TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SirTruffleberry Archive

View 0 posts and 983 comments by SirTruffleberry on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

So would you say that the knowledge that a man is a virgin causes you to lose the possibility of being attracted to him, or that it is merely correlated with it? Pretend, for example, that a guy seems otherwise great in every other dimension you care about, but you learn he is a virgin. Does this alone change your opinion of him?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/25 12:14 AM
5

The trophy analogy is spot on. People want their prizes to be easy enough to get that they can successfully obtain them, but challenging enough to get that only they can obtain them. That these two requirements are often at odds is true enough, but it doesn't make the underlying motivation difficult to understand. People want to feel special for catching you. Women experience something similar, it seems, upon learning that they weren't the first woman their suitor approached--perhaps not even th…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/25 04:12 PM
1

Not the one who originally responded, but I'll give a self-deprecating example so that perhaps their point will be better understood (as it's always easier to understand shortcomings of others). I find possessive behavior in women highly attractive. It's not exactly a niche preference; one need only look at the yandere archetype to see the public appeal. But of course I realize that a relationship with such a person is unstable. A possessive person will gradually deprive you of your autonomy and…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/25 03:34 PM
–

I disagree that what I described is just a statement of your observations. It's an interpretation. Maybe I should make that interpretation clearer. Suppose you were browsing, I dunno, used cars. Some dude walks up to you in casual clothes and starts admiring one you're looking at, and you both start gushing about it. A couple of minutes later, he reveals himself to be a salesman in disguise. He starts talking to you about price. And you think craaappp. You were not in the mood to negotiate price…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 07:00 PM
–

There is a non-negligible chance that she only intends to be hit on when she prepares for it, and you burned that script by doing so outside the scheduled time, which caught her flat-footed. I'm not saying that's what happened, but in the absence of a way to rule it out, we probably shouldn't construct an elaborate theory on your encounter.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/25 06:46 PM
–

I'm reading the intent rather than the letter. If women are marrying men with their own houses and vehicles, then divorcing and taking half of that value, how is that functionally different than alimony? You're just getting it as a lump sum rather than in installments.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 02:03 PM
-2

ITT: "Alimony is so rare lol. No need to talk about it. No, seriously. Stop. Talking. About. It. 😊"
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/25 07:39 AM
1

I am simply making an observation, not suggesting that anything ought to be done about it. Personally, I'm glad women are so upfront about how little they desire sex nowadays. It spares me the trouble of wondering what I'm doing wrong when their libido drops after the honeymoon phase.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 06:18 PM
1

What I'm saying is that men pretty much enjoy sex in itself, which is why they aren't very picky about whom they choose, or when. Women enjoy sex under very specific conditions. It makes one wonder at what point it is the conditions being enjoyed, rather than the sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 04:42 PM
1

Well firstly, I want to reiterate that I was making a statistical claim. Of course there are exceptional cases. But are you an exceptional case? Suppose, for instance, that I claimed to love seafood. But not tuna! That's cheap and tastes as such. Tilapia is pretty bland too. Flounder is too chewy. Etc., etc. After talking to me for a bit, you begin to realize that the only seafood I enjoy are big ticket items like caviar and wine-soaked oysters. Why, compared to the average person, I wouldn't se…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/25 01:33 PM
1

Do you really believe women have taken their advice? Do you really think a woman was on the verge of making a decision, paused, and then thought, "Hold on, a man has weighed in on this!"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/25 10:45 AM
1

It's not a dream. It literally has already happened. Women couldn't get their own credit cards in America. And--surprise, surprise--marriage was more common for that and other reasons decades ago. Do they not teach y'all history anymore?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/25 03:23 AM
1

The reason I chose that particular example is because it already happened in the past. Women used to not be able to get credit cards in their own name, or their own loans (in the US). So they had to marry if they wanted even the faintest chance at the "American dream". This was worth the risks to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/25 01:37 AM
6

I don't think you need to elevate this to a matter of morality. Women are pickier because they can afford to be due to supply and demand. Case in point: If, say, you increased the demand for men by allowing only men to acquire credit, then women would suddenly become much less picky despite all the same dangers still being present.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 11:34 PM
4

I don't think you need to elevate this to a matter of morality. Women are pickier because they can afford to be due to supply and demand. Case in point: If, say, you increased the demand for men by allowing only men to acquire credit, then women would suddenly become much less picky despite all the same dangers still being present.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 11:34 PM
1

It's possible for an unfortunate scenario to play out without anyone committing a moral wrong. I don't see why this isn't one of those cases. It sucks for both of them, sure, but there isn't necessarily any wrongdoing occurring.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 02:02 PM
4

As I said elsewhere, remaining friends with an unrequited love is painful and it's entitlement to expect others to endure that for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 01:11 PM
7

Remaining friends with an unrequited love is painful. It's entitlement to expect another to endure that pain for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 01:00 PM
2

The Halo Effect is the phenomenon in which expressed traits are perceived differently based on a specific trait: in this case, physical attractiveness. So for example, an unattractive guy is overcompensating, but an attractive guy is confident. An unattractive guy is shy, while an attractive one is a man of few words. The former is a people pleaser, while the latter is witty. Apply that idea here. If the guy is unattractive, this is the ruse of a desperate man to get in your pants. If he's attra…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 12:43 PM
4

Their point is that the "morality" of the situation isn't a function of what the guy does, but rather what he is. Basically a special case of the Halo Effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 11:44 AM
3

I feel like we're playing semantics games. Ah yes, women love sex, just as long as it's under a very specific set of conditions that are rarely fulfilled.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 02:48 AM
5

I don't disagree with much of this, but I'll add that a big part of men "not being hot enough" is tied to women's lower sex drives. They're two sides of the same coin. Here's an analogy: I'm not a huge fan of mac 'n' cheese in general. I've eaten some good dishes of it before, but because the base desire for it isn't there, it has to be what others would consider exceptional before it registers as good for me. Women by default don't want sex (statistically), so for sex to be on their mind, you h…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 03:25 AM
–

It's only hypocrisy if you elevate it to normative standards (moral right and wrong). Otherwise it's just having contradictory preferences, which cannot be chosen anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:58 AM
1

There's always someone better than you and you can't be sure of your partner's loyalty? This is the dating reality for all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 09:47 PM
1

I can respect that. I appreciate the clarification.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/24 09:44 AM
4

The second and third items are interesting. Let me ask you this: Suppose a man agrees with the majority on a topic, but he provides clear reasoning leading to this agreement which proves he isn't bandwagoning. Is that exciting? In other words, are you granting points for being thoughtful, or just for being different?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/24 08:05 AM
5

This inevitably requires us to address what it is that women find "exciting". "Nice" is obvious enough. But what does exciting look like? Unreliable? Dangerous? Conditional niceness to only you?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/24 07:20 AM
2

I'm not sure if I'd describe my own view that way. I believe that love is conditional in the sense that you must judge someone's presence to be in your self-interest in some way in order to keep them around. How that's perceived can range from prurient (e.g., using someone for sex) to admirable (e.g., "my child is my legacy"), depending on the interest in question. "Transactional", however, suggests a sacrifice being made for this gain. Transactions are certainly parts of relationships. I think …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/24 01:17 PM
1

It's times like this that I have to remind myself that men and women typically want different things out of relationships. Those feelings are the entire point of pursuing a relationship to begin with, from my perspective. I suppose if the goal of a relationship were instead to, say, raise children, then more of a business partnership would be adequate for stability.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/24 07:02 AM
-1

I can see how a relationship may fail in spite of being passionate, but why would it fail because it is passionate?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/24 04:06 AM
8

I appreciate the honesty. You really can't know what you'd be willing to do in an extreme situation in advance.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 02:54 AM
22

Even if you are right, only Trump's heartbeat separates us from Vance, who is on-record as being pro-federal ban. And we have to worry about Vance because of Trump.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 08:03 PM
1

It could also be that, rather than conflicts being intentionally squashed as OP describes, there is a tendency to subconsciously avoid conflict. This usually means one partner or the other is a doormat, and that trait itself is detrimental to relationships. (At least, to their quality.)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 05:25 PM
13

I appreciate this answer more than the simple "no's", because we're hard-pressed to find any one, specific reason for a rejection. It's not as if women churn out receipts after an approach that itemize everything that gave them the ick.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/24 12:57 PM
–

If someone believes they'll get a different outcome with dating without changing anything on their end, then they are attributing poor outcomes to things they consider unavoidable. So no, I think it's pretty much the only way to interpret it lol. I feigned uncertainty to be polite.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/24 09:58 PM
–

A fair paraphrase of the first question would be, I think, "Do you consider the outcome of your dating life to be a function of your efforts, or do you attribute it to external variables?"
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/24 09:51 PM
–

That's fine, but saying you're doing them for your partner is simply inaccurate. I will provide absolute proof: You would still have to care for your children if your partner died!
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:00 AM
0

If you say you're doing something for someone, it's generally taken to mean that it isn't something you intended to do for yourself anyway. Men do many things in relationships that are exclusively to the woman's benefit. Women claim selflessness points for stuff they were already going to pursue out of self-interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/24 06:30 AM
7

I would count childbearing as effort if having a child wasn't one of the woman's life goals. Buying an engagement ring counts as effort for men because it's something we typically wouldn't do if the expectation weren't there.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/24 05:54 PM
2

I think when OP says "in general", what they really mean is "statistically".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/24 05:52 PM
–

Apologizing for things that clearly aren't your fault is ironically easier than apologizing for those that are. When you apologize and fully expect to be met with "You're right--that was your fault", it's harder than doing so when the expected response is "Oh Honey, of course I don't blame you."
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 08:43 AM
1

It seems to me that you can either believe in determinism, randomness, or somewhere in-between. Full determinism suggests that relationships are transactional, e.g., I cause serotonin and dopamine releases in your brain that make you want me around, so you keep me around. Full randomness suggests that relationships persist by sheer luck, e.g., you want me around because I happen to make you feel good that day for no particular reason. Neither produces a model of love that the blue pill peddles. …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 02:41 AM
0

I have to prepare the amount of detail in my answer. Tell me, are you 1) the sort who has accepted that all interactions are ultimately transactional, or 2) the sort who believes that love is unconditional and our actions aren't attached to causal chains?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 02:16 AM
1

I agree there is no need. But for me to even get some division of labor was asking a lot. I certainly didn't have the leverage in my relationships to demand the distribution be fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:55 AM
1

In my experience, there is little need for tracking. Regardless of what relationship I'm in, I'm always the trashman, the lawn-mower, the chauffeur...Chores tend to be gendered.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:30 AM
2

The problem with that is that stuff gets memory-holed the second an argument arises. "You never do anything around here!" Always carry the receipts.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 11:59 PM
1

I totally get how this relates to family planning, but on other issues, where is there even a compromise? Let's say, for instance, that your partner is more anti-immigration than you. Neither of you has any power to influence that apart from your votes, which will be the same whether you're together or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/24 10:08 PM
2

Scientists do attempt to disprove the opposite of their hypothesis, which is the null hypothesis. Are you certain you understand science? Anyway, your game is obvious: "I'm going to require my opponent to make an extremely precise statement about a vague aspect of human nature, and once he refuses, I'll pretend the original claim doesn't spit in the face of the burden of proof."
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 06:58 AM
1

The original comment I replied to disagreed with OP, who rejects all apparent love as ultimately transactional. This transactional view, while not clearly correct, is at least superficially consistent with our evolutionary origins. So suppose two people disagreed on the nature of love; one declaring it to be a transactional arrangement, the other something..."transcendent", I suppose? What experiment could we devise to distinguish those? Distinction of the two requires them to be falsifiable cla…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 06:04 AM
1

I feel like we've wandered off into the woods here a bit. Let's return to my original claim, which was met with resistance. It was said that you won't find love unless you believe in it. I pointed out that this is textbook unfalsifiability. If I said something like, "You won't see the evidence for God unless you believe in Him," then the error would be obvious to you. To change my mind on this, you would have to convince me that 1) love is somehow unique among phenomena in dodging the need for f…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 01:17 AM
1

Being able to understand people's emotional motivations for their actions isn't the same as loving them. Let's look at this from a different angle: Do you think the most emotional people are the most empathetic? I think we all know incredibly erratic narcissists.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 10:37 PM
1

Well I think there's a belief involved, yes, but not in love itself. You don't believe in emotions--you feel them. You could believe, for example, that if you persist through hard times with your partner, you'll pull through and experience that emotion again. But that belief is predicated on having experienced love in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 04:10 PM
2

Set aside that we are talking about love specifically for a moment. In general, if I say that you won't find something if you don't believe in it, we call that an unfalsifiable claim in science. "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/24 09:14 AM
–

They can, but let's consider success rates. What's the surer route to societal stability? Let everyone be a clean slate with respect to the other sex's standards, teaching only critical thinking skills instead, and hoping they arrive at a sane conclusion without humanity's collective knowledge guiding them, or... ...teach them what women actually want accurately early on?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 02:21 AM
–

Even if you're right that Fred got his ideology from a group as well, that just reinforces my point, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 01:40 AM
–

When we think of ideologies, the suppliers are normally churches, political parties, and online communities. Usually it's not going to be your pal Fred at work who happens to offer you answers that resonate with your experiences. And if people could devise answers on their own, well, would they need to be raised with norms at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/24 12:54 AM
–

But in this example, it's only after OP's experiences conflicted with their worldview that they sought other explanations. We need to stop pretending that the Internet is indoctrinating men to buy into RP. RP is filling in gaps for men that BP is not. It is the failure of BP to adequately explain observations that is giving RP traction. So here's my proposal: Why don't we raise men to have accurate expectations of what women are actually looking for, rather than comforting lies that will lead to…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/24 11:00 PM
9

I thought the way that study worked was that the age cutoff was critical. Most of the young women were dating older men. So when you compare similar ages, there appears to be a disparity that evens out in the aggregrate when all ages are considered.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/24 11:51 PM
1

If I didn't care about looks, I'd date men. Dead serious. And yes, it's not a certainty. But it does make me update the probability that the woman is insatiable.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/24 07:05 PM
5

I don't think my first thought would be "I'll never stack up to this guy" so much as "if this guy wasn't good enough for her, how long will I last?"
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 10:24 PM
3

I didn't mean to come across as a hater lol. I only meant to draw the distinction between "Hey pal, I'm in a tight spot, can you help me out?" and "I need a man who can support my (very one-sided) lifestyle." which I felt was necessary because every example you gave was of the former sort.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 06:15 PM
-1

That you ask these questions at all is interesting. Did you similarly interrogate the beggars you gave $20s to? If a person does interrogate a beggar before chipping in, do you feel that says something about their character? If they never reflect on whether their charitable act was earned in some way, does this say something quite different about their character?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 05:45 PM
0

These are fine things, so I'm not trying to deny your good deeds or anything. But can you acknowledge the difference between a charitable act and a charitable arrangement? By the latter I mean accepting a long-term expense for another's benefit, such as being the sole earner for the household because your partner is "too depressed to work" or something similar? That's the distinction other commentors are drawing when they speak of doormats. Most of us do one-off good deeds here and there, but co…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 04:25 PM
1

What you're really asking is not for standards to be lowered, but for preferences to be changed, which is impossible to do voluntarily.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/24 07:29 PM
2

I would say that both of these outlooks are mistaken. Individuals generally do not and cannot make choices that aren't closely tied to their self-interest. Case in point: Most people can't bring themselves to give up meat even after seeing the horrific processes by which it arrives at their dinner table. If gruesome death can't persuade people to give up some flavor, what are the odds someone will change their dating expectations for others' happiness?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 12:18 PM
16

Counterexample: Suppose a woman wasn't attracted to me but, as you say, prioritized safety above all else. She believes that, because of my circumstances, I am unlikely to find any more suitable partner than her. She knows I know this and it gives her a lot of "coasting" ability in the relationship. She feels lucky to have found this grand opportunity. Most guys would find the above to be a bad outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 11:22 AM
13

To be fair, dating is what decision theorists would call a satisficing problem. That is, you aren't looking for the literal best candidate--that would be infeasible given the search space--but rather the first candidate who is acceptable. The acceptability threshold varies with circumstances, of course. But I do think acknowledging that this is the nature of the problem would help a lot of women, because you really should be able to get an acceptable result within a few tries. The feeling of bei…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/24 11:01 AM
2

The fallacy of trying to shift undesirable preferences in others to vices is common, and certainly not limited to feuds between the sexes. People treat poor taste in music and literature as similar "flaws to be overcome".
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 08:57 PM
2

A preference is a preference. The scope doesn't make it more or less a choice. For example, is being a boob guy rather than an arse man a choice? Indeed, it doesn't even have to be about sex. Do you think one can choose to like celery more than donuts?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 07:41 PM
4

Are you trolling? That clearly isn't my opinion. I'm using it as an example of a statement very like yours in that it's nonsensical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 07:28 PM
3

Suppose I said there is no excuse for gay guys to be attracted to men. Setting aside the homophobia that would entail, would that thought even be coherent? No. We as a society have long ago reached the correct conclusion that attraction isn't chosen.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 06:04 PM
3

Sure. But they are outside the domain of needing an excuse, contrary to your title. Only actions can be excused. It's rather like saying one has no excuse for their poor eyesight.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 03:29 PM
6

Actions are one thing, but attraction isn't a choice. If it were, most men would simply choose to be asexual, or perhaps gay.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/24 02:48 PM
0

Did OP assert that vaginas (permanently) widen due to overuse? I missed it if so. I'll grant you that it's a common misconception, but I don't see it here.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/24 12:50 AM
0

Are you suggesting that muscles have uniform size across the human population?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/24 07:29 PM
1

To add: Even when Americans acknowledge nuance, they still use only a 1D model. The left/right paradigm in politics is a good example. Red/blue is often presented as a pairing of opposites, so even when the gap between them is filled out, it's still just a 1D spectrum.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/24 12:24 PM
–

Also: A lot of these kinks revolve around humiliation. That femininity doesn't seem to suit them is kind of the point. That's why it's humiliating, which makes it exciting.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/24 05:18 PM
1

Even if you aren't frugal, you'd have to go out of your way to never build equity or get raises or get better insurance premiums (the last being virtually assured as you age). You'd have to always rent, constantly swap vehicles and phones, hop jobs before getting seniority or longevity pay, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 03:00 PM
–

/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 02:39 PM
3

But it's easier to get a calorie deficit when you're 20 than when you're 30. Again, metabolism slows down. Exercise gets harder because of joints. You're playing dumb just to be stubborn, I suppose.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 01:46 PM
1

Not really. People accrue wealth over time because that's how investing works. People gain weight over time because that's how metabolism works.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 01:20 PM
2

There's at least one major difference: People generally accrue wealth over time. The broke guy may never be loaded, but he will likely become less broke. But weight usually stays on once you gain it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/24 12:28 PM
1

OF isn't necessarily worse. You can, in principle, run an OF account like a sort of porn studio, especially if you're famous. But small-time models chat up their clients, create a sense of familiarity, a safe space to lay out fantasies. The client is made to feel thrilled at the thought of supporting his mistress, at winning her attention. It may feel, if one suspends disbelief, that perhaps Mistress is partial to me! It's very different from having a favorite porn star. My favorite porn stars d…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 11:43 PM
4

Do you feel the same way about, say, drugs? Or comfort foods? I'm not allowed to be against heroine use or obesity because I tolerate a bit of drinking and sugar rushes?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 09:24 PM
6

It's really not the same thing. OF isn't doing what a porn studio does, just on a smaller scale. OF nurtures one-sided parasocial relationships that feed on the weaknesses and delusions of desperate, lonely men. At least that's what the models actually turning a profit are doing. Otherwise you'll make chump change.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 09:09 PM
2

OP should try applying their argument to pretty much any item on the black market, e.g., meth.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/24 04:46 PM
1

I should know after many years of experience discussing controversial topics on the Internet that it doesn't matter if you preface an assertion with "tend to", "anecdotally", "in my experience", "often we see that", etc., the other person is always going to accuse you of making absolute generalizations lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 03:10 AM
1

This is true, but it's not inconsistent with what I've said. Power corrupts. People act up and take advantage of others when they think they can get away with it. You're going to say this is anecdotal or that I'm lying, but this is my experience and that of many men: Less attractive women tend to be more agreeable, generous, attentive, etc., than more attractive ones. They will talk to men others wouldn't give the time of day. Why? It seems obvious enough that when you have all the options in th…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 10:01 PM
2

What I'm saying is that the efficacy of holding out for better options depends on how many other people are doing it. With wages, for instance, if only one person says they won't work for a crap wage, then you're right. Nothing would change, and they'd just remain unemployed. But if everyone raised their standard simultaneously, then the employer would have to play ball or go out of business. So it's basically a coordination problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 05:19 PM
5

Vetting better could work if a significant fraction of men raised their standards. But how likely is that to happen? It's a bit like observing that wages would raise if no one crossed the picket line. Can you really expect the desperate not to cross the picket line?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/24 04:59 PM
1

Sure, no disagreement there. But your original observation was that women don't go asking men how to use them as ATMs, yet it's socially acceptable (at least online) for men to ask women how to get laid. I've given one plausible explanation for this: The former is, in some sense anyway, more morally repugnant. Of course, another more obvious explanation is just that women don't struggle with their goal at all, so they need no advice. But the moral point is still true lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/24 03:27 PM
–

It's not a skill issue lol. As I said, it's just math. If every man tried to spin two, only half of all men at most could do it, because there aren't enough women to go around. I suppose you could allow that the women are spinning plates at the same time, but at that point, who's spinning who?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/24 02:18 PM
1

Ah, let me be more specific. While the company can be a mutual benefit, the payment of the bill surely is not. I guess the closest sex analogue to this might be a blowjob? Most women don't find them intrinsically enjoyable, so blowjobs are one-sided. However, you can have mutually enjoyable sex without blowjobs. You can't eat dinner without a bill though. So I maintain that using men as ATMs is more objectifying than using women for sexual gratification. I might concede that merely using them fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/24 11:27 AM
–

Spinning plates alleviates the problems if you're very attractive. Most men can't spin plates. As the numbers of men and women are roughly even, and spinning plates entails one man occupying multiple women's attention, you can reach that conclusion by simple math. There's of course also enormous evidence of 80-20 rules in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/24 07:42 AM
–

The preference for a partner is not a choice. By "preference for a partner" I mean the desire to have a partner, to not be lonely, to have a family, etc. If it were a choice, it would solve, like, 90% of men's problems lol. Why would I choose sexual frustration, taking on another's expenses, sharing living space that I own, general turbulence in my life, etc., if I could just flip the switch to turn off that desire?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/24 07:31 AM
0

I'm not sure where a date came from. I was addressing the reaction men get from women when asking about how to get laid. It isn't something I would ask women tbh, but it's clearly different than women asking men how to get handouts. The latter is one-sided unless you're into findom. The former is mutually beneficial unless you're asexual.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/24 01:53 AM
2

Sex isn't a case of "diametrically opposed" objectives, though. Sure, men value it more than women. But good sex is enjoyable by both parties. Only one party benefits from cash gifts. This is why I find the whole "men objectify women" thing absurd. At least the woman has to be there and appear to enjoy sex for the man to be satisfied. Women would be satisfied with any windfall, whether or not the men are present. Alimony, workplace accidents, payments for foot pics...money is money. That's objec…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 10:03 PM
9

Yes lol, I have. To their credit, women have very robust support networks. This distributes the emotional labor needed to sustain them among many people. Men tend to have fewer outlets, and place greater burdens (proportionately) on their partners. But don't take it from me. You'll hear the same from women in more feminist-leaning subs.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 07:02 PM
10

I'll take the poll at face value. To be fair, I didn't say that women had exited the dating market. I said that they view relationships as things they could very well do without. Here's a way to frame it: Women view men as dishwashers. Men view women as cars. You really, really need a car (in the US, at least). A dishwasher? Talk me into it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 06:46 PM
1

Source? I'm having trouble finding anything besides marriage statistics. (40+% of women are unmarried when they give birth.)
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 05:22 PM
0

The preference for a partner is not a choice. Or do you really want to go down the road of preferences being choices? Homosexuality, anyone? Gender identity?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 04:39 PM
34

It's simpler than that, really. Women believe in a world in which the preference to have a partner is a choice. For some women, it nearly is. With a lower sex drive, the pay gap ever shrinking, and the feasibility of affording children increasingly a pipedream, their reasons to enter relationships are evaporating. But the male desire remains.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/24 03:39 PM
1

Absolutely. And I think you are right to pinpoint weight as the culprit rather than fitness. As a runner, I can attest that being trim helps, but few women give a crap about my leg muscles or physical feats lol. Lots of gym bros need to hear that if they're doing it for dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/24 02:55 AM
2

They know it, and I'm sure what you're advising is accurate. To be clear, I'm trying to get in their heads as much as you are. I would never ask for general dating advice on the Internet lol. But here's what I think is happening: Think of the effort as input and the results as output, then consider the input/output ratio. Clearly maintaining a healthy weight and grooming oneself yield better results. But how much better, given the effort? If a man has to drop hundreds of dollars for a nicer ward…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/24 02:31 AM
2

I regret that women are facing pressure to procreate when, for most, it is a rarely joyful and often burdensome responsibility. If men are viewed as work-horses, women are viewed as egg-laying hens.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/24 09:15 PM
1

Sure, and I'm glad you are forthright in providing this clarity. In return, I'll provide clarity: When a guy asks what attracts you to men as a woman, he's asking about the hurdles at which most men will stumble. This is clearly at the "baseline" of physical attractiveness. Most men have personalities. They are asking about a cheatsheet, a list of physical features they can min-max that will best improve their odds of attracting a partner. That you would rather a hunk write epic poetry in his sp…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/24 08:10 PM
3

"If women can do it why is it so difficult for men to exist being single?" The answer is obvious in light of evolution. Males evolved to need female affirmation, because that's the mindset that maximizes procreation. Humanity may well have died out if males could so easily do what you suggest.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/24 01:34 PM
8

True enough, but here's the rub: The men who do self-actualize without a relationship see no need to put effort into finding and maintaining a relationship because they are already self-actualized.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/24 06:24 PM
–

Exponential population growth was never going to be sustainable. All culture did was accelerate the collapse.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 02:12 PM
–

That's likely true. I suspect the intent of the poll was for politicians to measure how pessimistic they should be about social security and such staying afloat. If women have children later and later, that's still going to have a big impact.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 11:39 PM
–

It's from Pew Research, but I realize now that I misread it. The 64% figure, for example, is the percentage of women who decided against having children just because they don't want to (as opposed to a more pragmatic reason). It's not the percentage of women that have decided against having children. Similarly, the 50% figure is for men who have decided against children. They weren't supposed to add up to 100% lol. But this is the citation of another Pew Research poll we want: "Just over one-fif…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 03:39 PM
–

I looked it up. 64% of women aged 18-49 to 50% men. It's not a huge boost to seek out the child-free (for comparison, men outnumber women at least 3 to 1 on every major dating app), but I'll concede your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 10:28 AM
10

When you consider that many women who actively look for relationships are doing so to become mothers, you realize that the existence of the women who don't want children doesn't improve your dating odds much.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/24 06:29 AM
4

There's a correlation, albeit likely a weak one, between testosterone and risk-taking behavior (e.g., gambling). I wonder if this study is just capturing that correlation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/24 03:37 AM
-2

I was genuinely curious for a referendum on the matter. Feminists seem rather divided on the topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/24 09:19 PM
-9

So you are morally opposed to legalizing prostitution, and indeed most sex work? Their consent isn't enthusiastic. It's purely transactional.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/24 08:29 PM
2

Let's step back and look at this interaction. OP observes a problem that affects many men, and you point out that there may be good, if not inevitable, reasons for it. But what does this achieve? Explaining the problem doesn't make it un-problematic. This isn't a just world where we get what we deserve so that the man can fix the problem by behaving.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/24 09:22 AM
0

If it truly weren't about sex, it would be trivial to find a gay dude who would live with you, game with you, talk to you, etc. Yes, it really is just about sex. (There's nothing wrong with that btw! Sex is important and we need not diminish it.)
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/24 01:24 AM
–

It's worth pointing out that if it is only love and companionship that you care about, then the bar for gay men is much lower. I rather suspect there is a sexual component to the love you miss and you never consciously acknowledged it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/24 01:21 PM
0

Likewise, I've found many like you who take comfort in obscurity--who believe ardently in their own virtue, and never examine their own motives enough to threaten that belief. This requires them to view their own minds as a sort of black box, their good behaviors emerging ex nihilo from them regardless of input. It requires them to sacrifice a causal understanding of the universe. If your friendships were truly unconditional, you would be friends with literally anyone. Why not with me, for examp…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/24 11:34 AM
1

You can't sling the argument back at me, because the notion that we aren't objects is your premise, not mine. I fully admit we are all objects, and our genitalia are just as much traits as, say, shyness and humor.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/24 11:33 PM
1

This is a serious question, and if you engage with it, then it may help you understand: Why not marry a woman instead? Chromosomes and genitals are just objects, after all. Why not view your partner purely as a person?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/24 10:42 PM
0

Sex can only be validating if one sees the other participant as a human, so I'm not sure how you're modeling the male thought process here. If men literally saw women they pursue sexually as objects, trust me, they'd settle for the fleshlight instead. Cheaper and less fussy. Actually it's a higher standard even than that. Most men would see sex with a prostitute as a big step down from being chosen by a woman. Again, this undercuts the view that we see women as objects in the quest for sexual va…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/24 09:25 PM
-1

I'm saying that all relationships are transactional in some way. You're friends with certain people, for example, because you get something out of the friendship. Maybe they relate to you in a unique way because of shared traumas. Maybe they share a similar talent. But friendship isn't arbitrary or unconditional. So it is with romantic relationships. If it truly is arbitrary to you, then it would make no difference if your partner were male, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/24 09:12 PM
3

If you expect a man you get with to provide for you financially, to watch your children, to maintenance your appliances, to provide emotional labor, etc., then you are also treating them as objects. We are all objects.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/24 08:45 PM
2

"Why do people who want to earn trophies pursue prestigious, hard-won trophies? Why not participation trophies?" The point here is not that you are an object, but that sex is about validation. Winning a trophy is appealing not because of the trophy itself. Anyone can buy a trophy!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/24 08:28 PM
1

Men also have no reason to think of women as a group outside of a sexual context. And in that context, of course we think of sexual conquest lol. I'm sure that makes us sound piggish to folks like OP, but think about it. If I'm sizing up an individual woman, naturally I'll think of her as a person, because I'm not fixated on her specific trait of being female. But if you ask me, "Hey Truffle, what do you think of the group of people that is entirely defined by being of the female sex?", then wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/24 08:16 PM
13

So one reaction makes me whiny and the other desperate? Is there a good way to react in your view? Anyway, sure, I'll grant that duty sex is common. Buy I also think most men rationalize that their partners enjoy it more than they really do. They haven't confronted the full reality of their situation. It's why folks are reluctant to break down the transactional nature of relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/24 02:09 AM
39

I think if most of these dudes had ever experienced duty sex, they'd rather women not settle. I'd rather remain abstinent for the rest of my life than be condemned to duty sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/24 08:47 PM
1

It's very rare. I got it for a few years and I think that's as much as most men can expect unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/24 05:45 AM
3

In my experience, it results in settling, even if it doesn't initially feel that way. If you are attracted to someone because they woo you, that attraction will fade within months (in my experience) along with the honeymoon phase. You see this, for example, with attraction to humor or attentiveness. What starts out as witty becomes dull and then grating. What starts out as thoughtful becomes expected and then servile. Looks also fade, but at least that process takes years for most. I still found…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/24 06:02 PM
–

The non-religious requirement alone rules out at least 80% of the US lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/24 08:59 PM
–

This is true, and it's why I feel safe expressing this view as SirTruffleberry and not as [insert name here]. This is what I love about Reddit. We never could have had this convo on Facebook, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/24 07:23 PM
–

What I mean by calling it a low standard is that it is satisfied by default, and only fails after one's life choices undermine it, e.g., you have to choose to eat poorly and be sedentary. Women's standards for men are different. Men have to achieve things, or at least strive for them. We don't just start off with a good enough package and as long as we don't mess it up, we're okay.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/24 06:35 PM
–

Standards are like market prices. If no one's buying what I'm selling, then I either have to close shop and leave the market, or I have to lower my price. Most men's low standards are a response to their success or lack thereof with women. We will lower the standards until we find interested parties or until what remains isn't worth it to us, same as women. It's just that women tend to have different thresholds, because they want relationships for totally different reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/24 05:45 PM
7

Men don't have high standards lol. Our standards are 1) don't be obese and 2) don't be a financial black hole. I'm not asking women to lower their standards, but don't pretend that the bar isn't in Hell for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/24 04:31 PM
3

I entirely understand the point you're making, but I'm not sure why you feel it's a significant one to make in the first place. No one can be guilted into complying with the standard that (for example) a median earner match with another median earner. Nor should they! People who settle--even this rational sort of settling--just grow to resent their partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/24 09:50 PM
–

It's more a statistical inference. If the women who show interest are predominantly older, or heavier, or have more kids, etc., then most of them see you as an easy settling target.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/24 12:57 AM
1

Not really. She couldn't talk me into getting her pregnant and hasn't found a suitable replacement since. She kept my name for at least a year afterward. Maybe she still has it lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 02:30 PM
5

This is hilarious to me because my ex-wife, who made the final decision to divorce (though we had both threatened it before), still had me file it lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 11:51 AM
10

Women initiate 70% of divorces, and 90% when you home in on the college-educated. Strange how they simply must marry due to societal pressure, but that same pressure doesn't keep them married! It couldn't be that divorce is profitable?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 11:05 AM
1

Women may have economic freedom, as you say, but the fact is that they still largely work in the service industry, often part-time, with many hoping to be SAHMs or as near as possible. Most of them are looking for a breadwinner. Before anyone accuses me of sexism, let me be clear that men would do this too if we could. But for a man to hold out for a breadwinning wife, they have to either be a chiseled god or delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 10:54 AM
3

"How should I go about losing weight?" "Look, you've got to exercise a lot. So much that it's going to make you ache and feel daunting if you just do it for the sake of weight loss. So instead, you should try to exercise for its own sake! Run for fun! The weight loss will come in due time. Okay, maybe it won't come. The point is that you need to be willing to exercise regardless of the outcome." "But if I were willing to do that--if I enjoyed exercise for its own sake--we wouldn't be having this…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/24 01:10 AM
8

I never said I expected success. I'm pointing out that if you're compelled to do X after hearing that it makes Y more likely, you aren't doing X and achieving Y organically. You're using X as a means to an end. People will suggest that you socialize to get better dating prospects but then get upset when you joined the club, entered the friend group, etc., with an "ulterior motive". If there weren't an ulterior motive, the advice wouldn't be compelling!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/24 07:14 PM
6

Okay, suppose I take your advice. I join clubs, I hit the bars, I call up old friends, I network, etc. All things I'm reluctant to do, because they're stressful and taxing and I don't enjoy them much. Suppose I end up meeting women this way. Did I meet them organically? Of course not. I met them because I took advice in the hopes that it would improve my dating prospects. If I wanted socializing for its other merits, I would already be doing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/24 07:10 PM
11

I get that this is well-intentioned, but it's also disingenuous. The dude's on a subreddit largely about dating, created a thread on dating, asked for input on the state of dating, and your advice is for him to fundamentally change how he lives his life without any expectations on how it will impact dating. There's a reason we don't socialize: we prefer not to. The only way he or others here could be talked into it is if it yields results.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/24 04:41 PM
1

I think you're missing my point. A woman, or at least a feminist, is going to tell you that placing enough value on a potential partner that you're repressing your emotions to improve your odds is a priority issue. They do not share your priority ranking that places getting a relationship ahead of expressing your feelings. I think that's what so many men here don't get, and what women think is too obvious to state: Women are largely okay with remaining single if the options before them are lackl…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/24 12:49 PM
3

Well, you've got to put yourself in their headspace. Relationships are frosting to women, as they largely value us as resources anyway. If a man can't "handle her at her worst" then she'd rather just be single, because having a partner is much less valuable to her than free expression. Men would be willing to do almost anything to avoid being single. It's why our standards are so low. So to us, anything that would torpedo a relationship seems like terrible advice. But to women, relationships are…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 06:02 PM
3

What they're going to say is that men absolutely have the right to express their feelings, but that women are under no obligation to consider them as partners if it turns them off. And honestly, would you have it any other way? Would you want women to feel guilted into staying with men that make them as dry as the Sahara? Both sexes suck, but for the most part, they suck in immutable ways. We can prescribe behavioral changes, but it doesn't change what we desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 05:18 PM
3

Is that an inference you've made, or do they outright say you need your own wealth? Because women will say it and face no social repercussions for it. At least men are shamed for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 04:52 PM
1

Not at all. If women don't desire men for their intrinsic value, then I would never advise them to settle for instrumental value. I'm only pointing out that it's a sad state of affairs.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 04:38 PM
7

This will get downvoted, but you're absolutely right. Men are expected to bring status and stability, on top of whatever looks standard the woman may have. Women are expected to bring only themselves. Imagine a guy telling you that he was looking for a female doctor, or a woman with money. People would double-take. I can drop the bar lower: I can't remember the last time I heard a guy say he expects her to have her own place.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/24 03:28 PM
1

Suppose you're trapped in a room with two locked, apparently equally sturdy doors. You're starting to get hungry and desperate, so you decide to try kicking one of the doors down. There is no apparent advantage to switching to a different door after your first several kicks fail, since the doors are identical and, if you've made any headway at all (in this case, making a profile, getting matches but being ghosted, etc.) it would be on the door you've already kicked. Either you kick a door down b…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/24 07:27 AM
-1

No, I think they have a point. If women didn't use dating apps at all, then the strategy for men is to leave them. If women do use dating apps, but only briefly until they get a match, then abandoning the apps won't necessarily improve your odds. After all, women don't stay single for long no matter how they choose to meet men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 07:57 PM
1

You...you think they need to traffick voice actors? Most people can moan on command. Trust me, I was a teacher. Even my male students could pull off some rather convincing effeminate moans, and they provided the "service" for free. (In case anyone misunderstands, I'm saying my students heckled me for the lulz.)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/24 06:55 AM
1

I'm arguing that if your sole opposition toward porn is that there may be sex trafficking involved, then this clearly doesn't apply to hentai. Indeed, to the extent that hentai supplants "real" porn, it is good, as it eliminates that much more potential trafficking. Even if you took the stance that it degrades women, at least it doesn't do so through a real actor, tarnishing her reputation.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 11:34 PM
0

Porn includes hentai. If that's not what she meant, I'll wait for her to say so.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/24 09:58 AM
13

"Look, there's no one else in this desert who's willing to sell you a bottle of water. So how about it? $1,000 for a bottle. It's reasonable, otherwise you'd have better offers."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/24 01:19 AM
2

I'm not sure we fully agree. I'll tell you how I interpret what you're saying. Let me know if I'm misunderstanding it. You seem to be suggesting that women find money intrinsically attractive; that is, attractive whether or not it gets spent on things they desire. Not only do I disagree and think most people find money only instrumentally valuable, I think this paints attraction to the wealthy as a virtuous endeavor. "I love him because of the sort of person he is." I disagree. He is loved becau…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/24 10:38 PM
1

I suppose it's a matter of honesty. I have no problem with citing, say, looks as a necessary condition for a relationship. It may not be "the" reason I'm with a woman, but if I don't like how she looks, nothing else can compensate. I think women tend to struggle with acknowledging their shallow dealbreakers. I will fully admit that some of mine are shallow lol, as are those of most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/24 07:56 PM
1

That men tend to have significantly more money is no accident. If relationships weren't so often transactional, with the man effectively buying companionship, then it's difficult to see why the wealth disparity would persist to the extent it does. Men put more effort into their careers because it's often the only way to attract women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/24 12:59 PM
7

I would argue that men indulge in hobbies far more than women, and many of them build camaraderie with friends, e.g., gaming nights. But this misses the point. There's an unspoken premise to many of your questions: That if you just throw enough things into the void, you'll fill it. I'm afraid you can't fill a triangular hole with a cube, no matter how many cubes you have.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/24 07:44 PM
6

Your ELO will plummet after the first few days anyway. I've used Tinder with modest success, but only by creating and deleting profiles weekly. (This is a lot of work because if you just use the same number and pictures, Tinder will shadowban you. So you need fake numbers, new emails, new pictures, etc.) But it's always the same. About a dozen matches in the first 2 or 3 days, regardless of my swiping, then abrupt radio silence.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/24 02:40 PM
3

Do you expect an employer to say they're hiring you for the sole purpose of making more money? Sure, you know it's true. But hearing it suggests they are worse than average. A "decent" company would say that perhaps it's to make a better product, connect better with customers, or some other tripe.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/24 03:39 AM
1

Basically I'm saying that with your approach, there is no such thing as irrationality. We can always invent a goal that would explain an action, and if the pair conflict with past action/goal pairs, then we can chalk it up to a priority shift rather than calling it what it is: irrationality. I'll give a well-studied example of this. People tend to temporally discount the value of money when they are to be paid at a later date, which is why interest is so common. Usually interest is a fixed perce…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/24 06:53 PM
1

So let's say, as often as the bank allows, I refinance my mortgage from a 20-year payment schedule to 30, then to 20, then 30, etc. At each point we can say that I was pursuing a goal, but since the goals alternate and contradict each other, there is no unified goal. Surely that is irrational behavior, yes? It seems to me that your approach lets you trivially match any set of behaviors to goals. Could you give an example of apparently contradictory behaviors that couldn't be characterized as jus…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/24 03:32 PM
0

This doesn't seem to be enough though. Consider someone with two preferences: 1) X prefers donuts. 2) X prefers maintaining a healthy weight. If X scarfs down a dozen Krispy Kreme donuts every morning, are they being illogical? By your standard they aren't, since they are following a rationale, i.e., satisfying (1). The issue in my view is that (1) and (2) conflict.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/24 07:57 AM
8

I would say, rather, that women have fewer romantic/sexual needs than men. Platonic relationships suffice for many female needs, so as we would expect, women tend to have more robust friend groups. Now perhaps you would say that men should learn from this and start networking more as well, but I think that would miss the point. Most men simply cannot find fulfillment this way. It's rather like asking a woman who dearly wants to be a mother to find fulfillment elsewhere. She will struggle. She mu…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 10:52 PM
0

Well yes, because they had to already know how to navigate to get there. Humanity originated in African savannahs, not tiny islands.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 07:55 AM
0

So you're either calling Australia an "island" or you're underestimating how much they sailed about. A smaller landmass with more isolated people would be something like Japan for most of history. But even then, I would hardly call that an island. When I think of a "stranded on an island" scenario, I'm imagining something like Gilligan's Island, the cast of which would have indeed drowned themselves if you told them they were trapped for life.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 10:15 PM
2

It seems to me that the issue here is time scale. If you're stranded with people only temporarily, then procreating with them is usually a net loss resource-wise. You're constantly feeding the children and can't extract useful labor from them for at least a decade, and the investment probably won't pay dividends until at least 15 years after the fact. The realistic answer to the question, "What would you do if you were stranded on an island, and you knew it was forever?" is, for most, that they …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 07:20 PM
2

Psychology is only a science in the loosest sense lol. It relies on a ton of self-reporting and interpretation.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/24 12:43 PM
5

Maybe for some, but there is the completely opposite theory that women do see the abusive behavior these men dish out, but fancy the idea that they might be the lone exception. "He's gentle for me." Women even seem to be aware of this to some degree. I've heard women explain that this is why they prefer cats to dogs, for example. The dog is friendly indiscriminately; the cat is cold to everyone but the owner.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 07:25 PM
1

There's a difference between changing strategy and changing preferences. If I could change preferences, I and most men would just choose to be gay, or perhaps asexual. If you're a whale, I can't just choose to find you attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/24 02:39 AM
4

Because of the hypocrisy lol. It's a blatant lie. Women are very sexual with attractive men, and have no libido issues during the honeymoon phase. But they don't want to lead with that info, because they figure the man will then expect a certain amount of sex. So they lead with "demisexuality" and "waiting" to lower the expectations placed on them. It's no different than a man pretending he's just unsure of where he is in his life, so he doesn't want to commit. Most men absolutely will commit to…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 10:10 PM
9

Some men entertain the dim hope that if women are made consciously aware of the flaws in their dating strategy, then they'll adopt a new strategy. There is no hope of this, of course, but it feels good to vent. You may ask why they seek to change women at all. Why not just pursue the "good" ones? Because AWALT tbh. The number of women who lead with claims of demisexuality and forbidding hookups that somehow still have a storied sexual past is nauseating.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 06:00 PM
2

How someone walks around in the club isn't necessarily how they'll act on a date or in the bedroom, either. So what's your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 06:32 PM
1

I didn't say you couldn't observe someone. I'm saying you can't observe someone without taking in their appearance first. Obviously, you can then invest some time to decide whether or not to approach. But it's infeasible to invest that time for everyone. You decide whom to invest in by appearance, e.g., you won't be observing their behavior intently if they aren't attractive to you. And sure, the info you glean is different in-person...but is it better? For example, I am bad at impromptu chit-ch…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 06:04 PM
1

What part do you disagree with? 1) Your appearance is the first impression people have of you. 2) Being the first barrier, appearance is statistically what prevents most pairings from even getting started.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 10:23 AM
3

It may be mostly looks, but looks are mostly what determine chemistry anyway. Think of it this way. You see two women at a bar who are strangers. You start chatting with one. What made you choose that one? The only possibility is appearance. Personality only becomes a factor if you survive the first impression, which is grounded in looks. The brunt of your attempts will die there. The only reason this is less obvious with women is because they don't approach, so it's less transparent when they m…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 07:23 AM
9

Most people, be they man or woman, decide whether or not they want to sleep with you within seconds. Women make those decisions in person as well, but finish the polite conversations they're holding with you rather than announce their conclusions. Now if you enjoy those pleasantries, then that's all well and good. But I'd rather not waste my time with someone if I fail their looks test. A personality cannot compensate for lack of physical attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/24 12:06 AM
14

I mean, I think it's a change for the best tbh. I'm not especially successful on the apps, but neither was I when I approached in person. The apps let you get your answers efficiently and painlessly--likely the same answers you would get in person, where there is more time, money, and pride on the line. What some men don't like about it is that in-person approaches grant you the illusion of a chance, but these are the folks who mistake politeness for interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/24 07:08 PM
4

But we don't only like women for their bodies. Sex toys are very sophisticated these days. You can easily get more physical stimulation from them than from a real woman. What men can't replace is the validation women offer. Women and money are different: Women will happily accept any money for any reason. A boyfriend or husband's money isn't special to them. They could get the money by collecting your life insurance for all they care.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/23 06:19 PM
4

It's worse than that, I think. These changes came about after women became less financially dependent on men. We were only ever loved for our resources; there was never anything to save. No matter where you move, you can't unlearn that truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/23 03:55 PM
8

I agree that these are long-term effects, but this definitely isn't why the average man cares. I don't see the point of OP's post, as it seems to be preaching to the choir, but they are correct. Men wish women would be more eager to commit because their dating lives are difficult, so they threaten the worst thing they can imagine: remaining single. But this isn't the worst thing women can imagine. They have much lower libidos and much larger friend networks. They are largely satisfied without me…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/23 03:28 PM
0

Fair enough. Someone who is truly happy being single can theoretically go without lowering their standards. I agree with that. It should be noted, however, that women generally don't go out of their way to get partners anyway. Most women don't ask men out, for example. So I'm a bit skeptical that you weren't counting on being asked out all along, but I can't prove it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/23 09:37 PM
0

He's perfect to you now because you've already grown attached to him. This is why imagining a counterfactual world in which you haven't been with him yet is an unfortunate part of my question that can't be replaced. Perhaps somewhere in the multiverse is a version of you with a slightly worse version of your boyfriend who simply couldn't imagine changing a thing about him. On your point about a potential partner not being good enough: I suppose it's true that some people care so little for compa…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/23 08:48 PM
1

They don't usually perceive it as settling, sure, but it is settling. I gave the example elsewhere of students discarding most of their classmates after graduation. Those friends were the best they could do at the time, but now that the graduate has more options, the old crowd seems comparatively worse. That's how everything is. We calibrate our standards to what we can achieve in a given environment. Standards are not intrinsic. When someone says they've "lowered their standards", they mean tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/23 07:44 PM
0

Suppose hypothetically that you could have met a better version of your boyfriend and grown attached to him instead. Assuming he would still want to be with you, would you not have gotten with him? If not, I don't believe you. If yes, you have effectively settled for the current version because it's the one that was available. Likely you are not conscious of how your standards are calibrated to your environment, but you see it everywhere in human interaction. It's why kids have so many friends i…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/23 07:28 PM
4

It seems to me that if you unpack what it means to be someone's "equal" in this context, it boils down to "I'll take the best person who will have me". It's the same idea as an item's price being what the buyer and seller agree upon.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/23 07:07 AM
2

Sure, and because it is optional and usually unnecessary, the man looks like a villain for asking. This of course dissuades them from asking, which is precisely what the woman would want when it is necessary!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 02:30 PM
2

So how would you explain the rise of divorce and decline of marriage since, say, the 50s? Again, even the feminists agree with me on this one. The inclusion of women in the workforce has had a liberating effect on women in their marriages, and indeed reduced their need for marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 06:41 PM
2

I certainly wouldn't say he is naturally superior or anything lol. But I think it's more accurate to say that, in modern times, women (in the US) don't need leaders in their domestic lives. I would also argue that women as a sex (not necessarily as individuals) were largely complicit in their past treatment, but that's a topic for another thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 12:20 PM
3

It seems like you're thinking about this backwards. It's not that being independent makes her want to leave when she otherwise wouldn't. Rather, being dependent makes her decide to stay when she otherwise wouldn't. No job, no car, no savings, strapped to a child 24/7...the SAHM of the 50s had no good exit strategy in a failing relationship unless her family took her back in. Similarly, a woman who didn't marry quickly was basically a failure to launch. It's a lot of power that men had and lost. …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 07:09 AM
0

If you compare the rise of female employment alongside divorce rates (divorces being predominantly filed by women), you see that the demise of the SAHM norm led to more divorce. By this point the phenomenon is decades-old. And I know I'm a guy, so that will be met with skepticism. But this has actually been a feminist talking point for a bit. In feminist circles it is seen as purely positive, of course, while my observation of it here is more neutral. (It's emphasized that the woman can leave, n…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 06:07 AM
2

I think the primary reason is that a woman who is financially independent is far more likely to leave, for good reasons or bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/23 02:18 AM
2

These are good points, but I think it's worth considering why someone may not have had strong bonds in their past. When you see a woman in her 30s or 40s who has been through loads of relationships, you get the impression that it isn't due to unfortunate mismatches so much as the woman is just impossible to satisfy for long.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 06:45 AM
0

I truly am glad that this gives you comfort, but I can't relate. That sounds bleak to me. I hope I still feel like I have good things left to lose when I turn 40. (Which is what causes folks to give a fuck.)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/23 06:34 AM
2

I definitely see the appeal. I mean, it's the same thing men want with the sexes swapped. To feel special. To feel that he has uniquely captured a woman's attention. Entire genres of anime are devoted to that niche with nothing analogous for women. The difference is sexual market value. A woman has a selection, so if she picks you, you really are special to her in some way. But men generally have to take what they can get.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/23 06:57 AM
1

To be fair, she did say "never".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/23 07:47 PM
4

Good lord. I'm a loser with women and have still managed 3 at 30, with each lasting a couple of years. Those figures are...okay, I guess? But you're going to struggle to find desirable men past their mid-20s with this standard. Are you that insecure?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/23 06:03 PM
1

I disagree with your analogy. In the case of the gay man, the partner has to be a guy because the sex would be unsatisfying for him otherwise. We can see a logical connection between his sexuality and his preference. With the asexual couple, it isn't clear at all why the sex of either would matter. They are, by definition, not attracted to each other's physical appearance. They do not prefer using their partner's equipment for fun stuff. The only way I can see someone arguing this is to say some…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/23 09:28 PM
2

Fair enough. If she openly tells the guy she experiences no sexual attraction toward him and he chooses to stay, I have no qualms with that. It's pretty sad, but not morally objectionable.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/23 07:05 AM
2

So in addition to manipulating some poor sod into thinking she is attracted, OP should also deprive him of having a genetic legacy by selling this fiction if she is so inclined? Jesus.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 08:57 PM
1

Does it? It seems that then the pressure would be: "So that's your type?" "When are you getting married?" "When are you going to have kids?" Etc. Also, RIP to the man's ego if he ever discovers this is the reason he was selected lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 07:17 PM
2

If it's any consolation, I'm stuck in early dating hell myself now. Waiting for something to stick. Stand strong, broseph.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 07:13 PM
2

Hey, we have comparable numbers! 3 relationships for me and I'm 30 lol. And I agree. I suppose this reads like I'm blaming women. But I know they can't help having so little sexual desire, anymore than we can help craving it. It's not that women suck or even that society sucks. Sexual dimorphism sucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 07:06 PM
3

Sure, she became a hypochondriac in response to desperation I had a year prior, before we began dating. Just lol. You're reversing cause and effect. Low standards of men are a response to selectiveness in women, not the other way around. I would still be a virgin into my 30s if I were picky.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 07:00 PM
1

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you think I said this to her? The whole point of this sub is to vent about things we would only ever say anonymously. But if you must know, the problems began when she started playing hypochondriac. She revved up her "mental illness" (supposedly OCD) to a climax, only for it to magically disappear after we broke up.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 06:07 PM
5

So if your girlfriend said that all future sex is off the table for whatever reason, your love would persist through the years? OP speaks of sexual desire too, so we can actually make it worse: Suppose your girlfriend says that she finds some men very sexually desirable, but not you, so she won't have sex with you. But she says she is still in love with you. Are you sticking around? Sex is to a romance what a bathroom is to a house. The bathroom doesn't make the house, but any house without a ba…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 05:49 PM
7

In what way does this differ from platonic love? We have urges for that too. I suspect the answer is that an asexual woman wants to be attractive without being attracted. This would make the relationship lopsided.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 05:05 PM
3

Vetting? That's adorable. I'm a guy. I take anyone who would have me who isn't morbidly obese or an obvious money leech. I still struggle to find anyone with those standards. When I said I sniff out women like OP, it's more of a mental preparation thing than a disqualification. So I guess she could still land a sufficiently desperate man. He will leave the moment a better option presents itself though. If I had enough options to vet, then I suppose duration of prior relationships would be a dece…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 04:58 PM
11

That one was actually two relationships ago. It began typically enough. Hot and heavy the first couple of months, then a bit of winding down. You expect that of course. Things started to become harder about a year in, and harder still around two years. By that point we were scheduling sex. We made it to three and a half before we both reached a breaking point. I sat through one of her therapy sessions in which she said she could easily go without ever having sex again. Absolutely soul-crushing t…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 02:54 PM
23

It's the most important factor because it's the only thing that is unique to a romantic relationship. It's the reason a man seeks a woman as a partner and not, I dunno, a gamer bro roommate. Which leads to a question I have for OP: Why do you need a man specifically for companionship?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 02:33 PM
24

I can't speak for all men, but I deliberately try to sniff out women like OP. One dead bedroom makes a guy hypervigilant about that for life. Enthusiasm in the bedroom is extremely important to me. If you treat sex like a chore, it just makes me feel undesirable. Sex is about validation. Trust me, there are toys on the market that feel like the real thing. The mechanical aspects of sex aren't what we want.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/23 02:26 PM
2

I should have been clearer. Being a provider doesn't make you attractive. This is one answer to your question about who wouldn't date an awesome guy: women who don't find him attractive. They may change their minds when they become desperate enough, but we're still left with the conclusion that the provider is unattractive. That's OP's point.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/23 03:24 PM
1

You're not really "awesome" for being a provider. I could die in a forklift accident and provide for a spouse with a lawsuit and life insurance policy. That's how disconnected what I provide is from who I am.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/23 03:09 PM
1

I'm wondering, though, if this just amounts to observing that people old enough to have divorced tend to find new partners that are also older and therefore more likely to have divorced.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/23 03:03 PM
2

Then perhaps OP should have provided that argument rather than hiding behind more mild objections. If you want to hold the stance that sex is a Very Special Case (TM), then you have to at least own that crap.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/23 02:01 AM
1

I notice that most of your criticisms apply to acting in general. Would you apply the same age restriction to all of theatre? I think there are misgivings about sex under the hood here tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/23 01:25 AM
1

Well let's examine one of the reasons you gave just as an example: You say you want her to feel that you've waited for her. What if the woman is otherwise perfect for you, but it turns out that she doesn't care about your sexual past at all? What if she wishes you were experienced? It seems to me that you should be interested in the probability that this woman will turn out to be like what you're expecting. That probability is determined by the real world, not your regrets about sunk costs. Or t…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/23 01:02 PM
4

I'm confused as to why you're reflecting on the psychological payoffs of these beliefs rather than showing an interest in what is true. Your goals are what determine whether virginity matters. You have some degree of control over those, but all else is rooted in reality, not feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/23 08:29 AM
1

Note, of course, that a platonic friend can provide those things. So I will add that much of what men value in women is unique to romantic relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/23 10:18 PM
3

Seriously though, I think a good way to emphasize the vast chasm between sex and financial security is this: I can literally financially provide for a woman by dying under the correct circumstances so that she can collect life insurance, file a lawsuit, etc. However, a dead woman is useless to a man. A corpse provides no sexual validation, no "emotional labor", etc. What women value in men is so far removed from "who they are" that they needn't even be alive to provide it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/23 06:51 PM
2

I'm not sure what you mean. My exes still exist post-breakup, and they are still indulging in their negative behaviors, just with someone new. My choice to stay with them as long as I did had no moral consequences as far as I can tell.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/23 09:56 PM
5

I think it's more that it's hard for people to admit that they find negative--or at least neutral--traits attractive. My exes aren't especially good people. I knew they weren't good when I was with them. They were irresponsible, neglected their friends, and generally thought they were the center of the universe. It's tough to admit that your sexual preferences are orthogonal to your sense of morality.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/23 04:16 PM
1

Quick maths. The amount of time it takes to get a success is: (# of approaches until success)×(average time needed to approach) You are probably right that the # of approaches needed for cold methods is higher, but the average time needed to approach is wayyyyy smaller. Easily enough to offset the other factor, all with less collateral damage. It's similar to applying for a job, really. The person who mass applies is going to land a job before the person who carefully studies each workplace for …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/23 08:30 PM
1

I just don't see the strategic appeal of this method. It takes longer, you're still going to be labeled a creep if you do it at a workplace, gym, bookclub, etc., and you've still made the woman uncomfortable if she isn't attracted. In fact, you've made her more uncomfortable than if she were simply ignoring a message from a stranger, because she has to properly reject the warm approacher. All it seems to do is reduce the frequency of approaches. I suppose that's good for the women who would pref…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/23 08:05 PM
3

If you're using online dating, 20 would be a trivial amount lol. I would say that blowing up 9 friendships and getting labeled a creep in 2-3 social circles you spent months infiltrating before the 10th friend accepts you is a lot of collateral damage.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/23 06:20 PM
6

If she doesn't find you attractive, spending months becoming her friend is unlikely to change her answer. I'm going to make up some numbers here, but hopefully it illustrates my point. Let's say you have a 5% success rate getting a response from a woman by cold approach, and 10% by warm approach. On average, you would need 20 cold approaches to get a success, or 10 warm approaches. The problem is that 10 warm approaches would consume years of social capital. You have to either exhaust your curre…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/23 11:10 AM
14

Actually it wastes only very little time at most, and that's one of the strongest arguments in its favor. It takes weeks, perhaps even months of effort to work your way into a woman's social circle if you aren't already there. And if you fail to meet her looks threshold, you were always going to fail. Asking her out straight away takes a few minutes to reach the same outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/23 04:09 AM
2

Because it's dismissive. Let me step back for a second and give you the benefit of the doubt. So I'll explain. As a guy, I see this topic brought up a lot. And without fail, a caped crusader swoops in to suggest therapy. It is done almost reflexively, usually after diminishing the importance of the OP's problems with various flavors of "it's not the end of the world" and "there's more to life anyway". It gives the impression that you don't want to face the full force of their predicament. Someti…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 05:34 PM
1

See, this is the problem with reductio ad absurdum and analogies: your opponents can just feign being dense and lean into the absurd conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 05:22 PM
0

"And even then, professional help in the form of some sort of psychiatric/medical intervention is necessary." -Your advice to people too disabled to work and earn money lol
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 03:42 PM
6

That's what's eating at me. She at first agrees, and even goes further in insisting that "the vast majority of people have external issues", but then she spends the rest of the comment emphasizing individual agency. It's like someone saying, "I acknowledge that your blue-collar wage is barely affording you subsistence because we live in a post-capitalist hellhole, but most of the responsibility for that is still on you."
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 03:39 PM
2

1) The reality is that we are both making probabilistic judgments about what OP has done and is experiencing, because we certainly don't know him well enough for customized advice. So it seems to me that our main disagreement here is what the "average" man's experience is. I'm sure there are some men who would benefit from your advice to seek therapy. However, I think the more typical case is that the dating market has become increasingly unfavorable to men so that male loneliness is, if not sys…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 01:25 PM
3

So three things: 1) I was right that you don't view dating issues as external problems, despite your protestations otherwise, because you proceed to blame OP's "date-ability" and insist they can control it. As a woman, your dating issues really are things that can be resolved by priority shifts, e.g., settling. It doesn't surprise me that you don't take men's issues seriously in this realm. 2) I was wrong in thinking that you would at least have the decency to acknowledge that recommending thera…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 12:36 PM
12

Therapy doesn't really help when the problem is external. I'm assuming you're a woman, so I'm sure you don't believe it really is external. But imagine for a moment that OP was complaining about the feeling of anxiety they get from struggling to make rent. You wouldn't suggest therapy then, because that problem can't be magicked away by a change of perspective. It is a sane reaction to external conditions rooted in the world around the would-be patient.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/23 10:16 AM
0

But you are a single data point. And since you don't date women, that one data point is all you will ever have. When men who actively date are telling you their experience, perhaps you should listen. They have dozens of data points.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/23 06:00 PM
-1

I date women...do you date women? This isn't true of all women, sure, but it's true of virtually no men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/23 05:37 PM
-2

The man organizes the date, drives her there, and pays for it, all while receiving one-liner texts as the only input from her. In what way is she "entertaining" him?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/23 05:18 PM
4

Most people aren't very interesting, women included. Yet most guys would bang the average woman. This is just a difference in sex drives, plain and simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/23 06:08 AM
3

I don't think it quite follows that "incompatible implies unattractive". I'm incompatible with someone who lives across the country and won't move. But that has no bearing on their attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/23 05:48 AM
1

You read my mind. Yes, I would say all relationships are transactional in the same sense that all deliberate actions are selfish. But my point was a bit deeper than that. It makes us very uncomfortable to know the explicit details of the transaction. We know the idea of a person having infinite value is illusory. It must be finite. But placing an exact value on it is soul-crushing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/23 10:21 PM
5

I'm reminded of a short story ("On Self-Delusion and Bounded Rationality") in which the author explains a theory that love is basically a tool men and women use to convince each other of their inability to leave one another even if better opportunities arise, and that it's so very effective because you aren't even aware that you're using the tool. You sincerely believe that you cannot go on without the person you "love". Deep down, we know all of this is transactional. But we don't want to know …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/23 03:06 PM
6

So it would help to know where you're from to explain this better. Roughly ~40% of people in the US are obese. This is probably determined by BMI, so it's not a perfect measure. There are body builders and very short women with decent figure that would be obese by this measure. But even if I generously give you a few percentage points to wave away that crowd, we're still left with about 1 in 3 women having a rotund "figure" here in the US. That is prevalent enough to explain the phenomenon of fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/23 02:25 PM
13

And I'll add that the attraction women experience toward other women is not the result of selective pressures, e.g., OP's weight preference for women has no bearing whatsoever on her odds of producing healthy offspring. So of course the sexual preferences women have for other women are different than those men have.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/23 11:44 AM
10

As it is often said here, when women say that X is attractive, they mean that a guy with good looks that exhibits X is attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/23 09:36 PM
4

There is another option: Society has made it where there is no comfortable way to have children. We need to slow reproduction down quickly enough that the government panics and does something about wages. Also, studies on rates of cheating are probably worthless. Polls are already barely acceptable, much less when it's an uncomfortable topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 04:18 PM
5

Most jobs can't even support a family on one income. If the father is making enough to comfortably support a family, he has a demanding job that limits his time with them. This will affect both his happiness and the quality of his relationship with his wife. Also--and this is anecdotal because it's the sort of thing that can't be studied--women get bored at home and start looking. They also spend more when they're bored.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:51 PM
1

Why would a student bring their non-student boyfriend on campus to walk to class with them? Some of the women you see walking alone have older boyfriends off-campus.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/23 07:58 PM
0

At that point you are searching for something nice to say rather than saying what you feel at the moment. Why? It sounds like a calculated maneuver.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/23 05:52 PM
6

I think female interactions seem so fake because women feel compelled to interact in the first place. After all, the saying is, "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all," and not, "If you don't have anything nice to say, make something up."
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/23 11:37 AM
1

I'd be happy to analyze that data if you provide your source, but now you're skipping many steps indeed. "Would you like to go out sometime?" is when an attempt starts, not, "Now that we've slept together, will you stay with me?"
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 07:49 PM
3

I think I can answer the question in the other direction--that is, why women are discouraged from sleeping around. It is obvious that women have more options on the dating market. If they are aware of these options and willing to exercise them, then that gives them considerable leverage. Slut shaming and the like suppress that advantage.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 07:45 PM
1

What are you talking about? Most people need many tries! We don't have exact figures on relationships in general, but half of all marriages (in the US) end in divorce. For relationships as a whole? Surely north of 90% end in breakups. And that's just if we're counting a relationship as a "try". It gets much worse if we include the asking out phase.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 07:03 PM
1

Multiple men, hmm? So what did they do after you broke up? Yes, exactly. They scouted outside the social group. Dating friends only works for a couple of tries.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 04:21 PM
1

Maybe if you live in an urban area and move a lot? I grew up and still live in a rural area. We keep the same friend groups here our whole lives. To do what you're advising, I would have to be such a natural that I get it right within a couple of tries with no experience to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 07:23 AM
2

I can think that a girl and I are "vibing" and she could feel we're "good friends". You're asking for men to read minds. Every relationship I have been in began with mixed/weak signals. Conversely, women have given me overwhelmingly positive signals before only to ghost me later. You. Cannot. Rely. On. Signals.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 02:25 AM
2

The person to whom I was replying insists (correctly) that approaches from non-friends are based on looks, and prefers approaches only from people they know sufficiently well.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/23 02:13 AM
4

Propositioning a woman in one's social group is very risky for a man. All of his friends hear about it. If he gets a few failed attempts accumulated then he becomes "that guy" who asks everyone out.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/23 08:27 PM
3

Awareness is only one of the barriers. Another is the medium itself. While older folk are texting more, they frequently complain about young people not meeting in person. I suspect they won't consider a relationship with a chatbot to be sufficiently intimate.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/23 04:24 PM
9

Well now you've retreated to a safe but useless position. Grannies aren't excited by AI boyfriends for obvious reasons, among them being obliviousness toward new tech.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/23 03:29 PM
9

Older women can get younger men if they relax their standards a bit. (By not expecting a provider, for example. As the older party, they ought to be more established than young folk anyway.)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/23 03:05 PM
26

You're equating women being unpartnered because they are picky with men being unpartnered because they can't find anyone who will have them without being paid.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/23 12:43 PM
1

I think your last point is most important. It's rather like asking why folks who cross the picket line are viewed negatively. It reduces our collective bargaining power, and judging from the state of the dating market, we need it dearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/23 11:14 PM
2

Counting only in-person, warm approaches, my success rate is maybe 10%. This is not unusually bad based on other men's anecdotes, so I'll just use that figure for the average man for the purposes of this discussion. 10% for warm approaches feels quite bad. It's not just that you miss 90% of the time, but that you specifically approached women you thought you might have a chance with. My "actual" success rate (the % of women I could attract if they knew me well enough) is maybe 2-3%. But my circl…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 07:46 PM
2

"Approach" is a pretty low bar tbf. Approaching can mean sending a first message on OLD, for example. It doesn't usually refer to properly courting a woman. Courting became impractical ages ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 07:19 PM
5

This is like saying that if a team is scheduled for fewer games then they will lose less. While true, it doesn't exactly help them win lol. Look, to fix this either way may take a whole generation. That means you're asking a whole generation of men to rip up their only lottery tickets in order to improve the odds of the next gen's lottery. No one is that selfless, I'm sorry. You have illustrated this yourself by showing that, while women could also solve the problem, they won't make the sacrific…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 06:02 PM
21

Except men approach many women in response to the high rejection rate women dish out. It's a feedback loop, not a line. Sure, either side could break the loop...at immediate cost to themselves. No one wants to be the sucker who takes one for the team though.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 01:45 PM
20

It's almost like both sexes have dynamically evolved strategies that are responses to each other and it isn't anyone's fault as there is no initial root cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 12:13 PM
0

Right. You're either single, in which case having attractive friends is frustrating, or you're taken, in which case having attractive friends is seen as threatening by your partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 02:11 AM
3

My point was that being a guy with a lot of female friends isn't indicative of your ability to score. Women will happily accept you into their circles even if you have no chance at all with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 12:33 AM
1

I don't see the difference besides connotation. If I instead said, "Women will generally socialize with anyone, no matter how little in common they have with the person" would it significantly change my point?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 12:23 AM
-4

It's completely trivial to be "friends" with a woman. Women will generally welcome attention from anyone, no matter how little in common they have with the person. It doesn't mean you have a chance to score with them. Not even close.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 06:29 PM
6

Right. The hoe "phase" doesn't become less desirable, just less manageable as looks wane and budgets tighten.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 11:26 PM
22

Heck, we can extend this further. Most people would prefer not to watch their food being made lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 10:57 AM
0

You're assuming that women will only procreate with men they find sexually attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/23 09:40 PM
1

albertandmable seems fixated on the sexual aspect. They refer to objectification that occurs from raising one's body count and the influence their Catholic upbringing had on this view. Both of these make me think their concerns are carnal in nature.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/23 06:04 PM
1

This thinking confuses me. So if someone had, say, 10 one-night stands, that is too much experience for you. But if they had sex with only one previous partner 100 times, that's an acceptable amount of experience? This seems like the female counterpart to the myth that if a woman has too many partners, she'll be loose. Surely she would be no looser than if she had tons of sex with one person.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/23 11:57 AM
0

The "average man" doesn't exist. People's traits tend to be correlated with one another. Piecing together a bunch of averages and pretending a group embodies them is naive. As an example, the median household income in the US is in the low 50k's. You seem to think it is much higher (as you believe the man alone would make this). Likely this is because pay is correlated with your local cost of living, which your analysis ignores. A better metric might be to order men by the amount of action they …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/23 02:10 AM
29

No more than I would feel used for being asked to run an errand. Sex doesn't have to be a boogeyman. And this isn't hypothetical for me. I have done it when I was tired and not aroused several times before.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/23 05:50 PM
22

"Just turn off your sex drive, bro." This is about as useful as telling depressed people to go out and have fun.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/23 11:31 AM
3

While I see your point, very few people will admit to "dating down". At best, people might say that value is judged along multiple dimensions and that, while they outscore their partner in some metrics, the reverse is true in others. Personally I have found that once value in a relationship has been quantified ("you're worth this much, but not an iota more"), it is the beginning of the end. People in love are polite enough to obscure these metrics.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/23 05:02 AM
2

Which rather proves that it isn't much about pleasure at all. For example, I rarely get off during sex. I get off without fail if I masturbate. But 99% of the time, I would prefer to have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/23 01:38 PM
-1

I'm explaining the existence of a correlation with another correlation. You can't get far in understanding the world if you only ever work with particulars.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/23 01:40 PM
0

Speaking only for myself, while I wouldn't say women are unpleasant to be around, I see little point in it outside of the intimacy of a relationship. Most women do not share my interests. Without common activities or discussion topics or sexual tension, what's left?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/23 08:57 AM
6

As a guy, I can kind of empathize with OP. Acknowledgments women have made about me being suave have stuck more than any other compliment. I won't feign humility here: I know I'm smart. I know I'm funny. But I don't usually feel attractive. I would rather be told that I am than hear about a virtue. That said, OP's bit about consent bugs me. Consent to a deal requires knowledge of all that is relevant to the deal by both parties. So let's say I lie about being a doctor to impress a woman. Occupat…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/23 02:58 PM
4

Right. I mean, there are technically solutions, but they all suck: 1) Increase female libido with testosterone supplements. 2) Decrease male libido with antidepressants. 3) Selectively breed fewer men. They're all invasive and risk huge population issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/23 06:25 AM
8

I think a bit of nuance is being glossed over with that answer. Going through life without getting a guy is one thing. But in this hypothetical, it seems you're supposed to know in advance that you aren't getting a guy for reasons beyond your control. It's like the difference between deciding not to have children and being infertile. Infertility is surely far worse, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/23 04:11 PM
2

Right. A standard is a preference that you can "back up" with some sort of leverage. I prefer all kinds of specific and sometimes unrealistic features in women, but most of them aren't standards because I would just end up alone if I held out for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/23 06:17 PM
–

I think you're missing my point. It's not about completing a transaction, but about assessing where you stand with someone. It's about whether the woman is truly attracted and serious or whether she's playing games or settling. Sex is strong evidence of the former. Words, on the other hand, are very weak evidence. I acknowledge that your approach to dating is to take it slow. There is nothing "wrong" with that. However, that approach is hard to distinguish from either playing games or settling, …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/23 03:18 AM
–

Having a standard and sticking to it isn't coercing. As hannahg000 indicates, women would be able to opt out of relationships entirely if they wished. Whether or not they actually would...we'll never know.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/23 03:15 AM
–

I mean, if every guy followed OP's advice, women would be forced to adapt. While I think he put it crudely by making it all sound transactional, I'm inclined to agree with OP to the extent that words are cheap and sex is stronger evidence of commitment and attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/23 07:34 PM
1

I don't see the point in trying to omit subsequent divorces beyond one's first. The argument being made doesn't privilege first marriages. It would be like discussing US life expectancy and saying that it shoots up if you neglect obese people. I'm sure it would, but that's an arbitrary omission.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/23 01:12 PM
1

Would you have sex with them if they offered?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/23 06:23 PM
3

My response to this and to OP is that even the "nice guys" aren't keeping it secret. Men and women very rarely have enough common interests to hit it off without romantic undercurrents. Deep down, everyone knows what it means when a man and woman develop such a camaraderie without any of the usual prerequisites. Now you may argue that even so, the man (or woman) should state this explicitly. This would shatter the sexual tension and make it awkward. It's like asking for updates on the other pers…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/23 04:38 PM
1

I don't think it's so much that we each assume the other is lying. Consider a claim like "My dating life is difficult." Or perhaps "I'm struggling because of others' standards." If a moderately attractive woman says such things, it's unlikely that she's deliberately trying to mislead people. The issue is that for someone to know these things (that is, in order for them to be justified, true beliefs), they need a whole lot of perspective. They need vast knowledge of others' experiences before the…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/23 12:54 AM
–

I didn't claim it was a dominant trend. I said as much in the previous comment. You always have to repeat things with women. The overwhelming majority of conclusions you have ever reached in your life have been from anecdotal evidence. We can't carry out detailed surveys and statistical analyses of every query that pops into a randos mind. That costs time and money.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 07:19 PM
–

You're so right my guy. I'm lying about my observations to a random stranger about a trivial matter in an obscure forum for what...clout? I didn't claim it was some kind of dominant trend. But it happens frequently enough to be noticeable and far more often than the reverse.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 06:16 PM
–

I said "older", not "old". Think late 20s dude dating a girl just out of high school. Happens all the time around here.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 06:08 PM
–

Look at it from the girl's perspective. Her peers are still living off of allowances and hitching rides and living with their parents. An older guy offers to give her independence of these things. Of course that is attractive to her.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 05:34 PM
–

I live in a small town where a lot of the women both don't want to work nor drive, and they live with their parents. It may sound silly, but having a reliable career, car, and a house already puts you miles ahead of the guys who are just starting out. An older woman isn't going to be as impressed by these things.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 05:29 PM
24

Even OP's data doesn't support this. Consider a world where only one woman watches porn and has violent kinks, yet 99% of men do the same. It would still be true that a higher percentage of female porn searches were made for violent kinks than male porn searches. But clearly it is the men who predominantly have violent kinks in such a world.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/23 05:52 PM
1

I would say that OP's specific reason for being in this situation is the unusual bit, not so much the situation itself. (Although, yes, statistically 21 is a bit late.) This may be hard to hear OP, but romance isn't going to just happen. Most people have to actively pursue it. I would worry less about how long it's taken and more about what you're going to do about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/23 09:34 AM
–

You can be "still hot" long after your hottest phase.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/23 04:36 AM
1

This has less to do with niches (going for a specific type of woman) and more to do with seeking a group of women who are isolated from men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/23 03:09 AM
8

But this has an obvious corollary: As dating for men is already a numbers game in the typical case, it makes no sense not to embrace the most popular trope, all else equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/23 06:09 PM
3

Well, sure, it isn't deep if you don't ask why and just take it as a brute fact that men and women are different.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 05:13 PM
24

To me, the interesting bit is that men largely don't complain about portrayals of women pining for men in this way--probably because this only happens in fiction lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 04:22 PM
–

I think you're treating an increased willingness to settle as if it were a preference change. Distinguishing the two can be done with the following thought experiment: Suppose you prefer A to B, but after going an extended period of time with limited access to A, you "change your preference" to B. Now suppose A and B become equally accessible. If you would still choose B, I would concede that your preference has changed. It's still not an adjustment per se, because you weren't the one restrictin…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/23 09:55 PM
1

A change is different than an adjustment. An adjustment is intentional and controlled. I mean, don't get me wrong, it sounds like it would be a lovely superpower. "I ran out of chocolate ice cream and only have vanilla left! I guess I'll just voluntarily change my preferences for the day." Too bad that's not the way the brain works.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/23 02:46 PM
1

Well settling falls under actions, not preferences. If you prefer who you're settling for, can you even call it settling? And I agree that preferences aren't uniform. The point is just that they aren't consciously mutable. Example: You could probably make a woman averse to men with rape trauma, but probably not with radical feminist rhetoric. Since we can't weaponize things like trauma to make predictable adjustments, it is of no use.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 09:27 PM
4

I agree that we can adjust behaviors acquired by evolution. I do not agree that we can adjust preferences. As long as we keep those separate, I'm on board with OP. But somebody saying (for example) that women generally prefer taller men due to evolution is being perfectly reasonable. But being aware of this isn't going to change anyone's preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 08:12 PM
25

Exactly. Arousal is, generally speaking, a necessary condition for a good relationship. Therefore a necessary condition for arousal is also a necessary condition for a good relationship. It doesn't make sense to treat the two as separate things.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/23 05:41 PM
2

Targeting is an action. I am not speaking of actions. I am talking about involuntary desire. "Regulation of desire" is Protestant claptrap. It's the same nonsense as saying gays can choose not to be gay.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/23 04:48 AM
3

Restrained feelings still exist. I'm not sure how I can make it clearer that I am not speaking of actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/23 02:59 AM
5

But there isn't a switch for those, either. You still feel the emotions. You still suffer. The fact that the feelings aren't acted upon doesn't change the subjective experience. Honestly, are you guys AI?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/23 02:08 AM
8

"...change your feelings toward friendship only..." That isn't how emotions work lol. Do you think there would be so much drama surrounding love if folks could just flip it off like a switch? Heck, I would simply choose not to desire a partner at all. It's much cheaper!
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/23 07:03 PM
5

But then women complain that men don't value female friendships. Obviously if you're attracted to her and you value the friendship, you'll remain friends while hoping that she changes her mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/23 03:48 PM
4

I mean, she'd only be seen as the villain if she actually was lol? That's kind of the point of the test.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/23 01:13 AM
3

I'm wondering if you feel the same way about pregnancies that result because daughters are forced to either carry the fetus to term or ask parental permission for birth control. Then she needs government assistance for the kid because she wanted to avoid an awkward conversation. They're your tax dollars. These things become your problem one way or another.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/23 01:11 AM
4

No. This isn't about the probability that the test is needed. The problem is that if a test is needed, you've made the man the villain for suggesting it. Therefore he is less likely to suggest it. Making it just part of standard protocol fixes this.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/23 09:54 PM
2

The problem with your argument is that only the people who are willing to have sex with you will consider you for a relationship. So for sex to be easier to get implies that relationships are more likely to begin. That isn't to say they always will or that it's easy, but yes, it is easier for women to get relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/23 04:52 AM
–

Maybe I missed it, but where is the alternative you present? It looks to me like you're just saying that what they're trying probably won't work. It may well be true, but that isn't an alternative.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/23 03:48 PM
–

Sure, but some enjoy noticeably more success than others, all else equal. There have to be underlying reasons for that, because effects have causes. It's hard to blame folks for trying to understand the causes and recreate them in their own lives because what else can they possibly do lol?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/23 01:25 PM
–

For those interested, the "150 person" figure is probably a reference to Dunbar's number (which is said to be between 50-200). Dunbar's number isn't about empathy per se. The claim is that you can only maintain personal relationships with that many people, at least to the extent of staying in touch and up to date on details of their lives. This is supposedly because the human brain evolved to deal with the type of socializing that would occur in small hunter-gatherer tribes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/23 03:43 AM
14

To be fair, men here have asked women the more pointed question, which is some variant of "What is a set of traits sufficient to be dateable?" and women generally admit that they don't know of such a set. This kind of goes back to OP's observation (2). These men are looking for a checklist and women aren't claiming to offer one.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/23 07:55 PM
1

I think we're talking past each other. OP seems to be describing a scenario in which she would have said yes to sex if only he had asked. You are describing a scenario in which there is the theoretical possibility of a yes in the future (because the work of "building up to it" is still before you). Those are very different. The former says that the hard work of building attraction is already done. The latter just says that there is enough compatibility on which to build attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/23 06:45 PM
1

It seems like your criticism applies more to the numeric scale (which I do not use) than to the concept of a league. I agree that these ideas don't jive. For one thing, the league framework doesn't assign an ordering to people. I have my league and you have yours. There is likely some overlap. It isn't clear what it would mean for you to be "above" my league. I suppose if my league were strictly a subset of yours, then it would be fair to rank you higher. But most people are not going to have th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/23 11:25 PM
12

So consider this. OP believes that they were objectively a good match based on the first date. We'll assume the girl agreed. She rejects after the fourth. Could it be that instead of this owing to some kind of expiration date on attraction, instead the girl had 4× as much in-person experience with OP, and this led her to update her opinion to "actually, this dude is kinda awkward now that I've had some time to study him"? It's not that attraction expires, it's that first impressions are so often…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/23 10:09 PM
1

One can easily tweak the definition to use willingness to commit as the criterion instead. My point is that the notion need not be subjective. It's as objective a notion as, say, the price of an item (the price being the amount of cash the buyer is willing to give for the item and the seller is willing to receive for the item). While price may indeed vary by buyer/seller pairings for the same item, no one claims that price is subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/23 09:54 PM
2

We may have different definitions of "league" in mind, but I think a good one is "the set of people you would be willing to sleep with who are also willing to sleep with you". That's fairly objective.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/23 04:36 AM
2

It's worth noting that in the absence of sex, the effectiveness of everything else suffers. It starts to just look like empty gestures that are meant to signal interest without there being any underlying interest. I know you said "no sexual answers", but this sounds a lot like something my ex-wife would have asked and she always mistakenly believed sex could be substituted with other things.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/23 09:51 PM
14

Right. It's really not difficult to understand when you realize that preferences do not have to be consistent or attainable, and indeed, they often aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/23 09:35 PM
7

The ability to gatekeep relationships is only relevant if you already have women willing to have sex with you lol. (Why would anyone want a relationship with someone they find sexually repulsive?) The sex gatekeeper has loads more power.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/23 01:39 AM
0

Only the individual can truly answer that for themselves. However, it seems highly unlikely that someone makes it all the way to adulthood without forming a prior opinion on pair bonding and such, and then out of the blue wonders whether the number of prior sex partners interferes with connecting with future ones, and then looks it up. It's the sort of thing you simply wouldn't research if you didn't already have an opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/23 12:40 AM
1

Right, but you aren't emotionally attached to carbs, especially not prior to the studies. Indeed, you wouldn't have even known that carbs existed prior to research on human nutrition. Sexual prowess is clearly different.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/23 12:13 AM
11

I think people prefer to not face competition on matters in which they base their self-worth. You don't need to narrow your focus to sex to make sense of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/23 12:10 AM
7

That does sometimes happen, sure. I find that it happens for me most often with beliefs that are just based on a bit of misinformation. Usually the bad info came from one source, and I wasn't emotionally invested in its content. So once I got better info, updating my beliefs was no problem. But I think this situation is different. It is natural to feel intimidated by those with more sexual experience, and I would say even to feel a bit inadequate when comparing oneself to those with more romanti…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/23 09:35 PM
52

The explanations OP gives are just rationalizations anyway. Don't get me wrong, it's fine to prefer a low body count. But you don't prefer it because of studies. If anything, you looked up the studies because you already had that preference. You don't accidentally encounter a study on pair bonding while running to the grocery store lol. You search it because you want to validate a belief you already hold.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/23 07:48 PM
1

An achievement, then. It's no different than a woman wanting to feel her partner loves her for unique qualities. People desire a world in which they are exceptional. "I got that girl when no one else could!"
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 05:52 PM
1

Literally didn't come remotely close to insinuating one could or should. I'm explaining basic psychology since you seem to have trouble grasping it. Suppose you had an obese friend who was gorging themselves on donuts. Between donuts, they lament that they wish they could lose weight. Does this strike you as a "gotcha!" moment? A baffling paradox? Of course not. People have contradictory desires all the time. Our brains are meat, not formal axiomatic systems.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 04:24 PM
-1

The answer to your OP is best explained with an analogy: People want trophies that are easy enough for them to earn, but difficult enough to earn for doing so to feel like an achievement. Do these work against each other? Of course. But that doesn't exactly make it a paradox. It only seems paradoxical if you begin with the assumption that desires have to be consistent, and why would we assume that?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/23 04:14 PM
6

You point out that it seems for men that the engine is always running. As a man, I agree, but note the difference between that and saying that it's an active thought at all times. You may rarely say no to chocolate, but that doesn't mean you're constantly obsessing over the next bar you'll get to eat.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/23 06:09 PM
0

Ah, so I found the culprit. Notice that the data uses only full-time wages and salaries. There may be more weirdness going on under the hood, but that alone is (if your goal is to get a general median) a massive bias in sampling. If your goal is to get a median for full-time work, then sure, it's fine. You just have to state that that's what you're doing. It may turn out, after all, that the average male isn't a full-time worker!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/23 05:57 PM
7

That is not the "median male salary" lol. The figure you gave is higher than even the median household salary.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/23 07:26 AM
3

Well, for one, your entire thought experiment focuses on trying to punish the parents equally rather than producing the best outcome for the child (if the fetus isn't aborted).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 11:37 PM
3

A prenup generally only protects assets that were there prior to the marriage. He would need a postnup to protect those gained during the marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/23 04:48 AM
2

I don't think you even need to refer to hypergamy or "wiring" to explain this. The most basic reason to pursue a romantic relationship is sexual intimacy. Women desire that less than men. The second biggest reason is financial support for a family. Women need that less than they used to, partly because they prefer fewer children than past generations, and partly because they now make their own paychecks. So relationships are now at the point where they're a fun idea for women, but not a "need". …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/23 01:22 PM
-1

Unless, ya know, you're negotiating with someone else to fertilize your eggs at a specified time. Then it kinda is their business.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/23 03:35 AM
5

You do realize that 1) people bathe, and 2) even if the "excrements" somehow stuck around, yours would stick around too, and that would still be gross right?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/23 09:18 PM
6

Tech jobs are not average lol. What, do you write for Forbes or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 10:16 PM
3

Sure, but the debt single mothers have is going to drive up that average. It would strengthen your argument if you could find stats on the debt of childless women. I suspect that info will be hard to find, however, because you would only divide the population that way if you wanted a study to advance this very specific thesis of yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 09:32 PM
19

I mean, it goes without saying that whichever sex bears the greatest share of the burden of childcare is going to lean on social safety nets hardest. Men would drain the system more if we were suddenly expected to be the ones to take leave after birth and to take custody after divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 06:25 PM
1

We don't get fulfillment from our "biological purpose". If we did, do you think our brains would have to trick us into causing pregnancy by dosing us with happy chemicals during orgasm? That's how much men don't want children. It only happens on the scale needed to sustain our population because our brains bribe us with intense pleasure.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/23 10:24 PM
9

Let me answer your question with another question: If you just want to get off, why not save the money and masturbate? Sex is about validation.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/23 05:13 AM
6

In principle, I would rather be single. Empirical evidence suggests that I will endure a terrible relationship, however.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/23 03:09 PM
0

He's saying that the segregation was so impractical that even an overwhelmingly racist country decided afterward that it couldn't be done in the future. Edit: For those interested, military racial segregation ended in '48 but "civilian racial segregation" ended in ~'64. So you have to believe that either 1) the military was unusually progressive for the time, or 2) they recognized segregation as impractical in spite of their racism.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/23 04:26 PM
15

Your views are just so odd. I am in a relationship for companionship and intimacy, as are many. I didn't pursue my SO because I felt I was incapable of wiping my own arse and needed someone who could wipe it for me. Who does that?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 02:29 PM
2

I think it's simply that men are wired to pursue sex more fervently, so they are more easily attracted. A woman's attraction is optional for procreation and so it isn't emphasized by sexual selection.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/23 02:29 AM
4

Giving them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps they mean that they are initially attracted, but need familiarity to let themselves be vulnerable to the guy. I could believe that, but even in that case there is still initial attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/23 07:48 AM
35

It is extraordinarily rare. You're better off assuming attraction won't develop if it hasn't after a short time and seeking greener pastures elsewhere. There is also some science suggesting that humans make decisions before they are consciously aware. The conscious mind rationalizes after the fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/23 12:39 AM
77

Here is the "master algorithm": If she's attracted to you and you go for being friends first, you'll succeed. If she's attracted to you and you make your intentions known, you'll succeed. If she's not attracted to you and you go for being friends first, you'll fail. If she's not attracted to you and you make your intentions known, you'll fail.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 09:58 PM
1

It seems like you're contradicting yourself though. You say these men have no intentions, but then you say men are angling for sex all the time. Which is it? Sure, I do work in a factory and see middle-aged men flirt with 20-somethings. It's safe to say that they have no intentions...but that's only because they have no shot. If they could, they would.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 09:06 PM
2

I'm so glad you added that bit at the end, because it leads to another point. Another reason women's moves are seen as ambiguous is that they apparently practice flirting when they have no intentions.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 02:54 PM
3

This is possibly why women's advances are so often seen as ambiguous. If you ask to hang out after you're already friends, well, that could mean anything. If you ask someone to hang out that you just met, most people see what that means.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 08:03 AM
12

This thread is like when a high school freshman takes a passing interest in philosophy and reads about nihilism for the first time. Try this one on for size, OP. What is the point of anything? Everything is temporary, after all. You'll die. Your kids will die. Any structure you build will corrode. Even if other humans try to preserve it, it will be obliterated when the sun implodes. If you write a book or compose a song, and humans take it with them when they colonize space, it will fall on blin…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 11:21 PM
1

I would qualify it by saying that men are often locked out of long-term relationships in which the couple is on close-to-even footing, by which I mean that the man isn't simply being squeezed for cash until he runs dry.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 04:20 PM
13

That part of the graph jumped out to me as well. The spikiness suggests to me that the sample sizes for >12 divorces were small. I tried to check the source but it took me to a whole library of surveys instead of just the relevant ones, so I noped out because that's too much work for Reddit bickering lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 11:53 AM
1

You've mistaken my meaning. I am not making a normative statement about how we should live. I am saying that aversion to "whores" isn't natural in the sense that it isn't rooted firmly in our evolutionary history. Your own definition of "health" may not be rooted in what's natural, and that isn't necessarily wrong. But it's no longer obvious what one's health is being compared to. I'll give an example: Compared to the average person, I am a bit antisocial. But for most of human history, one only…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 01:11 AM
5

Hmm. If we look at the animal kingdom, the usual way that males deal with promiscuity in females is mate-guarding at best, or murdering the competing males' children at worst. The usual response is not to turn down easy sex. So the disgust with "whores" seems to be uniquely human. I wouldn't consider it a matter of health as it is probably emergent from culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/23 11:21 PM
10

Right. I don't understand the preoccupation on this sub with bullying women into settling. Sure, their standards are often unreasonable and that sucks, but I wouldn't want a woman to stay with me only reluctantly.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/23 11:14 PM
1

To be attractive is to be found attractive. It is meaningless to say you are attractive independently of an observer.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/23 04:05 AM
22

As a guy, I find the majority of women attractive enough to work up some arousal if need be. I suspect the headspace women are in is alien to most guys. That said, I agree that this particular thing isn't women's fault. I think it's not so much that women's standards have gone up over generations, but rather that they are seeking relationships that are based on attraction rather than financial dependence. It turns out female attraction is rarer than many guys predicted based on the stories of ol…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/23 12:26 AM
3

Yeah, it makes even discussing the topic kinda difficult. Maybe I should have said "residents of areas with low/high population density", but it doesn't roll off the tongue as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/23 08:52 PM
9

As evidenced by election results, the US is actually pretty evenly split between rural and urban residents. It's true that you are more likely to be living in [insert big city here] than [insert small town here], but that isn't the same thing as saying you're more likely to live in some big city rather than some small town.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/23 04:50 PM
–

Sex has been tied to morality for probably all of recorded history. Like, just look around. gestures at every religion
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/23 04:43 PM
–

I think what we're mostly upset about is the realization that most relationships were the result of this settling that you describe--an acknowledgment by the woman that being with the man is advantageous. The attraction of a woman to a man is relatively rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/23 10:19 PM
3

Can we talk about how OP thinks the average of percentages is mathematically meaningful when the groups have different sizes? Suppose there are two classes of students. The first has 10 boys and no girls--100% boys and 0% girls. The second has 15 boys and 15 girls--50% boys and 50% girls. The aggregate of those classes contains 25 boys and 15 girls--62.5% boys and 37.5% girls. Averaging the percentages, e.g., (100%+50%)/2=75% for the boys, yields a nonsense value. The math ain't mathing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/23 12:37 PM
10

Agreed. The masses have also accepted the lie that eating fewer calories is just so expensive, when in fact it costs the same to choose diet soda over regular, skim milk over whole, low-calorie bread over white, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/23 01:56 PM
1

This is definitely the message conveyed to men. There's a lot of truth to the adage here that whether your approach is considered appropriate or not just hinges on whether or not she is attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/23 06:40 PM
5

That's preferable if you're in that situation. There are many people who want partners but don't want to "frequent places", though, and for those people it's a choice between infiltrating a space under the guise of a hobby or OLD. That's always been the case with me. My hobbies are mostly solitary and I don't feel the need to socialize. Getting out to meet people could only ever be part of a dating strategy for me. (Fortunately a coworker fell for me lol. That's luck.)
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/23 02:17 AM
17

I don't think the appeal of OLD is that it's easy, per se. Consider what we frequently hear from women: You shouldn't approach at the grocery store. She is busy with errands. You shouldn't approach at a restaurant. She is busy eating with friends and family. You shouldn't approach at the workplace. This forces her to respond and makes things awkward forevermore if you're rejected. You shouldn't approach in a book club, gym, etc. You make it seem like you're just feigning a hobby to infiltrate th…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/23 08:11 PM
1

On the matter of adoption, I agree. Here in the US at least it is partly privatized. But this seems to be by design, no? The legislators are predominantly male. I feel that as men (I am assuming you are male), we often shoot ourselves in the feet and reject public options, e.g., adoption, prostitution, universal mental healthcare. Our reliance on personal relationships with women falls partly on us.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/23 08:16 PM
0

I think this is an interesting view with some merit, but I'll offer a contrary observation. Women's fertility is a public good. There are plenty of kids to adopt! It's just that people prefer that good to be personal. Similarly, prostitution (so the "good" of sex) could be a public good, but it is often prohibited.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/23 07:59 PM
4

You're agreeing with OP that men here do it for acceptance. I don't interpret OP as "shaming" the men. More like diagnosing them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/23 12:36 AM
–

I can't quote it since OP deleted it, but they were the ones claiming folks wanted true love for its rarity. That was not my claim. As you can see, I argued against the notion multiple times in my comments. So in this case, you are trying to create a generalization and attribute it to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 04:29 PM
–

Those apps have very finely tuned algorithms. They are based on models of dating dynamics that presuppose many ideas women rail against here. In particular, the algorithms treat men and women differently. People are given ratings that determine their visibility, and the formulas for men are different than those for women. You can say the science behind dating is bunk, but even the very means you used to get into your relationship adopted a scientific approach. This crap doesn't just find you. It…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 01:57 PM
–

You do know that those apps prioritize suggesting folks that swipe you and it isn't just random, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 01:09 PM
–

Love didn't find you. Your partner did. Did you find your partner? One of you had to be the one to initiate. That initiator couldn't count on love just finding them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 12:58 PM
–

You said that we want it because it's rare. That is just not at all how men think. We don't usually feel that our partners need to be exceptional. We would be pleased if every bloke had a partner of similar quality and a relationship that made them similarly happy. And you actively spent hours networking on a site to arrange meeting your partner. He probably spent longer. I'm sorry, I thought love "just happens"? Shouldn't you two have just been able to passively wait?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 12:52 PM
–

A couple of things here. Love doesn't "find you". That is just world fallacy, karmic tripe. Love happens because of largely predictable factors. No, we can't predict exactly who you'll connect with or when, but clear trends exist. Secondly, we don't want love because it's rare. That's more like how women think about jewelry. We want intimacy the way people want tasty food. You don't care about the rarity of chocolate when you crave it. The fact that you can't even get this one right shows that y…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 12:43 PM
9

There's a lot of truth to this, but I'll add some nuance. If the question is of the form "Why do women do X?", men won't want to hear "X doesn't happen!" They'll probably respond better to an explanation of why X happens rather than a rejection of the presuppositions of the question. Not saying it's never justified to reject a question. I just want to point out that rejections are not received the same way that answers are.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/23 08:13 AM
1

It depends on what counts as a "time". If you screw, lie in each other's arms watching an episode of a show you're marathoning, then screw again, that's two times within an hour. Some may see it as one time because the couple only went to bed once.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/23 11:06 AM
2

I feel you would get more of a response by summarizing his points in text here. If you've ever been on the receiving end of a friend's excited "omg watch this video!", you'll know it's hard to sit through something for an unknown payoff that often takes too long due to buffering, intros, ad shilling, etc. If we find the text points sufficiently interesting, we may click the link to see more.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/23 07:21 PM
1

To even get the figure that "less than 5% of women" you dated are relationship material implies that you've dated more than 20 women, e.g., 4% implies at least 25. Probably hyperbolic, no? Anyway, I think it's just more to the point to say that dating is messy. It's never really easy no matter who you're with, at least not over the span of months.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/23 06:17 PM
8

As I said, the idea that women choose their partners for less arbitrary reasons--one might even say more "moral" reasons--than men do is what causes the insecurities. Because if it really is your personality or your work ethic or what have you, then you can do something to change that. But often it isn't. I think the pill we cannot speak of is best for acceptance of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/23 01:12 AM
8

I guess it depends on what you consider "bluepill". Often ideas such as "women choose partners for personality, but want sex just as much as men" are considered bluepill. There is the general sentiment that women are pure. As you say, this denies toxic women. But it also leads men to evaluate themselves incorrectly, e.g., you may be a great guy but just too ugly for her, but bluepill ideas make you think you need to try harder. This causes you to start gaslighting yourself rather than accepting …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/23 12:16 AM
6

Exactly. They aren't attractive because they're bad. They bad because they're attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/23 05:13 AM
7

I think you all are overthinking this. She is not attracted to OP but feels threatened when other women are involved, so she temporarily indulges OP enough to satisfy him. That's all this is. As for why a woman would stay with a man she doesn't desire: financial support, father figure, the husband being her "best friend", etc. There are many possible reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/23 11:58 AM
3

I suspect geography is a factor. I live in a rural area and it's definitely the minority here that make it to the mid-20s childless. I don't have hard data on the average number of kids here but it just seems to be decently high.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/23 03:34 PM
4

Yeah, that's the sad thing about this sub. Most resent the other sex and it's far too late for positive experiences to overwrite it. So mostly we're just venting at each other here.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/23 10:36 AM
9

I absolutely agree with better sex education and family planning. I disagree that having a child one cannot care for, even in their teens, is merely "a mistake". That is a hell of an understatement. At best, it takes 18 years (19 counting pregnancy) to fix the mistake, likely longer considering higher education and insurance needs. Roughly 1/3 of your life. And you're locked into choosing partners with lucrative careers, for which competition is high. You cannot afford to leave them because you …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/23 10:23 AM
5

I often see it as a critique of actions in the late teens and early 20s. Obviously a woman with 3 kids at 22 can't pull the guys she did childless at 18 even if she looks just as good, especially if she has no career and no assets.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/23 10:09 AM
10

Eh. While I don't like discussion being halted just for getting heated, I do prefer subs not to be inundated with memes. Moderation is worth it for that alone IMO.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 01:52 PM
7

I think in this case the simpler explanation is that women just don't enjoy sports as much as men, and men prefer to see the most physically capable athletes perform (who are usually men).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 09:42 AM
6

It is widely known, to the point of being frequently joked about, that marriages and even LTRs in general experience a decline in romance over time. It's usually noticeable within a few months and gets worse with kids. Men know this but still pursue and keep relationships, which suggests they do not require "constant sex", and they do not believe there is a promise of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 09:36 AM
10

The hypocrisy stands either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 05:36 AM
27

I like how the importance of being in a relationship is downplayed so hard by women here, yet they use the absence of a relationship as the ultimate threat.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 05:24 AM
7

In addition to a drive to spread your genes, there is also the more general drive to keep the species going. Adoption serves that drive well.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/23 04:45 AM
45

Perfectly acceptable child: "Would you be my mommy?" This woman: "I will literally pay $19,000 and buy infant supplies to get a different kid lol."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/23 11:05 PM
1

Technically your views are consistent, since he could just be asserting that nearly all wages are bad. He could believe that, say, 95% of people aren't making enough. It would be a very stupid opinion, just not an inconsistent one.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 12:57 PM
5

Completely depends on whether you live in an urban or rural area.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 06:35 AM
6

That doesn't sound like "being too nice". It just sounds like they were unremarkable people with no distinctive characteristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/22 08:53 PM
1

Okay, but if you think the author is full of nonsense, do you predict you'll get a good debate from them?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/22 08:12 PM
5

Why would you want to comment on a post you aren't interested in reading?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/22 01:53 PM
1

I'm curious where you draw the line. I'll give you a sort of continuum to work with: We both agree that making sexual contact for pay is prostitution. What about having the man watch a sexual act? What about selling nudes? What about selling used panties? What about selling sweaty socks? I think it's easy to make these questions arbitrarily difficult if you feel that the buyer's intent is a factor. But what about the seller? The woman selling her socks likely doesn't get off on it. Indeed, she i…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 02:59 AM
1

And that would be prostitution. But if she isn't having sex with the client, then it isn't prostitution. There's no gray area here, because no one would consider just talking or going on dates to be sexual activity. Christ Almighty, is this your all's third language or what?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/22 07:02 PM
2

You're twisting words around. If someone pays a plumber to come to their house to watch football, they are not paying for plumbing. Just because your profession is in X doesn't make everything you do X. This is the top definition for "prostitute" that comes up on Google: "a person, in particular a woman, who engages in sexual activity for payment" No sexual activity -> no prostitution
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/22 01:12 PM
1

Sure, that happens. It also sometimes happens that there is never direct contact between the two. Just watch a few episodes of Catfish. Sometimes people know deep down that what they appear to have isn't real, but they can continue to believe in it as long as it's long-distance/online. Call it Schrödinger's romance--it both exists and doesn't exist until you test it, so some never test it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/22 03:25 AM
4

I have a fiancée that I live with lol. I just don't see the point in pretending these relationships don't exist. Is it because you feel the absence of sex would make it purer somehow, and you want to feel that these women are dirty?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/22 12:57 AM
4

What if I told you that several of these relationships are long-distance?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/22 12:36 AM
14

There are several cases where women who have never physically met their clients are given allowances. The clients usually do it for the sexual thrill, sure, but sex itself isn't always necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/22 12:34 AM
7

My interpretation of OP is that they are just making the general observation that effects have causes, i.e., if someone chooses to stay with you, there is an explanation. Love--at least romantic love--isn't unconditional.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 09:13 PM
1

In context it is pretty clear that I was referring to the setting of the approach, not the man's personality (which would be a facet of his attractiveness).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 03:30 PM
2

My theory is that using an "approved" setting just softens the rejections. I think the man's probability of success is unaffected. A woman who finds a man attractive will probably accept him any way she finds him. But if he's not attractive enough, her reaction may be harsher. When I was young and dumb, I asked out many girls I knew well. It hurts a lot more than asking a virtual stranger, and you may as well do that online IMO.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 02:22 PM
18

It's not the only way, but it's one of the few "approved" ways. It irritates women to be approached at stores. They're on errands, after all! It corners women to be approached at their workplaces. They're paid to be polite to you, after all! It's manipulative to join clubs just to meet people. You should just be yourself, after all! Clubbing and OLD are the only contexts in which women basically sign up to be hit on.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/22 05:51 AM
3

The proof lies in our actions. If enthusiasm were a non-factor, we'd just use prostitutes.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/22 01:21 PM
6

This. Unenthusiastic sex is often worse than no sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/22 04:11 AM
2

Indeed, the popularity of Fifty Shades suggests to me that women don't normally seek out this sort of thing. Someone who regularly reads smut could find better fanfiction than Fifty Shades lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/22 08:26 PM
4

What they mean is that the only way for most points of a data set to be below average is if the distribution is highly skewed. Attractiveness is often assumed to be normally distributed, i.e., a bell curve. In a bell curve, the average and median are the same; exactly half of the data is below average, half above.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/22 04:40 PM
7

Similarly, "young male syndrome" is surely a more modern phenomenon. Hunter-gatherers did not have such a thing as unemployment.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 04:35 AM
12

I very much doubt that folks are thinking, "Hmm, I'm very tempted to form this knee-jerk opinion of a classically marginalized group. But let me consult the statistics to confirm." Even if it's true, it's not the reason for the hate. It's like saying you're against incest because of genetic defects of offspring. No, you're against it because it's gross. The former is a rationalization.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 11:37 AM
0

I genuinely fear this sort of thing. The dating market sucks, it's true. But people need goals. They need stuff that motivates them to try and fail and try again. Then they succeed, and it's thrilling. They gradually develop loftier goals and try their luck with those. But when all gratification is instant, there's nothing left to do afterward. You just eat, sleep, and go to work ad infinitum. That isn't a life.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 12:21 AM
1

I'm saying that if you pick the 30-year old, it happens a decade sooner. You are choosing to lose a decade of sex by picking them for the LTR in this hypothetical.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/22 12:52 AM
6

When you ask a vague hypothetical as we are here, you can only make statistical inferences. Example: What does a 30-year old look like? So yes, statistically speaking, older women desire sex less. Shocker.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/22 06:39 PM
2

I don't think answers to the title are actually touching your thesis, which is that a "changed man" cannot re-ignite attraction. You're just getting a lot of testimony about the failure of men to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/22 06:36 PM
6

Libido plummets with menopause. So that choice for a LTR basically means you lose a decade worth of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/22 06:13 PM
6

The 80% rejection rate already applies to a narrow age range, because that figure was obtained on OLD, where you set age preferences. So no, you adding old women and little girls to the pool to dilute to a 20% acceptance rate isn't an apt comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/22 12:06 PM
1

Fine, I'll bite. Sex is what makes romantic partnerships what they are. You could say it is the single most important thing. It's why most people prefer their partners be the opposite sex, why they be a certain age, why they be nearby, and why they be peers, but not relatives. All of those factors are fairly rigid. Contrast them with hobbies, career choice, etc. These are much more negotiable because they are less important to what makes the romance a romance. That strong enough for you?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/22 09:54 PM
2

If I say anything else--e.g., companionship--then the rebuttal will be that it is often easier to find it by other means. (In the case of companionship, through friends of one's own sex.) But mutually enjoyable sex is perhaps the only thing you can point to that is uniquely easiest to get consistently while in a romantic relationship. Anything else I could have said would have been countered lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/22 09:40 PM
8

Sex with real women who are attracted to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/22 12:07 PM
1

Most well-adjusted people desire sex with an enthusiastic participant. Otherwise, why not just get a prostitute? They may seem pricey, but they are probably cheaper than divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/22 05:01 PM
4

ACE=asexuality spectrum. The husband doesn't just not initiate. He doesn't want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/22 03:49 PM
1

But we're really not talking about how people act. You're telling people that they can change how they feel. It's reminiscent of the folks who ask depressed people to just look at the bright side.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 10:54 PM
1

You're right, but I suppose I also kind of get it. It's impossible to imagine having a drive when you don't. The obsession with sexual intimacy probably seems very childish and frivolous from the viewpoint of someone with little to no libido. I'm asking them to try to empathize with something they have probably never experienced. It's a lot to ask.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 10:47 PM
1

You and I are here today because generations of men chose all manner of hardship and violence just to get laid. They strove to be the best hunters. They murdered their neighbors. They raped if they couldn't get it willingly. It's easy to pretend we are simply above all of that now--that it was a bad dream and civilized society is the default state. Everything around you is barely held together, mostly by implied threats of force from government or what have you. Sorry for the tangent, but I'm tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 10:34 PM
2

You cannot change the prerequisites of your happiness by sheer force of will. You can pretend having such prerequisites is rare or disordered. It doesn't detract from my point that you can't switch off the psychological need. It's like asking a trans to just try to enjoy being their assigned gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 08:03 PM
2

And I am saying that people who have the energy to survive without consuming food will save so much more buying groceries. Let's try this: What exactly should we do with OP's observation? It seems that if I am a lonely person, I cannot change that except by seeking a partner. And if I am not, it's just easier to forego relationships. At no point is this observation useful.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 05:33 PM
9

OP seems to be referring to loneliness rather than an inability to care for oneself.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 05:09 PM
6

Exactly. OP might as well say that grocery shopping would be cheaper if humans didn't need food to survive. It's both a trivial and useless observation. Are we supposed to flip a switch to turn off our basic drives?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 05:07 PM
4

It's so weird to see a woman being candid with you, even to the point of portraying an unflattering image of herself, yet you refuse to believe what you are reading lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/22 04:15 AM
2

Of course our studies are often not very quantitative. But I think you may have missed my point. Let's try this: You say the logarithm is a good measure of the value of humor. What if someone else thinks the square root function y(x)=x1/2 is better? They are qualitatively similar: both positive, increasing, and concave. How do you settle that dispute without empirical data?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/22 02:00 PM
5

With any physical characteristic the graph will be unimodal, i.e., large near a certain value, but smaller as you move farther from that value. Consider height as an example: 6'5" is attractive. 8' is a disease. With other traits it is probably as you say, where there is a diminishing returns effect. We would expect a concave graph. You may also want to consider that for most people, the appeal of any one trait can only have so great an effect. I would stipulate that the concave functions should…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/22 01:44 PM
3

Why do people prefer food that is tasty to them, yet sometimes they will cave and eat whatever is available? It's not really a paradox lol. You wouldn't argue that people enjoy eating just anything simply because they would do so in a pinch.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/22 11:00 PM
9

Sex appeal is the main thing that motivates men to pursue women in the first place. If we could just shut off that preference then we wouldn't bother at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/22 07:36 PM
9

Confirmation bias occurs when you make a hypothesis and cherrypick data to support it, not when the observations happen before the hypothesis is formed.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/22 07:28 PM
3

While I see what you mean, I'm not sure it's helpful to distinguish "personal happiness" from other psychological needs, like the desire to fit in. Men also have complexes where (for example) they feel they need sex for validation. You could say that the desire to be seen as attractive is, like the women's desire to be taken, a result of external pressure. That doesn't make it less real.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/22 10:55 AM
2

I have noticed the need in all of my partners (current and past) to see a "progression" in the relationship. There is a restlessness when things appear to stagnate, even if the spot you're stagnating in seems enjoyable to both people. I think part of this is due to cultural expectations--a draw to follow the narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/22 09:14 AM
1

What do you mean by "commitment"? If the couple is not married and has no children or mortgage, then their "commitment" is entirely voluntary at every step. They are staying together because they want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/22 08:38 PM
2

But other things change with aging too. A gradual shift in identity is different than just instantly deactivating a huge facet of one's identity. Maybe the closest analogy for women would be learning very suddenly that you are totally infertile. Even that isn't as drastic, though, because of adoption.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 11:18 PM
1

This is true. I should have phrased more carefully. Just removing the libido with no other change would be catastrophic. I do believe, though, that many would prefer to lack the drive if other things filled the void. (Women seem to find joy in other things, e.g., networking.) But yeah, I'd end it if I lost my dick or something, because I would know what I am missing.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 10:46 PM
5

You already are well on the way with your own answer. You aren't as horny. You don't want it as much as men do. And your lack of desire is typical of women. Nearly every issue discussed here stems from mismatched libidos. And because you want it less, it doesn't bother you to wait. There is less incentive to compromise your standards. You'll get offers, implicit or explicit, and be able to filter them at your own pace. That is a fantasy for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 10:29 PM
3

Consider an analogous question: If all employers need employees, why do most just wait for the applications to roll in rather than asking random people to work for them? Answer this first, and I think it will put you closer to answering your question.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 10:16 PM
0

I said nothing about casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 06:22 PM
0

Not sure what the mocking scarequotes are doing there. It is a need. True, it's not a need in the sense that you'll die without it. But that's a pretty high bar for something to be a need. We could cryogenically freeze you and you could live for years without water, food, or sleep. Many homeless people survive without shelter. These things are all still considered needs though.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 02:44 PM
25

A bathroom is not the only thing in a house that matters. It's perhaps not even the most important thing! However, I would never buy a house that lacked a bathroom or was known to have serious plumbing issues. Good sex is not sufficient for a good relationship, but it is necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 05:56 PM
1

I agree that women are joining these professions in greater numbers. I disagree that it is anywhere near a 50-50 split though. In the aggregate, there is a clear difference in the way men and women choose their career paths. It seems men prepare to be providers and women prepare for the eventuality of motherhood. It's not a groundbreaking observation, of course, but there it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/22 02:28 AM
1

So I tried to Google this and while the numbers for law are pretty consistent (60-66% male, 34-40% female), the numbers for medicine vary wildly. It is hard to find stats that only count MDs. Sites want to count all med students. This is not quite what we want to measure. For example, sites that refer to MDs specifically report a 2:1 ratio of men to women, but sites that do not specify the degree report a slight majority of women! I suspect nurse practitioners are being counted. About the grunt …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/22 01:05 AM
3

I don't know if this is the culprit, but the bulk of paralegals in the US are women. Similarly, most nurses here are women. So it's not that women aren't present. They just don't shoot for the positions that make the real money. One wonders what the gender ratio would be if, hypothetically, a lawyer could not use paralegals for grunt work, or doctors had to be on-site at all times. Would women be willing to pursue those fields if they had to aim high? Would men lose interest if the jobs became m…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/22 02:40 PM
3

Most references I see show a 60/40 split at best, some as low as 66/34. Still a pretty big gap. And I mean, yeah, that's my point. Nearly all of the lucrative degrees are in STEM fields. They may be the "only" areas that are male-dominant, but they are the only ones that consistently make big money, and that is sufficient for my argument that men and women seem to weigh salary differently when deciding on a career path. This is more controversial, but some researchers suggest that women also fav…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/22 01:33 PM
9

These are good points. In the US at least, I feel there is an economic factor as well. Most degrees are not a good return on investment. Example: Getting a master's to start at $35k/yr as a teacher doesn't make a man a good breadwinner, but is largely accepted for women. Indeed, when we look at the fields in which degrees are lucrative--medicine, law, engineering, etc.--they are male-dominated.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/22 12:56 PM
3

I think of this sub as a place where people mostly come to vent. Most of it isn't intended to be normative or constructive IMO. People are allowed to be upset that life is hard and complain about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 10:36 PM
4

I'm not blaming anyone. Where did you read that?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 10:28 PM
2

The topic was about withholding intimacy. (Sane) Men do not withhold intimacy as a dating strategy. That is my only point.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 09:57 PM
1

I think there's a misunderstanding here. I'm not talking about treatment, just preferences. Your basic argument is that 1) Men want X. 2) Men want Y. 3) X and Y cannot both be true at once! Conclusion) Men are being unreasonable. The thing is that people do not choose their preferences. There is no reason to even assume our preferences would be consistent under the best of circumstances. Why would they be? We are sacks of meat that have survived because of a bundle of vague biological imperative…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 09:40 PM
1

It isn't difficult to understand, really. Athletes want trophies that are hard enough to earn that it's an accomplishment, but easy enough that they can do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 09:05 PM
3

Hmm. I think men prefer a low body count, sure. But this doesn't mean a high count is a dealbreaker. If you're hot and interested, the guy is unlikely to reject you unless your reputation is straight-up embarrassing. And even then he may meet with you covertly. Men have preferences. Women have dealbreakers.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 09:03 PM
6

Right. This isn't a normative phenomenon at all. It's not that men are evil for trying this. Rather, they are stupid for trying it. Now if OP saw female dating sites warning women about dudes playing hard to get, then I would possibly see that as evidence. But women do not need this advice because it isn't even attempted by most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 08:53 PM
8

If relationships were optional for happiness, humanity would have died out long ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/22 06:47 AM
2

That $51k figure is actually the median household income. $51k is well above the median pretty much anywhere outside the big cities.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/22 11:17 PM
3

Kinda agree. Here's how I think the "rating" works: If you have a low n-count, the woman assigns a low prior probability to you being good in bed. If you have a high n-count, obviously the prior probability is higher. However, if you have a high n-count and you turn out to disappoint, it means you suck so bad that even ample experience hasn't made you adequate. Your updated probability is now nearly 0.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/22 08:26 PM
6

I would say that of those, only charisma counts as liking you. Here's a litmus test. If it's a trait you can "give" someone else--money, fame, status, etc.--it's not an intrinsic trait.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 09:30 PM
4

Strictly speaking, your argument doesn't contradict OP. OP says the girl either "likes you or she doesn't". A girl who is with you for money doesn't like you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 06:48 PM
1

Well, consider the following "inheritance" situation that a will would not resolve: A triad (3 mutually married people) has one person who wants out. They get a (partial?) divorce. During the marriage, they all pitched in to get a sports car. Who gets the sports car? Indeed, what weight does the person leaving get? 1/3, since he is 1 out of the 3? 1/2, because the remaining couple is still legally 1 entity? Seems complicated. You are right that similar scenarios can occur in monogamy, but they a…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 03:10 PM
1

This is not exhaustive, but a few factors that come to mind when I think of stability: -Longevity. Polyamorous relationships typically (not always) have short life expectancies. Hop onto the polyamory subreddit and you'll see that it's unusual for their length to be counted in years rather than months. -Cohabitation. Many poly people have a primary mate and folks on the side. The primary couple lives together, but it's not uncommon for the others to remain long distance. The feds care about livi…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 02:39 PM
3

I'm not sure what your point here is. You are not sampling from the matchless demographic I am referring to, by definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 01:14 PM
10

The reason for your disappointment is a bit of miscommunication. Most men struggle to get non-bot matches. They struggle harder to get convos, and harder still for meetups. You are probably not struggling with any of these things. This is what is meant by "easy mode". Your difficulty is finding a guy that meets your standards. It's an apples and oranges comparison.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 12:46 PM
4

Most governments would see no advantage in recognizing polygamy. It would be a free tax benefit that often doesn't lead to a stable family structure. Why would bureaucrats want that?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/22 12:40 PM
10

I have seen feminist sites insist that every stage of sex--every position, for example--should involve "enthusiastic consent", including an explicit "yes". I don't know about you, but good sex for me often starts with spontaneous makeout sessions that do not require words. Words diminish it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 10:16 AM
0

I don't think it's reasonable to neglect influencers and their, well, influence. If the Red Pill audience was in the thousands then but millions now, then the old demographic becomes negligible in calculating the average age. It's conceivable that many of the old Red Pillers are still in the community, but you never see them because of the influx of young blood.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 05:21 AM
7

I think they explained the consent thing well. There is a difference between asking for consent and spelling out every detail of sex as it is happening. Presumably if the woman doesn't like something that happens during sex she has consented to, she can speak up.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 05:10 AM
–

How old is the Red Pill phenomenon? Give it time for its audience to age.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/22 04:43 AM
3

The difference in skill level between a dude who has had sex once and a dude who hasn't at all is not as great as you seem to think. You would still be bad. And being bad at sex has pretty much the same consequences for your dating life as being new to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/22 07:47 AM
2

He said the man has not tried dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/22 07:32 AM
2

You wanted it all this time but, as OP says, just "happened to not try dating" until now? To be clear: OP isn't saying this hypothetical man failed at dating. OP is saying he never tried until his 30s. Such a man is likely asexual lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 10:48 PM
1

If he already has a diverse group of friends and activities, then the advice to which I was replying is redundant.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 08:36 PM
12

While a lot of this advice is valid (at least in some contexts), I think it misses the spirit of OP's question. We have a hypothetical dude who, for some reason, hasn't even considered dating during his 20s, but now he wants it. Okay, weird. But OP asks us to assume it. Now you're adding that he suddenly becomes interested enough in whatever he enjoys to pursue it in a sort of club, which he presumably wasn't doing before. That he gains friends he felt no need to have before. This is why women l…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/22 08:20 PM
8

This applies generally, but is more noticeable for men. People believe in "soul mates", as if they found the best fit for them out of 3.5 billion people. But most only meet a few thousand people, and only hundreds of those are the correct sex, age, and vicinity for a relationship to be feasible. Of those, many are already in relationships when you meet "the one", so the timing is also a random element. Everyone takes the best they believe they can get within a reasonable time frame.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/22 12:00 PM
0

This seems like a subtle backpedaling. Before, we were talking about a situation where the guy's intentions were known. You insisted this wasn't enough, and that continuing to have sex with the woman was wrong. Now you act as if awareness is the only issue at hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/22 11:11 PM
0

You sound like the guys who say that women shouldn't talk or hang out with a man if they realize he wants to hookup, because obviously they are leading him on. We are talking about adults. They need to be able to act in their own interests, not be coddled.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/22 03:20 PM
3

It takes at least an hour to actually digest a research paper, even a short one. This is the middle of my workweek. Indeed, you haven't even linked to the paper itself, so I know you haven't seen it lol. You just linked to a pop-sci article. This is no better than doing research by Wikipedia.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/22 07:52 PM
4

Becoming 7 times bigger is a 600% percent increase by the way. A good way to remember is doubling, which is a 100% increase. And with speculation this sloppy, who knows what else the researchers muddled? I don't care enough to parse their paper to find out.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/22 11:15 AM
14

Oh, well since the researchers speculated about something outside their data and methodology and happened to agree with you, we ought to by all means take them at their word.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/22 05:52 AM
6

Maybe we shouldn't be surprised, but we're allowed to be frustrated at the hand we're dealt.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 02:46 PM
3

That you had to specify you find being pretty attractive suggests that you don't feel attractiveness is part of the definition of "pretty". Am I reading that right? Like, if I said I find spicy food tasty, it suggests that the link is a matter of personal preference and not a claim that spiciness implies tastiness in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/22 08:49 PM
1

Men and women engage in (straight, one-on-one) casual sex equally often. The distribution of lays over the respective male and female populations probably isn't equal, but then your options are either 1) more women get casual sex than men, or 2) some women get more casual sex than most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/22 09:14 PM
3

Are these things that feel "icky" to you, or just general stuff you dislike? I interpreted OP as asking about things that cause creepy vibes or disgust.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/22 06:43 AM
3

I mean, a lot. I'm attracted to different women than when I was 19. You learn more about yourself, and depending on your phase in life, you shift priorities. Examples: I spent a lot of time pursuing a girl in high school who sent mixed signals. Nowadays that gives me too much anxiety. I went through a marriage in which we communicated well but had conflicting priorities, e.g., mismatched sex drives. Now I check my partner's priorities first because it's more important than communication.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/22 01:16 PM
2

Try asking out a woman after being rejected by her friend. It most likely won't end well. I haven't tried anything quite that bad, but I live in a small town. Yes, folks chat about "those guys" (and gals!) who hit on too many people.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 10:04 PM
3

What I am asserting is very plain: I don't believe there is a scenario in which a woman, who already knows of a man and would agree to date/hookup with probability p, would observe the man get rejected by a woman and update the probability to something greater than p. There is no earthly way. If anything it would lower a bit. I could imagine a scenario in which the woman had no clue the man existed and witnessing the rejection was her introduction to the man, but then there is no prior probabili…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 06:13 PM
5

I am open to the possibility that this trait is correlated with success, sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 03:09 AM
3

This is very different from saying that accepting rejection well "wins women over". Does it actually cause your chances to improve? That is the matter at hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 03:08 AM
9

As I said, they will be offended that they weren't first pick. If he tries it often enough, he will be known as "that guy" in his social circle who is desperate enough to ask anyone out.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/22 03:07 AM
20

I don't buy that women are "won over" by the grace with which the guy accepts rejection. If you're the one doing the rejecting, nothing will win you over, as he has already lost. If you are witnessing another woman reject him, you will be upset that you weren't first pick. Either way it isn't beneficial.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 11:13 PM
19

People keep mentioning "failed relationships", but what does that mean? Is a relationship a failure because it ends? Consider an analogous question: Is a job you once took a mistake because you eventually quit, even if it paid your bills for years?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 07:17 PM
9

This reminds me of a term I read about recently: "satisficing". Not looking for the ideal solution--because that's often not feasible--but rather the first acceptable solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/22 07:39 PM
1

I don't disagree, but it kind of undercuts the effectiveness of "survival of the fittest" as a normative standard. You might as well say "whatever people prefer ought to be preferred". Your moral code collapses into indifference and tautology.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/22 02:24 PM
17

Also, "fittest" is highly contextual. Being a Tiktok model doesn't make you an effective hunter or a fertile mother. Sexual selection eventually takes on a life of its own when survival is no longer the chief concern.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/22 10:09 PM
3

He was already a moderately famous author by the time they married.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/22 08:17 PM
6

Regarding controlling your own choices: I think OP's need to "always be on his A-game"--a form of hypervigilance--is misguided. People usually cheat to chase new relationship energy. You cannot retain new relationship energy for long, by definition. You can't entertain thrill-seekers forever.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/22 08:13 PM
3

Tldr; Most people have a routine that doesn't allow for meeting new people. Actively seeking to meet potential partners is the only time it happens for such people. Consider: Most of my hobbies are solitary. Why should I feign interest in a more social hobby I don't care about just so a woman can feel I met her organically? Fake personality traits so she can feel special? Screw that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/22 02:45 AM
1

There is no interacting with their environment. Have you never done online dating? All you have is a profile. To get more, you have to "swipe" (indicate your sexual interest). And I'm not using a stereotype so much as what she directly tells me about how she acted lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/22 02:35 AM
3

My fiancée is a punk-ish tomboy with pastel highlights that is shy and likes nerds. She looks like the girl who would shove the preppy girls into lockers in high school. If you could have guessed her preferences merely from looking at her (and that's all you have before "swiping" on a dating app), then you are psychic. Personally, I don't see any reason to suppose one's sexual preferences are at all correlated with their appearance. If there is a correlation, it is very weak.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/22 07:16 PM
3

If I weren't actively looking for someone, I would simply never meet new people. I live in a small town and commute to work, where most of my coworkers are a fair bit older than I am. I have hobbies, but they are solitary ones, and social groups devoted to hobbies are scant around here anyway. Maybe you live in a big city and work in a vibrant office and go to a book club or something. But believe me that that isn't typical. Yes, I could upheave my entire life to marginally increase my chances o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/22 06:52 PM
7

Not from a profile on a dating app or their appearance in a bar. Feeling out their personality works if they are friends with you and you hang out under different pretenses. But most guys don't have large enough social circles to get a match that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/22 06:41 AM
3

You misunderstood. I don't just look nerdy. I am a nerd. Changing who you are at such a fundamental level sounds stressful. Since my dating strategy has worked without it, I won't partake. But thanks anyway lol. I also exercise quite a lot, but it's running, which mostly just keeps the weight off. Cardio doesn't make one buff. I guess if the girl has a thing for legs then it works out. But more important than any of that is my height: I am 5'7". So the benefits of working out would be negligible…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/22 06:38 AM
14

You can make a bunch of great points about how humanity would benefit if we could produce energy with no waste, but noting the benefits doesn't make it so. Again, I get why you would want to feel that your partner sees you as unique, or special, or a soulmate. But dating dynamics force it to be a numbers game. It doesn't matter how great it would be if it weren't. There is something else too: People aren't as unique as they imagine. Coming to terms with that is a big part of being a functional a…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 08:41 PM
27

I definitely understand the sentiment, but as a member of the sex that is expected to approach the pickier sex, I regret to inform you that that just isn't feasible unless the man is exceptional. Dating for men is a numbers game. Most of us don't enjoy approaching, and women don't like knowing about other approaches. But unless women also start approaching or lowering their standards, there is no other way. Take me, for example. I look and act kind of nerdy. There is a small percentage of women …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 04:30 PM
3

This is really silly, and to see why, just replace "have sex" with any other biological imperative, e.g., eating or sleeping. They don't get old.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/22 12:02 PM
3

Well, going with my sales pitch analogy, men are always interested in the product. So it's not much of a gamble if you're a woman flirting lol. Come to think of it, the analogy is even better than I thought. You don't need a sales pitch if your product is already sought after, nor do women really need to actively look for prospects; men will find them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/22 11:17 AM
6

Right, and there really isn't a place that's good for approaching. Imagine if you were asked when/where would be a good time to hear a sales pitch. The answer is never/nowhere unless you happen to find the product fascinating.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/22 06:45 AM
5

A guy with lots of options is probably spinning multiple plates. Having to work harder for one sounds like less of a drag if you have a date with another already arranged.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/22 12:42 AM
0

We could talk about different varieties of porn until the cows come home, but I think looking at the average salaries might speed things up. Male porn stars make far less on average. The producers know the guys' looks are unimportant (for hetero porn), so there isn't much incentive to pay for the cream of the crop. In fact, I suspect there could be a psychology trick in play. I want to imagine myself as the guy, right? That's easier for my suspension of disbelief if the guy looks average.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/22 09:00 PM
17

Yeah, like half of the guys have beer guts and unruly body hair. The camera spends minimal time on them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/22 03:16 PM
8

Basically my stance too. The number only matters in context. If every guy she's been with was part of months-long commitment in relationships that just didn't pan out, I think I could tolerate even a double-digit body count. I might infer that she is bad at choosing men, though, or that she is repeating a failing pattern of behavior in her relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/22 03:04 PM
–

Assuming looks and sexual preferences are independent, there are bound to be conventionally attractive women with unconventional preferences. Play the numbers game and cross your fingers. Source: All of my gfs had/have unusual or broad preferences for nerds and such.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/22 10:59 AM
1

This is a silly question. The "internal" standard is always perfection. Reality falls short of whatever form that takes, and that's why people strategize about dating in the first place. Dating is a well-known supply and demand problem. You're asking us what demand would look like if we ignore the supply.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/22 07:27 PM
1

Even if you allow serial dating (which my original comment did), it still implies you'll die alone. Having a few years of dating in your youth doesn't change the general tone of your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/22 05:39 PM
6

What you're saying isn't even mathematically possible. The difference between the sizes of male and female populations implies that some folks will be alone even before accounting for preferences. (Unless you consider monogamy to be a mere preference.) Some people must lose. I suppose you can work hard to reduce the chance that you'll be one of them, but either way, not everyone can have a happy ending.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/22 01:53 PM
3

See, this is why I want to reject the premise of OP's question. You cannot in practice know that you do not and will not share a common interest with someone, but you can know if their looks won't do it for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/22 01:32 PM
1

She sounds like the type of woman more likely to be fulfilled by a gay bff or a lesbian than a straight man. Men and women generally do not have many common interests that aren't super generic.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/22 01:27 PM
12

I feel like you're grossly overestimating how much in common you need in the way of hobbies. Women go to ball games with men even when it's not their thing. Men browse stores with women even when it's not their thing. Couples watch random movies that don't seem like they'll be good on the off-chance that it will interest one or both of them. Couples crunch out quality time in all kinds of ways. But it's usually not about the activity itself. The activity is a pretense to spend time together. Per…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/22 01:19 PM
1

I didn't mean to suggest that, and personally I'm not sure I agree. I think men and women have different priorities when dating or looking to date. Communication is definitely an issue, but a discrepancy in goals becomes clearer as communication improves. This sub is the ultimate proof of that. The sexes speak candidly here, more so than most other arenas, yet our dissatisfaction with each other is higher here than in "the real world". So I don't think it's that we are failing to see the other p…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/22 06:03 PM
3

Insecurity in general is good for business. "Sex sells" is true because men consume a lot of sexualized content, and where men struggle sexually, there is a market (not only in cosmetics, but performance-enhancers, hair treatments, ways to meet women, etc.).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/22 04:02 PM
5

If I told you that most resumes get binned within 10 seconds, would you find that unbelievable? I mean, you can't possibly know everything about an applicant within 10 seconds! There are a series of hurdles, and most people fail at the very first hurdle, which occurs the moment the woman interacts with you. And if you fumble at the hurdle, you can't compensate by doing well at the next few.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/22 10:20 PM
17

Becoming attracted to someone isn't a decision. That was their point. It may take a woman a while to act on their attraction, but you can't create attraction ex nihilo. It was likely always there or never there.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/22 08:49 PM
1

I think it's more a matter of experience than age. A 20-year old with a toddler is like a 25-year old childless woman in maturity.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/22 11:13 PM
1

Well I think in general it's easy to fixate on certain practices and ignore ones you take for granted. I don't recycle, but I know folks who do that insist on bottled water. Despite all their recycling efforts, I'm pretty sure that that vice alone undoes it and causes more damage than I do lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/22 05:23 PM
1

Recycling is great when it happens, but tbh most of the stuff people think they're recycling gets tossed anyway. (Yes, even if the label says you can recycle it.) There's a nice John Oliver on that one if you're interested. And of course most of it is downcycled. And you could easily set any number of similar rules. "I wouldn't date someone who drives a truck. They're making their carbon footprint worse and they don't need it!" But anyway, it stuck out to me as being an impractical rule where I …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/22 04:50 PM
0

I feel like if this particular example is a dealbreaker for someone then they have waaayyy too many options. But I understand your point lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/22 04:29 PM
1

I think it's somewhat because men don't really have attractive "parts". Height isn't a part. Build isn't a part. Even things that seem like they would be parts that matter, e.g., faces, are much larger regions than what we find attractive in women. Women have full lips, cute noses...no one talks about a dude's lips or nose unless they are hideous.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/22 04:07 PM
2

I don't like it when people dress up necessities as if they were opportunities. A righty is just as capable of learning to use their left hand as the other way around. They just don't have to. People with rare diseases usually learn more about their affected body parts than the average person, but we don't gaslight them and say that this knowledge is an advantage of their disease. Being forced to do something isn't a perk.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/22 10:07 PM
25

Usually "fun" in these contexts is a euphemism for "provides easy sex to a lot of guys that invest little". The lack of commitment potential is built-in.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/22 04:13 PM
1

I mean, it can. I want to win money in lotteries, but it's so inconsistent that the most logical conclusion is not to participate, else I'd waste money. Most people play the lottery for entertainment and take actually coming out ahead as a pleasant surprise. OP seems to think it's the same scenario with women when it comes to probability of orgasm vs. effort spent, so perhaps there is another reason to participate in the hookup lottery such as emotional support. (I would call this "validation", …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/22 01:00 PM
1

Are you more likely to be ambidextrous, or are you more likely to learn to be ambidextrous, because so much tech is engineered to cater to righties? Example: I'm a lefty but use my right hand for a computer mouse, for shifting gears, etc. What other choice do I have? At this point it would feel weird to use my left for it. Is that being ambidextrous, or adapting to adversity? I suppose the analogous statement is that a short guy is more likely to become a silvertongue with women. Not because bei…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 09:45 PM
3

That's for being tall and thin.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 06:59 PM
2

That's for being tall and thin.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 06:58 PM
9

Every source I see shows increases over the last few decades in the West, not just a century ago. Also, there's another factor I never see mentioned: There are more elderly folk now than ever. They actually get shorter over the course of their lives, yet the average still increases.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 10:42 AM
11

Over the last century in the US? Maybe immigration I could see. But nutrition? Surely that has gotten worse in the last century. Now if we're talking multiple centuries back, then I could see that.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 09:44 AM
8

I have been a lefty my whole life and see no advantage lol. Maybe in certain sports it would throw off an opponent? That's a hard reach though. Plenty of downsides, though. Desks, notebooks, etc., all work against you.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 09:42 AM
85

Being a tall man is often an advantage, and even where it isn't, it is never stigmatized. Examples of the opposite are easy to find though: -We don't have terms like "manlet" for tall men. -There is no perceived "Tall Man Syndrome". -The average height of men is increasing over time, reflecting sexual selection. -Women do not fear being seen as too short to belong with their potential partners. -There are stock phrases like "tall, dark, and handsome" but nothing similar for short men. Denying th…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/22 08:51 AM
4

Good sex mostly depends on a combination of communication, kinks, and libido. Each person has what you might call a "looks threshold" that needs to be met to get the spark going, but once you have the spark, there isn't really a need for much more. Also, your partner being exceptionally hot won't prevent the sex from getting stale. Reddit is replete with stories wherein the partner is hot but uninterested in keeping sex exciting, so the relationship declines.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/22 10:06 PM
3

Probably the most famous porn star alive. A minor celebrity. She's done talks at schools and authored books about her career and how liberating it was to her sexuality.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 10:37 PM
4

Would you extend this to porn? Would you look at someone like Sasha Grey and see a victim of trafficking?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 10:15 PM
1

There's a difference between "I don't enjoy X" and "witnessing X disgusts me, possibly to the point that I am reminded of past traumas".
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 09:19 PM
11

It's interesting to see the in-fighting between feminists on this one. You have those who believe women do and should commodify sex and intimacy, then you have those that deny that women ever do this by choice. In other words, there are those that think sex work is a legitimate career and those that think it is always slavery.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 08:50 PM
1

What I mean is that, for a woman that wants a child, there aren't great financial options. It used to be that a 40-hour/week job could support a family. Being a SAHM was a good strategy then. But now an average job won't support a family, so settling for a man the woman doesn't love makes no sense. She will financially struggle with or without the man (unless the man would make big bucks), so she might as well forgo the man and get by on aid.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 08:45 PM
0

I literally just told you I chose to be a step-dad and see it as a good compromise. I didn't even bother with the rest of your comment. I don't want power over women. I would prefer no children or legal financial ties. Having children, in this economy? That's insane. She and the bio dad wanted to be parents as their life goal, and they got it. I want my gf to be happy without making me poor, and I get that. Compromise.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 03:19 PM
24

At least she is being honest about how she feels. You can't rationalize someone to feel differently than they do. You can point out as you are doing here that this creates a world of winners and losers, but this guilt tactic is unlikely to change how women feel.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 03:12 PM
30

The people who feel this way aren't shaming you into relationships with them. They're trying to shame you into not wanting sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 03:08 PM
-2

laughs in being a step-dad and outsourcing the financial burden to the biological dad Awful lot of assumptions you made about my situation and goals, bud. Raising a kid is easier with three people, and my gf knows I wouldn't have given her a kid if it were just us. So we both got what we wanted.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 02:37 PM
1

I don't know if most women think as you describe but it would make economical sense. Whether you're a single mother or a SAHM with a breadwinner husband or both parents are working while paying a sitter, it's all kind of the same. You can't get ahead unless the man earns big money. Otherwise, you might as well raise the child with government assistance since the whole family would be living off the man's meager income anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 09:19 AM
29

Here in rural America, you're already above average as a woman if you are under 150 pounds and don't have multiple children.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/22 07:44 PM
4

You know, when I was a teen, I often wondered why girls didn't give guys a chance to generate attraction. Now that I'm older and realize it essentially can't be generated--you're either attracted or you aren't--I fear this very scenario. If this woman had chosen to stay because they simply valued your companionship, you would have had a dead bedroom. It just terrifies me. I went through that once.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/22 09:06 PM
34

Probably true for most, but the drawback is that the number of chances you get before becoming "that guy" is logarithmic in the size of your circle. If you get rejected by a woman, you'll usually get a poor outcome by attempting her friends.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/22 06:46 PM
1

Hopefully my YouTuber example cleared up how even with skill, money is often a limiting factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/22 06:15 PM
2

Shouldn't just having a good enough salary for yourself and your family count as "taking care of yourself"? Most people wouldn't call that an ambition unless you were already failing dismally at doing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/22 06:13 PM
3

When I think of someone who has a dream, it usually involves a significant amount of luck or investment. Another example besides those I gave might be "I want to be a YouTube celebrity." Being a YouTube celebrity obviously involves a lot of luck, but it also requires initial capital. You eventually need a good camera, good mic, a soundproof room, perhaps an animator/editor, etc. And here's the big one: It's a full-time job. You have to quit your stable job for the dream. For most people, such an…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/22 05:40 PM
5

Hmm. I often associate ambition with a lack of financial security, e.g., "I want to go back to college for X", "I want a larger house", "I want another kid", etc. Usually the ambition is expensive, which is why they haven't done it yet. I guess this doesn't include lame ambitions, like wanting to be promoted to a supervisor or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/22 05:24 PM
1

Right, it's like folks here don't know what average means. In a normal distribution, for 90% of folks to be average, your average range would have to cover everything within ~1.65 standard deviations from the mean. That's crazy in nearly any context, not just attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/22 10:26 PM
0

Here in the US, poverty is basically just a waste product of capitalism. Our system is based on low wages and constant consumption. People are pressured to live paycheck to paycheck. Poverty is just a natural consequence of that, and not really seen as a problem to be solved by about half the population.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/22 03:09 PM
10

There's a difference between someone giving themselves a layer of plausible deniability and being a master manipulator. You see this a lot with men creating obvious excuses not to commit to a woman, e.g., gotta work on myself, been busy at work, I don't have the money now, etc. In these cases, the woman is simply refusing to see what's plainly there. It's kind of like your employer insisting your coworkers are "like a family". It's so clearly BS that not seeing through it makes you blameworthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/22 02:27 PM
1

I remember having a lengthy discussion with a woman here in which I effectively used the type of model you assume: good and bad options in a population, selecting randomly until you hit a good option. It took a while to see where our communication was breaking down, but it seemed they basically rejected that this models practical dating because they felt you need to choose the best member of your dating pool. They did not accept that dating was just going through folks until you found a good eno…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/22 12:22 PM
1

It's not so much sexlessness, from what I can tell, but lack of validation. Obviously anyone here could get sex by paying for prostitutes. Here is some food for thought: Men want to be sexually desired, right? Why would an ugly woman's sexual preferences differ from those of an attractive woman? On average, they would not. A man doesn't increase his odds of being validated by lowering his standards to rock bottom. He merely increases his odds of being settled for.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/22 07:00 AM
12

Neither did his original point. If everyone followed his advice to become above average, the average would rise and so would the difficulty of that task.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 01:38 AM
1

Again, it's not that saving is foolish. It's more that expecting to retire as a working class person is foolish. Having a rainy day fund is not the same as retiring. And my generation began the trend of living with one's parents into the mid to late 20s. I doubt we'll be able to pass down much wealth. Having children is a mistake for most Millennials.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 01:28 AM
1

I would encourage you to verify this yourself and not take me at my word. Because if you do accept this as reality, it can lead to another insight: These women truly do love their men. It is a constant refrain on that sub that "my relationship is perfect except for the intimacy" or "I have built an amazing life with this man". And it's not that they are ignorant of the willing men. They often mention the frustration of being hit on by other guys but not their husbands. They truly are being loyal…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 05:29 PM
1

Consider an analogy: People here in the US are mostly dissatisfied with their government. They feel they are poorer than their parents and have little hope for the future. They see others doing better and it makes them frustrated and paranoid. They create elaborate conspiracy theories to deflect blame for their lot in life while at the same time feeling a sense of control--and in even superiority--in their ability to explain it all. I'm used to seeing this kind of coping, so this all kinda seems…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 05:23 PM
1

Maybe I should have been clearer. I do save money, and in fact have quite a nest egg. I've just lost faith in retirement: a phase of my life many years long in which work won't be necessary to maintain a decent standard of living. It already doesn't truly exist, anyway. People often die a couple of years into retirement, their hard-earned money being heavily taxed before their descendants see a cent.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 04:18 PM
1

I mean, you could speculate based on what is clearly a cherished view of yours, or you could challenge that view by simply perusing the sub. Many of the women describe their men as being unwilling to go down, or to try new positions or toys. Even more describe elaborate attempts at seduction and foreplay. Also, your argument neglects the fact that, as I said, their sex life usually started strong. So what, they started out competent in bed but got less skilled over time? That makes no sense. But…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 04:08 PM
4

As in, why are folks angry here? This seems to be a place where folks blow off steam. I think it's normal to vent when one feels shortchanged for their efforts in life, or when they simply don't feel validated.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 04:03 PM
1

Rising retirement age, inflation outpacing interest, the need to job-hop making pensions not viable, the constant talks to axe social security. I could go on. There are about 40 more years for those trends to continue before I would retire. I've just accepted that I will likely work until I die.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 12:52 PM
8

Not sure if you were being sarcastic, but it turns out that most of the users complaining about the lack of sex on that sub are female. Again, it's a niche corner of the Internet, so I'm not claiming it's common lol. I would say, very roughly speaking, that most cases in that sub are caused by one or both parties overestimating theirs or the other's libido due to new relationship energy. Often the sex starts strong and dwindles, to the confusion of the high libido partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 12:38 PM
2

I think maintaining looks is subject to what I call the "why bother?" paradox. Looks are important, but unless additional effort produces a noticeable difference in outcomes, there is no perceived value in giving that effort. Kinda like Millennials putting back money for retirement lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 12:09 PM
1

I think there's also the issue that even much of the data one could use comes with a sample bias. As an example, there was the report by Bumble of its female users' height preferences. But it is important to note that height preferences are in the advanced settings, so only women who would see height as a dealbreaker would bother to adjust those settings. Therefore the report reflects mostly extreme opinions.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 11:24 AM
7

You can hop onto the dead bedrooms sub if you doubt the existence of workaholic men who take every excuse to avoid intimacy with their wives. I don't know how common it is, but it does happen, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 11:17 AM
14

More practically, even if a woman were to settle with you for your job (for example), that wouldn't satisfy most men. We want to be wanted. We don't want someone who will have sex with us twice a month after the new relationship energy fizzles out. This is the missing ingredient in many PPD discussions, I think. The reason one is chosen affects the nature of the relationship. Being chosen for a poor reason is as good as rejection.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/22 11:09 AM
2

I say this even as a guy who was a virgin until he was nearly 23, so understand that this is hard for me to admit: I don't think it's especially shallow. Much of the strength of a couple's bond in the earlier phases (first few months) comes from the initial spark in most cases, and that often includes a lot of sex. I can definitely see how feeling that those first sexual encounters are tutoring sessions could kill the mood. All couples are different of course. Some couples can generate a lot of …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/22 12:12 PM
3

I would argue that there are no pants. Men might make most of the day-to-day decisions but, as is often pointed out here, women initiate most divorces. Women are the ones pursued and their "capture" ends whenever they wish. Much of our power as men is illusory.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/22 06:06 AM
1

Oh certainly. But I think revealing those weaknesses will be necessary/inevitable, and no one should commit to you under the assumption that you will change. Example: Let's say you're a problem gambler. Anyone who intermingles finances with you will eventually find out, and as an addiction, you are unlikely to change it. It's great if you can! But realistically, any potential partner will need to know this and accept that you might be that way indefinitely.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 10:43 PM
11

General rule for saving time while screening: Get dealbreakers out of the way first. If something is not a dealbreaker, i.e., it can be overlooked for the sake of the rest of the package, then reveal it more gradually. As for your questions, I don't think opining about the probabilities of eventual rejection is very useful. Most vulnerabilities will surface in a LTR. The only variable you can control is the timing. As I said, a dealbreaker should be revealed early because, by definition, the pro…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 02:44 PM
8

Right. It's pretty confusing for someone to say, "Yeah, I really want sex with you and would enjoy it. Let me reduce it to a bargaining chip though."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 12:56 PM
2

You're telling this to a guy who very rarely orgasms during sex but loves it dearly. I will go further: If the orgasm is the only reason you're having sex, then you don't enjoy sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 09:16 AM
2

I think you're misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying testosterone controls the (for lack of a better word) "direction" of one's sexual preferences. It seems to control the strength of the desire to meet those preferences. So to put the whole thing another way, men may hold out for more ideal women if they had lower testosterone because, if no one fit the bill, they would just wait for sex until the right person came along as women do. Men don't wait for sex because their drive is too strong.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 09:00 AM
2

Actually I was browsing the Wiki article on testosterone because of this very conversation, and there was a bit about how positive orgasm experience in women is correlated with their testosterone levels (not so with men, though). So even the women you see "out there fucking" are often those blessed/cursed with high testosterone.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 08:38 AM
3

I mean, again, it goes back to what I said about testosterone. It is known to play a big role in libido. Men with unusually low libidos are told to check their testosterone levels, and if that's the culprit, it improves with treatment. Men who lose their testicles for whatever reason lose a big chunk of their sex drive because that was their testosterone factory. I've read testimonies from women here about testosterone treatments they have had and they attest that if feels totally different--tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 08:17 AM
2

I think a more parsimonious explanation, which is backed up by our understanding of testosterone, is simply that women don't desire sex as much as men on average. This imbalance of desire manifests as a difference in (psychological) need, and is why women can have higher standards. This explains ONSs. The woman happened to be in the mood at the time and got off. She didn't need to contrive a whole relationship for it to happen. After all, why would she want to? It's just a mood and it passed. Fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 07:44 AM
7

Well it's a bit more than just nervousness. I'll take one for the team here and mention stuff that happened to me my first time: 1) The actual first time I simply went soft in her. I spent the next hour trying to get hard in vain. 2) The first successful time I had a ton of trouble finding the hole. It's lower than you'd think lol. 3) I was afraid to press too much of my weight on her for fear of hurting her. 4) I didn't jackhammer, but I also didn't build up speed. I started too fast. Mistakes …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/22 02:47 AM
7

OP was asking about women rejecting men for inexperience. Men would almost never reject women for inexperience. (Traditionally, inexperience has boosted women's value to men.)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 10:44 PM
1

It will likely be obvious to the other person that you are, if not a virgin, quite bad and probably inexperienced. They will probably ghost you at best. If that doesn't shatter your confidence, great. But I think you're much better off trying to hold out for relationship sex so that your first time is a positive experience rather than a soul-crushing one. Also, your first twenty or so times will be kinda bad. Again, relationship sex is the better route.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 10:17 PM
28

I would like to add that indifference can make someone "picky" because they are debating which criteria they should use to decide. Example: If you ask me where I want to eat when I'm not especially hungry, I might really have to wrestle with that decision. I can't use the food to decide, so should it be price? Driving time? The other person's tastes?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 08:10 PM
11

I think "beta bux" refers to men who are selected as providers and not for raw attraction, hence the "bux". If a woman actually were into you for your personality, I don't think anyone here would call you a beta bux. They may, however, question the woman's existence lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 06:17 PM
11

The logic behind drunk driving sentencing is that the fault is presumed to be yours as opposed to being split between you and another driver, or, in the case of a cyclist or pedestrian, often on that cyclist or pedestrian. The situation with cheating is different. The cheater is always at fault. No presumption is needed. There is no equivalent of an "accident" with cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/22 06:11 PM
1

To be fair, I think the alternative to understanding the dynamics of the dating market is internalizing a lot of sex essentialism, e.g., "women are just like that". People like having answers, and, in the absence of understanding, they embrace bad answers that require no effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/22 11:50 AM
2

What I mean is that there is no reason to suppose that men's attractiveness and women's are distributed similarly. If women's is a bell curve and men's curve has a really skewed tail, then what you observe is just a consequence of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/22 02:50 AM
3

Men find more women attractive than the other way around. All you have observed is that the beauty gap still exists when you narrow the population down to the taken folks. To put it another way: Of course you find the woman to be "the attractive one" oftentimes. You probably find the majority of women attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 11:11 PM
1

One thing we could do is advertise antidepressants as libido-killers. A big chunk of the population needs them anyway, so we might as well capitalize on the side effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 10:25 PM
6

Kinda worried about your view on which sex committing rape is worse, then.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 05:15 PM
1

I mean, women can be pretty bad at reading men and each other. I think their advantage is that they can succeed without knowing what is going on. That's probably why they flirt like they do. It's not that they're using advanced techniques. They're bad at it because their success doesn't depend on it, so they have no incentive to learn.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 11:38 AM
1

I think we might be getting toward more of a mutual understanding! I think of the qualities I mentioned as relational rather than innate. As another example, I am funnier around certain people. I am more at ease. I am more emotionally available and honest. I don't think of these as innate traits because they are conditional on my partner. I also don't buy that these traits are my "real" traits, and elsewhere I am hiding them beneath a facade. The facade is real. I treat my friends differently th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/22 06:14 AM
1

People probably do seem more unique within one's own friend group, I'd agree. But speaking from personal experience, most don't have the privilege of dating those in their friend group. They have been your friends for years without piquing your sexual interest. It's unlikely that attraction will form. It's like deciding to make a meal from the dusty stuff at the back of the pantry--it was back there so long for a reason. Calling it a game was me being a bit dramatic, I suppose. What I mean is th…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/22 10:36 PM
1

I just wanted to say that I've been enjoying this conversation. I often hear about men having unrealistic beauty standards, so it's interesting to discuss the polar opposite premise lol. I am sure you're right that that is the effect my SOs desired when asking for reassurance. But at the end of the day, the verbal responses I can give will be indistinguishable from those of a suave first date. It's still just some variant of "you're pretty". It may be dressed up, but there are only so many ways …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/22 12:56 PM
1

I always end up living with my partners after the first couple of months, so I am more motivated to keep the house tidy and stay hygienic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/22 08:23 AM
1

I agree that being pretty to a man is a low bar, but it is still important to mention. Every woman I have dated has, at one time or another, mentioned (sometimes jokingly, sometimes seriously) that I need to assure them they are pretty more often. Such is the paradox of the low bar. Meeting a low bar doesn't mean much, but failing to meet a low bar is devastating, so one needs assurance that they do in fact meet it. Maybe I'm not communicating the shared experience stuff well. Having inside joke…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 08:50 PM
1

I guess I'm confused at what phase the "you're pretty" is being received here? I've been working with the assumption we were talking about the approach or maybe the first date. Any compliment one could offer that early on is going to be shallow and indicative of pretty much nothing. That goes for both sexes. I've heard about how smart I am that early on and I mentally kinda laugh because there is no way to know that so early. At least the looks compliment is verifiable at that stage. If you're t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 07:27 PM
1

I should have been more specific. You should not be assured of a relationship's longevity with anyone during the early dating phase. Even if you were a lesbian and dating women. That's just extremely naive. People are largely interchangeable before attachment occurs, and even then you can have irreconcilable differences that weren't foreseeable, e.g., domestic issues. I think everyone just has to accept a high probability (greater than 50%) of eventual breakup when they start dating, regardless …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 04:38 PM
1

I never suggested that "you're pretty" is meaningful enough to predict loyalty. Nothing that you hear in the early dating phase should assure you of the relationship's longevity. I feel like you're trying to attach normative qualities to descriptive statements. I'm a man, trying to explain to you how men think and why we think it. I'm not saying we should think that way. But it's not something we can change. Many of us would probably just turn off our sex drives if we had that much control.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 03:08 PM
6

You misunderstand my biology point. It is not a choice. We sometimes call it a mating "strategy", sure, but it's more of a hard-wired instinct. We can't choose to "take the hit" as you say. We simply find most women attractive, full stop, and the reason owes to evolution. And even if you're one in a thousand, there are still, like, 3.6 million women like you. (Using the estimate that the human population is 7.2 billion and women make up half.) This attraction is mostly relevant in the beginning,…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 02:13 PM
1

Do you not feel it's a smidge dehumanizing to want to be "the best he could reasonably get", as if all women can be ranked and he can score everyone up to a certain percentile? It is bad to need to feel special because, by definition, very few people are special. It's like how everyone thinks they're above average. There is also the biological point: You can't have both sexes be picky. Humanity would have gone extinct by now.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 01:37 PM
5

Dating for most men is a numbers game. It helps if you have female friends for warm approaches, I suppose, but you have to approach a lot either way. But don't take my word for it! Try the RP game strategies, but keep a tally of how often it truly works; that is, how often it leads to at least a date. Maybe a second tally for intimacy. The success rate is low no matter what you do if you don't have good looks, so the most important thing is just to make many attempts. Remember: success rate. Cou…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 04:29 AM
1

SAHMs? In this economy? It's like you stepped out of a time machine.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 03:57 AM
5

Game is bollocks. People think that game works because of the halo effect, and because they want to attribute their success to something within their control.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 03:49 AM
10

I think you're trying to force the conversation in a certain direction with "hole". There is a difference between acknowledging that your partner has diverse preferences and interests that could be checked off by many people versus believing they don't regard you as a human being. Again, to use my gf as an example: I surely have quirks that are rare, and the exact combination may even be unique. But my dominant personality traits are fairly common. She knows it. But this doesn't diminish our enj…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 02:30 AM
6

"You're such a nice guy! You'll make a lucky girl very happy someday."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 02:23 AM
24

That you feel you must be unique to be validated sounds like a personal problem that will lead you to misery. My gf loves me, but she would find another if I died tomorrow, because there are many like me. I think people need to make peace with that sort of thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/22 01:43 AM
16

I think you're both right. It's kind of like how our ancestors tried random crap like chewing roots for remedies. When they found a root/ailment pair that worked out, they obviously kept doing it even though they didn't understand why it worked.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/22 08:27 PM
–

Yes, contraception exists...for now.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/22 07:27 PM
0

I have to agree in most cases. Every woman I know who says this clamped onto their current partner shortly after meeting them. It wasn't like, "Hey, we've been friends for a few months and I noticed we have a lot in common..."
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/22 04:11 PM
0

So not an emotion, but an "emotional skill". Got it lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 10:40 PM
5

If it were a skill then it wouldn't fluctuate with life events. Example: Driving is a skill. I don't lose the ability to drive because my dad died.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 10:10 PM
13

Paradoxically, attempting to follow this advice negates it. If A leads to B, but only if you acquired A without B in mind, then you can't use the knowledge that "A leads to B" to obtain B.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 10:09 PM
21

Then is it a mood? That's even dumber if women are just attracted to an emotional state.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 10:06 PM
1

I guess it depends on how you verbalize it. But if any way of verbalizing it kills the attraction, then I'd say she just doesn't reciprocate your feelings. Maybe you excite her sexually but that's it, and the idea of more puts her off. So what verbalizing does for you is grant clarity. I think people confuse the means of verifying success or failure with the cause of success or failure.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/22 06:14 PM
4

And then your "friend" ignores you until the end of time when you confess feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 08:26 PM
1

Whether you use SMV or some other metric, I think the main predictor of success would be the perception of either partner that they are settling or not. Clearly if either believes they are settling, then the relationship is running on borrowed time. So it's not so much having a high SMV that is good, but having an SMV nearly equal to one's partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/22 07:54 PM
2

It wouldn't be random. Bring it up the same time questions like "So are you on the pill?" would arise. I very much hope you ask that question! There are two possibilities. Either she assumes it, in which case you mentioning it (in the context above) will have no effect, or she doesn't, in which case mentioning it prevents causing more damage with a misunderstanding. The only reason you wouldn't mention it is if you think she is isn't assuming it and wouldn't fuck you otherwise. I shouldn't have …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 09:36 PM
4

For godsake, just say, "I am seeing other women too. I use/do not use protection though. Etc." Communicate.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 06:07 PM
12

Exactly. Also OP, it is important that someone know you are sleeping with others because they need to know their STD risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/22 06:03 PM
1

More to the point, suppose this notion of value that is independent of attraction did have meaning. Do you really want someone to choose to be with you because they made a calculation, comparing their stats to yours, and deeming you the best fit as a result of an algorithm? Would that satisfy you?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 06:32 PM
2

I think ratings you give yourself, or more generally to a member of a sex that doesn't attract you, are pretty worthless. It's like asking your sister to rate you. Only ratings from potential mates matter. And if you get little attention from the sex you are interested in, that is a consistent low rating.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 05:12 PM
1

I have read this story. There are two important takeaways: 1) His superiors at Google disagree with him. 2) The Turing Test wasn't even carried out here, because it requires a human outside the conversation to be the judge. Here, the person fooled was a participant of the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 04:08 PM
2

I like having a figure to use as well, but it's worth noting that an educated and employed woman has less need of a man for financial support. So you're looking at a demographic mostly outside this discussion. I believe the rate for the general population is closer to 50%.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 03:55 PM
1

You mention that women should find partners "fairly equal" to themselves. This is like saying that a merchant from whom you are making a purchase should price their product reasonably. The fact of the matter is that if you are willing to pay it, then it is a reasonable price. Or to put it differently, if it really were an unreasonable price, the merchant wouldn't be getting sales.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 03:17 PM
3

Women are more likely to be content with single life. You're basing this off the presumption of settling (i.e., any relationship is better than none), which is more a male strategy IMO.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 01:58 PM
0

I ask this respectfully, just so I can communicate with you better: Are you a virgin? No judgment, it just sounds like maybe you underestimate how unintuitive sex can be and what typical expectations are. A virgin is almost always bad at sex, and will continue to be bad after the first several times. There is a learning curve. That you seem to think being naturally good at sex is anything but rare just gives me the impression that you have little experience yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 12:29 PM
3

I didn't advise that the man avoid having sex. I merely explained why disappointment for the woman is a natural reaction. I mean, play through the scenario. The woman goes out hoping to get a good lay, you chat her up for an hour or two, and drive her to your place. By this point you are her only option for the night. Now you're telling her just before the lay that it will probably be bad. Of course she will be disappointed.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 11:23 AM
5

That doesn't contradict what I said. It's a virtually guaranteed failure against a merely possible failure. One would be more apt to bank on the latter.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 11:05 AM
2

Just as the price of an item is determined by the buyer and the seller at the moment of transaction, your value on the dating market is determined by who will take you. It makes no sense to say that you're attractive, but no one is attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 10:58 AM
5

You're overthinking this. Most women place a lot of importance on having an orgasm, and a virgin is unlikely to provide them one. (And this isn't symmetric--a man is virtually guaranteed an orgasm either way.) For relationship sex, that is something you can learn over time and you may get a patient reaction. For a ONS, you basically just wasted the woman's night.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 09:32 AM
1

You would definitely disclose to a passenger that you were new to driving if you were, right? If you have a license, you are technically qualified to drive them safely. However, this knowledge gives them reasonable expectations of the journey. It also gives them the opportunity to provide more constructive feedback that they would assume is redundant for a more experienced driver.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/22 09:27 AM
14

I think it's kind of weird to associate submissiveness together with being "slow". Speed is purely a mechanical thing, while dominance and submission are more about roles. My gf and I kind of switch, where the top one assumes the dominant role. She chooses to spend most of the time on top. She orgasms both ways, but most are with her on top. Take from that what you will.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/22 08:57 PM
0

I have sunk hundreds of hours into some games, but have never been convinced that they were real. Maybe religiosity would be a good predictor of this form of gullibility?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/22 05:44 PM
1

I don't think you'll easily accept the illusion if you are the one facilitating its existence. You can't just forget that you set it up to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/22 04:00 PM
4

If it's simple enough for a human to program, then it's probably too simple to fool you. I don't think any chatbot has yet passed the Turing Test.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/22 03:50 PM
0

Men and women have the same available career paths. Women can even join infantry now. They actively choose not to pursue traditionally male fields.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/22 03:27 PM
3

"You get rejected most of the time anyway. [...] It comes across as desperate." We get rejected most of the time! We are desperate. You literally acknowledged the very source of the desperation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/22 12:11 AM
1

Totally agree. With an ex, the first date was dinner and a movie, but movies are about gauging comfort with physical proximity and touch. You don't learn much about the other person during a movie. So one hour probably covers the talking portion of most dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/22 10:44 PM
11

Yeah, this attitude that something must be eternal to be valuable is really weird when you start to scrutinize it, considering that literally nothing in the observable universe is eternal.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/22 11:44 AM
–

Imagine being in a long line for a rollercoaster and telling everyone that the only way to make the line short enough to feasibly get to ride is if several people leave. Would that persuade anyone to leave?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/22 11:33 AM
7

I mean, if we're just counting instances of sex, and we suppose that in each instance there is one male and one female, then yes, men (as a group) are having sex as often as women (as a group). It just isn't as evenly distributed.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/22 11:02 AM
3

At least as far as sex goes, it totally makes sense that men would want relationships more. For most men, relationship sex is the most frequent they will get. Women can get enough with or without a relationship. The same goes for attention in general, really. The only things a man loses by having a relationship are money and novelty.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/22 06:14 AM
6

I am saying that it's not that women are saying no to relationships in general for attention in general. They are saying no to a relationship with you and are fine with receiving attention from you.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/22 12:42 AM
9

There is no causal relationship here. You are good enough for the attention, but not good enough to commit to.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/22 09:24 PM
1

I do blame them for it, because it is both easy and fun to measure and be measured in front of your partner as a bit of after-sex banter.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/22 09:23 PM
9

So like the reverse of fast food cup sizes, where "small" is not even used for drinks anymore. And on that note: Condom companies like Trojan use names like "magnum" to refer to their average-sized products. Helps boost the ego.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/22 08:51 PM
1

I can pay an escort for the "girlfriend experience" to get those, and it wouldn't have the same effect. Also, "expression of love" is cheating. We are talking about actions independent of context. You don't get to build your belief that the actor has a certain mental state while acting into the action. You are assuming the context by doing so.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/22 01:40 PM
2

What would be an example of an inherently intimate act? As in, something that is intimate independent of context? Politicians share secrets. Clients relate trauma to their therapists. But these aren't what folks mean when they refer to intimacy. Intimacy necessarily involves the underlying relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/22 01:52 PM
5

Your thesis statement was "They’re not making post after post about how quickly women offer emotional support and non-sexual intimacy." which is true. But the way you have isolated sex from the rest of intimacy is misleading. If men only wanted sex, they would just hire prostitutes. We often want relationship sex. I guess an analogous thing for women might be gifts. Imagine if I said, "Well gifts are basically just money. If you want money, just sell feet pics or be a sugar baby." I would be twi…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/22 04:57 AM
1

I applaud your consistency with the word, at least. Yeah, I'm not sure what happened with her. She had OCD and religious hangups, but they got much worse over the course of the relationship. It's hard to tell how much of it was an excuse. I like to think she meant well. I don't hate her. It definitely gave me a respect for new relationship energy, the (inevitable) decline of which I monitored closely in the next relationship. Basically you can't know someone's true libido in the first 3 months o…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/22 01:07 AM
15

I suspect this owes to the various incel communities being systematically eliminated lol. You can either have a zoo or let the animals run wild. We should have kept the zoos around.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/22 01:03 AM
2

I certainly want that to be the case. I have grown less certain of it over the years though, and I think surveying Reddit has surprised me. Last year I got out of a dead bedroom marriage in which I was told I only wanted sex despite moving mountains for that woman. She too hated calling sex a need. Of course, she had many "needs" that were not survival based. People are selective with that word. Fortunately I am with a woman now who matches my libido, so for the time being (and hopefully forever…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/22 12:21 AM
3

I was assuming that OP exaggerated the situation as I have seen many times in this sub. If a man truly doesn't care for your presence and literally only wants sex, this should be abundantly obvious in his behavior. He won't last more than a few dates without getting his dick wet. He won't invite you over. He won't introduce you to friends and family. The list goes on. Usually this complaint comes from women who lament sex being necessary. Nothing is "necessary" in the strict sense you provided. …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/22 11:45 PM
0

I think women confuse sex being necessary with sex being sufficient. I wouldn't buy a house just because it has a good bathroom. But I won't buy a house that doesn't have a good bathroom. There is a vast chasm between acknowledging sex as a need and only being in it for the sex. You should assume every man views sex as a need. It is rarely wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/22 11:30 PM
1

And I think you're right that this is a difficult situation. Where we disagree is that I have accepted the situation and advise working with it, while you are hoping there is some kind of alternative. Again, consider the job market as an analogy. An employer might say that people jump ship because of pay, so they want to find folks who don't view the job as just a paycheck. This is a hopeless approach. They need to find folks who find their pay appropriate, or raise the benefits.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/22 11:28 PM
1

Out of curiosity, why reject the advice to consider those outside the Chad pool? If a company wanted advice on how to retain employees, among your bits of wisdom would probably be "Don't hire someone who is overqualified for the position." Let's suppose that men are all just in it for the sex. A less attractive man optimizes their sexual frequency by getting in a relationship. Even just a once per week sex schedule puts him above where he would be with ONSs. So my advice is: Find someone who fee…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/22 09:24 PM
3

True, but many men don't prioritize their place being tidy (no hypocrisy here, I am one lol). If they clean for your arrival, they are probably serious.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/22 09:14 PM
3

I think part of the discrepancy you're seeing is as you say, but another part is that, for a man, a big chunk of affection is physical intimacy. Words, acts of service, etc., don't produce the same effect in us. Not to the same degree anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/22 08:26 PM
1

Awareness isn't the same as caring. It's anecdotal, but you just don't see guys asking each other for reassurance about their appearance. Women do so to each other openly, even in front of guys if they have no sexual interest in those guys. Women also seem to go through more trouble to primp and dress up before outings just in case they encounter friends. Men lose interest in appearance completely if getting their dick wet isn't a factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/22 03:49 PM
3

Just from my observations, it seems like there is little correlation between a woman's attractiveness and her ego. I know tons of women who are ugly but confident, and I also know many hot women who are always chasing the next hit of validation like an addict. I attribute this partly to all of the "noise" generated by their peers. For men it is simpler. (Straight) Men don't care what their male friends think of their looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/22 11:22 AM
5

Not OP, but I think a working definition is this: If you are inevitably going to try to find a substitute for it, even a harmful one, then it's a need. So for example, someone might say they don't need a better job. But if their job makes them develop drinking and gambling habits to cope, then improving it is a need. As for your stricter sense of "need", are you sure that food and such are needs? Does one need to live? Will the universe implode without them? Need the universe exist?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/22 11:02 AM
1

I literally didn't write that lol. Maybe you're confusing me with OP? I would be fine if women threw their hands up and simply said, "Look, I wish women as a whole earned more and men less, but I want MY man to out-earn me." If they acknowledged it upfront then I would be fine. The whole scenario is very analogous to men wanting women to have low body counts but to be easy specifically for them. I have acknowledged those conflicting desires in myself, in fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/22 10:22 PM
1

I didn't say anything about your experience???
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/22 03:52 PM
3

No one's trying to generalize lol. It's a question. If you are offended that the question is asked, what is that telling you?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/22 03:43 PM
6

The question wasn't whether men are more progressive than women. The question is about whether women actually find a scenario they condone to be problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/22 03:16 PM
3

I lost my virginity just before 23 and I can concur that seeing the sexual appetite in women made me nervous at the time. It was going to be my weakest point, so of course I wanted more weight to be given to my other attributes.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/22 09:11 PM
1

I think what OP is trying (very poorly) to say is that it isn't an equal sacrifice in terms of effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/22 09:06 PM
1

The situation I am imagining in the context of OLD would be this: For the woman, 100 guys have swiped/liked/whatever. Assume she has a premium account so she sees all of these. Currently she has only their pics, age, and location to work with (the info first presented in OLD). ANYTHING ELSE counts as vetting. Learning their job? Their dating history? Number of kids? All vetting. A "match" will be defined as a guy who would commit to a relationship with this particular woman if interest is recipr…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/22 05:00 PM
1

All the time you use to vet any particular person is built into the device's one week processing time. The device does the work for you. (This type of black box model is common in thought experiments. It is a simplification and not intended to deceive.) And no matter how strenuously you vet, the start of the process is arbitrary. How do you decide whether or not to vet someone before you have data? It's the same decision as deciding to point the device at their pic.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/22 02:50 AM
1

So I'll try this one more time. Maybe I'm just morbidly curious about your vetting process or something lol. If I'm still not making sense then we will agree to disagree. I give you a magical device. You point it at a guy's picture and it returns either "match!" or "no match!" The catch? It takes a week to return a result, and it can only process one guy at a time. You proceed to filter through your group of 100 men until you find a match, then you stop at the first date-able guy. (I'm beginning…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/22 03:35 PM
1

Do you feel liberated? Also, do you feel that men would stay to raise children with women they do not love? (Since you brought up survival of the species earlier.)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/22 11:22 AM
1

Ah, so not only are you beyond the need for desire, but love too! I hope this power makes your life more enjoyable. It sounds pretty miserable to me. Obviously you can desire a girl who is unaware of you. But if she doesn't desire me by the time I'm on top of her, it will be obvious and kill my lust for her. She is well aware of me by then.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/22 06:06 AM
1

No, there's really no need to agree to disagree over basic probability. Let's try this. Suppose I grab a 10-sided die and you grab one of those fancy d100s. My goal is to roll a 1, yours is to roll anything in the 1-10 range. Which of us will need more rolls on average? I hope you will agree that the same number of rolls will be needed by both of us. You don't have to "sort through" the 90 failures to reach one of the 10 good results. The ratio of good to the total is all that mattered, and by a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 07:37 PM
2

You're playing this weird word game where you just replace the word "desire" with "receptiveness". Call it whatever your ideology demands, I guess. You know what was meant. EDIT: Oh, you're a MGTOW. That explains the reluctance to admit wanting female desire and rebranding it something that makes you sound dominant and detached.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 07:24 PM
1

(3) isn't a deep observation or even a reason. If I said folks that have had a heart attack previously are more likely than the general population to have another attack, you would say it is obvious because we are selecting for weak hearts--weak enough to have already had an attack. It's not that the previous attack would cause the next one necessarily.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 02:32 PM
3

If desire isn't a factor then you might as well use a fleshlight. Get one you can warm up. It really does feel exactly the same, and is cheaper than dating. If that doesn't sound appealing, then I hate to be the one to tell you, but you crave desire as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 02:22 PM
9

A big reason for cheating is to recreate new relationship energy after it fades in the existing relationship. That is the biggest flaw in the OP: NRE comes and goes regardless of your value as a partner. "Leveling up" won't allow you to sustain it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 07:34 AM
1

Firstly, I disagree that the woman will take more time to find a suitable partner. On average, both would need 10 attempts because of the 10% success rate you assume. More importantly, the man has to deal with whatever the one suitable match hands him, because he has no other options. God forbid the woman realizes she is the only option too, for then she will have a ton of leverage. This is why I often say that women have dealbreakers while men have preferences. A man often has to settle with a …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 06:42 AM
2

Men have to do this with women too. There is the same risk of wasting time. Men just have the additional problem of scant options on top of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/22 06:33 AM
2

I think they were referring to the 0/1-10 scale when they mentioned points, not percentage points. Note that 2 points is not necessarily 20 percentage points, because the 0-10 scale is subject to a bell curve. Nearly half of men are in the 4-6 range, because that's the hump of the curve.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 12:29 PM
2

Well that's not what I'm wanting. To be precise, what I want is a type of observation that could be made, or condition met, which would prove your view wrong (if it is wrong). If you can always fall back on your own experience as an excuse for making a general claim, then you have an unfalsifiable view.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 06:43 AM
3

I could say the same with my experiences as a man. At the end of the day, we are each making a statement not only about our experiences, but about whether the other side has it better. The difference is that I am very open to being persuaded otherwise. I'm not sure your own view is falsifiable.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 06:37 AM
3

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I don't see how I can scrutinize your view since A) neither of us can test out being the other sex, and B) you don't seem willing to entertain a thought experiment, nor, based on your reply, even data.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 06:23 AM
2

Well, let's see the mathematical advantages. If the woman and man each pick a match at random, failure is equally likely. However, as the man only has 3 not-dreadful options, he is very much at the mercy of their idiosyncrasies. Maybe one has no job and three kids, another is obese, and the last wants an expensive lifestyle the man can't handle long-term. With 30 options available to her, the woman can probably find a palatable one. It's pretty hard to argue that, all else equal, having more opt…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 06:15 AM
3

Okay, let's make up some numbers for an example. Suppose a woman and a man make a Tinder profile and let it set for a week. At the end of the week, the woman has 100 likes/swipes and the man has 10. Of the 100 for the woman, 70 are a waste of time. Of the 10 for the man, 7 are a waste of time. The man still seems far worse off here.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 06:04 AM
2

Again, the underlying assumption here is that women have risks while men have scarce options. The reality is that men are dealing with both. Do you think women don't waste the time of men they pursue?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 05:47 AM
6

"You poor folk are actually lucky! I have money, so all kinds of businesses bombard me with ads. Sometimes the products are bunk and I waste time on them. I imagine it's easier not to have the attention, like a homeless person." Also, you're operating on the assumption that an interested woman is less likely to use a man and waste his time. Even if a guy gets a gal's attention, we still take the risk you take.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 05:30 AM
4

You do not have to exert energy to avoid options. What, do the men literally throw themselves on top of you? The worst-case scenario is that you withdraw from dating, which takes no effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 05:22 AM
6

If your time is being wasted, at least that stems from something you can control (your selectivity). It has to be better than having the options taken from you by the genetic lottery.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/22 05:14 AM
1

Ah yes, trafficking is exactly equivalent to catcalling in severity. Which do we solve first? It's really a toss-up.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 09:49 PM
3

Additionally, gay men always top the charts in terms of average number of sex partners, implying that men would have loads more sex if female reluctance were removed from the equation. Since everyone is being contrarian today, I should specify that this is not endorsing rape or some crap lol. Just an observation that the difference in libido is clearly observable in the gay and lesbian communities.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 03:06 PM
1

The difference in standards is because of the difference in need. (If I don't feel I need a product, I can be terribly picky about it.) And the population difference is pretty negligible here in the States, but I don't know where you live. Possibly it feels there is a big difference because most men try to date young women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 03:02 PM
1

I was clearly talking about sex and not the desire to be desired lol, hence the reference to sex drives.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 02:57 PM
2

I don't know what you're replying to. I didn't insinuate that anyone could become Chad. I was saying that women won't treat you like crap in everyday situations just because you aren't Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 02:47 PM
3

As in having a deformity? No. I was speaking more to OP's concern about "not being Chad", which is a very different threshold.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 07:14 AM
11

No, what I am saying is that they don't have to fear that random passerby will harangue them merely for existing. That might sound like little consolation, but to anyone with genuine social anxiety, that's big. Seriously, stop trying to read what isn't there. I say precisely what I mean. No more, no less.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 07:12 AM
2

No, merely interacting usually results in neutral/positive treatment (as OP describes receiving). It's advances that we're talking about: flirting, touching, asking for contact info, etc. It's not pleasant to know you risk getting a disgusted reaction for advancing, sure. But I want those like OP to at least be aware that they needn't fear mundane, everyday interactions. You pretty much know ahead of time when you're taking the risk to hear disgust.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 05:19 AM
10

To be fair, we (men) have no idea what it's like to have such low sex drives. The imbalance in the dating market exists for a reason: women want it less.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 04:45 AM
5

I think what you're saying is often true, but as an introvert in a small town, I have in many cases experienced the opposite. Those geographically near tend to think alike. I see much more diversity online. To address the OP's experience: The claims that women treat ugly men like trash are largely baseless IMO. They only treat you like trash if you make an advance.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/22 04:17 AM
8

I think it's more that attractive people don't have to be polite to get action, so they aren't, because that would be unnecessary work. They get laid despite their temperament, not because of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/22 03:51 PM
21

I think the worst thing wasn't so much advice, but the frequent portrayal of "friends turned SO" in media. In my experience, you have worse odds asking out a girl with whom you're very familiar than someone at random. Young me naively thought that sharing years of similar experiences and in-jokes gave me an edge. In reality, it meant I was pursuing girls who gave me no IOI despite having known me for years. It was a sampling bias that worked against me.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/22 03:44 PM
5

I don't know what "not looking" even means for women. They generally don't initiate. You know how sometimes you're hungry but you haven't went to the fridge yet because you're too busy? That's what's being asked, and people dodge the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/22 10:02 AM
3

People complain about a lack of intimacy and desire, and what you choose to hear is that they only want sex. I think this comes from the just world fallacy. No one wants to believe there are people who will lead miserable lives through no fault of their own, so they imagine a version of reality in which their problems are personality traits (they are horndogs) that have simple fixes (prostitution).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/22 09:13 AM
1

This is true. There is another complication too: Older men tend to date younger women, so the "settling" ages are different. I am in my late 20s, so of course I am more interested in the serial model. PPD is pretty obsessed with the more lustful, hormonal sexuality of youth, and if you offer the prospect of settling with 35+ year-old women as consolation, you'll usually get a response that is a bit hostile lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 05:10 PM
2

So I think the "math" you refer to is based on a model in which each female chooses a male mate for life. I agree that this would likely lead to what PPD calls "looksmatched" couples. But I disagree with the model you're using because the dominant relationship style is serial monogamy. Consider the opposite extreme: All women take turns dating the high-ranking men. Now clearly neither model is accurate on its own, but the truth is probably somewhere between them. There's an easy way to test this…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 10:21 AM
12

How do you determine equivalence of attractiveness between the sexes? It cannot be by percentile. Example: Statistics show the median woman doesn't want the median man. If your equivalence is based on whom is willing to settle for whom, then sure, I guess what you're saying is true by definition lol. Just not very helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/22 10:15 PM
2

They aren't mutually exclusive! Some people will eat any flavor of ice cream. You wouldn't say that they must not like any flavor since they would settle for another. I think it's common to confuse being liked with being considered special or unique.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/22 05:35 PM
1

I would put it at about 4 times a week as the ideal, but it also depends on the enthusiasm during. Half-hearted sex is sometimes worse than no sex, and essentially doesn't count. Conversely, mind-blowing sex counts for extra. Also, I don't know if keeping a tally like this is typical. It's a learned behavior from a dead bedroom I was once in. I think it made me hypervigilant when it comes to monitoring changing behaviors in my partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/22 06:19 AM
2

For the umpteenth time, I'll employ the trophy analogy: One simultaneously wants their trophy to be hard enough to earn that they would feel accomplished earning it, but easy enough that they themselves have a shot at earning it. There is nothing mysterious about having contradictory desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/22 05:04 AM
4

Let me start off by saying that I was only explaining a source of frustration, not condemning female behavior. Based on my personal experience and perusal of Reddit tales, it is like this. If a man pries for details about libido and such, the woman knows that a) this dude is way into sex, and b) a negative answer is probably a dealbreaker for him. So if she is into the guy, the temptation is there to lie. It's not the same as delaying sex. Saying you have low libido is like denying most future s…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/22 03:49 PM
8

As 8m3 says. The problem, in terms of your analogy, is that women all say they are burgers, regardless of what's hidden in the package.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/22 03:37 PM
8

The reason I would get frustrated at this stage in my life (late 20s) is that I can't tell if you have low libido or weird sexual hangups--in which case we won't match--or if you are, as you say, playing a game. I could ask, sure, but women lie about their libidos all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/22 02:25 PM
6

But that's the rub: If you feel all of your relationships suck, it could be that you choose badly...but it could also be that you have unrealistic expectations of relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/22 09:14 AM
27

You're just summarizing his point badly. There are plenty of scary milestones in life that, prior to your firsthand experience, seem totally different. Jobs, driving, marriage, college, etc., all seem far more intimidating until you're there. Then you realize they are mostly mundane like everything else.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/22 05:18 AM
2

Let's make up a hypothetical guy, call him Bob. Bob has friends; a decent number of guys, a few gals. Up to this point in life, those connections have been enough for him. But he feels lonely at night, and romantic comedies make his stomach churn. He wants a partner. The few female friends he has are taken. He could expand his network to include more women, but he already hangs out with a bunch of people, and he doesn't want to sacrifice his alone time. He could get more friends, yes, but more f…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 05:06 PM
1

People have different types of relationships in their lives for different needs. Friends fill a certain need. But eventually you have enough friends, and you want something romantic. At that point, a man won't want to put in more emotional labor to secure a female friend. If you go to the store to buy milk, but all they have left is juice, no one castigates you for leaving because you don't see the value of juice.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 04:33 PM
2

I appreciate your honesty, so I hope you appreciate mine when I say this is exactly why men pretend to be friends to get in your pants. We don't want large social networks lol. We aren't like women. If a guy is actively trying to expand his network, there is likely an "ulterior motive".
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/22 04:11 PM
2

Perhaps. No one really maintains their beards around here, and the only hipster places here are probably vegan-friendly restaurants lol. Maybe this applies moreso to urban areas.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/22 04:31 PM
2

Tbf I think there's a simple reason for it. If you just glance at two people and nothing unclean really stands out (greasy hair, dry skin, etc.), you may suppose they are about equally clean...unless one of them is clean-shaven. Unless they are just incapable of growing hair, you have proof that they have tended to their body. It is unlikely that they shave but don't wash.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/22 03:59 PM
14

My suspicion is that body hair is strongly associated with poor hygiene nowadays.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/22 05:18 PM
6

I think something women tend to overlook is that guys are effectively not allowed to maintain female friendships whilst in a relationship. Your average taken dude can't meet with a female friend for coffee, for example. What this means is that each new relationship wipes your list of active female friends clean. When a guy is seeking female friendships, he is therefore likely single...coincidentally, right around the time he would be seeking a new relationship. Women have the same issue to an ex…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/22 08:42 PM
7

The real solution is to abort men disproportionately often to offset the supply/demand problem. This is only partly sarcasm.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/22 12:23 PM
3

"Objective" doesn't mean "consistently held as a view". Just use the word "consistent" if that's what you mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/22 09:09 PM
1

You're confusing an observation for advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/22 10:43 PM
29

It's not a trivial observation though. Men will flirt even with women who aren't particularly attractive. (Maybe not ugly, but nothing special.) Flirting is fun for men. As others have said, it's as if women find sexuality to be threatening or gross by default, and need significant attraction to override it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/22 09:20 PM
3

Absolutely this. Men want intimacy and sex more, and the supply and demand curves show it. We aren't going to beat women in a game of chicken. You might as well ask people to stop shopping at large retailers and buy from pricier Mom and Pop stores.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/22 11:00 AM
1

No problem lol, and you too.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 11:11 PM
0

I thought it was clear, but my comment was about a scenario in which everyone involved got to witness each other's reactions. Men talk about women differently than they talk to them if they think there is the slightest chance of a yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 10:18 PM
12

The group of men would cheer the woman for having standards, simping in the hope that it marginally increases their chances of getting a yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 09:59 PM
2

He might need to run a t(estosterone) test to be sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 02:16 PM
1

This is kinda the problem with language. "Attractive" sounds like a trait that we can attach to objects, but it's truly relational, i.e., it describes how someone feels about the object. You can't remove yourself from the equation. The closest you can get is trying to find a consensus. Some folks on this sub mistake consensus for objectivity, but it's easy to poke holes in that. For example, I can become an 8 if everyone who rates me below 8 were to be struck by meteorites.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 01:39 PM
8

It's funny because I would pit some of the 7 tier against the 9.5 tier, and that's a huge discrepancy if we take the normal distribution claim seriously. My own suspicion is that what is attractive has greater variance than what is unattractive. If you ask people which features turn their heads, I think you'll see a lot of disagreement, but asking about turn-offs will lead to more similar answers. I cannot prove this, but it seems to be a theme with these tier lists.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 01:28 PM
1

I strongly disagree. I say this as someone who desperately clung to my failing marriage because it was all I had at the time. Every negotiation ends up being an ultimatum if your partner recognizes their leverage. The nearest equivalent would be severing your professional ties to devote yourself to your employer. Now you won't quit even if you're being exploited.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/22 02:51 AM
2

What do you mean by not treated well? Men are generally ignored by women if they aren't attractive. Ugly guys aren't "treated well". They aren't treated like anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/22 05:58 PM
7

If you don't care about male attention, then surely what they value is also insignificant. Isn't it enough to value yourself?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/22 12:33 AM
8

My first serious girlfriend told me after we had been together for a few months that she considered rejecting my first request to go out to see if I would keep pressing. She said it was a turn on to see someone work for it. I'm not saying it is incredibly common, but that behavior definitely rewards sexual harassment. I did my small part by telling her that my pursuit would have ended there with her test.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/22 04:25 PM
9

I have perused the polyamory subreddits a bit and my takeaway is that they often define "success" differently. Mono couples expect to be together until one dies. Success is rare with that standard. If a triad lasts a year, it is considered a success as long as it was fun. Shifting to poly isn't a solution to the low success rate for mono couples, of course. Mono folks want something that nature is reluctant to produce. They wouldn't be satisfied with a substitute.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/22 06:17 AM
1

I think that if sex is so easily available to you that you could have a 100+ body count, your interest in it would likely diminish anyway. Humans like scarcity and novelty. Thus those that can have that count may choose not to reach it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/22 02:11 PM
1

I had a shower thought and realized that we might have different ideas of what it means to be happy, so perhaps we are speaking past each other. I subscribe to what I will call the J.K. Rowling interpretation of happiness. A truly happy person has all they feel they need, and so has no incentive to make major life changes. They are content with the status quo. They aren't looking for a bigger house, or the next promotion, or a relationship. They are content with life as is. True happiness is qui…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/22 10:37 PM
1

The job-seeking analogy was referring to people who aren't headhunted. (I dunno where you live, but that's the vast majority of people.) Saying that employers prefer candidates that get lots of offers is just a tautology. You're saying that employers like candidates that they like. There has to be some underlying reason why they are liked, else it is circular. As for liking oneself, again, I don't really get what you mean. I can occupy my time and have fun with hobbies and such. But I can't "be …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/22 10:13 PM
6

Yeah, this chick is likely terrified of sex, or has very low libido. It's not completely clear why she has withdrawn, but OP wasn't going to get their happy ending in any case. OP, have you considered that she may be past the average age of losing one's virginity by a wide margin for some deeper reason? You say she's a hot athlete. So she could have sex very easily. Seems pretty obvious that sex freaks her out.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/22 09:30 AM
1

So on your first point, there is some nuance missing here. As you say, revealing that you are looking can backfire. But I maintain that men need to look/approach/initiate or they will likely remain alone. So the optimal strategy is to look, but without appearing desperate. It's not unlike looking for a job. You need to apply everywhere, but also keep the illusion of having options. On your second point, there have been many studies on the psychological need to connect, be it with family, friends…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/22 05:10 AM
6

I have had three serious relationships. The first girl admitted talking to five guys at once before choosing me. The second told me she had never been rejected. (It was hilarious to watch her realize this. She hadn't consciously thought about it until I asked!) The third has never been the initiator. I love her very much, so this isn't a put-down, but I am her thirteenth relationship. These girls are all in their 20s, so this ain't high school either. I am sorry to sound discriminatory here, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/22 01:01 PM
16

"Blue pill" is basically conventional dating wisdom that your parents/grandparents might give. A big one IMO is that "love finds you when you aren't looking". As a guy, dates aren't inevitable, much less relationships. You have to approach, likely many times. Another one is that "someone else can't make you happy if you aren't happy with yourself". This is a coping mechanism for lonely people. No one would invest time, energy, and half their assets for someone if they didn't realize loneliness w…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/22 04:55 AM
3

You make sex sound like a one-time use thing. If my partner is good at sex, I'll want it frequently. It's not like an obscure Xbox achievement that I ignore after getting it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/22 10:57 AM
1

Oh there are definitely risks on the woman's end, I wouldn't deny that. And on your last point, I think another issue is that new relationship energy sex/libido is not a good predictor of typical, long-run sex/libido. For many it is an upper bound. In your case, perhaps a lower bound. That's still useful though. If early sex is an upper bound and is insufficient, that is a negative answer to the sexual compatibility question. Otherwise it is an inconclusive test.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/22 10:30 PM
1

It's more than that, I think. It's the sort of claim that's unfalsifiable in practice, e.g., a poor person claiming to be a philanthropist. No one's going to give them money to prove/disprove the philanthropic motive, so it's a baseless but irrefutable assertion. How would you deal with someone claiming such a thing? Well since, all else equal, it's more preferable to be a philanthropist than not, but actual philanthropy is rare, it seems better to err on the side of caution and say that person …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/22 07:10 PM
12

Yeah, I really don't get these (imaginary?) men that can't score a girl but are really anxious about losing all of their options by committing lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/22 02:46 PM
26

If sex is important to you, then the test for sexual compatibility needs to happen early. It is a common dealbreaker, so in terms of time investment, it is best to get it out of the way before proceeding. If sex isn't important to you, I can see why this simply comes across as the guy being impatient. But again, it's more like "If the sex sucks, then we're wasting all this time/energy getting attached when it's doomed". Note that libido is also important. So if the guy presses the issue and dete…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/22 06:17 AM
1

Universal and objective are not the same thing. That was my point. Maybe it would help to put it differently. An objective statement would be just as meaningful if no sentient being existed. It would be true even if no cultures existed to recognize it. It is objective that 2+2=4. One could imagine an alien race with a very different biology. They may have different needs for survival and fertility. They would find different features attractive. Whether or not this alien race exists is beside the…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/22 03:35 PM
1

Even consensus doesn't make something objective. This is easy to realize by thought experiment, e.g., if an apocalyptic event killed everyone accept those who preferred dwarves, it wouldn't make dwarfism objectively attractive. Some body features are correlated with objective things, such as fertility. That's as close as you're gonna get, but then you aren't directly talking about attraction anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/22 09:54 PM
2

I don't really care about your beef with this guy. But in the future, you might want to Google the definition of "hypocrisy". The first several definitions all mentioned morals and beliefs, not preferences. Again, just to show you how silly this is: I prefer a partner with a pussy even though I don't have one. Indeed, I will never have a real one. It is, as you say, "who I am". This isn't hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 04:53 PM
10

It isn't hypocrisy to acknowledge a preference that you wouldn't satisfy yourself. Example: I prefer a dominant partner. I'm not dominant. Therefore the female equivalent of me might not date me. That isn't hypocritical. It would be hypocritical if I said there were some moral imperative for everyone else to be dominant.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 08:47 AM
1

Firstly, and I'm going on memory here, I believe those are separate studies. The results aren't even contradictory, e.g., it could be that men interact with most women and give women a higher average rating than women do for men. I don't think women talking to men they find ugly is the moral high ground you seem to think, either. You aren't going to have sex with, date, or marry a guy you find ugly. Secondly, you didn't answer my question about bars, clubs, and dating app use. Men use these to m…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 04:25 AM
0

Where I live at least, women tend to have a kid by 20. If they don't have a kid in their early 20s, it is usually a red flag. My ex-wife didn't have a kid when I met her at 26, but it was because she could barely take care of herself and manage money. Now I am dating a mother of one who is pretty responsible and doesn't ask for financial support. It's not ideal, but the alternative is to fight for recent high school grads. That isn't something that appeals to me in my late 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/22 04:17 AM
1

This shows that women find the majority of men to be ugly, while men rate women along a bell curve. Not sure what your point is. But in case that study doesn't do it for you: Why do you think bars drop the cover charges for women, and clubs cap the number of men? The ratios are off otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 10:09 PM
2

I mean, it's patently false. There is, for example, the study done using OkCupid data which shows that 60% of women only interact with 10% of men, 80% of women with 20% of men, and 95% of women with 50% of men. The only thing that muddies the water a bit is that men use online dating apps more than women, but that actually strengthens the argument. It shows that men are more desperate for companionship. Think about it mathematically. Let's say guys took whatever they could get, but women only ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 09:00 PM
2

There is an asymmetry in the dating game. Women are very picky. It's hard to just leave when you finally get a taker. As I often put it: Women have dealbreakers. Men have preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 05:34 PM
8

Just lol at responding "so?" to the prospect of being alone. There is a reason the suicide rate for men is higher. The need for human connection isn't optional.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 04:32 PM
1

TL;DR: Modern humans are animals too, and not outside of nature. Everything that happens in nature is natural. Beavers build dams, material constructs. The great apes have hierarchies, social constructs. These constructs are natural. Our constructs are a good deal more complicated, but they are not fundamentally different. They arose because of our survival needs as a species. Monogamy has filled that role for many, and still does for some. It isn't somehow less valid than polygamy. You may thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 03:36 PM
6

The real issue is that women threaten to end the relationship if you don't agree to unqualified marriage. Either way, the choice is between being alone or risking your assets. There are exceptions as with any dating trend, but it's a problem every straight man has had to face at least once. #yesallmen
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/22 03:30 PM
1

As someone who used to be in a bit of a dead bedroom, I can attest that unenthusiastic sex is worse than no sex. A sex worker would do nothing for me long-term. I might be able to enjoy it short-term the way that I would a new sex toy, I suppose. But it would grow to be depressing if I were single, so again, not for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/22 01:09 PM
12

While it's good info to share, you didn't really answer OP's question, not even indirectly. This girlfriend could have known about the hair piece prior to sex, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/22 12:33 PM
2

I'm willing to buy into the idea that having initial options leads to more options, but it still doesn't answer the underlying question: How did they get these initial options? Well, because they were attractive, of course. And that attractiveness wasn't based on the number of other options. Again, it's like money. You can make money with interest, but not all of your money. You need an initial amount to invest.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/22 06:13 AM
1

Ah, this is easy. It's a friendship if you don't have a SO. It's an emotional affair if you do. /s
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/22 09:47 PM
3

I mean, it's just a tautology. Saying that someone is successful in dating implies they have a lot of options and vice-versa. It's like saying the best predictor of wealth is having a lot of money. Duh.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/22 09:44 PM
1

Some go on to marry and become trophy wives. Would you say they aren't real wives?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/22 09:17 PM
1

I feel behind the times with all the lingo. I thought OP was referring to women who offer the "girlfriend experience", i.e., pretend to date you. Being a sugar baby is different. A sugar baby is a real girlfriend, e.g., she will live with you and have sex with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/22 06:08 PM
22

To be fair, men are mostly the ones initiating because that's the expectation. Women may be just as clueless but we'll never know. To put it another way, obviously men will make most of the mistakes if they are taking on most of the risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/22 10:21 PM
1

I think you misunderstood me. I mean that I have no problem with someone who intends to get wasted saying, "Hey, I'm going to get wasted tonight, and I want us to fuck while I'm wasted."
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/22 11:37 AM
1

It's not very financially realistic (to have a single income), but if you find someone who can make it happen, go for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/22 08:18 PM
1

It is interesting that people dislike the notion of consenting to sex in advance. We do that with literally every other thing, why not sex? I think people bring their Puritanical baggage into the topic of sexual consent, which is why talking about consent itself doesn't bring us to the root issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/22 07:26 PM
1

Okay, but we aren't mind-readers. I wasn't there, so I can't use your body language for reference. But let's review the facts: 1) You matched on Tinder, an app known primarily for hookups. 2) You agreed to a date in a private setting. "Watching a movie at my place" is practically code for having sex. 3) He kissed you, and presumably you kissed back. It's really hard to forcibly take someone's clothes off, so you likely stripped too. Unless you want romance to devolve to the point where people fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/22 03:19 PM
3

Probably the part where she said "he was using me for his own pleasure". It doesn't seem reasonable to judge someone else for enjoying sex with you when the root problem is you not communicating clearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/22 06:25 AM
2

I was replying to the suggestion that men are raised to think women are angels. At best it is engraved in us that they aren't lustful. But in every other sense, I think mainstream culture does a great job of highlighting flaws in typical female behavior. Another exception is the common misconception that women are mysterious. I don't find this to be true, but it's a small gripe.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/22 05:52 AM
47

My dad taught me mostly negative things about women: That they lure you into relationships with frequent sex, but dial it down later. That they use sex to control relationships. That they are easily manipulated by female friends to break up and by male coworkers to cheat. The list goes on. The message, intended or not, was that women are conniving and fickle. Honestly, "I hate my wife" is a hallmark of Boomer humor. I don't think they are portrayed as angels at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/22 06:12 PM
8

You literally shifted backward from your previous response in which you said it was "borderline" cuckoldry. Just have some dignity and admit you were wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/22 09:12 AM
4

Cuckoldry is when you let someone else fuck your woman. Jfc stop shifting the meanings of words.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/22 09:10 AM
2

By what metric is dating ineffective? I get that it's frustrating because you "keep coming back to it", but is a system that rushes you into a relationship that will leave you unsatisfied and locks you there really a better alternative?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/22 06:32 AM
4

Are the current rates record lows, or were the old rates the same? Make up your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/22 12:34 PM
3

I think a lot of women treat sex as a chore and just figure you should feel honored that they stripped for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/22 02:24 PM
1

We simply disagree about what objectivity is. Tendency is not the hallmark of objectivity. Even consensus doesn't really make something objective if we're being pedantic. (If I murder every non-Justin Bieber fan, it doesn't make Bieber objectively talented.) Objectivity has more to do with the nature of the thing being discussed. Physical properties, for example, are objective. How something makes you feel is not, even if others tend to agree. In this case, the matter is clearly subjective becau…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/22 08:01 PM
2

Given the wide range of kinks, even those who are widely considered ugly are likely to arouse some. That means they are not objectively on the bottom. I suppose you could say a man is on the bottom if they are in the bottom 20% by every woman's ranking, but that group is much smaller than 20% of the population. Indeed, it may be an empty group due to aforementioned kinks. Also, requiring consensus on preferences in this way trivializes the question. If you define the bottom as those no one wants…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/22 11:41 AM
26

This is the answer. OP believes that using percentages makes the question unambiguous, but the ambiguity lies in "bottom". There is no objective ordering, thus there is a different bottom for each person.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/22 02:54 AM
3

Imagine an employer rejects you as unqualified, then contacts you later after running off other employees during a downturn in the market and tells you they are interested. You'd probably not have much respect for that employer. It's one thing to not be the first pick. Few people end up with someone who picked them first. That's just the mathematical reality. What is upsetting is knowing you weren't good enough for them during the ho-ing days.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/22 07:52 AM
3

Even your dog won't love you if you don't feed it. I guess it will still be excited to see you, but the loyalty won't be there. But this observation isn't so remarkable. You might as well say "effects have causes". I guess some need it pointed out though.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/22 10:27 PM
4

Enjoying hobbies is not wasting life away!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/22 11:59 AM
5

Oh look, hobbyshaming. Fun. The temporary, insignificant activities you do on this rock floating through the void matter so much more than other's activities. Keep desperately clutching onto whatever meaning you can muster out of life, even if it involves imagining that your interest in politics and such makes an ounce of difference to global affairs, or the path to that dream job will finally be cleared. Or you can just realize nothing ultimately matters and try to enjoy the moment whichever wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/22 11:53 AM
7

Or it just means you live in a small town.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/22 08:50 PM
2

Let me play Devil's Advocate and flip the question around. Suppose you're a guy who struggles with dating due to, say, an ugly face. You probably realize that building muscle only marginally improves your dating prospects. But what is the alternative? Accept being alone forever? Don't get me wrong, I think many men here could benefit more from changing approach methods than working out (unless they're obese). But I think the rationale for it is obvious enough. Being able to find a partner isn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/22 10:31 AM
6

The closest (large-scale) simulation we have to raising women's sex drive is alcohol intoxication. I would think every regretful story of a drunken one-night-stand would be evidence that women's preferences are mutable. Inb4 "Every such story is just a cover for sex they soberly wanted." Women do get drunk and relax their standards. Just like men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/22 11:10 PM
16

Exactly. I mean it sucks, but at the end of the day, the only options to change it are either lowering men's sex drives or raising women's. As long as women have greater demand, most of the stuff observed on this sub just comes down to free market forces. I suppose there is also the route where we inflate the supply of women by aborting boys, but that might not be so popular lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/22 10:20 PM
3

And I respect that. To be clear, I'm not trying to be critical of these conflicting preferences. I think it's human nature to value scarcity, and that's the theme surrounding everything we've talked about. We know deep down that it's impossible for us all to be rare prizes, but we all want to feel that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/22 04:48 PM
1

And that is perfectly fine. I think there is a counterpart to this for women though: "I want men to make the first move and for me to be picky, but I want to be the first he approaches." Clearly if men are doing all the approaching and the probability of success each time is small, most women who say yes will not be the first asked.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/22 04:29 PM
3

Participation trophies arose because parents wanted their kids to be recognized. The kids themselves generally don't get the sense of pride they would with a real trophy. Source: I have a ton of participation trophies from childhood. The same phenomenon happens with collectibles. We proxy rare, expensive cards in trading card games for gameplay purposes, but it doesn't feel the same as "earning" one, even if earning it just means spending enough money. For many women, it's the same with jewelry.…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/22 04:17 PM
1

In my case, the girl often just has unusual preferences. Notice that even if most of the girl's possible types are typical, it might be easier for her to get a type that is more niche. (Example: If the girl likes bodybuilders and nerds, she's more likely to end up with a nerd.)
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/22 07:35 AM
5

Ask yourself honestly what the probability is that you are the most physically attractive man that even a single woman on this planet could get. It would just be a blatant lie. Seriously, imagine it. They are just attractive enough to score you, but no one above you? The probability is microscopic. In the real world, the biggest determinant of a relationship (after gender) is geography. You are never going to be the most attractive unless driving distance narrows the dating pool. So at best you …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/22 04:48 PM
13

Women don't really care how they meet men, only which men they meet. If it's a no, it was probably always going to be a no, independent of context.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/22 05:07 PM
3

I think it's generally self-defeating to hobby-shame. Most people don't "need" to do X, but if it helps make their ~80 years on this floating rock more enjoyable and doesn't harm others, why bash it? Are your hobbies somehow more legitimate? Example: Why watch sports when you could be out there playing?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/22 03:40 PM
10

Also, good relationships are less likely to end because, well, they're good. So in addition there is a sampling bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/22 01:36 PM
-2

Unless you are donating to charities that target such places, he is ironically doing more to help these women than you are. Your words are empty.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/22 07:21 AM
2

Ackshually, divorce rates have been steady since the late 70s. It's marriage rates that have declined.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/22 10:53 PM
1

One possibility that's sometimes brought up (though I don't know if it's the case) is that nearly as many women have used dating apps, they just have instant success finding a partner and proceed to delete their profiles. So for men there is a long queue waiting for a match, but for women it's a quick in-and-out.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/22 10:50 PM
2

Not the answer that you had in mind, but economic systems absolutely have an affect. Consider that some cultures pay men to marry daughters with dowries, and others have their daughters sold with bride prices. The basic reason for these two polar opposites to exist is that children are useful for labor in some cultures, but a financial burden in others.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/22 10:43 PM
36

A trad woman? In this economy? Nah, I would hope she could pay her half of the bills.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/22 03:56 AM
2

It's an analogy, not an equation. The point is that one side's willingness to pay an amount doesn't make the amount reasonable. It could just mean the seller has found a desperate customer and is taking advantage
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 07:43 PM
2

Bad sex isn't like the concerns about looks standards we see so often here. You can learn to be good at sex. You might still not be sexually compatible, but for the sex to be "bad", one or both of you are dropping the ball and not communicating about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 07:38 PM
1

Perhaps they were hoping for a relationship from the dating (potentially endless sex) rather than just sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 06:55 PM
3

There was a study done by OkCupid, I believe, that had women rate men on a 1 to 5 point scale. IIRC only 20% were ranked 3 or higher. Men's rankings of women fell closer to a bell curve.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 06:53 PM
1

I can guarantee you most diabetics would pay hundreds of dollars for insulin. That doesn't mean hundreds of dollars isn't a lot for a drug.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 06:49 PM
1

Preferences aren't morals. If two people can agree on that arrangement, sure. If they disagree, no harm done. But you can't act indignant and demand someone give you X because you are offering Y.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 06:45 PM
4

As I said, you can flirt, but many don't consider that a clear statement of intent. I've had friends flirt with me who later rejected an advance and I have heard many similar stories. Social media is rife with women speaking of flirting as a fun little hobby rather than pursuit of a goal. Flirting also doesn't convey that your intent is sex alone. Men pretty much never communicate that and hope it will be implicitly understood. This is where you get women complaining about the "fuckzone".
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 05:01 PM
1

I still feel like the communication difficulties aren't symmetrical. Women will often get pissed if you come on to them directly with no build-up (not just flirting), but how often would men reject an offer for a relationship? Sometimes, sure. But "will you be my boyfriend?" is going to get approved way more often than "wanna have sex?", all else being equal. That means that women reject statements of intent more than men, and would prefer some theatre leading up to the transaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/22 12:56 PM
1

Equally shallow probably, they just are in a better position to decide their preferences are dealbreakers.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/22 03:49 AM
1

For example, UN Women has written a lovely article detailing what they feel are the main features of consent: https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2019/11/feature-consent-no-blurred-lines Note the quote: "You can’t give consent if you’re unconscious or in an altered mental state such as being drunk or high." They have another section devoted to enthusiasm. Please stop pretending this isn't a mainstream position.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/22 06:26 PM
1

Well that's rather the issue, right? Your partner probably can lose the weight. But they may very well choose not to because it doesn't matter enough to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/22 03:56 AM
1

There was another post recently where the OP talks about guys needing the hope that they will overcome the odds. Most of us know that women would prefer if we were hotter. But not having this explicitly stated or acted upon gives us hope that we are exceptional--that we landed a relationship in which neither party settled.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 06:29 PM
4

I simply did not read the original comment as having that tone. Perhaps you are seeing what you want/expect to see? The words themselves don't make him sound like a wannabe stud who thinks women are automatons. He seems confident in his ability to read the women he's been with, but we don't know why. Maybe he has spent a lot of time getting to know them in advance.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:54 PM
3

You honestly ask "can I kiss you now?" each time? What about hugs? What about when she becomes your gf? People really think we're exaggerating when we talk about sex contracts being in the future.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:33 PM
2

Consent to kiss and such pretty much never happens unless it's your first time together and it's awkward. Usually anytime I get consent to touch genitalia it's because I've waited too long to make a move and began to irritate my gf lol. So I wouldn't say it "never" happens, so much as usually something is going wrong when it does.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:29 PM
1

When did I say "all these women claim rape"? Are you confusing me with other commenters? This would explain a lot of your past comments, actually. There is a prominent view of consent often touted by feminists that runs on two basic premises: 1) Sex requires constant, enthusiastic consent. 2) Drunk people cannot consent. (2) varies a bit from feminist to feminist. Some allow it when the guy is drunk too. Some object when the guy plans on being drunk, requiring that drunk sex only be a happy acci…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 02:16 PM
1

Just lol. My partner has to be drunk to propose anal and such, not vanilla sex. And I've repeated several times that I am not referring to withdrawal of consent, but to the supposed inability to consent while drunk. You're putting words in my mouth because I'm asking difficult questions. We're done here.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 10:50 AM
3

The usual stance here is that a sufficiently drunk person (and surely being blacked-out is enough) cannot consent. So it would seem that my gf loses her ability to consent the moment she gets drunk enough. The question is whether her prior consent is a substitute for her now that she cannot consent in the usual way. If you say she can, you agree either that sex doesn't require constant consent, or that a drunk person can consent. Oh, and by blackout drunk, I meant she cannot remember the details…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 12:14 AM
1

If you really do feel that way, then I applaud you on your consistency, even if I think it's extreme.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 11:25 PM
2

Well I'll give you a real example. My girlfriend likes to try out new stuff in the bedroom when she's blackout drunk. She tells me in advance that she does this to loosen her inhibitions and wants me to use those opportunities, even if I'm sober. If sexual consent is like consent given in a contract, this type of agreement is perfectly fine. If sex requires constant consent, rather than consent given in advance, then it's rape. Aren't gray areas lovely?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 11:06 PM
3

I feel like you don't actually think that taking drunk people's money is wrong. That suggests to me that your position is less about consent and more about sexual hangups. Why else would you want sexual consent to function differently than every other type? As I said elsewhere, I see lots of gray areas. I'm just challenging the absolutes I'm seeing posted.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 10:51 PM
9

I can see a lot of gray areas, so you won't get a firm statement from me either way. I just think many well-meaning people pretend consent is simple when it very much is not. You'll see the analogy of having sex being like making someone coffee a lot, followed by a "consent isn't complicated". But it is. It's terribly complicated. How many people sign up for payday loans without knowing how much interest they will actually be paying? It's been an ongoing debate to decide how much info you can wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 10:16 PM
9

Replace this with any example of an online transaction made while drinking if you feel the need. I can't void the transaction later by saying I was drunk when I submitted it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 09:48 PM
12

But all of your arguments can be applied to the casino example. Here we have a business that does its damndest to loosen your inhibitions to shake as much money from you as possible. The legal system shrugs at it. Why is sex of all things so special? Our Protestant heritage?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 09:45 PM
8

Being homeless does a number on bodily autonomy unless you're playing semantical games. I would rather be raped than lose my house.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 08:02 PM
86

And people are allowed to take advantage of drunks, too. A casino will let me gamble my life savings while drunk. But sex is given special treatment
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 07:12 PM
3

My thinking is that if someone knows you well enough to count you as a friend, then romantic interest would have already sparked if it were ever going to. It's like getting through the first season of a show at a slow pace. If you aren't binging it yet, you probably never will.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 07:02 PM
2

I feel like women have a much lower bar for what counts as being a "friend" (as indicated by the size of their networks vs. those of men). Get someone to ask your guy friends about you earnestly and most will probably say you're an acquaintance.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 06:54 PM
0

You use morality-laced language in the OP, and that's what I was referring to. For example, you say that men think that only women with self-restraint "deserve" commitment. This is surely the minority of men. It is simply more flattering to be the only guy a girl wants to pounce on. No one is saying that is a realistic expectation or that a woman is bad for failing to meet it. Again, I really want a coveted reward like the Fields Medal, because it's hard to get. But if it were easy enough for me…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 05:53 PM
2

My theory is that women do indeed vent more overall, they just have very robust friend networks to carry the load. Men tend to have comparatively fewer and more distant friends. I didn't realize this until I started comparing how much I share with my significant other(s) versus my friends, whom I rarely talk to about my personal life.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 01:40 PM
1

No. This is actually far worse than just being single. Only a truly asexual person would subject themselves to this.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 11:42 AM
1

I explain this by analogizing with trophies. Everyone wants a trophy. At the same time, everyone wants trophies to be difficult to get. Same with any collectible as well. There's really no contradiction or mystery here. It only seems like a contradiction because you're adding a layer of morality to it that needn't be there. This is all just preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 11:40 AM
1

There is definitely prejudice against virgins, so there is at least one value of n that matters. But as long as n>0, I agree that it matters little.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/22 09:13 PM
4

I'll be generous and assume OP thinks that women being more highly educated will allow them to push past mens' earnings eventually. I can see how a Boomer or Gen X might believe that, but Millennials and Gen Z really ought to know the worth of most degrees in the job market.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/22 07:06 PM
1

I'm not convinced that resigning oneself to an unfulfilling life is necessarily better than struggling in vain to thrive. I can see the need for balance, but between the two extremes, neither stands out as better to me. Just look at Japan, where young dating has dried up and suicide is rampant. Or China, where the male to female ratio has left millions so lonely that the sex doll industry is booming. These people have accepted their unfulfilling lives and seem miserable for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/22 07:00 PM
1

You said it yourself that the dating market is skewed. If you acknowledge the limited supply of females that will take a given man, you can't then blame him for his scarcity mindset.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/22 06:54 PM
1

As thelastjeka did, you are imagining a defense of men that simply wasn't written. My comment was a neutral observation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/22 03:55 AM
1

So let's try this with something we aren't all conditioned to lie about. Suppose your little cousin (of average intelligence/ability), who normally gets F's in school, manages a few D's this semester. Is it a lie to say his grades are good this time around? They are certainly "good relative to his normal grades", but that stops noticeably short of plainly calling them good, yes? To be perfectly clear: I understand why you would lie in the case of looks but not academics when you sincerely feel t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/22 05:27 PM
1

If you know that's what is meant, why should the honest version of the comment be not as well received? If you know someone just means you look better, not good, then why can't they just say that? I think we both know the answer. There is ambiguity in lies like this. Part of us wants to believe the "good" version, and is allowed to by the phrasing.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 10:49 PM
2

Honestly? Yeah, you are. Does a 3 normally look good to you? It wouldn't be a lie if you said they look "better" with that haircut, or something to that effect. better=/=good.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 05:45 PM
17

It's worth noting that, if I recall correctly, 2/3 of divorces are initiated by women. Sometimes this is a mutual thing, and the decision of who will fill out the forms is just a formality. But that figure still makes it plain that the woman is calling the shots most of the time, so it would be very strange if the suicide figure didn't show a greater risk for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 05:39 PM
8

How prone someone is to denial/rationalization is a huge factor in this subreddit. You have guys here who think they blew a chance with a girl because they failed some arcane shit test when in reality she just wasn't that into them. These guys are 50+ timers, because they think they just have to fill in the right bubbles on the shit tests.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 05:03 PM
3

I suppose they asked for it, so I wouldn't blame you for the irritation per se.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 04:21 PM
14

I think "time spent interacting" is a more relevant metric than " time elapsed since we started talking".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 04:14 PM
7

Was it on this subreddit? I don't think it's any secret that most posters here are men who resent women for the difficulties they face in the dating market. So I wouldn't say a confident woman is a "threat" so much as an irritant. We get it. You have every reason to be confident. No need to rub it in.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 04:01 PM
6

What is your "male-female dynamic and worldview"?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:16 PM
3

Please stop, I can only get so erect. But in all seriousness, I think it's the libido differential and strength combo that makes men look like such brutes.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 11:41 AM
2

You're thinking wayyyyy too hard to see it as a possible shit test. Shit tests are planned, but you're talking about knee-jerk reactions. Those are genuine.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:51 PM
3

I agree on the house bit but as a guy living in a somewhat redneckish place, I can assure you that many men do have love affairs with their vehicles. Some spend more on their vehicles than the women they date/marry.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 02:15 PM
1

I faked an orgasm my first time with my first gf. I figured it would bruise her ego otherwise. Some guys just aren't very sensitive. Anyway, it's very possible you'll find a gf that thinks your inexperience is endearing. The idea of being the one to teach me amused her. Alternatively, many women have resigned themselves to a life of unfulfilling sex because they have dealt only with men who are bad at it, or the women just have low libidos and don't prioritize good sex. That's how my ex-wife was…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 08:35 AM
1

I feel like there is a whole prequel series I am missing lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 04:02 AM
1

What is wisest very much depends on the circumstances of the rape. A guy jumps out at night and ambushes the girl? That's unlikely to happen again, so your argument would fail. Is the rape more of a domestic issue? Often people won't get directly involved in a situation like that because, legally, the woman needs to press charges and tell her story for it to work.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 04:00 AM
11

If someone needs sex once to not kill themselves, they'll need it again, and again, and again... So I think your question is easier than you intended. Sex won't fix the long-term issue without a relationship to make it consistent. Now the question becomes: Is he entitled to a relationship with the woman? The answer to that is even clearer.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 12:06 AM
4

I always think of this when people talk about sexual experience. You certainly figure some things out the first time: the vagina is a bit lower than you expect, you can apply your weight and the other person won't be crushed, etc. But besides knowledge of a handful of facts, the difference between a virgin and a one-timer is only slight. It probably took me ~20 times with one girl before I lost enough of the jitters to reliably keep erections. I couldn't imagine having to accrue the same experie…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 11:53 PM
1

I don't agree with the premise that being well-kept means folks will assume you're gay. However, playing along with that premise, surely being perceived as gay defeats the point of hitting on women in the first place. You want to be taken seriously as a potential mate, after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 01:42 PM
1

Interesting. It generally costs more to have different packaging for near-identical products, though. Was there a price difference compared to the female version?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 01:10 PM
0

The question is circular. When you say I can objectively identify attractive men, you're really just saying I know which men women will find attractive. How does it add anything to the discussion to ask my opinion when it is just my best attempt to copy and paste women's opinions that you've already heard?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 01:01 PM
1

It doesn't bug me so much that you respect people with impractical lifestyles. Attraction is irrational, I get it. What bugs me is that you think a man playing video games all day becomes a "hustle" just because he presses the record button. Men need absolutely no financial incentive to sink time into games. It isn't inconvenient or unpleasant for them in any way. When you say "hustle", I think of, I dunno, someone working out the logistics of starting an actual business.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 11:39 PM
1

I work a dead-end job (that pays decently) because I know that I will likely never land a dream job. I would burn what money I do have trying. It isn't lack of ambition. It's just living in reality. From that perspective, you are rewarding naivety more than ambition. And you say you don't want your partner to just be chilling at home, but that's exactly what a Twitch streamer would do!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 01:53 PM
25

"If you don't buy every lottery ticket, you'll probably miss the winning one!" Sometimes statistics help us recognize when the odds are too slim to waste our time.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 01:45 PM
1

None of this explains why the decline is especially steep for women, though. Your reasons seem gender-symmetric. I understand new relationship energy, but there is a "base" level of desire that should always be there in a healthy relationship. If the base desire of a woman toward her man is insufficient to make her horny, I think it's more to the point to say that she is no longer attracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 12:36 AM
1

Biologically speaking, you're supposed to be having sex right before bedtime anyway. If you work dayshift, this would also coincide with the kids being asleep.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 11:30 PM
8

That's what I'm thinking too. I hear a lot of waffling about "responsive desire" at this point, which sounds rather like mustering up the strength to do a chore. I don't believe the responsive desire tripe. Women begin relationships with clear lust and it often declines. I don't know if it's new relationship energy or if it's just an act, but it's not "responsive".
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 05:35 PM
3

I think the thrust of the question is whether drive and unusual preferences are related. Like sure, men want sex badly. Why should this give them strange tastes? Do women have the strange tastes buried deep down, or does a sufficiently strong drive create them ex nihilo?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 05:06 PM
21

You can easily have a round with a couple of positions in <20 minutes. I'll never understand people who act like it's such a time sink. My bet is that people hate cardio so much that the sex feels much longer than it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 05:03 PM
1

The question is nonsensical. Any reason I could give for wanting to be with [insert sex here] will necessarily involve their sex...otherwise we wouldn't be referring to them by their sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 12:08 PM
1

I dunno, what chick rejects a guy they're thirsting for because they didn't open with a canned pick-up line? "Damn, if only he had checked off that box. I have to reject him now!" She was a friend, so how would game matter? Game is for cold approaches. A friend has already decided long ago whether or not you are bangable or dateable.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 05:54 PM
7

I think you're rationalizing this. She was on the fence about saying yes, so she blurted a no instantly? That makes zero sense. Alternative theory: She just wasn't that into you, but showed interest later to spare your feelings, which she feared she trampled with her "no". She offered to hang out for pity.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 12:13 PM
1

Respectfully, neither do I think most people do a long-run calculation of how many rejections each strategy leads to. We were both talking about big picture ideas that don't occur to people in the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 05:54 PM
1

It's pretty obvious that having both sexes approach speeds up the whole process and leads one to settle into a LTR faster. That is better than years of rejection on both sides.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 10:22 AM
2

Nearly every date I have had, and 2 out of the 3 long-term relationships I have had, came about because I approached without waiting to spot "signs of interest". They are indistinguishable from basic friendliness anyway. And the one relationship that didn't require my unsolicited approach came about because her friend made the unsolicited suggestion. Life is way too short to try to divine someone's hints or even to hope they notice without you speaking up.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 10:15 AM
1

If we're talking about marriage, then aging is an issue. If she's barely attractive now, she won't be at all in 10 years. So you want to find a woman that will still be passably attractive in ~20 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 08:54 AM
1

Men may prefer women above them, but they differ from women in that they will settle for much less. Put another way, men have preferences, but women have dealbreakers.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 08:52 AM
2

There are other reasons to desire a relationship, but this stuck out to me: "Can fuck who you want, when you want to" I say this even as a guy with an ex-wife who didn't put out much: You will have more sex by orders of magnitude in a relationship than you would single. Most guys might get, what, a hookup once a month, tops? If I hadn't married, I would have continued to muster at least twice a week with my ex. Fast-forward to now, I have daily sex with my gf of 3 months. I'm sorry, but if you t…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 05:09 PM
1

OkCupid did a survey on it and the graph is well-known. One place you can find it is in a WSJ article titled "The Belle Curve".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 08:47 PM
1

I'm not sure which app(s) you use, but you can get an initial message with OkCupid and PlentyOfFish without mutually swiping. Indeed, neither has to swipe first for an initial message. Bumble is a notable exception. I think it only has to be mutual for a conversation to continue past the first message. EDIT: Amusing that BoopEverySnoot followed up and said that they indeed just waited for a message. But go ahead and downvote me. What is the point of pretending to know how a dating app you've nev…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 01:07 PM
11

The difference between being a creep and being attentive is how good you look.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 11:57 AM
6

Yes, I know what girls want in a guy. Unfortunately, I can't will myself to grow 5 inches taller. And maybe I could have had a 6-figure salary if I devoted my life to a career, but the economy cannot support everyone doing so. It's been said elsewhere that men prefer absolute qualities in women, while women prefer relative qualities in men. Women look for the aggressor, leader, alpha, etc. There can be only so many leaders. If everyone were 6-foot tall, women would set the bar at 7. But in theor…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 11:48 AM
2

We don't even know if she swiped at all. Many women simply wait for messages rather than doing any swiping, and will tell you so in their profiles. "I don't get on here much and won't pay to see likes, so just send a message if you have any questions."
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 11:42 AM
32

Statistics show that women do not rate men along a bell curve, but men do so for women. Therefore we mean very different things by "average".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 06:27 AM
7

This is the insight many miss. It's not that being an asshole makes you attractive. Rather, being attractive makes you more likely to be an asshole (since you often get your way without compromise).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/22 12:47 AM
1

It sounds like they're confusing cuck porn with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/21 10:54 AM
8

Why aren't you allowed to care even in that case? Feelings and preferences aren't axioms or theorems. They don't have to be consistent and often aren't, whether the topic is sex or anything else. Example: I would love to gorge myself on donuts all day. This would lead to weight gain, which I don't want. It doesn't make me a hypocrite to be in this situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/21 02:47 PM
1

Doing something casually seems antithetical to making a sport of it. Sex for sport would suggest one cares about their body count and actively tries to push that number higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/21 01:09 PM
1

They were specifically taking issue with the "sport" label, nothing else.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/21 05:10 AM
1

TRP believes that success in dating isn't genetic but is instead a matter of "game". There is no game with lions or non-human animals in general. When males fight to the death in the wild, the physically stronger one prevails. So basically what TRP argues is that attraction in humans is fundamentally different than with other animals. I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with that here, only trying to explain.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/21 11:58 AM
1

I would want a woman to be attracted to at least someone vaguely resembling the person I actually am. Imagine scoring a date with a fake Tinder profile. Is that even a win? Validation of who I am is the single biggest appeal of relationships and even sex to me. Perhaps that makes me unusual?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/21 09:14 PM
1

Well, that's the thing. No one is saying you need to have an endless supply of meaningful texts. It can just be something like "Hey, sorry I'm not talkative today. Work's been crazy and I need some rest. I'll tell you about it tomorrow." It took me ~30 seconds to think of and type that and I'm running on 3 hours of sleep and I peck with one finger lol. No matter how lazy that text seems, it is infinitely worse to not receive any text at all that day.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/21 04:46 PM
2

I think one needs to distinguish presenting yourself well versus faking a whole persona. Obviously you want to present your good traits first. You don't want to make up traits you don't have.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/21 12:09 PM
4

Worst: Love finds you when you least expect it/when you aren't looking. For men, this is great advice if you want to be a 30-year-old virgin shut-in. Generally you'll have to take initiative and approach several women if you want a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/21 11:56 AM
3

There's a difference between "dating" and "we are in a committed relationship for the foreseeable future". Indeed, many do not consider dating to be exclusive unless specified these days. And usually if sex doesn't happen in a reasonable time after becoming exclusive it's a red flag. So you can say that the "relationship" happens first, but it's kind of just a trial run until sexual compatibility is confirmed.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/21 01:21 AM
19

You generally need sex to happen before a committed relationship, so in the gate metaphor, it's like women guard the outer gate to the stronghold, and men guard the inner gate. But of course, this means that women guard not only the stronghold but the inner gate as well. The man only gets to exercise his power if the woman first makes it possible. This is why I don't like the metaphor. It makes the sexes seem equal in power when clearly the gatekeeper of sex has priority.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/21 03:03 PM
1

So let me ask you this: If we got rid of the legal trappings and reduced marriage to a ceremony and certificate, would you still feel that way? I think many see the legal status as essential.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/21 09:42 AM
7

I mean, this is definitely the sub for spouting controversial things, but you still have to try to connect the dots. I don't see how the existence of love implies marriage. Marriage almost always threatens one partner financially, for the benefit of the other. It frankly isn't clear to me that it ought to exist. Source: Once married, lucky enough that the ex-wife had mercy and didn't fight for my assets.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/21 07:02 AM
4

I have never heard of oxytocin not playing a similar role for men, nor does a quick Google/Google Scholar search support that claim. I am open to correction if you have a source. The closest thing I saw is that several articles say less is known about oxytocin's effects in men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/21 06:52 AM
1

If you truly don't need attention, my advice would be to simply opt out of dating entirely. My first comment was intended for the neurotypical guys, who tend to be more desperate than neurotypical women. I think pretending to be less needy than you are generally leads to a worse outcome than reaching out.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/21 09:13 PM
4

There are legitimate reasons to warn against casual sex, but they are gender symmetric, i.e., they apply to men and women. If you are advising women in particular not to have casual sex, it's because you're teaching them that they shouldn't enjoy it for its own sake--that it is transactional. Why else would you not advise the same for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/21 07:41 PM
1

Neither alone was sufficient for my marriage, which ended in divorce. No amount of willpower can overcome sexual incompatibility. You need only check the dead bedroom sub for that. So your question is rather like asking whether water is more important than food.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/21 06:26 PM
3

Women of today have immediate gratification at their fingertips 24/7. If you don't give them attention, others will. This is why playing hard to get is a losing strategy for guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/21 06:21 PM
2

Preference becomes prescription all too easily.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/21 06:44 AM
2

I have done this both ways. My ex-wife and I built up a bit before sex. The relationship was fine for a while, then became a dead bedroom. My gf of 6 weeks had sex with me on the first week. We are still having a lot of fun learning about each other and feel quite close. Conclusion: The girl will either be compatible with you or not. The order does not matter, except perhaps in the sense that it may give you your answer earlier (sex first may reveal sexual incompatibility).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/21 11:16 AM
3

I was thinking the same thing. An exchange is not manipulation so long as both parties know what is happening.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/21 11:11 AM
1

There are two meanings of "norm". One refers to the typical, and the other to what is prescribed. "Gender norms" refers to the latter type. So since English is a fun language, we can say stuff like being a stay-at-home mom isn't the norm for women but it is the norm.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/21 06:18 PM
5

But she was still second choice...just 6 months later. This is like how people don't like eating off a dish that was cleaned right in front of them. It still feels dirty, but of course waiting a day will make it no cleaner.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/21 09:52 AM
1

Loose "We occasionally chime in on each other's posts" friendships are a dime a dozen, and people don't trip over themselves to seek them out. They just happen. They help fill the existential void a bit, but it's not like you doll yourself up and drive to a get-together so you can meet someone who will like one of your pics every once and a while.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/21 11:21 PM
9

So if regulating your desires is so easy, I'll assume you've already done this. And if you have indeed transcended your thirst, why do you care whether the market has been balanced?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/21 08:52 AM
15

So other men should pass up their chance for scraps so you might enjoy a larger meal, basically?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/21 07:21 AM
1

"Well-adjusted" means a lot of things to a lot of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/21 06:18 PM
1

I think it's a bit more complicated than this. It appears we go through an intense bonding phase during the first few weeks with someone. That bond starts fairly strong, and strong it must be to withstand incoming conflicts. Now suppose we did not go through a bonding phase. Suppose that the totality of a person's character and what life with them would be like were known to us at first sight. It would be like showing up to your first date with your usual appearance and temperament. Not only wou…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/21 06:13 PM
1

Well what makes it especially weird in CimZim's case is that she would "take a bullet" for this person, yet is willing to have sex with him. If that's not romantic love, it appears almost familial, as if he were her brother. I don't want to screw family. Sure, I have fun with my friends, but I can't say I'm confident I would die for any of them. I would die for either a partner or family though. I guess my platonic bonds have never been as strong as what she describes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 02:57 PM
1

That's a shame, because as a dude who was a virgin until 22, I can tell you that confidence and sexual experience can very much change in a short time period. I can understand not having the patience to help someone grow comfortable enough with you to learn it (or even to watch them learn it from another), but you should be honest and say that's the reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 01:22 AM
2

The existence of players implies the existence of women that sleep with them. You can't be a celibate player.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 01:15 AM
3

Yeah that's more confusing, but I liked reading this exchange anyway. Fascinating.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/21 12:27 AM
1

Men don't want families because it is now more expensive than it's worth. Denying basic economics is the usual conservative stance, of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 11:46 PM
3

You can't change what you want just because of some incongruity with your own circumstances. Preferences aren't chosen.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 05:06 PM
2

This is completely normal brain function actually. It's no different than drug tolerance. You can't therapy your way out of growing tolerant to what you had and wanting more, it's just how we're wired. In fact, I would extend OP's claim. Looking at the "beauties" half a century ago often feels underwhelming because of the increasingly competitive sex market. More women are vying to be sex symbols than before and they're altering their bodies and image more to do it. They have "ruined" the vanill…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 04:25 PM
1

If revealing some of your thoughts drastically limits your dating pool (and dating is already challenging for guys), then you're inclined not to do so. On the other hand, every single relationship I have had was with a girl with self-proclaimed disorders. They wear them proudly, knowing that it won't dissuade desperate men. (They also all have rape stories and parent issues. No originality.)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 09:33 PM
2

Just talk about your feelings as a man, they said. You need to be open, they said. If that's a dealbreaker for you then it's a dealbreaker, but don't be surprised when the male response is to simply never bring up their issues. It tends not to work out well for us.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 05:26 PM
1

It's because you said nothing could have caused you to see them as anything other than a friend. Not if they matured. Not if they changed the way they treated you. Not if they developed new hobbies or better taste in movies or music. The list goes on. If you fail to have the correct height or facial structure or race, none of that matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 05:06 PM
8

A girl at work who had never talked to me until that point started telling me dead baby jokes after learning that I like dark humor. Kind of a dead giveaway lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 02:29 AM
5

As a man, I don't think taking longer to make a move increases the chances of rejection. You were always going to be rejected. Making a move early just prevents you from wasting time on someone who is not attracted to you. So you found the right technique for the wrong reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 01:52 AM
1

You can control how much money or status you have? If you aren't a billionaire, may I ask why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/21 10:49 PM
1

I kinda find a high "relationship count" intimidating. X dudes failed to keep her so what are my chances?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/21 09:53 PM
0

You could mostly fix dating in a single stroke by making women want sex as much as men, to the extent that we no longer have a horny sex vs. a picky sex. You could also make men less horny, but that might make your population plummet.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/21 04:16 AM
1

I think the advice you're hearing is based on men's misunderstandings of their own successes and failures. It's easy to look at your own experiences and believe whatever you wish due to confirmation bias, taking correlation to be causation, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 11:23 PM
4

Well, I don't think debate in general is very useful for changing the opposition's mind. Debate is for the fence-sitting spectators, spectators that may stumble on this post a year from now and peruse the comments. But as for the RP in particular, I think there are many "innocent" reasons one may be attracted to the ideas. Even a single bad breakup with a high school crush could be enough in this culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 11:14 PM
10

I have been dating my SO for a month. About two weeks into the relationship, I had an anxiety attack in front of her and cried because I thought I had offended her. (I just came out of a rough marriage.) She held me, reassured me that she was not offended, and invited me to share those feelings when they pop up again. Even my ex-wife consoled me often until the marriage fell apart for unrelated reasons. I say this out of concern: The RP has twisted your expectations of what a healthy relationshi…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 08:04 PM
2

Sexual attraction is not sufficient, but it is necessary. A good analogy is a bathroom. You probably wouldn't buy a house just for its bathroom. But if a house lacked a bathroom, it wouldn't sell no matter how good the rest of it was.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 07:50 PM
2

Please look up post hoc ergo propter hoc.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/21 03:40 PM
3

You are probably more impressed by the cross-sectional area of the penis than its circumference. Remember their relationship: Doubling circumference quadruples the area. So it's not hard to get large areas by modestly increasing circumference.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/21 08:16 PM
13

But surely if one stuck a bunch of nails in themselves throughout life, noting the measurements of at least some of them for reference, they would begin to get a sense of roughly how large they are by sight alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/21 08:08 PM
1

At the end of the day, is there much difference between a woman rejecting you for being below average in the general population versus being below average compared to her previous partners? They want to continuously upgrade in either case.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/21 08:05 PM
2

Introversion and extroversion only matter early in the dating phase. Introverts aren't shy and reserved around people they know well.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/21 08:00 PM
1

Did you like to earn trophies as a kid? Did you want them to be easy to earn? Wait, you wanted trophies but didn't want them to just be handed out?! That makes no sense! /s
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/21 04:22 PM
2

Well, like I said, the alternative is to have both sexes be picky, which is too strong of a filter. Reproduction rates would plummet. Consider an oversimplified example: Suppose each male has a 10% acceptance rate, i.e., they cannot mate with 9 out of 10 females because they will be rejected. Suppose further that females have a 10% acceptance rate. If their sexual preferences are independent of each other (a female rejecting you gives no information about whether you'll reject her), this means a…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/21 03:04 PM
2

I don't think it can be 1-to-1 considering differing life expectancies. Men die faster and are born more frequently to compensate, but I doubt these two factors perfectly cancel out.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/21 02:20 AM
3

A few things: 1) Animals don't believe in their mating strategies. They follow those strategies instinctively, as do we. As a self-aware human, you can choose to act against your most base desires to some extent but it isn't pleasant, so most don't. 2) "Perfection" in the context of evolution is relative to the environment. Once a species settles into its niche, its evolution slows until a disruptive event occurs that changes its environment. So to think it was perfect in some absolute sense bef…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/21 01:57 AM
1

I don't know where anyone gets that 50k annual income is average for men. 51k is the median for a household. In a typical household the wife is working at least part-time, so it's probably more like 35k for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/21 07:37 PM
3

New discoveries are rare enough that you can't really expect the capacity to make them to impact mating trends. Only one person has to make the discovery for everyone to enjoy the benefits as if they made the discovery themselves. Likewise, humanity's shift from hunter-gatherer tribes is probably too recent to have made an evolutionary dent.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/21 05:04 PM
-1

When you say "we have the power to prevent this", but then fail to prevent it, you have made it your own responsibility when it would not have been otherwise. This is why one shouldn't make idle promises.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/21 04:58 PM
0

Women don't choose loser men. Rather, men who are chosen too often and easily become losers. Why develop strong ethics if you're already given what you want?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/21 04:18 PM
2

In this scenario, you already got what you wanted without showing affection. Most men are smart enough to withhold that "generosity" until some affection is shown. That's why women find they have to marry into money or commit in some way.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/21 01:05 PM
1

Introversion/extroversion only matters early in the dating phase anyway. Once a woman (or really anyone) gets comfortable with you, they will talk your ear off regardless of how they treat strangers.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/21 01:02 PM
1

NSA is a myth, or at least rare enough that you should assume that people who say they are having it are kidding themselves. Many people are self-aware that they will get attached to whomever they have sex with, therefore they skip the heartache and seek a relationship. High-schoolers are often too naive to realize how attachment works.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/21 02:52 PM
7

ITT: A whole lot of people who don't understand how thought experiments work.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/21 06:59 AM
1

The halo effect implies that people who think you look good will see your personality as intriguing, even if it isn't. So looks > personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/21 04:24 AM
1

The prevailing belief is that sexuality is genetic and, if this is so, surely one cannot "become asexual" just by being thrown in an environment where one doesn't need sex. I'm not saying the basic idea here is wrong, just that I don't think it's a matter of sexual orientation.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/21 05:31 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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