched matriarchal culture, single motherhood, and the marginalization of “low value” men utterly decimate both the half of my extended family which took that path and our broader black American community in general. That movie doesn’t have a happy ending.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 05:57 PM
1

English your second language? You don’t go out to pay $150-$200 per person for a steak dinner if you’re not hungry. Similarly if you’re hungry and walk by three other restaurants to get a burger, you were hungry and wanted a burger.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 03:10 AM
0

That’s not coercion.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 02:15 AM
-2

Keep that same energy for women who won’t engage in sexual intimacy until certain other conditions are met.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 02:14 AM
3

That the dude had to declare this just demonstrates that he was behind the 8-ball anyway and that he is so unaccustomed to being in front of it that he didn’t even realize he was behind the 8-ball. The sentiment is sound, but if you have to make that explicit you should have already cut bait and recast elsewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/26 02:02 AM
1

☝️This idea defies basic logic to the point of being entirely nonsensical. If person A desires to engage in sexual intimacy with person B without the expectation of receiving any other utility than that gained from engaging in sexual intimacy then person A has sexual desire for person B in that moment by definition… That’s what sexual desire is, the desire to be sexually intimate with another person. If you didn’t desire to be sexually intimate with that person (ie have sexual desire for that pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 09:21 PM
1

If one feels sexual desire and wishes to engage in sexual intimacy with the person “who is there,” the “person who is there’” is sexually desired by definition. What may not exist is the desire to do anything other than be sexually intimate with that person, but the “anything other” is not sexual desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 08:42 PM
0

If the sexual desire is genuine, then it will not be conditional on the receipt of some other utility. If it is conditional on the receipt of some other utility then the genuine desire is for that other utility and the sexual “desire” is just being offered as a means of obtaining that other utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 07:53 PM
1

You might wish to reread my comment for better understanding.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 07:46 PM
5

That you only find 2-3% of men attractive is pretty standard among women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 04:35 PM
0

Lack of imposing transactional conditions on sexual intimacy =/= being indiscriminate. Rather it means that the sexual desire is genuine instead of being a control mechanism via which other utility is garnered.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 04:33 PM
1

From what my wife and I have observed from other couples over the nearly 4 decades that we have known each other, the vast majority of men in relationships do not experience genuine sexual desire from their wives and (to a lesser extent) girlfriends. The sexual desire from the wife/girlfriend is almost always conditional on the man producing some other form of utility for the woman, and thus not genuine. My wife, especially, is consistently shocked at just how many women aren’t genuinely sexuall…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 04:31 PM
0

She desires to be sexually intimate with a given man with no expectation of receiving anything other than the sexual intimacy (aka desires casual NSA sexual intimacy with him) and is willing to initiate such.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 04:11 PM
1

Worse than raping children? That’s extremely unusual.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 08:35 AM
0

And none of that feeling is specific to people who exhibit psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behavior or to people who are particularly manipulative because generally, no one ever thinks anyone “would be capable of doing something like that” because of the egregiousness of the crime.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 08:31 AM
0

As I said, people are always shocked when anyone does anything like that because it’s so egregious.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 06:43 AM
1

People are stunned when anyone does that because it is so egregious a crime and not indicative of master manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 05:23 AM
0

That’s because they didn’t care that he was manipulative, not because they couldn’t see it. They all knew he wasn’t objectively “the greatest guy ever,” it just didn’t matter that he wasn’t. And they didn’t care because it wasn’t important in the context of the relationships that they had (because they weren’t married to him and sleeping with him).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:29 AM
1

He was sleeping with his friends, family, and male co-workers?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:15 AM
1

He was sleeping with his friends, family, and male co-workers?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:14 AM
1

As I said, easy to spot for the objective observer. Yes, less easy to spot when one is attracted to the psychopathy and narcissism which breed manipulative behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:07 AM
1

People who are not attracted to “bad boys” (aka men who display psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian traits) find manipulative behavior offputting, not attractive. And manipulative behavior is very easy to spot when one is an objective observer.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 01:57 AM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/4pzl0lM3HJ Noting especially that the first study quoted controlled for traits correlated to psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian tendencies and found that women actually prefer psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 12:12 AM
2

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273809664\_The\_Dark\_Triad\_personality\_Attractiveness\_to\_women https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-019-00213-0 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886921005547 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S019188691500210X?via%3Dihub Noting particularly the following quote from the first study (which controlled for attractiveness factors correlated to psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian tendencies):…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 12:07 AM
1

People who display those traits are only charismatic to those who are attracted to those traits, those who are not attracted to those traits typically label such people as “assholes.” And all the rebellious characteristics which you have described as “bad boyness” (drug use, materialistic orientation, disregard for family, Epicurean philosophy, and disregard for society) are exactly the characteristics which makes one a less reliable and loyal producer (and which also stem from an orientation to…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 11:44 PM
2

What, exactly, do you mean by “bad boy” (noting that “excites me” is not a sufficient description)? Women typically say that they wouldn’t be attracted to psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behavioral tendencies, but studies consistently prove otherwise..
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 10:05 PM
2

That’s because you are conflating “bad boy” with “sexually adventurous/exciting” when the only connection between the two is that women are more likely feel sexually excited by (and have a predilection to be sexually adventurous with) a “bad boy.” Back in reality, the characteristics to which women are attracted that make up the “bad boy” persona are psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behavioral tendencies - all of which are antithetical to the state of being a reliable and loyal produce…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 09:25 PM
4

I made no such claim nor any such implication. What I did say is that the state of being a “bad boy” is dichotomous with the state of being a “loyal (and reliable) producer” because those are inherently contradictory states.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 09:10 PM
4

You are correct that it is difficult for minimally conscious women to find their ideal match, but it is difficult precisely because their subconscious attraction cues are, in fact, dichotomous and also rooted in raw solipsism. Being a “bad boy” precludes being a “loyal producer” and vice versa, but both are derived from the objectification of the potential mate as merely a tool for the acquisition of wants and the achievement of goals. Thus, it is incumbent on women to mature beyond the base dic…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 06:19 PM
–

This isn’t a difficult concept: We desire women who authentically desire us (individually). The best way to know whether or not a woman authentically desires us (individually) is her willingness to be sexually intimate with us (individually). And the idea that women are either Madonnas or Whores is a fallacy women use to project their own dichotomous “bad boy vs. dedicated producer” attraction onto men. Unlike women, our attraction is not dichotomous. Real women are quite capable of desiring lot…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 11:12 PM
4

The only way in which you can be “used for sex” is if you are engaging in sexual intimacy with the conditional expectation that you will receive some other utility in exchange for engaging in the sexual intimacy (aka prostituting yourself). The “used” feeling comes from failure to receive the thing which you Intended to use your sexual intimacy to gain. You were using yourself to get something and it didn’t work out like you planned. If you aren’t looking to use sexual intimacy transactionally (…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 09:15 PM
–

Good thing we have an entire sub field of mathematics devoted to understanding exactly this issue!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:16 PM
0

If “incompatibilities” will lead one to abeyance of a promise to spend the rest of one’s life together, it’s not much of a promise. Incompatibilities will always exist and new ones will develop along the way. The point of the promise is that one will subordinate the importance of the incompatibilities to that of the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 06:35 PM
1

“We loved each other as long as we weren't sharing a home.” …which simply means that you didn’t actually love each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 06:31 PM
-1

…or maybe the analogy of women requiring different amounts of utility from different men for engaging in sexual intimacy. If someone is charging you for a thing, then you have to purchase it if you want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 03:55 PM
-1

Most people can understand how analogies work.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 03:40 PM
0

Do you frequently pay $15/dozen for the same eggs for which the person in line before you paid $3.50? If not, then you’re insecure.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 03:35 PM
1

In my experience women’s libido is most definitely not lower than men’s, it’s just much more selective. If women are actively (read: actually) sexually attracted to a given man they typically have very high libidos relative to the man and if they are only passively (read: not actually) sexual attracted to a man they will tend to have much lower libidos relative to the man. The issue is that women frequently enter into relationships with men to whom they are only passively sexually attracted - in…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 01:09 PM
0

And it would also seem that you misunderstand that of which slavery consists. Members of a crew who are not the captain are not slaves.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 01:39 PM
0

You don’t seem to understand the dynamics of respect. They start with a realistic assessment that has nothing to do with how you may want a situation to be and everything to do with the reality of how the particular situation actually is.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 01:37 PM
-3

Are you talking about a supposed “right” to kill your own children?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 02:12 AM
1

All time pro troll post. The comments are comedy gold.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 02:43 AM
-3

Do you have a copy of said contract? And to say “nope,” and subordinate her wants implies that they have been “thought about.”
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 11:49 PM
-3

Every time you subordinate her wants to the truth of whatever situation and the needs of the family unit in that truth you are only “breaking the contract” to the extent that “the contract” stipulates that her wants should take priority and it only “contributes to the breakdown of the relationship” to the extent that she maintains a childlike expectation that the purpose of the relationship is to service her wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 11:41 PM
1

You should probably bother to read the whole of the things you link before linking themt: “but a substantially larger difference emerged for participants in early and middle adulthood (3,275 WPD; d = 0.32)but a substantially larger difference emerged for participants in early and middle adulthood (3,275 WPD; d = 0.32)” Noting that “early and middle adulthood” was defined as 25-64, which is the vast majority of the time that we are considered both men and women and that the 3,275 figure approache…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 11:36 PM
1

Putting the needs of the family unit first very frequently means telling your wife “nope, we’re not doing that,” and “what you want is and will always be subordinate to that which is true and the appropriate response to that truth.” The issue in our modern society is that women conflate “the needs of the family unit” with “what I want” and the church is too emasculated to say “nope” to that conflation, aka too subject to “happy wife, happy life” thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 11:10 PM
–

It has been my experience that women enjoy sexual intimacy at least as much as do men, and quite possibly (I would say probably) more. It has been both my observation and that of my wife that if a married woman is feeling put upon by unwanted sexual attention from her husband it’s never because she doesn’t want sexual intimacy. Rather, she just doesn’t want sexual intimacy with him, and (in every instance) has already selected another man (or men) with whom she does desire to be sexually intimat…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 01:46 PM
0

I will bet you your entire net worth that the vast majority of the time your black friends have hear the “n-word,” so vast as to be verging on exclusion, it was similarly being used by someone who most definitely didn’t hate black people.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 01:48 AM
–

Having grown up black in the South right after desegregation (and being among the first black people to attend the schools to which I went), my experience with the “N-word” is that 99.99% of the time that I have heard it the word was being used by someone who most definitely didn’t hate black people. At the outset, my parents taught me the old (and wise) nursery rhyme: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 01:38 AM
1

That a community uses a word is not evidence of systematic “hate,” despite your lame oblique attempt to socially shame said community.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:40 PM
1

“Guy” (which was originally a term used to describe figures which were burned in effigy en masse in an actual display of hatred towards Guy Fawkes) The “blatant misogyny” you see is just your mind’s desire to present yourself as a victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:00 PM
1

One historical source could be the letters between John and Abagail Adams for most of the Revolutionary War period. There are many others. Once you rid yourself of the desperate need to be seen as a victim, life becomes much more beautiful.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 02:56 PM
-2

It very well could and most certainly has historically. …because, again, volume =/= density.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 10:04 AM
1

A portmanteau =/= an etymology. And the absence of flattery also =/= hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 10:01 AM
-2

Volume of interaction =/= depth of interaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 07:32 AM
-1

…along which runs the depth of the bond in inverse proportion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:39 AM
-2

On average women speak about 20% more words a day than do men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:25 AM
-3

…or maybe like male bonding isn’t Kabuki theatre performative.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 06:20 AM
2

Foid is a portmanteau of “female humanoid.”
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:30 AM
5

Feel free to explain how the term “female humanoid” is any more “hateful” than the term “male humanoid.”
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 05:23 AM
24

Criticism =/= hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 02:35 AM
-3

If you base the stat off of all men (instead of just men with families) it would be a little over 13 per day.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 04:17 AM
-9

For an accurate perspective: In the US roughly 1.2 women die in any given day from pregnancy and childbirth complications. In that same day… …roughly 4 men will die in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children, and …women will kill at least 2,602 of their unborn children.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 07:38 PM
1

That you’re so victim focused that you have to lie about my assertions is a perfect example of your victim focus limiting your ability to think abstractly. Here’s my actual reply: As the only reason that the sexes exist in the first place is sexual reproduction, the only reason that paired intersexual relationships exist can only be sexual reproduction. Certainly we delude ourselves with alternative notions and fantasies, but those have no basis in the hard reality of the matter which is that th…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:53 AM
1

Nope. Your language is very victim based (“Women are broodmares”). You are so caught up in playing the victim that you can’t think about the issue abstractly. And the “I feel sorry for you” bit is little more than a lame attempt at social shaming. I have a fantastic wife of more than 30 years with whom I have traveled the world and we have several wonderful children for whom we have produced a wonderful life doing exactly what we want to be doing exactly where we want to be doing it. Shed no tea…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:28 AM
-1

As I said it is easy to understand when you let go of the need to present yourself as a victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:13 AM
-1

Adam didn’t eat from the tree. Eve fed him the fruit from her hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:24 PM
–

Again, the only reason for the existence of either sex is sexual reproduction. That which men like about women is all related to sexual reproduction (as that’s the only reason that women exist). Just as that which women like about men is all related to sexual reproduction (as that’s the only reason men exist). This is not a difficult concept to understand. You just have to let go of the need to present yourself as a victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:45 PM
–

As are men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:42 PM
–

As the only reason that the sexes exist in the first place is sexual reproduction, the only reason that paired intersexual relationships exist can only be sexual reproduction. Certainly we delude ourselves with alternative notions and fantasies, but those have no basis in the hard reality of the matter which is that the only reason for the existence of the sexes and intersexual pairing is sexual reproduction. Were it not for sexual reproduction neither would exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:05 PM
-1

Humans are inherently “bad.” But we can learn to moderate and eventually diminish that inherent tendency if we are introspective, objectively self observant, and objectively self critical while prioritizing that which is true over that which we want. The issue with women in Western culture is that we have allowed feminism to construct an almost entirely demasculated society which discourages women (primarily) and everyone else (secondarily) from the requisite introspection, objective self observ…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:05 PM
2

The entire reason either sex exists is for sexual reproduction. This is true for every sexually reproducing species of life on the planet.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 02:36 PM
2

Porn is not good for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 02:32 PM
3

In which case it is still being presented as if .05% of the time the species has spent in your broader definition of “modernity” is somehow discontinuous from and more impactful than the previous 99.94% of species behavioral development.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 02:30 PM
17

Thanks for being honest, introspective, and objectively self observant!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:36 PM
3

Asked as if the .02% of the time the species has spent in “modernity” is somehow discontinuous from the 250,000 years over which the behavior the species was formed. 🤦‍♂️
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:29 PM
2

💯% women. As I wrote above, the female sexual choice shapes the physical and behavioral patterns males of every sexually reproducing animal species on the planet. That’s just how nature works.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:05 PM
4

We don’t in and of ourselves because we all feel the pain and frustration of having to completely suppress our emotions and wouldn’t wish that on anyone. But we also that know we have to “man up” if we ever want to be able to attract women. And we raise each other (and straight tell each other what it takes) to attract women from the time that we start noticing girls. Attracting females is the single most impactful drive of males in every sexually reproducing animal species on the planet, and Ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 11:27 PM
6

Nope. It directly stems from women’s reactions to our display of any weakness (and women view genuine male emotional display as weakness). We learn pretty quickly that “emotionally available” to women means “react to my emotions in the way that most pleases me in the moment” and does not mean “share your genuine emotions with me.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 06:28 PM
6

On all my dates with the woman who became my wife we talked about a great many things ranging from our reactions to Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex to her parents’ likely reaction to dating me. But at no point were we ever “interviewing” each other for “compatibility” or doing anything like that. Neither of us were shopping for a relationship, we were simply enjoying each other’s company and the interaction which came with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 02:13 AM
14

If the woman in question has an interview mindset towards dating, she’s not going to be compatible with an healthy LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 11:24 PM
1

It is mostly women that control, administer, and individually profit from the US CPS system which is the world’s largest child trafficking network. There is a plethora information about the abuses of this child trafficking network and it’s pernicious effects on children and families are well documented. In fact, children are significantly more likely to be sexually abused within in this trafficking network than outside of it, and it is estimated that somewhere between 50% and 90% of all child se…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 12:27 PM
0

I’m sure you don’t as they conflict with your preferred worldview. As I stated, you’ve never actually tried to help poor women so you wouldn’t know, and because what I’m saying conflicts with your worldview, you don’t really want to know what’s actually true. But should curiosity overcome your desire to retain cognitive dissonance and you actually do want to go down this rabbit hole, here’s a good place to start: https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2024/05/civil-suits-by-parents-against-family-pol…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 10:29 PM
1

It is mostly women that control, administer, and individually profit from the US CPS system which is the world’s largest child trafficking network. There is a plethora information about the abuses of this child trafficking network and it’s pernicious effects on children and families are well documented. In fact, children are significantly more likely to be sexually abused within in this trafficking network than outside of it, and it is estimated that somewhere between 50% and 90% of all child se…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 07:20 PM
1

I come here to speak truth into the massive void of it created by the entropic feminist lie machine because that is an essential role for men and if we do not uptake it vigorously we will lose all semblance of a prosperous civil society. Again, that you find the truth about women disparaging is only because you seek to hide in lies. That women bear and give birth to children does not excuse the mass killing and trafficking of said children, just as male productivity does not excuse the 2% of hum…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 06:30 PM
0

Speaking the truth about what women actually do can only be considered “disparaging women” by those who see and feel a need to obscure what women actually do in order to maintain a delusion. As an American black man, I have no issue with those that point out that we black Americans have a serious issue with a culture of poor family structure, poor parenting, tolerance of criminal and violent popular culture, propagation of victim mentality, and a lack of sound value creation in our community tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:42 PM
0

I said nothing about morality. I just pointed out that the vast majority of child trafficking in the US is done in a state sponsored network largely controlled and managed by women, from which (mostly) women profit by setting up revolving door businesses to service the state sponsored child trafficking ring, and which (mostly) women use to attack and hurt each other on a personal level. And it’s all “legal” so it doesn’t show up in US crime stats, just like the vast majority (98%) of human killi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:59 PM
–

I have already done more volunteer work helping families of young children who have been trafficked in the world’s largest child trafficking ring (the US CPS system) than you will likely ever do in your life. And by the way, women do most of the child trafficking in the US via this CPS child trafficking system.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:27 PM
0

In your reach have also ignored my definition of the variety of expressions of power (focusing only financial).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 12:04 PM
1

You conflate power with “over dominating” out of nothing but bias and emotion. You also presume that plain homebody women don’t also want powerful men based only on the errant logic that power brings instability when (as you even admit) the opposite is broadly true, despite odd exceptions. You’re reaching.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 05:42 AM
1

Feel free to present a sound counter argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 05:37 AM
–

Just because a journalist makes an assertion in an article does not make the assertion sound. Professional experience doesn’t obviate bias. Rather, it frequently enhances it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:10 AM
–

Appeal to authority logical fallacy. The article in your link ignores the significant issue of reporting bias. I would suggest that abuse (physical and emotional) is the main driver of lasting emotional harm from relationships in both men and women, and women are at least equally as abusive as men, and probably significantly more so than men given well known reporting biases in this area. Add to that reporting bias that girls’ intentional use and manipulation of boys’ affection and attention wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 10:09 PM
–

Life as a human male.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 08:25 PM
-1

I would guess only slightly less common than for female relationship partners to misbehave so as to cause lasting emotional harm.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 05:09 PM
2

Those men aren’t really competing for “the top women” because (due to women’s hyperselectivity and high selection overlap) there are substantially more “top women” than there are “top men.” Thus the existence of hard and soft harems and the principle that in every healthy LTR the woman knows that she is more easily replaced by her husband/boyfriend than he is by her. Men primarily seek health and fertility (as represented by beauty) with agreeableness/peacefulness being very important secondary …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 04:25 PM
0

> like attracts like Hard science disagrees, that’s a “soft science” principle. But even the soft science clearly demonstrates women’s preference for DT traits. While it’s true that the link is correlative not causal, the correlating agent is actually power. Women are attracted to power - expressed physically, socially, financially, intellectually, and even spiritually. Different women are attracted to different combinations of those expressions, but at base it’s about power. The issue is that m…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 03:00 PM
2

Both sound controlled studies and observation demonstrate that women are attracted to psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behavioral characteristics. Those are commonly known as “asshole” characteristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 03:58 AM
13

The only men who get to pick are the very few who have multiple women offering themselves simultaneously and those men aren’t desperate. Aside from those rare cases women do all the picking.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:31 AM
18

The data says otherwise. The data says that we rank according to a standard normal distribution and have a much broader range of what we find attractive. You are projecting your own thought process onto us. We don’t think like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:20 AM
15

You are erroneously projecting how women think and rate attractiveness on to men. Men rate women’s attractiveness according to a standard normal distribution.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:13 AM
42

Women’s hyperselectivity when combined with significant overlap in what they find attractive creates a market condition in which they actually do have substantial competition and consequently the men that they want can be quite selective. We men express this dynamic with a simple saying that reflects our experience of it: “When it rains, it pours.” If you are a man whom women generally find attractive, you can be even more selective than they because you probably have a broader range of women th…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 11:41 PM
7

No, but women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 12:28 PM
–

Men are the sexually selected.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 04:54 AM
1

Yes, if you do so before said men have the opportunity to reproduce. If you do so after they have the opportunity to reproduce, it has minimal effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 12:33 AM
1

I never said anything about exact points, but yes humans tend to have significantly more sexual interaction when we are in the early stages of our sexual maturity than when we are older. So, to your point, unless all those men you suggest were “wiped out” were “wiped out” before the precise moment that they matured sexually, your “wiped out” theory is unlikely to explain the significant difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 10:46 PM
1

I have neither asserted nor implied any such thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 10:02 PM
1

I am not OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 10:01 PM
0

Yes, and that is not at all equivalent to saying that average men don’t shop at Walmart or Target. That you suggest that it is only demonstrates a complete lack of reading comprehension.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:58 PM
1

You made an assertion about the state of the “average man,” and to do so accurately you would need to sample from all men in order to determine the nature of the actual “average man” which you did not. Rather, you drew from a much smaller subset and can thus only make an assertion about the average man of that specific subset, in this case, men with whom you have partied.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:56 PM
1

I neither asserted nor implied any such thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:48 PM
0

If you are going to make a statement about men’s behavior in general (ie “the average man behaves like x”), you can’t do so based only on a sample of men from where you live.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:22 PM
2

Not if those men were of age to sexually reproduce before you “wiped them out.” If they were, then the fact that they didn’t reproduce is less a factor of the “wiping out” than that they weren’t chosen by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:20 PM
1

Because they are part of the population of all men. If you are going to make an assertion about all men’s behavior based on your observations you have to randomly sample from **all men**. If your sample is drawn from a subset of men in Miami who are in your specific social circle, then whatever assertion you are making only applies to *that subset of men that in Miami* **who are in your social circle**.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:17 PM
0

An average **is** a maths equation. That’s actually exactly how “it works.”
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:12 PM
0

This is very simple math. If the population of all males is rank ordered from 1 to 10, the average is 5. If you the population of males with whom you party is rank ordered from 6-10, the average is 7.5. The average of the males with whom you party is not the average of males.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 07:47 PM
3

If you “wipe them out” **after** they have reached the age of sexual reproduction, then the fact that they were wiped out was not what prevented them from sexually reproducing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 07:43 PM
1

See how you said “average around them?” That’s not the actual average because of the “around them” part. Rather, it’s the average of a set that’s already excluded a significant portion of the lower end. Just like I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 07:09 PM
1

Again, happening **after** young men go through puberty and thus not a significant factor in the differential.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 07:08 PM
-1

The men who you went to college parties with were already selected from a higher than average set simply because they were attending college. Thanks for making my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 07:03 PM
1

As you pointed out, by the time men are able to reproduce sexually, the numbers are equal, thus men dying early is not likely the cause of that dramatic difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 07:01 PM
9

Most of the excess male death to which you refer happens after men reach the age of being able to reproduce, thus it cannot be the cause of that disparity.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 06:59 PM
2

Your response has nothing to do with my comment. Again, I seriously doubt that the average of the men you see in any highly trafficked public area (aka a proxy for the actual “average man”) were your party cronies. When women typically refer to the “average man,” they are referring to the average of the men that they notice and accord the status of human. Thus, they are taking an average of the top 25%-35% at most and calling that “the average.” The fact that women’s attractiveness ratings of me…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 06:56 PM
9

Throughout human history we estimate that less than 40% of men reproduced whereas 80% of women did.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 06:36 PM
-1

Go to a Walmart or Target on a random day. Observe every male within 5 years of your age. The average of those men were your “party” cronies? Seriously doubt it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 06:35 PM
0

Outside of your fantasy land, women didn’t do much hunting or distance (heavy resource) gathering. We see clear evidence of this in both my aforementioned physical and behavioral sexual dimorphism and your aforementioned studies of relatively current pre-industrial people groups. Also, you are misusing the term “provide.” What you really mean is “produce.” Yes, all able bodied humans had to produce, but men and women tended to do so in different ways, and the women’s methods of production tended…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:35 PM
0

Homo sapiens is 250,000 years old. Farming is 10,000 years old. The division of labor is why men and women are so sexually dimorphic. And clearly you haven’t done much traveling in Africa.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:03 PM
2

This is not true. It’s about how you focus. Men who have an intense focus on making themselves attractive to women in the right way tend to become attractive to a lot of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:01 PM
2

See how you are qualifying the sexual intimacy versus having access to any at all? That’s the difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:59 PM
0

Occasionally, but nowhere near the extent to which women were. The men’s work typically involved the “away from the home part,” starting with the hunting/herding and distant resource gathering/trading and ranging through the raiding/fighting to the specialized labor on behalf of a capitalized enterprise.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:54 PM
1

SAHM is traditional and not a myth. SAHM does not mean “doesn’t work.” Rather it means (and meant) that the work was based out of and around the home and almost always involved the children in some way as well, family business style.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:40 PM
2

Most men that women choose, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 11:19 PM
1

It’s only a logical inference if (as I said) it applies to the population of men that women choose because women don’t choose randomly.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 09:25 PM
2

It’s math. No matter how normal you think you may be, the population of men you sampled is those which you chose, and since you didn’t choose randomly, you can’t make any sound inferences about the broader population of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 09:18 PM
3

No, for all intents and purposes it’s normal for the men that you choose, which is almost certainly not most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 08:45 PM
4

Yes, because that’s how logic works. The population you sampled is the men that women (and really just you) choose. That’s the only population about which you can draw inferences using your sample as evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 08:31 PM
-3

Precisely because (according to you) it is prevalent among the men that women are choosing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 08:18 PM
-3

…which says a lot about typical female choice patterns.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 08:06 PM
-2

Says a lot about your choice patterns.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 08:04 PM
0

We don’t think it’s because you couldn’t get “another” man, we know it’s because you couldn’t get a better man.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:05 PM
1

I made no assertion concerning “how my son turned out.”
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:39 PM
0

Women are not attracted to confidence, they’re attracted to power and confidence signals power.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 05:25 PM
0

Proper perspective is important.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 08:22 PM
0

Because feminism taught women to hate themselves and want to be men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:30 PM
0

Most of what “high value men” and most women do is of little actual merit when it comes to the core functions which undergird our basic standard of living. When it comes down to it, investment banking and HR don’t actually contribute much to the type of total economic output which positively determines anyone’s condition of living. OTOH, plumbers, electricians, farmers, mechanical engineers, truck drivers, and even road maintenance crews do.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:28 PM
0

…and neither does yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:22 PM
-1

I made no mention of “the end of the world.” You would do well to read and respond to what is actually asserted rather than attempting to construct straw men at which to weakly punch with lame attempts at social shaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:02 PM
1

Birth control has actually only served to accelerate the unsustainability of the welfare state system on which women rely.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 04:35 PM
2

Women need men more, but in a different way. The imbalance is created by a society which has been structured to take from men and redistribute to women via the coercive force of government.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 04:14 PM
2

It’s only awkward when there is an expectation attached to the gifts and/or the gifts are given as a means of covert manipulation, control, or bribery. You have to ask yourself: “Why do I love giving gifts?” and be ruthlessly honest with your answer. Do you like it because it creates a subtle debt? Because you expect it to curry favor? Because you think it makes people like you more? Would you feel some kind of way if the recipients don’t appreciate the gifts in the way that you want them to? Al…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 03:14 PM
-2

You might wish to reread what I wrote above.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 02:27 PM
-9

I have a son amongst my many children and I have watched how damaging the feminist emasculation of our society has been for his generation of young men. I am here to shout some truth into the whirlwind of lies for the benefit of younger men who may have ears to hear, grab onto it, and pull themselves from destruction.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 02:08 PM
-2

…or maybe just the reality that the welfare state on which women depend is unsustainable and when it goes away both men who have been emasculated by a feminist society and the women who feed from it are going to have a tough time in a more meritocratic system.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 01:13 PM
-7

I have been married for possibly longer than you’ve been alive, have several children, and my eldest daughter just got engaged. Your lame attempt at social shaming doesn’t apply here.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 01:09 PM
-9

We need men to be loud and obnoxious and whiny like feminists are. Wrong. We don’t need to behave like women and obnoxiously complain. We need to behave like men and act, paying no regard to what the women are saying, being obnoxious about, or whining about. And when the time becomes desperate enough (which it will in the economic collapse), the men who are prepared will act and those who are not will likely die. The smart women will follow those who men who are prepared, and they will do so wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 02:59 AM
0

Women are the sexual selectors of our species and men are the sexually selected. We respond to women’s sexual choice-making. If women regularly chose men who were submissive and followers sexually, men would strive to be submissive followers. However, women (generally) detest men who are submissive followers and never treat them with respect and almost never with any dignity. So, men strive to be dominant leaders. Even within the context of individual relationships, if a woman does not feel that…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 08:44 PM
2

The beauty industry’s $698 billion in revenue suggests otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 04:08 PM
–

If you want to see the results of a matriarchal culture in which women are generally not submissive to men, you needn’t look any farther than the black American community. I am of the 1st generation in the black American community in which the patriarchy (male headship of the family) had been largely upended, though the seeds of that upending started in my parents’ generation. I have had a front row seat for the movie of how matriarchy creates utter cultural chaos and horrendous outcomes for gen…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 03:38 PM
1

Nope. We only really know it from the inside looking out. If you’re “on the outside looking in” you never really get to see how women treat men whom they actually find sexually attractive, regardless of our personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:37 AM
2

It is our experience that this phenomenon is both continuous and perpetual.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:22 AM
-1

You contradict yourself. That “women can be more practical than men when it comes to love” is the substance of objectification.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:17 AM
1

The more a woman likes a man’s personality the more she is going to Love every part of him. The less she likes his personality the more she will be disgusted by him - that’s why “hot” guys can become extremely ugly to women if they dislike their personality. If I disliked a guys personality his dick would become disgusting to even think about especially if he was physically unattractive to begin with. The male experience of women is the opposite of this. The more sexually attractive we are to wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:11 AM
-2

Doesn’t bother me. It’s their own loss, not mine. I’m just here to speak truth into the void.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 11:20 PM
-2

Yet it still (fallaciously) rests on the principle of sameness.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 10:40 PM
-2

Men and women are not the same, thus arguments based on the principle of sameness are fallacious.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 07:07 PM
4

See below for a particular example. Women asking for rough or particularly aggressive forms of sexual intimacy (which is more frequently something that they desire and request than it is something that men want to do) is often psychologically deleterious for us. Most of us find it weird, uncomfortable, and somewhat emotionally scarring, but the pressure of women’s expectations connected to such types of intimacy and their enjoyment of it can be intense. Generally we don’t really like to be in th…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 05:39 PM
9

Exactly. It has been my experience that a significantly larger percentage of women like having that type of stuff done to them than men like doing it. Yet, somehow, it gets framed as a male desire. I feel the same goes for anal sex as well, though I do know some men that are into that, so I would guess that’s probably closer to a 50/50 request rather than a majority women request.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 10:22 PM
20

One example is “rough” and “particularly aggressive” “play.” Many men are really not into doing that type of stuff to women, but we get asked to do it far more than makes many of us comfortable.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 09:39 PM
9

Because it will give her pleasure, and good sexual intimacy is as much about giving as receiving?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 07:06 PM
18

For the same reason that women often ask their sex partners to do acts that their partners may not particularly enjoy.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 06:52 PM
6

No apology necessary. Those were things that happened in my life, whether or not to be a victim of the things that happened in my life is up to me and totally within my control. There is a difference between adulthood and childhood for developmental reasons and those reasons are related to one’s ability to have and accept the responsibility of agency in one’s life.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 04:47 AM
7

As a child, no. As an adult, yes. Source: victim of abuse as a child who also grew up watching his father be abused by his mother
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 02:42 AM
3

Gender roles aren’t “harmful” they’re a natural result of the fact that men and women are fundamentally different down to the genetic code inside of each and every cell in our bodies, which aggregate up to substantial sexual dimorphism and substantial intrasexual similarity of both physical and behavioral characteristics. What is harmful is resentment over gender roles.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 09:10 PM
–

The kind of man most sexually wanted by women has psychopathic, narcissistic, and Machiavellian behavior patterns.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 02:05 AM
1

No, you won’t just say it. You can’t even bring yourself to type it, precisely because you know how insane it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 06:33 AM
1

So close, in fact, that it’s blatantly obvious to any observer. All women who argue for a supposed “right” to kill their own children jump through multiple flaming hoops to avoid having to say exactly what they want because they know it’s utterly depraved. Thus all the euphemisms: “Health care,” “reproductive rights,” “a clump of cells,” “bodily autonomy,” etc. …all constructed to obscure the reality of the brutally cruel and intensely selfish act of killing one’s own child to avoid the parental…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 06:11 AM
1

The euphemism is the obscuring of the entire reason and intent of taking the action, which is to kill your child. You see how you went to the passive voice of “not enabling myself to keep a child alive?” Noting particularly that you even avoid admission that the child is yours. You literally twisted normal language like an Olympic gymnast in order to avoid expressing the actual action, that of killing your own child. And you did that because you know exactly how depraved it sounds to say I think…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 05:41 AM
0

See how you employ euphemisms to obscure the fact that you are advocating for killing your own children? You do that because you know just how depraved it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 04:22 AM
1

By arguing that you believe you have a supposed “right” to kill your own children rather than uptake your parental duty to use your body to care for them. One literally can’t be more selfish (and cruel) than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 04:07 AM
0

My, point exactly. Many women in the modern West are so psychopathically selfish and cruel that they will argue vehemently for a supposed “right” to kill their own children… …because they don’t care.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:55 AM
1

That elective abortion is the killing of one’s own children is fact. That such killings are the leading cause of human death in the US is fact. That such killings are almost exclusively done out of a desire to eschew the parental duty of care is fact. That the desire to eschew parental duty of care for children is rooted in selfishness is fact. That one who would kill her own child to shirk her duty of care is cruel is fact. That men are legally required to use their bodies to produce shelter an…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:51 AM
1

None of what I have said is opinion. It is all fact. As I have said many times already, that you wish to ignore the fact in order to preserve your self-imagine while simultaneously arguing for a supposed “right” to kill your own children is entirely unsurprising.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 01:37 AM
1

Perhaps, but not the one plugging her ears and covering her eyes so as to avoid the truth about that for which she is arguing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 12:38 AM
–

They are more successful than men who approach women, and would be even more successful if the bulk of their approaches weren’t flinging themselves at men who are already happily partnered or didn’t already have a plethora of other options. Women have no idea how much their attraction to men overlaps, and thus how much competition they have for the men to whom they are actually attracted. Generally speaking, if you find a man attractive enough to approach, he is probably getting approached by ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 05:33 PM
1

🙈🙉🤡
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 05:06 PM
1

If you kill your non-adult child for “breaking into your home” you will be arrested and prosecuted for murder or manslaughter among other crimes. If you kill anyone whom you invited into your home, you will be arrested and prosecuted for murder or manslaughter among other crimes. When you have sex, you are inviting your child into your body. And for a third time, I am not trying to change your mind. Women who are so selfish and cruel as to argue for a supposed “right” to kill their own children …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 02:40 PM
0

Civil societies all dictate that we cannot use our bodies to kill other living humans, and they also tend to dictate that parents have a duty to use their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children. Men in the US are legally obligated to do so until their children reach the age of majority. Men are also legally obligated to use their bodies to provide for the common defense, your defense, should the federal government require them to do so. As I said, I do not expect that you wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 10:55 PM
-1

Women are sexually attracted to power (expressed in some combination of physically, socially, financially, intellectually, and spiritually) and power tends to accrue as we age - in fact only the physical aspect of our power decreases from the mid 20s. The rest tend to increase until the early to mid 50s.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 09:00 PM
0

I write to speak truth into the super massive black hole of women’s psychopathic selfishness and cruelty. None of what you said obviates the fact that US men still die 3x more frequently than women in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children, and still aren’t so pathologically selfish and cruel as to argue for a supposed “right” to kill their children. And no, those men aren’t dying “because they wanted to,” they’re dying because they were willing to ris…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 02:49 PM
–

From women’s sexual choice-making.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 04:51 PM
0

As I said, in civil societies tend to believe that parents have a duty of care for their children which includes using our bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for our children and most parents would sacrifice their lives for their children. Those that would not are typically viewed as somewhat odd. Nonetheless, we do have a legal standard that in the extremely rare and tragic cases in which a child (or anyone else) is presenting an eminent and acute threat to the life of his or her parent, …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:31 PM
3

Yes. Grew up in a married 2 parent home, as did the significant majority of my peers. My parents divorced after my siblings and I graduated college, much to our relief because our mother was abusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 02:32 AM
0

In civil societies we believe that parents have a duty to produce sustenance and shelter for their children. And even in our current society men are legally obligated to use their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring until their children reach the age of majority. At no point does our right to do with our bodies as we please extend to killing others, especially our children.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:11 PM
1

The concept of truth implies objectivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:41 PM
1

Only because she was also unable to think abstractly from the time dimension.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:31 PM
1

…and you arrive at that conclusion because you are unable to think abstractly across time.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:27 PM
0

That you are killing your children by the use hormones to prevent your body undertaking the natural process (and responsibility) of providing shelter and sustenance for your children, does not obviate the fact that you are making a conscious effort to take an action which you intend to result in the death of your child (aka killing your child).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:26 PM
1

Time neither starts nor ends. It is a dimension.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:15 PM
2

Women enjoy sex with men. Men die in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children (and wives) more than 3x as frequently than do women in the US, inclusive of women’s death from complications with pregnancy and childbirth. Women are net consumers over their lifetimes and men are net producers, women currently rely on government enforced redistribution of productivity from men to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:31 PM
-2

Economics will do it for us. The current DEI infused welfare state system is unsustainable with low birth rates and women will suffer the most when it collapses.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 03:50 AM
1

Again, you are presuming that the subject doesn’t have the mental capacity to think abstractly and evaluate statistical information rationally. An example pertaining to me specifically: as a black man, I am several orders of magnitude more likely to have been killed by a young black man than I am to have been killed a law enforcement officer. Even though I live in a rural ski town, am well beyond the age in which black men typically suffer from and commit violence, am well above the income/wealt…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:32 PM
1

It appears that you might have forgotten (or skipped altogether) the biology of sexual reproduction. A gamete =/= a zygote, embryo, or fetus.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:16 PM
1

It makes no sense only to those unable to think abstractly across the time dimension. No matter what her current state of development, the largest risk to life and limb she will have faced will have been from her own mother. The risk from every other person she will ever meet is vanishingly small by comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:14 PM
0

It does state (rather plainly) that you don’t see value in rational risk comparison and ordination across a lifetime, but rather only see value in focusing on that which is forward, a valuation which implies the lack of ability to rationally abstract from the time dimension.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 05:03 PM
0

There was once a time when I was at risk of being aborted; there was once a time when I was at risk of dying of SIDS. Now, I am no longer at risk of either. It is no longer part of my current total risk. Life time risk is interesting to think about, but not useful in terms of current risk assessment. >Current risk assessment is an attribute that can apply to how women view men. The past possibility of being aborted by their mother does not apply to how women view men. Your words, but my emphasis…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:49 PM
0

Your entire argument rests on the idea that women only look at their forward risk and cannot place that risk in accurate statistical context with risk they have already been fortunate enough to have avoided - ie that they cannot think abstractly across the time dimension.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:36 PM
0

Your entire argument is founded on the premise that women are unable to think rationally enough to evaluate risk across time.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:06 PM
0

It’s your argument, not mine. My argument rests on the assumption that women can actually think abstractly and evaluate statistical risk rationally across the time dimension.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:01 PM
1

Men are legally required to use our bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for our children until our children reach the age of majority, and if we do not we can be punished with fines, wage garnishment, and imprisonment. Additionally, more than 3x as many men die in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children than do women (including deaths resulting from complications of pregnancy and childbirth). Yet we still are not so psychopathically selfish and cru…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:00 PM
-1

…but all forms of elective abortions are the killing of your own children. …because you are killing your own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:52 PM
0

Don’t have to pretend when your argument shouts it from the rooftop at full volume.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:48 PM
0

As I suggested this argument implies that women don’t have the capacity to abstractly measure total risk across time and then rationally order that risk. That you may not have that capacity doesn’t mean that other women don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 05:53 AM
0

So since you are not paying for me to eat, you are slowly killing me, and that’s equivalent to me actively killing and dismembering you?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 05:42 AM
0

…but apparently not in integrating such “understanding” into an abstract rational analysis of total risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:09 AM
1

You keep implying that women are incapable of understanding risk across time. I tend to think that women are capable of such abstract thought. Maybe not though.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:06 AM
-1

You see no substantial difference between refusing to pay for someone and killing them?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:03 AM
1

You are implying that adult women are not capable of the level of abstract thought required to understand that the greatest statistical risk of serious harm they face throughout their life is from their own mother. Maybe not.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:00 AM
0

Every adult woman’s largest risk of being killed (or even seriously harmed) by another person was from her own mother.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:55 AM
-1

If she’s thinking rationally, the largest risk of grievous harm that she will have faced in her entire life was from her own mother.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:54 AM
-1

Note, I said abstract thought (as in statistically evaluating the totality of their risk profile and applying it across the time dimension). Apparently not in at least one case.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:26 AM
-1

Your logic presumes that women are incapable of abstract thought and analysis, or at the very least not prone to rational consideration.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:11 AM
-5

That women who would argue for a right to kill their own children wish to diminish the brutality of doing so by denying those same children the status of being living humans, does not obviate the fact that those children are, in fact, living humans. Nor does it obviate the fact that the biggest threat to living humans in the modern US is being killed by their own mothers, regardless of how much many women might wish to ignore that fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:08 AM
-6

According to a combination of data from the CDC and the Guttmacher Institute women kill roughly 450,000 of their own daughters every year. Heart disease kills roughly 300,000 women a year.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:57 AM
-3

Women kill roughly 450,000 of their own daughters a year in the US by relatively conservative estimates. Men kill roughly 1,850 girls and women a year in the US. All according to data from a combination of the FBI, the CDC, and the Guttmacher Institute. And given that the post to which I responded rooted a disfavorable view in victimization, it is pertinent to understand the true metrics of female victimization.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:49 AM
-11

A combination of the CDC, the Guttmacher Institute, and the FBI. And yes, we are largely focused on the wrong issues when it comes to the killing of humans and birth rates in the US, though thanks to this SCOTUS some states are beginning to adopt a more logical and just approach to the protection of human life.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:45 AM
-1

Yes, but the leading cause of female human death is mothers killing their own daughters, and US women kill their own daughters roughy 50% more frequently than US women die from heart disease.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:37 AM
-8

The leading cause of female human death in the US is women killing their own daughters. They do so roughly 24,354% more frequently than boys or men kill girls or women.. Given your logic, women should fear their own mothers substantially more than they do men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 01:09 AM
–

Apparently, statistics is not your strong suit. Your assertion presumes that men and women have the same attraction triggers. We don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 04:53 PM
-1

If you want to see what a matriarchal culture leads to, just look at the current state of black American culture. I have watched matriarchy absolutely devastate our culture over the 4 generations from that of my grandparents to that of my children. And let’s not forget that women not only unashamedly argue for a supposed “right” to kill their own children, but they actually do so frequently enough that it’s the leading cause of human death in the US by a substantial margin. No way a matriarchal …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 05:10 AM
1

Be powerful.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 04:59 AM
3

…because women choose assholes. It’s for their own good. You set the terms on who gets to reproduce. If we don’t pay attention to those terms and mold ourselves to them, we don’t get to reproduce. Sometimes that molding of ourselves to your terms so that we can reproduce requires cooperative effort, especially when those terms are distasteful.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 11:19 PM
1

That math assumes a uniform distribution of the population differential across age, which is definitely not the case. Men die more frequently, thus though at birth the ration is 105 males for every 100 females, by the middle of reproductive years, the population is 50/50.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 06:52 PM
1

Seems as if you may not understand that of which sexual selection consists. In Homo sapiens sapiens (aside from rape) the females determine which males are able to reproduce. Historically roughly 80% of human females reproduce while only roughly 40% of human males do.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 02:54 PM
-2

When men are the sexual selectors it’s called rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 02:02 PM
1

Women are and have always been the sexual selectors of our species, as are the females in most sexually reproducing animal species in which rape is uncommon.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 02:00 PM
1

Women are the sexual selectors of the species. Men are the selected.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 01:53 PM
1

Generally, men appreciate that a woman even tries to cook for us every meal so much that we learn to like what she cooks. Not all men, but certainly far more than (seriously) complain and would ditch. Same here as your above example, men seriously complaining about this would be ridiculed by other men at best and shunned and/or beaten at worst.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 03:53 PM
0

Same. In every case, we appreciate the effort - with the realistic understanding that she’s actually more likely to be right than wrong in aggregate.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 03:26 PM
2

Nope. I’m old, I was an athlete in my youth, and a bond trader in my adulthood. I’ve had occasion to hang out with many men in “locker room” style environments, and I have yet to meet a single one who would ever ditch (or even seriously complain about) a woman because he didn’t like the way she performed oral sexual intimacy with him in preference for a different method, as long as she was trying. A man with that attitude would be soundly ridiculed by his peers at best and shunned or beaten at w…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 03:04 PM
6

Appreciate her effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 02:52 PM
0

What about when what you say you want is different from that which you actually want?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 02:24 PM
7

You successfully put men in “no win” situations. That’s not going to end well for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 02:15 PM
5

We will 100% “listen” to your actions. Those speak loudly.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 02:03 PM
0

They are less than .5% of all femicide victims. If your concern is actually about femicide, you probably want to focus on 99.5% of the victims of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 05:23 PM
0

The issue of elective abortion is an issue of femicide. For every girl or woman in the US that is killed by a man women kill at least 243 of their own daughters. If your concern is the killing of human females (aka femicide) then your biggest bang for the buck is to eliminate elective abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 03:51 PM
1

Accurate definitions of words are important for the precise reason that they annoy you: …namely that perversions of meaning are often used to hide atrocity behind euphemism. See “our peculiar institution,” or “person held to service or labor,” or “the final solution to the Jewish question,” (in this case) “reproductive rights” for examples of such.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 03:33 AM
1

Maybe you skipped biology altogether? The zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from the sexual reproduction of a man and a woman are absolutely and unambiguously scientifically classified as living individual members of the genus Homo (aka human). That the scientific fact upends your preferred worldview does not obviate the scientific fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 01:25 AM
-1

Nope. They absolutely do for everyday life as well. Remove all men and the entire society would completely collapse within 72 hours. Remove women and it would take a little longer but not much past a month max.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 09:17 PM
1

Of course they do, but they still need each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 09:03 PM
-1

The species is comprised of individuals.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 05:44 PM
–

The species is comprised of individuals and its survival depends on codependent pairs of those individuals.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 05:00 PM
–

We need each other, the survival of the species quite literally relies on our co-dependent relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 04:56 PM
1

Numbers are important because they provide proper context, and in doing so tell the stories that are frequently unpopular. You may find them annoying because the context they provide doesn’t align with your preferred worldview, but that you are annoyed by the context the numbers provide doesn’t lessen their importance in conveying the unpopular truth, which in this case is simply that: Women killing their own children is far and away the most pervasive form of human killing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 03:04 PM
1

You are correct, women’s psychopathically selfish and cruel killings of their own children does not compare to men killing each other Google AI estimated total global annual deaths from war in 2025 at around 250,000 and total annual deaths from homicide fluctuating between 400,000 and 460,000 in recent years. So, US women alone kill their own children at a rate that is roughly *47% more frequent than all worldwide killings in war and homicide combined**.*
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 01:47 PM
1

And the loss of 1,000,000 children a year who are killed by their own mothers in the USis actually a greater loss of genetic diversity than that experienced then (though a smaller percentage). And that’s not a mistake. Margaret Sanger started the whole effort to promote such killing specifically as a means of carrying out a eugenics program (and courted the KKK in that promotion). She spoke and wrote extensively about promoting elective abortion for the purpose of eliminating the genes of the po…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 02:01 AM
1

If you had read the article it would have been clear that genetic diversity wasn’t particularly high at the time so it didn’t take the killing of anywhere near the over 1,000,000 of their own children per year in the US alone that women kill to eliminate a significant percentage of the already small genetic diversity. That one may not feel that one has enough money to perform one’s natural parental duty is not a legitimate reason to kill one’s own child. It is, however, a legitimate reason to wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 11:21 PM
1

If you had read the article it would have been clear that genetic diversity wasn’t particularly high at the time so it didn’t take the killing of anywhere near the over 1,000,000 of their own children per year in the US alone that women kill to eliminate a significant percentage of the already small genetic diversity. That one may not feel that one has enough money to perform one’s natural parental duty is not a legitimate reason to kill one’s own child. It is, however, a legitimate reason to wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 11:19 PM
1

And yet, that scale of killing is made small by comparison to the numbers of children killed **by their own mothers** today, and it is universally recognized as the barbarism that it was. Let’s do the same for today’s mass killings instead of making arguments completely contrary to both science and the meaning of language in a pathetic attempt to justify such killing as a supposed “right.”
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 09:02 PM
1

No, I agree that most men do not experience constant sexual attention and therefore have no idea what it’s like, but even those of us that do aren’t particularly bothered by it. So, generally men aren’t bothered by it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 02:39 PM
-1

Man also have a duty of care to use our bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for our offspring, and the way in which we do so is actually more deadly and injurious to ourselves than pregnancy and childbirth. *Yet we still are not so psychopathically selfish and cruel as to demand that our duty of sacrifice* **for our children** *somehow grants us a supposed “right”* **to kill our children**. That you are unmoved by these facts is unsurprising and only demonstrates the psychopathic selfishnes…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 02:33 PM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/FQymGUVwD7
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 02:57 PM
3

While most men do not experience constant sexual attention because women tend to concentrate their sexual attention on a very small group of men, some of us do and we still don’t complain about it or disdain it. It tends to annoy our wives and girlfriends more than it does us.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 02:54 PM
1

That does not change the fact that women’s ability to require some other utility from men (which here you imply is “safety”) in order to have access to sexual interaction is still a result of women’s gatekeeper status because women are the sexual selectors and men the sexually selected. As I suggested previously, you would do better to think through your comments before posting them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 02:48 PM
0

Yes, people have been killing their own children for thousands of years. They did a lot of that in Carthage as sacrifice to Moloch and Ba’al, like the Caananites and Phoenicians. The Aztecs and Incas were also big on killing children. The theme has always been the same, “if I kill my child the gods will grant me better crops, a better job, more time, more money, a better life, a more perfect race…” et cetera. You know what else people have been doing for thousands of years? A: Dehumanizing and t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 02:36 PM
3

That you insist on ignoring the most accurate definition of the English word “child” in order to obscure the depraved and psychopathic selfishness and cruelty inherent in elective abortion does not obviate the accurate define of the word “child.” I have never seen men make an argument that women are untrustworthy if they do not hkill their own children**. If I had seen such, I most certainly would have decried it. While men’s DV is horrendous (and so is women’s) I have yet to see any man argue f…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:33 AM
1

You are responding reflexively without thinking through what you are about to say. It would behoove you to review your thoughts more thoroughly before writing a response. That women most often require men to produce relationship value for them in exchange for sexual intimacy is a result of women’s gatekeeping of sexual intimacy because women are the sexual selectors. Thanks for making my point. 😉
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:37 PM
1

In civil societies, the “autonomy to do what you want with your body” does not extend to the killing of other human beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:32 PM
5

I have never called elective abortion murder, because it isn’t currently legally defined as such and murder is a legal fiction. Elective abortion very much is, however, the killing of one’s own child.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:30 PM
7

The key word there is “belittling.” Women tend to view honest critique as “belittling” and demonstrative of “hatred” whenever it conflicts with their own self image, which is almost always. Women who are introspective, objectively self observant, and objectively self critical are the ones who get labeled as “pick-mes” because introspection, honest self observation, and honest self critique are anathema to women in general. A similar dynamic happens in the black community because it is so matriar…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:29 PM
1

Yes, and that happens to be a core tenet of RP philosophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:43 PM
1

Thus… women are the sexual selectors of the species …and they use that leverage to obtain other utility from men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:38 PM
1

Thought experiment: An average man asks 100 random women if they will be willing to be immediately sexually intimate with him NSA. What is the probability that at least one woman says yes? A: close to zero An average woman asks 100 random men the same question. What is the probability that at least one man says yes? A: 100% Women are the sexual selectors of the species.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:31 PM
3

Nope. Most men cannot, even if they lower their standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:35 PM
2

At any given time unattractive fat women have more options available to them for sexual intimacy than average men. An u attractive fat woman can be sexually intimate with a man any time she wishes. The vast majority of men cannot be sexually intimate with a woman any time they wish.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:33 PM
2

The market determines whether or not you are “aiming too high” and her failure in the market demonstrates that she is. Given your story, she apparently thinks she “deserves” a financially successful man. News Flash: she doesn’t. Financially successful men (by her apparent standard) are more rare than she is.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:29 PM
3

You have exactly the opposite construction. If your world were true, many more men would be sexually intimate with many more women. And every man who wanted to would be able to reproduce. As it stands, historically fewer than 40% of men have reproduces and more than 80% of women have.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:26 PM
2

That she holds her nose at the plethora of choice which is in front of her doesn’t mean that she doesn’t have choice. Rather, it means that she is so overwhelmed with choice that she has become spoiled by it and over values herself. Analogy: that she cannot afford to be catered to by a private chef, but must instead choose from one of several middle tier restaurants at which to eat, does not mean that she doesn’t have a choice of where to eat. Rather, it just means that her preference costs more…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:23 PM
1

The philosophical fiction of “bodily autonomy” itself (which you are advancing) implies such control.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:17 PM
5

I did not say that men don’t exercise some degree of choice. We do, but that choice is at all time subject and subordinate to the female choice. Women choose which men have access to sexual intimacy and reproduction, and subsequently men choose whether or not they will accept the women’s choice or go without sexual intimacy and reproduction. As an analogy: women get to choose from among a plethora of different always available options of what to eat and men get to chose whether or not to eat wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 04:46 PM
1

“Bodily autonomy” is a philosophical fiction designed to attempt a justification of a supposed “right” to kill one’s own children. In reality, we have very little conscious control over the natural processes of our bodies, and most certainly not pregnancy and gestation other than whether or not to engage in the activity which leads to pregnancy and gestation. What you do have conscious control over is whether or not you choose to kill your own child. And that a child’s first source of shelter an…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 04:32 PM
3

Like every other sexually reproducing animal species on the planet, Homo sapiens sapiens demonstrates significant sexual dimorphism of both physical structure and behavior as well as significant intrasexual commonality of both physiological structure and behavior. That distributions of individual differences exist does not obviate the substantial intrasexual commonalities, the (typically) standard normal distributions of those individual differences, and the statistically significant intersexual…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 04:18 PM
5

Men and women are not the same. Your line of thinking presumes that they are. Women always have parental certainty, men never do. Thus, “sleeping around” has significantly different consequences for both parties. Also, as women are the sexual selectors and men the sexually selected, “sleeping around” communicates significantly different things about the value of the individuals engaging in such behavior - for a woman it demonstrates that she isn’t very selective, and for a man it demonstrates th…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 03:34 PM
6

And RP philosophy (and most men) would agree that it is in men’s nature to take whatever sexual opportunity we are given. We are the sexual selected of the species and women are the sexual selectors. RP philosophy would also agree that if men seek to be in a committed LTR not restraining that nature is a sign of lack of discipline. This is the thing about RP philosophy, it’s masculine. It’s designed to recognize and prioritize what is actually true and then deal with it rather than deny what is …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 03:14 PM
8

And like today, women were likely at least as abusive of their husbands and children as men, probably more so. Both my wife’s (paternal) and my (maternal) grandmothers were horribly abusive to our grandfathers, and both of our fathers have suffered abuse from their wives.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 03:04 PM
1

I don’t believe they were. But even if they were, that’s no reason to ignore the truth about women’s nature.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 02:58 PM
2

☝️Note the use of the word “organism” in place of the word “child” or “offspring.” The attempt is to liken one’s own child to a parasite, which itself demonstrates just how psychopathically selfish and cruel the mindset is. And furthermore, women employ such euphemisms to obscure what they are actually doing because they know it’s depraved.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 02:54 PM
2

Yet women still insist on a supposed “right” to kill their own children?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 07:57 AM
37

Observing women’s behaviors and trying to predict them. Red Pill philosophy works a lot better as a framework for accurately predicting women’s behaviors and thus for having more mutually satisfying interactions with women than the feminist framework (of lies) in which many of us were raised. In reality Red Pill philosophy is just the generational wisdom that men traditionally passed down about women’s nature, but that chain of learning was disrupted by feminism. If you were born in the brief pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:47 AM
2

That you feel the need to obscure the act of killing one’s own child by calling it “a medical procedure” only demonstrates that you also recognize the inherent violent depravity of the act. Similar to the use of the terms “our peculiar institution,” “person held to service or labor,” “ethnic cleansing,” and “final solution to the Jewish question,” the employment of such euphemism to hide the ugliness reveals knowledge of the ugliness.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 01:28 AM
2

Correct, it is absolutely about women choosing to kill their own children because they find the duty of care for them inconvenient. That’s a winner on the depravity scale. It is, in fact, so depraved that you choose to employ euphemisms in order to obscure the true depravity of the act.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 11:11 PM
2

No men in the US have the “autonomy” to not use our bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for our offspring without being legally punished. And we certainly don’t have the “autonomy” to kill our own children simply because we wish to shirk the natural duty of a parent to use his or her body to provide sustenance and shelter for our offspring.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 11:09 PM
3

Women will say whatever makes them feel best about themselves in any given moment or whatever they think will make you feel best about them subsequent to the first condition. None of it has any bearing on reality. And to my point, women’s perception of negging is entirely variable based on the attractiveness of the man doing it and has nothing to do with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:31 PM
–

☝️”Ignore the ugly truth, it undermines my worldview!”
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:22 PM
3

“Creepy” and “manipulative” to women is defined by the man’s level of attractiveness, not the behavior. Attractive man approaches = complimentary. Unattractive man approaches = creepy. Attractive man negs = flirty. Unattractive man negs = attempt at manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 04:16 PM
12

Women are so accustomed to sexual attention that they take it for granted and disdain it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 02:11 PM
1

I never used the word murder. Murder is a legal fiction. It is very much scientific fact that the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from the sexual reproduction of a human male and female are 1) living, 2) members of the genus Homo (aka humans), and 3 the offspring of their parents (aka children). It is also very much a scientific fact that the act of elective abortion is the act of killing said living human children.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 11:48 PM
1

I’m not appealing to emotion. Just stating facts. That you are unmoved by those facts is unsurprising, and only speaks to my original point. As I have repeatedly stated, women in our culture are so psychopathically selfish and cruel (aka anti-social) that they unashamedly argue for a supposed “right” to kill their own children. That you do so as well only bolsters the accuracy of that statement and adds to the proper perspective through which readers can assess women’s spurious assertions about …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 11:36 PM
0

That the leading cause of human death in the US is women killing their own children is not an opinion. It is a fact. And it is a fact which brings sound, accurate, and proper perspective to every conversation involving sex and anti-social behaviors (including violence and/or any form of disregard for others). That you wish to ignore the prevalence and extreme extent of women’s anti-social behaviors does not invalidate them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 11:17 PM
3

…and this year women in the US will kill at least 1,000,000 of their own children, merely because they find the burden of care for them inconvenient. You don’t want to get into a depravity measuring contest, modern women have that on lock.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:48 PM
4

Hard to think of more extreme examples of depravity than killing one’s own children, and women killing their own children is the leading cause of human death in the US, by far.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:45 PM
1

That you choose to ignore the relevance of my response to the OP does not obviate that relevance. Rather, it merely highlights women’s reliance on making arguments without reference to meaningful perspective because proper perspective often demonstrates the foolishness of their arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:41 PM
2

Is this about women choosing what to do with the organism siphoning inside of her body that she alone is gestating? That construction is a naked attempt to elicit sympathy for the decision to kill one’s own child.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 09:46 PM
2

Yet women die from doing so less than 1/3rd as frequently as do men and still claim a supposed “right” to kill their own children because they wish to duck the universally acknowledged responsibility of parents to do so. That’s about as anti-social as one can get, yet you are still expecting sympathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:57 PM
2

☝️Expecting sympathy for the act of killing their own children The “organism siphoning inside of her body” is her child, and humane societies recognize that parents have a duty to produce sustenance and shelter for their children. In fact, men in our society are legally required to use their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children until they teach the age of majority, and more than 3x as many men die in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:44 PM
0

There is little more anti-social than killing one’s own children and then arguing for a supposed “right” to do so, yet each year in the US women kill their own children at least 4,600% more frequently than men kill anyone but themselves in suicide, and vehemently argue for a supposed “right” to do so. Yet women still expect sympathy, even for the act of killing their own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:15 PM
–

In the vast majority of cases the children women produce are substantially more beneficial to society than the economic goods and services produced by women. Also note that the period that we have not been “cavemen” is less than 5% of the history of the species. We’re a lot closer to “caveman” than you realize.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:06 PM
0

Definitely #2. As modern Western society continues to unwind and the economic portion of that unwind kicks into high gear, women will have increasing economic pressure to flock to powerful men (which they naturally do anyway). The large pools of frustrated low status young men are already accumulating- and what’s worse is that older demagogues are already crafting the messaging required to harness that frustration in a bid for tyrannical power.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:51 PM
18

False. Psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behaviors are very anti-social traits which usually result in “nobody’s wanting to be around them,” yet women are attracted to just those traits. OTOH, agreeableness, being conciliatory, and generally nice are very social traits which usually result in “everyone wanting to be around them,” yet women view those as “doormat,” “creepy,” or “manipulate,” behaviors and are repulsed by them.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:42 PM
1

My stance is that trying to draw an analogy between a nation and a club is idiotic. As is trying to draw an analogy between a club and a welfare state economy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 04:00 AM
1

The question you have been avoiding is whether or not you believe that your interpretation of the “ethical responsibility” entitles you (or anyone) to violate the negative rights of others and force them to adhere to your interpretation of the “ethical responsibility” which you have defined. Again, this is the essential problem with establishing positive rights. They inevitably create an entitlement to violate the negative rights of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 03:44 AM
1

Good question, you’re the one who’s been arguing that membership benefits should “be provided” to everyone. I have made no such argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 03:02 AM
–

Your (convoluted and somewhat nonsensical) assertion presumes that people are only attracted to people who are like themselves in personality. I am unaware of any empirical evidence supporting that assertion. Nor am I aware of a sound rational argument supporting that presumption.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 03:00 AM
–

That’s not what the empirical evidence shows. Rather, it shows that men are attracted to niceness and agreeableness in women. But the issue for men is that we aren’t the sexual selectors of the species. We are the selected.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 02:53 AM
–

Women are attracted to narcissistic, psychopathic, and Machiavellian behaviors. What do you expect?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 02:39 AM
1

You cannot provide anyone with membership in a club, they have to apply.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 02:30 AM
1

No club to which I ever belonged automatically enrolled you because you were born in a certain place and then forced you to pay their dues. They also didn’t make some members pay more than others for the same set of services.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 02:20 AM
1

Your response begs the question: How does “the group” decide? As to working in “an office”: Co-operation is voluntary, and in my 30 year career working in “an office,” those who didn’t pull their productive weight got fired and those who produced the most got promoted. Similarly, in the clubs to which I belonged if you didn’t pay your dues you got kicked out.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 01:31 AM
1

What you call “consensus” morality is only an aggregation of individual personal morality as only individuals have the capability of holding a particular position on whether something is moral or not. So then the question becomes: “Whose morality set will become the standard by which determinations are made to seize the productivity of others via the use of forceful coercion for redistribution by a centralized authority. Given your previous comment, your likely answer will be “the majority.” But…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 12:26 AM
1

You haven’t thought this one through. Where do you think the goods and services that a socialist government distributes come from? They have to be produced by people, mostly young men. And since socialism is one of the most inefficient systems for producing goods and services, you need more people (and especially more young men) to produce those goods and services which the government will distribute. Where do you think those people (mostly young men) that produce the goods and services that the…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 08:23 PM
1

Well in socialist societies, maintaining a birth rate above 2.1 children per woman is even more important than it is in non-socialist societies.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 08:06 PM
1

You seem to be suggesting that you should get to impose your view of morality with regard to how others use the excess productivity that they produced. Are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 08:04 PM
1

Your country is likely poor because it has been socialist, most poor countries are.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 07:44 PM
1

The only legal users of coercive force are governments. So if you intend to centralize control over individuals’ ability to decide de for themselves how much they want to produce, how much they want to consume, and how they wish to consume it, you will have to use coercive force to do so and then you’re talking about using the government.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 07:35 PM
1

Ahh, I see. You haven’t traveled much and you’ve buying the socialist nonsense. You should get out of whatever city in which you live occasionally. The world is massive and almost entirely unpopulated. Every single human in the world standing shoulder to shoulder would fit within the city limits of Los Angeles.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 07:32 PM
1

You don’t care about the existence of humanity? You only care about your own existence? Given that you only care about your own existence, you should care a great deal about the continuation of the modern Western welfare state economics, because your existence as a woman becomes dramatically more difficult without it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 05:10 PM
1

What is universally true is that without reproduction at a rate above 2.1 per woman, the species ends. What is also true is that without a higher rate than that modern Western welfare state economics cannot be sustained.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 04:53 PM
2

Yep, and in doing so explains what is valuable.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 04:29 PM
2

Women are not sexually attracted to agreeable men. Women are sexually attracted to men who display narcissism, psychopathy, and narcissism.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 04:27 PM
2

According to biology. You can believe whatever you want, but in the real world women’s most valuable contribution to the species is having children.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 04:20 PM
2

There is a vast difference. For example, though my wife and I are the same age, I am still capable of producing children and she is not. But that is not even really relevant to the argument because as I said, women’s most valuable contribution to the species is their fertility and men’s is our utility (two different things).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:52 PM
1

Doesn’t seem like you are familiar with the definition of charity. All individuals can chose to be charitable. And most people are. There is nothing more concentrating than putting care for others in the hands of a government, which is literally a very small set of individuals who make decisions for a vastly larger group of people. The more economic power you remove from individuals and give to government the more you are concentrating economic decision-making into a smaller group of people and …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:48 PM
2

Technically no but it changes the shape of the distribution dramatically, and the distribution is what actually counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:38 PM
0

Did you just back track and agree with me about the social circle? If you define “social circle” to include people you’ve never met but have been in places in which you have been, then yes. Did you know there are men who can wait until you know each other a bit before being intimate with someone? Yes, but that doesn’t mean they don’t want sex and didn’t from the very beginning, before even actually meeting you. The reason they are “waiting” is because they have to or because they think you might…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:35 PM
1

☝️This is a non-sequitur. I don’t really care what others think about me, I care about truth and am confident enough in who I am to acknowledge that unless they know me personally they would have good reason for thinking that because… What is true is that black (American) culture is matriarchal and consequently does suffer mightily because most of our children are not raised in households with intact family structures.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:23 PM
2

The older boys in their school are still just slightly older. …because of school age cohorting.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 05:28 AM
2

They mainly select men in their age cohort because school cohorts by age… You probably want to reread my post. And even in 1st world countries women prefer the most powerful men to which they have access.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 04:02 AM
2

They mainly select men in their age cohort because school cohorts by age, but even with school cohorting they still tend to select the older boys and men in their cohort because the older boys and men in their cohort tend to be the more powerful boys and men in their cohort. And women are primarily attracted to power.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:15 AM
7

Physical utility is pretty low on the scale of utility (which is why physical labor isn’t particularly highly compensated).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:12 AM
0

Women certainly DO approach the men they are interested in, this almost always happens with social circles. While this may be true for you, this has not been my experience, nor would I believe it to be the experience of most men who are regularly approached. Women approach out of the blue (from our perspective) at least as frequently as they do from within our social circles, probably more. That said, if you count “social circle” as any woman who has potentially heard of your existence or seen y…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:10 AM
3

The number one thing women care about when it comes to selecting a man is how old he is. Empirical evidence suggests otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 02:53 AM
5

It’s not up to us, it’s down to biology. Women’s most valuable contribution to the species is their fertility, men’s is our utility. Both peak at different ages.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 02:50 AM
2

Apparently you don’t know what I mean. Co-operative effort arises out of specialization of labor as a natural means of improving efficiencies of production so that everyone benefits. It exists because human ability is limited and we all need help at something. But cooperation is not the same thing as charity which also has a vitally important place in society. But charity is not charity if it is coerced via the use of force. It only exists when it is voluntary, and for good reason. The voluntary…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 12:08 AM
–

Yet if 70% of black children are born out of wedlock and raised without fathers in the home, it is neither racist nor sexist to say that the black community has a serious problem with fatherless homes and a matriarchal culture which is causing substantial harm to our community and the nation as a whole. And while I say this as a black man with several children raised in an intact family structure, it would be neither racist nor sexist if anyone else said it too. Rather, like OP’s post, it would …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 04:25 PM
1

The question is not whether or not we are social animals who need cooperation with others to survive and thrive. That’s obvious. The question is whether or not you wish to use coercive force to engender that cooperation in others according to your perception of how those others should be cooperating… …or do you believe that each individual should be free to choose the extent to which he wishes to cooperate with any other individual. Because the bottom line reality is that as social animals we co…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 04:05 PM
1

Regardless of what your moral stance might be, the material conditions necessary for survival require material effort. If we don’t work, we die. If you want to guarantee survival for everyone, then you will have to commit to the use of coercive force to take from those who produce and redistribute to those who do not, which inherently means that you do not in fact value everyone’s “intrinsic” qualities equally. This is demonstrative of the conflict between positive and negative rights. You canno…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 04:12 AM
1

I never claimed that it wasn’t a “real number.” It’s the result of a census which most definitively is not an exact count of all work related deaths of US citizens in the employ of US entities. And that data has been shaped and used in statistical models to produce a full report which estimates US workplace related death rates in order to produce a more complete statistical picture. So now that we understand that the “real number” to which you refer is an estimation (because it is most definitel…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 01:06 AM
1

What about you being a woman has anything to do with your confidence in your claims? If you are confident, I am presenting you with an opportunity to double your net worth. The fact is that you’re not confident in your claims, and you shouldn’t be because you haven’t actually thoroughly researched (or really even just thought through) that on which you are commenting. So I’ll ask you again, without the integrity check of you having to actually risk something on the veracity of your claim: Do you…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:52 PM
1

Again, your post didn’t require a rebuttal because it didn’t present a logical refutation of anything I have claimed. You keep referring to a specific count. And I ask you: Would you bet your net worth that there were only 5,070 work related deaths in the US in 2024? How about 15,795 homicides? Those are both officially reported numbers from US government agency census counts. If you are willing to bet your net worth, I’m happy to take you up on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:38 PM
1

Apparently you didn’t go so far as to investigate exactly how they arrived at that count. A: They do a census pulling data on a population of about 165,000,000 people (the estimated us labor pool), from about 8,300,000 ultimate end sources (the estimated number of US employers).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:20 PM
3

And here you are continuing to demonstrate your willful ignorance of the actual statistics. No, the fact that we are not reaching even replacement levels of population is not due to “teen pregnancy” declines. It’s due to declines in women giving birth between the ages of 20 and 29. But yes, I agree that Western welfare state economic structures are inherently unsustainable and thus “stupid.” However, reversion to any more sustainable (and just) meritocratic economic system would be anathema to t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:05 PM
1

The “raw data” to which you refer is on an estimated population of roughly 165,000,000 people collected from at least 8,300,000 different sources (another estimate) and collated in at least several thousand distinct data formats. Do you think that FBI crime statistics (which use the same basic census, data shaping, and statistical modeling methods with a much smaller set of input sources) capture all homicides? A: Of course not. Yet we still take their reporting on homicides as factual informati…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 04:55 PM
2

As I originally said, women are the majority beneficiaries of modern Western welfare economies, and stand to suffer the most when they fail. Which makes it all the more ironic that the failure of such systems is becoming imminent because of women’s current attitude towards their essential biological function.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 03:19 PM
1

Now dollar weight it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:49 PM
1

Juice boxes (nor any other type of food/services for children) account for the vast minority of total welfare state payments. The majority of such payments are healthcare and income support for elderly women (who may or may not have adult children).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:37 PM
1

And yet, women are still the majority beneficiaries.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:31 PM
1

I know they do, but women are the majority recipients.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:23 PM
2

Nope. Welfare includes much more than just AFDC (or whatever the current acronym is). The two largest welfare programs in the US are Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, both of which are at least an order of magnitude larger than AFDC and women are the significant majority beneficiaries of those as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:19 PM
1

As I said, they conduct a census with multiple inputs. So obviously it’s not impossible to do a count. What is impossible is to do an entirely accurate count because that presumes perfection of data across those multiple inputs in the aggregation process. You will note that the “very specific demographic of people” to which you refer is drawn from a population of roughly 165,000,000 across roughly 8,300,000 ultimate sources for the data. You’d have to be insane to think that your census net will…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:09 PM
1

You may have looked but you clearly didn’t read. The BLS often gives specific numbers because their estimation models output precise numbers (via the magic of math!) just like all complex models. Yet the precision of the model output does not invalidate the fact that they are still estimates. Like with most of their published reports for workplace deaths they conduct a census using a variety of data inputs and then shape the data collected into an estimate based on complex statistical modeling b…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:09 AM
1

Some are counted and then used in an estimation. You probably should read actual BLS reports before commenting on them so (over)confidently.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:27 AM
1

You’ve just made it clear that you don’t actually understand the process by which that data is aggregated and published.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:17 AM
1

Yes. Almost everything which we commonly accept as fact is actually a probabilistic estimation based on subsets of observed data and statistical analysis, like (for instance) the number of children born each year, the number of children killed by their mothers each year, the number of men killed in the workplace, the number of women that die from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth, or even the number of residents in the US. That’s broadly called empirical inquiry (more commonly re…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:10 AM
2

So you are unfamiliar with how simple math allows for estimation using extrapolation and/or interpolation across data sets as well I take it. Just because you don’t like a fact (presumably because it doesn’t align with your preferred narrative) does not invalidate the fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 04:16 AM
1

Nope. Apparently you are as unfamiliar with the principles of logic as you seem to be with the data. If I had included all working men, that multiple would be in the neighborhood of 250% larger than it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 04:09 AM
1

Your point didn’t require a rebuttal as it was not a logically sound refutation.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 03:12 AM
6

Yes, women are the significant majority of beneficiaries in the Western welfare state economic system. And women net consume more than they produce. That you dislike those facts does not obviate those facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 03:11 AM
0

Yet every year in the US more than 3x as many men die in the act of producing sustenance and shelter for their children (and wives) than do women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 03:08 AM
0

I’ve been married for over three decades and have several children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 11:21 PM
0

Yes, your argument could absolutely be described that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 10:13 PM
0

Because men understand that “compatibility” is mutable, flexible, and ultimately subordinate to one’s will and maturity, not some monolithic edifice of division. Women, OTOH use the term as vague euphemism for “does what I want whenever I want” - which actually isn’t even attractive to them
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 10:01 PM
0

Every year in the US more than 3x as many men die in the act of producing sustenance and shelter for their offspring (and wives) as do women, inclusive of death from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth. If you count debilitating injury that multiple gets even larger.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 09:44 PM
6

It’s because we men tend to be more familiar and comfortable with math and the prioritization of that which is true over that which makes us feel a certain way. The modern Western welfare state economies on which women absolutely rely for their current quality of life are unsustainable with women’s current attitude towards their essential biological function. And the math suggests that the collective “head in sand” posture taken by women generally is going to end very badly for modern Western we…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 08:38 PM
1

Bucketing and probabilistic analysis based on it is not about determining certainty of outcome, it’s about estimating probabilistic outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 08:20 PM
2

Fortunately, I’m not looking for favors. Just speaking truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:44 PM
1

Everyone can see what you did. Your denial doesn’t change that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:27 PM
1

The “used for sex” mantra you alluded to rests on the implication that women don’t enjoy sexual intimacy for its own sake.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:21 PM
2

The “used for sex” mantra you alluded to rests on the implication that women don’t enjoy sexual intimacy for its own sake.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:18 PM
–

It has been my experience that women actually enjoy sexual intimacy too and don’t need to receive some other utility in order to be able to enjoy it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 07:03 PM
1

How does one “develop perspective” on something that is common knowledge and readily observable yet not self evident (like the fact that men cannot gestate and give birth to children)?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:34 AM
1

Is the fact that men cannot gestate and give birth to children self evident?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:29 AM
1

Guess not. Try a sixth.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:25 AM
1

Maybe on a fifth read the plain English can overcome your attempts at obtuseness?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:24 AM
1

Maybe a fourth?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:22 AM
1

Might want to read it a third time.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:19 AM
1

You may wish to re-read the first sentence of my last comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:16 AM
1

That women tend to be statistically significantly more conflict avoidant than men is common knowledge and readily observable. From Google AI on the matter: Studies suggest that women often adopt conflict-avoidant or compromising styles, frequently prioritizing relationship harmony over immediate issue resolution to avoid being perceived as aggressive. While some studies show women can be more collaborative, others indicate they may use avoidance to manage high levels of anxiety and emotional dis…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:11 AM
1

For anything. If you need love, you want it more than if you don’t. If you need air to breathe, you want it more than if you don’t. If you are walking 30 miles in the desert on a 100 degree day, you’ll want water more than if you’re sitting on your couch watching Netflix.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 05:02 AM
2

By definition it is the men who appeal to a broader array of women more consistently, thus the nonsensical nature of the OP. What makes it rare is that women have a very high overlap in what they tend to find sexually attractive and tend to rate men’s attractiveness in accordance with an inverse Poisson distribution as opposed to a standard normal distribution. And the reason they do that is that women find power sexually attractive at base and the way in which they perceive power is almost excl…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 09:47 PM
1

My buddies and I prefer skiing (alpine & jet) or riding (motorcycles or dirt bikes) or doing a long list of things together, none of which we would consider “romantic” unless we were engaged in them with our sexual intimacy partners of choice, because the entire concept of “romance” is derived from an origin point of sexual desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 09:01 PM
1

Not sure about you, but I don’t listen to people playing the violin on the beach or explore the “hip” arrondisments in Paris with romance on my mind with my platonic friends. To do so would be cruel to both myself and the other party. I only do that type of thing with my wife now and before that with other women with whom there was mutual desire for sexual intimacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 08:49 PM
1

In order to exercise any level of choice other than taking the single option that has been offered or nothing a man must have at least two women at any given time who have expressed a desire for sexual intimacy with him. That’s a very rare condition for men. And even then his choice is extremely limited compared to that of most women, and still fundamentally subordinate to women’s choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 08:15 PM
4

The idea of romantic love and romance itself is distinctly different from (and almost oppositional to) the idea of platonic love and friendship for a reason. That reason is sexual interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:56 PM
1

And would you say that women generally would advise their children to get into the fight even if they knew they were going to lose the fight? Would you say that women generally tend to prioritize overt conflict avoidance?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:47 PM
1

Would you advise to fight back even if you knew you were going to lose the fight?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:39 PM
1

I think you might have glossed over the second delineated point of my comment above.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:28 PM
5

Romance is entirely function of interest in sexual intimacy. Posing it as a distinct goal is nonsensical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:23 PM
4

“Getting laid” is a key factor of long term sexual relationships, ultimately the key factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:18 PM
4

True, but the “paying for dates” issue is just symbolic of what they can expect going forward.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:16 PM
1

She’s not primarily responsible. I am primarily responsible. She did most of the execution while deferring to my strategic and tactical decision-making. Being the ultimate decision-maker makes me primarily responsible and her secondarily responsible, and Researching and making a determination about which curriculum to use, which teachers to hire, which extracurriculars to pursue, etc is not at all the same thing as giving advice on how to handle bullying. It is absolutely idiotic to expect peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:13 PM
1

No, my wife spent much more time doing that than I did on the whole, though now I probably spend more time in direct teaching than she does. She managed, and still manages, the execution and defers to my strategic and tactical decision-making. Generally, as the children get older men take on more of the specialized educational roles in the homeschooling community.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:56 PM
1

We have homeschooled all of our several children. In my spare time over the last almost 20 years, I have taught economics and monetary history to homeschooled children, publicly schooled children, and children attending some of the finest private schools in the country. Generally speaking, the home schooled children are the most capable and facile critical thinkers and enthusiastic learners by a fair margin, with the children from excellent private schools reaching about 80% of that level on ave…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:41 PM
-1

Our modern educational systems were designed and originally put into place to suppress individual critical thinking ability and creativity, to create uniformity of opinion and belief, all in order to generate a subservient working class (inclusive of “white collar” middle management). And they are exceedingly effective at it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:32 PM
-4

You most definitely don’t want your wife giving advice to your bullied child, but if one is foolish enough as to put one’s child in school in the first place, I wouldn’t necessarily expect one to understand that. Where there are two, there will be differences of opinion, and when differences arise someone will have decision-making power. Ultimately if one’s wife isn’t willing to submit, the family’s going to have a difficult time thriving. Women tend to have very different priorities to men and …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:22 PM
16

Very few men have the capacity to choose women. Most men’s choice is limited to accepting whoever chooses them or going along with nothing. Thus, most men have to cast a wide net.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:02 PM
-1

Pro Tip: Women ask compliance and sycophancy of men in general because they think it makes their lives easier, but they actually detest it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:47 PM
1

You are conflating immediate sex with casual sex. You used two different adjectives precisely because the two different things are not the same. What we are actually discussing is whether the woman is viewing sexual intimacy as conditional on the receipt of some other utility (aka transactionally) or whether she is choosing to engage in sexual intimacy with a given man purely for the potential enjoyment of the intimacy itself without regard to the receipt of some other utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:44 PM
0

Need tends to encourage the strongest want.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:30 PM
1

Two non sequiturs and an ad hominem aside, again casual sex is not the root issue. The root issue is whether or not a woman is actually sexually attracted to a given man. And if she is not he shouldn’t seek to be in any sort of committed relationship with her.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:22 PM
1

I don’t care that “most women aren’t into causal sex” for three reasons. One: Your premise is false. It’s not the casual nature of the sexual intimacy that is the root issue. Most women are totally fine with the idea of being sexually intimate with the very small percentage of men who they actually find sexually attractive solely for the enjoyment of the sexual intimacy and without the need to receive some other utility from those men in exchange for being sexually intimate with them. and Two (c…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:16 PM
5

It’s not “trying to make women jealous.” Humans have a tendency to use heuristics and since women are the sexual selectors of our species they are likely to use heuristics in their sexual selection. One heuristic that they frequently use is assigning value based on the choices of other women. There is no better aphrodisiac than showing up to an event with one or two attractive women on your arm. It works because women are attracted to power and when women see that other women are attracted to yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:34 PM
1

The fact that women in and out of relationship have a tendency to make sexual intimacy with the vast majority of men (but not all men) conditional on the receipt of some other utility is evidence of the fact that women have a dual standard of sexual attraction; and only the one that is not conditional on the receipt of some other utility can be considered true sexual attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:26 PM
1

Less than 25%.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 01:17 AM
2

https://ifstudies.org/insights?id=3587
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:50 AM
2

That we want relationship with women who actually find us sexually attractive does not men that we don’t want relationships. Rather, it just means that we want relationships with women who actually find us sexually attractive and not with those who don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:46 AM
2

Bankers typically do not complain about the financialization of the economy. Mercedes dealers typically do not complain about the decline in the durability of Mercedes cars. The British East India Company did not complain about the effects of opium on the Chinese population.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 06:28 PM
1

☝️ "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" -Queen Gertrude (Hamlet, 3:2)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:58 PM
3

Of course. Why would we want a relationship with a woman who doesn’t find us attractive enough for casual sex? Such relationships are a recipe for misery.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:54 PM
1

You would do well to study that which you wish to critique before critiquing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:51 PM
1

Again, if you do not definitively know what it is, you cannot logically know what it is not. Not knowing “what it is” evidences that the process is entirely happening in your subconscious and therefore you are consciously unaware of any aspect of that process and your conscious feelings about it are merely projections of how you would like to be perceived rather than valid understanding of the process. And you can tell this, because I referred to several different categorizations of the expressi…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:49 PM
1

If you don’t definitively know what it is (what creates “magical spark”) you cannot know what it is not. You are just reacting to the fact that you don’t like how it sounds to be attracted to power.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:55 PM
1

I don't know. Either I FEEL the spark or not. It's not just looks, I must have some interaction with him and feel the vibe. But it's a mystery to me too. And I really don't know how or why, it just happens. I have no control over it… Like you said (but emphasis mine).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:42 PM
1

Almost everything women do is in pursuit of power, and men pursue power because it is so attractive to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:32 PM
4

Relationships in which one was “settled for” aren’t very good relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:30 PM
1

Status and money are just two aspects of 5 different forms of the expression of power.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:23 PM
1

OP, this ☝️is an honest answer. Note that she admits to not knowing how or why or to having any control over it, but then asserts that “there are no rules” and no common factors. That is an oxymoron. There very much are rules and commonalities. They just operate in her subconscious and thus she is unaware of them. That is not unusual, most women persist in that state, even most of those who claim otherwise. The rule and the commonality for all women is the expression of power, in some combinatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:19 AM
1

Based on research into genetic history, roughly 40% of men who ever lived have reproduced, compared to about 80% of women. This indicates that today’s human population is descended from roughly twice as many women as men, largely due to historical disparities in resources and power where fewer men left descendants. Massive Skew: Studies indicate that throughout much of human history, as few as 1 man reproduced for every 4 or 5 women. Unequal Legacy: While most women who reached adulthood histori…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 10:33 PM
1

You haven’t cited a single law or piece of any law in your critique. Likely because you haven’t actually read any of the laws you are presuming to critique.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 09:03 PM
1

If you wish to criticize the laws, criticize the actual laws. I don’t think you’ve even read any of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 07:38 PM
1

You showed me alleged results of laws which you are criticizing with no reference to the actual laws. Have you read the actual laws which you are criticizing? Do you know what they actually are? …or are you just repeating what you have been told,d?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 07:24 PM
1

Don’t see any actual laws in your links. Have you read the actual laws for yourself?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 04:30 PM
1

That it doesn’t work for many is unsurprising given the feminist effort to deconstruct the functional base organizational unit of society (the family) and thereby weaken both that unit and subsequently society as a whole. Equality =/= sameness, and Co-equal headship precludes unity and lessens the effectiveness of the structure
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 03:08 AM
1

Please link any such “draconian rules” to which you refer.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 02:36 AM
1

The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” is “offspring.” The English word “fetus” is a loanword from the Latin “fetus” meaning “offspring.” That you need to deny, subvert, and twist the very meaning of words in order to uphold such a depraved argument only demonstrates that you actually do understand just how depraved the argument actually is. This is not unusual. Human history is replete with certain more powerful groups of humans subverting language in order to deny other less …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:43 PM
3

The title implies that you are unfamiliar with the meaning of the word “amoral.”
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:38 PM
1

☝️Argues that elective abortion is not killing one’s own child. When given proof that it is actually exactly that, claims that the proof “isn’t relevant.” 🤡 Then attempts to argue via implication that others should have a supposed “right” to kill human beings simply because they may be poor. 🤡🤡
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:36 PM
0

I neither asserted nor implied that abandoning one’s child is “morally OK.” It is morally wrong. It is, however, less morally bankrupt than killing one’s own child.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:18 PM
1

That you wish to ignore the meaning of words (and declare them irrelevant) so that you can continue to obscure the scientific fact that elective abortion is the act of killing one’s own child, does not obviate the fact that elective abortion is the act of killing one’s own child.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:16 PM
1

The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” describes a relationship between two individuals that is independent of the state of development (zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, etc) of the individuals being described by the relationship. For example, I am still accurately described as the child of my parents even though I have adult children of my own and both of my parents are deceased. Fun Fact: Etymologically, the English word child is derived from the proto-Germanic word “k…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:09 PM
1

The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” describes a relationship between two individuals that is independent of the state of development (zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, etc) of the individuals being described by the relationship. For example, I am still accurately described as the child of my parents even though I have adult children of my own and both of my parents are deceased. Fun Fact: Etymologically, the English word child is derived from the proto-Germanic word “k…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 06:10 AM
0

…rather than kill her own child. See how you avoid that whole killing of others part.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:57 AM
1

That’s less than .01% of the 1,000,000 children a year killed by their own mothers in the US. Why are you defaulting to talking about an extreme edge case instead of the 999,900 other children who are killed by their own mothers?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:15 AM
1

What those men who skirt their responsibility (and are held accountable for it) do not do is kill their own children. Nor are they so psychopathically selfish and cruel that they assert a supposed “right” to kill their own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:12 AM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/wGjGeys3e3
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:08 AM
0

See above.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:07 AM
0

More than 3 times as many men die each year in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring than do women, inclusive of deaths from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth. Yet men are not so psychopathically selfish and cruel as to assert that that fact somehow confers on them a supposed “right” to kill their own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:07 AM
0

☝️Username checks out Hard to think of something more hateful of women than advising a traumatized young woman to kill her own daughter. That’s the kind of thing which takes one traumatic experience and heaps another massively traumatic experience (that of killing one’s own child no less) on top of the first. As I stated earlier, we have a generally accepted moral tradition that two wrongs don’t make a right.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:02 AM
0

Actually, more than 3x as many men in the US die every year in the act OG using their bodies to provide sustenance and shelter for their offspring as do women, inclusive of death from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth. Strange conclusion that the assertion that women shouldn’t kill their own daughters at the rate of 450,000+ a year is somehow “hating women.” 👀
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 11:39 PM
0

Yes, but they quit their jobs and flee because the law is holding them accountable via fines, wage garnishment, and imprisonment.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 11:10 PM
0

We have legal standards for self defense as a justification for killing others and they work fairly well. There are also two traditions in Western legal practice that 1: two wrongs don’t make a right, and 2: we don’t punish children for the sins of their fathers. And aside from eugenicists we typically find it immoral **to kill** others simply because they may have defects of one sort or another.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 10:58 PM
1

You can accurately be described as “a clump of cells.” That you wish to deny the scientific fact that the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are both living and individual members of the genus Homo, does not obviate the scientific fact that the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are in fact living individual members of the genus Homo (aka individual living humans).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 09:39 PM
1

I made no mention of murder in any of my posts. Murder is a legal fiction which is a criminal act. That elective abortion is not classified as such does not obviate the fact that it very much is the killing of living human beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 09:36 PM
1

You didn’t look at all human death, you restricted your observation to death from disease. CDC estimates annual US elective abortion at roughly 900,000, roughly 450,000 of those will be females. The Guttmacher Institute estimates roughly 1,150,000 per year of which roughly 575,000 will be females. As the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from the sexual reproduction of a human male and female are scientifically classified as both alive and members of the genus Homo (aka living humans), the…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 09:34 PM
1

FBI, CDC, Guttmacher Institute **Edit:** It’s important to keep things in their proper perspective so that we understand from where the bulk of violence against human females actually originates. For every one woman that is killed by a man, women kill at least 184 of their own daughters.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 08:04 PM
0

The leading cause of human female death in the US is mothers killing their own daughters. They do so at least 18,367% more frequently than men kill women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 07:56 PM
2

I never claimed that you build careers for the sake of attractiveness. Rather, I simply asserted that you presume such is attractive to us because it is attractive to you. But men are attracted to different qualities in women than women are in men and ambition typically isn’t one of them. It is far more important to us that women to whom we choose to commit be kind and agreeable because “It is better to dwell in the corner of the rooftop, than with a quarrelsome woman in a large house.”
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 06:28 AM
2

Adults do not do the unconditional love; that's for children but we do understanding love for each other. Nope. Some of us are capable of actually appreciating others without regard to their utility to ourselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 06:21 AM
0

The existence of (or lack thereof) “ups and downs” is not what defines the health of a relationship. Correlation =/= causation.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 06:19 AM
2

She has learned how to actually love others (myself included) over the years, particularly upon becoming a mother. And again, to provide does not mean “buy stuff for” or “give stuff to.” It quite literally means “to look ahead or towards.” And in the context of others it is a shepherding role in which one simultaneously looks ahead (to the future) and looks toward (the best interests of another). The largest part of being a good provider is saying no to the prioritization of wants and refocusing…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 06:15 AM
-1

The percentage of people getting married has also dropped precipitously.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 06:02 AM
1

Washing and cleaning is very easy to hire out and much cheaper than a girlfriend or wife. And women are absolutely horrendous “emotional tenders” for men. The fastest way to lose sexual attractiveness to a woman is to show her emotional vulnerability requiring “tending.”
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 06:00 AM
2

It’s not “offensive” to me, and no people who actually love others don’t do so like a man “loves” his Makita LXT cordless impact driver and drill set. We love them for who they are without regard to their utility to ourselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 05:51 AM
2

It is true that the male example that you have given is also not love. But I suspect that he would admit that it’s not love. It is not true that what you describe is uniformly distributed across sex, which is evident in divorce statistics.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:16 PM
2

She does actually love that I provide for her (given the actual meaning of the word - which is not “buy stuff for”).
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:13 PM
2

Ask them.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:11 PM
1

You can’t actually observe “red pilled dudes” on the internet.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:11 PM
6

Ask them why, or what they love about them. In more than 50% of cases you’ll get a list essentially describing utility to themselves rather than his inherent qualities without reference to the utility to themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:05 PM
1

Most of them love what their husbands do for them more than they actually love their husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 09:02 PM
4

Yes, and have been for long enough to have observed many marriages somewhat closely. In very few of them would I say that the wives have “fallen for” (or even actually love) their husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:57 PM
1

It is becoming more apparent why you haven’t yet figured out that UBI is a pipe dream.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:51 PM
5

It has been my experience of observing marriages that most women who are married haven’t actually “fallen for” their husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:42 PM
1

I was not limiting my statement to resources on Earth, which is why I used the descriptor “readily available” and suggested that acquisition of the resources required to build a Dyson Sphere would require the energy produced by a Dyson Sphere. It is becoming more apparent why you haven’t yet figured out that UBI is a pipe dream.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:39 PM
8

In the US 40% of marriages fail and of the 60% that don’t a significant percentage of them are unhealthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:29 PM
1

Construction of a Dyson Sphere would take more material resources and energy than are readily available if you don’t already have one. So yes, also a good analogy to UBI.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:25 PM
2

If you had actually read any RP philosophy, this would be apparent to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:23 PM
2

It is effeminate to conflate criticism with hate, they are not the same thing, and men that were raised with fathers don’t do that. And we don’t even criticize “financially independent” women, we just believe that your “financial independence” doesn’t make you any more attractive to us. What we criticize is the solipsism which leads you to believe that it should and the lack of wisdom evident in valuing a “corporate career” over motherhood, both of which make you less attractive to us. It is coo…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:06 PM
2

And we also call out ourselves for failing to be successful in that which we seek.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 07:40 PM
2

UBI is a crack pipe inspired fever dream that is as unworkable as establishing a colony on the sun. 🤡
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 07:20 PM
3

That women (generally) flee from honest introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique as if it were a deadly toxin.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 06:53 PM
2

That you think “you put [me] in a corner” is itself evidence of my assertion.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 06:50 PM
3

I could not ask for better evidence of my assertion than your post history in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 06:47 PM
5

Yes RP philosophy exists because Western culture was emasculated by feminism and boys were not raised in masculine environments.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 05:03 PM
7

The main theme of RP content is: If you want sexual access to women, work on yourself and if you’re unwilling to do that, stop bitching about it. Men (who were raised with strong fathers) criticize ourselves all the time. It’s ingrained in our culture because we understand that it’s how we improve. Women, OTOH, are extremely conflict avoidant and eschew open criticism because it can engender conflict. Thus the effeminate construct that criticism = hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 04:56 PM
10

Simps, Betas, Emasculated men, Lazy men, Etc And I didn’t say feminists don’t self criticize. I assert that honest introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique is anathema to women generally.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 04:51 PM
9

It’s not that women are never criticized, it’s that women never criticize themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 04:45 PM
8

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273809664_The_Dark_Triad_personality_Attractiveness_to_women https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-019-00213-0 …and so on. TL;DR: Women are attracted to psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellian behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 02:58 AM
1

There is a difference and the latter situation is an indicator that you are more likely to eventually find yourself in the former, as I explained in my above comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:02 PM
1

…and with that you’ve just undermined your entire argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:32 PM
1

Not when they can’t rely on their relative lack of productivity being subsidized.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:38 AM
1

Power is expressed in 5 different ways: physically, socially, financially, intellectually, and spiritually. Different women are attracted to different combinations of those expressions, but all are attracted to power and the expression of power.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:36 AM
1

In our hunter gatherer days, people died in their 30s and 40s. Nope. Average lifetimes were much shorter because far more children didn’t make it to adolescence, not because people typically died a lot younger if they did make it to adolescence.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:32 AM
3

For men, your power. And women are attracted to power.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:29 AM
3

In my socioeconomic cohort (US private day school to NE boarding school to Ivy college & grad school to .5%er income careers - if you weren’t a Trustafarian) the most stable marriages by a substantial margin have been those that were entered into early on with couples formed in prep school or college. At my prep school reunions I’d estimate the percentage of couples still together who came together in prep school or college is in the 70% range, whereas the percentage of couples still together wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:24 AM
0

In Western economies it is women who benefit most from productive younger cohorts, by a significant margin. When older women outnumber the productive younger cohorts, they will suffer hard and women of childbearing age will suffer too, but less hard because they will be able to bear their own children. And the prospects for women are much worse in non-capitalist economies.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:03 AM
0

Most developed nations have birth rates under replacement and having children isn’t in the top 10 of priorities for most young women. Waiting to get into LTRs leads to higher rates of happiness and more stable relationships. The second assertion is a fleetingly temporary condition which only lasts until your society doesn’t have enough productive young people to sustain the older population due to the first assertion. Then it all collapses and the older women suffer the most.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:43 PM
–

Taken one step further, do not think of your spouse as an object for the provision of some utility to yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:41 PM
1

Can women?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:35 PM
1

Was your plan all along to point to evidence of an involuntary physical reaction in a minority of males that often results from lack of regular sexual intimacy, claim that said involuntary physical reaction is in fact voluntary, and then claim that said evidence demonstrates intentional male causality for why women don’t orgasm as much in casual sex? 🤡
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 03:14 PM
1

Which contradicts your statement directly above.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 03:00 PM
1

Evidence?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 06:55 PM
1

And again, correlation =/= causation. I would refer you to my earlier causal hypothesis.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:09 PM
1

For a third time correlation =/= causation.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:05 PM
1

Which you declare has a single specific cause that is entirely unsupported by any evidence you have given.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:56 PM
1

None of which supports your causal claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 05:09 AM
1

Nothing in your linked study evidences your claim. You shouldn’t link studies that you haven’t actually read.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:25 AM
3

When I speak, I speak to dispel lies and share truth. How I appear to others is not really a concern of mine. Those who appreciate truth will respond positively and those who are more concerned with image will likely respond negatively.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:14 AM
1

Only roughly 50% of women regularly experience orgasm anyway, 20% report having difficulty doing so, and as many as 15% never have. Yet women report having orgasms 60% of the time on average in heterosexual encounters. Maybe it’s not because men are “bad at it.”
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:11 AM
3

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:55 AM
1

That sounds more like a personal experience than a sound logical conclusion. Again, correlation =/= causation, and I would refer you to the same potential causes I mentioned above.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:53 AM
3

Neither that thought, nor anything like it has never crossed my mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:50 AM
3

☝️Word Salad
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:54 AM
3

Your comments speak for themselves in this regard, and in doing so they belie your ostensible representation.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 12:55 AM
3

Perhaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 09:48 PM
5

This sub, the comments under this post, and even your comment provide ample evidence of my assertion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 08:21 PM
0

☝️False dichotomy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 07:18 PM
4

No, the fact that women generally eschew introspection, objective self observation, and objective self critique creates RP content.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 07:17 PM
1

Correlation =/= causation. This take is entirely believable if the woman in question had been having casual sexual relationships with the intention of converting them into long term relationships while simultaneously choosing men for whom she herself happened to be in the lower physical attractiveness tier of their multiple options for intimacy, or she has significant character flaws that become apparent to the men in question. Those are two causal factors likely extant in the correlated events …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:52 PM
1

Maybe because we generally don’t believe in the specialization of rights according to identity?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 09:44 PM
-2

Either way it ends in a societal collapse, which will be catastrophic for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 06:21 PM
3

The analogy is to the money and the job (obverse sides of the same coin). You should give more thought to things before commenting.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 04:35 PM
3

You want to get paid $1,000,000,000/year. Why settle for less than that? Why not just get on the public dole?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 04:09 PM
-4

Saw a YT video recently in which the CC dug into the data and arrived at the conclusion that the drop in birth rates was more due to women delaying coupling to periods of low fertility and then regretting it than opting out entirely - a conclusion which was then supported by adoption data. Can’t find the video but apparently CBS, PBS, and the BBC have done similar research and arrived at a similar conclusion in years past.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 04:01 PM
1

I care to tell the truth about the current state of affairs because the current state of affairs cannot be changed as long as we are willing to use euphemism to obscure the truth and excuse the mass killing that is taking place. Unless those that are doing the mass killing are confronted with the reality of what they are doing instead of being comforted in conducting the mass killings, we cannot expect the mass killings to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 01:44 AM
1

All women were at one point in their developmental process zygotes, embryos, and fetuses, and at that point their sex was not indeterminate.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 10:06 PM
1

There is no “mixing of demographics” in any of my assertions. I have repeatedly been very clear about the demographics to which I am referring. And it is fact that the demographic to which you refer is encompassed by the demographic to which I refer and has faced the same risk profile. Thus, a mathematical comparison between the risks is absolutely pertinent to the proper contextual evaluation of the risks in question.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:02 PM
1

It’s illogical to call the killing of one’s own child violence? 🧐 Why? A: Because it’s women doing the killing. That’s disingenuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 08:24 PM
1

The moles on your skin are not living human beings, nor are they your children. That differential developmental stages of humans exist does not confer on anyone a supposed “right” to kill other humans, their own children no less. That people are unwilling to purchase contraception does not confer on them a supposed “right” to kill their own children. That some people die in the act of giving birth (or even doing something as plain as driving a car) does not confer on them a supposed “right” to k…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 08:05 PM
1

If we wish to truly understand any risk we must do so with contextual accuracy. That putting your statistics in their proper mathematical context is so bothersome to you is precisely why they need to be put in their proper mathematical context. That the proper mathematical context clearly demonstrates that men are a vanishingly small risk to the lives of human females relative to other women is important context for evaluating the risk being discussed. And your determination to ignore proper mat…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 07:52 PM
1

…but did face it in order to get to their present state of development… …which puts the (vanishingly small) risk that they currently face into its proper mathematical perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:36 PM
1

…who all faced the same risk that their own mothers were 17,000% more likely to have killed them than any man is.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:20 PM
1

No. My claim is that a dead human female is 17,000% more likely to have been killed by her own mother than by a man. And I make that claim to put the actual risks to human females in proper perspective. It’s not men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:17 PM
1

☝️”Accurate perspective on risk is irrelevant.” 🤡 Presumably because it demonstrates that the risk which you are decrying is vanishingly small in reality when compared to the actual risks of being killed? “IT DOESN’T COUNT WHEN WOMEN KILL, ONLY WHEN MEN DO!!!”
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:10 PM
1

It is a risk that every person in the demographic faced which puts their current risk into accurate perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 04:51 PM
4

Chaos and abuse in your background can either serve as the ultimate motivation for not repeating the conditions which spawned it or the ultimate excuse for not taking the responsibility to create order and security. That’s a choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 04:50 PM
0

It’s important to put risks into accurate perspective so that they don’t get exaggerated and used disingenuously.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:12 PM
1

The zygotes, embryos and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are scientifically classified as both living and being members of the genus Homo (aka living humans). The act of elective abortion is factually the act of killing those living humans. As you have suggested, in order to get to the statistics you quoted you have to limit the category to less than 2.5% of its actual size.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:10 PM
1

Including all human killing is not “padding the data” on human killing. And yes it’s true that approximately .57% of the total number of human females that have been killed are more likely to have been killed by a man…. …but approximately 99.43% of the human females that are killed every year are killed by their own mothers.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:38 AM
0

Nope not trying to dilute homicide statistics. Rather just making an accurate statement about the killing of humans in the US. That the facts may bruise your feelings does not obviate the fact that a human female is at least 17,000% more likely to have been killed by her own mother than a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:14 AM
1

You are only using criminal acts of killing classified as homicide, which are less 2.5% of the total annual killings of humans in the US. For the legal killings in the US you need to look at CDC data (estimates at 850,000 up) and the Guttmacher Institute (estimates at 1,160,000).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:34 AM
1

A human female in the US is at least 17,000% more likely to have been killed by her own mother than a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 01:26 AM
0

I get it, you’re young and naive, but the fact that a woman really wants one man doesn’t mean that she wants all men or even any other man. Every man’s ideal woman finds him irresistible and all other men completely resistible. And yeah, that’s worked out really well for me and every other man I know who has a similar setup. What works significantly less well is when your wife does actually find you resistible and thinks sexual intimacy with you is doing you a favor of some sort instead of herse…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 01:06 AM
–

You don’t math much, do you? The word mutual does not describe a distribution. If one sex has 99% of total choice and the other 1% of total choice, that is technically mutual. If total “choice” is 50/50 but in one sex it has uniform distribution but in the other it is inverse Poisson, that’s also mutual but the accurate description would be that one sex experiences choice whereas the other doesn’t. And choice is not who you message, it’s who’s willing to be sexually intimate with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 09:54 PM
–

No, I think it’s you demonstrating poor reading comprehension (or a lack of statistical understanding). I also said humans display mutual mate choice, but the distribution of the choice is neither uniform nor remotely symmetrical between men and women. The bulk of us are lucky to get chosen at all, and our secondary “choice” is either accept who chooses you or go without - possibly forever. A very small percentage of us get simultaneously chosen which then gives us an actual choice between the s…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 09:39 PM
–

Might be a good start to read the first sentence of your own quote.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:53 PM
–

Did you not read the first sentence of your own quote? In this thread I accurately described the extent of the human male sexual choice - a very few males get the vast majority of male choice and the vast majority get none.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:52 PM
-3

The leading cause of human death in the US is women killing their own children. They do so at a rate which is at least 4,600% more frequent than men kill anyone but themselves in suicide, and multiple orders of magnitude more frequent than even that. And women will go so far as to argue against the scientific reality that their own offspring aren’t living or aren’t human, or even liken their own children to parasites in order to justify the mass killings. Few things are more destructive to socie…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:48 PM
1

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:19 PM
1

All confidence schemes rely on the desire of the victim to get some utility for less than what they perceive to be the typical requisite effort. The con artist takes advantage of that desire by promising that utility to the victim. If you are not focused on obtaining utility, you cannot be conned. Thus my caution against evaluating others based on an evaluation of utility to the self.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:53 PM
5

…if you’re roughly average or better. Take a look around and count how many below roughly average looking dudes you see with significant female friend sets. Researchers attempted to study how women rate men and react to imagined sex with men while in an aroused and unaroused state. To do so, they showed 91 women either an erotic video or a hiking video before rating the attractiveness of photographs of men’s faces. The faces varied in attractiveness. The women then rated their disgust towards an…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:03 PM
4

Genetic and anthropological research suggests that throughout human history, approximately 40% of men reproduced, while about 80% of women did. This means that roughly twice as many women as men passed on their genes, with a few elite men often leaving large numbers of offspring, leading to a significant reproductive disparity. Source: Google AI Most men don’t get chosen.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:50 PM
8

Nope. We’re just not the sexual selectors of the species. The bulk of us are lucky to get chosen at all, and our secondary “choice” is either accept who chooses you or go without - possibly forever. A very small percentage of us get simultaneously chosen which then gives us an actual choice between the simultaneous choosers. That only happens because women have very high overlap in what they find attractive. And that high overlap can make it appear to women that men actually have choice because …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:42 PM
0

People’s actual character is always on full display and very easily observable for those who are truly observant (ie not engaged in trying to evaluate utility).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:11 PM
3

All that being said, I'm pretty confident that he's also below average in looks. Because if he were above average in looks, one of those women he meets at parties would have f*cked him for some random reason by now. Maybe, but women rarely (if ever) befriend men who are truly below average in looks, and when they do it’s only because those men supply them with something not easily obtained elsewhere (like money or illicit substances). If he does have many female friends (as he claims) it’s more …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:08 PM
3

I’ve probably been married for longer than you’ve been alive.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 05:25 AM
3

It substantially increases the likelihood that the sexual attraction is strong and not dependent on the anticipated receipt of some other utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 05:08 AM
1

Sound healthy LTRs are based on appreciation for the other that is so extensive that you are willing to be flexible with all other aspects of your life. If you are prioritizing how that other is going to fit (or not fit) into your plans, you are already prioritizing your plans over the person and evaluating that person as an object for the fulfillment of your plans. When the evaluation of the other based in determining the character of the other and has nothing to do with what you expect to rece…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 05:06 AM
3

But they are based on strong sexual attraction. If the desire for sexual intimacy is conditional on the receipt of some other utility, the sexual attraction isn’t strong enough for a healthy LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:42 AM
3

Of course they can, but that he buys into the trope that men generally don’t and he’s somehow special or deserving because he does signals that he’s been emasculated by feminist nonsense and is easily manipulable. Women tend not to be sexually attracted to easily manipulable men, it comes across as weak.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:34 AM
9

If none of them have been straightforward about hitting on you, it’s because either you’re not physically attractive (less likely because women are repulsed by men they don’t find physically attractive) or, more likely, you don’t come off as powerful and masculine. I see them as human and I can see value in them beyond a sexually That quote is strong evidence of the latter. It screams that you listen to what women say about their attractions and believe it, even though your experience belies wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:38 AM
3

It has been my experience that when women approach and express interest in a man, they’ve been observing him for longer than he has even been aware of their existence and very often have already done their vetting without him even knowing it. But at any rate the “compatibility” testing really boils down to “is he willing and able to do for me that which I want/expect him to do for me,” which is where the trouble lies (and the lies fester). As I suggested above: Pro Tip: If you vet for the charac…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:25 AM
3

So you have the onus of having to choose carefully. With great power (that of the sexual choice) comes great responsibility. And you’ll have to stop eschewing introspection, objective self-observation, and objective self-critique to be able pull it off. Pro Tip: If you vet for the character of the man without regard to what he can do for you, it’s much easier to choose well.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:58 AM
7

Which RP tenets specifically demonstrate that?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:46 AM
1

That a non-virgin woman wouldn’t “hookup” with a particular man implies that she requires the receipt of some other utility from him in exchange for participation in sexual intimacy. That’s never a sound basis for an healthy LTR. The man in question is never “any” man. Rather, he is always the particular man. Similarly, men should never date women who would “hookup” with “any” man, only the particular man. That a couple has an LTR does not make it healthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:28 PM
1

See my edit.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:04 PM
1

All men should only date women who would “hookup” with them. That a non-virgin woman wouldn’t “hookup” with a particular man implies that she requires the receipt of some other utility from him in exchange for participation in sexual intimacy. That’s never a sound basis for an healthy LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:59 PM
12

They know, often better than we do. It’s just difficult for them to openly admit and critique because then they’d have to acknowledge their own lack of wonderfulness. Keeping the WAWE going requires a collective conformity to eschewing introspection.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:55 PM
4

Victim mentality is anti-masculine and entropic. It will never appeal to men broadly.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:36 PM
2

It does mean that they’re not attracted enough to sustain a healthy LTR. Of course, exceptions could be made for a virgin.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:42 PM
2

Women are very adept at making it known when they want to be sexually intimate with a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:22 PM
2

All men should only date women who would “hookup” with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:19 PM
4

All men should only date women who would “hookup” with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:13 PM
4

…and if a woman isn’t attracted enough to you to take a risk, she’s definitely not attracted enough to you to sustain a healthy LTR because those are full of risk. As to the degeneracy, it’s certainly more degenerate to engage in sexual intimacy only conditional on the recipient of (aka in exchange for) some other other utility. The short term for such behavior is “prostitution.”
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:09 PM
1

Usually, we bring the table itself, and the chairs, and the structure that the table is in.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:01 AM
15

I’ll take it one step further: All men should only date women who would “hookup” with them. If a woman doesn’t view a man as quality “hookup material,” she’s not attracted enough to him to sustain a healthy long term relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:42 AM
1

Some human lives are worth more than others? It wouldn’t be unusual for you to think that. Human history is replete with certain more powerful groups of humans denying humanity to or otherwise asserting their superiority over other less powerful groups of humans as the result of various arbitrary differences (like state of development) in order to justify killing those less powerful groups masse. Even still, of all the examples of some groups of humans being depraved enough to kill others en mas…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:12 AM
1

Women do approach and shoot their shots, on the regular. They just don’t like giving up the plausible deniability of interest unless they absolutely have to. So, for most men, they don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:14 AM
1

You watch too much fictional TV and movies.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 07:33 PM
2

Indeed, which is why I added the “conservative families with strong male leadership and good female role models” clause. Weak male “leadership” within Christian families leads to poor female role models which leads to the absolutely rotten daughters you are observing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 07:30 PM
0

☝️How to tell everyone that you don’t know the first thing about hunting without saying “I don’t know the first thing about hunting.” Female lions are efficient at hunting. Female humans, not so much. One of the first things is that you have to be quiet. Lots of talking will ruin your day. That alone disqualifies women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 06:49 PM
3

Facts. You have to commit early on (right after you qualify), be looking in the right spot (church for conservative families with strong male leadership and good female role models), and you have to understand that you want to commit to a good support truck (not a Ferrari).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 06:36 PM
7

Never commit to a woman who picked you at the finish line. The smart ones pick you once you get your qualifying number, drive your support truck during the race, and hand you hydration and energy bars at strategic stops along the course. The ones who deserve your commitment do that and make meals for your pit crew as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 06:22 PM
0

The stats to which you refer only capture the instances in which mothers killing their own children are recorded as crimes. When you include non-criminal acts of such killing (and you can get that data from the CDC and the Guttmacher Institute) the instances of women killing their own offspring rise to 850,000 on the low end (according to the CDC) and 1,120,000 per year on the higher end (according to the Guttmacher Institute). https://www.guttmacher.org/news-release/2026/guttmacher-releases-ful…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 05:22 PM
-1

“Women created clothes?” 🤔 Also, that you think clothes are what protected you from the elements is telling. 👀 “Capable of hunting?” Yes. Efficient at hunting, nope. Hunting is hard, if you’re not efficient at it, you starve. Women were not efficient at it, which is why they didn’t do it (and still mostly don’t even with modern tools that even out the efficiency differential). “Women were gatherers?” Yes, but the reason the species has the intellect we do is because of the meat that men garnered…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 04:32 PM
3

Mostly men’s protection from the elements, starvation, and other animal predators, and occasionally men’s protection from other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 04:18 PM
1

You are statistically more likely to have been beaten by your mother than by your husband, and multiple orders of magnitude more likely to have been killed by your own mother than by any man.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 04:12 PM
–

It’s not wrong at all if you’re just looking for casual sex partners. It will almost certainly help with that. If you’re looking for LTR partners it is a very poor strategy indeed. Sounds a bit like you’re Ferrari shopping on a Hyundai budget - perhaps with the idea that if you can find dealer who’ll allow you to test drive a Ferrari, you’ll get lucky enough to win the lottery on that same day. You may well eventually find a Ferrari for the price of a new Hyundai, but at best you’ll end up with …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 03:55 PM
9

That you live in as safe an environment as you do and have the both the time to conceive of the above nonsense and the ability to send it all over the world instantaneously is evidence counter to your argument. Meanwhile women in the US kill more humans than men by at least 3.5 orders of magnitude every year, but only fight vigorously to protect their own supposed “right” to do so, and then go out of their way to twist and distort both scientific understanding and even language itself in order t…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:27 PM
13

It is much more common in my observation to see women have rich lives wit different goals and hobbies and commitment to art and literature, and rich inner universes, while far more men lack substance. This is neither my experience nor the experience of most men. I suspect you don’t get the opportunity to listen to women talk to each other very much. On average women tend to be significantly less curious, creative, interested, and interesting than men. And this is a secondary reason why women do …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:52 AM
0

You were the one who drew the false analogy to organ donation, not me. Again, exactly how does a woman’s use of her body to produce sustenance and shelter for her unborn child violate her “bodily autonomy?”
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 02:36 AM
0

How, exactly, does a mother using her body to produce sustenance and shelter for her unborn child violate her “bodily integrity?”
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 12:26 AM
0

Like all children (and almost all adults including yourself) human embryos, zygotes, and fetuses are reliant on the bodies of other humans for the production of sustenance and shelter. Again, what does it matter if the place of shelter is inside of one’s body or outside of one’s body? The essence of your argument is that a child is reliant on its mother’s body to produce sustenance and shelter for him or her. And somehow you want that reliance to confer on the mother (but not the father on whom …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 11:49 PM
–

RP philosophy does not promote the faking of anything. It does promote the development of masculinity.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 09:29 PM
0

Homicide is a legal fiction. You are unable to survive without relying on the bodies of others for sustenance and shelter. Does that confer on those others a supposed “right” to kill you?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 09:01 PM
0

Yes, scientifically speaking, the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are individual living humans who are just as “independently” alive as you are (noting that you went through this early phase of development as an individual living human). However, just like all very young children, they do their survival relies on parents (or other people’s) bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for them because they are not capable of doing so on their own. And in that r…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:55 PM
2

The zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are: Living, and Members of the species Homo (aka human), who Exist… …until someone kills them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:33 PM
2

I understand the biological science of the matter (human sexual reproduction) and the most accurate denotations of the relevant English words (along with their etymological roots) quite well, apparently much better than you do. What I struggle to understand is the level of delusional cognitive dissonance required to maintain that killing one’s own child is less psychopathically selfish and cruel than abandoning him or her.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:20 PM
1

You have most certainly advocated for the absurd idea that killing one’s own child is somehow less irresponsible and morally bankrupt than merely abandoning one’s child (which itself is irresponsible and morally bankrupt). And you have done so by disingenuous denial that elective abortion is the killing of a living human, one’s own child no less. That is quite asinine indeed.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:10 PM
0

I understand. It’s got to be hard to resolve the state of cognitive dissonance required to advocate for a supposed “right” to kill one’s own children while still trying to maintaining a positive self image.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:44 PM
0

They are, which is why your attempt to conflate (against all scientific reality) them is so disingenuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:34 PM
1

The “medical act” to which you refer “prevents the existence of a person” by killing a living human which happens to be one’s own child. You’re engaging in Olympic level rhetorical gymnastics in order to avoid the truth of that for which you advocate for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:32 PM
1

See how you substitute the passive “the child never existing” for the act of killing your child?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:28 PM
0

Nope. Just suggesting that demanding such a supposed “right” is clown world. And that you wish to employ the euphemism of “medical procedure” in order to obscure the act of killing your child only demonstrates that you actually do recognize just how insanely depraved the act of elective abortion is.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:15 PM
1

Personhood is a legal fiction that is entirely independent of the fact of the existence of a living human. For example, my great grandfather (who was born a slave) was not considered to be a person, yet he was most definitely a living human being. Similarly discordant, the legal fiction of personhood is dependent upon state of development whereas the factual existence of a living human is independent of the state of development of that human. For example, children do not gain the status of full …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:11 PM
-2

…or… …maybe demand an equal supposed “right” to kill any living human who relies on the use of his body for access to sustenance and shelter - people like his wife and children, or anyone who is a net recipient of government subsidies. 🤡 Women killing their own children is the leading cause of human death in the US by a substantial margin. They do so at a rate at least 4,600% greater than men kill anyone but themselves in suicide.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 04:00 PM
–

And they are all in trouble with the law (have lien judgements against them, orders for wage garnishment, and/or warrants out for their arrest) for not using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring (aka children). But you know what else they did not do? They didn’t kill their own children (aka offspring).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 03:45 PM
–

As opposed to killing them? Abandonment is the more humane thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 01:35 AM
3

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/8T8uklni6D
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 01:19 AM
2

It’s actually quite a bit more than your oversimplification.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 12:19 AM
1

Whether or not a product delivery is guaranteed does not change the essential transactional nature of the exchange.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 10:35 PM
1

Women also enjoy sexual intimacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 08:15 PM
3

Women also enjoy sexual intimacy. Additionally, you’re making it very clear that you haven’t actually read any RP philosophy. RP tenets specifically promote “non sexual physical touch and eye contact to form bonds with women.“ In the future, it would behoove you to undertake some study of the thing you wish to critique before critiquing it lest you demonstrate your ignorance on the matter to the world by making utterly false assertions in your critique.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 08:08 PM
1

Yet, none of that makes the actual perpetration lopsided.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 06:13 PM
1

I have not advocated for any specific change. I have just stated that viewing sexual assault as a male perpetrator/ female victim phenomenon is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 06:05 PM
1

…and RP philosophy is all about how to get and maintain the physical contact. But don’t most women claim that they need to feel “bonded” before they engage in that oxytocin releasing physical contact?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 05:34 PM
1

The entirety of RP philosophy is an exploration of that which creates “the bonds.”
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 05:18 PM
0

Banter is just another signal for power. It’s not the banter, it’s the power.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 04:19 PM
0

They do, just far less frequently, of significantly less difficulty, and with substantially less severe health consequences. Thus, to OP’s point, women don’t actually “have it harder,” and the argument that their “burden of childbearing / childcare” makes it so is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 04:14 PM
1

That has never once happened to me, so I have little sympathy for men who complain about it. If men want claims like yours to be taken seriously about how unsafe the world is for random men, then they need to report things like this. Instead, most of what I see in the news is random women and non-random men being assaulted. This speaks directly to my point. We have very different standards for what constitutes sexual assault and how seriously it is taken when a woman is the perpetrator than when…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 04:11 PM
2

Those statistics are coming from reports, not incidents. Men almost never report sexual assault. All you have to do is spend an evening in any bar or club, observe closely, and apply the same standard for sexual assault to women as you do to men. As for myself, I have been groped, rubbed, otherwise inappropriately touched, had my hand grabbed by women and placed on their bodies, and been randomly tongue kissed by women far more frequently than my wife has had any similar incidents happen to her …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 03:22 AM
1

Lots of excuses here (☝️) for killing one’s own child. There are many reasons that people choose to kill other living humans. The only ones which we generally deem sufficient are when that other living human poses a credible and imminent threat to one’s life or that other human has been lawfully adjudicated to have committed particularly heinous crimes. In any case, the vast majority of elective abortion occurs simply because women find the responsibility to produce sustenance and shelter for th…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 02:05 AM
0

That which you call a “burden” (producing sustenance and shelter for your children) is actually more deadly and dangerous to men than to women and is yet another example of women overestimating the “difficulty” of their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:54 AM
1

Similar to the most accurate denotation of the English word “child,” the denotations of the English words “son” and “daughter” describe relationships which are independent of the state of development of the individuals in the described relationship. For example: My father is accurately described as the son of my paternal grandfather, even though they are both deceased. Similarly, my son was accurately described as my son (the male offspring resulting from my participation in sexual reproduction …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:09 AM
1

…or a son or a daughter of any age. That you choose to use an inaccurate definition of the English word “child” as a euphemistic mechanism for obscuring the depravity of elective abortion does not actually change the meaning of the word. Nor does it obviate the psychopathic selfishness and cruelty of the act. No matter how harsh you may perceive the world to be, killing your own children is harsher.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 11:07 PM
0

The words “zygote,” “embryo,” and “fetus” are used to describe the particular states of development of a child prior to its birth. The English word “child” is etymologically derived from the Proto-Germanic word “kiltham” meaning “womb” or “fetus” or “fruit of the womb.” The most accurate denotation of the English word “child” describes a relationship between two individuals which is independent of the state of development of the individuals. For example: I am still accurately described as the ch…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 08:35 PM
0

I neither asserted nor implied any such thing. I merely described what goes on in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:04 PM
1

Women frequently encourage each other in the denial of truth in order to uphold a false self-image. That’s a main theme of this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:00 PM
1

You haven’t been reading from the beginning. Nothing’s different.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:57 PM
1

That it is not going to a spot where you can continue denial of fact, does not mean that it is going “nowhere.” Rather, it just means that it isn’t going where you want it to go. But that’s really just a function of your own obstinance in maintaining your worldview despite evidence to the contrary.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:54 PM
0

In your haste to deny facts, you seem to gloss over understanding of that which an unfunded liability actually consists.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:41 PM
-2

The FBI only measures criminal acts of killing other humans. CDC stats put elective abortion at roughly 850,000 plus per year. Guttmacher Institute stats put it at up to 1,250,000. As the zygotes, embryos and fetuses resulting from human sexual reproduction are (according to well settled scientific understanding) both living and members of the genus Homo (aka living humans), the leading cause of human death in the us by far is women killing their own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:03 PM
1

$100 trillion in unfunded liabilities is a big stat. You know it to be true because you have looked it up. You also know that older women are the majority beneficiaries of those liabilities. The rest is math.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:59 PM
1

I don’t have to “validate” my points. They stand on their own merit (usually math) regardless of whether you wish to acknowledge it or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:45 PM
1

That you wish to ignore a thing does not invalidate that thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:43 PM
1

I just pointed out what you are doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:36 PM
-2

The leading cause of human death in the US is women killing their own children, and they do it more than 4,600% more frequently than men kill anyone but ourselves in suicide.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:35 PM
2

A random women is much more likely to be the victim of violence than a random man. False. Furthermore, sexual assault a much worse violent attack than just getting beaten up and robbed. Also false. And women sexually assault men all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:34 PM
-2

Each year in the US more than 3x as many men die in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring (and wives) as do women, inclusive of death from pregnancy and childbirth complications. If you include serious injury, the multiple gets even higher. The entire reason for the existence of both the male and female sexes is sexual reproduction.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:31 PM
1

You already know what the promises are (as you brought them up in a previous comment). You’re just playing the silly women’s game of refusing to acknowledge the math of the situation because it doesn’t fit your self image.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:26 PM
0

Money.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 03:18 AM
0

The reason you have the luxury to claim that it isn’t relevant to a “dating argument” is because men did (and still do) those things.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:06 PM
0

The unfunded liability is the gap between what has been paid and what has been promised.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:49 PM
1

That women in the US kill somewhere between 850,000 and 1,250,000 of their own children each year and women generally attempt to justify such psychopathically selfish and cruel behavior by declaring (against scientific reality) that their own children are not living humans, and even go so far as to liken their own children to parasites is neither a complex idea, nor a matter of “worldview.” Rather, it is simple fact, and a very sad one at that. What’s even sadder is the denial of this mass killi…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:46 PM
0

US unfunded liabilities total around $100 trillion Most of those are welfare state promises to older women The percentage of childless young women has increased to the point that those liabilities are completely unrecoverable The whole pyramid scheme will likely collapse within 1 or 2 generations
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 09:54 PM
1

Again, that you choose to ignore the US economic and fiscal situation does not obviate the US economic and fiscal situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 09:43 PM
-1

☝️The ignorance is rich.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:00 PM
1

I did: US unfunded liabilities totaling about $100 trillion are the nuclear warhead headed towards the US fiscal situation and they are the result of welfare state promises to mostly older women and the detonation of the nuke is being accelerated by the childlessness of younger women. That you choose to remain ignorant of the US fiscal situation and its cause obviates neither.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 05:57 PM
1

As I said: Your ignorance of our fiscal situation and the demographics which have caused it obviates neither our fiscal situation nor its cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 05:51 PM
1

K….. I have no idea what youre referring to… Your ignorance of our fiscal situation and the demographics which have caused it obviates neither our fiscal situation nor its cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 05:47 PM
1

The roughly $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities (aka debt) from our welfare state that is the sword of Damocles for our economy is mostly a function of promises made to fund older women. And somewhat ironically, the scissors cutting the thread holding that sword are childless younger women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 04:15 PM
0

The roughly $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities (aka debt) from our welfare state that is the sword of Damocles for our economy is mostly a function of promises made to fund older women. And somewhat ironically, the scissors cutting the thread holding that sword are childless younger women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 04:14 PM
–

Nope. They enhanced the value of a few men while decimating their own.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 04:07 PM
0

General data shows that women net collect productivity from men which sustains them in their older age (and is absolutely devastating the US economy).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:30 PM
-2

So were you talking about a single example or a general trend? Seemed like you were speaking to a general trend.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:25 PM
1

Legally the woman is the decider, and the vast majority of times it is the woman’s sole decision. And yes, men should not allow this. There is no anger on my behalf. There is extreme sadness.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:23 PM
-3

Welfare statism ultimately destroys societal function.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:22 PM
1

☝️projection
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:18 PM
2

Not in our current society’s legal system.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:14 PM
0

So now you’ve circled back to the “women don’t enjoy sex” theme again.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:13 PM
-2

Yes, because we have built a society in which government redistributes other men’s productivity to older single women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:01 PM
-5

That’s it. In fact—it’s a detriment if she has any other qualities or if her character is more than looking at the ground and “submitting”. This is false. We just don’t value the same set of characteristics in women as do women in men. Why should we? Men and women are fundamentally different. The idea that we should is utterly contrary to natural division of labor and patently solipsistic. That women like (and have been deceived by) feminism does not set feminism as a healthy standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:59 PM
1

Yes, the use of social and legal pressure to coerce men into accepting exclusive long term prostitution contracts is a bad thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:54 PM
0

Not sure you know what “inherently” means. You keep determining the value of the activity based on variables external to the activity itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:50 PM
1

Same answer as when men get pregnant.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:59 AM
1

Because someone may have a birth defect (or be poor) is not a sound reason to kill them. That’s how eugenicists think. That you are unable to face the fact that the mass killing of one’s own children (which is what women in our society actually do) is psychopathically selfish and cruel, but instead label the recognition of such as “being mad at women” only demonstrates the extent to which both that depravity and gaslighting has become part of the nature of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:41 AM
7

One can only “be used for sex” if her own intent was to engage in the sexual intimacy on the condition that she receive some utility other than the enjoyment of being sexually intimate (ie transactionally). In other words, she intended to use herself to get something and then didn’t receive that thing which she was intending to get.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:35 AM
0

It’s demonstrative of a severe lack of love to kill your own child for any reason (the vast majority of which are not wanting the inconvenient duty of care BTW). Even women who don’t have abortions regularly argue for a supposed “right” to kill their own children and often do so by declaring (against the scientific reality) that their children are living humans. That’s demonstrative of an extreme lack of love.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:26 AM
1

Your hypothetical fantasy land example? Does this hypothetical woman even know when the oil changes on the car are due? Or how much it should cost to get a new set of winter tires mounted and balanced (so as not to get ripped off)? Or that she even needs winter tires? Of when to change them back to all seasons so as not to wear them out too soon? When somebody’s breaking through the door at 2:30am, is she going to flip a coin to see who grabs the pistol from the nightstand and addresses the issu…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:21 AM
1

Bureau of Labor Statistics has plenty of data which will confirm that, but it’s common knowledge that women choose less dangerous, strenuous, and productive fields.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:02 AM
1

According to the work that women have the tendency to do versus men. It’s less hard, less dangerous, and less productive.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:00 AM
5

OP’s assertion and specifically the equivalency relies on the premise that women do not inherently enjoy sexual intimacy. Without that underlying premise the equivalence she attempts to draw is asymmetrical.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:58 AM
14

It’s about the mentality and decision-making framework. Chasing status (rappers, athletes, celebs, CEOs, or even just the popular banking family scion in prep school or college) is a sign of poor values for a sound LTR, inclusive of an overestimation of her own attractiveness. Would be significantly better if she had actually been completely sexually intimate with her past relationship partners who were the really nice average guy in high school and the smartest guy in her college organic chemis…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:27 AM
9

Casual “encounters” chasing status says that she’s not going to be compatible with any sort of sound LTR. But were that her mindset, she wouldn’t have been attractive enough for me to have been considering for an LTR in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:10 AM
2

Nope. Women do enjoy the activity, even if they may not want it with that particular man. In contrast, no one enjoys the activity giving others money inherently.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:46 AM
2

Most women actually enjoy sex without having to receive some other utility from a man with a much smaller set of men than enjoy sex with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:40 AM
2

So you’re back to the “women don’t actually enjoy sex” trope. That has not been my experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:36 AM
1

You listed one. And being truthful about the state of things =/= misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:36 AM
1

You listed one.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:34 AM
0

Not even close.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:34 AM
-1

Totally aware and sex is the most powerful leverage tool in modern human society other than violence. It’s more powerful than money, which is why women wield it in the workplace to get money (and then play victim to get even more money).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:26 AM
1

The activity of sexual intimacy is inherently mutually enjoyable. The activity of giving someone else money is not.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:22 AM
1

Nope, it’s elective abortion by far.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:19 AM
1

Those men already carry the bulk of the burden of sustaining a household, even and especially when their wives are pregnant. It is the epitome of entitlement for western women to believe that they do even half the work.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:17 AM
2

The OP is drawing an equivalence between the inherency of activities.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:15 AM
-1

The activity itself is mutually enjoyable, so when one presents a desire to engage in it with another, the presentation is not rooted in a one way receipt of utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:12 AM
6

OP equivocates the desire to engage in a mutually enjoyable activity with someone with the desire to revive money from someone. Those two things are not similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:07 AM
14

Sex is a mutually enjoyable activity. Giving someone money is not.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:03 AM
9

So then the equivalence OP proposed doesn’t hold.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:00 AM
13

…so they need to get paid?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:58 PM
1

Yet remains the least taxing, harmful, and difficult.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:58 PM
1

Go ahead and list them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:57 PM
1

The leading cause of human death in the US is women killing their own children. They do so at least 4,600% more frequently than men kill anyone but themselves in suicide (and at least one order of magnitude more than even that).
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:56 PM
1

…because women choose not to, and those jobs still need to get done.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:26 PM
0

Women using sex to get ahead in the workplace is indeed sexual exploitation, you just have the victim and perpetrators backwards.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:24 PM
1

Most school cohorting is very similar in Western countries. In non-western countries age gaps tend to be wider.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:23 PM
1

…and they produce less.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:17 PM
1

Nope, men have benefited too, just a lot less than have women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 11:00 PM
1

Most women don’t even love their own children unconditionally, let alone their male partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:59 PM
1

You’ve not met most women? Look into divorce statistics.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:53 PM
0

…because it’s the easiest, least risky, and least damaging of the work that needs to be done to sustain a household.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:49 PM
2

If it’s unconditional (aka agape) no. If it is conditional (on the receipt of some utility), yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:46 PM
1

Feel free to answer with anything else that will not ultimately result in… …feels confident that she will be able to garner some other utility than the enjoyment of sexual interaction from said man.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:36 PM
1

Maybe you live in a city. Most men not in large cities do all of that stuff all the time. But every man in the US has signed up to put his life on the line fighting wars.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:34 PM
1

☝️She says as we have just gotten into yet another war in the Middle East for which only men are in danger of being drafted… Yes, things have gotten easier for men too, but much less so than for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:29 PM
0

And the “traditional” woman’s role has gotten a lot easier (ie there is substantially less total work involved) than the traditional man’s role.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 10:25 PM
1

On average men have the harder jobs and work more than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:53 PM
1

Why does she feel “emotionally close?” The concept of “investment” implies the expectation of return (aka receipt of utility) by definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:42 PM
-1

Not a crime at all. Rather, it’s just a demonstration of how “trad” women’s work doesn’t really exist any more and has been replaced by men buying things that men invented and built to do their women’s “trad” work for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:35 PM
1

The woman who works less hard.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:34 PM
1

…funny how that aligns with the age gaps of school cohorting.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:34 PM
-2

If a woman needs to be in a relationship to enjoy sex with a given man it is only because she needs to garner the utility from the relationship (whatever that may be for her) in exchange for the sexual intimacy in order to enjoy it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:50 PM
2

Again, men in the US not only die at more than 3x the rate of women in the act of producing sustenance and shelter for our children (and wives) - not counting the negative health effects of white collar jobs which would only make the stats worse - but they also net produce more than they consume whereas women net consume more than they produce. Modern Western women have the easiest, safest, and most luxurious lives of any major demographic group of humans to ever have existed.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:45 PM
1

Then you know that being a woman used to be hard work and now you have machines that do most of that work for you (which trad women expect men to buy). Most women in the 1950s did not have washing machines.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:41 PM
2

You said it yourself: I don’t know many women who enjoy one night stands. Women mostly enjoy sex in a relationship, which is not what’s being talked about here…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:35 PM
0

Modern Western trad women most definitely have the easiest, safest, and most luxurious lives of any major demographic group of humans to ever have existed. I am probably quite a bit older than you, and when I was very young and my father was driving a cab to pay for us and grad school, we didn’t have a washing machine or a second car, or a laundromat anywhere near us. Disposable diapers were a luxury item. My trad mother literally had to hand wash my siblings diapers with a washboard in a tub an…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:32 PM
2

Modern western women have the easiest, safest, and most luxurious lives of any major demographic group of humans to ever have existed.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:18 PM
1

Imagine having to wash all your clothes by hand on a washboard with water that you fetched from the river and soap that you made from fat which you rendered from the meat that some man gave you and the lye you made ashes from the firewood that he CSSed for you that you burned in the fire you had to get up throughout the night to keep burning so that you could stay warm. Imagine having made those clothes which you are washing yourself. Now, you expect men to work to buy you the clothes, the furna…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:11 PM
-4

While it is true that most women only enjoy sex with most men when it is transactional and they therefore receive some utility other than the pleasure of sexual intimacy from the man, it is also true that most women actually do enjoy sexual intimacy with a small subset of men for the sake of enjoying the sexual intimacy itself… …because (surprise surprise) women actually do like sex, maybe even more than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 08:04 PM
3

Dinners out? Meh, not really. Maybe some of the NYC metrosexuals, but generally nowhere near as much as women enjoy sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 07:53 PM
-4

That’s not traditional. Traditionally women worked, and they worked hard. They just did so in the household (including working in the family businesses) for the most part. Nowadays women have machines that essentially do all the hard household work for which they used to be responsible for them, and the children are (horribly) cared for by the state in public schools.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 07:20 PM
25

Women also enjoy sexual intimacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 07:14 PM
2

We know this because where women have more rights and are equal to men, the age-gap goes away. Correlation =/= causation. This phenomenon is likely explained by extensive age cohorting in schooling, and even with that extensive age cohorting girls tend to prefer boys who are older than they.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 02:00 PM
4

Probability in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 01:03 AM
3

Probability matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 01:02 AM
6

The majority of Americans prefer McDonald’s French Fries to kale, yet kale is the better food for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 12:45 AM
5

This ☝️argument rests on the false presumption that popularity denotes quality.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 12:12 AM
1

More than 3x as many men die each year in the US from using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children (and wives) as do women, inclusive of deaths resulting from pregnancy and childbirth complications. If you include serious injury the numbers are even higher. Yet we are not so psychopathically solipsistic as to subscribe to your victim mentality.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 11:40 PM
1

The saving grace to the rat race you describe is that women assess power via five dimensions of expression (physical, social, financial, intellectual, and spiritual) and different women will be attracted to different combinations of power expression. So, it’s not all about your relative job and bank balance. But no matter what, women are the sexual selectors and if they’re not “into you” enough to initiate, they’re not “into you” enough to sustain a healthy LTR in which you are appreciated as an…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 10:16 AM
1

When women are into you, they initiate. If they’re not initiating it’s because they’re not into you and your time is better spent becoming more powerful so that they will be into you and initiate.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 02:08 AM
0

In this comment you have partially explained why “like” swipes are not a reliable indicator of attractiveness metrics.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 01:26 AM
0

Most guys do… …because she’s not that into them.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 01:23 AM
0

Women are the sexual selectors of our species. And men whom women find attractive are much more rare than women whom men find attractive. If you’re a man who has to jump through hoops, it’s because you’re not one of those guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 01:22 AM
1

And my paternal grandfather had over 20 children with 4 different women, but Ibn Saud had over 100 with at least 22 different women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:54 PM
1

The 14 number is just the children resulting from the sexual interaction, not the sum total of sexual interaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:46 PM
1

Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:44 PM
2

I’ll take it one step further. If you have to spend any money on her, she’s not that into you. Maybe one more step… If you had to ask her out on a date in the first place, she’s not that into you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:43 PM
1

Over the history of humankind for every woman that reproduces the number of men that reproduce has varied between 4 and 17, and the majority of women have reproduced and the majority of men have not.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:31 PM
2

I neither said nor implied any such thing. What I did say is that statistical distributions matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:25 PM
1

Historically, most human males don’t reproduce at all, so 14 is a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:23 PM
-3

Be thankful for your male friendships, they’re much more resilient. Men will fight and die for each other, women won’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 05:32 PM
1

Elon has at least 14 children by at least 4 different women. Your own example contradicts your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 05:23 PM
4

Statistics matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 05:21 PM
2

Elon has at least 14 children by at least 4 different women. Your own example belies your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 05:18 PM
1

You: “It’s not women who share the top percent of men, it’s the other way around.” The top percent of men who share women? If so, that’s true. Men who share the top percent of women? If so, that’s not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 05:13 PM
1

See how your examples use “all men” but your post refers to “the top percent of men?” Therein lies the post on which you are hanging your delusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:44 PM
1

The actual math remains that there are many more women who are willing to be casually sexually intimate with “the top percent of men” and with whom “the top percent of men” are willing to be casually sexually intimate, than there are men who fall into “the top percent of men.” Distributions matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:41 PM
1

It’s what you want to observe in reality, not what you actually observe in reality. And we can know this because your post refers to “the top percent of men,” but your examples use all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:37 PM
1

…and they will have it unconditionally with “the top percentage of men” more frequently than the distribution of “top percentage of men” actually occurs.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:18 PM
2

You can deny the logic all you like, that doesn’t obviate the logic. Women (generally) enjoy sexual intimacy for the sake of sexual intimacy as much as men do, maybe more. They just want it with a tiny percentage of men. They will engage in it conditionally with a larger percentage. Your post refers to “the top percent of men,” and consequently the variance in the male and female distribution of attractiveness matters. Given the variance of the distributions, women surrender their sexual choice …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:14 PM
5

This: Here’s your misunderstanding. It’s not the woman determining if she’s a casual gal or not. It’s the man she’s in the presence of that determines how she will operate.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:00 PM
4

The math cares, and it says you’re wrong (because you’re trying to prove what you want to be true rather than trying to determine what is actually true).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 02:59 PM
5

…and she determines that boundary based on the attractiveness of the man she is evaluating.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 02:56 PM
5

A room of 10 men and 10 women is a complex social situation. Scale it up, same math applies (that’s the thing about percentages). But you are the sexual chooser. The men you want most definitely have a line and the line of women whom they find attractive enough for casual intimacy is much longer than yours. Noting here that your post speaks to “the top percentage of men,” which would be the 1 guy in your “line” that you actually find sexually attractive enough to pursue for casual intimacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 02:46 PM
16

You haven’t done the math. In a room of 10 women and 10 men, 8 of the women are sexually attracted to 1 of the men and 3 of those women are so sexually attracted that they will be sexually intimate with that man casually. And those percentages are being generous to your argument. Men’s attractiveness to women takes the form of a heavily skewed Poisson distribution whereas women’s attractiveness to men is relatively normally distributed.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 02:41 PM
-5

Embracing Christ is the act of embracing truth (and thus RPed).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 12:42 AM
3

It is common, unfortunately, and incorrect, and misleading as it allows effeminate bloopers to broaden the term out to mean either “optimization” or “preference for that which ranks higher on an objective scale” which robs the concept of its true meaning and descriptive power. For example: a preference to receive $1,000 as opposed to receiving $100 is not hypergamy just as a preference to be sexually intimate with 1996 Salma Hayek as opposed to being sexually intimate with 2026 Rosie O’Donnell i…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 12:31 AM
5

Lame attempts at social shaming (criticism = hate, only incels critique women)
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 11:50 PM
3

I’ll stick with the accurate denotation derived from the Greek etymology as doing so tends to cause less confusion and error than using a rando’s philosophical interpretation.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 07:39 PM
5

Hypergamy does not mean “she wants the best she can get.” It literally means the tendency to marry “up” (better than oneself) in social status, for which financial means is often a signal.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 07:27 PM
1

Never said that it didn’t exist, just that it is easier and requires less sacrifice of one’s body and health, which is true. And yet, to my original point, men do not use the fact that they produce more than they consume, do more of the hard work, and sacrifice their bodies and health for others more so than women as an excuse to claim a supposed “right” to kill those others (their own children no less).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 07:08 PM
1

You can disagree all you like, but that doesn’t change the facts on the ground. That men die at their jobs and suffer injury at least an order of magnitude more frequently than do women is objective evidence. I’ve done elderly care (taking care of my father with dementia for 5 years). Compared to most jobs that men do, it’s not at all hard, though it was emotionally difficult because he was my father, My wife was a stay at home mom after being an investment banker. She says it was much easier an…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 06:42 PM
1

That’s not the hard stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 06:10 PM
1

But women don’t do the hard stuff (which is why they don’t suffer nearly as much harm).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 05:34 PM
1

So men should be like women and refuse to do the hard stuff that keeps society (and you) ensconced in comfort and safety? That attitude, again, speaks directly to my original point.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 05:19 PM
1

And women suffer substantially less (almost negligible) harm from doing so, so they actually don’t have anything on which to base their complaints. But where they do suffer a little harm (though still much less than men) they do use it disproportionately and disingenuously as justification for killing their own children, to my original point.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 04:46 PM
0

And the “top women” is defined as a 5.84 or better on their scale, so just a smidgen more attractive than the 5 average.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 04:33 PM
1

But men actually rate women according to a standard normal distribution, so the top 20% would equate to a Z-score of about .84 which on a 0-10 X-axis (of beauty ranking) would equate to about 5.84.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 04:19 PM
1

…which is not hypergamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 04:01 PM
0

It would seem that you are unfamiliar with the definition of the word “hypergamy.” From Google: Hypergamy is the act or practice of marrying or dating a person of higher social, economic, or mating status, frequently referred to as "marrying up". Historically, it was a survival mechanism for women with limited financial independence, but modern views suggest it persists as a preference for stability, wealth, or desirable traits like strength and intelligence.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 03:53 PM
1

The embryos, zygotes, and fetuses resulting from the sexual reduction of a human male and female are most definitely: Living, and Members of the genus Homo, and The offspring (aka children) of their parents
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 03:50 PM
1

But nonetheless men suffer many more deaths and injuries than do women from the use of their bodies to to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring, and still don’t use that fact as an excuse to argue for a supposed “right” to kill their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 03:46 PM
1

I neither asserted nor implied any such thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 03:43 PM
1

And you are doing so by analogizing pregnancy and childbirth to being assaulted and having your leg broken - which again, only goes to my original point.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 11:39 AM
1

Men use far more of their “bodily resources” to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring (and wives) than do women for theirs.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 11:37 AM
0

I made no assertion that I see “legions of strong and able men.” I did assert that we see more many men who are suitable for marriage to our daughters than we do women who are suitable for marriage to our sons. It’s a relative measure that reflects more on the paucity of suitable women than it does the plenitude of suitable men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 02:50 AM
1

At no point do women donate any of their organs to their children during pregnancy or childbirth. They maintain full use of all of their organs during childbirth and pregnancy and retain all their organs afterward. That analogy is patently false and only used as a disingenuous excuse to argue for a supposed “right” to kill one’s own child. And to liken the process of gestation and birthing another human being (and one’s own child no less) to being assaulted and having one’s leg broken, only unde…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 02:33 AM
1

There are, none of which are equivalent to killing one’s own children because one finds the burden of care for their children inconvenient. And (to my original point) none of which cause anywhere close to as much human death as women killing their own children. Women in the US kill their own children at least 3,400,000% more frequently than anyone in the US is killed as a result of capital punishment, and at least 60,700% more frequently than anyone dies while on active military duty (inclusive …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 02:23 AM
1

Yet the facts remain that men die in the act of using their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their wives and children more than 3x more frequently than do women, and if you count injury and health issues we suffer those from using our bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for our offspring at an even greater rate. Yes, what we do to produce that sustenance and shelter for our offspring is different, but it is actually more deadly to us and takes more of a toll on our bodies than a…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 02:13 AM
1

All parents use their bodies to produce sustenance and shelter for their children, and many more men die and suffer serious health consequences from doing so than do women. The idea that the use of one’s body to produce sustenance and shelter for their offspring is exclusive to women is patently false and disingenuously made in order to justify the psychopathically selfish and cruel argument that women somehow deserve a special “right” to kill their own children. And yes, given that the main pur…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 09:47 PM
1

Because killing another human being is only justified when that other human presents an imminent threat to one’s life. And even then, most parents would recognize a duty to sacrifice their own lives for those of their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 09:26 PM
1

And again, women’s tendency argue for abrogating the responsibility of a parent to care for her child when their own duty is in question (as you have done above) but to uphold such duty when it is men’s only underscores my initial assertion. Elective abortion is an example of the ultimate act of violence by definition. That many people did not consider chattel slavery violent did not obviate the violence of chattel slavery. My original point was that women’s tendency to argue for a supposed “rig…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 09:21 PM
1

You are correct, killing in self defense is not wrong. Elective abortion never meets the well established legal standards for self defense. Unlike cells in a disattached human limb, the zygotes, embryos, and fetuses resulting from the sexual reproduction of human males and females are themselves living individual members of the genus Homo (aka human beings) in an early state of development who are the offspring (aka children) of those men and women who participated in the act of sexual reproduct…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 08:40 PM
1

Please stick to the assertions that I have actually made. Elective abortion is the act of killing a living human, one’s own child no less.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 07:28 PM
1

Yes, many societies have also participated in the abhorrent practice of child sacrifice (see: Carthage), as they have brutal slavery, genocide, even cannibalism, and other forms of depravity. That they have does not obviate the depravity of such practices. And, yes, some men are as pathologically selfish and cruel as women and do kill their own children. To my point, far fewer men than women do so. And yes, in some baser animal species in which the young are less dependent on parental care paren…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 07:24 PM
1

It is fact that elective abortion is the killing of a living human (one’s own child no less). It is fact that the leading cause of human death in the US is women killing other living humans (their own children no less). It is fact that women attempt to justify such mass killing by making the counter-factual arguments that their own children aren’t living, aren’t human, and are in fact “parasites” in order to justify abrogating the natural responsibility of a parent to care for his or her child. …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 07:07 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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